Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00

Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..

In message <5pdQN.40211$lu2.17059@fx15.ams1>, at 14:57:05 on Sat, 6 Apr
2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00
>
>Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..

As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:

(a) All legs on such buses should be free of charge, as long as you have
a ticket for previous or subsequent legs (both in my case).

(b) Car park fees should be waived** should one decide to drive to a
railhead which is being bustituted. In my case I could drive to
Royston and catch the train from there, and if one takes into
account the time to get between home and the local station, it
would save at least three quarters of an hour (each way).

** Or as a practical implementation, issue a free car parking voucher
with the ticket.
--
Roland Perry

On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <5pdQN.40211$lu2.17059@fx15.ams1>, at 14:57:05 on Sat, 6 Apr
> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>> Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00
>>
>> Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..
>
> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:
>
> (a) All legs on such buses should be free of charge, as long as you have
> a ticket for previous or subsequent legs (both in my case).
>
> (b) Car park fees should be waived** should one decide to drive to a
> railhead which is being bustituted. In my case I could drive to
> Royston and catch the train from there, and if one takes into
> account the time to get between home and the local station, it
> would save at least three quarters of an hour (each way).
>
> ** Or as a practical implementation, issue a free car parking voucher
> with the ticket.

The car parks at Cogan and Cardiff Central railway stations are
partially closed for bustitutions so provisions for free car parking are
limited anyway. Cogan railway station has free parking anyway.

Whilst I agree with your sentiments I would include the right to travel
on an alternative non-bustituted route regardless of additional mileage.
If I wanted to travel by bus I would book National Express or one of
their competitors in the first place.

Perhaps we should lobby our new MPs for amendments to the National
Conditions of Carriage after the general election?

Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <5pdQN.40211$lu2.17059@fx15.ams1>, at 14:57:05 on Sat, 6 Apr
>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>> Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00
>>>
>>> Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..
>>
>> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
>> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:
>>
>> (a) All legs on such buses should be free of charge, as long as you have
>> a ticket for previous or subsequent legs (both in my case).
>>
>> (b) Car park fees should be waived** should one decide to drive to a
>> railhead which is being bustituted. In my case I could drive to
>> Royston and catch the train from there, and if one takes into
>> account the time to get between home and the local station, it
>> would save at least three quarters of an hour (each way).
>>
>> ** Or as a practical implementation, issue a free car parking voucher
>> with the ticket.
>
> The car parks at Cogan and Cardiff Central railway stations are
> partially closed for bustitutions so provisions for free car parking are
> limited anyway. Cogan railway station has free parking anyway.
>
> Whilst I agree with your sentiments I would include the right to travel
> on an alternative non-bustituted route regardless of additional mileage.
> If I wanted to travel by bus I would book National Express or one of
> their competitors in the first place.
>
> Perhaps we should lobby our new MPs for amendments to the National
> Conditions of Carriage after the general election?
>
>
Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.

Perhaps it is better to close a route for a continuous week or two rather
than for endless weekends. It would be more efficient and thus cheaper for
the engineering.

On 07/04/2024 10:11, Tweed wrote:
> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <5pdQN.40211$lu2.17059@fx15.ams1>, at 14:57:05 on Sat, 6 Apr
>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>> Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00
>>>>
>>>> Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..
>>>
>>> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
>>> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:
>>>
>>> (a) All legs on such buses should be free of charge, as long as you have
>>> a ticket for previous or subsequent legs (both in my case).
>>>
>>> (b) Car park fees should be waived** should one decide to drive to a
>>> railhead which is being bustituted. In my case I could drive to
>>> Royston and catch the train from there, and if one takes into
>>> account the time to get between home and the local station, it
>>> would save at least three quarters of an hour (each way).
>>>
>>> ** Or as a practical implementation, issue a free car parking voucher
>>> with the ticket.
>>
>> The car parks at Cogan and Cardiff Central railway stations are
>> partially closed for bustitutions so provisions for free car parking are
>> limited anyway. Cogan railway station has free parking anyway.
>>
>> Whilst I agree with your sentiments I would include the right to travel
>> on an alternative non-bustituted route regardless of additional mileage.
>> If I wanted to travel by bus I would book National Express or one of
>> their competitors in the first place.
>>
>> Perhaps we should lobby our new MPs for amendments to the National
>> Conditions of Carriage after the general election?
>>
>>
> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>
> Perhaps it is better to close a route for a continuous week or two rather
> than for endless weekends. It would be more efficient and thus cheaper for
> the engineering.

That hits hard-pressed commuters™ who might find other ways to travel
(or avoid travelling) and stop paying peak fares, perhaps permanently.

Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:
> On 07/04/2024 10:11, Tweed wrote:
>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <5pdQN.40211$lu2.17059@fx15.ams1>, at 14:57:05 on Sat, 6 Apr
>>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00
>>>>>
>>>>> Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..
>>>>
>>>> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
>>>> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:
>>>>
>>>> (a) All legs on such buses should be free of charge, as long as you have
>>>> a ticket for previous or subsequent legs (both in my case).
>>>>
>>>> (b) Car park fees should be waived** should one decide to drive to a
>>>> railhead which is being bustituted. In my case I could drive to
>>>> Royston and catch the train from there, and if one takes into
>>>> account the time to get between home and the local station, it
>>>> would save at least three quarters of an hour (each way).
>>>>
>>>> ** Or as a practical implementation, issue a free car parking voucher
>>>> with the ticket.
>>>
>>> The car parks at Cogan and Cardiff Central railway stations are
>>> partially closed for bustitutions so provisions for free car parking are
>>> limited anyway. Cogan railway station has free parking anyway.
>>>
>>> Whilst I agree with your sentiments I would include the right to travel
>>> on an alternative non-bustituted route regardless of additional mileage.
>>> If I wanted to travel by bus I would book National Express or one of
>>> their competitors in the first place.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we should lobby our new MPs for amendments to the National
>>> Conditions of Carriage after the general election?
>>>
>>>
>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
>> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>
>> Perhaps it is better to close a route for a continuous week or two rather
>> than for endless weekends. It would be more efficient and thus cheaper for
>> the engineering.
>
> That hits hard-pressed commuters™ who might find other ways to travel
> (or avoid travelling) and stop paying peak fares, perhaps permanently.
>

I would have assumed that covid, WFH and rail strikes would have shaken out
all the commuters who can find viable alternatives.

On 07/04/2024 10:11, Tweed wrote:
> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <5pdQN.40211$lu2.17059@fx15.ams1>, at 14:57:05 on Sat, 6 Apr
>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>> Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00
>>>>
>>>> Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..
>>>
>>> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
>>> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:
>>>
>>> (a) All legs on such buses should be free of charge, as long as you have
>>> a ticket for previous or subsequent legs (both in my case).
>>>
>>> (b) Car park fees should be waived** should one decide to drive to a
>>> railhead which is being bustituted. In my case I could drive to
>>> Royston and catch the train from there, and if one takes into
>>> account the time to get between home and the local station, it
>>> would save at least three quarters of an hour (each way).
>>>
>>> ** Or as a practical implementation, issue a free car parking voucher
>>> with the ticket.
>>
>> The car parks at Cogan and Cardiff Central railway stations are
>> partially closed for bustitutions so provisions for free car parking are
>> limited anyway. Cogan railway station has free parking anyway.
>>
>> Whilst I agree with your sentiments I would include the right to travel
>> on an alternative non-bustituted route regardless of additional mileage.
>> If I wanted to travel by bus I would book National Express or one of
>> their competitors in the first place.
>>
>> Perhaps we should lobby our new MPs for amendments to the National
>> Conditions of Carriage after the general election?
>>
>>
> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>
> Perhaps it is better to close a route for a continuous week or two rather
> than for endless weekends. It would be more efficient and thus cheaper for
> the engineering.
>

One of the problems is that bustitution is now the first resort whilst
in BR days it was a last resort. I can remember the weird and wonderful
diversionary routes BR sometimes used to avoid using buses. Although
they might have been slow they avoided additional changes onto and off
buses and were faster than today's bustitutions.

Unfortunately ToC crews now only have minimal route knowledge so crews
are not available for diversions.

Today we have the idiotic situation that when the Severn Tunnel is
closed my journey to the West Country from Cardiff can involve train to
Newport, bus to Bristol Parkway, bus to Bristol Temple Meads, then train
towards my destination which is three changes, and two buses instead of
a direct rail service.

On 07/04/2024 10:19, Certes wrote:
> On 07/04/2024 10:11, Tweed wrote:
>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <5pdQN.40211$lu2.17059@fx15.ams1>, at 14:57:05 on Sat, 6 Apr
>>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00
>>>>>
>>>>> Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..
>>>>
>>>> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as
>>>> well as
>>>> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a
>>>> proposal:
>>>>
>>>> (a) All legs on such buses should be free of charge, as long as you
>>>> have
>>>> a ticket for previous or subsequent legs (both in my case).
>>>>
>>>> (b) Car park fees should be waived** should one decide to drive to a
>>>> railhead which is being bustituted. In my case I could drive to
>>>> Royston and catch the train from there, and if one takes into
>>>> account the time to get between home and the local station, it
>>>> would save at least three quarters of an hour (each way).
>>>>
>>>> ** Or as a practical implementation, issue a free car parking voucher
>>>> with the ticket.
>>>
>>> The car parks at Cogan and Cardiff Central railway stations are
>>> partially closed for bustitutions so provisions for free car parking are
>>> limited anyway.  Cogan railway station has free parking anyway.
>>>
>>> Whilst I agree with your sentiments I would include the right to travel
>>> on an alternative non-bustituted route regardless of additional mileage.
>>>   If I wanted to travel by bus I would book National Express or one of
>>> their competitors in the first place.
>>>
>>> Perhaps we should lobby our new MPs for amendments to the National
>>> Conditions of Carriage after the general election?
>>>
>>>
>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
>> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>
>> Perhaps it is better to close a route for a continuous week or two rather
>> than for endless weekends. It would be more efficient and thus cheaper
>> for
>> the engineering.
>
> That hits hard-pressed commuters™ who might find other ways to travel
> (or avoid travelling) and stop paying peak fares, perhaps permanently.

Weekend works disproportionality affect those travelling long distances
and makes journeys which would be normally be viable unviable.

On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:

Would you propose to charge more up here the replacement bus is usually
quicker than the train. :-)

In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:

>Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
>want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.

Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
roads instead.

As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
hourly 62-seater coach.

They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
possible).
--
Roland Perry

In message <uutseb$2nq5s$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:27:23 on Sun, 7 Apr
2024, JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> remarked:
>On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
>> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
>> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:
>
>Would you propose to charge more up here the replacement bus is usually
>quicker than the train. :-)

There's also the comfort. Rail Replacement Buses make me feel travel
sick, especially if I'm using my laptop. They also rarely have Wifi and
power sockets.
--
Roland Perry

On 07/04/2024 11:27, JMB99 wrote:
> On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
>> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as well as
>> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a proposal:
>
>
> Would you propose to charge more up here the replacement bus is usually
> quicker than the train.  :-)

You're lucky. Cardiff to Dawlish can be more than 90 minutes longer.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
>> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>
> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
> roads instead.
>
> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
> hourly 62-seater coach.
>
> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
> possible).

They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what their
masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the costs, and is
constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It doesn't receive the fare
revenue.

Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 07/04/2024 10:19, Certes wrote:
>> On 07/04/2024 10:11, Tweed wrote:
>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 07/04/2024 09:07, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <5pdQN.40211$lu2.17059@fx15.ams1>, at 14:57:05 on Sat, 6 Apr
>>>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Channel 5, 10 April, 20:00
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Critical analysis of schedules, fares, safety, etc..
>>>>>
>>>>> As a long term sufferer from busitutions (this weekend again, as
>>>>> well as
>>>>> over Easter) which doubles the time to get to London) I have a
>>>>> proposal:
>>>>>
>>>>> (a) All legs on such buses should be free of charge, as long as you
>>>>> have
>>>>> a ticket for previous or subsequent legs (both in my case).
>>>>>
>>>>> (b) Car park fees should be waived** should one decide to drive to a
>>>>> railhead which is being bustituted. In my case I could drive to
>>>>> Royston and catch the train from there, and if one takes into
>>>>> account the time to get between home and the local station, it
>>>>> would save at least three quarters of an hour (each way).
>>>>>
>>>>> ** Or as a practical implementation, issue a free car parking voucher
>>>>> with the ticket.
>>>>
>>>> The car parks at Cogan and Cardiff Central railway stations are
>>>> partially closed for bustitutions so provisions for free car parking are
>>>> limited anyway.  Cogan railway station has free parking anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Whilst I agree with your sentiments I would include the right to travel
>>>> on an alternative non-bustituted route regardless of additional mileage.
>>>>   If I wanted to travel by bus I would book National Express or one of
>>>> their competitors in the first place.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps we should lobby our new MPs for amendments to the National
>>>> Conditions of Carriage after the general election?
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
>>> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>
>>> Perhaps it is better to close a route for a continuous week or two rather
>>> than for endless weekends. It would be more efficient and thus cheaper
>>> for
>>> the engineering.
>>
>> That hits hard-pressed commuters™ who might find other ways to travel
>> (or avoid travelling) and stop paying peak fares, perhaps permanently.
>
> Weekend works disproportionality affect those travelling long distances
> and makes journeys which would be normally be viable unviable.
>
>

Indeed. It’s one of many reasons why I take EasyJet from Birmingham to
Glasgow. They don’t have an inferior service on a Sunday.

In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time you
>>> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>
>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>> roads instead.
>>
>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>
>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>> possible).
>
>They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what their
>masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the costs, and is
>constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It doesn't receive the fare
>revenue.

If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
--
Roland Perry

On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time
>>>> you
>>>> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>
>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>> roads instead.
>>>
>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>
>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>> possible).
>>
>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what their
>> masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the costs,
>> and is
>> constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It doesn't receive the fare
>> revenue.
>
> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.

HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.

Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time
>>>>> you
>>>>> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>
>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>> roads instead.
>>>>
>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>
>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>> possible).
>>>
>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what their
>>> masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the costs,
>>> and is
>>> constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It doesn't receive the fare
>>> revenue.
>>
>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>
> HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.
>

This is often asserted, but I can’t find actual evidence that this is so.
Anyone got a reference?

On 07/04/2024 20:10, Tweed wrote:
> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the time
>>>>>> you
>>>>>> want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>>> roads instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>>
>>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>>> possible).
>>>>
>>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what their
>>>> masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the costs,
>>>> and is
>>>> constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It doesn't receive the fare
>>>> revenue.
>>>
>>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>>
>> HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.
>>
>
> This is often asserted, but I can’t find actual evidence that this is so.
> Anyone got a reference?
>

I have read it somewhere.

However I note that HMG documents only seem to mention fare income and
losses with no detail of the money-go-round.

In message <uuuph4$2uisa$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:43:48 on Sun, 7 Apr
2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the
>>>>>time you want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>
>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>> roads instead.
>>>>
>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>
>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>> possible).
>>>
>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what
>>>their masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the
>>>costs, and is constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It
>>>doesn't receive the fare revenue.

>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>
>HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.

As agent for DfT.
--
Roland Perry

On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 21:32:14 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <uuuph4$2uisa$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:43:48 on Sun, 7 Apr
>2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the
>>>>>>time you want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>>
>>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>>> roads instead.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>>
>>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>>> possible).
>>>>
>>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what
>>>>their masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the
>>>>costs, and is constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It
>>>>doesn't receive the fare revenue.
>
>>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>>
>>HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.
>
>As agent for DfT.

No, it goes to, and stays with, the Treasury. The DfT acts as the Treasury's agent in spending the money the Treasury
allows it.

In message <cd261j9h855hss2mo1kka1mjsl8mfb0cbt@4ax.com>, at 22:02:22 on
Sun, 7 Apr 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 21:32:14 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <uuuph4$2uisa$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:43:48 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the
>>>>>>>time you want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>>>> roads instead.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>>>> possible).
>>>>>
>>>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what
>>>>>their masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the
>>>>>costs, and is constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It
>>>>>doesn't receive the fare revenue.
>>
>>>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>>>
>>>HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.
>>
>>As agent for DfT.
>
>No, it goes to, and stays with, the Treasury. The DfT acts as the
>Treasury's agent in spending the money the Treasury
>allows it.

You are having an issue with fungibility, and I think it's confusing
you. Why not accept that someone at the DfT is counting the beans going
out and coming in, and therefore calculating profit and loss accounts
for each of the franchises.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <cd261j9h855hss2mo1kka1mjsl8mfb0cbt@4ax.com>, at 22:02:22 on
> Sun, 7 Apr 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 21:32:14 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <uuuph4$2uisa$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:43:48 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>> 2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the
>>>>>>>> time you want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>>>>> roads instead.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>>>>> possible).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what
>>>>>> their masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the
>>>>>> costs, and is constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It
>>>>>> doesn't receive the fare revenue.
>>>
>>>>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>>>>
>>>> HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.
>>>
>>> As agent for DfT.
>>
>> No, it goes to, and stays with, the Treasury. The DfT acts as the
>> Treasury's agent in spending the money the Treasury
>> allows it.
>
> You are having an issue with fungibility, and I think it's confusing
> you. Why not accept that someone at the DfT is counting the beans going
> out and coming in, and therefore calculating profit and loss accounts
> for each of the franchises.

It's actually the GBRTT that's calculating route profitability. There are
no franchises any more, and nobody calculates P&L accounts for the
individual DfT TOCs.

But the key thing is that the only minister responsible for both rail
revenue and costs is our famously rail-loving PM. The DfT's job is to
minimise spending, even if this reduces revenenues.

In message <jHOQN.91084$au2.55699@fx12.ams1>, at 09:22:23 on Mon, 8 Apr
2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <cd261j9h855hss2mo1kka1mjsl8mfb0cbt@4ax.com>, at 22:02:22 on
>> Sun, 7 Apr 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 21:32:14 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <uuuph4$2uisa$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:43:48 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>> 2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the
>>>>>>>>> time you want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>>>>>> roads instead.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>>>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>>>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>>>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>>>>>> possible).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what
>>>>>>> their masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the
>>>>>>> costs, and is constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It
>>>>>>> doesn't receive the fare revenue.
>>>>
>>>>>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>>>>>
>>>>> HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.
>>>>
>>>> As agent for DfT.
>>>
>>> No, it goes to, and stays with, the Treasury. The DfT acts as the
>>> Treasury's agent in spending the money the Treasury
>>> allows it.
>>
>> You are having an issue with fungibility, and I think it's confusing
>> you. Why not accept that someone at the DfT is counting the beans going
>> out and coming in, and therefore calculating profit and loss accounts
>> for each of the franchises.
>
>It's actually the GBRTT that's calculating route profitability. There are
>no franchises any more,

Tell that to RMT who are *still* banging on about foreign
franchise-holders lining their pockets.

>and nobody calculates P&L accounts for the
>individual DfT TOCs.

Cite.

>But the key thing is that the only minister responsible for both rail
>revenue and costs is our famously rail-loving PM. The DfT's job is to
>minimise spending, even if this reduces revenenues.

On a day to day basis there are other ministers involved in scrutinising
both costs and revenues.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:50:20 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <jHOQN.91084$au2.55699@fx12.ams1>, at 09:22:23 on Mon, 8 Apr
>2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <cd261j9h855hss2mo1kka1mjsl8mfb0cbt@4ax.com>, at 22:02:22 on
>>> Sun, 7 Apr 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 21:32:14 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <uuuph4$2uisa$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:43:48 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>> 2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the
>>>>>>>>>> time you want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>>>>>>> roads instead.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>>>>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>>>>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>>>>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>>>>>>> possible).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what
>>>>>>>> their masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the
>>>>>>>> costs, and is constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It
>>>>>>>> doesn't receive the fare revenue.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.
>>>>>
>>>>> As agent for DfT.
>>>>
>>>> No, it goes to, and stays with, the Treasury. The DfT acts as the
>>>> Treasury's agent in spending the money the Treasury
>>>> allows it.
>>>
>>> You are having an issue with fungibility, and I think it's confusing
>>> you. Why not accept that someone at the DfT is counting the beans going
>>> out and coming in, and therefore calculating profit and loss accounts
>>> for each of the franchises.
>>
>>It's actually the GBRTT that's calculating route profitability. There are
>>no franchises any more,
>
>Tell that to RMT who are *still* banging on about foreign
>franchise-holders lining their pockets.

Yes, it's a political message that works with their target audience. And they're not the only ones: many left-wing
commentators do the same, as did the recent Channel 5 expose programme on the railways. Any suggestion that a UK
taxpayer-subsidised entity might be paying dividends to foreign shareholders disgusts them. They ignore the fact that
many UK buses are also operated by foreign-owned companies.

On 12/04/2024 13:28, Recliner wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 08:50:20 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>> In message <jHOQN.91084$au2.55699@fx12.ams1>, at 09:22:23 on Mon, 8 Apr
>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <cd261j9h855hss2mo1kka1mjsl8mfb0cbt@4ax.com>, at 22:02:22 on
>>>> Sun, 7 Apr 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> On Sun, 7 Apr 2024 21:32:14 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <uuuph4$2uisa$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:43:48 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>> 2024, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 07/04/2024 18:03, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <S2vQN.8792$jC2.3354@fx06.ams1>, at 11:02:10 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>>>> 2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <uuto0v$2ms4m$1@dont-email.me>, at 09:11:59 on Sun, 7 Apr
>>>>>>>>>> 2024, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Free bus legs run the risk of encouraging travel exactly at the
>>>>>>>>>>> time you want to restrict it because of limited bus capacity.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Encouraging train travel that would never do! Force everyone onto the
>>>>>>>>>> roads instead.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As for capacity issues, that's a self-inflicted injury by the train
>>>>>>>>>> companies. On the route I'm describing an 8-car EMU is bustituted by an
>>>>>>>>>> hourly 62-seater coach.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> They need to make their mind up about their core remit, which on
>>>>>>>>>> weekends like this seems to be to annoy as many passengers as humanly
>>>>>>>>>> possible).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> They understand their remit perfectly well. It's to do exactly what
>>>>>>>>> their masters in the DfT instruct them to do. The DfT funds all the
>>>>>>>>> costs, and is constantly looking for ways of cutting them. It
>>>>>>>>> doesn't receive the fare revenue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If "it" is the DfT , then it does receive the fares revenue.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HM Treasury receives the fare revenue.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As agent for DfT.
>>>>>
>>>>> No, it goes to, and stays with, the Treasury. The DfT acts as the
>>>>> Treasury's agent in spending the money the Treasury
>>>>> allows it.
>>>>
>>>> You are having an issue with fungibility, and I think it's confusing
>>>> you. Why not accept that someone at the DfT is counting the beans going
>>>> out and coming in, and therefore calculating profit and loss accounts
>>>> for each of the franchises.
>>>
>>> It's actually the GBRTT that's calculating route profitability. There are
>>> no franchises any more,
>>
>> Tell that to RMT who are *still* banging on about foreign
>> franchise-holders lining their pockets.
>
> Yes, it's a political message that works with their target audience. And they're not the only ones: many left-wing
> commentators do the same, as did the recent Channel 5 expose programme on the railways. Any suggestion that a UK
> taxpayer-subsidised entity might be paying dividends to foreign shareholders disgusts them. They ignore the fact that
> many UK buses are also operated by foreign-owned companies.

Most of Britain is operated by foreign owned companies.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.