|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 20, 2019 20:24:31 GMT
There's an Evening Standard article this evening talking about TFL finances. Maybe a clever ploy by TFL to make people more understanding of the cuts.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 20, 2019 21:13:18 GMT
There's an Evening Standard article this evening talking about TFL finances. Maybe a clever ploy by TFL to make people more understanding of the cuts. Hardly. TfL Board papers published today contain the new Budget for the new financial year commencing on 1 April. They have simply picked out the key headlines from a presentation about the budget included in the Board Paper. Anyone with web access can read the papers for themselves and reach their own conclusions. There is actually no change in the basic proposition for the bus network from what was published in the Business Plan. The scale of anticipated Central London cuts remains the same so anyone hoping for any sort of reprieve is on a hiding to nothing (unsurprisingly).
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 21, 2019 13:33:17 GMT
I note with interest that LOTS, in the latest TLB, have stated the consultation conclusions are with the Mayor for a final decision. Interesting.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2019 14:10:11 GMT
Hackney Council seem to have confirmed that the 388 reduction is not going ahead. Wonder if the same will apply to the 48s withdrawal as they were against that too.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Mar 21, 2019 14:32:58 GMT
Hackney Council seem to have confirmed that the 388 reduction is not going ahead. Wonder if the same will apply to the 48s withdrawal as they were against that too. Unless the cancellation of the 388 cut was an agreement to "soften the blow" if you like, so Hackney could stop bothering them about the 48 withdrawal.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 21, 2019 14:39:19 GMT
Hackney Council seem to have confirmed that the 388 reduction is not going ahead. Wonder if the same will apply to the 48s withdrawal as they were against that too. Unless the cancellation of the 388 cut was an agreement to "soften the blow" if you like, so Hackney could stop bothering them about the 48 withdrawal. Would much rather the 388 cut to go ahead instead of the 48 but that's been discussed in detail here.
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Mar 21, 2019 14:41:58 GMT
Hackney Council seem to have confirmed that the 388 reduction is not going ahead. Wonder if the same will apply to the 48s withdrawal as they were against that too. Unless the cancellation of the 388 cut was an agreement to "soften the blow" if you like, so Hackney could stop bothering them about the 48 withdrawal. What cut are you referring to? The frequency reduction or the cutback to Liverpool Street?
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Mar 21, 2019 15:15:06 GMT
Unless the cancellation of the 388 cut was an agreement to "soften the blow" if you like, so Hackney could stop bothering them about the 48 withdrawal. What cut are you referring to? The frequency reduction or the cutback to Liverpool Street? The frequency reduction.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 21, 2019 15:37:02 GMT
Unless the cancellation of the 388 cut was an agreement to "soften the blow" if you like, so Hackney could stop bothering them about the 48 withdrawal. Would much rather the 388 cut to go ahead instead of the 48 but that's been discussed in detail here. I'd rather neither go ahead in all honesty.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 21, 2019 18:57:21 GMT
The 388 freq reduction may be TFLs 'climbdown'. We intend to proceed with the changes but have decided to keep the frequency the same. Like with the D7 in the I.O.D changes.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Mar 21, 2019 23:05:30 GMT
I note with interest that LOTS, in the latest TLB, have stated the consultation conclusions are with the Mayor for a final decision. Interesting. Well the Mayor is Chairman of TfLs, and TfL enacts the Mayors policies. The budgetary decisions are made by the Mayor and he also sets bus policy, so it is only right that he should approve these cuts, which after all are done in his name. If he is now thinking that they are a cut too far, maybe we'll see a change, but if he is sticking to his financial guns that will be difficult. Perhaps we'll just see a little softening around the edges such as not changing the 388 frequency.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Mar 21, 2019 23:30:03 GMT
I note with interest that LOTS, in the latest TLB, have stated the consultation conclusions are with the Mayor for a final decision. Interesting. Well the Mayor is Chairman of TfLs, and TfL enacts the Mayors policies. The budgetary decisions are made by the Mayor and he also sets bus policy, so it is only right that he should approve these cuts, which after all are done in his name. If he is now thinking that they are a cut too far, maybe we'll see a change, but if he is sticking to his financial guns that will be difficult. Perhaps we'll just see a little softening around the edges such as not changing the 388 frequency. Let's face it, the 388 NOT losing 1 bph, or whatever it is, is a pinprick in TfL's budget and the cynical might think that the occasional item of this sort is deliberately inserted into 'consultations' in order that some body or other can be later said to have 'saved' it. I've heard this happens with lists of proposed Post Office closures, knowing that one or two will get reprieved.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2019 0:51:02 GMT
Hearing more reductions and route changes already consulted on being “postponed”.
More bad news for bus passengers...
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 23, 2019 7:25:47 GMT
Surely postponed is a good thing for passengers not bad.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 23, 2019 7:37:02 GMT
Hearing more reductions and route changes already consulted on being “postponed”. More bad news for bus passengers... Bad news that they've been postponed?
|
|