|
Post by capitalomnibus on Oct 26, 2021 11:34:52 GMT
This is an interesting tweet from the Lead Member for Planning, Place and The Environment for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. The separate reference to 'planned changes to route 19' make me wonder whether the earlier proposals are being revived in some form. He best CC in his own Tory Transport Secretary who has mandated such draconian cuts at TfL as a condition of funding deals. But hey, gotta disregard facts to score that goal. The changes he's referencing to are a cut in frequency on the 19 from every 8 to every 10 mins Utter Labour rubbish. The condition was not that they cut services. TfL CHOSE to cut services. I specifically recall it was to raise congestion charge price and other attachments. TfL is its own downfall. The mayor has the buck to most of it as he knew about the grant cut. If Boris was there he would have worked amongst it. But Khan chose to continue with measures that would put them in the red (ie fares freeze, hopper fare) then banning many adverts etc which were high revenue. Various road schemes that have caused delays to bus services and operators have appealed in cases to get their money back.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 26, 2021 12:45:48 GMT
He best CC in his own Tory Transport Secretary who has mandated such draconian cuts at TfL as a condition of funding deals. But hey, gotta disregard facts to score that goal. The changes he's referencing to are a cut in frequency on the 19 from every 8 to every 10 mins Utter Labour rubbish. The condition was not that they cut services. TfL CHOSE to cut services. I specifically recall it was to raise congestion charge price and other attachments. TfL is its own downfall. The mayor has the buck to most of it as he knew about the grant cut. If Boris was there he would have worked amongst it. But Khan chose to continue with measures that would put them in the red (ie fares freeze, hopper fare) then banning many adverts etc which were high revenue. Various road schemes that have caused delays to bus services and operators have appealed in cases to get their money back. Boris would of worked with it? It was his fault in the first place before Khan exacerbated it further so both are as bad as each other Let’s see how long it takes for the Boris fans on here to defend him!
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 26, 2021 20:50:57 GMT
Utter Labour rubbish. The condition was not that they cut services. TfL CHOSE to cut services. I specifically recall it was to raise congestion charge price and other attachments. TfL is its own downfall. The mayor has the buck to most of it as he knew about the grant cut. If Boris was there he would have worked amongst it. But Khan chose to continue with measures that would put them in the red (ie fares freeze, hopper fare) then banning many adverts etc which were high revenue. Various road schemes that have caused delays to bus services and operators have appealed in cases to get their money back. Boris would of worked with it? It was his fault in the first place before Khan exacerbated it further so both are as bad as each other Let’s see how long it takes for the Boris fans on here to defend him! I'm not sure anyone is to 'blame' as such. Most non enthusiastics were in favour of fare freezes and the hopper, coupled with the whole ride hailing cab service which is arguable a world wide phenomen effectively the amount of revenue was inevitable it would drop.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Oct 26, 2021 21:50:16 GMT
Utter Labour rubbish. The condition was not that they cut services. TfL CHOSE to cut services. I specifically recall it was to raise congestion charge price and other attachments. TfL is its own downfall. The mayor has the buck to most of it as he knew about the grant cut. If Boris was there he would have worked amongst it. But Khan chose to continue with measures that would put them in the red (ie fares freeze, hopper fare) then banning many adverts etc which were high revenue. Various road schemes that have caused delays to bus services and operators have appealed in cases to get their money back. Boris would of worked with it? It was his fault in the first place before Khan exacerbated it further so both are as bad as each other Let’s see how long it takes for the Boris fans on here to defend him! Boris would have worked with it, after all he conceived it. The hopper fare was a good idea, but a freeze of the type Khan did, costs a lot. Especially when they are calling for investment. It has not helped crossrail over run, cost more money then revenue that would have came in from it, did not due to it not being open. Word has it Khan did not do enough about crossrail when he took over, until late when it was coming to reality it would not be finished and there were a lot of hold ups. He knew months before, but then played it down (typical politician style). Andy Burnham is now kicking London in the nuts saying the fares are too cheap. Although what he done imo was not nice to do this to your own party colleague.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 26, 2021 22:11:11 GMT
Boris would of worked with it? It was his fault in the first place before Khan exacerbated it further so both are as bad as each other Let’s see how long it takes for the Boris fans on here to defend him! I'm not sure anyone is to 'blame' as such. Most non enthusiastics were in favour of fare freezes and the hopper, coupled with the whole ride hailing cab service which is arguable a world wide phenomen effectively the amount of revenue was inevitable it would drop. Boris removed the subsidy and Khan, despite knowing this, reduced revenue by implementing a fare freeze and hopper fare on top - it wasn't inevitable that revenue would drop and both the former and current mayor's must share the blame.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Oct 26, 2021 22:47:34 GMT
I'm not sure anyone is to 'blame' as such. Most non enthusiastics were in favour of fare freezes and the hopper, coupled with the whole ride hailing cab service which is arguable a world wide phenomen effectively the amount of revenue was inevitable it would drop. Boris removed the subsidy and Khan, despite knowing this, reduced revenue by implementing a fare freeze and hopper fare on top - it wasn't inevitable that revenue would drop and both the former and current mayor's must share the blame. Kahn should have had TfL look at ways to raise revenue to pay for both the fare freeze and hopper fare. Even if it meant delaying their introduction for up to a year whilst funding was found it would have been better. Both get rushed and TfL was vulnerable to the loss almost instantly. Failing that he could have done what he is best at and launched a PR campaign deflecting the blame if neither could be done.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Oct 27, 2021 5:24:10 GMT
Boris removed the subsidy and Khan, despite knowing this, reduced revenue by implementing a fare freeze and hopper fare on top - it wasn't inevitable that revenue would drop and both the former and current mayor's must share the blame. Kahn should have had TfL look at ways to raise revenue to pay for both the fare freeze and hopper fare. Even if it meant delaying their introduction for up to a year whilst funding was found it would have been better. Both get rushed and TfL was vulnerable to the loss almost instantly. Failing that he could have done what he is best at and launched a PR campaign deflecting the blame if neither could be done. Free travel should have been abolished beyond the ENCTS, the Hopper Fare was long overdue and putting fares up would just put more people off bus travel.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 27, 2021 5:33:41 GMT
Kahn should have had TfL look at ways to raise revenue to pay for both the fare freeze and hopper fare. Even if it meant delaying their introduction for up to a year whilst funding was found it would have been better. Both get rushed and TfL was vulnerable to the loss almost instantly. Failing that he could have done what he is best at and launched a PR campaign deflecting the blame if neither could be done. Free travel should have been abolished beyond the ENCTS, the Hopper Fare was long overdue and putting fares up would just put more people off bus travel. What's ENCTS?
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Oct 27, 2021 5:43:49 GMT
Free travel should have been abolished beyond the ENCTS, the Hopper Fare was long overdue and putting fares up would just put more people off bus travel. What's ENCTS? English. National Concessionary Travel scheme Basically a Government funded off-peak and weekends bus pass for those over state retirement age (currently 66) and registered disabled who are younger. There are similar schemes in other countries but details vary. TfL currently funds extra free travel: under 18, over 60, peak hour (commuting) travel for under 18 and over 60, plus number of others given free travel, when they could buy a ticket
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 27, 2021 5:59:28 GMT
English. National Concessionary Travel scheme Basically a Government funded off-peak and weekends bus pass for those over state retirement age (currently 66) and registered disabled who are younger. There are similar schemes in other countries but details vary. TfL currently funds extra free travel: under 18, over 60, peak hour (commuting) travel for under 18 and over 60, plus number of others given free travel, when they could buy a ticket Yes absolutely agree with you. Probably one of the biggest disgraces in London that this has been allowed to continue. Completely agree with a free bus pass over 66 (even 60 not so bad) but not for all modes practically 24/7 now. Tube and train fares should be re introduced to raise funds and if people don't want to pay then there is still a bus network to use (even still so with some cutbacks so far).
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Oct 27, 2021 8:39:55 GMT
English. National Concessionary Travel scheme Basically a Government funded off-peak and weekends bus pass for those over state retirement age (currently 66) and registered disabled who are younger. There are similar schemes in other countries but details vary. TfL currently funds extra free travel: under 18, over 60, peak hour (commuting) travel for under 18 and over 60, plus number of others given free travel, when they could buy a ticket Yes absolutely agree with you. Probably one of the biggest disgraces in London that this has been allowed to continue. Completely agree with a free bus pass over 66 (even 60 not so bad) but not for all modes practically 24/7 now. Tube and train fares should be re introduced to raise funds and if people don't want to pay then there is still a bus network to use (even still so with some cutbacks so far). And then everyone flocks to their cars and gridlocks the city.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 27, 2021 9:21:50 GMT
Yes absolutely agree with you. Probably one of the biggest disgraces in London that this has been allowed to continue. Completely agree with a free bus pass over 66 (even 60 not so bad) but not for all modes practically 24/7 now. Tube and train fares should be re introduced to raise funds and if people don't want to pay then there is still a bus network to use (even still so with some cutbacks so far). And then everyone flocks to their cars and gridlocks the city. Highly unlikely. If you pay for your travel when your 59 years and 364 days old I can't see someone suddenly saying on their 60th birthday they are only going to drive everywhere. If you like in Surrey, Kent, Essex, Herts, Bucks and Berks you kee paying till 66 and don't get it on the the tube and trains even if the underground extends into you area (Met and Central Lines).
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Oct 27, 2021 10:18:48 GMT
And then everyone flocks to their cars and gridlocks the city. Highly unlikely. If you pay for your travel when your 59 years and 364 days old I can't see someone suddenly saying on their 60th birthday they are only going to drive everywhere. If you like in Surrey, Kent, Essex, Herts, Bucks and Berks you kee paying till 66 and don't get it on the the tube and trains even if the underground extends into you area (Met and Central Lines). Yes, but the chances of people having free travel withdrawn causes the opposite. If you suddenly have to fork out a few more grand each year people are likely to switch.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 27, 2021 10:26:40 GMT
Highly unlikely. If you pay for your travel when your 59 years and 364 days old I can't see someone suddenly saying on their 60th birthday they are only going to drive everywhere. If you like in Surrey, Kent, Essex, Herts, Bucks and Berks you kee paying till 66 and don't get it on the the tube and trains even if the underground extends into you area (Met and Central Lines). Yes, but the chances of people having free travel withdrawn causes the opposite. If you suddenly have to fork out a few more grand each year people are likely to switch. So your solution to raising more revenue without making the fare payers pay more is what? At the end of the day there is only so much in a revenue pot. If more can't be raised then cloth has to be cut.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Oct 27, 2021 10:37:05 GMT
Highly unlikely. If you pay for your travel when your 59 years and 364 days old I can't see someone suddenly saying on their 60th birthday they are only going to drive everywhere. If you like in Surrey, Kent, Essex, Herts, Bucks and Berks you kee paying till 66 and don't get it on the the tube and trains even if the underground extends into you area (Met and Central Lines). Yes, but the chances of people having free travel withdrawn causes the opposite. If you suddenly have to fork out a few more grand each year people are likely to switch. But losing free passengers will be good financially for TfL. Even if just 20% pay, that will be a significant revenue increase. Increase revenue, less cuts are required. Don't increase revenue, greater cuts required.
|
|