I haven't got the latest Rail mag out today but just reading through the
last one have to say I agree with what Wolmar says about the election.

I quite like this bit: "There may well be the odd extra sentence or two
about the railways, but mostly, for politicians, rail will be like the
war when Basil Fawlty had German guests: "Don't mention it.""

IT's also on Google - http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/rail/511.shtml
and something else 'Election manifestos fail to address transport
issues' http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/online/april05.shtml


M

"Mike" wrote in message
.. .
I haven't got the latest Rail mag out today but just reading through the
last one have to say I agree with what Wolmar says about the election.

I quite like this bit: "There may well be the odd extra sentence or two
about the railways, but mostly, for politicians, rail will be like the
war when Basil Fawlty had German guests: "Don't mention it.""

IT's also on Google - http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/rail/511.shtml
and something else 'Election manifestos fail to address transport
issues' http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/online/april05.shtml


M

True but not really surprising. The politicos dare not mention it. They know
that even without the ghastly fragmentation that followed privatisation, a
near half-century of political interference and under-investment had left
the railway system in an awful state, for which they were chiefly to blame.

No disrespect is intended to the worthy assistance that Parliament received
from Messrs. R. Gunter, S. Weighell, R. Buckton et. al. in bringing about
the decline of the railways.

The amazing thing is that people still want to use the rail system, and in
ever-increasing numbers too.

So if for a moment you thought that what the electorate wants really matters
to politicians, think again. Since when did they ever listen to the voters?

mb wrote:
"Mike" wrote in message
.. .

I haven't got the latest Rail mag out today but just reading through the
last one have to say I agree with what Wolmar says about the election.

I quite like this bit: "There may well be the odd extra sentence or two
about the railways, but mostly, for politicians, rail will be like the
war when Basil Fawlty had German guests: "Don't mention it.""

IT's also on Google - http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/rail/511.shtml
and something else 'Election manifestos fail to address transport
issues' http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/online/april05.shtml


M


True but not really surprising. The politicos dare not mention it. They know
that even without the ghastly fragmentation that followed privatisation, a
near half-century of political interference and under-investment had left
the railway system in an awful state, for which they were chiefly to blame.

No disrespect is intended to the worthy assistance that Parliament received
from Messrs. R. Gunter, S. Weighell, R. Buckton et. al. in bringing about
the decline of the railways.

The amazing thing is that people still want to use the rail system, and in
ever-increasing numbers too.

So if for a moment you thought that what the electorate wants really matters
to politicians, think again. Since when did they ever listen to the voters?





I'm sure there was some opinion poll that put transport something like
fourth in the list of voter concerns, but I guess this is mostly to do
with traffic congestion and fuel tax, not the railways!

M

Mike wrote:

So if for a moment you thought that what the electorate wants
really matters to politicians, think again. Since when did they
ever listen to the voters?


I'm sure there was some opinion poll that put transport something
like fourth in the list of voter concerns, but I guess this is
mostly to do with traffic congestion and fuel tax, not the
railways!

That's right. Focus groups have told them that rail transport isn't
an issue.

--
Chris Game

Maintenance-free: When it breaks, it can't be fixed...

"mb" wrote in message ...

The amazing thing is that people still want to use the rail system, and in
ever-increasing numbers too.

The amazing thing is that people are amazed by this. For most people
the railway system is pretty satisfactory. Sure, they'll have the
occasional grumble about ticket prices, toilets or mayonnaise in
sandwiches, but on the whole the system works pretty well.

So if for a moment you thought that what the electorate wants really matters
to politicians, think again. Since when did they ever listen to the voters?

They do. They listen very closely. And what they hear is that people
really aren't too bothered by the state of the railway system and the
moment - and certainly not as much as they are bothered about other
things, like finding an NHS dentist, starting wars or reducing council
tax bills.

The "Bring Back Locomotive Hauled Coaching Stock" party might be an
attractive idea on the platform ends in Stafford, but I don't think it
has the other parties terribly worried.

Ian

Ian Johnston wrote to uk.transport.london on Thu, 28 Apr 2005:

The amazing thing is that people are amazed by this. For most people
the railway system is pretty satisfactory. Sure, they'll have the
occasional grumble about ticket prices, toilets or mayonnaise in
sandwiches, but on the whole the system works pretty well.

I've never seen a toilet in my sandwich - plenty of other things, mind,
but never a toilet.....
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 3 April 2005

"Ian Johnston" wrote in message
om...

So if for a moment you thought that what the electorate wants really
matters
to politicians, think again. Since when did they ever listen to the
voters?

They do. They listen very closely. And what they hear is that people
really aren't too bothered by the state of the railway system and the
moment - and certainly not as much as they are bothered about other
things, like finding an NHS dentist, starting wars or reducing council
tax bills.

Starting wars? Hmm, in years to come they'll still be telling tales of the
government that took us on an illegal war based on fabricated evidence after
a million people marched on Westminster to say "We don't want to go to war."
Hardly listening to the voters.

Ronnie

In article ,
"Ronnie Clark"
rve.co.uk wrote:

Starting wars? Hmm, in years to come they'll still be telling tales of the
government that took us on an illegal war

You've just had the proof it was not illegal.

based on fabricated evidence

There's a difference between evidence which turns out to be inaccurate
and evidence which has been fabricated. This was the former.

after a million people marched on Westminster to say "We don't want
to go to war."

Is that a new constitutional rule? More than a certain number marching
in London creates an absolute duty on government, regardless of the
merits of the issue? I could point out all the reasons why that's
objectionable but don't feel like wasting your time: if you can't
see them now you never will.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"I feel Mr (John) Hemming deserves a mention. True, he was a dreadful witness.
His evidence was largely inadmissible hearsay. He possesses an inability to
give a straight answer to a straight question" - para 706

"Mrs Redboots" wrote

I've never seen a toilet in my sandwich - plenty of other things, mind,
but never a toilet.....

or even a tiolet. ;-)

Peter

(Ian Johnston) wrote in
om:

The amazing thing is that people still want to use the rail system,
and in ever-increasing numbers too.

The amazing thing is that people are amazed by this. For most people
the railway system is pretty satisfactory. Sure, they'll have the
occasional grumble about ticket prices, toilets or mayonnaise in
sandwiches, but on the whole the system works pretty well.

Or, perhaps, for most people the railway system is utterly irrelevant. For
a majority, the occasional grumble will be provoked only by having to wait
for a minute or two at a level crossing. And they are unlikely to be
tempted because they know rail is dirty, unreliable, expensive, and
dangerous. It must be, it says so in the 'Daily Rag.'

Rick.