You could also point out that the motorists who use the motorway network contribute more to the tax pool than virtually any other single group - last time I checked the combined tax take from motorists (VAT on fuel, Road Fund licence etc) far exceeded the total transport budget.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
What if the Beeching Act never happened?
- Thread starter charlee
- Start date
- Status
You could also point out that the motorists who use the motorway network contribute more to the tax pool than virtually any other single group - last time I checked the combined tax take from motorists (VAT on fuel, Road Fund licence etc) far exceeded the total transport budget.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Gareth Marston
Established Member
factor in the costs of congestion, NHS -accidents, NHS- long term impact of obesity due to lack of exercise in driving population, police, regulating insurance industry, pollution and all those off balance costs of motoring easily equal out the imagined war on the motorist tax/road spend whinge.
Funnily it was the man voted the greatest ever Briton who insisted that road taxes were not hypothecated- Winston Churchill. He thought motorists would think they owned the road rather than the state.
Not a chance! It doesn't even pay back the direct costs of roads (building, maintaining, policing etc) never mind the indirect costs. Motorists more than pay their share of that, but the HGV industry in particular (and buses and coaches) pay a small fraction of their share.
Next time you fill up or pay your road tax, just refelect you are subsidising Eddie Stobart and other HGV operators who are in competition with the far more severely regulated and far less finacially compensated railway freight operators.
Harlesden
Member
Is it equally true that fares on long distance rail services subsidize city commuter services?
341o2
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 1,906
Eddie Stobart is now RIP and ever increasing powers to make you pay your road tax. You now have to declare if you take your vehicle off the road (thus not liable for road tax) or be automatically fined. Police in certain areas have the ability to impound untaxed vehicles found on the public highway, and Joe Public is encouraged to report via a dedicated phone line or online details of vehicles seen on the road without a valid tax disc. You can be fined for having brought one, but fail to display it on your windscreen. One feels things are going OTT regarding what after all is a civil offence of not paying your taxes
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
and add tax on motor insurance, VAT on parts and servicing/repairs. Modern cars are getting to the point of complexity where servicing cannot be carried out by the home mechanic or small workshop so this means franchised garages and higher prices all round
Last edited:
Buttsy
Established Member
While I agree that having and not displaying is harsh, not having a tax disc would also suggest the vehicle is not MOT'd, so possibly unsafe to drive, or insured, no cover for any liabilities. If you have no insurance, would you take more or less care when driving????? The tax disc is an easy way of confirming that the vehicle was safe and insured, at least when issued.
Bevan Price
Established Member
- Joined
- 22 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 7,337
Don't forget that Beeching was brought in by Transport Minister Ernest Marples, who happened to have been one of the founders of Marples Ridgway, civil engineers, and (amongst other things), builder of roads & motorways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Marples
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Some railways were built mainly for freight, with passenger services as an incidental benefit. When freight declined, the passenger services were inevitably at risk of closure. Other lines can only be described as "basket cases", built either in periods of railway mania, or arising from inter-company competition tactics to stop your rival company entering "your" territory. However, I think that some passenger services suffered because of incompetent management. I suspect that the main potential users of passenger services (pre-Beeching era) would be "workers", followed by "shoppers" and the "leisure trips". However, if you look at some old timetables, you see that the services provided would have been pretty useless for most potential passengers.
In the 1950's, apart from shift workers, many people started their workday between about 08:00 and 08:30, with a minority starting at 09:00 or later. Finishing times were often between 17:00 and 17:30, and flexi-time was rare or non-existent.
A couple of examples:-
1. Witham - Wells - Yatton. Nearest large towns or cities : Bristol or Bath. Bristol Temple Meads is some distance from the city centre, so you probably need to arrive there 15 to 20 minutes before you start work. First train from Wells (1953) got you into Bristol T.M at 08:18; first train through from Witham got to Bristol at 10:13. So, you lose most of your potential passengers by providing a hopeless service.
2. Ashbourne - Uttoxeter. The latter is fairly small, so more potential for passengers changing at Uttoxeter for connections to Derby or Stoke on Trent. (1947 timetable) First train from Ashbourne arrived Uttoxeter 07:47 - with onward arrivals in Derby at 08:48, or Stoke at 08:58. Last return of day from Uttoxeter was 18:17, with connections from Derby at 17:08 and Stoke at 16:43. You could also go north from Ashbourne to Buxton (first arrival 08:53), with connection to Manchester arriving at 09:49). The last return from Buxton was at 17:55, with a risky 4 minute connection (SX) from Manchester at 16:40 (16:00 on Saturdays). And some manager probably wondered why they got so few passengers.
Next - the long ASLEF strike in 1955 caused mortal damage to many rail passenger & freight services. Those on strike probably thought they were indispensible to the economy. Passengers and freight users decided otherwise. Whilst road vehicle use was already increasing, the 1955 strike was probably a major factor in encourage people to move from rail to road transport in the years following 1955.
Hence, some Marples-Beeching era closures must have been inevitable, but others should have been avoidable.
341o2
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 1,906
you can obtain a year's road tax disc on the basis of insurance and MOT valid on the date of issue or when the disc becomes valid - they could expire within weeks. Details of a vehicles insurance and MOT can be instantly checked - you can even do it online yourself. Just go to the appropriate page on the DVLA website, you can enter the registration of any vehicle and you will be told whether or not the vehicle is insured.
That the DVLA have stated that those who do not purchase a car tax disc are more likely to be involved in other criminal activities says it all
Was browsing on youtube and found this very interesting set of interviews about the Beeching Cuts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRsTLeVmquA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRsTLeVmquA&feature=related
341o2
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 1,906
what about trucks from EU member countries who fill up before making the channel crossing and do not pay GB road tax. British truckers have staged protests about this. Roadside checks have revealed many of these vehicles would not pass the MOT here as well
ChiefPlanner
Established Member
Beeching REPORT - surely , not legislation !!!
The Engineer
Member
Many of the later closures (late 60s into the 70s) were mainly Beeching proposed closures that had been opposed but eventually carried through. Later closures included the Waverley Route, for instance. On the flip side, some Beeching proposed closures were successfully opposed (e.g Kyle of Lochalsh, Cambrian Coast).
There's no doubt that some closures of through routes should never have taken place and would have been useful (if not profitable) passenger routes with RETB and Sprinters from the 80's onwards. The aforementioned Waverley Route, Harrogate - Ripon - Thirsk, Woodhead Route, Lewes - Uckfield, Exeter -Oakhampton - Plymouth.......... I could go on!
341o2
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 1,906
Exeter - Okehampton has survived for freight, actually Meldon ballast quarry, now sees trains on summer Sundays, seems to be a fairly serious proposal to reinstate the line at the other end at least as far as Tavistock, which was one of the most opposed closures
It was the cost of maintaining Meldon viaduct which led to the closure of this stretch of line, at the Plymouth end, the inability of buses to negotiate the narrow roads has led to the survival of the section to Bere Alston and Gunnislake
It was the cost of maintaining Meldon viaduct which led to the closure of this stretch of line, at the Plymouth end, the inability of buses to negotiate the narrow roads has led to the survival of the section to Bere Alston and Gunnislake
We might have had continental loading gauge freight reaching Sheffield rather than London, using the Great Central. Still, that was more a victim of regionalisation than Beeching. Notice how many routes closed or were run down after they transferred from one region to another.
Was this "unnecessary duplication" being removed, or was it simply the regions being protectionist towards their former company? Nobody can really say, but it is worth thinking about.
- Great Central to London Midland - closed
- Waterloo-Exeter to Western - run down
- Withered Arm to Western - mostly closed
- Somerset and Dorset to Western (I think) - closed
- Woodhead to London Midland (I think) - closed
- Oxford-Birmingham to London Midland - run down
- Snow Hill lines to London Midland - main station closed and lines still not electrified
- Midland lines around Sheffied to Eastern - run down
Was this "unnecessary duplication" being removed, or was it simply the regions being protectionist towards their former company? Nobody can really say, but it is worth thinking about.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
Good post.
I can only think of one case where the "rival" firm won out, and that was Cheltenham (Midland route transferred to the WR but they kept Lansdown (Midland) and closed St James (WR).
Scotland closed Glasgow Buchanan St, Edinburgh Princes St, and Dundee West (all Caledonian/LMS) in favour of the NB/LNE stations.
Nahh, Long distance and commuter services *should* subsidise branch lines. However these days its the TOC's shareholders...
Buttsy
Established Member
But they also closed St Enoch's (GSW) and kept Central (Caley) when St Enoch's would have been more useful (with a couple of spurs added).
The 3 stations you mention - Buchanan St - wooden building next to Queen Street. Could have kept either, but a wooden building is always likely to be demolished above a brick/stone one.
Princes Street & Dundee West - both terminal stations whereas the ones kept (Waverley & Tay Bridge) were/are through stations.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
Yes I agree it was maybe tactically the right thing to do, but the upshot was the general downgrade of the Caley route system including the demise of Perth-Forfar-(Aberdeen).
The upshot is that WCML connections beyond GLC/EDB are rather poor today.
In some ways, yes. It also meant a Scotrail monopoly in privatisation. Splitting Scotrail into former LNER and former LMS lines might have produced some interesting results. Still, although the Dundee decision makes sense, the Edinburgh decision meant inevitable congestion at Waverley with little or no room for expansion. Assuming a declining market always causes problems, either by becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy or by leaving no room for expansion.
Buttsy
Established Member
However, if St Enoch's had remained rather than Central, would services now not be heading north & south out of that station instead of Queen Street HL & Central...?
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
How would you have got from St Enoch to, say, Stirling?
It was also rather small compared to Central.
I visited the St Enoch Centre recently to see what was left of the station (some nice photos of how it was), but was booted out by the security staff for daring to photograph the display and the centre's shiny glass roof...
Buttsy
Established Member
The station would have had to be extended, but bearing in mind had the other 3 closed, the amount of land available to negotiate with, I wouldn't have seen this as a problem. Plus Argyle Street station would have been the link with the Milngavie-Motherwell services rather than Central.
The route would have been St Enoch's-Bellgrove-Springburn-Croy-Larbert-Stirling. As Queen Street has only 2 approach lines, the use of the Springburn route (with quadrupling and a flying junction near High Street or Bellgrove) should have been able to cope with the diverted Queen Street traffic, particularly with the ability to quadruple through Springburn. The local stations south of Springburn may have had to go from a regular all stations stopper to being 'skip-stops' at regular intervals on other services eg. Dunblane-Stirling-Larbert-Croy-Bishopbriggs-Springburn-Duke Street-St Enoch.
Cliveblackpool
Member
7.30 pm Today - Welsh Railways : Beating Beeching
991 - BBC 2 Wales
991 - BBC 2 Wales
341o2
Established Member
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Messages
- 1,906
Certainly. For the S&D the beginning of the end was the rerouting of the Pines express and for the former LSWR the withdrawal of the ACE. The holiday traffic for which these lines were built was lost to the roads and that was that. We should be thankful that not all closure proposals occurred, had they all be implemented we would have no ex LSWR at all west of Salisbury, yes Salisbury - Exeter, Exmouth, Barnstaple and Gunnislake would be no more, and no railway west of Plymouth.
A summer weekend service was run in 1965 between Paddington & Bude. Poorly advertised, poorly patronised and not to be repeated
- Status