<http://news.scotsman.com/glasgow.cfm?id=1861872005>
JIM MCBETH

A 1 BILLION vision of the future was unveiled yesterday in the shape
of Britain's biggest ever scheme for an integrated transport system to
satisfy everyone from cyclist to air traveller.

The 20-year project in the west of Scotland, where half the country's
population lives, will create new roads, rail links and ferry routes
in Argyll, Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, Dunbartonshire,
Ayrshire and Dumfries & Galloway.

About 100 delegates, representing 13 local authorities, planners,
politicians, business people and operators of airports, transport and
haulage companies, met in Glasgow yesterday to discuss the plans.

It was the first stage of the Scottish Executive's proposal for an
integrated national transport system outlined in the Transport
(Scotland) Act 2005 which advocates creating Regional Transport
Partnerships (RTPs).

In the west, Strathclyde Passenger Transport is at the heart of
WESTRAN, a new RTP.

Its work has already started. By the end of the year, three new
Lanarkshire railway stations will be open on a 35 million Larkhall to
Milngavie line.

The Glasgow Airport rail link private bill will soon be before
parliament and work has started on the Partick interchange as part of
the Glasgow Harbour development.

Alistair Watson, the chairman of SPT said: "Our population makes 284
million journeys a year by car and public transport. We require
management and campaigns to reduce car journeys."

WESTRAN hopes to follow the example of countries such as Germany,
where, in relative terms, they own twice as many cars but make half
the number of journeys.

Mr Watson said: "To change the culture of dependency we need
alternatives. The present set-up is not sustainable."

The 1 billion will be provided by the Executive and will fund
improvements to existing roads and build new ones, improve rail
stations, pay for better ferries and provide traffic systems to assist
the flow of buses in busy towns.

A new route over the River Clyde may also be created because the
Kingston Bridge is inadequate and will remain so until some of the
pressure on it is eased by the completion of the M74 missing link.

A finished M74, with its four new junctions, is a key component of the
future plans, as is an extension of the rail network, in particular a
Glasgow "cross-city" route with new stations at Glasgow Cross, Gorbals
and West Street on the South Side.

Clyde ferries will also be improved along with terminals and piers,
and a new route will run from Campbeltown to Ballycastle.

To ensure good environmental practice, cyclists will be catered for by
major extensions to the national cycle network.

Public transport remains central to the scheme. Presently, 45 million
peak-time journeys a year are made by train and 224 million by bus in
the region.

New roads and railways will increase those numbers and there are plans
to extend Glasgow's Undergound, to the west.

Mr Watson added: "One used to be able to drive from Glasgow to
Edinburgh in an hour. It's 45 minutes longer now.

"We need big change and the only disruption would be created by
maintaining the status quo. Everyone in the west can expect to see
improvements."

Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon
Please observe the Reply-To address.

NP: Mull Historical Society - The Final Arrears (from the album 'Us')

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 10:59:46 UTC, Neil Sunderland 
 wrote:

: Clyde ferries will also be improved along with terminals and piers,
: and a new route will run from Campbeltown to Ballycastle.

Hah! Not exactly new, that one. It's been tried at least twice before 
with complete failure. There's no appreciable traffic for that route, 
and if there was, the A82 down Loch Fyne couldn't handle it.

: Mr Watson added: "One used to be able to drive from Glasgow to
: Edinburgh in an hour. It's 45 minutes longer now.

To which the answer is clearly more and better trains. There are three
and a half routes from Glasgow to Edinburgh, only one of which has 
anything approaching a full service.

Ian

Ian Johnston wrote:


>
> To which the answer is clearly more and better trains. There are three
> and a half routes from Glasgow to Edinburgh, only one of which has
> anything approaching a full service.
>
> Ian



Couldn't GNER simply extend their Edinburgh services to Glasgow? That
way creating not just another frequent route to Glasgow from London,
but a full regular Intercity service between the two cities? I'm sure
alot of people would benefit from eight/nine coach trains. Virgin could
also extend their edinburgh services to Glasgow.

Neil Sunderland  wrote:


><http://news.scotsman.com/glasgow.cfm?id=1861872005>
>JIM MCBETH
>
>A 1 BILLION vision of the future was unveiled yesterday in the shape
>of Britain's biggest ever scheme for an integrated transport system to
>satisfy everyone from cyclist to air traveller.
>
>The 20-year project in the west of Scotland, where half the country's
>population lives, will create new roads, rail links and ferry routes
>in Argyll, Glasgow, Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, Dunbartonshire,
>Ayrshire and Dumfries & Galloway.
>
>About 100 delegates, representing 13 local authorities, planners,
>politicians, business people and operators of airports, transport and
>haulage companies, met in Glasgow yesterday to discuss the plans.
>
>It was the first stage of the Scottish Executive's proposal for an
>integrated national transport system outlined in the Transport
>(Scotland) Act 2005 which advocates creating Regional Transport
>Partnerships (RTPs).
>
>In the west, Strathclyde Passenger Transport is at the heart of
>WESTRAN, a new RTP.



Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.  

While much needed light rail schemes in England's cities are shelved
for lack of money, Scotland is having to invent schemes for spending
all the English cash it is given.  It's just another giant con trick.

"GreatWesternSean"  wrote


> Couldn't GNER simply extend their Edinburgh services to Glasgow? That
> way creating not just another frequent route to Glasgow from London,
> but a full regular Intercity service between the two cities?


GNER already run some through services to Glasgow see

http://www.53a-pix.co.uk/picture/91001-GC-180700.jpg

John.

In message , Tony Polson 
 writes

>
>Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
>spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.
>
>While much needed light rail schemes in England's cities are shelved
>for lack of money, Scotland is having to invent schemes for spending
>all the English cash it is given.  It's just another giant con trick.
>
>


Och away and moan somewhere else you southern fairy. It's us who 
subsidies you, and you bloody well know it.
If that weren't the case, Scotland would be the UKs version of Norway. 
It isn't, so where does the money go? Go figure.
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

John Turner wrote:

> "GreatWesternSean"  wrote
>
> > Couldn't GNER simply extend their Edinburgh services to Glasgow? That
> > way creating not just another frequent route to Glasgow from London,
> > but a full regular Intercity service between the two cities?
>
> GNER already run some through services to Glasgow see
>
> http://www.53a-pix.co.uk/picture/91001-GC-180700.jpg
>
> John.


Every two hours is hardly regular tho. I was aware the services ran,
but alot of GNER trains still terminate at Edinburgh, which could come
to great use going to Glasgow, preventing most people being packed like
sardines on regional DMU and EMU's all of the time.

In article ,
GreatWesternSean  wrote:


> Every two hours is hardly regular tho. ...


<pedant> I haven't checked the TT but every two hours seems very
regular, just not very frequent. </pedant>

Sam

> Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
> spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.
>


It's payback time for all our oil money that the English squandered

"GreatWesternSean"  wrote in message
news:1125411046.456316.177970@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

>
> John Turner wrote:
> > "GreatWesternSean"  wrote
> >
> > > Couldn't GNER simply extend their Edinburgh services to Glasgow? That
> > > way creating not just another frequent route to Glasgow from London,
> > > but a full regular Intercity service between the two cities?
> >
> > GNER already run some through services to Glasgow see
> >
> > http://www.53a-pix.co.uk/picture/91001-GC-180700.jpg
> >
> > John.
>
> Every two hours is hardly regular tho. I was aware the services ran,
> but alot of GNER trains still terminate at Edinburgh, which could come
> to great use going to Glasgow, preventing most people being packed like
> sardines on regional DMU and EMU's all of the time.
>

GNER haven't got any spare stock; they have to pay a substantial premium for
the franchise, and they can make more money between London and Leeds rather
than increasing the frequency between Edinburgh and Motherwell. In any
event, their trains aren't really ideal for local Edinburgh to Glasgow
journeys - they can be unpunctual coming all the way from London, and are
primarily intended for passengers travelling from York, Newcastle, etc, to
Glasgow, though they do provide the main Edinburgh - Motherwell service.

Peter

Tony Polson wrote:


> Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
> spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.
>
> While much needed light rail schemes in England's cities are shelved
> for lack of money, Scotland is having to invent schemes for spending
> all the English cash it is given.  It's just another giant con trick.


Almost right. Most of that billion will go on the M77 extension round
Glasgow: it's con trick all right, but the main purpose is to present a
road building scheme as an integrated transport policy.

Ian

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:36:01 +0100, James Christie
 wrote:


>If that weren't the case, Scotland would be the UKs version of Norway. 
>It isn't, so where does the money go? Go figure.


Well it doesn't seem to come to England - we just seem to get exported
politicians. Maybe the transport schemes could be funded through sales
of cuddly Nessies.
-- 
Arthur Figgis                Surrey, UK

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005, Arthur Figgis wrote:


> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 14:36:01 +0100, James Christie
>  wrote:
> 
> >If that weren't the case, Scotland would be the UKs version of Norway. 
> >It isn't, so where does the money go? Go figure.
> 
> Well it doesn't seem to come to England 


Where does the money go?  What about the army of lawyers, consultants, 
and strategic Authorities who all seem to be employed (for a 
considerable fee) to tell England that Nothing Can Be Done?

Frankly, I would rather that the money is spent on Doing Something, 
even if the current collection of actions (Anniesland via Maryhill, 
and off to Larkhall) seems entirely tangential to anything I could use 
myself.  My gripe is how much it had cost to tell the politicians that 
a heavy rail crossing of the Clyde to the west of central Glasgow was 
too expensive, when IMHO it would have been a good idea even -before- 
the Glasgow Harbour development started prattling about its wonderful 
P.T links.

Neil Sunderland wrote:


>A £1 BILLION vision of the future was unveiled yesterday in the shape

of Britain's biggest ever scheme for an integrated transport system to
satisfy everyone from cyclist to air traveller. <

How refreshing.  It is good to hear that one part of the UK, at least,
has its transportation ducks in a row.

Adrian.

Tony Polson wrote:

>Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
>spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.  


<http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1757948,00.html>

'Scottish Raj' effect not felt down south
By Angus Macleod, Scottish Political Editor

THE growth of the so-called Scottish political and media Raj may
cause much angst at dinner parties in Notting Hill and Islington but
in the rest of the country there is no such resentment  yet.

That is one of the conclusions of research conducted by social
psychologists at the University of Lancaster and presented to the
British Psychological Society conference in Edinburgh yesterday.

Contrary to popular perception, the researchers found that the English
were perfectly at ease with the Scots having their own Parliament, and
at the same time holding power and influence in Westminster and the
higher echelons of the London-based media  a development dubbed the
Scottish Raj by Jeremy Paxman, the BBC Newsnight presenter.

The idea of the Scottish Raj may annoy people in the media and in
politics but it simply has not filtered down to the ordinary English
man and woman, Susan Condor, one of the researchers who interviewed
around 100 people several times over the past five years for the
study, said.

English people like the Scots and they are happy about the Scottish
Parliament. They do not feel they should have the same amount of
self-rule because they do not have a sense of competition with the
Scots or the Welsh. They feel that as the biggest constituent part of
Britain, they have a sense of responsibility to other smaller parts
and that they have to demonstrate a certain constructiveness to their
political demands.

The researchers found that there had been no growth in political
nationalism in England because of devolution. People in England know
Scots have their own Parliament but thats about it and they are not
annoyed about it, Dr Condor said. It is a sense that this is what
the Scots have decided they want and that therefore it is appropriate
that they should have it.

What has happened is that because of devolution people in England
feel more able to say that they are English as well as British and
that it is a perfectly legitimate response. That was not always the
case in the past because English people were taught that the
appropriate response to questions about nationality was to say they
were British. Now they feel more free to say they are English. But
the sense of British identity has not declined. It is just that they
are able to say they are English as well.

The researchers are sceptical that this new sense of Englishness
will one day manifest itself in calls from south of the border for a
break-up of Britain and for the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish to go
their own ways. The break-up of Britain could come through a more
formal political route but it would not be something at the moment
that the English would push for, Dr Condor said. Such a break-up is
certainly not the settled will of the English people.


Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon
Please observe the Reply-To address.

NP: The Beatles - Drive My Car (from the album 'Rubber Soul')

Neil Sunderland  wrote:


>The researchers are sceptical that this new sense of Englishness
>will one day manifest itself in calls from south of the border for a
>break-up of Britain and for the Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish to go
>their own ways. The break-up of Britain could come through a more
>formal political route but it would not be something at the moment
>that the English would push for, Dr Condor said. Such a break-up is
>certainly not the settled will of the English people.



It is the settled will of me, and it cannot come too soon.

;-)

"Mark @ Home" <newsgroup @ stewarton.org> wrote:


>
>> Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
>> spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.
>>
>
>It's payback time for all our oil money that the English squandered 




When it comes to squandering public money, the Scots take some
beating.  Public spending per head of population in Scotland is twice
what it is in England.

Adrian Auer-Hudson wrote:

> 
> How refreshing.  It is good to hear that one part of the UK, at least,
> has its transportation ducks in a row.


As the cost of the road schemes spirals higher, the other modes will
slowly drop away. As someone else pointed out, this is just a con trick
to dress up a road-building scheme as integrated transport, and to
secure a little pot of money to fund the inevitable cost increases of
said road-building.

Cheers

mark-r

-- 
"Let's meet the panel. You couldn't ask for four finer comedians -
so that answers your next question..."
 -- Humphrey Lyttleton

The message 
from Tony   Polson  contains these words:


>  Such a break-up is
> >certainly not the settled will of the English people.

> It is the settled will of me, and it cannot come too soon.


I don't particularly want a break-up, but a casting vote in English
affairs should be for the English, rather than the Scottish Mafia.

But then most people weren't interviewed, just a selected few...

-- 
Dave,                                     
Frodsham

David Jackson  wrote:

>
>I don't particularly want a break-up, but a casting vote in English
>affairs should be for the English, rather than the Scottish Mafia.



Increased University tuition fees spring to mind.  They would not have
been passed without the votes of the Scottish Mafia, but they do not
apply in Scotland.



>But then most people weren't interviewed, just a selected few...



'Twas ever thus.   :-(

"Tony Polson"  wrote in message 
news:rffch15dq0t1dp1kaljrbjfilq15pfr4ej@4ax.com...

> David Jackson  wrote:
>>
>>I don't particularly want a break-up, but a casting vote in English
>>affairs should be for the English, rather than the Scottish Mafia.
>
>
> Increased University tuition fees spring to mind.  They would not have
> been passed without the votes of the Scottish Mafia, but they do not
> apply in Scotland.
>


I would say that the 80's English dominated government imposing an illegal 
tax in Scotland would rank higher than making Students pay their costs.

"Not Here"  wrote:


>
>"Tony Polson"  wrote in message 
>news:rffch15dq0t1dp1kaljrbjfilq15pfr4ej@4ax.com...
>> David Jackson  wrote:
>>>
>>>I don't particularly want a break-up, but a casting vote in English
>>>affairs should be for the English, rather than the Scottish Mafia.
>>
>>
>> Increased University tuition fees spring to mind.  They would not have
>> been passed without the votes of the Scottish Mafia, but they do not
>> apply in Scotland.
>>
>
>I would say that the 80's English dominated government imposing an illegal 
>tax in Scotland would rank higher than making Students pay their costs. 



But the "illegal tax" - the Poll Tax - was also applied in England and
Wales, so your point is not valid.

"Tony Polson"  wrote in message 
news:t8kdh1hfnissvi8t444n7tkbp1108709bj@4ax.com...

> "Not Here"  wrote:
>
>>
>>"Tony Polson"  wrote in message
>>news:rffch15dq0t1dp1kaljrbjfilq15pfr4ej@4ax.com...
>>> David Jackson  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>I don't particularly want a break-up, but a casting vote in English
>>>>affairs should be for the English, rather than the Scottish Mafia.
>>>
>>>
>>> Increased University tuition fees spring to mind.  They would not have
>>> been passed without the votes of the Scottish Mafia, but they do not
>>> apply in Scotland.
>>>
>>
>>I would say that the 80's English dominated government imposing an illegal
>>tax in Scotland would rank higher than making Students pay their costs.
>
>
> But the "illegal tax" - the Poll Tax - was also applied in England and
> Wales, so your point is not valid.
>


It was illegal to apply a tax in Scotland, while not applied in England and 
Wales, under the Union.
It was brought in a year before the tax was applied in E & W, so the tax was 
imposed on Scotland while not in England.

In message 
          Tony   Polson  wrote:


> "Not Here"  wrote:
> 
> >
> >"Tony Polson"  wrote in message 
> >news:rffch15dq0t1dp1kaljrbjfilq15pfr4ej@4ax.com...
> >> David Jackson  wrote:
> >>>
> >>>I don't particularly want a break-up, but a casting vote in English
> >>>affairs should be for the English, rather than the Scottish Mafia.
> >>
> >>
> >> Increased University tuition fees spring to mind.  They would not have
> >> been passed without the votes of the Scottish Mafia, but they do not
> >> apply in Scotland.
> >>
> >
> > I would say that the 80's English dominated government imposing an
> > illegal  tax in Scotland would rank higher than making Students pay their
> > costs. 
> 
> 
> But the "illegal tax" - the Poll Tax - was also applied in England and
> Wales, so your point is not valid.
> 
> 


And, however unfair and unjust it was, it wasn't illegal.

-- 
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at <http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html>

In message , Tony Polson 
 writes

>"Not Here"  wrote:
>
>>
>>"Tony Polson"  wrote in message
>>news:rffch15dq0t1dp1kaljrbjfilq15pfr4ej@4ax.com...
>>> David Jackson  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>I don't particularly want a break-up, but a casting vote in English
>>>>affairs should be for the English, rather than the Scottish Mafia.
>>>
>>>
>>> Increased University tuition fees spring to mind.  They would not have
>>> been passed without the votes of the Scottish Mafia, but they do not
>>> apply in Scotland.
>>>
>>
>>I would say that the 80's English dominated government imposing an illegal
>>tax in Scotland would rank higher than making Students pay their costs.
>
>
>But the "illegal tax" - the Poll Tax - was also applied in England and
>Wales, so your point is not valid.
>
>

It was tried out in Scotland first, as an experiment. So it is valid.
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

The message <5LARe.1975$w4.1321@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>
from "Not Here"  contains these words:


> It was illegal to apply a tax in Scotland, while not applied in England and 
> Wales, under the Union.
> It was brought in a year before the tax was applied in E & W, so the
> tax was 
> imposed on Scotland while not in England. 


In that case why is it legal for Scots students to have their Uni fees
paid for them, while English and Welsh students must "pay their way". 
Why do elderly Scots have their care paid for them while the rest must
pay as much as they have.  Sound like illegal _benefits_ to me.

-- 
Dave,                                     
Frodsham

In message , David Jackson 
 writes

>The message <5LARe.1975$w4.1321@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>
>from "Not Here"  contains these words:
>
>> It was illegal to apply a tax in Scotland, while not applied in England and
>> Wales, under the Union.
>> It was brought in a year before the tax was applied in E & W, so the
>> tax was
>> imposed on Scotland while not in England.
>
>In that case why is it legal for Scots students to have their Uni fees
>paid for them, while English and Welsh students must "pay their way".
>Why do elderly Scots have their care paid for them while the rest must
>pay as much as they have.  Sound like illegal _benefits_ to me.
>


You must be under a misapprehension. Scottish Students DO pay tuition 
fees.

The only difference is that they're not upfront (paid off same way 
Student loans are, when the person starts earning over X thousands), and 
up here they're called a 'Graduate Endowment' (just a play on words by 
the Govt).

See:

http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/paymentbydegrees/tuition_fees.asp

Englanders, eh? Jeez.
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

The message 
from James Christie  contains these words:


> >In that case why is it legal for Scots students to have their Uni fees
> >paid for them, while English and Welsh students must "pay their way".
> >Why do elderly Scots have their care paid for them while the rest must
> >pay as much as they have.  Sound like illegal _benefits_ to me.

> You must be under a misapprehension. Scottish Students DO pay tuition 
> fees.

> The only difference is that they're not upfront (paid off same way 
> Student loans are, when the person starts earning over X thousands), and 
> up here they're called a 'Graduate Endowment' (just a play on words by 
> the Govt).


Thank you for that enlightenment. Now please pick up the point about
care for the elderly in Scotland. 

-- 
Dave,                                     
Frodsham

"David Jackson"  wrote in message 
news:31303030333733334317399B96@zetnet.co.uk...

> The message 
> from James Christie  contains these words:
>
>> >In that case why is it legal for Scots students to have their Uni fees
>> >paid for them, while English and Welsh students must "pay their way".
>> >Why do elderly Scots have their care paid for them while the rest must
>> >pay as much as they have.  Sound like illegal _benefits_ to me.
>
>> You must be under a misapprehension. Scottish Students DO pay tuition
>> fees.
>
>> The only difference is that they're not upfront (paid off same way
>> Student loans are, when the person starts earning over X thousands), and
>> up here they're called a 'Graduate Endowment' (just a play on words by
>> the Govt).
>
> Thank you for that enlightenment. Now please pick up the point about
> care for the elderly in Scotland.
>


The Parliament Act stipulates what is power is devolved to the Exec, and as 
such, payments to the elderly are a devolved matter. Perfectly legal. Unlike 
the Community Charge which broke the act of Union.

Whether you agree with payments to the elderly or not is another matter, 
however, I'd rather use taxes to pay for them, than for a junket for 2 weeks 
in 2012.

In message , David Jackson 
 writes

>The message 
>from James Christie  contains these words:
>
>> >In that case why is it legal for Scots students to have their Uni fees
>> >paid for them, while English and Welsh students must "pay their way".
>> >Why do elderly Scots have their care paid for them while the rest must
>> >pay as much as they have.  Sound like illegal _benefits_ to me.
>
>> You must be under a misapprehension. Scottish Students DO pay tuition
>> fees.
>
>> The only difference is that they're not upfront (paid off same way
>> Student loans are, when the person starts earning over X thousands), and
>> up here they're called a 'Graduate Endowment' (just a play on words by
>> the Govt).
>
>Thank you for that enlightenment. Now please pick up the point about
>care for the elderly in Scotland.
>

Well that's simply us being far sighted. You only have yourselves to 
blame for that one.
Just think, if you get an English parliament, then you could have all 
this stuff too!
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

The message 
from James Christie  contains these words:


> Just think, if you get an English parliament, then you could have all 
> this stuff too!


Amen to that!

I think this is where we came in...

-- 
Dave,                                     
Frodsham

GreatWesternSean wrote:


> Couldn't GNER simply extend their Edinburgh services to Glasgow? That
> way creating not just another frequent route to Glasgow from London,
> but a full regular Intercity service between the two cities? I'm sure
> alot of people would benefit from eight/nine coach trains. Virgin could
> also extend their edinburgh services to Glasgow.


The GNER services have to run via Carstairs, because that is the only
electrified route. This is considerably longer than the direct route,
taking 1 hour as opposed to 50 minutes for a semi-fast via Falkirk.

The best service that could realistically be provided would be hourly.
Currently about a quarter of all ECML services terminate at Newcastle,
leaving Edinburgh with 3 in 2 hours. Some of those continue further
north, so only one per hour could regularly be extended to Glasgow.
This does not compare favourably with a quicker service running every
15 minutes.

Intercity standards of service are not necessary on journeys of less
than an hour. The Scotrail services have First Class and a buffet
service - what more do you need for such a short run?

GNER would like, first and foremost, to run a half-hourly service to
Edinburgh. The reason they don't is that they don't have enough
trainsets to run that service robustly and reliably. Unless extra
funding is available for them to acquire more trains (and what?), I
can't see them being too keen to spread their existing trainsets even
more thinly, to duplicate an existing good service.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

Stevie D wrote:

> The GNER services have to run via Carstairs, because that is the only
> electrified route. This is considerably longer than the direct route,
> taking 1 hour as opposed to 50 minutes for a semi-fast via Falkirk.
> 
> The best service that could realistically be provided would be hourly.
> Currently about a quarter of all ECML services terminate at Newcastle,
> leaving Edinburgh with 3 in 2 hours. Some of those continue further
> north, so only one per hour could regularly be extended to Glasgow.
> This does not compare favourably with a quicker service running every
> 15 minutes.


For a journey from Glasgow to *beyond* Edinburgh a fifteen minute point 
to point difference isn't important as the connection time in Edinburgh 
from the Scotrail service to the GNER service would be longer.

Tony Polson wrote:

>Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
>spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.  


Just to prove it's not all, er, one-way traffic... :)

<http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1872802005>

Transport projects 'driven by political expediency'

ALASTAIR DALTON
TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENT

MAJOR road and rail projects in Scotland have been approved for
political expediency rather than value for money, according to a
damning independent assessment of the Scottish Executive's transport
strategy.

Academic experts said schemes such as the Borders rail line and the
Aberdeen bypass had been given the green light because of the "fuzzy"
appraisal process which could be manipulated to justify marginal
projects.

The study, being launched at the Royal Geographical Society's annual
conference in London today, said this had "encouraged the
politicisation of the decision-making process".

It said: "The selection of schemes for progression depends more on the
ability of interest groups to articulate their demands - and to align
them with the political cycle - rather than the intrinsic value of the
projects concerned."

The Executive is a coalition of Labour and Liberal Democrat MSPs, and
the study pointed out that the Borders line ran through Lib Dem
constituencies while the new Aberdeen road passed seats Labour feared
losing in the 2003 Holyrood elections.

The study, Building Better Transport?, by academics including David
Begg, a former government transport adviser, welcomed the appraisal
process being widened beyond narrow cost grounds, to include areas
such as environmental impact.

However, it said the "fuzzy" assessment of such factors enabled
schemes with a tenuous case to be approved.

The authors, who also include Dr David Gray, of Robert Gordon
University in Aberdeen, Dr Iain Docherty, of Glasgow University, and
Dr Jon Shaw, of Aberdeen University, said it was not clear whether
such projects were good value for money, because few had been
appraised against each other. This also applied to the planned rail
links to Edinburgh and Glasgow airports, which are expected to cost a
total of 640 million.

The report also pointed to other inconsistencies, highlighting that
some of the most promising road projects were left to local
authorities to pursue, but less viable schemes were taken up by the
Executive.

The controversial M74 extension and a link between the Forth Road
Bridge and M9 scored highly in value terms but were left to councils,
while the Executive pursued the lower-scoring M77 extension south of
Glasgow and A1 Haddington-Dunbar expressway.

The Executive's national concessionary fares scheme for pensioners was
also criticised for not being subjected to detailed economic scrutiny
to ensure its 160 million annual cost would not have been better
spent elsewhere.

The report stated: "The value for money of such schemes in terms of
both the impact on the wider economy and the opportunity costs of
those other schemes not advanced as a result, remains in doubt."

The authors also warned ministers were likely to fail their target of
capping traffic growth unless road-user charging was introduced
because new roads, such as the M74 extension, and further economic
growth, would generate extra traffic.

The Executive's major increase in transport spending to more than 1
billion next year - compared with 650 million in 2003 - was
applauded, but concern was expressed that this would be a short-lived
bonanza and transport would lose out in future budget cuts.

The report also predicted the Executive's "potentially very powerful"
national transport agency could prove ineffective because ministers
would retain powers over buses, ferries and aviation.

It said the new body should assess projects "according to real
transport needs, rather than partisan or pork barrel demands for pet
projects".

A spokeswoman for the Executive said the economic case for the Borders
rail line was backed by MSPs, while the Aberdeen bypass was also of
"major value". A planned strategic projects review would decide the
priority for schemes.

She said: "The review will be a unique opportunity to assess and
compare an array of future infrastructure projects on an equitable
basis, all at the same time."


Neil Sunderland
-- 
Braunton, Devon
Please observe the Reply-To address.

NP: Nick Drake - River Man (from the album 'Five Leaves Left')

David Jackson  wrote:


>The message <5LARe.1975$w4.1321@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>
>from "Not Here"  contains these words:
>
>> It was illegal to apply a tax in Scotland, while not applied in England and 
>> Wales, under the Union.
>> It was brought in a year before the tax was applied in E & W, so the
>> tax was 
>> imposed on Scotland while not in England. 
>
>In that case why is it legal for Scots students to have their Uni fees
>paid for them, while English and Welsh students must "pay their way". 
>Why do elderly Scots have their care paid for them while the rest must
>pay as much as they have.  Sound like illegal _benefits_ to me.



And why is it OK for Scotland to pay its teachers 15% - 25% more than
England's for equivalent posts?

Because it is Scotland, of course!

And because the English taxpayers pay the bill, as usual.

;-)

James Christie  wrote:


>Well that's simply us being far sighted. You only have yourselves to 
>blame for that one.
>Just think, if you get an English parliament, then you could have all 
>this stuff too!



No we couldn't, because the English don't ever get the chance to
sponge off the Scots.

Neil Sunderland  wrote:


>Tony Polson wrote:
>>Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
>>spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.  
>
>Just to prove it's not all, er, one-way traffic... :)
>
><http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1872802005>
>
>Transport projects 'driven by political expediency'
>
>ALASTAIR DALTON
>TRANSPORT CORRESPONDENT
>
>MAJOR road and rail projects in Scotland have been approved for
>political expediency rather than value for money, according to a
>damning independent assessment of the Scottish Executive's transport
>strategy.
>
>Academic experts said schemes such as the Borders rail line and the
>Aberdeen bypass had been given the green light because of the "fuzzy"
>appraisal process which could be manipulated to justify marginal
>projects.
>
>The study, being launched at the Royal Geographical Society's annual
>conference in London today, said this had "encouraged the
>politicisation of the decision-making process".
>
>It said: "The selection of schemes for progression depends more on the
>ability of interest groups to articulate their demands - and to align
>them with the political cycle - rather than the intrinsic value of the
>projects concerned."



Who cares ... when England pays, every time?


(thanks for posting this, by the way)

"James Christie"  wrote in message
news:xf+i7bFBDGFDFwYf@christie.demon.co.uk...

> In message , Tony Polson
>  writes
> >
> >Surprise, surprise!  The Scots manage to find yet another way of
> >spending hundreds of millions of pounds of English taxpayers' money.
> >
> >While much needed light rail schemes in England's cities are shelved
> >for lack of money, Scotland is having to invent schemes for spending
> >all the English cash it is given.  It's just another giant con trick.
> >
> >
>
> Och away and moan somewhere else you southern fairy. It's us who
> subsidies you, and you bloody well know it.
> If that weren't the case, Scotland would be the UKs version of Norway.
> It isn't, so where does the money go? Go figure.
> --

lol. including the oil production scotlands gdp would actually be less than
the uk average (and that assumes 100% of oil and gas in the north sea that
is the uks would go to scotland).
cheers
james

"Tony Polson"  wrote in message
news:uc7fh1hd0ppcht65qedaa6b7h14ps3ku4k@4ax.com...

> David Jackson  wrote:
>
> >The message <5LARe.1975$w4.1321@newsfe7-win.ntli.net>
> >from "Not Here"  contains these words:
> >
> >> It was illegal to apply a tax in Scotland, while not applied in England
and
> >> Wales, under the Union.
> >> It was brought in a year before the tax was applied in E & W, so the
> >> tax was
> >> imposed on Scotland while not in England.
> >
> >In that case why is it legal for Scots students to have their Uni fees
> >paid for them, while English and Welsh students must "pay their way".
> >Why do elderly Scots have their care paid for them while the rest must
> >pay as much as they have.  Sound like illegal _benefits_ to me.
>
>
> And why is it OK for Scotland to pay its teachers 15% - 25% more than
> England's for equivalent posts?
>
> Because it is Scotland, of course!
>
> And because the English taxpayers pay the bill, as usual.


and thats although cost of living is higher in england than scotland.
cheers
james

"Adrian Auer-Hudson"  wrote in message
news:1125441453.112846.56770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Neil Sunderland wrote:


>A 1 BILLION vision of the future was unveiled yesterday in the shape

of Britain's biggest ever scheme for an integrated transport system to
satisfy everyone from cyclist to air traveller. <


>How refreshing.  It is good to hear that one part of the UK, at least,
>has its transportation ducks in a row.


and one of the few regions of the uk where the population is declining (and
will continue to decline for the forseeable future).
cheers
james

"gonzo"  wrote:


>
>"Adrian Auer-Hudson"  wrote in message
>news:1125441453.112846.56770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>Neil Sunderland wrote:
>
>>A 1 BILLION vision of the future was unveiled yesterday in the shape
>of Britain's biggest ever scheme for an integrated transport system to
>satisfy everyone from cyclist to air traveller. <
>
>>How refreshing.  It is good to hear that one part of the UK, at least,
>>has its transportation ducks in a row.
>
>and one of the few regions of the uk where the population is declining (and
>will continue to decline for the forseeable future).



I bet the midge population isn't declining.

Andrew Bell wrote:


> For a journey from Glasgow to *beyond* Edinburgh a fifteen minute point 
> to point difference isn't important as the connection time in Edinburgh 
> from the Scotrail service to the GNER service would be longer.


True enough. Which is why GNER do run some services to Glasgow - to
provide for that through market.

The discussion was about GNER providing an intercity service from
Glasgow to Edinburgh, not beyond, and for that purpose it is a
non-starter.

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

In message <YRSRe.16620$x4.7714@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, gonzo 
 writes

>
>"Adrian Auer-Hudson"  wrote in message
>news:1125441453.112846.56770@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>Neil Sunderland wrote:
>
>>A 1 BILLION vision of the future was unveiled yesterday in the shape
>of Britain's biggest ever scheme for an integrated transport system to
>satisfy everyone from cyclist to air traveller. <
>
>>How refreshing.  It is good to hear that one part of the UK, at least,
>>has its transportation ducks in a row.
>
>and one of the few regions of the uk where the population is declining (and
>will continue to decline for the forseeable future).
>cheers
>james
>
>

Actually, the population has just gone up. Births were higher than 
deaths in the last quarter.
But heh, we need all this transport invenstment to cope with the English 
and American tourists.
They still think we all wander about in kilts, munching on shortbread 
and humming 'Highland laddie'....
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

In message <FOSRe.16617$x4.5823@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>, gonzo 
 writes

>lol. including the oil production scotlands gdp would actually be less than
>the uk average (and that assumes 100% of oil and gas in the north sea that
>is the uks would go to scotland).
>cheers
>james
>
>

Are you going on the duty from the oil produced? Ok, let Scotland break 
away.
Then all the big oil companies that have their bases in London, will 
have to set up camp in Scotland. And as a result Scotland will gain from 
the all the tax money gained from said companies, which currently goes 
to England.
A simple matter of the money that's earned in Scotland, staying in 
Scotland, and NOT going over the border to subsidise a country of 
moaning scroungers who's last great achievement was to kick a few balls 
into a net 39 years ago.
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

James Christie  wrote:

>
>Actually, the population has just gone up. Births were higher than 
>deaths in the last quarter.
>But heh, we need all this transport invenstment to cope with the English 
>and American tourists.
>They still think we all wander about in kilts, munching on shortbread 
>and humming 'Highland laddie'....



.... instead of which you wander round in a drunken stupor, clutching
the remains of a six pack of Tennents Extra Strong and retching
uncontrollably.

I think the kilts and shortbread would be more socially acceptable.

;-)

On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 01:34:00 +0100, Tony   Polson 
wrote:

<snip>

>
>And because the English taxpayers pay the bill, as usual.
>

So you're saying that no tax is raised in Scotland or that tax is only
raised in England from English taxpayers ?
-- 
                                                             _______
 +---------------------------------------------------+      |\\   //|
 | Charles Ellson: charles@e11son.demon.co.uk        |      | \\ // |
 +---------------------------------------------------+      |  > <  |
                                                            | // \\ |
                                              Alba gu brath |//___\\|

In message , Tony Polson 
 writes

>James Christie  wrote:
>>
>>Actually, the population has just gone up. Births were higher than
>>deaths in the last quarter.
>>But heh, we need all this transport invenstment to cope with the English
>>and American tourists.
>>They still think we all wander about in kilts, munching on shortbread
>>and humming 'Highland laddie'....
>
>
>... instead of which you wander round in a drunken stupor, clutching
>the remains of a six pack of Tennents Extra Strong and retching
>uncontrollably.
>
>I think the kilts and shortbread would be more socially acceptable.
>
>;-)


That's just an act we put on to try and discourage as few white settlers 
as possible from moving here, like the deep fried mars bars.....

:-)
-- 
Regards,

James Christie

"Luck is my middle name," he said, indistinctly.
"Mind you, my first name is Bad."

James Christie  wrote:

>
>That's just an act we put on to try and discourage as few white settlers 
>as possible from moving here


Don't stop.  It is very successful.  To give up would only encourage
an even greater wastage of English taxpayer's money. <big grin>


>like the deep fried mars bars.....


Eek!  

;-)

On Sat, 03 Sep 2005 02:24:49 +0100, Tony   Polson 
wrote:


>>like the deep fried mars bars.....
>
>Eek!  


My Scouts convinced me to have one once when on camp in the Lakes and
visiting a chippy (which isn't there any more, interestingly).  I have
a sweet tooth, but **yeuch**!

I don't think I've ever eaten anything that made me feel my arteries
clogging up so quickly during consumption - not even a greasy piece of
fried bread...

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

In article ,
   Charles Ellson  wrote:

> On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 01:34:00 +0100, Tony   Polson 
> wrote:

> <snip>
> >
> >And because the English taxpayers pay the bill, as usual.
> >
> So you're saying that no tax is raised in Scotland or that tax is only
> raised in England from English taxpayers ?


He thinks it's all raised from him. :-))

-- 
David Wild using RISC OS on broadband

David H Wild  wrote:


>In article ,
>   Charles Ellson  wrote:
>> On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 01:34:00 +0100, Tony   Polson 
>> wrote:
>
>> <snip>
>> >
>> >And because the English taxpayers pay the bill, as usual.
>> >
>> So you're saying that no tax is raised in Scotland or that tax is only
>> raised in England from English taxpayers ?
>
>He thinks it's all raised from him. :-))



LOL!

It certainly feels that way.  

;-)