ERTA Bristol Forum 10-06-2023 Join Us!

ERTA is doing a ‘get out more’ Summer Wetherspoons-based Forum style get together to reach out to parts of the country we do not usually visit. If you wish to join us, please notify Mr Simon Barber T. 0208 940 4399 E. simon4barber@gmail.com All welcome, an agenda will be issued.

ERTA Northern Thrust: Sheffield Calling!

Appeal for help/ers 09-08-23:

Dear All,

Please can you talk together and sort or source people to get photos of the 'now' Woodhead rail route esp. the Woodhead Tunnels and adjacent road A628 being 'busy'. Really need feedback, not just criticism but other sources. I attach what is done more or less so far. But I need a team effort please before we can finish and put it out. All offers to help gratefully welcomed.

Regards,

Richard

ERTA

Request unfinished copy if willing to help via richard.erta@gmail.com

Update from Chris Bell: 02-06-23 (views may vary from ERTA perspectives):

To briefly sum up, I updated on progress of Don Valley Railway.

-The outline strategic business case for the bid to the Restoring Your Railways fund has been approved and we are awaiting further news on the Strategic Business Case Bid.

-At the same time the Barrow Hill Line RYR bid is further on and the Strategic Business Case is being developed.

-There are discussions on the potential of combining the two projects and in some way looking at aspirations to maximise and optimise rail capacity into Sheffield by reopening Sheffield Victoria as a second rail hub.

-I also set out the potential of creating a 4train /hour cross city rapid transit corridor between Wadsley Bridge and Woodhouse to match tram to Brighton aspirations expressed by Clive Betts MP. This would be created by extending 1/2 hrly Chesterfield - Sheffield (via Barrow Hill) to Chesterfield and a 1/2hrly Stocksbridge/Deepcar service towards Worksop improving frequency by avoiding the constraints of nunnery main line junction.

-I also pointed out that moving other services to Victoria from Midland could assist in delivering more Sheffield City Centre Capacity and significantly increase the number of hourly destinations accessible by direct train services.

- Moving Lincoln and Gainsborough Central services creating 2 express and 2 stopping services to Worksop every hour could improve this service to that currently offered between Sheffield and Barnsley. Service on this corridor could be created by extending the Robin Hood Line service creating direct services from Mansfield etc to Sheffield.

-The Kirton Lindsay line services could be deparliamentrified and go to Barton on Humber (in line with another RYR bid) as well as Cleethorpes.

If Barrow Hill line trains are extended to Nottingham diverted via Trent Valley calling at Alfreton, Langley Mill, Ilkeston, Attenborough and Beeston it may be possible to upgrade the all-purpose service to an Intercity style fast supplemented by a stopping service.

-If the Sheffield - Leeds via Dearne stopper is diverted to Victoria and supplemented by a deparliamentrified Sheffield to York via pontefract hourly service this may allow a 2/hr Nottingham to Leeds and Bradford service achieving Northern Powerhouse Rail frequency aspirations with slight timetable adjustments to Nottingham-Liverpool & Cross Country services.

Regarding Woodhead route beyond Deepcar, SYMCA are keen to develop the link to Penistone, though I personally have doubts over its viability compared with other options favouring options via Barnsley to serve other west West Yorkshire destinations.

SYMCA are dismissive of reaching Manchester despite uncertainties of benefit of Hope Valley Line up grade.

Therefore I now categorise Woodhead along with Matlock Buxton aspirations as not in my lifetime.

I hope that summary is of assistance

Yours, Chris Bell

Update on 29-05-2023 Have your say, support our calls for rebuilding Colne-Skipton and Woodhead and join ERTA and offer to become a volunteer - it all helps get things progressing and done. ERTA wants Colne-Skipton and Woodhead amongst other rebuilds made a top priority: https://transportforthenorth.com/our-north/strategic-transport-plan/ and https://ertarail.co.uk/

On Saturday 20^th May I attended the ERTA Sheffield meeting being held at the Benjamin Huntsman which is a Wetherspoons pub and there were 5 people there - our members David Ferguson and Christopher Hyomes, plus Stephen Chaytow (MEMRAP) and Chris Bell (Don Valley Railway). The following items were discussed:

·                    MEMRAP (Buxton/Chinley - Matlock) - There is expected to be an increase in aggregate production which is being planned.

·         Buxton will be connected to Chinley via a freight-only line using a Very Light Railway (similar to what is proposed for Coventry).

·          Ambergate North curve is being proposed, linking the Matlock branch and the line to Sheffield.

·          Don Valley Railway - Outline Strategic Business case. Hopefully this will become a Full Business case and then the Department of Transport.

·          Barrow Hill Railway - That is a freight-only line from Chesterfield to Woodhouse, and there is now a Full Business case.

·         Woodhead - There is at present a shortage of construction workers.

We also discussed the re-opening of the Doncaster - Knottingley railway line (freight-only line) including the re-opening of Askern Station. Notes by Chris Hyomes and Simon Barber.

ERTA is only as good as its members inform. We aim to get back to Sheffield and welcome people to turn out and engage positively. We still need photos for Woodhead Report to proceed please. Contact richard.erta@gmail.com with firm offers. It is all voluntary for a good cause – reopening lines! 

You may wish to see this article as well: 

https://www.itv.com/news/granada/2023-05-25/72-million-boost-for-train-services-in-the-north Ask why Colne-Skipton is not being given the go-ahead despite a good case well argued?!

See also: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Woodhead,+Glossop+SK13+1JA/@53.496728,-1.8717302,15z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x487bce3038b1bd91:0x4b20a2b276dc139b!8m2!3d53.496729!4d-1.861409!16zL20vMDVuMmsw?hl=en&entry=ttu A628 parallels the old railway route, it is congested and calls for expansion in a National Park (!) abound and yet people like Pip Dunn say there's no business case and that seems a popular stance, without any studies or presented research beyond secret purportation of HS2/3 - which does large conurbations, but as of design, misses out interim places and with no interim local-regional rails, defaults gap-wise to more roads = bad for the environment. This is the time to take action for the local railway to be restored as much as reasonably possible. Join ERTA to get your rail oar into the mix! https://ertarail.co.uk/

Further comment 04-06-2023

Please can you head hunt to find someone willing to take photos of the former Woodhead trackbed - not more than half a dozen or so, Then I can finish my report. Then I can market it on-line and add a bit of weight to the debate on Woodhead rebuild itself.

I can't go there for many reasons, but we need photos asap to pep up the report and for me to use on social media of a 'now' railway, not past glories.

If anyone is willing to help, please let me know.

As a southerner I have to tread carefully, but feel a. there's a rivalry between Leeds and Sheffield and east-west of Pennines; b. there's a diversity of views which means translates to varied agendas which then gets interpreted as 'not knowing exactly the definitive answer' so we get fudge of agencies courting high salaries, trading reports and organising conferences, but absence is spades on the ground as far as reopenings/rebuilds are concerned. Correct me if wrong, but that is my impression. It may also be elsewhere around Britain too, but with limited resources, we can but reach out via the forums, people can use them to introduce new-comers to ERTA, join and volunteer to be either area reps or general helpers where they live. The more we grow, the more we can aspire to do and better. That is how it works, delegated responsibility and leadership from the

EC in prioritising.

We do not wish to be like some organisations who plum for popularism and never get to the Haverhill's and Circencesters' of this world as they don't believe in them, we can aspire to try and raise the game across a wide spectrum and be inclusive. In the 1980's I was told by a Labour MP that Robin Hood Bay line linking Scarborough and Whitby was too far gone and no demand, yet now we see renewed interest and probably desecrated by development as per north of Ripon to Northallerton? We need teams who get in there, make the case and oppose blight/foster reworking to ensure a rail can be got through.

Thoughts?

Some of you may find this of interest: https://www.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/media/6719/gmipr-evidence-update-transport.pdf

On the one hand HS2/3 offers principal place to principal place and nothing in between. So driving to a principal place to catch a long distance speed train is probable and/or existing rail commute and change? But what about interim places of places where existing rails and/or criss-cross rail links don't exist anymore? I am not saying 'reopen everything' even as some give that impression, but neither am I saying throw the baby out with the bathwater either and reject everything and swallow Beeching era negativity whole.

Offers to richard.erta@gmail.com It is all voluntary.

East-West Rail and associated matters.

Update at 07-08-23

Dear All,

re: https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/news/east-west-rail-ceo-says-line-can-help-drive-major-growth-9324778/

I email now to share that we wanted a different route to the Northern Route E idea. We wish they were worked up together and see what saves money, what is flatter and less distance and gradient and what makes getting over A1, two rivers and entering current flood plain south-westerly of Station Road, Tempsford or (in your route case) north-westerly towards north of Tempsford.

In any case (see attached) we believe physical rail arms would optimise market share and versatility of routes and people and goods operations via the East-West Rail which we do support in principle and notwithstanding our reservations on routes. 

Our junction rather than a station idea makes rail more competitive as people north of Stevenage, south of Peterborough and East Bedfordshire can alight at a station near their home and commute/travel east or west direct to Bedford, Oxford corridor and/or eastwards to Addenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge and beyond and vice versa as well as the direct Oxford-Cambridge end-to-end pattern. 

Given Whitehall has thrown development to allow the railway at it, beit 44, 000 houses, 300 or 144, 000 in various parts east of Bedford/west of Cambridge; unless the open land as is now has those physical links built-in, the opportunity will be lost in coming years due to non-rail development.

Are people in let's say Sandy or St Neots going to await a ECML local train, change at the proposed Tempsford Station and await another east-west train to get to Bedford or Cambridge at cost and time, when a bus or car can do it in less time-cost and save hanging about? Our idea means Sandy-Bedford by rail direct within 15 minutes, beating any problems or delays or cost-time issues. What is not to like and prefer?

Happy to discuss if a window can be available for you and your good offices to genuinely appraise the pros and cost and costs and the costs on and off the rails if you don't have physical rail connectivity in the Tempsford area?

I attach our recent newsletter, our diagram and another scheme diagram which could also feed to the A43 rail alternative of Northampton-East-West Rail - Oxford and vice versa.

There is no west-north curve from the east to existing radial north-south main lines and our route idea gives that option as well as non MML trains to avoid the Bedford Midland 'box' via a reinstated junction at St John's.

If the Government found £10 billion, not £5 billion you could at this point have both routes! But for Southampton-ECML north-east to/from and vice versa, you need a physical link from the west to the ECML, otherwise it does not work. Huntingdon-Cambridge South for Addenbrookes, avoids driving and Cambridge Cities chronic congestion, so make a load of pragmatic sense, if traffic choice and reduction with associated benefits is what the goal is?

I am open to discuss and work with anyone, if real mileage can be forthcoming. What we don't want is double-glazing hard-sell that existing arrangements with 000's of new developments is adequate, I don't believe it is, sadly.

To oppose the rail link is daft given the rapid increases in east-west traffic and nil rail choice in the same axis and areas of growth. However, some fine-tuning is required and if, like Crossrail and HS2 costs rise, you have to pit 60 houses and Ravensden to how many properties needed to be relocated via the old route, albeit they cost more and are des-res? Upheaval has to be balanced, but the lessons for elsewhere in planning and governmental terms (with compensation?) should be a. protect old rail corridors/realignment spaces and b. study a proposition first before dismissing it out of hand - gets out of route protection as 'no need' - when lo, there is! Not least, such prudence and providence can save money and give modal shift a choice and chance back to rail more x nationwide in scope as well as specific local schemes like Northampton-Market Harborough and Guildford-Horsham-Shoreham ERTA supports. We'd do more if we had more resources - human and financial and membership is available to all via our website: https://ertarail.co.uk/become-a-member/ Remember, we started in Bedfordshire, but by no means have to finish there! 

Glossary for non rail people: ECML = East Coast Main Line between Kings Cross-Sandy-Leeds and York for example. Midland Main Line (MML) runs north-south from St Pancras to Leicester and beyond and vice versa. WCML is West Coast Main Line (Euston-Birmingham, Crewe and Manchester) for example. Newsletter not included in this email. Copies available via this email or retro on our website page: https://ertarail.co.uk/newsletter-archive/

Yours sincerely,

Richard Pill

ERTA CEO

Update 23-06-2023

The battle for Tempsford – ERTA appeals to Government and scheme promoters to think again!

 

ERTA wants a physically joined-up rail linkage between East-West Rail and the existing principal north-south main line slow lines of the East Coast Main Line (ECML) in the Tempsford area rather than as proposed, a segregated station without physical linking rail arms for multiple benefits and optimal market reach and ranges.

ERTA is against 44, 000 houses* being dumped in a green field site, north and south of Station Road, Tempsford, which will require significant social infrastructure akin to a new town development. We are not NIMBY objectors seeking to de-rail the rail link scheme, but notwithstanding we have a preferred route east of Bedford via St John’s and approaching Tempsford from a south-westerly direction, our call for physical rail linkage stands in its own right. * from above: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-65874170

Richard Pill CEO ERTA said “It is crucial the new railway has physical linkage for south of Peterborough, north of Stevenage and East Bedfordshire to get on a train where they live and travel direct to Bedford or Cambridge without changing. Who wants to change in the middle of nowhere and await another train, when car, bus and our rail ideas offer seamless journey access, saving time and cost?”

ERTA calls on the promoters of the new east-west railway and Government to think again and accommodate the physical rail linkage as per our diagram suggests which needs working up if so interested. Once the development happens, the curtain comes down on available land and scuppers the option we are suggesting, locking in a less-than optimal situation.

On the link between Milton Keynes and Aylesbury for South Bucks scope, the following news has been communicated as well:

'Greg Smith MP for Buckingham raised the issue of the Aylesbury Link in the Transport select Committee.

Welcomed funding in Spring Budget for current work on EWR.

 Is DfT confident it has funding for next stages of EWR?

Does DfT see the Aylesbury spur as part of EWR?

Huw Merriman, Rail Minister:

Funding for Phase2 and 3 to Cambridge is £4b-6b. Current Phase ( to Bletchley) £1.3b.

Economic benefits are £103b are high return.

Treasury is committed to EWR as sees the economic benefits to UK.

Aylesbury Spur is not in current delivery scope but as an existing line with some enhancements part of HS2, it is to be hoped that the case will become apparent in the future.

He is committed to it (?DfT) and feels that once EWR is operating, a case may be made as has happened with other rail re-opening schemes. 

Issues over HS2 disruption were again raised including HS2 working on unauthorised land at Elm Tree farm at Steeple Claydon 2am and roads not being built to standards.

End.

Thanks for listening. Please give us your support and contact Department of Transport, your local MP and demand these physical rail links are considered properly and factored in, with any development off the tracks being tailored and properly designed with facilities like hospitals, schools and so forth, not just dumped in the middle of nowhere overloading existing facilities and ruining the green and pleasant land used for food production. We need the railway for connectivity and modal choice to land-guzzling road development, piling up congestion in urban and junc

tion interfaces.

Useful link: https://members.parliament.uk/members/commons

Demand our alternative route which is probably cheaper, be worked up and assessed for expediency to gain the railway but reduce the pain of the Northern Route.

Our rough sketch of what we would prefer at Tempsford: 

This is what we would prefer at Tempsford north or south of Station Road, not 44, 000 houses in the middle of nowhere, on a flood plain and without social infrastructure? History repeating itself with the mistakes of Sandy?! Join our email loop: richard.erta@gmail.com It is free and without obligation, although we love it when people join and offer to help as reliable, assisting volunteers.

Update at 27-05-2023

Our route would not require 60 houses be demolished and bureaucracy like level crossings being given special dispensation across Cardington Road and at Priory Marina entrance, would result in a mere 5 minutes delay, but the benefit would be a railway direct, on flat ground, linking Bedford with East Coast Main Line (ECML), Cambridge and East Anglia and those audiences to Bedford and the Oxford corridor. 

I also enclose our statement on our preferred route. It is no panacea, cost is always with us x whatever route is chosen. We want a Bedford-Northampton 'new build' rail link as well for Cambridge-Northampton South Midlands to get people and goods off roads through choice, saving land and making for a better and more sustainable urban and rural landscape. Whilst a railway has to be better than no railway, none-the-less we need amendments to the east-west rail design, to ensure proper links. Our route would enable freight from east to north at Bedford, the Northern Route E does not allow such a linkage. It is really a segregational design and needs to be more integrational. 

A dossier breakdown is available free as a pdf doc via email richard.erta@gmail.com

Also: https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/breaking-news-east-west-rail-corridor-announced/ and https://eastwestrail.co.uk/routeupdate

Our Press Release:

27 May 2023
Press Release
 
ERTA ‘disappointed’ on the designs and route for an east-west rail link Bedford-Cambridge and calls on Government for a rethink with a Plan B route ERTA has long suggested.
 
ERTA is ‘disappointed’ that more-or-less Northern Route E has been selected. There’s been a failure to properly compare and contrast with our suggested alternative route using part of the traditional rail route. Key issues are:
·               The proposed route requires 60 houses be demolished, yet less than that at Blunham and north of Sandy was dismissed!
·               Our route requires very few properties be demolished or moved. Mostly extended back gardens
·               The new route fails to have arms to link with the north-south main line at Tempsford which curtails through-train (passenger AND new freight) south of Peterborough, North of Stevenage and East Bedfordshire likewise a south to east arm would enable direct Huntingdon and St Neots to Addenbrookes (Cambridge South) reducing a need to drive.
 
Richard Pill, CEO ERTA and Media Spokesperson said “These physical rail arms to the main line at Tempsford would increase the scope of the railway. I think people are far more likely to use it if they can board a train where they live and travel direct to Bedford, a County Town, and the Oxford corridor for a variety of purposes and vice versa. They will not want the delay and hassle of changing at Tempsford to a segregated station in the middle of nowhere. Lands will probably be developed and that locks-in a lack of wriggle room.”
 
ERTA has put forward its own alternative rail link route between Bedford and Tempsford via the old St John’s site.
 
End of Press Release

Further contact and comment: Mr Richard Pill T. 01234 330090 / 

Mobile: 07752096392 E. richard.erta@gmail.com

An anouncement of new Bedford-Cambridge route by Government due to take place this month we are told, exactly what date as yet unknown, but watch this space. The East West Rail Company seem to have set their hearts on Northern Route E and numerous parties including ERTA will doubtless object. ERTA wants a rail link east of #Bedford via St John's. No route is a panacea and there's pros and cons, winners and losers whichever rail route. Do we need the railway at all? Often asked question by many who tend to drive everywhere and rely on cheap fuel. But the strategic weakness is that there's no east-west rail link for 100 miles of the North London Lines and that means all into and out of East Anglia for a wide gap, has no choice but to go by road. Over last 3 decades bypasses, dualling and road expansion has happened and traffic has grown to fill that capacity. They deliver to urban cordons, but then the urban roadscape cannot deal with the volume and congestion happens. That causes delay, that proliferates pollution and side-effections which are dysfunctional and adds costs we have to pay for. The rail link would give choice, enable genuine overall traffic reductions - people and goods - and save land which we need to do. If you support our route idea and want a rail link, why not join ERTA and give us your support. It is one thing to say what we do not want, another to put a Plan B in its place so we offer something now and for successive generations. To support us, you can join ERTA as a member and offer to help as part of a team: https://ertarail.co.uk/ and join our free email loop via requests to richard.erta@gmail.com

London Travel Card Withdrawal threat - please push for its retetion and versatility.

Update 01-08-23

Congratulations to Chris Hyomes for getting ERTA on BBC Radio 4 You and Yours Programme about it. Also our Bedford and Kempston MP has taken up the baton as well: https://mohammadyasin.org/rail-ticket-office-closure-consultation-response/ So a Bravo for all who are doing up proud and will this government listen? Consultation extended by a few weeks so far... we all remember the rail concessionary card attempt to eradicate them at Privatisation? It back-tracked! Costs have spiralled whilst most ordinary people are priced off public transport and government subsidies for more roads/road-based guzzling or battery jobs-at-any-cost, when reopening local railways would massively boost sustainable employment and supply chains. Yet Labour itself is not pro-green as much as it should be it seems. So all need continual lobbying and levelling up for equality for all in better public transport access, but affordability as well in the wider environmental interest please. Join our email newsy loop free via requests to richard.erta@gmail.com

What others are doing: 

I believe a third council from Wokingham has spoken out against TFL's proposal to withdraw One Day Travelcards.

https://news.wokingham.gov.uk/news/concerns-shared-with-mayor-of-london-about-plans-to-stop-travelcards/

Also, the London Assembly Member named Caroline Pidgeon has published an open letter objecting to TFL's proposal and provided loads of detail including people that had their wallets stolen.

https://twitter.com/CarolinePidgeon/status/1665765932071788545

Media coverage 05-06-2023: 

https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/bedford-leaders-oppose-transport-for-london-proposals-to-discontinue-day-travelcards/ and Bedford Borough wades in too! https://www.bedford.gov.uk/TfLProposal Add your voice and write to your local MP: https://members.parliament.uk/members/commons

Update 02-06-2023

This is the consultation
https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/travelcards
The email address to engage in the consultation is Haveyoursay@tfl.gov.uk

He can also contact TFL using the government relations email address.
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/how-we-work/public-affairs#on-this-page-2
memberscorrespondence@tfl.gov.uk

Also, you can show him the video posted on YouTube by a transport enthusiast raising issues with the withdrawal of the One Day Travelcard, with references in the description and comments raised under the video. Also people who don't have Oyster or contactless won't be able to travel on London's buses as they don't accept cash payments.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbSu5ylZonY

And the sales of the One Day Travelcards had increased since the Coronavirus pandemic started in 2020.
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-2365-2223

Also the MP should know about the London Mayor's transport duty
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/29/section/141

and the Equality Act 2010 as it will affect protected groups.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/1
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/1/1

and

Would you be able to share this out to various people including your local MP and Neil Middleton of Railfuture please.

This is very recent information I've found on TFL's freedom of information website about the Day Travelcards:

TfL Issued Tickets
Year 2018/19
2019/20
2020/21
2021/22
2022/23

Issues TfL Revenue (£) Issues TfL Revenue (£) Issues TfL Revenue (£) Issues TfL Revenue (£) Issues TfL Revenue (£)
Day Travelcard (Peak) 823,871 9,438,239 726,700 8,306,361 21,040 286,193 160,876 1,912,416 521,845 5,883,158

Day Travelcard (Off-peak) 4,564,103 46,270,685 3,678,702 38,541,652 216,796 1,919,530 1,439,986 14,470,122 3,049,404 32,181,557
of which Railcard discount N/A
236,880
27,525
141,943
181,881
of which Group Day Travelcard N/A
216,347
806
16,092
132,902

N/A - these figures were not reported at the time and data required to extract this from is only kept for 4 years.

Here's a link to the freedom of information page containing the spreadsheet attachment.
https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/transparency/freedom-of-information/foi-request-detail?referenceId=FOI-0339-2324

This is proof that TFL must retain the Day Travelcards and they must finally back off on their decision.

The campaign is making progress and we welcome you to kindly help keep up the pressure. Thanks to all who have responded.
ERTA London More Rails for Hertfordshire English Regional Transport Association (ERTA)

Hope food for thought and action in favour of retention of the Travelcard please. Write/email your MP: https://members.parliament.uk/members/commons

Update 23-05-2023

I've found a few documents on the Parliament and government website in regards to social and financial exclusion.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/359358/socinc.pdf

https://committees.parliament.uk/work/1052/financial-exclusion-followup/publications/

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201617/ldselect/ldfinexcl/132/13206.htm

https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/6317/documents/69458/default/

TFL have still yet to publish an Equality Impact Assessment on their proposal.

The Equality Act 2010 states:

Section 1

Public sector duty regarding socio-economic inequalities
(1) An authority to which this section applies must, when making decisions of a strategic nature about how to exercise its functions, have due regard to the desirability of exercising them in a way that is designed to reduce the inequalities of outcome which result from socio-economic disadvantage.

(2) In deciding how to fulfil a duty to which it is subject under subsection (1), an authority must take into account any guidance issued in accordance with subsection (2A).

(3) The authorities to which this section applies are—
(d) the Greater London Authority;

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/part/1

Explanatory Notes
Commentary on Section 1

23. This section requires specified public bodies, when making strategic decisions such as deciding priorities and setting objectives, to consider how their decisions might help to reduce the inequalities associated with socio-economic disadvantage. Such inequalities could include inequalities in education, health, housing, crime rates, or other matters associated with socio-economic disadvantage. It is for public bodies subject to the duty to determine which socio-economic inequalities they are in a position to influence.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/notes/division/3/1/1

Although TFL is not mentioned in this legislation, they are under control of the GLA.

And to recap the Mayor's statutory transport duties in the GLA Act 1999:

Section 141

General transport duty.
(1) The Mayor shall develop and implement policies for the promotion and encouragement of safe, integrated, efficient and economic transport facilities and services to, from and within Greater London.

(2) The powers of the Authority under this Part shall be exercised for the purpose of securing the provision of the transport facilities and services mentioned in subsection (1) above.

(3) The transport facilities and services mentioned in subsection (1) above include facilities and services for pedestrians and are—
(a) those required to meet the needs of persons living or working in, or visiting, Greater London, and
(b) those required for the transportation of freight.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/29/section/141

Everyone must take note of these legislations, they don't have to be an expert in law, if TFL and the Mayor decides to proceed with the proposal to make travel in London much harder, then organisations (especially disability groups as they have Railcard discounts for themselves and their companions) should challenge this against TFL and the Mayor in courts.

Quick update, TFL has extended the deadline for the engagement by two weeks (6th June) which gives us enough time.

https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/travelcards

I've taken a read of Rail Future's articles calling on TFL to retain the Day Travelcards.

 

https://railfuture.org.uk/article1903-Keep-the-London-Travelcard

https://railfuture.org.uk/Press-release-11th-May-2023-B

 

Would you be able to share the email (including the one below) to Neil Middleton, as he missed out on various points made by my friend. I've been seeing more people raising concerns on social media about how the loss of the Day Travelcards will make it harder for them to travel in situations where their Oyster or Freedom pass and contactless card get lost or stolen. Unfortunately, London is a high crime area, and many people lost their belongings to pickpockets and robberies. TFL's proposal will make travel to and within London much harder and will create barriers, especially among vulnerable and the disabled people.

 

Also, people who are waiting for their replacement Oyster card or Freedom pass (including 60+ Oyster) and their contactless card to arrive at their address won't be able to travel because the cost of a new Oyster card is £7, which is very expensive! That means they won't be able to travel to work or attend their appointments.

 

Neil has also missed out that London's buses haven't taken cash fares since 2014, TFL's proposal will definitely make it hard for people to travel on London's buses without the Day Travelcards.

 

This is why the in boundary part of the Day Travelcard must be retained because it will affect victims of crime and other vulnerable people!

A YouTuber with over 25k subscribers has also raised concerns about TFL's proposal and raised similar points. I suggest that the video be shared with Neil, and some of the commenters raised their concerns as wll.

https://youtu.be/IbSu5ylZonY

 

A disability organisation named Inclusion London and Inclusion Barnet has raised their concerns about TFL's proposal on Twitter.

 

https://twitter.com/InclusionLondon/status/1653750938769711105

 

More transport organisations and the Reading Council has also raised their concerns.

 

https://newsroom.londontravelwatch.org.uk/news/scrapping-day-travelcards-transport-watchdog-responds

https://twitter.com/TransportFocus/status/1653331958749962244

https://bettertransport.org.uk/media/withdrawing-day-travelcards-will-be-a-step-backwards-says-transport-charity/

https://media.reading.gov.uk/news/council-objects-to-proposed-removal-of-one-day-travelcard-to-london

 

Also in the email below, Neil should quote the Mayor of London's statutory transport duty from the GLA Act. I'm not a lawyer, but this piece of legislation must be raised to know that the Mayor may breach his statutory transport duty by allowing TFL to proceed with the proposal, along with the Equality Act 2010, as TFL's proposal will affect various protected groups. If the Mayor presses ahead with TFL's proposal, someone (including an organisation) should be taking legal action against the Mayor and test the GLA Act statutory transport powers and the Equality Act 2010 in courts.

 

Also, you're welcome to pass the information on to your local MP.

 

Good morning

 

Sorry for the late response.

I'll have to mention that the loss of the One Day Travelcards will cause people to get stranded and will deter people from visiting London.

I've been told a story by a friend of a friend of a friend, etc. She mentioned that she had her Oyster card stolen to pick pockets, and she does not hold contactless cards as she fears thieves would use her stolen cards to buy stuff and travel on public transport as they don't require a chip and pin.

She's lucky she had cash (a minimum of £20) with her, which allowed her to buy a One Day Travelcard at a station to continue with her journey.

She had to wait ages for her new Oyster card to get sent through the post, there's no point getting a new one on the day because it costs £7, and it's really expensive! Instead, she purchases a One Day Travelcard on each day until her new Oyster card arrives in the post as she has to travel by train (TFL and National Rail) and bus in London to work, etc.

 

Not only will the withdrawal of the One Day Travelcard affect various groups of people (ranging from the disabled, vulnerable, tourists, etc.), but they will also have problems travelling on London's buses as they don't take cash payments and only accept Oyster cards and contactless cards.

This will certainly cause more vulnerable people to get stranded, especially companions of Railcard holders as they get 1/3 off on the One Day Travelcards, and this will cause more problems for the companions of disabled people that are wheelchair bound as they won't be able to travel on London's buses! This will cause disruption to London's bus services, as it will cause problems for bus drivers!

 

The big issue is that the withdrawal of the One Day Travelcard will cause people to get stranded!

 

Imagine losing your Oyster and contactless cards to thieves. How would you be able to travel? Especially as you safely arrived home and still had to wait for TFL and your bank to send you replacement cards, which usually take a long time, and you won't be able to travel on public transport because TFL ended the sale of One Day Travelcards? The people at the Greater London Authority (including the Mayor), TFL, and the government should realise the mental pain these people had to go through!

Please, I urge you to get your followers and subscribers to contact their local MP, Councillor, Assembly Member, etc. and raise their concerns on how TFL's proposal will affect all groups of people including the vulnerable! Also tell others, such as transport user groups, charities, etc., to do the same!

https://www.writetothem.com/

To recap, the people, including the Ministers in the Department for Transport, like to claim that TFL is a devolved matter, but they actually have the power by law to veto the proposal!

 

Greater London Authority Act 1999

Section 143 - Directions by the Secretary of State.

(1) Where the Secretary of State considers that—

(a) the transport strategy (or any part of it) is inconsistent with national policies relating to transport, and

(b) the inconsistency is detrimental to any area outside Greater London, he may direct the Mayor to make such revisions of the transport strategy in order to remove the inconsistency as may be specified in the direction.

(2) Where the Secretary of State gives the Mayor a direction under subsection (1) above, the Mayor shall revise the transport strategy in accordance with the direction.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/29/section/143

 

And the proposal to withdraw the One Day Travelcards is against the Mayor of London's statutory transport duty:

Section 141 - General transport duty.

(1) The Mayor shall develop and implement policies for the promotion and encouragement of safe, integrated, efficient and economic transport facilities and services to, from and within Greater London.

(2) The powers of the Authority under this Part shall be exercised for the purpose of securing the provision of the transport facilities and services mentioned in subsection (1) above.

(3) The transport facilities and services mentioned in subsection (1) above include facilities and services for pedestrians and are—

(a) those required to meet the needs of persons living or working in, or visiting, Greater London, and

(b) those required for the transportation of freight.

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1999/29/section/141

 

Please, don't forget to quote these laws to MPs, Councillors and Assembly Members!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbSu5ylZonY&authuser=0

Note the author wishes to remain anon. ERTA passes this information on in good faith. For the medium term, join ERTA and give us your help and support: https://ertarail.co.uk/