• 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!

Londoners will riot if squeeze on public transport gets any worse, TfL boss warns

Status
Not open for further replies.

Penmorfa

Member
Joined
16 Nov 2011
Messages
399
Location
North Wales coast
from the Independent: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-riots-as-transport-crisis-looms-9749138.html

London’s transport commissioner has warned the city could face riots again unless more trains and buses are available at affordable fares for the poorest communities.

Many of the poorest communities are no longer based in the inner-city but instead on the outskirts of London, according to Sir Peter Hendy. They rely on buses, whose fares have risen by 50 per cent over the past six year, to get them to work.

Sir Peter, head of Transport for London (TfL), said unless transport capacity is increased and fares stabilised there would be serious problems.

“The stakes are pretty high. If you're not able to increase transport capacity, and people find accessing work impossible, you risk social unrest. You can expect trouble."

Painting a bleak picture, Sir Peter said to the Guardian: "The bus network is the staple of outer London. We're going to need more revenue funding. Otherwise we're going to leave people behind.

“When you start leaving people behind, you start saying to people in London they may not be able to get to work on time and when that happens, you damage the economy quite severely."...
not wishing to start any more North/South feuds but some very valid points are made here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,822
I don't think they will riot but I also read in the standard last night about one Labour Mayoral candidate saying they wanted more control over kent services to improve frequency and more trains... Which led me to ask in me head - where are they going to put them on those lines and terminal stations? And how do they get peoples mindset to change from wanting to be as close to the front as possible(maybe off on a tangent there) but trains are full. And without any new lines I dont think theres anywhere to put more services.
 

Yew

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
6,537
Location
UK
And how do they get peoples mindset to change from wanting to be as close to the front as possible

Easy, travelators from the back carriage to front of the platform, or a secondary exit at the back of the station
 

broadgage

Member
Joined
11 Aug 2012
Messages
1,094
Location
Somerset
The appalling state of public transport in suburban London is in my view ALREADY affecting the wider economy.

I have recently left London, partly due to worsening public transport.

I had two possible routes into work, either a thameslink train or two buses. The thameslink service was by far the worst of any TOC that I used regularly. I do not think that I EVER got a seat on a thameslink train, and sometimes overcrowding was so bad as to prevent even boarding to stand.

It seemed rare for a whole week to pass without significant disruption due to snow, leaves, high winds, ice, bob crow, signalling failure, security alerts, flooding, or other problems.

The alternative to thameslink was two buses, I always got a seat on the first bus as I boarded at the second stop of the route, but the bus invariably became overcrowded en route. This caused further delay at each stop as more tried to board, often via the "exit only" rear doors. The bus frequently terminated short of the advertised destination, and of course there was no question of getting a seat on the following bus. Often a second fare was demanded on the following bus.
The second leg of the journey involved another bus route and was nearly as bad, though shorter.

As the years went by, the bus journey took steadily longer each year due to the endless road narrowing and traffic obstructing schemes and the altering of traffic signals to allow shorter green periods.
Any short term gains in journey times by the introduction of oyster cards, red routes or the congestion charge were soon absorbed by road closures and traffic obstructing schemes.

I have certainly seen significant public disorder, if not full scale riots, in particularly bad public transport foul ups.

IMO radical and in some cases costly action is needed to address overcrowding in and near London. Piffling or trivial capacity improvements seem to take decades and are more than overwhelmed by growth in passenger numbers.
As an example, some suburban trains into Waterloo are being made 10 car instead of 8 car. Whilst better then nothing, this has been talked about since the 1970s !
Present passenger numbers would justify 16 car trains into Waterloo, with provision for future 20 car trains. And yes I know that would require substantial rebuilding at Waterloo. Adding an extra track between New Malden and Waterloo would help and has been discussed for decades, but I see no action.
Similar arguments apply at other London terminals.
 

Bantamzen

Established Member
Joined
4 Dec 2013
Messages
9,618
Location
Baildon, West Yorkshire
Isn't this the same problem as faced by large cities the world over? Too many people, not enough capacity?

I my opinion the answer is simple, although not liked by many. Lobby governments to help encourage businesses away from the capital moving at least a percentage of the commuter strain away at the same time. To provide any serious improvements, short of what HS2 & it's potential to release capacity on other routes, is going to cost billions upon billions, and take as long as the other major projects. And then when they open they will just fill up again & the cycle continues.

So moving some businesses away is the only real option, albeit a terribly difficult one both logistically and politically. But it has to be looked at.
 

NSEFAN

Established Member
Joined
17 Jun 2007
Messages
3,504
Location
Southampton
broadgage said:
Present passenger numbers would justify 16 car trains into Waterloo, with provision for future 20 car trains. And yes I know that would require substantial rebuilding at Waterloo. Adding an extra track between New Malden and Waterloo would help and has been discussed for decades, but I see no action.
Similar arguments apply at other London terminals.
I don't think you want longer than 12 car trains for suburban services, as this starts to cause problems for dispatch and hence dwell times. Short of building a new line, the next step is new trains with high acceleration/braking curves and ATO to squeeze them in as close as possible. Grade separated junctions also help a lot, but are not always easy to fit in without demolition of properties.

Bantamzen said:
So moving some businesses away is the only real option, albeit a terribly difficult one both logistically and politically. But it has to be looked at.
Agreed. Whilst you can't really force businesses to move, you can give them financial incentives to do so.
 

Busaholic

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Jun 2014
Messages
14,019
This could be interpreted as a coded message from Sir Peter to his boss. So much money has been spent on developing and then buying (because the bus companies weren't going to) the superfluous New Bus for London so that Boris could have his fantasy of 'hop on/hop off' which was never going to happen (and hasn't happened) that their is no money left in the budget to provide more buses for routes that desperately need them. Instead, as car traffic inexorably increases in outer London, bus timetables have to be adjusted, which means, in the absence of more buses, widened headways, or, occasionally, a route converted from single to double decker. At the most, one extra peak journey is being provided on some routes. The 'Routemaster' TV series on BBC last year (nothing to do with the bus of that name) had some good footage, unstaged, of passengers waiting in railway-free North Peckham for buses which, when they turned up, were full and sailed past.The whole problem is exacerbated in the areas which are Underground (or even Overground) free. Don't be surprised to see extra buses being provided in the Uxbridge area though over the next few months!
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,284
Location
Isle of Man
Trains can't really be any longer than they are now, 12 coaches is a long train, not far short of a quarter of a mile long, and getting longer than that is silly for a suburban service.

The solution is to make the trains double-deck, as they are in many cities. It keeps getting talked about but nothing ever happens, seemingly put on the "too difficult" pile. It wouldn't work for every line, not with the cost of lowering the track bed, but on the busiest lines it could work.

The crux of the issue is the low housing density of london. This forces long journeys to work. We need large scale compulsory purchase and redevelopment of the inner london bouroughs.

London's housing density isn't as high as Hong Kong, but it's not as though everyone's got a huge single-storey house and garden. And most developments in the centre now are high-rise, because developers can make more money by stacking up huge piles of luxury flats.

The main problem with London is cost. People on average salaries can no longer afford to live in zone one and in most of zone two. So they end up further and further out, in places like Enfield or Dagenham, because these are the only places they can afford. I'm now 23 miles out of London because I can't really afford to live closer in; I'm better off even factoring in my obscenely expensive season ticket.

You can cycle or walk into the centre from a fair wedge of zone two, but if you're in the backend of Enfield or out in Hertfordshire you can't.
 
Last edited:

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,580
Working class and other poor people are now stuck on the outskirts but all the jobs and fun things to do are in the middle - unless there is an inexpensive means to get to the latter then there will be a significant risk of a full scale breakdown of the social order.

Think those 2011 Summer riots were bad?
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,001
Location
UK
Fares in London, especially buses, are still pretty good compared to anyone who lives outside. So maybe those who commute by train from outside zone 6 are paying more than they should, or perhaps TfL is just subsidising travel more in London?

The problems are an ever increasing population, the continued need to travel to London for work, and the lack of interest in having people working from remote offices (or even at home if the work allows it) or working flexible hours to spread the load and take advantage of excess capacity during the off peak hours.

Flexible season tickets for people that don't travel every day might help, but TfL doesn't seem to want to do too much that could see a reduction in passenger numbers and revenue.

It was a few years back now when I attended a talk with TfL and back then, it was about expanding to cope with more users, not trying to encourage people to travel less. I doubt the view has changed now.

Working from home was talked down (and, yes, there are issues but also solutions, like remote offices or shared offices where people can hot desk and retain some social interaction), while relocating businesses outside London was obviously NOT something that anyone wanted when some people want everything and everyone in London.

So it seems that there's a lot of agendas at play, and having things full to bursting point is a good political way to push for further expansion projects.

Of course we need to still build and improve the infrastructure in London, but there are other ways to reduce problems too.
 

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
17,882
Location
Reston City Centre
This could be interpreted as a coded message from Sir Peter to his boss. So much money has been spent on developing and then buying (because the bus companies weren't going to) the superfluous New Bus for London so that Boris could have his fantasy of 'hop on/hop off' which was never going to happen (and hasn't happened) that their is no money left in the budget to provide more buses for routes that desperately need them

Just seems standard scare mongering before the Autumn statement as TfL gear up their lobbying campaign to get more money for various pet projects

Agreed - it's been on other news websites too - the lobbyists at TfL have left it slightly too late, as I think they'd have had more headlines if they'd released their "riots" warning in August when people still thought that there may be some civil unrest in the capital this year (remember the hysteria about water cannons six months ago... we had a peaceful summer as far as I can remember).

On top of the regular pressures on London's infrastructure, we have the two "new" issues of a part-time Mayor (which we were promised that we wouldn't get in London, but being an MP in Uxbridge is apparently more interesting - on top of all the media commitments etc!)...

...and the fact that due to benefits caps/ house price rises/ foreign ownership the "inner cities" have gone from being poor areas to gentrified ones - which means that we are going to see large numbers of working class people (who used to live in run down areas fairly close to central London, so faced pretty low public transport costs as they may even have been able to walk to work) squeezed out to places like Ebbsfleet, which will put their transport costs up significantly. Whilst the increase in overall passenger numbers may not be *huge*, it sees a chunk of people with threadbare budgets living pretty marginal lives who are going to be sunk if their season ticket goes up by RPI+3% whilst their housing benefit/tax credits/ child allowance is either frozen or goes up lower than the proper rate of inflation. Each round of fare rises will be more painful, because it'll be people who have no choice (rather than those who are rich enough to choose to move out of central London to the commuter belt).

No easy solutions here, but this is a real problem (rather than the "the south gets billions spent on it so that they can have gold plated new trains whilst us poor northerners have cattle trucks unfit to put cattle in" pantomime stuff)
 

CaptainHaddock

Established Member
Joined
10 Feb 2011
Messages
2,192
Working class and other poor people are now stuck on the outskirts but all the jobs and fun things to do are in the middle - unless there is an inexpensive means to get to the latter then there will be a significant risk of a full scale breakdown of the social order.

Think those 2011 Summer riots were bad?

We're English. When something happens we don't like we don't go out rioting, we just "tut" loudly and then go back to reading our papers.


As others have alluded, it's the basic economics of supply and demand; if demand exceeds supply you can either increase supply or decrease demand. The latter is the most rational option; the less attractive London and the South East are to live in, the more you encourage people to move away.

Bearing in mind that in many areas of the capital indigenous English people are in a minority, perhaps incentives could be given to immigrants to return to their home nations?
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
What about the poor passengers in the North riding around in Pacers and London getting most of any new units. They would have something to moan about then.
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,001
Location
UK
Bearing in mind that in many areas of the capital indigenous English people are in a minority, perhaps incentives could be given to immigrants to return to their home nations?

Most of them will in due course. Take the Poles, who are willing to work hard but also live in some atrocious conditions - packed in like sardines in properties and being taken advantage of by rogue landlords. In some cases, shift workers will be expected to vacate their room for 12 hours so others can sleep in their beds.

But they work hard, save money, and will go home because they've got no chance of getting on the property ladder here anymore than the 'natives'.

It's a total joke, and London is becoming a place where only the rich will be able to live. Even those 'up and coming areas' (normally regarded more eloquently by locals as **** holes) are getting beyond a joke and while you might now be able to say you live in London, you'll rarely if ever want to stay out too late at night - or have to take taxis home all the time.

To have so many properties standing empty because foreign investors just want to make money on the increasing value, and not have to deal with tenants that might cause damage and all the other hassles, is another 'crime'.

As the economies in eastern Europe continue to grow, I wonder what will happen when workers from Poland, Romania etc decide to go home and stay there. It's doubtful many people here would accept being crammed with loads of other people into a multiple occupancy house to be close to your work.

Indeed, I wonder what the impact will be on those businesses that rely on such workers.

Rest assured, as time goes on, more and more people will be moving out of the capital into the suburbs, continuing to impact on already overstretched railway lines and local services/roads that can't cope either. If anyone wants a decent quality of life, buying a shoebox flat in Bethnal Green isn't the way ahead.
 

Antman

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
6,842
This could be interpreted as a coded message from Sir Peter to his boss. So much money has been spent on developing and then buying (because the bus companies weren't going to) the superfluous New Bus for London so that Boris could have his fantasy of 'hop on/hop off' which was never going to happen (and hasn't happened) that their is no money left in the budget to provide more buses for routes that desperately need them. Instead, as car traffic inexorably increases in outer London, bus timetables have to be adjusted, which means, in the absence of more buses, widened headways, or, occasionally, a route converted from single to double decker. At the most, one extra peak journey is being provided on some routes. The 'Routemaster' TV series on BBC last year (nothing to do with the bus of that name) had some good footage, unstaged, of passengers waiting in railway-free North Peckham for buses which, when they turned up, were full and sailed past.The whole problem is exacerbated in the areas which are Underground (or even Overground) free. Don't be surprised to see extra buses being provided in the Uxbridge area though over the next few months!

Can we stick to facts here? It was never intended that bus companies buy the NB4L. Oh and the hop on/off facility does happen............try the 11 or 24 route for example. Oh and passengers seem to love them:roll:
 

CaptainHaddock

Established Member
Joined
10 Feb 2011
Messages
2,192
Most of them will in due course. Take the Poles, who are willing to work hard but also live in some atrocious conditions - packed in like sardines in properties and being taken advantage of by rogue landlords. In some cases, shift workers will be expected to vacate their room for 12 hours so others can sleep in their beds.

But they work hard, save money, and will go home because they've got no chance of getting on the property ladder here anymore than the 'natives'.

It's a total joke, and London is becoming a place where only the rich will be able to live. Even those 'up and coming areas' (normally regarded more eloquently by locals as **** holes) are getting beyond a joke and while you might now be able to say you live in London, you'll rarely if ever want to stay out too late at night - or have to take taxis home all the time.

To have so many properties standing empty because foreign investors just want to make money on the increasing value, and not have to deal with tenants that might cause damage and all the other hassles, is another 'crime'.

As the economies in eastern Europe continue to grow, I wonder what will happen when workers from Poland, Romania etc decide to go home and stay there. It's doubtful many people here would accept being crammed with loads of other people into a multiple occupancy house to be close to your work.

Indeed, I wonder what the impact will be on those businesses that rely on such workers.

Rest assured, as time goes on, more and more people will be moving out of the capital into the suburbs, continuing to impact on already overstretched railway lines and local services/roads that can't cope either. If anyone wants a decent quality of life, buying a shoebox flat in Bethnal Green isn't the way ahead.

I can remember a few years back people saying that as people start to communicate solely via the internet, it won't be long before we all work from home and commuting will become a thing of the past.

A quick google reveals that a major supporter of this view is the head of a company that runs some of the most overcrowded commuter trains on the network!

http://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/one-day-offices-will-be-a-thing-of-the-past
 

jon0844

Veteran Member
Joined
1 Feb 2009
Messages
28,001
Location
UK
I work from home, but still need to travel into London for my work (attending events, meeting people etc).

Working from home isn't always as much fun as you think. You do lose the social interaction, and despite communicating with colleagues via Skype it will NEVER be the same.

One idea was to have local community centres, or even pubs (and of course places like Regus etc) to work from - where you can meet with other people who also work from home, but aren't literally at home all the time. I don't think any such ideas have really taken off, although a lot of people do like to work from a nearby Starbucks or similar to get out of the house.

I actually miss my commuting in many ways. 45 minutes or so where I could actually relax and switch off, read a paper, use my phone or listen to music. But, then again, my commuting was pretty good - always getting a seat unless there was major disruption, and I made sure to have a plan B and C when things went tits up, and always wondered why some commuters clearly didn't.
 

physics34

Established Member
Joined
1 Dec 2013
Messages
3,681
London is so crowded now thanks to mass immigration, all the transport is packed all day now.

Im sure the population has doubled in 10 years!! It feels like it anyway!
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
I work from home, but still need to travel into London for my work (attending events, meeting people etc).

Working from home isn't always as much fun as you think. You do lose the social interaction, and despite communicating with colleagues via Skype it will NEVER be the same.

One idea was to have local community centres, or even pubs (and of course places like Regus etc) to work from - where you can meet with other people who also work from home, but aren't literally at home all the time. I don't think any such ideas have really taken off, although a lot of people do like to work from a nearby Starbucks or similar to get out of the house.

I actually miss my commuting in many ways. 45 minutes or so where I could actually relax and switch off, read a paper, use my phone or listen to music. But, then again, my commuting was pretty good - always getting a seat unless there was major disruption, and I made sure to have a plan B and C when things went tits up, and always wondered why some commuters clearly didn't.

I work from home three or four days a month purely because I don't have any social interaction! By working from home I can do 8 hours+ of work without interuption assuming that my wife's shift patterns mean that she is at work. I of course accept that no all jobs are the same but I get a lot more work done if no one can up to my desk and talk to me! In fact we encourage people to work from home when they have deadlines to meet.
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
The problems facing London are massive and need to be addressed in a wider manner than through transport. The economic conditions, caused by capitalist market forces, that are forcing people out of the centre of London should be treated in order that less money has to be spent on transporting people in and out.

We need a reverse of the 1930's Metroland situation, and we need to encourage people to live nearer the centre again, in good conditions and at a reasonable price. Otherwise we will end up subsidising the super rich who will use London as their playground.
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
The problems facing London are massive and need to be addressed in a wider manner than through transport. The economic conditions, caused by capitalist market forces, that are forcing people out of the centre of London should be treated in order that less money has to be spent on transporting people in and out.

We need a reverse of the 1930's Metroland situation, and we need to encourage people to live nearer the centre again, in good conditions and at a reasonable price. Otherwise we will end up subsidising the super rich who will use London as their playground.

It doesn't help that borough councils have been selling off their housing stock and that large chunks of the remaining properties remain empty. The failure in the last few decades to build cheap and affordable properties is almost criminal.
 
Last edited:

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
It doesn't help that borough councils have been selling off their housing stock and that large chunks of the remaining properties remain empty. The failure in the last 20 years to build cheap and affordable properties on derelict land is almost criminal.

I couldn't agree more. This has definitely contributed to the current situation.
 

Tetchytyke

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Sep 2013
Messages
13,284
Location
Isle of Man
It doesn't help that borough councils have been selling off their housing stock and that large chunks of the remaining properties remain empty. The failure in the last few decades to build cheap and affordable properties is almost criminal.

We can blame good old Margaret Thatcher for that. Councils were forced to sell their properties at bargain prices and were legally prevented from building replacements.

And now we act surprised that the son of Thatcher's housing minister owns 120+ ex-council properties in Wandsworth borough alone.

The main problem in London now is the property speculation, primarily caused by overseas investors hiding their money in a "safe" asset. The developments that are getting built now in the centre of London are advertised in Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai and Moscow long before they're advertised to Londoners. Half the Bishop's Avenue in Finchley is empty because the owners aren't interested in the house, they're interested in keeping their money safe. It's utterly ridiculous, and isn't getting better.

TfL could do something about it, but instead they're redeveloping Earls Court into luxury flats that will be sold to property speculators in the Far East. Every mafioso or corrupt banker between Moscow and Singapore gets to put a bid in on London houses before a Londoner- even one with the money- gets a look in.

The Tories, meanwhile, blame some Polish plumber who's sleeping 12 to a room above a kebab shop on the Holloway Road.
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
We're English. When something happens we don't like we don't go out rioting, we just "tut" loudly and then go back to reading our papers.

Surely it's a good that we don't have widespread social unrest in this country and that rioting, certainly outside of Northern Ireland is very rare. Having said that I'm sure the BNP would rub their hands with glee at the thought of frequent rioting.

Bearing in mind that in many areas of the capital indigenous English people are in a minority, perhaps incentives could be given to immigrants to return to their home nations?

Are you suggesting that Blacks and Asians, many of whom have lived in this country for decades and make a positive contribution to society and the economy should be encouraged to leave?
 

OuterDistant

Member
Joined
25 Oct 2010
Messages
547
Location
North Staffordshire
The time has surely come to force employers to reduce demand for travel, perhaps like this: If a job can be done remotely, a company should be obliged by law to accept teleworking for at least two days a week, if the employee requests it.

IMHO, the only thing stopping this kind of thing is idiotic managers who think that "people sat in an office" = productivity. Well, if that's how you're measuring productivity you're a **** manager, and your company clearly has bigger problems.

Oh, and ignore those who say "if your job can be done from home, it can be done from India." If it could, you would already have been made redundant.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top