Dave Arquati wrote:
Why should they run it themselves? Doing so would be unlikely to bring
many benefits. The concession approach is similar to the running of the

Apart from the fact that they wouldn't require having to make a profit
out of the service , unlike any company that does run it. Unless they
have all been struck by the christmas spirit and will do it all for no
comeback.

DLR, which has a phenomenal track record, and it allows a performance
incentive and penalty regime to be installed so that the concessionnaire
is continually motivated in the right direction. You'd be unlikely to

I suspect its rather easy to run a completely isolated computer
controller light railway which pretty much runs itself. Quite another
to run a semi-metro system that will run on network rail lines and be
subject to all the usual cockups and delays.

If, in the 1980s, someone had asked for £1.5bn to build a 40km light
railway network throughout the derelict docklands of East London, they
would have been laughed out of the Treasury - but by 2012, that will be
the investment in and scale of the DLR.

I think that says it all really. If they'd built more originally it
would have probably cost somewhat less in real terms. And don't forget
the DLR could probably no longer cope with the daily traffic to canary
wharf. If the JLE hadn't been built it would probably be falling to
bits under the strain right now. The DLR was only ever a half hearted
cut price token gesture from the Thatcher government who wanted to be
seen to be doing something but pay bugger all for it. If they had been
really serious about regenerating Docklands as opposed to just hoping
for the best they'd have built a tube line there from the start.

B2003