Transport policy?

Hereward the Wake · 10-10-2005, 01:07 PM

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.

spaman · 10-10-2005, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SGK

spaman, rail depots in the countryside would be disasterous. The route to and from would have to have new wide roads to allow for the lorry trafic. Around the depot itself you would need storage warehouses. People who worked there would have to commute through the countryside or you would have to allow housing nearby.
As a similar example, go to the beautiful Peak District national park and go to the Hope Valley cement works. See the blot on the landscape it creates and experience the disruption great cement lorries have on the surrounding villages.
There may be some suitable sites, but to make this INTO phpbb_some kind of policy would be awful.

Generally speaking, most intervention aimed at getting lorries off the roads tends to conflict with improving the transport network as a whole. I agree with improving railfreight options through investment, but there's little else you can do after that. The rest heads towards state control of the economy to an overbearing degree.
Encouraging locally produced wares is a nice idea, but you'll have to explain how you think you can achieve it.

Just for clarity, I did say:

Quote:

I am not suggesting farm land at all - there must be plenty of out of town brown sites that could be used........

....and yes, we are talking about a fairly major investment to improve the infrastructure of the country, not necessarily government funded, but triggered by a need for improvement, and so government led.

SGK - You also said:

Quote:

The route to and from would have to have new wide roads to allow for the lorry trafic

- don't disagree with that 100%........ but consider the state of our roads - London is effectively the hub and all roads lead to it........ We are badly in need of a road structure and rail network that caters for the shape of the country and avoids London as the main bottleneck - the majority of motorways run North to South...... try going East to west and it can be a nightmare

All I am saying is that we need some joined up thinking when it comes to transport....... not over committing to an overnight plan to change the face of transport....... but a plan that says we will look at what is really required, and do something about it..........as opposed to labour who spout a lot and just make it worse - we have to introduce a bit of credibility, by providing working solutions that people can see will have some chance of working - but the bottom line is we need constructive ideas that people can buy into.

SGK - You also, also said:

Quote:

Encouraging locally produced wares is a nice idea, but you'll have to explain how you think you can achieve it

First action - cutting the red tape and regulations that destroy so many small businesses........ tax incentives....... improvements to the tax rates system levied on small businesses.
Encouragement of viable local communities is a must....... and can be done in several ways..... ensure a PO, bank, and pub are easy to setup and cheap to run....
Make it easy to sell things from your own doorstep/stall without a myriad of daft rules and licences....
Getting the idea across to all concerned that they can be responsible for themselves and what they do without a nanny state watching their every move.....

Just a few thoughts...

:idea:

Tom Commis · 10-10-2005, 08:18 PM

Hereward the Wake wrote

Quote:

Absolutley stupid. I believe many inter-city services and evening/weekend are unprofitable. A number of cities and large towns would lose all rail services. Minibuses are a poor substitute for trains over quite long distances.

I was suggesting minibuses to replace short routes really. As for intercity routes being unprofitable, I was unaware of that but if so why are they there?
You need to be clear about what you want from the rail network, if it is enviromental benefit then you cannot have sparsley used trains. If you seek to provide a universal service then that will require a massive increase in public spending as on the continent. Since the current network already leaves many areas uncovered why should some people have a special service subsidised by those without access to it?.

Quote:

The loss making services are supported by subsidies, not the profitable routes.

My understanding is that the companies recieve a subsidy on the understanding that they must keep up certain services, the franchise depends on this and they must keep those services up even if the subsidy does not cover them.

David Holland · 10-10-2005, 10:32 PM

I think logically air fuel should be taxed like petrol and rail diesel. It would also partially solve our immigration problems.

At the moment for part time workers the train is not economical because you can not buy multiple journeys eg a book of tickets so that it can be economical for part time workers to travel by train.
An ex colleague of mine used to take the train but when she went part time she could not afford it anymore. However she wanted to but the ticket system made her drive.

However the problem is that more and more people want to travel but we have limited space on the roads and public transport is badly managed !

It will be difficult to solve this.

WindupMerchant · 12-10-2005, 02:01 PM

Just thought I'd add this to the debate

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...449413,00.html

mkpdavies · 12-10-2005, 02:08 PM

Quote:

A new survey has also found that seven-in-10 villages do not have appropriate speed limits.

Who deems what appropriate is for all conditions and times?

10-10-2005, 10:32 PM	#24 (permalink)
David Holland Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: London Posts: 1,319	What about air travel and the greenhous effect I think logically air fuel should be taxed like petrol and rail diesel. It would also partially solve our immigration problems. At the moment for part time workers the train is not economical because you can not buy multiple journeys eg a book of tickets so that it can be economical for part time workers to travel by train. An ex colleague of mine used to take the train but when she went part time she could not afford it anymore. However she wanted to but the ticket system made her drive. However the problem is that more and more people want to travel but we have limited space on the roads and public transport is badly managed ! It will be difficult to solve this.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

12-10-2005, 02:01 PM	#25 (permalink)
WindupMerchant Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 1,508	Just thought I'd add this to the debate http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0...449413,00.html