Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 10
Discussion
Iwantafusca said:
Interesting in this article they have climate change first and the gender recognition act second last. Let’s see what the greens push first?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-po...
80% reduction in emissionshttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-po...
independence will achieve that
might not have electricity but we will be zero emissions
the-sharpener said:
80% reduction in emissions
independence will achieve that
might not have electricity but we will be zero emissions
If they had a brain they would be dangerous. Ban sale of petrol cars in Scotland in 2026 and all you do is create a boom for northern England car dealers. independence will achieve that
might not have electricity but we will be zero emissions
nc107 said:
The reality of running and paying for a railway yourself !!
I have to laugh at the consultation web page Scotrail have for the consultation - Scotrail Website said:
Our analysis shows prior to the pandemic, on a number of routes across the country, significantly more seats were being provided than were required for the number of passengers travelling. For example, under five and a half million passenger journey miles were completed on a typical weekday, which was just 23 per cent of the available number of seats. In other words, seats were empty for 77 per cent of the distance that was travelled.
Returning to a pre-pandemic timetable would result in trains operating 26 million more vehicle miles each year for little customer benefit. As well as increased emissions, that would increase ScotRail costs to the taxpayer by £30million to £40million each year.
Which is abject bReturning to a pre-pandemic timetable would result in trains operating 26 million more vehicle miles each year for little customer benefit. As well as increased emissions, that would increase ScotRail costs to the taxpayer by £30million to £40million each year.
ks. If they're really looking to reduce the amount of fresh air being carted round Scotland, they could look at the number of services that run over-length all day for Scotrail's convenience rather than being cut down off-peak, e.g. just before the pandemic, they were crowing about how almost all services out of Queen Street Low Level towards Airdrie were 6 cars all the time. They needed to be 6 cars in the peak, but could easily have been cut to 3 during the day. It's a hassle (a) trying to co-ordinate a service that has to sastisfy both the Glasgow & Edinburgh rush hours (and they're stupidly busy from Edinburgh to Bathgate in normal times) and (b) there's limited parking at places like Helensburgh and none at Balloch, though Network Rail just spent a fortune creating more parking at Milngavie, which has had its off peak service halved and (c) taking them back to depots between peaks would probably mean extra drivers were needed.Instead of right-sizing the trains, it seems they're taking the easy option & slashing the timetable, which obviously saves on crew wages as well.
Also - anyone noticed how there seems to be zero interest from the Scottish Government or Scotrail in sorting out the never-ending Sunday strikes?
link - https://www.scotrail.co.uk/about-scotrail/fit-futu...
the-sharpener said:
Iwantafusca said:
Interesting in this article they have climate change first and the gender recognition act second last. Let’s see what the greens push first?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-po...
80% reduction in emissionshttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-po...
independence will achieve that
might not have electricity but we will be zero emissions
Scotrail Website said:
Our analysis shows prior to the pandemic, on a number of routes across the country, significantly more seats were being provided than were required for the number of passengers travelling. For example, under five and a half million passenger journey miles were completed on a typical weekday, which was just 23 per cent of the available number of seats. In other words, seats were empty for 77 per cent of the distance that was travelled.
Returning to a pre-pandemic timetable would result in trains operating 26 million more vehicle miles each year for little customer benefit. As well as increased emissions, that would increase ScotRail costs to the taxpayer by £30million to £40million each year.
Ahh... this wouldn't be the timetable that Transport for Scotland/SNP designed and insisted all bidders comply to would it? The one they then beat Abellio over the head with when a train was missing as it was depriving the good people of Scotland the mobility that was so desperately needed? It can't be that one surely.. Returning to a pre-pandemic timetable would result in trains operating 26 million more vehicle miles each year for little customer benefit. As well as increased emissions, that would increase ScotRail costs to the taxpayer by £30million to £40million each year.
How amazing things look when you're paying the bill not someone else!
the-sharpener said:
Iwantafusca said:
Interesting in this article they have climate change first and the gender recognition act second last. Let’s see what the greens push first?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-po...
80% reduction in emissionshttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-po...
independence will achieve that
might not have electricity but we will be zero emissions
alangla said:
h, though Network Rail just spent a fortune creating more parking at Milngavie, which has had its off
Minor correction . The carpark at Milngavie was resurfaced and better lighting and a few herbs put in. No extra spaces.The solution to park and ride from Milngavie would be a new halt at the Allander Sports centre. Land should have been set aside as part of planning for the new housing there.
I hear part of the problem was Scotrail said an extra half would not work with existing timetables and incorporating a 2 minute stop was left in the too difficult box.
Which, given the taxpayer subsidy Scotrail get is the tail wagging the dog.
irc said:
alangla said:
h, though Network Rail just spent a fortune creating more parking at Milngavie, which has had its off
Minor correction . The carpark at Milngavie was resurfaced and better lighting and a few herbs put in. No extra spaces.The solution to park and ride from Milngavie would be a new halt at the Allander Sports centre. Land should have been set aside as part of planning for the new housing there.
I hear part of the problem was Scotrail said an extra half would not work with existing timetables and incorporating a 2 minute stop was left in the too difficult box.
Which, given the taxpayer subsidy Scotrail get is the tail wagging the dog.
Press release - https://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/exte...
nc107 said:
Scotrail Website said:
Our analysis shows prior to the pandemic, on a number of routes across the country, significantly more seats were being provided than were required for the number of passengers travelling. For example, under five and a half million passenger journey miles were completed on a typical weekday, which was just 23 per cent of the available number of seats. In other words, seats were empty for 77 per cent of the distance that was travelled.
Returning to a pre-pandemic timetable would result in trains operating 26 million more vehicle miles each year for little customer benefit. As well as increased emissions, that would increase ScotRail costs to the taxpayer by £30million to £40million each year.
Ahh... this wouldn't be the timetable that Transport for Scotland/SNP designed and insisted all bidders comply to would it? The one they then beat Abellio over the head with when a train was missing as it was depriving the good people of Scotland the mobility that was so desperately needed? It can't be that one surely.. Returning to a pre-pandemic timetable would result in trains operating 26 million more vehicle miles each year for little customer benefit. As well as increased emissions, that would increase ScotRail costs to the taxpayer by £30million to £40million each year.
How amazing things look when you're paying the bill not someone else!
I'm loving the crowing from the RMT as well about the potential cull of jobs to get the costs down. Welcome to the realities of nationalised railways when the treasury is pulling the strings and those nasty private operators aren't being compelled to keep paying regardless of the commercial viability.
s'all westminsters fault init....... those tories are stoppin people to get on the scottish railways
and of course, they dont give us the "levers" to generate more cash
well apart from all the levers you already have been given, income tax yada yada yada but you dont want to mess with those and cause a mass exodus of scottish rich people to go living abroad - although that does have its flip side, because then they can spout on about how great Indy would be without actually living here.
and of course, they dont give us the "levers" to generate more cash
well apart from all the levers you already have been given, income tax yada yada yada but you dont want to mess with those and cause a mass exodus of scottish rich people to go living abroad - although that does have its flip side, because then they can spout on about how great Indy would be without actually living here.
alangla said:
nc107 said:
The reality of running and paying for a railway yourself !!
I have to laugh at the consultation web page Scotrail have for the consultation - Scotrail Website said:
Our analysis shows prior to the pandemic, on a number of routes across the country, significantly more seats were being provided than were required for the number of passengers travelling. For example, under five and a half million passenger journey miles were completed on a typical weekday, which was just 23 per cent of the available number of seats. In other words, seats were empty for 77 per cent of the distance that was travelled.
Returning to a pre-pandemic timetable would result in trains operating 26 million more vehicle miles each year for little customer benefit. As well as increased emissions, that would increase ScotRail costs to the taxpayer by £30million to £40million each year.
Which is abject bReturning to a pre-pandemic timetable would result in trains operating 26 million more vehicle miles each year for little customer benefit. As well as increased emissions, that would increase ScotRail costs to the taxpayer by £30million to £40million each year.
ks. If they're really looking to reduce the amount of fresh air being carted round Scotland, they could look at the number of services that run over-length all day for Scotrail's convenience rather than being cut down off-peak, e.g. just before the pandemic, they were crowing about how almost all services out of Queen Street Low Level towards Airdrie were 6 cars all the time. They needed to be 6 cars in the peak, but could easily have been cut to 3 during the day. It's a hassle (a) trying to co-ordinate a service that has to sastisfy both the Glasgow & Edinburgh rush hours (and they're stupidly busy from Edinburgh to Bathgate in normal times) and (b) there's limited parking at places like Helensburgh and none at Balloch, though Network Rail just spent a fortune creating more parking at Milngavie, which has had its off peak service halved and (c) taking them back to depots between peaks would probably mean extra drivers were needed.Instead of right-sizing the trains, it seems they're taking the easy option & slashing the timetable, which obviously saves on crew wages as well.
Also - anyone noticed how there seems to be zero interest from the Scottish Government or Scotrail in sorting out the never-ending Sunday strikes?
link - https://www.scotrail.co.uk/about-scotrail/fit-futu...
alangla said:
Which is abject bks. If they're really looking to reduce the amount of fresh air being carted round Scotland, they could look at the number of services that run over-length all day for Scotrail's convenience rather than being cut down off-peak, e.g. just before the pandemic, they were crowing about how almost all services out of Queen Street Low Level towards Airdrie were 6 cars all the time. They needed to be 6 cars in the peak, but could easily have been cut to 3 during the day. It's a hassle (a) trying to co-ordinate a service that has to sastisfy both the Glasgow & Edinburgh rush hours (and they're stupidly busy from Edinburgh to Bathgate in normal times) and (b) there's limited parking at places like Helensburgh and none at Balloch, though Network Rail just spent a fortune creating more parking at Milngavie, which has had its off peak service halved and (c) taking them back to depots between peaks would probably mean extra drivers were needed.
Instead of right-sizing the trains, it seems they're taking the easy option & slashing the timetable, which obviously saves on crew wages as well.
Also - anyone noticed how there seems to be zero interest from the Scottish Government or Scotrail in sorting out the never-ending Sunday strikes?
link - https://www.scotrail.co.uk/about-scotrail/fit-futu...
Is it that easy to chop and change train length during the day? Would've thought you'd need somewhere to park the spare half, a driver to move it if not at depot and then all the hassle of forming up full length services again for the evening peak.ks. If they're really looking to reduce the amount of fresh air being carted round Scotland, they could look at the number of services that run over-length all day for Scotrail's convenience rather than being cut down off-peak, e.g. just before the pandemic, they were crowing about how almost all services out of Queen Street Low Level towards Airdrie were 6 cars all the time. They needed to be 6 cars in the peak, but could easily have been cut to 3 during the day. It's a hassle (a) trying to co-ordinate a service that has to sastisfy both the Glasgow & Edinburgh rush hours (and they're stupidly busy from Edinburgh to Bathgate in normal times) and (b) there's limited parking at places like Helensburgh and none at Balloch, though Network Rail just spent a fortune creating more parking at Milngavie, which has had its off peak service halved and (c) taking them back to depots between peaks would probably mean extra drivers were needed.Instead of right-sizing the trains, it seems they're taking the easy option & slashing the timetable, which obviously saves on crew wages as well.
Also - anyone noticed how there seems to be zero interest from the Scottish Government or Scotrail in sorting out the never-ending Sunday strikes?
link - https://www.scotrail.co.uk/about-scotrail/fit-futu...
[/quote]
Also - anyone noticed how there seems to be zero interest from the Scottish Government or Scotrail in sorting out the never-ending Sunday strikes?
link - https://www.scotrail.co.uk/about-scotrail/fit-futu...
[/quote]
That would mean facing down the unions though. I can't think of a single example of where Scottish Government has been keen to tackle this. Much easier to roll over and crow about the jobs being created - any focus on efficiency is of secondary importance. In fairness, it's now not Abellio Scotrail's problem. They are out of the door soon so I wouldn't expect them to bother lifting a finger now. Once Scotrail is back under direct Ministerial control the strikes might evaporate as ScotGov will quietly cough up to whatever demands there are. I fully expect that despite running a lot less trains there will be not a lot of change in staffing levels. The unions are already putting marks in the sand for that, so any expectation of ScotRail costing a lot less to operate will evaporate and I wouldn't be surprised it it ended up costing a lot more as those nice Civil Servants in Transport Scotland play at managing complex rail services with their little or no expertise or experience in doing so.
Fun times ahead.
irc said:
Patrick Harvie? Any relation to Penfold from Dangermouse?
Surely you mean Donnie Murdo?(Related fact - Donnie Murdo is not the literal Gaelic translation of Danger Mouse. It is just a teuchtery sounding name with the same initials).
malks222 said:
Anyone else find it slightly funny that we are getting a government that we didn’t vote for in holyrood?!?!
Well I can't stand the SNP but as they were the party with the most seats they have earned the right to try and govern. Who else? a coalition is just one way of doing it. I suspect most policy will be SNP driven anyway.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff