tenthofjune

A relative came down from Glasgow yesterday to attend an event in the middle of Manchester, so had purchased a return ticket to Manchester Piccadilly. Heading home today, she had originally planned to get a train from Blackrod or Horwich in to Manchester to catch her return train. Unfortunately with the current engineering work on the line it meant replacement buses, which even if they actually turn up means a 30 min train journey becomes an hour and a quarter. We therefore decided that a better option was to drive her in to Manchester (a return journey for me that was still quicker than the one-way bus journey).

What is ridiculous though, is that the better solution would have been to take her to Wigan North Western station, as the train she had a ticket for, called at Wigan on the way to Glasgow. National Rail, however, has a condition which reads as follows:

Break of journey
You may not start, break and resume, or end your journey at any intermediate station except to change to/from connecting trains as shown on the ticket(s) or other valid travel itinerary.

Now I can understand that it would be wrong to purchase a ticket and then want to stop off somewhere to carry out some business for a few hours and then carry on, but when you have purchased a ticket for a seat from Manchester to Glasgow, getting on at Wigan (especially when the reason is due to an inconvenience cause by the rail companies in the first place) is not using any extra service, it’s actually less. It would only make sense if the ticket for a shorter journey actually cost more (although nothing would surprise me with the illogical ticket pricing we have in the UK)

I see that Blackrod Station is finally getting better access to both platforms, but I can’t help feeling that this is only being done because they are obliged to under DDA regulations.

Below are the passenger figures for Blackrod, Horwich and Lostock for the past six years¹.

Can someone please explain why, when Blackrod handles almost double the passengers handled by Lostock, Blackrod Station has no ticket office (or even a simple ticket machine) and no live information signs yet Lostock has both of these and enjoys twice as many calling services as Blackrod.

[1] Office of Rail Regulation – Station Usage Data

Everyone who buys a mobile phone or drives a car should be made to watch this video.

I make no apologies about the graphic nature of the content – only when people see the consequences do we stand any chance of people changing their behaviour.

Haydon Bridge is the last remaining village on the A69 to be bypassed and while construction is still underway with a completion date of Spring 2009, Google maps appears to have jumped the gun and seems to think it has been completed:

View Larger Map

Update

I have just updated the maps on my TomTom and the new bypass is also shown on here:

This is not surprising as both Google and TomTom take their map data from Tele-Atlas, who would appear to be the ones jumping the gun here.

Ironically, TomTom’s map update service proudly claims “Tomorrow’s maps today“. I didn’t realise they meant literally.

Further Update (24 Nov)

A representative from The Highways Agency has today confirmed that they were unaware of Google and TomTom showing the bypass as open. They also noted that Google maps has given the old road the number B6319 (as have TomTom) which has yet to be confirmed.

Update (27 Mar 09)

I drove along the A69 today and the bypass is now open.

One from the inbox, portraying exactly how those who want the TIF proposal to go through view the motorist:

We can argue until the cows come home about the accuracy of the ‘only 10% will pay the congestion charge” claim of the Yes Vote campaign (it’s 20% according to the TIF consultation brochure), but let’s play along.

The pro-toll advocates say that it will only be 10% because others will be able to switch to a viable alternative (I can’t as previously posted). Following this logically through, this means that the remaining 10% are precisely the ones for whom the TIF proposals will not provide a viable public transport alternative.

So basically, the yes campaign are happy to promote the notion that the improvements should be paid for by those who can’t benefit from them.

How is that fair?

Have a read of this letter from Howard Bernstein to the DfT in London. In it he clearly states:

Heavy rail rolling stock and associated infrastructure (platform extensions, turnbacks, depots and stabling). These costs are now assumed to be met by the Department directly through the TOCs (Train Operating Companies) and Network Rail rather than through TIF grant to Greater Manchester and Prudential Borrowing cover.

AGMA are actively promoting extra carriages and platform extensions as part of the TIF package, yet they are clearly not.

While looking at the details for Blackpool Illuminations, the guide has an advert for Transpennine Express, claiming a fare for Manchester to Blackpool of only £4 (£8 for the family as the children go free). Hmmm…. not bad, that’s worth considering as an alternative to driving, except for one thing:

That fare is not available!

In reality, the cheapest return for two adults is £25.40, the cheapest single is £25.20, over three times the advertised price.

Even from our local station, Blackrod, it is still £21 return for two adults. Compare that to just under £9 of fuel (even at today’s prices) for a return trip by car, and the train represents a premium of 133% over the car.

When you also consider the reduced flexibility of the rail timetable, and the fact that it would drop us off a couple of miles from where we want to be, the car wins hands down, yet again.

While I was on the Transpennine Express site, they were also advertising Manchester-Glasgow fares for £10 each way, so at a cost of £40 return for two adults, I was interested, especially after my last look at using rail to get to Glasgow, but sadly, the truth is once again different – it still costs a minimum of £120 return for two adults.

How are they allowed to advertise these fares when they are obviously extremely limited?

They even have the cheek to claim that ‘It’s quicker, cheaper, more direct, and less hassle than any other way.’ That’s definitely not the case for more than one person. Even for one person, it is still more expensive and unless the stations are adjacent to your house and destination, then ‘direct’ does not enter into it.

Two more reasons not to use public transport:

• Rail Overcrowding is going to get even worse;
• If you do persist in using public transport, especially buses, it is highly likely to make you ill.

I’ve just found this gem on a Manchester Evening News Article from last year:

Oldham and Rochdale may not pay any congestion charges until Metrolink extensions to their town centres are complete. Other outlying areas – such as Stockport, which hopes to get a Metrolink line in the future – are also likely to avoid the charges for the first year.

Yet there is no mention of other outlying areas, such as Bolton and Wigan, who will NEVER get the Metrolink, yet are getting no such exemption.

Is it any wonder, Bolton and Wigan don’t want to be lumped in as part of Greater Manchester when they are discriminated against in this way?

As it happens, it would appear that AGMA have reneged on this exemption and only Trafford Park is getting a 50% discount until they get some more buses, but this clearly shows how some areas are considered more equal than others.