Is rail REALLY that bad in the North?

[Edgeley]

I think Bletchleyite's radial v web-like dichotomy is a good one.

DfT planners would seem to have more difficulty appreciating the value of web networks. HS2 is another affirmation of the preference for the radial.

 

[yorksrob]

I would hope that some might be stored for a while, in case an unexpected requirement for additional long distance trains arises.

 

[AndrewE]

I think Bletchleyite's radial v web-like dichotomy is a good one.

DfT planners would seem to have more difficulty appreciating the value of web networks. HS2 is another affirmation of the preference for the radial.

I think "focussed on London" is more the driving factor than "Radial." The media have reinforced the propaganda that most tax is collected from the financial services sector, so serving the City of London predominates in the Whitehall mind. Never mind that "the City" took the rest of the country's pensions funds to the casino and lost most of them.

 

[Gareth Marston]

We have to remember that the prevailing attitude in Government throughout the late 60's and into the 90's was that the railways were a "declining Victorian mode of transport" with no long term future. Government in the early 90's genuinely thought that once the magic of the private sector had worked is way to increase inefficiency the remaining basket case lines nobody used could be quietly closed once the blame would not stick to Government. It was assumed that apart from InterCity services that would be the case for the bulk of services in the North. Therefore until the recent Northern franchise the franchise deals struck by Daft/SRA have reflected this attitude.

Apart from the work of the PTE's its all been managed declined in the North or locking things in aspec. 1st Generation DMU replacement caused hysterical gnashing of teeth down in Whitehall until the Government got cold feet when it realised the implication and the political consequence.

 

[HSTEd]

Web networks are notoriously hard to path trains for efficiently though.

Radials are much better in that regard.

 

[QueensCurve]

Yes, I know TPE services are permanently busy, but is Leeds to Manchester in 55 minutes so bad, given the topography of the route?

I have not travelled on the route for many years, but I have always considered Manchester to Leeds painfully slow. The distance is not that great (42m) giving an average speed of about 45mph. This is very slow compared to the speeds that might be achieved between cities connected by the radial routes from London.

Two important cities do need to have a better connection. It does not have to be 140mph+ and I have always thought the idea of "HS3" was hyperbolic and over-specified.

Even giving the Topography of the route it should be possible to shorten the journey times. My recollection is that there are extended periods of slow running particularly through the numerous junctions. The track layout could be simplified and linespeeds improved.

The last paragraph is my opinion and the facts may admittedly differ. My recollection is that British Rail and successors offered the teaser of faster journeys on the route many times over the years but it has never been delivered.

 

[pemma]

I have always thought the idea of "HS3" was hyperbolic and over-specified.

I've not heard anything to suggest 'HS3' or 'Northern Powerhouse Rail' as it seems to have been renamed, would include speeds faster than what can be achieved on the WCML, ECML, MML and GWML. 'TransPennine Mainline' would probably have been a more appropriate name.

 

[Bantamzen]

I've not heard anything to suggest 'HS3' or 'Northern Powerhouse Rail' as it seems to have been renamed, would include speeds faster than what can be achieved on the WCML, ECML, MML and GWML. 'TransPennine Mainline' would probably have been a more appropriate name.

HS3 was always just a buzzword for politicians to throw about, nobody with any sense or understanding of the region thought for even a second that some kind of HS line will emerge either side of the Pennines. Trans-Pennine Main Upgrade would have been a better, and more realistic name for the project as it doesn't have some people in a flap about some bespoke high speed connection where other projects are being shelved, but calls it what it is. Working towards speeding up what is really just a slow commuter route that does and always has carried an awful lot of inter city traffic along it.

 

[AM9]

I have not travelled on the route for many years, but I have always considered Manchester to Leeds painfully slow. The distance is not that great (42m) giving an average speed of about 45mph. This is very slow compared to the speeds that might be achieved between cities connected by the radial routes from London.

Mainly because most of the Thames basin is as flat as a billiard table compared to the route over the Pennines. That results in a number of curves
to navigate the terrain without gradients that even today would be operationally difficult.

Even giving the Topography of the route it should be possible to shorten the journey times. My recollection is that there are extended periods of slow running particularly through the numerous junctions. The track layout could be simplified and linespeeds improved.

I'd agree with that. Unfortunately, some of the route that was four tracked has been streamlined by removing tracks to allow an alignment for faster running. So there isn't a quick fix for that.

 

[QueensCurve]

It does also concern me that all the references to the Northern Powerhouse and HS3 seem so Manchester and Leeds centred. I hope it won't end up that those who shout the loudest get the improvements whilst other areas of the country continue to be overlooked and neglected.

The focus on Manchester to Lees may reflect that being a major route which is unduly slow and that it is at the core of northern services. If that could be accelerated there would an improvement in the end to end journey times for services fanning out at either end.

I am very cynical about the Northern Powerhouse which seems to have bee a political ploy by George Gideon Osborne which would always underdeliver. Furthermore it seems to have died with his political career.

 

[QueensCurve]

I'd agree with that. Unfortunately, some of the route that was four tracked has been streamlined by removing tracks to allow an alignment for faster running. So there isn't a quick fix for that.

I seem to recall a lot of rationalisation in the early 1980s and thinking at the time it would be a lot better when it was all done. That however has not been the case.

Speed improvements have been promised many times. It seems pertinent to question whether that reflects the improvements not in fact being possible or the road to Huddersfield being paved with good intentions.

Mainly because most of the Thames basin is as flat as a billiard table compared to the route over the Pennines. That results in a number of curves to navigate the terrain without gradients that even today would be operationally difficult.

Not just in the Thames valley. There are racing stretches York to Doncaster, York to Darlington, Preston to Lancaster and Carlisle to Gretna.

 

[daikilo]

I have not travelled on the route for many years, but I have always considered Manchester to Leeds painfully slow. The distance is not that great (42m) giving an average speed of about 45mph. This is very slow compared to the speeds that might be achieved between cities connected by the radial routes from London.

Two important cities do need to have a better connection. It does not have to be 140mph+ and I have always thought the idea of "HS3" was hyperbolic and over-specified.

Even giving the Topography of the route it should be possible to shorten the journey times. My recollection is that there are extended periods of slow running particularly through the numerous junctions. The track layout could be simplified and linespeeds improved. ...

Every trans-Penine route is relatively slow, but this goes back to when they were constructed in the industrial era where gradients were a bigger issue than bends. In fact, Manchester-Leeds can be under 50 minutes with a atHuddersfield stop, but there are pinch points such as the western approach/departure Leeds, the junction at Ardwick (and the eastern approach/departure from it) and the ladders into Piccadily (many discussed previously).

What is relevant is that, apart from the congested M62, the roads are really no better in terms of end-to-end times at least between these cities.

I am still of the opinion that the power of a 185 with the tilt of a 390 might be more affordable and suitable than anything else.

 

[bbrez]

Well obviously not the North! :roll: They just want squillions spent on them until they match what's spent in the "London" although I've not heard of any proposals for additional funding such as that done by TfL.

There does seem an attitude in the North that it's only them that have been hard done by. :roll: If I seem uncaring it's because I don't see that many proposals to improve the service in the SW other than the bare minimum required for electrification and even that's being cut back and deferred.

Quite possibly, because we have, to an extent. History shows that, the decline in it's industry and the failure to re-establish new industry beyond the retail sector. The railways and transport infrastructure play a huge part in helping economies grow. It would be nice to see some investment in the railways across the NW, Y&H and NE to match the growth which is already starting to occur and will most likely continue.

Then you have journey times like the ones below (the first two are usually done on pacers too)

Wakefield to Bradford - 50 mins (19 miles)
Huddersfield to Sheffield - 75 mins (30 miles)
Liverpool to Hull - 190 mins (125 miles)
Then you have Leeds which two decades on still hasn't found a solution for light rail or some form of transport network to relieve it's congestion.

All of the above leads to reduced opportunity to find work, for industries to set up in area and for there to be more productivity.

A lot of hope is then pinned upon "Northern Powerhouse" which is just empty rhetoric and far too Manchester based - most likely due to political implications. However, where as the action is currently not matching the words there is genuinely scope to create. Hope is pinned on HS2, a severely flawed idea - HS3 would be better but then again, how much will it do to truly improve infrastructure?

The great thing about the north is the potential though. You have 6 of the top 10 biggest cities in England, you have scope to expand the current Manchester Airport site (unlike Heathrow) to create a huge transport hub, land is cheaper, house prices too - perfect opportunity to set up business.

Now I realise that other areas of the UK are also hard done by. Past Bristol, areas of Scotland etc. However, "The North" is not just one small area, it's a large area that has been left untouched far too long and is still recovering from political decisions taken 30/40 years ago.

The needs of it's people aren't being met and people are really starting to get ****ed off about it.

 

[QueensCurve]

I am still of the opinion that the power of a 185 with the tilt of a 390 might be more affordable and suitable than anything else.

Electrification might have helped. :cry:

 

[Spartacus]

I am still of the opinion that the power of a 185 with the tilt of a 390 might be more affordable and suitable than anything else.

Isn't that just a 221 though Personally I'd prefer speeds stay low if being on a train that smells like cess pit is the other option

 

[Greybeard33]

Electrification might have helped. :cry:

From Philip Hammond yesterday:

Mr Hammond told The Yorkshire Post:

“Just to be clear no decisions have been taken on electrification, the Government’s position hasn’t changed.”

He said Network Rail was looking at “different options” for improving journeys on the trans-Pennine route.

“My own view is, and I was transport secretary at the very beginning of my ministerial career, my own view is that we should start from outputs and work backwards.

“What are we trying to deliver? On this particular route we are trying to deliver an increased frequency, higher capacity, shorter journey times and greater reliability.

“That may well be delivered through electrification, that may well be the way to do that, but I think we should be clear that what we are trying to deliver is a result for passengers not some conceptual thing based on inputs.

“It is a difficult piece of railway between Manchester and Leeds and people won’t want to sacrifice the benefits of local services stopping at the intermediate stations but at the same time they want faster journey times overall between Manchester and Leeds,” he said.

Read more at: http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news...rthern-powerhouse-is-a-30-year-task-1-8736816

 

[Old Yard Dog]

Hence my suggestion that the overcrowded trains (probably limited to some evening peak services westbound out of Leeds, and maybe Manchester too) have a restriction that stops local passengers preventing access to long distance trains by those travelling further afield .

It was quite common on the continent 20, 30 or 40 years ago, when long distance international trains that were part of an hourly internal cycle were restricted for local traffic in the evening peak. I'll see if I can dig out an example.

In the olden days (1960s), Bradford City Transport used to have minimum fares on long distance bus routes (e.g. 64 Huddersfield, 72 Leeds) to discourage short distance travel on long distance services.

 

[47802]

Hence my suggestion that the overcrowded trains (probably limited to some evening peak services westbound out of Leeds, and maybe Manchester too) have a restriction that stops local passengers preventing access to long distance trains by those travelling further afield .

It was quite common on the continent 20, 30 or 40 years ago, when long distance international trains that were part of an hourly internal cycle were restricted for local traffic in the evening peak. I'll see if I can dig out an example.

Think that is a bit of a nonsense quite frankly, on the main TPE route there will hardly be any local trains between Leeds and Manchester when TPE take over with the semi fast service, and we already have the evening peak restriction introduced by Northern a few years ago.

In the North I don't think people are asking for London and South East levels of funding, but the Northern Rail franchise in particular has been unacceptably poor, the new franchise does go some way to address some of the issues although whether it will be enough remains to be seen, and while there has been some improvement in terms of frequency on the main TPE route it does need to go further in terms of journey time improvements although whether it needs to go as far as full HS3 route is perhaps more debatable, I think its also fair to say that there are other parts of England and Wales that don't get a particularly good deal either.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In the olden days (1960s), Bradford City Transport used to have minimum fares on long distance bus routes (e.g. 64 Huddersfield, 72 Leeds) to discourage short distance travel on long distance services.

Irony: the Stagecoach X5 from MK Coachway to the centre is cheaper than the Arriva local bus.

 

[Altfish]

In my experience, the answer to the question is no.

The two main gripes seem to be overcrowding and old trains. Whilst I don't dispute there are places in the north where it's possible to experience heavy peak overcrowding, with exceptions I still don't think it's as bad as in the London area. Yes the 17XX out of a major city may be filled to bursting point for the first couple of stops, or maybe a little further on somewhere like the Bolton corridor, but I'd still say people are standing for much shorter distances than in the London area. "Rush hour" in the north is still roughly 1700-1800, whereas in the south east we're now talking about 1530-1930, with many trains still crowded either side of that. Same in the morning, where in the London area it's now quite easy to find full trains as early as 0600.

What I'd say is worse in the north is off-peak overcrowding, especially that associated with events. This is less of an issue in the London area as there is more stock available from the peaks to provide longer off-peak trains across the board, plus the generally longer lengths can absorb fluctuations in demand that little bit better. It's still possible to find heavily overcrowded off-peak trains in the London area at times though.

As for the age of rolling stock, I confess to getting a little tired of hearing about this. My local line in the London area still has trains dating from the mid 1970s, and until recently all the rolling stock dated from BR days. As long as stock is reliable and well maintained I really don't see the issue. I do agree however that some of Northern's rolling stock could and should be presented better.

On balance, given the constraints of financial viability, I feel the north's rail service isn't bad at all. Not perfect by any means, but not nearly as bad as some make out.

The answer is to move more government departments out of London. Move them to Newcastle, Bristol, Leeds, Manchester, etc. This will decrease London demand.

Despite the Daily Mail's stories of woe and gloom the BBC's move to Salford has been a great success.

Already large companies are seeing the opportunity to move (intially their backroom staff) to the northern cities to take advantage of the lower rentals and wages.

 

[tbtc]

In my experience, the answer to the question is no.

The two main gripes seem to be overcrowding and old trains. Whilst I don't dispute there are places in the north where it's possible to experience heavy peak overcrowding, with exceptions I still don't think it's as bad as in the London area. Yes the 17XX out of a major city may be filled to bursting point for the first couple of stops, or maybe a little further on somewhere like the Bolton corridor, but I'd still say people are standing for much shorter distances than in the London area. "Rush hour" in the north is still roughly 1700-1800, whereas in the south east we're now talking about 1530-1930, with many trains still crowded either side of that. Same in the morning, where in the London area it's now quite easy to find full trains as early as 0600.

What I'd say is worse in the north is off-peak overcrowding, especially that associated with events. This is less of an issue in the London area as there is more stock available from the peaks to provide longer off-peak trains across the board, plus the generally longer lengths can absorb fluctuations in demand that little bit better. It's still possible to find heavily overcrowded off-peak trains in the London area at times though.

As for the age of rolling stock, I confess to getting a little tired of hearing about this. My local line in the London area still has trains dating from the mid 1970s, and until recently all the rolling stock dated from BR days. As long as stock is reliable and well maintained I really don't see the issue. I do agree however that some of Northern's rolling stock could and should be presented better.

On balance, given the constraints of financial viability, I feel the north's rail service isn't bad at all. Not perfect by any means, but not nearly as bad as some make out.

This post probably sums up the whole thing.

Agreed - bramling makes some good points, and didn't need to search for extreme examples to try to highlight a bigger point (unlike a few of the comments on this thread!).

Heavy rail isn't the solution for linking every village, it won't be "perfect", it's better suited to core flows with the most bums on seats - given the subsidies required and the unavoidable topography, I think that what we have at the moment is okay. Could be better but could be a lot worse too.

Yes there are a few ancient trains on routes around London but the point is they are not Railbuses where you may have to spend a 2 hour journey on them, and most are down for replacement in the next few years.

How many normal people actually spend two hour journeys on Pacers?

Yes, there are examples where it may be possible to spend two hours on one, but (out of the millions of journeys in "the north") how many people are sitting on a Pacer all the way from Scunthorpe to Lincoln? Or from Carlisle round the coast to Lancaster (rather than taking VT/TPE via Penrith)?

Using these extreme examples doesn't help the case. You could similarly complain that London Underground's Piccadilly Line isn't suitable for the hour and a half it takes to get from Cockfosters to Heathrow, but the number of people doing that journey direct will be fairly insignificant.

EMT doesn't have a large fleet of Pacers to deal with yes it has some 153's which will have to be dealt with ...

<snip> </snip>

... it always strikes me that EMT is kind of luxury compared to Northern yes they have capacity issues like Northern, but most of their Sprinter fleet is much better condition internally than Northern, and their 158's have had a proper refurb unlike Northern 158's.

EMT's "Provincial" fleet has had the same treatment as the equivalent "Provincial" fleet of FGW/ LM, plus all of W&B/ Northern.

All are stuck with Sprinters (and Pacers in the case of FGW and W&B), but the problems at EMT, LM and FGW tend to remain under the radar because the "London" fleets disguise things.

That and the fact that "the north" and "Wales" tend to have much noisier local political representation.

I think "focussed on London" is more the driving factor than "Radial." The media have reinforced the propaganda that most tax is collected from the financial services sector, so serving the City of London predominates in the Whitehall mind. Never mind that "the City" took the rest of the country's pensions funds to the casino and lost most of them.

You need to stop the "chip on shoulder" political agenda stuff before concentrating on the railway.

HS3 was always just a buzzword for politicians to throw about, nobody with any sense or understanding of the region thought for even a second that some kind of HS line will emerge either side of the Pennines. Trans-Pennine Main Upgrade would have been a better, and more realistic name for the project as it doesn't have some people in a flap about some bespoke high speed connection where other projects are being shelved, but calls it what it is

I think that calling it "HS3" was a reasonably clever move, in that it tied this investment into acceptance of HS2 (i.e. if you support HS2 then that scheme will have done the groundwork for infrastructure investment that HS3 can piggy-back upon).

It's also an easy shorthand for getting everyday members of the public to understand that's suitably vague/ nebulous (i.e. it could mean places like Sheffield or it could be just the main "TPE" corridor... it could extend to Liverpool and Hull or it could be just the core bit from Manchester to Liverpool).

Plus it then encourages the idea that High Speed lines will become a network, rather than just stopping at "2".

 

[Bantamzen]

I think that calling it "HS3" was a reasonably clever move, in that it tied this investment into acceptance of HS2 (i.e. if you support HS2 then that scheme will have done the groundwork for infrastructure investment that HS3 can piggy-back upon).

It's also an easy shorthand for getting everyday members of the public to understand that's suitably vague/ nebulous (i.e. it could mean places like Sheffield or it could be just the main "TPE" corridor... it could extend to Liverpool and Hull or it could be just the core bit from Manchester to Liverpool).

Plus it then encourages the idea that High Speed lines will become a network, rather than just stopping at "2".

It also has it's disadvantages, for example it allows politicians plenty of wriggle room when coming to actually make a decision on TP improvements. Using HS3 is simply a potential deferral technique, as it implies by name that it will be built onto the end of HS2, i.e. 2032 or beyond. Its certainly be used to distract from the news of the delays / deferrals of some of the planned projects in the area. And it also distracts local councils like Bradford who become obsessed about how HS3 can be brought through the city (think all new Bradford Crossrail debate), and provides unrealistic expectations from the public.

We all know that there isn't going to be a super-shiny high speed link running through the Pennines for decades, and realistically ever. I would much prefer Ministers, The Treasury, NR, TOCs etc just got on with the job of working out how best to improve the network and how to fund it.

 

[47802]

Agreed - bramling


How many normal people actually spend two hour journeys on Pacers?

Yes, there are examples where it may be possible to spend two hours on one, but (out of the millions of journeys in "the north") how many people are sitting on a Pacer all the way from Scunthorpe to Lincoln? Or from Carlisle round the coast to Lancaster (rather than taking VT/TPE via Penrith)?

Using these extreme examples doesn't help the case. You could similarly complain that London Underground's Piccadilly Line isn't suitable for the hour and a half it takes to get from Cockfosters to Heathrow, but the number of people doing that journey direct will be fairly insignificant.



EMT's "Provincial" fleet has had the same treatment as the equivalent "Provincial" fleet of FGW/ LM, plus all of W&B/ Northern.

All are stuck with Sprinters (and Pacers in the case of FGW and W&B), but the problems at EMT, LM and FGW tend to remain under the radar because the "London" fleets disguise things.

That and the fact that "the north" and "Wales" tend to have much noisier local political representation.




".

Ive been Leeds - Lancaster twice in the last couple of months also Newcastle Carlisle ok that not quite 2 hours but its still a poor product for long distance traffic between Newcastle and Carlisle and hardly extreme journeys.

EMT fleet is similar to Northern really, No raibuses for starters, I seem to recall EMT 158's got a decent refurb with new seats a few years ago while Northern 158's had a lick of paint and seat retrim, ok they are getting something of a belated refurb now although still no sign of new seats as yet, and then there were the famous stickers on Northern 156's that EMT got apologising for the state of the interior.

 

[Spartacus]

EMT fleet is similar to Northern really, No raibuses for starters, I seem to recall EMT 158's got a decent refurb with new seats a few years ago while Northern 158's had a lick of paint and seat retrim, ok they are getting something of a belated refurb now although still no sign of new seats as yet, and then there were the famous stickers on Northern 156's that EMT got apologising for the state of the interior.

You beat me to it about the 156s and 158s, EMT's are far better than most of Northern's ones are currently. Many of Wales' 150s are better than Northern's too.

 

[muddythefish]

The problem goes back far behind rail planning strategy. It's about the relative economies of the South East and the rest of the country (not just the north, but thats what this thread is about.) No government is prepared to look far enough ahead, or be visionary enough, to invest in rebalancing this economy, although providing a decent transport system would help to kick-start this.
It's not enough just to say 'London is where the jobs are and where most people choose (?) to live, therefore it should get the lion's share of transport funding.'

Moving the DfT from London to, say, Bradford.

I can guarantee that within 3 years the rail service will be vastly improved.

 

[muddythefish]

Agreed - bramling





You need to stop the "chip on shoulder" political agenda stuff before concentrating on the railway.
.

The fate of the north and the way this country has been run in favour of London for the past 40 years or more is instrinsically linked with politics.

It's not chip on shoulder. It's wrong - and the country as a whole has suffered because large areas of it are not reaching their full economic potential.

 

[ashworth]

You beat me to it about the 156s and 158s, EMT's are far better than most of Northern's ones are currently. Many of Wales' 150s are better than Northern's too.

As I pointed out in my earlier posting Stagecoach did a fantastic job of refurbishing all of their 153s, 156s and 158s. They have also been kept and maintained them in a very good condition since the refurbishment. However, many of them originally were far worse than any of Northerns (excluding the pacers) at the beginning of the EMT franchise. EMT got a very poor deal with all the 170s going to the West Midlands including London Midland and Cross Country. Some of the 153s and 158s they inherited from various places were in an appalling state. Although most EMTs stock now looks and is far superior to Northerns current stock it is the same age but has just been refurbished and maintained to a higher standard in recent years. The East Midlands deserves new stock just like Northern and shouldn't be left to manage with their old stock just because they have looked after it better!

 

[AndrewE]

The fate of the north and the way this country has been run in favour of London for the past 40 years or more is instrinsically linked with politics.

That is suggesting that only politics(Westminster) is to blame... I think that the problem is probably more with Whitehall. How many of the London-based civil servants have any knowledge of (let alone interest in) places outside their and their colleagues' travel-to work area?

Really what underlies it all is Management Accounting and the short-sighted focus on "the bottom-line" in the absence of any national transport policy. As has been said by a few people before now (including me a few years ago), we need a TaktFahrPlan for the whole country. Forget business cases that somehow only seem to support services to and from London, there needs to be a national infrastructure network that helps us all.

In the absence of a Transport policy we suffer the consequences of no consideration of nation-wide connectivity, no desire to see how far public transport can contribute to de-carbonising the economy, no real concern for the prosperity of the provinces...

Rail franchises are one of the worst outcomes of this mindset, legally requiring the Directors to look after shareholder interests and ignoring the passengers' needs except where the franchise remit included it at the outset. (and that was set by the Westminster-based DafT.)

 

[The Ham]

The fate of the north and the way this country has been run in favour of London for the past 40 years or more is instrinsically linked with politics.

It's not chip on shoulder. It's wrong - and the country as a whole has suffered because large areas of it are not reaching their full economic potential.

There are difference between arguing that there should be more investment in the railway in other regions and saying that London has messed up the rest of the country by loosing people's pension fund by betting it at a casino.

Let's for argument sake say that London want the money powerhouse that it was with somewhere else taking that title (take your pick, Frankfurt, New York, etc.) would it have stopped those bets still being made?

The answer is almost certainly not.

As such whatever was done politically (unless done unilaterally) would have still resulted in broadly the same outcome.

Yes, governments have been more London centric than they should have been, yet even those political parties who's main support is from outside the South East (where it is mostly Tory) should have done more, yet haven't.

You also have to remember how long some of the key improvements in the London area have been in the pipeline (Thameslink 2000 due to open 2018). As such London hasn't had it all it's own way when it comes to rail investment.

 

[muddythefish]

That is suggesting that only politics(Westminster) is to blame... I think that the problem is probably more with Whitehall. How many of the London-based civil servants have any knowledge of (let alone interest in) places outside their and their colleagues' travel-to work area?

.)

Yes, agree with that. The answer is to shut Whitehall, sell off the offices for housing and disperse civil servants around the country. Sir Humphrey would love travelling to work on a Pacer.