BREXIT - Is This Really Still Rumbling On? 😴

surrey_commuter

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

tailwindhome

Frost punts.

Pross

tailwindhome said:

Frost punts.

Is this rhyming slang?

Jezyboy

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I'm sure tbb will be more well read in this area, but batteries are unlikely to have the power density to be a good solution for HGVs.

You may be able to electrify the roads, but that's a pretty big challenge.

You could use hydrogen, but at that point a hydrogen powered train would presumably be quite a bit better than lots of hydrogen powered HGVs

pblakeney

Electrify the lines, not the trains?
They already exist.

john80

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

pblakeney

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

East/West is probably more of a priority.

john80

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

darkhairedlord said:

surrey_commuter said:

darkhairedlord said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/sep/06/keir-starmer-labour-national-insurance-boris-johnson-nhs-covid-afghanistan-uk-politics-live

from the liveblog

And he confirmed that the government was opposed to putting HGV drivers on the government’s shortage occupation list, which would make it easier for firms to hire drivers from abroad. “We want to see employers make long-term investments in the UK domestic workforce, rather than relying on labour from abroad,” he said.

in whatever a live blog is, does anybody point out the contradiction between an immediate shortage and long-term investment?

The free market can adjust quickly when it wants to. those that do adjust prosper, those firms that keep standing around saying "wish we had some drivers, wish we had single maket, yaddah yaddah.." they go bust and someone else picks up the slack.

but how long will it take to gear up o that they can train the additional drivers? why not bring in enough to alleviate the problem but not enough to push up wages and increase the numbers training?

once the doors are open. The whole thing smells like a put up job by the RHA to suppress wages and working conditions. They want their cake...

Are we just ignoring the truckers who have said they have seen the rates increase by 40% and are still not interested in returning to the trade?

So where does rejoining the EU help that and why do EU drivers seem more prepared to accept rubbish working practices?

I don't know, to be clear ,but that does seem to be the case.

At a guess, I would imagine the markets these people are coming from have fewer opportunities to do other more lucrative or fulfilling jobs than the EU.

These guys are not driving lorries at the UK minimum wage AFIK.

They're not but I never had you as an advocate of getting immigrant labour to do jobs so that the conditions don't have to be improved.

Unless there's something morally wrong with the conditions, inhumane etc, then why not?

You have to remember the majority of my family are "immigrant labour". Absolutely nothing wrong for someone coming to a country to work there. I believe they should be welcomed with open arms.

It was more that they should be prepared to work in the conditions that British drivers have decided are not good enough for them. That said it feels like drivers are looking for things to blame as previously they complained about foreign drivers keeping wages down.

Yeah I mean I have no idea why they will work in conditions the locals won't, but that doesn't mean the conditions are horrendous per se.

If they are horrendous then of course, there should be both some legislation and enforcement in place to ensure that's not the case, but I really don't think it is.

Not that I would have much say over what my children did, but if they asked me about a career in haulage I would suggest they do another job - I suspect a lot of us here would too.

Come on Rick. Use you imagination as to why a polish trucker would want to drive around the UK on a month on month off UK rate living in his cab with very few living costs whilst going back to his nice pad in Poland. It's not rocket science.

pangolin

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

darkhairedlord said:

surrey_commuter said:

darkhairedlord said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/sep/06/keir-starmer-labour-national-insurance-boris-johnson-nhs-covid-afghanistan-uk-politics-live

from the liveblog

And he confirmed that the government was opposed to putting HGV drivers on the government’s shortage occupation list, which would make it easier for firms to hire drivers from abroad. “We want to see employers make long-term investments in the UK domestic workforce, rather than relying on labour from abroad,” he said.

in whatever a live blog is, does anybody point out the contradiction between an immediate shortage and long-term investment?

The free market can adjust quickly when it wants to. those that do adjust prosper, those firms that keep standing around saying "wish we had some drivers, wish we had single maket, yaddah yaddah.." they go bust and someone else picks up the slack.

but how long will it take to gear up o that they can train the additional drivers? why not bring in enough to alleviate the problem but not enough to push up wages and increase the numbers training?

once the doors are open. The whole thing smells like a put up job by the RHA to suppress wages and working conditions. They want their cake...

Are we just ignoring the truckers who have said they have seen the rates increase by 40% and are still not interested in returning to the trade?

So where does rejoining the EU help that and why do EU drivers seem more prepared to accept rubbish working practices?

I don't know, to be clear ,but that does seem to be the case.

At a guess, I would imagine the markets these people are coming from have fewer opportunities to do other more lucrative or fulfilling jobs than the EU.

These guys are not driving lorries at the UK minimum wage AFIK.

They're not but I never had you as an advocate of getting immigrant labour to do jobs so that the conditions don't have to be improved.

Unless there's something morally wrong with the conditions, inhumane etc, then why not?

You have to remember the majority of my family are "immigrant labour". Absolutely nothing wrong for someone coming to a country to work there. I believe they should be welcomed with open arms.

It was more that they should be prepared to work in the conditions that British drivers have decided are not good enough for them. That said it feels like drivers are looking for things to blame as previously they complained about foreign drivers keeping wages down.

Yeah I mean I have no idea why they will work in conditions the locals won't, but that doesn't mean the conditions are horrendous per se.

If they are horrendous then of course, there should be both some legislation and enforcement in place to ensure that's not the case, but I really don't think it is.

Not that I would have much say over what my children did, but if they asked me about a career in haulage I would suggest they do another job - I suspect a lot of us here would too.

Come on Rick. Use you imagination as to why a polish trucker would want to drive around the UK on a month on month off UK rate living in his cab with very few living costs whilst going back to his nice pad in Poland. It's not rocket science.

Ah the lack of overnight facilities is actually a perk! Fascinating.

Making a decent salary in the UK and living somewhere cheaper is certainly an appealing option if it suits your circumstances. An option no longer open to UK truckers.

darkhairedlord

pangolin said:

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

darkhairedlord said:

surrey_commuter said:

darkhairedlord said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/sep/06/keir-starmer-labour-national-insurance-boris-johnson-nhs-covid-afghanistan-uk-politics-live

from the liveblog

And he confirmed that the government was opposed to putting HGV drivers on the government’s shortage occupation list, which would make it easier for firms to hire drivers from abroad. “We want to see employers make long-term investments in the UK domestic workforce, rather than relying on labour from abroad,” he said.

in whatever a live blog is, does anybody point out the contradiction between an immediate shortage and long-term investment?

The free market can adjust quickly when it wants to. those that do adjust prosper, those firms that keep standing around saying "wish we had some drivers, wish we had single maket, yaddah yaddah.." they go bust and someone else picks up the slack.

but how long will it take to gear up o that they can train the additional drivers? why not bring in enough to alleviate the problem but not enough to push up wages and increase the numbers training?

once the doors are open. The whole thing smells like a put up job by the RHA to suppress wages and working conditions. They want their cake...

Are we just ignoring the truckers who have said they have seen the rates increase by 40% and are still not interested in returning to the trade?

So where does rejoining the EU help that and why do EU drivers seem more prepared to accept rubbish working practices?

I don't know, to be clear ,but that does seem to be the case.

At a guess, I would imagine the markets these people are coming from have fewer opportunities to do other more lucrative or fulfilling jobs than the EU.

These guys are not driving lorries at the UK minimum wage AFIK.

They're not but I never had you as an advocate of getting immigrant labour to do jobs so that the conditions don't have to be improved.

Unless there's something morally wrong with the conditions, inhumane etc, then why not?

You have to remember the majority of my family are "immigrant labour". Absolutely nothing wrong for someone coming to a country to work there. I believe they should be welcomed with open arms.

It was more that they should be prepared to work in the conditions that British drivers have decided are not good enough for them. That said it feels like drivers are looking for things to blame as previously they complained about foreign drivers keeping wages down.

Yeah I mean I have no idea why they will work in conditions the locals won't, but that doesn't mean the conditions are horrendous per se.

If they are horrendous then of course, there should be both some legislation and enforcement in place to ensure that's not the case, but I really don't think it is.

Not that I would have much say over what my children did, but if they asked me about a career in haulage I would suggest they do another job - I suspect a lot of us here would too.

Come on Rick. Use you imagination as to why a polish trucker would want to drive around the UK on a month on month off UK rate living in his cab with very few living costs whilst going back to his nice pad in Poland. It's not rocket science.

Ah the lack of overnight facilities is actually a perk! Fascinating.

Making a decent salary in the UK and living somewhere cheaper is certainly an appealing option if it suits your circumstances. An option no longer open to UK truckers.

I believe a lot of them were employed by East European contractors and paid accordingly. of course, that made Rick happy as he is more Tory than Seano on this. F*ck the working man if an Ikea table costs 35p less.

Edit* TBF, it was Gordon Brown that shipped in the cheap labour to keep wage claims and inflation down.

rick_chasey

darkhairedlord said:

pangolin said:

john80 said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

rick_chasey said:

darkhairedlord said:

surrey_commuter said:

darkhairedlord said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2021/sep/06/keir-starmer-labour-national-insurance-boris-johnson-nhs-covid-afghanistan-uk-politics-live

from the liveblog

And he confirmed that the government was opposed to putting HGV drivers on the government’s shortage occupation list, which would make it easier for firms to hire drivers from abroad. “We want to see employers make long-term investments in the UK domestic workforce, rather than relying on labour from abroad,” he said.

in whatever a live blog is, does anybody point out the contradiction between an immediate shortage and long-term investment?

The free market can adjust quickly when it wants to. those that do adjust prosper, those firms that keep standing around saying "wish we had some drivers, wish we had single maket, yaddah yaddah.." they go bust and someone else picks up the slack.

but how long will it take to gear up o that they can train the additional drivers? why not bring in enough to alleviate the problem but not enough to push up wages and increase the numbers training?

once the doors are open. The whole thing smells like a put up job by the RHA to suppress wages and working conditions. They want their cake...

Are we just ignoring the truckers who have said they have seen the rates increase by 40% and are still not interested in returning to the trade?

So where does rejoining the EU help that and why do EU drivers seem more prepared to accept rubbish working practices?

I don't know, to be clear ,but that does seem to be the case.

At a guess, I would imagine the markets these people are coming from have fewer opportunities to do other more lucrative or fulfilling jobs than the EU.

These guys are not driving lorries at the UK minimum wage AFIK.

They're not but I never had you as an advocate of getting immigrant labour to do jobs so that the conditions don't have to be improved.

Unless there's something morally wrong with the conditions, inhumane etc, then why not?

You have to remember the majority of my family are "immigrant labour". Absolutely nothing wrong for someone coming to a country to work there. I believe they should be welcomed with open arms.

It was more that they should be prepared to work in the conditions that British drivers have decided are not good enough for them. That said it feels like drivers are looking for things to blame as previously they complained about foreign drivers keeping wages down.

Yeah I mean I have no idea why they will work in conditions the locals won't, but that doesn't mean the conditions are horrendous per se.

If they are horrendous then of course, there should be both some legislation and enforcement in place to ensure that's not the case, but I really don't think it is.

Not that I would have much say over what my children did, but if they asked me about a career in haulage I would suggest they do another job - I suspect a lot of us here would too.

Come on Rick. Use you imagination as to why a polish trucker would want to drive around the UK on a month on month off UK rate living in his cab with very few living costs whilst going back to his nice pad in Poland. It's not rocket science.

Ah the lack of overnight facilities is actually a perk! Fascinating.

Making a decent salary in the UK and living somewhere cheaper is certainly an appealing option if it suits your circumstances. An option no longer open to UK truckers.

I believe a lot of them were employed by East European contractors and paid accordingly. of course, that made Rick happy as he is more Tory than Seano on this. F*ck the working man if an Ikea table costs 35p less.

Edit* TBF, it was Gordon Brown that shipped in the cheap labour to keep wage claims and inflation down.

Paying less than minimum wage is illegal and if there is some loophole to not do so it needs to be illegal.

I don’t think many if any lorry drivers are paid even close to minimum wage.

pblakeney

Just guessing, but...... Is the issue that time spent sleeping in the cab away from friends and family not counted in hours worked?
I've worked away from home but wouldn't accept those conditions.

mully79

Last time I spoke to a driver he got paid a terrible wage + 38 quid per delivery. Supposedly he could do 4 or 5 drops a day except traffic, missing paperwork, no one to unload, waiting for space to unload etc meant some days he didnt even complete a delivery.
They would send drivers on bad drops prior to holidays to keep their holiday pay low etc.
im sure there's probably some bs that non-driving hours are paid differently than the logged driving hours.

rjsterry

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

1. That's only because so little of the network is electrified. In any case, a couple of big diesel-electrics burn a lot less oil than twenty or thirty HGVs.
2. Building a motorway is not carbon neutral in itself.
3. Carbon emissions are just one of the problems with everyone having a car to drive everywhere. Someone was griping about how busy and overcrowded the roads are earlier.

rjsterry

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

briantrumpet

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

And in any case, they've been talking about finishing the dualling the A30 to the West Country for decades, and yet still nothing's happened yet.

john80

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

The guys that commute on the m5 might have a different take on this. We allowed an excessive number of junctions and housing developments next to them. Should we then deliver a rubbish experience when you use them as well.

darkhairedlord

briantrumpet said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

And in any case, they've been talking about finishing the dualling the A30 to the West Country for decades, and yet still nothing's happened yet.

Where do they drive when they get there?

john80

briantrumpet said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

And in any case, they've been talking about finishing the dualling the A30 to the West Country for decades, and yet still nothing's happened yet.

They were doing some big works when I passed the other week

mr_goo

Pross said:

mr_goo said:

Lots of houses being built in the greater BCP area. Mostly to accommodate those pesky London commuters that no longer have to travel into the city for work. I blame MS Teams.
Keep away you skinny macchiato lovers.

I'm surprised anything gets built in BCP. I had some dialogue with a person there who seemed helpful at first but has now failed to answer a simple question for 5 weeks despite repeat chasing which is stopping anything being designed let alone built (education scheme not housing).

You need to furnish the planning officer with a nice fat brown envelope. BCP planning department and it's associated councillors are notorious for being corrupt.

TheBigBean

The Guardian reports an anonymous EU diplomat as saying that the events in Afghanistan have made some countries realise that they need a close relationship with the UK. Obviously not the most reliable source, but it seems an indefinte extension to the implementation of some elements of the protocol is not going to be opposed.

TheBigBean

Ireland IKEA having supply issues. Unrelated to Brexit, but it seems to be the thread for such news.

Pross

john80 said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

The guys that commute on the m5 might have a different take on this. We allowed an excessive number of junctions and housing developments next to them. Should we then deliver a rubbish experience when you use them as well.

Not really, I do the southern stretch regularly (anywhere south of Worcester) and other than the Bristol section, especially the M4 junction to Cribbs Causeway, it is quiet for 9-10 months of the year.

Pross

TheBigBean said:

Ireland IKEA having supply issues. Unrelated to Brexit, but it seems to be the thread for such news.

Do they get supplied directly into Ireland or do their supplies have to cross through the UK?

rjsterry

john80 said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

The guys that commute on the m5 might have a different take on this. We allowed an excessive number of junctions and housing developments next to them. Should we then deliver a rubbish experience when you use them as well.

So we now need a motorway with no connections to the surroundings? I grew up a couple of miles from the M4/M5 interchange. Bank Holiday jams on the M5 have been happening for at least the last 40-odd years; long before most of these housing developments were built.
The M25 is 5 or 6 lanes in each direction in places now and still comes to a halt regularly. There is no motorway that can be built that won't fill up with traffic as soon as it's open.

kingstongraham

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

The guys that commute on the m5 might have a different take on this. We allowed an excessive number of junctions and housing developments next to them. Should we then deliver a rubbish experience when you use them as well.

So we now need a motorway with no connections to the surroundings? I grew up a couple of miles from the M4/M5 interchange. Bank Holiday jams on the M5 have been happening for at least the last 40-odd years; long before most of these housing developments were built.
The M25 is 5 or 6 lanes in each direction in places now and still comes to a halt regularly. There is no motorway that can be built that won't fill up with traffic as soon as it's open.

I'd agree with that. Motorways are full of local traffic around cities.

surrey_commuter

Apparently the steel tariff wars are still rumbling on but now we are going to have to stick 25% on EU steel imports

john80

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

The guys that commute on the m5 might have a different take on this. We allowed an excessive number of junctions and housing developments next to them. Should we then deliver a rubbish experience when you use them as well.

So we now need a motorway with no connections to the surroundings? I grew up a couple of miles from the M4/M5 interchange. Bank Holiday jams on the M5 have been happening for at least the last 40-odd years; long before most of these housing developments were built.
The M25 is 5 or 6 lanes in each direction in places now and still comes to a halt regularly. There is no motorway that can be built that won't fill up with traffic as soon as it's open.

Given motorways are the local roads now maybe the answer is a second set of them for automated cars. At least 50 miles between exits and automated cars only. Could be the new form of public transport that is door to door. You just have to drive the first and last 50 miles yourself. We need to face facts that is the population growth wanters get their way we need to either start growing cities up to reduce urban sprawl and keep mass transport systems efficient. Or we need to start developing the less well connected parts of the country and this means getting transport door to door in an efficient manner. Alternatively we can just turn the South West into a housing estate and live with the consequences. As has been pointed out I only have to deal with this about 10-20 times a year so crack on.

darkhairedlord

john80 said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

The guys that commute on the m5 might have a different take on this. We allowed an excessive number of junctions and housing developments next to them. Should we then deliver a rubbish experience when you use them as well.

So we now need a motorway with no connections to the surroundings? I grew up a couple of miles from the M4/M5 interchange. Bank Holiday jams on the M5 have been happening for at least the last 40-odd years; long before most of these housing developments were built.
The M25 is 5 or 6 lanes in each direction in places now and still comes to a halt regularly. There is no motorway that can be built that won't fill up with traffic as soon as it's open.

Given motorways are the local roads now maybe the answer is a second set of them for automated cars. At least 50 miles between exits and automated cars only. Could be the new form of public transport that is door to door. You just have to drive the first and last 50 miles yourself. We need to face facts that is the population growth wanters get their way we need to either start growing cities up to reduce urban sprawl and keep mass transport systems efficient. Or we need to start developing the less well connected parts of the country and this means getting transport door to door in an efficient manner. Alternatively we can just turn the South West into a housing estate and live with the consequences. As has been pointed out I only have to deal with this about 10-20 times a year so crack on.

Drive where? Are we going to spend billions just to make it quicker to get Newquay and moan about how over-crowded it is, and wont someone do something about the town traffic?

surrey_commuter

john80 said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

rjsterry said:

john80 said:

surrey_commuter said:

john80 said:

elbowloh said:

rick_chasey said:

I get that we are in a sort of neo victorian world where we have to rely on a few ultra rich benefactors to make interesting technological developments and blame the poor for their own poverty, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised everyone gets a hard on over rail.

My experience of rail is that it is abhorrently expensive and British rail cannot cope with any increased demand, and any attempt to improve capacity is met with shrieking nimbyism that massively increases the cost of it.

Your experience is completely wrong, which is why we're investing in rail.

Plus we need to if we want to meet climate change targets.

Every freight train I have ever seen pulling loads is a couple of diesel locomotives. Not sure that is the green answer you are looking for. When we all have electric vehicles and most of our power comes from carbon free sources why are we bothered about trains when they don't take those outside cities from door to door. This is the elephant in the room the greens miss in that if technology makes something green then they lose their objection. Why not another motorway when everything on it is green for example.

I am not against building motorways but do think you get more bang for your buck upgrading existing routes, like the A14 you mentioned.

Where would you build new motorway (s)

M6 version two slap bang down the middle of the country. More roads into Cornwall or any other areas where there is congestion.

Building more motorways for the couple of weekends a year that everyone wants to drive to Cornwall is about as daft as it gets.

The guys that commute on the m5 might have a different take on this. We allowed an excessive number of junctions and housing developments next to them. Should we then deliver a rubbish experience when you use them as well.

So we now need a motorway with no connections to the surroundings? I grew up a couple of miles from the M4/M5 interchange. Bank Holiday jams on the M5 have been happening for at least the last 40-odd years; long before most of these housing developments were built.
The M25 is 5 or 6 lanes in each direction in places now and still comes to a halt regularly. There is no motorway that can be built that won't fill up with traffic as soon as it's open.

Given motorways are the local roads now maybe the answer is a second set of them for automated cars. At least 50 miles between exits and automated cars only. Could be the new form of public transport that is door to door. You just have to drive the first and last 50 miles yourself. We need to face facts that is the population growth wanters get their way we need to either start growing cities up to reduce urban sprawl and keep mass transport systems efficient. Or we need to start developing the less well connected parts of the country and this means getting transport door to door in an efficient manner. Alternatively we can just turn the South West into a housing estate and live with the consequences. As has been pointed out I only have to deal with this about 10-20 times a year so crack on.

OK, I am genuinely baffled.

From previous conversations we know that some people on here (including myself) believe that it is possible to be inside the M25 and be in the sticks. There are other people who would rather chew their arm off than live within 50 miles of London.

As you live in the least densely populated part on England I am assuming that you are in the latter category. What I do not get is why you are so worked up about the population density in the south east?

I love the tower blocks and think the previously mentioned Elephant and Castle was a total sh1thole that should have been bulldozed long ago and that the new tower blocks are beautiful. What I don't do is get angry about the lack of towers in Hawkshead and the lack of decent restaurants and in particular the absence of authentic foreign cuisine.

So I have tried not to be confrontational because I am genuinely interested in the population density where you don't live and have no reason to go?