| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Licencing reforms & the tube
An idle thought...
The pub licencing hours are currently - as you may have heard... - being overhauled (finally), with the result that a lot of pubs may well be open later into the night. Let's assume that the doom'n'gloom scenario doesn't happen, and we don't descend into a Tracy Emin reinterpretation of a Hogarth painting. I'm an optimist on this one - any initial chaos will soon disappear, and we'll be better off than currently. I hope. Anyway - The question is... Will LU reflect this in extending the time of the last trains? It's a bit pointless pubs applying for later licences if people still have to leave at the same time to get home. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
Adrian wrote:
An idle thought... The pub licencing hours are currently - as you may have heard... - being overhauled (finally), with the result that a lot of pubs may well be open later into the night. Let's assume that the doom'n'gloom scenario doesn't happen, and we don't descend into a Tracy Emin reinterpretation of a Hogarth painting. I'm an optimist on this one - any initial chaos will soon disappear, and we'll be better off than currently. I hope. Anyway - The question is... Will LU reflect this in extending the time of the last trains? It's a bit pointless pubs applying for later licences if people still have to leave at the same time to get home. There was consultation about extending the Friday and Saturday operating hours by an hour, but it would have to be reflected in a later start on Saturday and Sunday mornings to preserve the overnight maintenance periods. LU say that they would plan to implement the changes in December 2006 if the Mayor decides to go ahead with them. Otherwise, use night buses. Or perhaps people should finish their drinking at a pub within walking distance of home. -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Licencing reforms & the tube
Richard J. ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : Otherwise, use night buses. There's a tube station at the end of my road. The nearest a Night Bus gets to me is about 15 miles away. Or perhaps people should finish their drinking at a pub within walking distance of home. I'd have thought Ken wanted people to be out in Central London? |
Licencing reforms & the tube
I don't see that it is LU's responsibility to get people home just
because pub opening hours are longer. If people must insist in drinking until 2 am get a taxi or a night bus or move closer to the pub, or choose a pub wihin walking distance. This problem will be nationwide and not just in London but the whole business of the new licencing laws seems to be ill conceived but then most of what nu-Labour does seems to finish up as f**k-up, just look at child tax credits. Kevin |
Licencing reforms & the tube
|
Licencing reforms & the tube
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:48:50 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote: wrote: I don't see that it is LU's responsibility to get people home just because pub opening hours are longer. If people must insist in drinking until 2 am get a taxi or a night bus or move closer to the pub, or choose a pub wihin walking distance. This problem will be nationwide and not just in London but the whole business of the new licencing laws seems to be ill conceived but then most of what nu-Labour does seems to finish up as f**k-up, just look at child tax credits. Perhaps it's more the case that they're withdrawing what was imposed as a temporary measure? I don't think it fair that LU should stay open later to accomodate late night revellers, whilst starting later in the mornings, causing hard working Londoners grief in getting to work. It's us Londoners that keep London going. Or is it true that Britain is becoming a Leisure and Tourism culture and sod the worker??? Life without sex just isn't life. Make love not war! |
Licencing reforms & the tube
"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170... An idle thought... The pub licencing hours are currently - as you may have heard... - being overhauled (finally), with the result that a lot of pubs may well be open later into the night. Let's assume that the doom'n'gloom scenario doesn't happen, and we don't descend into a Tracy Emin reinterpretation of a Hogarth painting. I'm an optimist on this one - any initial chaos will soon disappear, and we'll be better off than currently. I hope. Anyway - The question is... Will LU reflect this in extending the time of the last trains? It's a bit pointless pubs applying for later licences if people still have to leave at the same time to get home. I suppose people will have to drink in a pub near home. I don't see why the tube should close at night. People will say it is for engineering work to be carried out. Hooey. EW starts at about 1:00am and finishes at about 4:30 or 5:00am - and what is done in those 3-4hrs? As Michael Kenyon showed, very little. The only way to get things done on the track is by line closures. The Central Line closed last year for months - unfortunaltely LUL did not have the money to make use of the time to do large-scale work. But it showed that LUL *can* close a line for a few months and get everything done. The Northern Line has at least twice closed the Bank Branch in the quiet months of July/August to put more speed restrictions in I say let three or four lines run all night long, with trains about every 10 minutes. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
Christine ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : I don't think it fair that LU should stay open later to accomodate late night revellers, whilst starting later in the mornings, causing hard working Londoners grief in getting to work. It's us Londoners that keep London going. How busy are the trains at 5.30am? And do they really use the full close-time every night? Are other similar systems closed for five hours every night? |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:48:50 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote: wrote: I don't see that it is LU's responsibility to get people home just because pub opening hours are longer. If people must insist in drinking until 2 am get a taxi or a night bus or move closer to the pub, or choose a pub wihin walking distance. This problem will be nationwide and not just in London but the whole business of the new licencing laws seems to be ill conceived but then most of what nu-Labour does seems to finish up as f**k-up, just look at child tax credits. Perhaps it's more the case that they're withdrawing what was imposed as a temporary measure? Income tax was once a temorary measure... -- James Farrar September's coming soon |
Licencing reforms & the tube
"James Farrar" wrote in message ... On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:48:50 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone" wrote: wrote: I don't see that it is LU's responsibility to get people home just because pub opening hours are longer. If people must insist in drinking until 2 am get a taxi or a night bus or move closer to the pub, or choose a pub wihin walking distance. This problem will be nationwide and not just in London but the whole business of the new licencing laws seems to be ill conceived but then most of what nu-Labour does seems to finish up as f**k-up, just look at child tax credits. Perhaps it's more the case that they're withdrawing what was imposed as a temporary measure? Income tax was once a temorary measure... Perfectly true, but so what? |
Licencing reforms & the tube
In message . 170,
Adrian writes Anyway - The question is... Will LU reflect this in extending the time of the last trains? It's a bit pointless pubs applying for later licences if people still have to leave at the same time to get home. Clubs have been opening until the wee small hours for more years than I can remember, and LU doesn't run late tubes for their benefit - I don't think it likely that we will do so for pub-goers either (other than the possible extra hour at weekends currently under discussion). -- Paul Terry |
Licencing reforms & the tube
Adrian wrote: Christine ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : I don't think it fair that LU should stay open later to accomodate late night revellers, whilst starting later in the mornings, causing hard working Londoners grief in getting to work. It's us Londoners that keep London going. How busy are the trains at 5.30am? And do they really use the full close-time every night? Are other similar systems closed for five hours every night? The 5.30 am start isn't the problem as the late start would only be needed on Saturday and Sunday unless of course the masses decide to binge drink Monday night, Tuesday night, Wednesday night and Thursday night aswell. The trouble is would it be reasonable in a city like London to expect 6.30 start on Saturdays and 7.30 on Sundays. Add to that late running engineering work and you wont be able to get into London until 9am on a Saturday and God knows what time on a Sunday. Now Ken was going on about the reduction in retail spending as a result of the bombing. Will the retail organisations allow the late running to go ahead, I don't think so. Kevin |
Licencing reforms & the tube
) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:
Are other similar systems closed for five hours every night? The 5.30 am start isn't the problem as the late start would only be needed on Saturday and Sunday unless of course the masses decide to binge drink Monday night, Tuesday night, Wednesday night and Thursday night aswell. I'm not quite sure why you think that pubs staying open for a little longer necessarily implies "binge drinking"? |
Licencing reforms & the tube
"Adrian" wrote in message
. 244.170... How busy are the trains at 5.30am? First trains are fairly busy, subsequent ones not so. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Licencing reforms & the tube
It doesn't imply binge drinking anymore than when licencing laws were
amended before that it implied an increase in binge drinking but I bet that is what will happen. Kevin |
Licencing reforms & the tube
"Adrian" wrote in message . 244.170... Richard J. ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : Otherwise, use night buses. There's a tube station at the end of my road. The nearest a Night Bus gets to me is about 15 miles away. Which tube station is it? |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Adrian wrote:
Richard J. ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : Otherwise, use night buses. There's a tube station at the end of my road. The nearest a Night Bus gets to me is about 15 miles away. Do you live somewhere freakish and wrong, like Amersham, or are you just the victim of amazingly bad planning? tom -- If you tolerate this, your children will be next. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
Tom Anderson ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying : Otherwise, use night buses. There's a tube station at the end of my road. The nearest a Night Bus gets to me is about 15 miles away. Do you live somewhere freakish and wrong, like Amersham, or are you just the victim of amazingly bad planning? Chalfont & Latimer lies between here and Amersham. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Alan OBrien wrote:
"Adrian" wrote in message . 244.170... a Tracy Emin reinterpretation of a Hogarth painting. I have _no idea what this means_ and yet i love the description. Anyway - The question is... Will LU reflect this in extending the time of the last trains? It's a bit pointless pubs applying for later licences if people still have to leave at the same time to get home. I suppose people will have to drink in a pub near home. Or catch a night bus. Or cycle. I don't see why the tube should close at night. People will say it is for engineering work to be carried out. Hooey. EW starts at about 1:00am and finishes at about 4:30 or 5:00am - and what is done in those 3-4hrs? As Michael Kenyon showed, very little. The only way to get things done on the track is by line closures. The Central Line closed last year for months - unfortunaltely LUL did not have the money to make use of the time to do large-scale work. But it showed that LUL *can* close a line for a few months and get everything done. I think there are two kinds of maintenance. One is minor, routine stuff, like replacing lost rail clip thingummies and sweeping up train fluff or whatever, and the other is serious engineering. The former is why we have the few-hour overnight closures - it needs to be done often, but doesn't take long. The latter is why we have weekend and multi-week closures. I do wonder if the routine stuff could be done every other night, though; if we could have half the tube lines open each night, that would make a colossal difference. Alternatively, spend some money on getting, say, the Central and Northern lines to the state where they can run all night almost every night (buying extra-strong rail clips and shaving the trains, say), and use those as the backbone of an all-night transport system. I say let three or four lines run all night long, with trains about every 10 minutes. I say that too. tom -- If you tolerate this, your children will be next. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On 18 Aug 2005 08:52:53 GMT, Adrian wrote:
How busy are the trains at 5.30am? And do they really use the full close-time every night? Are other similar systems closed for five hours every night? Hamburg's used to be, but now operates 24 hours a day at weekends. Parts of the system are rather old but have not been allowed to get into the embarassing and disgraceful state of LUL. The night bus system, OTOH, is easy to understand and entirely acceptable, if a little slow. That said, the night buses are not busy, because clubbers tend to go out late on the weekend (say leave the house at 10pm) and return home on the first train (~5am). I can see this culture developing in London. If it does, an *earlier* start is what's needed, not a later finish. Incidentally, I don't see why some consider it is not a requirement to provide public transport for revellers. Why is it any less a requirement to provide for them than for customers of other businesses during the day? Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
|
Licencing reforms & the tube
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 08:52:17 GMT, "Alan OBrien"
wrote: The Northern Line has at least twice closed the Bank Branch in the quiet months of July/August to put more speed restrictions in :) Seriously, perhaps that is what is needed. Close one line at a time in its entirety, and completely re-lay the track, signalling and other failure-prone equipment. The amount of engineering work required in future would then drastically decrease. I'd bet that this approach would save money in the long term. Trouble is, TPTB refuse to recognise this, despite the fact that it is increasingly becoming the method of choice on the main line. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On 18 Aug 2005 14:33:02 GMT, Adrian wrote:
Chalfont & Latimer lies between here and Amersham. I very much doubt that all-night services could be justified on the outer reaches of the Met, any more than they could be to High Wycombe or Milton Keynes (for example). What *could* perhaps be justified is a service at 0100 and another at 0200 (then nothing until 05something), which is approximately what MK gets when there isn't engineering work and buses (when these departures still occur, just by bus instead). Because it doesn't stay open at night for the sleepers and freight, however, I doubt the staffing for this could be justified, not to mention the increased staffing levels LUL-type operations require. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
Neil Williams ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying : Will the retail organisations allow the late running to go ahead, I don't think so. How many high-street shops open before 10am on a Sunday? Other than the kind of smaller shop that opens 24 hours per day, or near to that, I can think of few. The staff have to get there before opening time... |
Licencing reforms & the tube
Neil Williams ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying : Are other similar systems closed for five hours every night? Hamburg's used to be, but now operates 24 hours a day at weekends. Parts of the system are rather old but have not been allowed to get into the embarassing and disgraceful state of LUL. Right. So there's no inherent need to close for five hours each and every night - except, perhaps, for cracks to be wallpapered over. The night bus system, OTOH, is easy to understand and entirely acceptable, if a little slow. That said, the night buses are not busy, because clubbers tend to go out late on the weekend (say leave the house at 10pm) and return home on the first train (~5am). I can see this culture developing in London. If it does, an *earlier* start is what's needed, not a later finish. I'm not necessarily thinking of all-night clubbers or "binge drinkers" roll of eyes I'm thinking more of people who'd go to the theatre/restaurant/cinema or some other event with friends who may live in a variety of different directions around London, then might actually fancy going to a pub and having a chat over a pint or two afterwards. *That's* the kind of social occasion that's going to benefit most from the change of closing time to midnight or 1am. Let's face it, if somebody wants to go and get ******ed, they can do that until dawn already. Bar - Late Bar - Club. Incidentally, I don't see why some consider it is not a requirement to provide public transport for revellers. Why is it any less a requirement to provide for them than for customers of other businesses during the day? Indeed. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On 18 Aug 2005 18:22:57 GMT, Adrian wrote:
The staff have to get there before opening time... Not several hours before opening time. For 10am opening, 9 or 9:30am would be quite sufficient, with suitable staff planning and organisation. Not all shops even open that early; as they're allowed 6 hours (I think), many choose noon-6pm or 11am-5pm. There remain, of course, night buses. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On 18 Aug 2005 18:27:45 GMT, Adrian wrote:
Right. So there's no inherent need to close for five hours each and every night - except, perhaps, for cracks to be wallpapered over. Agreed. See my other post; some short-term pain (e.g. closing a line for a month or two at a time once to completely retrack and resignal) would be a definite benefit in the long-term. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
In message . 170,
Adrian writes I don't think it fair that LU should stay open later to accomodate late night revellers, whilst starting later in the mornings, causing hard working Londoners grief in getting to work. It's us Londoners that keep London going. How busy are the trains at 5.30am? The ones I drive get pretty busy - all with people going to work and/or the airport. -- Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building. You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK (please use the reply to address for email) |
Licencing reforms & the tube
Tom Anderson wrote:
Anyway - The question is... Will LU reflect this in extending the time of the last trains? It's a bit pointless pubs applying for later licences if people still have to leave at the same time to get home. I suppose people will have to drink in a pub near home. Or catch a night bus. Or cycle. Without wanting to be a killjoy, it's an offence under section 12 of the Licensing Act 1872 to be drunk in charge of a carriage. A pedal cycle is a carriage for the purposes of this Act. You might also find that you're a bit prone to wobble if you're riding home from the pub. Matt Ashby |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On 18 Aug 2005 08:52:53 GMT, Adrian wrote:
Christine ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : I don't think it fair that LU should stay open later to accomodate late night revellers, whilst starting later in the mornings, causing hard working Londoners grief in getting to work. It's us Londoners that keep London going. How busy are the trains at 5.30am? And do they really use the full close-time every night? Are other similar systems closed for five hours every night? Well, Paris does. Has 4.5 hour window but certainly finshes around 12.30-01.00 - starts at 05.30. Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Licencing reforms & the tube
|
Licencing reforms & the tube
Adrian writes:
Are other similar systems closed for five hours every night? Yes, that's pretty much normal. -- Mark Brader, Toronto "These Millennia are like buses." --Arwel Parry |
Licencing reforms & the tube
James Farrar wrote:
Seriously, perhaps that is what is needed. Close one line at a time in its entirety, and completely re-lay the track, signalling and other failure-prone equipment. I've been advocating this for years. However, can you imagine how the ignorant masses, and the media, would react? Or, for that matter, those people for whom that line is the only practical means of getting to work in a timely manner. #Paul |
Licencing reforms & the tube
I don't see that it is LU's responsibility to get people home just
because pub opening hours are longer. If people must insist in drinking until 2 am get a taxi or a night bus or move closer to the pub, or choose a pub wihin walking distance. This problem will be nationwide The problem won't be nationwide. Pubs currently shut at 11, the last bus/train (if there is one) is well before then. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
|
Licencing reforms & the tube
On 19 Aug 2005 21:46:39 -0700, "Paul Weaver"
wrote: The problem won't be nationwide. Pubs currently shut at 11, the last bus/train (if there is one) is well before then. Depends on your location. I have a bus home at 23:25 which I use from time to time. Trouble is, the use of taxis for a night out is so ingrained that I'm often the only passenger, so I think it only runs for political reasons rather than strictly being required. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 23:36:13 +0100, James Farrar wrote:
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 17:58:49 GMT, (Neil Williams) wrote: On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 08:52:17 GMT, "Alan OBrien" wrote: The Northern Line has at least twice closed the Bank Branch in the quiet months of July/August to put more speed restrictions in :) Seriously, perhaps that is what is needed. Close one line at a time in its entirety, and completely re-lay the track, signalling and other failure-prone equipment. I've been advocating this for years. However, can you imagine how the ignorant masses, and the media, would react? If we are talking about closing the bank section of the Northern Line again then quite rightly given last time they closed it for several months. Have LUL suddenly become competent? |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 08:55:07 +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 22:13:29 +0100, wrote: Or, for that matter, those people for whom that line is the only practical means of getting to work in a timely manner. True, but they'll be able to get to work in an even more timely manner after the work is done. Short-term pain for very much long-term gain. They told us that before, I am not convinced the numbers added up in my favour. Long term pain in 1996(ish) was supposed to not mean http://www.thisislondon.com/news/articles/17184815 |
Licencing reforms & the tube
"Adrian" wrote in message . 244.170... An idle thought... The pub licencing hours are currently - as you may have heard... - being overhauled (finally), with the result that a lot of pubs may well be open later into the night. Let's assume that the doom'n'gloom scenario doesn't happen, and we don't descend into a Tracy Emin reinterpretation of a Hogarth painting. I'm an optimist on this one - any initial chaos will soon disappear, and we'll be better off than currently. I hope. Anyway - The question is... Will LU reflect this in extending the time of the last trains? It's a bit pointless pubs applying for later licences if people still have to leave at the same time to get home. Just drive home by car. |
Licencing reforms & the tube
On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:39:22 +0100, steve
wrote: If we are talking about closing the bank section of the Northern Line again then quite rightly given last time they closed it for several months. I am proposing, quite seriously, the idea of closing a complete line at a time (with suitable bus replacement services feeding other lines via areas of as low traffic congestion as feasible) and completely renewing all of the tired infrastructure, which would result in a reduced maintenance requirement for years to come. The idea would be to bring the infrastructure up to the superb standard of, say, the Hamburg system. New track, new signals, new cabling, the lot. A bit of short term pain for a *lot* of long-term gain, both financial and in terms of fewer blockades. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:03 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk