Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tom Commis
1. To scrap all subsidies on passenger railways and removing the obligation on operators to continue unprofitable services. I suggest this for enviromental reasons chiefly - the much vaunted enviromental efficiency of rail (that is fuel per passenger mile) disappears when you have a lot of services with few and sometimes no passengers. You could introduce more subsidised minibus services in rural areas to compensate.
|
Absolutely stupid. I belive many inter-city services and evening/weekend are unprofitable. A number of citys and large towns would loose all rail services. Minibuses are a poor substitute for trains over quite long distances. I would immediately leave the party if this ever became policy.
Quote:
|
Not really because only little used services would be cut, I've often been on trains where I was the only passenger, this is madness from both economic and enviromental perspectives.
|
While many trains are little used, I dont know what lines Tom Commis uses. It is the trains that carry say, 20 passengers, that will be removed under this proposal.
Quote:
|
The heavily used commuter lines would be improved because the train companies would have more money to spend on them so a better service or lower fares.
|
The loss making services are supported by subsidies, not the profitable routes.
Quote:
|
You are probably right but the policy does offer benefits to the majority of passengers (those that use busy routes) these people will appreciate the idea.
|
Those passengers that use the busy routes will use the less busy ones on other occasions.