Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Mark NWN Mar 12 2012, 05:50 PM

Hi all,

I am working on a piece in regard to the Government response to the McNulty report on how to make the railways better, and fairer for all.

You can read the response in full here:
http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/reforming-our-railways/

Would like your input on this please... are you a regular rail user, have you worked out the implications etc?

I will be doing the rounds of a few contacts and speaking to as many people as possible, feel free to debate the issue but if you would like to contact me and add to the article please email mark.taylor@newburynews.co.uk or call 01635 564532.

Cheers.

Posted by: xjay1337 Mar 12 2012, 07:42 PM

The only thing I remembered from my days of train travel is a general lack of space and dirty stations most of which smelt like wee.

Posted by: Darren Mar 13 2012, 08:17 AM

Not much has changed, except the prices go up and up. It's getting to the point where driving into london and paying to park is becoming a cheaper plan.

Posted by: Biker1 Mar 13 2012, 08:27 AM

If passengers think that getting rid of staff at ticket offices and trains is a good thing then I think they are sadly mistaken.
Time will tell as the government seem be convinced that most of the recommendations in this report should be implemented.

Posted by: xjay1337 Mar 13 2012, 09:07 AM

At Thatcham at least, the guy in the ticket booth was both a-) Awesome B-) Legend....wait for it.... c-) better than the ticket machine because he actually knew what station you mean, plus he works in the rain, where as the ticket machine doesn't and d-) following on from B-), I hope you're not lactose intolerant because the second part of that word is DARY.

Having both is good for queues and efficiency...one queue for the man, one queue for the machine (if it's not raining)

Talking of rain, how exactly can you set fire to it, because on it's own, it's not combustible.

Posted by: Bloggo Mar 13 2012, 09:10 AM

The reduction in train and station staff may be economically advantageous however it does not help passengers in any way.
What train passengers want and deserve considering the price of fares is reliable service, a seat and a stress free journey.
The present situation of passengers being forced to stand for long periods is at best irksome but at worse it is down right dangerous from both a health perspective and the potential of being hurled around the carriage in the event of an accident.

Posted by: xjay1337 Mar 13 2012, 09:13 AM

When I used to work in Basingstoke I took the train in once. It was horrible. Not only did I have to jump trains at Reading but on the line between Reading and Basingstoke there is quite a violent bump which caused me (I have a very good sense of balance) to fall over some guys bicycle...a colleague sat further down the train said she "thought I had fainted".

"Have you had an injury at work or on the train...?"

Posted by: Adrian Hollister Mar 13 2012, 09:28 AM

Agree.

McNulty wants to deliver less in a less convenient way and increase fares - madness and a real slap in the face for our rail users. How on earth does putting people off the train and back into the grid locked road network help encourage sustainable travel that the country can afford?

Privatisation has brought nothing but increasing costs to this country.

Posted by: Biker1 Mar 13 2012, 09:33 AM

Totally agree.

Posted by: Bloggo Mar 13 2012, 09:40 AM

The reality of the situation is that there are too many passengers using an inadeqate, antiquated and struggling rail rail system. The emphasise has shifted from providing a fit for purpose rail network to a profit taking cash cow.
Unless the government wake up to the mess that the rail system is in they will find more and more people travelling by car. But perhaps the swinging fuel taxes make this a viable option.
And it must not be forgotten that this system is still subsidised by the tax payer.