http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/document/3159/get

All motherhood and apple pie stuff - What specific measures would you
add to give the London Travel Watch document teeth or should that be
legs?

Two questions about London Travelwatch that I struggle to find
answered on their website.

Who funds London Travelwatch?

Excluding the admin staff what are they paid?

These exacerbate my concerns on the statement in the previous post
about the nature of the document.

OC

Old Central wrote:
Two questions about London Travelwatch that I struggle to find
answered on their website.

Who funds London Travelwatch?

I struggled for about 5 seconds and found this:

http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/about/index

"We are sponsored and funded by the London Assembly, which is part of
the Greater London Authority. The Assembly also appoints the members of
London TravelWatch, who are supported by professional staff* who carry
out much of the day-to-day work."

* http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/about/staff

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Oops, agreed - but doesn't answer what are the paid?

AFAICS they act like a local councillor would but does anyone vote for
them?

Remember we are considering the nature of a document that has been
produced for us.

Thanks

OC

On 28 Feb, 12:33, Old Central wrote:
Oops, agreed - but doesn't answer what are the paid?

GBP2,800 unless they have particular specialist transport skills in
which case up to GBP7,000: http://www.london.gov.uk/assembly/tr...c07/item07.pdf

Google is a fine thing, you know...

AFAICS they act like a local councillor would but does anyone vote for
them?

Remember we are considering the nature of a document that has been
produced for us.

They're appointed by GLA members - so not directly voted for, but
they're chosen by our elected representatives (the GLA has 9 Tories, 7
Labour, 2 Greens and 2 "One London" ex-UKIPpers, in case you're
worried their nominees will be overly pro- or anti-Ken)

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

Thanks John, obviously my googling is not what it was!

I've found them very helpful in dealing with claims and taking up
issues on my behalf. Their online forum, which I used to read,
collapsed about 18 months ago under a welter of adverse comment.

OC

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:12:27 -0800 (PST), Mwmbwls
wrote:

http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/document/3159/get

All motherhood and apple pie stuff - What specific measures would you
add to give the London Travel Watch document teeth or should that be
legs?

I like to see much more detail about how the National Rail network would
be developed to give consistent, frequent services that provide
sufficient capacity. I'd like to see some bravery around improving
signalling capacity, removing conflicting junctions and better
co-ordination of service patterns. I'd certainly want to see ELLX Phase
2 completed and I'd be brave and double and rebuild the Canonbury tunnel
to get Overground up to Finsbury Park. Electrification of the GOBLIN
would also be an absolute priority as would extra stations and further
improved interchange.

The Travelwatch document says nothing about interchange and while a few
bits and bobs have been done nothing that is genuinely useful or is a
real addition to transport connectivity has been delivered in recent
years. Much more can be done in this area - a proper rebuild of Finsbury
Park would be a good start after 20 years of inaction.

I'd like to see a move towards more tram lines and the reintroduction of
trolleybuses for busy routes or networks that don't justify conversion
to trams.

I'd like to see more innovation in the bus network and a more flexible
framework for minibus services that will create new links and open up
parts of the network. I'd also like to see certain key trunk links that
don't exist being put in place quickly. This includes more orbital
services. I also see a place for some Express routes too. Linked to the
Interchange programme I'd like to see more bus stations created and a
step change made in bus shelter comfort and provision. I wouldn't waste
any money on reinventing the Routemaster.

I'd like to see a commitment to Chelsea - Hackney being implemented. I'd
also like a full review done of tube services to see if or how they can
be further improved beyond the planned upgrades. I also believe there is
scope for a programme of new lines and possibly some extensions and I
believe the lessons from places like Madrid, where lines can be built in
next to no time, should be learned for London. Current proposals to
renew and upgrade the tube would continue. I don't really know what I'd
do about the Metronet situation as it's hideously complicated.

There's a bit of me that would quite like to see the DLR line to Charing
Cross but I don't believe sufficient capacity would be provided so that
would have to go into a new tube line. However I would like to see DLR
do more in South London and I'd complete the proposed line to Dagenham
Dock but with perhaps a further link on to connect with the District
Line.

I would completely review and almost certainly change TfL's policy
towards service information provision. I would like to see a minimum of
two TfL Travel Centres in each London borough where face to face access
to information on *all* forms of transport in London would be provided.
Ideally these centres would have a cafe as well as Internet access to
information as well.

On ticketing I would review and fine tune the plethora of concessions
that now exist. I would want to see the roll out of Oyster and PAYG
completed for National Rail as a matter of absolute urgency. I would
use the PAYG system to allow single journey multi modal through
ticketing - e.g bus to bus for a single fare. While this might be quite
expensive in the short run due to revenue loss I think the generative
effect would be very high (as it was in New York with Metrocard).

There's my 2p worth.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

I like to see much more detail about how the National Rail network would
be developed to give consistent, frequent services that provide
sufficient capacity. I'd like to see some bravery around improving
signalling capacity, removing conflicting junctions and better
co-ordination of service patterns. I'd certainly want to see ELLX Phase
2 completed and I'd be brave and double and rebuild the Canonbury tunnel
to get Overground up to Finsbury Park. Electrification of the GOBLIN
would also be an absolute priority as would extra stations and further
improved interchange.

stuff snipped

There's my 2p worth.

You do realise you just got my vote for mayor - now how do we pay for
it?`
--
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)

I'd like to see a commitment to Chelsea - Hackney being implemented. I'd
also like a full review done of tube services to see if or how they can
be further improved beyond the planned upgrades. I also believe there is
scope for a programme of new lines and possibly some extensions and I
believe the lessons from places like Madrid, where lines can be built in
next to no time, should be learned for London. Current proposals to
renew and upgrade the tube would continue. I don't really know what I'd
do about the Metronet situation as it's hideously complicated.

Amen!

Paul Corfield wrote:

I'd like to see a move towards more tram lines and the reintroduction of
trolleybuses for busy routes or networks that don't justify conversion
to trams.

What do trolleybuses get you?
--
Michael Hoffman