Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s NEW PB/ Polling Matters podcast: What drives how we

SystemSystem Posts: 6,389
edited May 16 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Tonight’s NEW PB/ Polling Matters podcast: What drives how we vote + public opinion on a customs union & a united Ireland

On this week’s PB/Polling Matters podcast, Keiran Pedley and Leo Barasi look at the demographic and ideological trends shaping our politics and how they drive voting intention.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281
    Is there anyone here?
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 8,576
    no.

    barred at the NI border.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 23,219
    Anazina said:

    Is there anyone here?

    Lurkers only.
  • JonnyJimmyJonnyJimmy Posts: 2,548
    fpt..

    justin124 said:

    I see that a Labour councillor in Oxford has had the whip withdrawn for tweeting picures of children being threatened by armed soldiers. One picture showed a Nazi soldier from World War 2 whilst another showed an Israeli doing something similar a mere few days ago. Personally , I feel his point is well made by those photos - and fail to see how producing them amounts to Anti-Semitism at all. At the end of the day, Netanyahu is little better than Himmler et al.

    The more-or-less official definition of antisemitism includes drawing parallels with the Nazis.

    https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/working-definition-antisemitism
    No matter how much their supporters try to make it so, Israel and Judaism are not synonymous. Indeed plenty of Orthodox Jews claim the existence of Israel is against Jewish teachings.

    To claim that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is merely a way to shut down debate.
    Why does criticism of Israel ever need to contain reference to the Nazis?

    Not being imaginative enough to think up different shits to compare Jewish people to than the shits that actually tried to exterminate them all is pretty fucking insulting.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 46,156
    Anazina said:

    Is there anyone here?

    A distant ship smoke on the horizon
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,635
    That third way sounds very much like ‘staying in the Customs union’.

    That would be fine for a transition, before a full FTA. But that transition needs to have a sunset clause.
  • anothernickanothernick Posts: 1,516
    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 27,605
    Anazina said:

    Is there anyone here?

    Our train got delayed :lol:
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 14,851
    Mortimer said:

    That third way sounds very much like ‘staying in the Customs union’.

    That would be fine for a transition, before a full FTA. But that transition needs to have a sunset clause.

    Yep 'cept it gets all complicated at the next GE with Lab going in with a commitment to remain in, er, THE Customs Union.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 27,605
    Of National Rail lines, only these left for me to do in England (apart from the odd connecting curve or chord here and there):

    Everything west and south of Newton Abbot
    Exeter to Barnstaple
    Exeter to Exmouth
    Yeovil to Weymouth
    Craven Arms to Knighton
    Retford to Barnetby via Brigg
    Habrough to Barton-on-Humber
    Stockport to Guide Bridge
    Clitheroe to Hellifield
    Darlington to Bishop Auckland
    Darlington to Eaglescliffe to Saltburn
    Middlesbrough to Whitby
    Barrow to Carlisle
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 21,379
    FPT:
    Cyclefree said:

    Yorkcity said:

    felix said:

    Senior Hamas figure admits 50 of 62 Gaza border deaths were terror group members
    - JC



    Peaceful Palestinian demonstration !

    I do not think it was a peaceful demonstration .Nevertheless the response by the Israel Army has correctly been questioned .

    Do you think it was appropriate ?
    I think killing 60 and wounding over 2000 is what Israel calls an appropriate response to a few rocks and burning tyres.

    Those who try to defend it imagine a protest by Anti Capitaltsts in London where some rocks were thrown at police. Would it be acceptable to kill 60 and wound over 2000?

    That's a dangerous question to ask on pb. Half the pb Tories would answer in the affirmative.
    I hesitate to say this to one of my favourite and most respected posters. But ...... you're being silly. (Or perhaps provocative.)

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    I cannot imagine PB'ers wanting anti-capitalist demonstrators killed (other than possibly @SeanT in one of his wilder alcohol-fuelled moments - and where is he, BTW?).
    I will try to indicate in future when I'm being flippant.

    On your point, as you say, Israel seem to lack any kind of strategy here. It is worse than a crime, it is an error. In the long run, brute force is not going to be enough.
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 1,179

    Anazina said:

    Is there anyone here?

    Our train got delayed :lol:
    TRYING TO CONTINUE LAST THREAD RE. THE SWISS RAILWAYS):

    The Swiss Federal Railways are impressive. They didn't have a 'Beeching' and the tracks are 100% electrified.
    ___________
    Not quite, some narrow gauge lines are diesel (eg. Chur to Arosa).
    ___________
    Maybe the online sources have rounded it up from '>99' to 100%. It's somewhere in that range.

    It would be nice for the UK to be able to have an argument whether its figure is 99% or 100%, not a pathetic debate whether to electrify busy main lines west of London which would still only take the figure up to about 60% (passenger km).
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 20,576

    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

    AIUI (not being a train expert) TGVs are totally separate - and much better - than the SNCF regional network. You're not comparing like with like as a result.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,080
    edited May 16

    fpt..

    justin124 said:

    No matter how much their supporters try to make it so, Israel and Judaism are not synonymous. Indeed plenty of Orthodox Jews claim the existence of Israel is against Jewish teachings.

    To claim that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is merely a way to shut down debate.
    Why does criticism of Israel ever need to contain reference to the Nazis?

    Not being imaginative enough to think up different shits to compare Jewish people to than the shits that actually tried to exterminate them all is pretty fucking insulting.
    For some it may be a lack of imagination.

    For some others it's a deliberately offensive insult.

    And for yet some others it's a way of delegitimising the very concept of Israel, of a home for Jews. If that Jewish home is no better than Nazis, why would we want it to exist any more than we would want Nazism to exist?

    Distinguishing between the unimaginatively offensive and those who have an agenda is increasingly tiresome.

    There are plenty of good reasons for criticising what Israel does without needing to make hyperbolic, insulting and usually wholly untrue statements which tend to reflect badly on those making them and detract from the force or otherwise of the criticism.

    But those who do the whole "Israel is the new Nazi Germany" shtick are following the dictum of that infamous Nazi, Goebbels, - "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

    I think though Mr Tyndall is wrong in what he says: Israel - the land of Israel (rather than any political state) - is pretty central to Judaism, Jewish ceremonies and key Jewish religious remembrance days. Asking Jews to pretend that this is not so is like asking Muslims to pretend that Mecca is not central to their religion.

    And, from the previous thread, on what has been happening in Gaza in recent days -

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281
    Mortimer said:

    That third way sounds very much like ‘staying in the Customs union’.

    Indeed, but we've agree to call it 'The Mortimer Approved Anti Federalist Mega Hard Full English Brexit Agreement', so it's all good. Go back to what you were doing.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,635
    TOPPING said:

    Mortimer said:

    That third way sounds very much like ‘staying in the Customs union’.

    That would be fine for a transition, before a full FTA. But that transition needs to have a sunset clause.

    Yep 'cept it gets all complicated at the next GE with Lab going in with a commitment to remain in, er, THE Customs Union.
    Easy: extend transition to March 2022...
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,386
    edited May 16

    FPT:

    Cyclefree said:

    Yorkcity said:

    felix said:

    Senior Hamas figure admits 50 of 62 Gaza border deaths were terror group members
    - JC



    Peaceful Palestinian demonstration !

    I do not think it was a peaceful demonstration .Nevertheless the response by the Israel Army has correctly been questioned .

    Do you think it was appropriate ?
    I think killing 60 and wounding over 2000 is what Israel calls an appropriate response to a few rocks and burning tyres.

    Those who try to defend it imagine a protest by Anti Capitaltsts in London where some rocks were thrown at police. Would it be acceptable to kill 60 and wound over 2000?

    That's a dangerous question to ask on pb. Half the pb Tories would answer in the affirmative.
    I hesitate to say this to one of my favourite and most respected posters. But ...... you're being silly. (Or perhaps provocative.)

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    I cannot imagine PB'ers wanting anti-capitalist demonstrators killed (other than possibly @SeanT in one of his wilder alcohol-fuelled moments - and where is he, BTW?).
    I will try to indicate in future when I'm being flippant.

    On your point, as you say, Israel seem to lack any kind of strategy here. It is worse than a crime, it is an error. In the long run, brute force is not going to be enough.
    Or to paraphrase, why is Israel so willing to give Hamas exactly what it wishes?

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 11,080

    FPT:

    Cyclefree said:

    Yorkcity said:

    felix said:

    Senior Hamas figure admits 50 of 62 Gaza border deaths were terror group members
    - JC



    Peaceful Palestinian demonstration !

    I do not think it was a peaceful demonstration .Nevertheless the response by the Israel Army has correctly been questioned .

    Do you think it was appropriate ?
    I think killing 60 and wounding over 2000 is what Israel calls an appropriate response to a few rocks and burning tyres.

    Those who try to defend it imagine a protest by Anti Capitaltsts in London where some rocks were thrown at police. Would it be acceptable to kill 60 and wound over 2000?

    That's a dangerous question to ask on pb. Half the pb Tories would answer in the affirmative.
    I hesitate to say this to one of my favourite and most respected posters. But ...... you're being silly. (Or perhaps provocative.)

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    I cannot imagine PB'ers wanting anti-capitalist demonstrators killed (other than possibly @SeanT in one of his wilder alcohol-fuelled moments - and where is he, BTW?).
    I will try to indicate in future when I'm being flippant.

    On your point, as you say, Israel seem to lack any kind of strategy here. It is worse than a crime, it is an error. In the long run, brute force is not going to be enough.
    Agreed.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 10,635
    Anazina said:

    Mortimer said:

    That third way sounds very much like ‘staying in the Customs union’.

    Indeed, but we've agree to call it 'The Mortimer Approved Anti Federalist Mega Hard Full English Brexit Agreement', so it's all good. Go back to what you were doing.
    Provided the EU drop this silly legislation restricting the import of antiques as part of the deal....
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,190
    Age is now the key determinant of how we vote, then whether we live in rural areas, suburbs or the inner city and university towns then class. Class is now far less a predictor of voting intention than it was half a century ago
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,255

    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

    Furthermore, the British fares structure seems to have been designed by one of Shakespeares monkeys on a bad day.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312
    Scott_P said:
    Charlie's boy is getting hitched and they need someone to walk the bride down the aisle.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212

    fpt..

    justin124 said:

    I see that a Labour councillor in Oxford has had the whip withdrawn for tweeting picures of children being threatened by armed soldiers. One picture showed a Nazi soldier from World War 2 whilst another showed an Israeli doing something similar a mere few days ago. Personally , I feel his point is well made by those photos - and fail to see how producing them amounts to Anti-Semitism at all. At the end of the day, Netanyahu is little better than Himmler et al.

    The more-or-less official definition of antisemitism includes drawing parallels with the Nazis.

    https://www.holocaustremembrance.com/working-definition-antisemitism
    No matter how much their supporters try to make it so, Israel and Judaism are not synonymous. Indeed plenty of Orthodox Jews claim the existence of Israel is against Jewish teachings.

    To claim that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic is merely a way to shut down debate.
    Why does criticism of Israel ever need to contain reference to the Nazis?

    Not being imaginative enough to think up different shits to compare Jewish people to than the shits that actually tried to exterminate them all is pretty fucking insulting.
    To repeat what I said on the last thread. Based on their actions at the moment they deserve to be pretty fucking insulted. And that is a very weird attitude. Its okay to shoot people but not to insult them?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 27,605

    Anazina said:

    Is there anyone here?

    Our train got delayed :lol:
    TRYING TO CONTINUE LAST THREAD RE. THE SWISS RAILWAYS):

    The Swiss Federal Railways are impressive. They didn't have a 'Beeching' and the tracks are 100% electrified.
    ___________
    Not quite, some narrow gauge lines are diesel (eg. Chur to Arosa).
    ___________
    Maybe the online sources have rounded it up from '>99' to 100%. It's somewhere in that range.

    It would be nice for the UK to be able to have an argument whether its figure is 99% or 100%, not a pathetic debate whether to electrify busy main lines west of London which would still only take the figure up to about 60% (passenger km).
    Sorry! Chur to Arosa is electrified, as is all of the regional railway in Graubunden, what I meant to say was: Not quite, it's 5270 out of 5323 kilometres electrified :)
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 20,576



    On your point, as you say, Israel seem to lack any kind of strategy here. It is worse than a crime, it is an error. In the long run, brute force is not going to be enough.

    From a European / US perspective I would agree.

    From the Israeli perspective they have an opponent who still challenges their right to exist.

    I can quite see why they think that, until Hamas is willing to enter into meaningful negotiations, then to show (what they would view as) weakness is a mistake.

    I would have thought (without being any more than an armchair general) it would be possible to control a demonstration with non-lethal forms of crowd control. But for 50 of the 62 fatalities to be members of Hamas (i.e. active terrorists) is a high strike rate.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281

    Scott_P said:
    Charlie's boy is getting hitched and they need someone to walk the bride down the aisle.
    LOL. You have just won politicalbetting.com if not the entire internet with that comment.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,255

    Scott_P said:
    Charlie's boy is getting hitched and they need someone to walk the bride down the aisle.
    Why shouldn’t the Heir to the Throne meet the Leader of the Opposition? Happened all the time in the 18thC
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 11,024
    Scott_P said:
    Shrug, I'm a lifelong republican, and welcomed Charles to Broxtowe when he visited (he seemed pleasant). It's the sort of routine thing that politicians at all levels do when needed, and healthy that Corbyn doesn't get stuffy about it as he might have done in the past (it's the sort of thing that used to trip him up when he was first elected leader).
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281

    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

    Furthermore, the British fares structure seems to have been designed by one of Shakespeares monkeys on a bad day.
    I think you are gracing it with a coherence it doesn't deserve even by using the word 'structure'.
  • David_EvershedDavid_Evershed Posts: 5,656

    Anazina said:

    Is there anyone here?

    Our train got delayed :lol:
    I suggest we return to canals.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 9,312
    Charles said:



    On your point, as you say, Israel seem to lack any kind of strategy here. It is worse than a crime, it is an error. In the long run, brute force is not going to be enough.

    From a European / US perspective I would agree.

    From the Israeli perspective they have an opponent who still challenges their right to exist.

    I can quite see why they think that, until Hamas is willing to enter into meaningful negotiations, then to show (what they would view as) weakness is a mistake.

    I would have thought (without being any more than an armchair general) it would be possible to control a demonstration with non-lethal forms of crowd control. But for 50 of the 62 fatalities to be members of Hamas (i.e. active terrorists) is a high strike rate.
    Active terrorists who were shooting or planting bombs when shot, or members of a terrorist organisation. It's not quite the same thing. Shades of recent Nobel peace prize winners defining terrorists as anyone killed by a drone.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281

    Scott_P said:
    Shrug, I'm a lifelong republican, and welcomed Charles to Broxtowe when he visited (he seemed pleasant). It's the sort of routine thing that politicians at all levels do when needed, and healthy that Corbyn doesn't get stuffy about it as he might have done in the past (it's the sort of thing that used to trip him up when he was first elected leader).
    Indeed we republicans and can and should be civil to the monarchy when one meets them – it is not their fault that they are royals, and I am sure many of them are perfectly good human beings. Charles strikes me as a nice enough chap.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212
    edited May 16

    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

    TGV flatters to deceive. It carries only 7% of the rail passengers on the French rail network. The other 93% travel on railways which in my experience are significantly worse than UK railways. I have regularly travelled from Nantes to Angers along the Loire valley. Undoubtedly very pretty but the railways are like something from the 1950s.

    Edit: And Paris commuter trains do actually make ours look good.

  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281

    Anazina said:

    Is there anyone here?

    Our train got delayed :lol:
    TRYING TO CONTINUE LAST THREAD RE. THE SWISS RAILWAYS):

    The Swiss Federal Railways are impressive. They didn't have a 'Beeching' and the tracks are 100% electrified.
    ___________
    Not quite, some narrow gauge lines are diesel (eg. Chur to Arosa).
    ___________
    Maybe the online sources have rounded it up from '>99' to 100%. It's somewhere in that range.

    It would be nice for the UK to be able to have an argument whether its figure is 99% or 100%, not a pathetic debate whether to electrify busy main lines west of London which would still only take the figure up to about 60% (passenger km).
    Sorry! Chur to Arosa is electrified, as is all of the regional railway in Graubunden, what I meant to say was: Not quite, it's 5270 out of 5323 kilometres electrified :)
    The 53 non-electrified kilometres are an international disgrace.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,255
    Charles said:



    On your point, as you say, Israel seem to lack any kind of strategy here. It is worse than a crime, it is an error. In the long run, brute force is not going to be enough.

    From a European / US perspective I would agree.

    From the Israeli perspective they have an opponent who still challenges their right to exist.

    I can quite see why they think that, until Hamas is willing to enter into meaningful negotiations, then to show (what they would view as) weakness is a mistake.

    I would have thought (without being any more than an armchair general) it would be possible to control a demonstration with non-lethal forms of crowd control. But for 50 of the 62 fatalities to be members of Hamas (i.e. active terrorists) is a high strike rate.
    Were 50 of those shot members of Hamas? And are ‘members of Hamas’ automatically active terrorists? I thought it was more like a political organisation nowadays
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212
    Cyclefree said:


    For some it may be a lack of imagination.

    For some others it's a deliberately offensive insult.

    And for yet some others it's a way of delegitimising the very concept of Israel, of a home for Jews. If that Jewish home is no better than Nazis, why would we want it to exist any more than we would want Nazism to exist?

    Distinguishing between the unimaginatively offensive and those who have an agenda is increasingly tiresome.

    There are plenty of good reasons for criticising what Israel does without needing to make hyperbolic, insulting and usually wholly untrue statements which tend to reflect badly on those making them and detract from the force or otherwise of the criticism.

    But those who do the whole "Israel is the new Nazi Germany" shtick are following the dictum of that infamous Nazi, Goebbels, - "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

    I think though Mr Tyndall is wrong in what he says: Israel - the land of Israel (rather than any political state) - is pretty central to Judaism, Jewish ceremonies and key Jewish religious remembrance days. Asking Jews to pretend that this is not so is like asking Muslims to pretend that Mecca is not central to their religion.

    And, from the previous thread, on what has been happening in Gaza in recent days -

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    There have been protest by Orthodox Jews in New York this week who have made exactly the point I repeated - that the state of Israel is against Jewish teachings.

    Now I didn't make that point on the last thread because I agree with it. I am in no position to judge these things. But I did want to make it clear that criticism of Israel in no way equates with criticism of Judaism. Indeed there are plenty of Jews criticising Israel right now.
  • Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    As I said on the previous thread, Beeching instigated a study which he knew from the very start was going to present an utterly false picture of rail usage. By ensuring that passenger usage surveys were taken at stations when it was known they were not at their maximum usage - particularly on commuter and seasonal lines - he ensured that many lines that should have stayed open on the basis of usage were destined for closure. It was a thoroughly dishonest way to proceed.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 27,605

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    Up the Continuity Anti-Beeching Front!
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 12,255
    edited May 16
    Anazina said:

    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

    Furthermore, the British fares structure seems to have been designed by one of Shakespeares monkeys on a bad day.
    I think you are gracing it with a coherence it doesn't deserve even by using the word 'structure'.
    Fair point. It appears, and I’m not spending any more time on checking, that it can be cheaper to travel from Norwich to Liverpool St (and return) than to do the same from places in the Colchester area!
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,331
    edited May 16
    Cyclefree said:


    For some it may be a lack of imagination.

    For some others it's a deliberately offensive insult.

    And for yet some others it's a way of delegitimising the very concept of Israel, of a home for Jews. If that Jewish home is no better than Nazis, why would we want it to exist any more than we would want Nazism to exist?

    Distinguishing between the unimaginatively offensive and those who have an agenda is increasingly tiresome.

    There are plenty of good reasons for criticising what Israel does without needing to make hyperbolic, insulting and usually wholly untrue statements which tend to reflect badly on those making them and detract from the force or otherwise of the criticism.

    But those who do the whole "Israel is the new Nazi Germany" shtick are following the dictum of that infamous Nazi, Goebbels, - "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

    I think though Mr Tyndall is wrong in what he says: Israel - the land of Israel (rather than any political state) - is pretty central to Judaism, Jewish ceremonies and key Jewish religious remembrance days. Asking Jews to pretend that this is not so is like asking Muslims to pretend that Mecca is not central to their religion.

    And, from the previous thread, on what has been happening in Gaza in recent days -

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 22,158
    FF43 said:

    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,

    Israel as Belgium?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 27,605
    FF43 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    For some it may be a lack of imagination.

    For some others it's a deliberately offensive insult.

    And for yet some others it's a way of delegitimising the very concept of Israel, of a home for Jews. If that Jewish home is no better than Nazis, why would we want it to exist any more than we would want Nazism to exist?

    Distinguishing between the unimaginatively offensive and those who have an agenda is increasingly tiresome.

    There are plenty of good reasons for criticising what Israel does without needing to make hyperbolic, insulting and usually wholly untrue statements which tend to reflect badly on those making them and detract from the force or otherwise of the criticism.

    But those who do the whole "Israel is the new Nazi Germany" shtick are following the dictum of that infamous Nazi, Goebbels, - "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

    I think though Mr Tyndall is wrong in what he says: Israel - the land of Israel (rather than any political state) - is pretty central to Judaism, Jewish ceremonies and key Jewish religious remembrance days. Asking Jews to pretend that this is not so is like asking Muslims to pretend that Mecca is not central to their religion.

    And, from the previous thread, on what has been happening in Gaza in recent days -

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine

    "The Plan also called for Economic Union between the proposed states, and for the protection of religious and minority rights."
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,314

    FF43 said:

    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,

    Israel as Belgium?
    Or Northern Ireland
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,690
    FF43 said:

    Cyclefree said:


    For some it may be a lack of imagination.

    For some others it's a deliberately offensive insult.

    And for yet some others it's a way of delegitimising the very concept of Israel, of a home for Jews. If that Jewish home is no better than Nazis, why would we want it to exist any more than we would want Nazism to exist?

    Distinguishing between the unimaginatively offensive and those who have an agenda is increasingly tiresome.

    There are plenty of good reasons for criticising what Israel does without needing to make hyperbolic, insulting and usually wholly untrue statements which tend to reflect badly on those making them and detract from the force or otherwise of the criticism.

    But those who do the whole "Israel is the new Nazi Germany" shtick are following the dictum of that infamous Nazi, Goebbels, - "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

    I think though Mr Tyndall is wrong in what he says: Israel - the land of Israel (rather than any political state) - is pretty central to Judaism, Jewish ceremonies and key Jewish religious remembrance days. Asking Jews to pretend that this is not so is like asking Muslims to pretend that Mecca is not central to their religion.

    And, from the previous thread, on what has been happening in Gaza in recent days -

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,
    Which would undoubtedly be the optimum solution, and only not feasible because nobody on either side is willing to accept it.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    Charles said:



    On your point, as you say, Israel seem to lack any kind of strategy here. It is worse than a crime, it is an error. In the long run, brute force is not going to be enough.

    From a European / US perspective I would agree.

    From the Israeli perspective they have an opponent who still challenges their right to exist.

    I can quite see why they think that, until Hamas is willing to enter into meaningful negotiations, then to show (what they would view as) weakness is a mistake.

    I would have thought (without being any more than an armchair general) it would be possible to control a demonstration with non-lethal forms of crowd control. But for 50 of the 62 fatalities to be members of Hamas (i.e. active terrorists) is a high strike rate.
    Hamas are without doubt a despicable organisation. But their positions can't justify keeping millions of people under military occupation for generations. French and British forces pulled out of imperialism despite some awful people on the other side.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 6,773

    Anazina said:

    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

    Furthermore, the British fares structure seems to have been designed by one of Shakespeares monkeys on a bad day.
    I think you are gracing it with a coherence it doesn't deserve even by using the word 'structure'.
    Fair point. It appears, and I’m not spending any more time on checking, that it can be cheaper to travel from Norwich to Liverpool St (and return) than to do the same from places in the Colchester area!
    For a while when I was commuting between Brixton and Norfolk VA, it was cheaper to fly from Gatwick to Norfolk VA than it was to fly from Newark NJ to Norfolk VA. Never worked that one out, particularly as I could break the journey in Newark.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,494

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.

    This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.

    He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,690
    MTimT said:

    Anazina said:

    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

    Furthermore, the British fares structure seems to have been designed by one of Shakespeares monkeys on a bad day.
    I think you are gracing it with a coherence it doesn't deserve even by using the word 'structure'.
    Fair point. It appears, and I’m not spending any more time on checking, that it can be cheaper to travel from Norwich to Liverpool St (and return) than to do the same from places in the Colchester area!
    For a while when I was commuting between Brixton and Norfolk VA, it was cheaper to fly from Gatwick to Norfolk VA than it was to fly from Newark NJ to Norfolk VA. Never worked that one out, particularly as I could break the journey in Newark.
    Very high demand on the internal route?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,331

    FF43 said:

    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,

    Israel as Belgium?
    Each mediocrity is mediocre in its own way. Israel is somewhere between apartheid South Africa and Stormont era Northern Ireland, I think, except the ascendancy is in the slight majority. Ultimately nothing changes because the ascendant have everything they want and don't see any reason to share it with the rest of the population that don't wish them well.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 27,605

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.

    This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.

    He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
    One report was under the Tories (1963) and the other under Labour (1965).
  • rural_voterrural_voter Posts: 1,179
    ydoethur said:

    FF43 said:

    Cyclefree said:

    [deleted, hope it's been done right]

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,
    Which would undoubtedly be the optimum solution, and only not feasible because nobody on either side is willing to accept it.
    I'd also been thinking that, now that Israel has built on Palestinian land, eliminating the possibility of a two-state solution, the only possible end to the 70 Year War (and counting ...) is a one-state solution. In parts of Israel, like Haifa, the relations between the two sides are said to be fairly good, although whether the two sides have equal rights is another matter.


    More Brexit bad news: https://news.sky.com/story/red-warnings-for-uks-post-brexit-nuclear-safeguards-11374097
    What to do ... grovel to the EU to prolong A50 until this can be done safely? Someone really should have thought of this.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,615

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.

    This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.

    He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
    One report was under the Tories (1963) and the other under Labour (1965).
    If it wasn't for the Beeching closures you would still have LOADS of lines to yellow-pen!

    BTW, when you do the Cumbrian Coast, make sure you catch the Class 37 hauled service.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 27,605

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.

    This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.

    He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
    One report was under the Tories (1963) and the other under Labour (1965).
    If it wasn't for the Beeching closures you would still have LOADS of lines to yellow-pen!

    BTW, when you do the Cumbrian Coast, make sure you catch the Class 37 hauled service.
    That's true - but I'm still young-ish :lol:
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 6,773
    ydoethur said:

    MTimT said:

    Anazina said:

    FPT

    MaxPB said:


    I take the Swiss railways extensively and they are cheaper than what I used to pay in the UK and they are more punctual. The Swiss railways company is publicly owned, it is efficient and makes an annual profit. I don't see why a similar system couldn't be replicated in the UK.

    Because it never is. Experience in the UK is that nationalised railways provide a poorer service. This has been the way ever since nationalisation.

    Of course Swiss trains do only 19 billion passenger km per year compared to 66 billion done by UK trains
    No. Experience shows that under-investment in the railways leads to a poorer service. This was the case of the Big 4 prior to nationalisation and with BR under Thatcher.
    Nope. The biggest destruction of the railways came under the Nationalised system and services were atrocious no matter who was in power at the time.
    In the 1970s French trains were regarded as a joke - old fashioned, slow, and uncomfortable. Not a patch on the HSTs that were then being introduced in the UK. Since then the UK system has been set free whilst the French are still weighed down by the millstone of nationalisation. But now it's the French system which is obviously superior - the UK still operates many of the 1970s HSTs and speeds have scarcely increased whilst the French have built an entire network of TGVs. We obsess about ownership and structure whilst other countries put their energies into technology and services.

    Furthermore, the British fares structure seems to have been designed by one of Shakespeares monkeys on a bad day.
    I think you are gracing it with a coherence it doesn't deserve even by using the word 'structure'.
    Fair point. It appears, and I’m not spending any more time on checking, that it can be cheaper to travel from Norwich to Liverpool St (and return) than to do the same from places in the Colchester area!
    For a while when I was commuting between Brixton and Norfolk VA, it was cheaper to fly from Gatwick to Norfolk VA than it was to fly from Newark NJ to Norfolk VA. Never worked that one out, particularly as I could break the journey in Newark.
    Very high demand on the internal route?
    More likely monopoly route at that time. Pre-Southwest setting up shop in Norfolk.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 7,331
    ydoethur said:

    FF43 said:


    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,

    Which would undoubtedly be the optimum solution, and only not feasible because nobody on either side is willing to accept it.
    There's a tendency to side with the underdog, but the underdog is not necessarily nicer. They simply have less power to do bad things. With that caveat out the way, I should say the two parties in Israel are not equal. The first move has to come from those with power, to at least be willing to share it in principle.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 30,266
    Scott_P said:
    Well known left winger who had spent their life wishing the queen would give up their position of power...met the leader of the labour party.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 11,906

    Scott_P said:
    Well known left winger who had spent their life wishing the queen would give up their position of power...met the leader of the labour party.
    You just made me LOL! :D
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,866
    FF43 said:

    ydoethur said:

    FF43 said:


    Strangely, Israel's friends and foes have a shared interest in making the country to be exceptional. In my view it is a deeply mediocre country. Not uniquely awful, but awful enough for a large part of its inhabitants. If there is ever to be a "solution" in my view it is as a single state that stretches from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, that is neither Jewish nor Palestinian but which institutionalises the fact of there being about half of each,

    Which would undoubtedly be the optimum solution, and only not feasible because nobody on either side is willing to accept it.
    There's a tendency to side with the underdog, but the underdog is not necessarily nicer. They simply have less power to do bad things. With that caveat out the way, I should say the two parties in Israel are not equal. The first move has to come from those with power, to at least be willing to share it in principle.
    Ethnic conflicts are almost always about who/whom rather than good vs bad.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212

    Scott_P said:
    Well known left winger who had spent their life wishing the queen would give up their position of power...met the leader of the labour party.
    LOL. That's brilliant
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,314
    GIN1138 said:

    Scott_P said:
    Well known left winger who had spent their life wishing the queen would give up their position of power...met the leader of the labour party.
    You just made me LOL! :D
    Me too!
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 12,690

    Scott_P said:
    Well known left winger who had spent their life wishing the queen would give up their position of power...met the leader of the labour party.
    Boom boom!
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.

    This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.

    He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
    He may have been political cover but - as has been confirmed recently by those who were actually sent out to do the passenger traffic surveys - he, or his officials - were pretty damn dishonest about how they went about collecting their data.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,494

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.

    This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.

    He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
    One report was under the Tories (1963) and the other under Labour (1965).
    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    The Beeching Cuts were essentially an ass-covering exercise by government. Both Labour and the Conservatives wanted the railways to stop haemorrhaging money, and either could have stopped the closures if they had desired. In fact, they did in some cases (famously the loss-making Mid Wales line, which ran through several Labour constituencies). In other cases, lines that were not in the report were closed (e.g. Matlock to Buxton).

    Don't blame Beeching: he did what his political masters asked of him. Although as Richard T says below, the data on which he made his decisions was limited, generally he got it right and there are far more lines rightfully closed - even with hindsight - than were wrongly closed.

    Even the Great Central closure made sense at the time, as did the Waverley.

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 969

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.

    This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.

    He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
    Just to play Devil's advocate: in the 1960s, rail was struggling to compete with bus on journeys of under 50 miles. Rail was inflexible, expensive, infrequent, dirty and not particularly fast. There was no reason obvious at the time to retain most stopping services. Few at the time anticipated how traffic congestion would grow and give railback an advantage. I regret the closures - many of the lines would now be viable, and many of those that wouldn't be be lovely to have for sentimental reasons - but I sympathise with the reasons for their closure.

    In much of rural Britain, bus is still better at getting you from A to B than the defunct rail lines ever were.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 27,605

    Regarding Dr Beeching, some of the lines definitely were duplicates and should have been closed like the bonkers Taff Vale Extension railway but the cuts went too far and this is causing problems now.

    A good example is the closure of the Wycombe railway from Bourne End to High Wycombe. It is only about 5 miles so can't have cost very much but would be a very useful link between the Greast West and Chiltern mainlines.

    Bucks CC are now talking about a reopening but the problem is that some of the former alignment has been built on. If they had closed the routes and safeguarded the alignments there wouldn't be such a problem reopening.

    I might be wrong, but I don't think Bourne End to High Wycombe was in the Beeching Report for closure.

    This is a little annoyance about Beeching: he gets blamed for all line closures, when many occurred before and after his report. Also, some lines he signalled for closure remained open, whilst others that should have remained open under his plan were closed.

    He only gave recommendations, and it was up to the government to decide - and both Labour and Conservative governments did so. He was political cover.
    One report was under the Tories (1963) and the other under Labour (1965).
    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    The Beeching Cuts were essentially an ass-covering exercise by government. Both Labour and the Conservatives wanted the railways to stop haemorrhaging money, and either could have stopped the closures if they had desired. In fact, they did in some cases (famously the loss-making Mid Wales line, which ran through several Labour constituencies). In other cases, lines that were not in the report were closed (e.g. Matlock to Buxton).

    Don't blame Beeching: he did what his political masters asked of him. Although as Richard T says below, the data on which he made his decisions was limited, generally he got it right and there are far more lines rightfully closed - even with hindsight - than were wrongly closed.

    Even the Great Central closure made sense at the time, as did the Waverley.

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.
    Great Central doesn't make sense as there's no railway north of Aylesbury Vale Parkway., neither is there a railway linking Aylesbury with Cheddington (on the WCML).
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212


    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    The Beeching Cuts were essentially an ass-covering exercise by government. Both Labour and the Conservatives wanted the railways to stop haemorrhaging money, and either could have stopped the closures if they had desired. In fact, they did in some cases (famously the loss-making Mid Wales line, which ran through several Labour constituencies). In other cases, lines that were not in the report were closed (e.g. Matlock to Buxton).

    Don't blame Beeching: he did what his political masters asked of him. Although as Richard T says below, the data on which he made his decisions was limited, generally he got it right and there are far more lines rightfully closed - even with hindsight - than were wrongly closed.

    Even the Great Central closure made sense at the time, as did the Waverley.

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.

    There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 22,866
    It's odd that people who consider themselves to be anti-imperialist will make an exception for Russian imperialism.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,713
    edited May 16
    Scott_P said:
    I don't get it - what's the story in that? Establishment figures such as senior politicians are bound to meet with royals on occasion.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,171
    So, the nationalisation of our Third World railway has begun - under a Tory Government!!

    Love it!!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 22,158
    Sean_F said:

    It's odd that people who consider themselves to be anti-imperialist will make an exception for Russian imperialism.

    Usually they're not really anti-imperialist. George Galloway was absurdly salivating over the prospect of Corbyn leading a socialist Pax Britannica in Latin America.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 33,713
    What a stupid, basic thing to be doing wrong - it really isn't that complicated to avoid conflicts of interests.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,494


    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    The Beeching Cuts were essentially an ass-covering exercise by government. Both Labour and the Conservatives wanted the railways to stop haemorrhaging money, and either could have stopped the closures if they had desired. In fact, they did in some cases (famously the loss-making Mid Wales line, which ran through several Labour constituencies). In other cases, lines that were not in the report were closed (e.g. Matlock to Buxton).

    Don't blame Beeching: he did what his political masters asked of him. Although as Richard T says below, the data on which he made his decisions was limited, generally he got it right and there are far more lines rightfully closed - even with hindsight - than were wrongly closed.

    Even the Great Central closure made sense at the time, as did the Waverley.

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.

    There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281

    Scott_P said:
    Well known left winger who had spent their life wishing the queen would give up their position of power...met the leader of the labour party.
    Bravo! :)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 46,190
    New poll finds Die Linke the strongest party in Berlin for the first time since the fall of the Berlin Wall

    https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/996815632523059200
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,494
    murali_s said:

    So, the nationalisation of our Third World railway has begun - under a Tory Government!!

    Love it!!

    "Third World railway"

    What an utterly ridiculous comment. Though given how the nationalised Network Rail has mucked things up recently, perhaps a Third World railway is what proponents of renationalisation really want ... ;)
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212


    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.

    The Leicester Mercury reported some movement on the Nottingham to Melton line back in December last year. But yes crossing the Trent might be an issue.

    Unfortunately the big canal project in the area is facing similar problems as it is still effectively open almost all of the way from Grantham to the centre of Nottingham but where it is crossed by the new roads at West Bridgford it is impassable.
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281

    Cyclefree said:


    For some it may be a lack of imagination.

    For some others it's a deliberately offensive insult.

    And for yet some others it's a way of delegitimising the very concept of Israel, of a home for Jews. If that Jewish home is no better than Nazis, why would we want it to exist any more than we would want Nazism to exist?

    Distinguishing between the unimaginatively offensive and those who have an agenda is increasingly tiresome.

    There are plenty of good reasons for criticising what Israel does without needing to make hyperbolic, insulting and usually wholly untrue statements which tend to reflect badly on those making them and detract from the force or otherwise of the criticism.

    But those who do the whole "Israel is the new Nazi Germany" shtick are following the dictum of that infamous Nazi, Goebbels, - "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

    I think though Mr Tyndall is wrong in what he says: Israel - the land of Israel (rather than any political state) - is pretty central to Judaism, Jewish ceremonies and key Jewish religious remembrance days. Asking Jews to pretend that this is not so is like asking Muslims to pretend that Mecca is not central to their religion.

    And, from the previous thread, on what has been happening in Gaza in recent days -

    Even if most of those killed were members of Hamas Israel's actions seem to me (based only on what I have been reading) to be disproportionate, possibly crimes and foolish since they do nothing to calm an already inflamed and difficult situation and perpetuate a vicious cycle of grievance, martyrdom, reaction, defensiveness, aggression and fear.

    I do not hold with the seemingly fashionable view that Israel is wholly to blame and wholly evil and the Palestinians are purely innocent victims. The situation is much more complicated. But Israel does not seem to me to have an intelligent long-term strategy and, as the stronger party, is behaving in a way which, quite apart from any other considerations, risks weakening its long-term position.

    There have been protest by Orthodox Jews in New York this week who have made exactly the point I repeated - that the state of Israel is against Jewish teachings.

    Now I didn't make that point on the last thread because I agree with it. I am in no position to judge these things. But I did want to make it clear that criticism of Israel in no way equates with criticism of Judaism. Indeed there are plenty of Jews criticising Israel right now.
    Isn't it possible to criticism Judaism itself without being antisemitic? One can be perfectly friendly to Jewish people while opposing their religious teachings, just as is the case with all other religions. Richard Dawkins isn't antisemitic, but he is an opponent of Judaism.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 2,800
    Sean_F said:

    It's odd that people who consider themselves to be anti-imperialist will make an exception for Russian imperialism.
    I’ve never got the pro-Russian line.
    The Baltics actually want us there. It’s Russia they’re afraid of. What moral or lawful right does Russia have from preventing those countries from joining NATO?

    None.

    Less than none, given the record of Soviet imperialism.

    Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.

    In other news:

  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 15,212
    edited May 16
    murali_s said:

    So, the nationalisation of our Third World railway has begun - under a Tory Government!!

    Love it!!

    If you think our railways are third world then you have led an incredibly sheltered life. Either that or Sri Lanka has some extraordinarily advanced railways compared to the rest of India.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,386
    edited May 16
    HYUFD said:
    Pavlov's Yoon swings into action.

    Of course Michelle Thomson was found to be guilty of FA, even though she resigned the whip. Will Mr Chapman be resigning the whip after admitting his error?

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 12,386
    kle4 said:

    What a stupid, basic thing to be doing wrong - it really isn't that complicated to avoid conflicts of interests.
    Yes, I'd imagine the dumbness is as telling as any moral failing.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 2,171
    HYUFD said:

    Age is now the key determinant of how we vote, then whether we live in rural areas, suburbs or the inner city and university towns then class. Class is now far less a predictor of voting intention than it was half a century ago

    I agree - as far as age is concerned where does the ever-shifting boundary lie? Will the under 40s carry their Labour affiliation forward as they age?
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,557
    murali_s said:

    So, the nationalisation of our Third World railway has begun - under a Tory Government!!

    Love it!!

    This is why no one takes the left seriously.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 22,158
    edited May 16

    Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.

    It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.

    I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 969


    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    ...

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.

    There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
    I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.

    Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,494


    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.

    The Leicester Mercury reported some movement on the Nottingham to Melton line back in December last year. But yes crossing the Trent might be an issue.

    Unfortunately the big canal project in the area is facing similar problems as it is still effectively open almost all of the way from Grantham to the centre of Nottingham but where it is crossed by the new roads at West Bridgford it is impassable.
    I thought they were planning to take a new route through /near Holme Pierrepoint? Though I haven't looked in on them for a while ...

    Actually, the Grantham Canal project is a perfect example of how not to reopen a canal/ They've done very well, but the piecemeal approach means that the sections that are open can become relatively unused and rather weed-strewn, and lack of use leads to other issues.

    And it will not be properly reopened unless they also reopen the Belvoir tramway ... :)
  • AnazinaAnazina Posts: 2,281
    Cookie said:


    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    ...

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.

    There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
    I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.

    Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
    Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,494
    Cookie said:


    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    ...

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.

    There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
    I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.

    Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
    I lack knowledge in economics, and especially railway economics. :)

    That must have been a fascinating dissertation. I'm interested in the reopening of the Varsity line, and was fascinated by the analysis they did about point-to-point traffic demands for the initial decisions about the routing of the central section. I'd always reckoned they just guessed these things... :)
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 6,773

    murali_s said:

    So, the nationalisation of our Third World railway has begun - under a Tory Government!!

    Love it!!

    If you think our railways are third world then you have led an incredibly sheltered life. Either that or Sri Lanka has some extraordinarily advanced railways compared to the rest of India.
    I love that line 'Sri Lanka ... compared to the rest of India'
  • CookieCookie Posts: 969
    Anazina said:

    Cookie said:


    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    ...

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.

    There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
    I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.

    Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
    Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
    I wasn't trying to be parochial about it! All I meant by being a bigger attractor was that it had more jobs. I make no other judgement on the rival claims of the two cities! (Though I did live in Nottingham for ten years.)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 21,494
    Anazina said:

    Cookie said:


    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    ...

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.

    There is a lot of movement towards reopening several lies in the East Midlands. Both the Nottingham to Melton and the Leicester to Burton Lines are in quite advanced planning stages. This is on the back of the reopening of the Nottingham to Worksop 'Robin Hood' line which was reopened in the 90s. That is now likely to be extended to Ollerton. All of these lines were closed in the 60s.
    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
    I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.

    Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
    Leicester will always be an also-ran to Nottingham in the region. Nottingham is the regional capital and will forever be so.
    Nah. Derby's the true regional capital. ;)
  • CookieCookie Posts: 969

    Cookie said:


    The line closed in 1970, and I don't think (though could be wrong) that it wasn't mentioned in either report ...

    ...

    The real shame was not keeping the routes intact so they could be reopened if necessary later - the land was often sold off piecemeal with undue haste. Witness also (allegedly) the destruction of the GC route through Nottingham. A massively wasted opportunity.

    The Ivanhoe Line (Burton to Leicester) has been talked about for a couple of decades, and as far as I'm aware, after a couple of local station openings, the project has stalled (ISTR that mining subsidence in the ?Ashby? area is a significant issue, as is the cost of resignalling).

    I've also heard of no *serious* proposals on the Nottingham to Melton line - and users of the Lady Bay Bridge in Nottingham may not be best pleased ... :)

    This is annoying, as all of Leicester to Burton, and most of Nottingham to Melton, are intact lines (the former for freight, the latter as a test track). If these cannot be economically reopened, there is little chance of serious re openings of lines that are not mostly extant.

    I do think the Robin hood line extension (I think again partly along a test track) is the most likely of the three projects to go ahead.
    I actually wrote a dissertation 10 years ago comparing the fortunes of Nottinghamshire and Leicestershire in reopening their respective railway lines and the economics of reopening railway lines in general. Conclusion: there are lots of factors. But the biggest and simplest is that the Robin Hood line serves a far larger population than the Ivanhoe line; and that Nottingham is a bigger attractor than Leicester. We cometimes forget how small the small towns of middle England are, and how little traffic each small town generates.

    Railway economics is an absolutely fascinating subject.
    I lack knowledge in economics, and especially railway economics. :)

    That must have been a fascinating dissertation. I'm interested in the reopening of the Varsity line, and was fascinated by the analysis they did about point-to-point traffic demands for the initial decisions about the routing of the central section. I'd always reckoned they just guessed these things... :)
    I looked at that line, too, and interviewed the project board. They were impressivley sharp-nosed about what could and couldn't be done and how it all might be funded.

    I also had a telephone interview with Norman Baker about the Lewes-Uckfield line.

    Quite honestly, I was living the dream.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 6,615

    Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.

    It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.

    I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
    So is being a Moscow stooge worse than being a Brussels stooge?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 15,557

    Sad to see Thornberry join the far left, Putin-stooges.

    It's quite a propaganda feat for Russia to have simultaneously seduced far-right stooges around the world while keeping their traditional cohort of far-left ones on board.

    I suppose the fact that most of them are incredibly ignorant about Russia helps.
    So is being a Moscow stooge worse than being a Brussels stooge?
    Both different types of traitor.
This discussion has been closed.