|
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Jun 27, 12:39 pm, Ian wrote:
On 27 Jun, 20:33, The Good Doctor wrote: So Gordon is in No. 10 at last. What changes will we see in transport policy, especially towards rail? If oly we had an ex-civil servant who kept banging on about his inside contacts here we might know better My guess: much more PFI. Ian My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. Adrian |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Jun 27, 10:04 pm, "Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS"
wrote: My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. It already has the government's full support - the current hurdle is getting it through parliament, which isn't really something you can announce. I don't think any progress can be made until there's been a few months of consultation whatnot over the recent Woolwich changes. The only thing Brown could announce is scrapping it. The Thameslink Programme, on the other hand... U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
"Mr Thant" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 27, 10:04 pm, "Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS" wrote: My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. It already has the government's full support - the current hurdle is getting it through parliament, which isn't really something you can announce. I don't think any progress can be made until there's been a few months of consultation whatnot over the recent Woolwich changes. The only thing Brown could announce is scrapping it. That should lead to a few questions about rail policy differences between Scotland and England - is it the Alloa - Kincardine route that goes through or near Brown's constituency? Paul |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
"Paul Scott" wrote That should lead to a few questions about rail policy differences between Scotland and England - is it the Alloa - Kincardine route that goes through or near Brown's constituency? AIUI not through, or even very close to his constituency - but by taking the coal trains for Kincardine Power Station away from the Forth Bridge it should improve the performance of the passenger trains which do serve Kirkcaldy. Peter |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
AIUI not through, or even very close to his constituency - but by taking the coal trains for Kincardine Power Station away from the Forth Bridge it should improve the performance of the passenger trains which do serve Kirkcaldy. Peter Are EWS et al still threatening to boycott the Alloa Line? For those not aware, NR appear to be charging a premium for access to the line for freight operators even though it isn't exactly a highly desirable alternative routing for them. It might make more sense to charge a premium for the bridge route. As for discrepancies in transport policy between Westminster and Holyrood, what of it exactly? The PM has no authority to alter the way the Scots parliament chooses to spend it's allocation of funds. If it appears to observers south of the border that transport projects are getting more backing in Scotland than in England, then less money will have to be spent on something else in England, as it is in Scotland, in order to fund the rail network expansion. You get ought for nought, it's all give and take, quid pro quo etc. The M8 is a motorway?? Where?!? |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
|
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS wrote:
My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. The announcement will feature 'cross' and 'rail' in it alright - as in 'rail passengers become very cross' - if this story is to be believed; http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle1996604.ece "Train fares will rise by several times the rate of inflation under a series of deals between the Government and rail companies designed to take advantage of record growth in demand for rail travel." ESB |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
Mr Thant wrote:
On Jun 27, 10:04 pm, "Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS" wrote: My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. It already has the government's full support - the current hurdle is getting it through parliament, Why should the government revert to the outdated practice of consulting Parliament? You'll probably find that there's been an "enabling order" which means that that's the last thing they'll do. which isn't really something you can announce. I don't think any progress can be made until there's been a few months of consultation whatnot over the recent Woolwich changes. The only thing Brown could announce is scrapping it. The Thameslink Programme, on the other hand... U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ -- Moving things in still pictures! |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Jun 28, 2:26 am, (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:
You're having a laugh surely? They have agreed no public funding at all. Sorry, should have been clearer - I meant it has full support for getting it past the current stage, and there's not a lot Brown could do to expedite that. U |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant
wrote: On Jun 27, 10:04 pm, "Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS" wrote: My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. It already has the government's full support ... .... but not "support" in the sense of "financial backing". And if there is one thing Mr Brown is good at, it's recognizing a monumental waste of money when he sees one. Hmm. Let's see. Electrify every main line in the UK, or build a tunnel to make it slightly easier to commute from Maidenhead to Canary Wharf? Tough call. Ian |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Wed, 27 Jun 2007 22:23:04 +0100 someone who may be "Paul Scott"
wrote this:- That should lead to a few questions about rail policy differences between Scotland and England - is it the Alloa - Kincardine route that goes through or near Brown's constituency? The Stirling - Alloa - Kincardine line does not go particularly near Mr Brown's constituency, or his former constituency. However, if EWS can sort out the stupid tolling regime, which the Executive were still talking of the last time I heard, then they will take their coal trains away from the Forth Bridge, which is used by many people in his constituency. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54 |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
Ian wrote:
On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant wrote: On Jun 27, 10:04 pm, "Adrian Auer-Hudson, MIMIS" wrote: My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. It already has the government's full support ... ... but not "support" in the sense of "financial backing". And if there is one thing Mr Brown is good at, it's recognizing a monumental waste of money when he sees one. So all those extra civil servants are "good value for money"? Hmm. Let's see. Electrify every main line in the UK, or build a tunnel to make it slightly easier to commute from Maidenhead to Canary Wharf? Tough call. Ian -- Moving things in still pictures! |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 28 Jun, 08:01, ®i©ardo wrote:
Why should the government revert to the outdated practice of consulting Parliament? You'll probably find that there's been an "enabling order" which means that that's the last thing they'll do. Except it's what they are doing: http://www.publications.parliament.u...05062.i-v.html Perhaps you should let them know they don't have to. U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/ |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant
wrote: My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. It already has the government's full support - the current hurdle is getting it through parliament, which isn't really something you can announce. I don't think any progress can be made until there's been a few months of consultation whatnot over the recent Woolwich changes. The only thing Brown could announce is scrapping it. Not quite. Getting it through parliament is not a problem - the bill will pass, because there is no serious opposition to it (apart from people who think that its only purpose is to speed commuting times between Maidenhead and Canary Wharf - I suspect these are the same people who thought Thameslink's purpose was to speed commuting times between Streatham and St Albans). However, as any fule kno, the stumbling block for the last few years has been on where the money's coming from. If Gordon wants to gain popularity and credibility with London voters and business leaders, then an announcement on Crossrail financing - obviously conditional on the passage of the bill - would be a good way to do so. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article .com, (Mr Thant) wrote: The Thameslink Programme, on the other hand... It's waiting for CSR2007 later in the year (allegedly, at current slippage rates it'll be 2008) for a funding decision. The planning permissions have been obtained. CSR2007? Since when was that bandied about? AFAIAA it's actually PR2008, although there may have been a change I'm not aware of. The fate of TL will be tied to the HLOS and SoFA which the Gov. is required to publish by July 31, although the latest I've heard is that it's due before July 26 when they break up for recess. As far as bad omens go, however, I wonder what will happen if our Darling friend becomes Chancellor? |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Jun 28, 10:15 am, John B wrote:
On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant wrote: (apart from people who think that its only purpose is to speed commuting times between Maidenhead and Canary Wharf - I suspect these are the same people who thought Thameslink's purpose was to speed commuting times between Streatham and St Albans). You mean to say that isn't what it is for. Oh hang they are joining up the link into Heathrow, just to give a bit more justification. Also amazing how Canary Wharf came into the picture otherwise it was dead duck. You would have thought that had somebody decided to spend billions developing a run down dock area into a large business area that they would have given somethought about how to get people in and out, and perhaps stumping up some cash. Kevin |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 28 Jun, 11:41, Kev wrote:
(apart from people who think that its only purpose is to speed commuting times between Maidenhead and Canary Wharf - I suspect these are the same people who thought Thameslink's purpose was to speed commuting times between Streatham and St Albans). You mean to say that isn't what it is for. Oh hang they are joining up the link into Heathrow, just to give a bit more justification. Also amazing how Canary Wharf came into the picture otherwise it was dead duck. You would have thought that had somebody decided to spend billions developing a run down dock area into a large business area that they would have given somethought about how to get people in and out, and perhaps stumping up some cash. The point is that it relieves the pressure on all the central Underground lines plus Liverpool Street and Paddington mainline stations, plus the other transport links to Heathrow. It will buy another 10 years of Central London's public transport network not being unusably overcrowded (i.e. in 10 years' time when Crossrail opens, the network will be left only as overcrowded as it is today, rather than more so). And Canary Wharf's developers stumped up cash for the DLR and the JLE, and will most likely stump up cash for Crossrail as well (assuming the private sector funding model is based on the award of development rights, which is likely). -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org/blog |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
Let me rephrase that last question - what will happen now that our
Darling Chancellor has arrived? |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 28 Jun, 10:15, John B wrote:
However, as any fule kno, the stumbling block for the last few years has been on where the money's coming from. If Gordon wants to gain popularity and credibility with London voters and business leaders, then an announcement on Crossrail financing - obviously conditional on the passage of the bill - would be a good way to do so. Maybe. But I'd think a funding commitment would be a risky idea politically. It could easily look like throwing money at an extravagant project with no real care, that will only benefit a few Londoners and a few big city businesses etc etc. All of the politically safe moves (funding development, introducing a bill) have already been done. I'm sure there will be a big song and dance when/if it does get funding, but now doesn't seem like a good time to me. U -- http://londonconnections.blogspot.com |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 28 Jun, 00:50, David H wrote:
AIUI not through, or even very close to his constituency - but by taking the coal trains for Kincardine Power Station away from the Forth Bridge it should improve the performance of the passenger trains which do serve Kirkcaldy. Peter Are EWS et al still threatening to boycott the Alloa Line? For those not aware, NR appear to be charging a premium for access to the line for freight operators even though it isn't exactly a highly desirable alternative routing for them. It might make more sense to charge a premium for the bridge route. As for discrepancies in transport policy between Westminster and Holyrood, what of it exactly? The PM has no authority to alter the way the Scots parliament chooses to spend it's allocation of funds. If it appears to observers south of the border that transport projects are getting more backing in Scotland than in England, then less money will have to be spent on something else in England, as it is in Scotland, in order to fund the rail network expansion. You get ought for nought, it's all give and take, quid pro quo etc. The M8 is a motorway?? Where?!? Quite. Perhaps more of England's money could be spent on English projects, rather than being sent across the border to be spent on Scottish projects. ;-) |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Jun 28, 12:04 pm, Mr Thant
wrote: On 28 Jun, 10:15, John B wrote: However, as any fule kno, the stumbling block for the last few years has been on where the money's coming from. If Gordon wants to gain popularity and credibility with London voters and business leaders, then an announcement on Crossrail financing - obviously conditional on the passage of the bill - would be a good way to do so. Maybe. But I'd think a funding commitment would be a risky idea politically. It could easily look like throwing money at an extravagant project with no real care, that will only benefit a few Londoners and a few big city businesses etc etc. All of the politically safe moves (funding development, introducing a bill) have already been done. But it won't just benefit a few Londoners. It'll indirectly benefit just about everyone that ever uses public transport in London - that must be about 20% of the country. Plus it'd have the added benefit of stopping the economy from grinding to a halt because noone in London can get about any more. Jonn Elledge |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant
wrote: My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. The Thameslink Programme, on the other hand... Yes my money is on Thameslink being announced as its; a) further advanced b) cheaper c) first phase can be (probably) completed before the olympics d) Less likely to soak up civil resources that would be needed for said games (Dont get me wrong; its a lot of work just not the same magnitude as Crossrail) For the next five years everything in political terms is governed by the olympic timetable. I would be very surprised if there is a serious start on Crossrail till its over. |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 28 Jun, 14:27, kytelly wrote:
For the next five years everything in political terms is governed by the olympic timetable. I would be very surprised if there is a serious start on Crossrail till its over. I had thought this - but someone clever (possibly on u.t.l/u.r) recently pointed out to me that one of the few things the Olympics *won't* need in civil engineering terms is skilled, specialised tunnellers and customised, specialised boring machines. Therefore, these will be among the few resources within the building market that *aren't* at a massive premium during the lead-up to 2012. If my understanding of the construction process is right, and if Crossrail building were to start next year, then the main work for about the first five years would be the tunnelling. Fit-out and surface construction would then kick off around 2013: conveniently in time to use all the builders freed up by the completion (/abandonment, depending on your levels of cynicism) of Olympic works. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org/blog |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Jun 28, 11:54 am, John B wrote:
On 28 Jun, 11:41, Kev wrote: And Canary Wharf's developers stumped up cash for the DLR and the JLE, and will most likely stump up cash for Crossrail as well (assuming the private sector funding model is based on the award of development rights, which is likely). Really, what percentage of the cost of the Jubilee Ext and the DLR did they cough up and are the developers currently putting money into the Jubilee resignalling or DLR works. Kevin |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 28 Jun, 15:43, Kev wrote:
And Canary Wharf's developers stumped up cash for the DLR and the JLE, and will most likely stump up cash for Crossrail as well (assuming the private sector funding model is based on the award of development rights, which is likely). Really, what percentage of the cost of the Jubilee Ext and the DLR did they cough up and are the developers currently putting money into the Jubilee resignalling or DLR works. They put up £400m for the JLE (although they went bust over roughly the same period, so not sure how much actually got paid out), and £70m for the DLR (out of c£300m cost for the original line plus the extension to Bank). They're not paying for the JLE resignalling, because the deal behind the £400m was that it would fund a railway that worked. And they're not paying for the new DLR extensions, because these are for the benefit of the Olympics/CTRL (Stratford Intl to Custom House), Woolwich regeneration (King George V to Woolwich), and Dagenham Dock regeneration (Canning Town to Dagenham Dock). I don't know whether or to what extent developers in these areas are funding the DLR extensions. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On 28 Jun, 14:53, John B wrote:
On 28 Jun, 14:27, kytelly wrote: For the next five years everything in political terms is governed by the olympic timetable. I would be very surprised if there is a serious start on Crossrail till its over. I had thought this - but someone clever (possibly on u.t.l/u.r) recently pointed out to me that one of the few things the Olympics *won't* need in civil engineering terms is skilled, specialised tunnellers and customised, specialised boring machines. Therefore, these will be among the few resources within the building market that *aren't* at a massive premium during the lead-up to 2012. If my understanding of the construction process is right, and if Crossrail building were to start next year, then the main work for about the first five years would be the tunnelling. Fit-out and surface construction would then kick off around 2013: conveniently in time to use all the builders freed up by the completion (/abandonment, depending on your levels of cynicism) of Olympic works. -- John Band john at johnband dot orgwww.johnband.org/blog Hmm I take your point but I think we're both feeling around in the dark a bit here as neither of us are civil engineers. I would suggest that the actual tunneling is but one part of building a tunnel; Design, project management and proffessional services would have a lot of overlap with other big projects. I'm not saying it wouldnt be possible but the way this country seems to work would rule out two mega civil projects running concurrently. |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, John B wrote:
On 28 Jun, 11:41, Kev wrote: (apart from people who think that its only purpose is to speed commuting times between Maidenhead and Canary Wharf - I suspect these are the same people who thought Thameslink's purpose was to speed commuting times between Streatham and St Albans). You mean to say that isn't what it is for. The point is that it relieves the pressure on all the central Underground lines Well, the Central line, and i think the Met and District, but not to the same degree. I don't believe it does anything for any other lines; my memory of the relief maps in the hoary old Central London Rail study is that most of the nice green and blue bits are to the east. Now, if they'd gone for the Wimbledon alignment ... plus Liverpool Street and Paddington mainline stations, plus the other transport links to Heathrow. AIUI, Crossrail will take over the Heathrow paths that are currently in use by Heathrow Connect; it won't provide more trains. Although, of course, they'll be twice the size. Is HC currently anywhere near capacity? I've never heard it suggested that it is; i suspect the premium fare may have something to do with this. Will that go away with Crossrail? Even if not, i suspect Crossrail will be more attractive than HC, since you don't have to change at Paddington. tom -- Biochemistry is the study of carbon compounds that wriggle. |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007, John B wrote:
On 27 Jun, 22:19, Mr Thant wrote: My guess: We have an anouncement on Crossrail soon. It already has the government's full support - the current hurdle is getting it through parliament, which isn't really something you can announce. I don't think any progress can be made until there's been a few months of consultation whatnot over the recent Woolwich changes. The only thing Brown could announce is scrapping it. However, as any fule kno, the stumbling block for the last few years has been on where the money's coming from. If Gordon wants to gain popularity and credibility with London voters and business leaders, then an announcement on Crossrail financing - obviously conditional on the passage of the bill - would be a good way to do so. Three words: land value capture. LVC is blindingly obviously the best way to fund large infrastructure projects like this. The reason it hasn't been used yet is that there isn't a legal framework to do it. El Gordo could announce that he was going to put one in place, thereby showing people that he backs public transport and that he's still a financial innovator, all for zero cost to the Treasury. tom PS This document contains a few tidbits of info on LVC, starting on page 8; by coincidence, it also discusses privatisation of trunk roads, with multiple competing routes between cities, as came up in another thread: http://www.policyinstitute.info/AllPDFs/Bruce2Sep05.pdf -- Biochemistry is the study of carbon compounds that wriggle. |
New Prime Minister - New Transport Policy?
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk