In an attempt to answer my own question, I came across this blog piece.

Bear in mind that it is anti-reopening, but it does have some good photos of some of the potential problems and obstacles previously mentioned.

Didn't Network Rail judge it to be "expensive but feasible" ? Is the plan to knock down anything in the way? If so, what specifically gets bulldozed?

I have had a look into this, and as a result, I am naming the "clever blighter" in question as Alistair Rice of the North Somerset Council Directorate: Development and Environment Policy Team. It was his January 2010 report here that made the decision to choose the "Red Route" described in the report as "South Bristol Link", over the "Blue Route" described in the report as "A38/A370 Link Road".

I therefore judge that it was at this point that the terminology definitively changed to "South Bristol Link".

Don't worry, I am sure we are all big Witham Bobby fans!

Does it have a bus fare for the common man?

Labour had 12% of the vote in the 2019 General Election which went down to 1% of the vote in the 2021 By-Election. Had they bothered to campaign seriously, then there is every chance that the Lib Dems wouldn't have made it to victory.

I would agree that there is a slow shift towards the kind of longer-termist Climate Emergency focused political view that Robin describes, as evidenced by impressive recent local election results for the Green Party in places like Bristol, London, Sheffield and Suffolk, and by the fact that the Conservative government have felt a clear need to focus on the messaging around COP26. However, I also feel that he is in danger of placing too much emphasis on this at the expense of the far more overriding short-term political imperatives that Central Office tends to focus on. The fact is that when the majority of people come to decide how to cast their all-important Westminster parliamentary votes, environmental issues simply aren't yet high enough up people's priority list. This is evidenced by the fact that, in the 2019 General Election, the Green Party only managed to get more than 10% of the vote in just 5 constituencies, which are their long-held solitary parliamentary seat of Brighton Pavilion, plus the constituencies of Bristol West, Bury St Edmunds, Dulwich & West Norwood, and Isle of Wight, all of which are situated in relatively strong concentrated pockets of Green Party support. In terms of Parliamentary By-Elections, they have never managed more than 10% of the vote, and it has been over a decade since they last managed more than 5% of the vote in a Parliamentary By-Election.

Similarly, the public perception of the extent to which the "Red Wall" seats are a preoccupation for Central Office - while obviously important to them - is generally overplayed somewhat. This is because the reasons for voters turning away from Labour in those areas are deep-seated and long-standing, and therefore they wont simply turn back to Labour just because Boris and the government have periods of poor performance, particularly given that the current Labour leader is for many of them the "metropolitan elite" poster boy for all the reasons they turned away from Labour in the first place. It is also the case that voters in these areas are far more likely to stick with the principle of Brexit - a clear Conservative electoral pillar - while polls show a clear shift towards dissatisfaction with the way Brexit has turned out among voters in the rest of the country. Were this not the case, then the Conservatives would not have been able to gain Hartlepool in that By-Election.

It is also the case that Conservative short-term political strategy in these areas is far more carefully calculated than people give them credit for. For example, the general media and public narrative was that the recent Integrated Rail Plan would prove a disaster for the government in "Red Wall" terms. However, this ignores the fact that the focus on the Western half of HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) was calibrated to show they look out for the "Red Wall" seats in the Midlands and North West, while the binning of the Eastern leg of HS2 was calibrated to "punish" those areas that had the temerity to vote Labour in 2019 - see here.

Also, despite the current broadly negative Treasury-led approach to rail, Central Office is not above using rail policy levers for political purposes. An obvious "Red Wall" example is the "dead cert" reopening of the Northumberland Line, which is a key part of a wider strategy to turn precarious parliamentary majorities such as Blyth Valley's 712 votes into more secure electoral footholds next time round. It is not just happening in "Red Wall" areas either - More on that later in the post.

What really keeps Central Office inhabitants up at night though is the recent trend in By-Elections for either Labour or the Liberal Democrats to basically not turn up in campaigning terms if the other party has a better chance. This mirrors the undeclared tactic deployed by Tony Blair and Paddy Ashdown in the run-up to and during the 1997 General Election, two men who were close enough in political terms to facilitate that kind of understanding. Today, Keir Starmer and Ed Davey are similarly close enough in political terms to facilitate that kind of understanding, in a way that would never have been possible with, say, Jeremy Corbyn and Jo Swinson. The modern day understanding between the two parties is directly responsible for the Lib Dem Chesham and Amersham By-Election win, for Labour holding Batley and Spen in that By-Election, and for the Labour vote jumping by 7.4% while the Lib Dem similarly plummeted by 5.3% in the Old Bexley & Sidcup By-Election. It therefore doesn't take a genius to work out what could be made possible if similar tactics are deployed in the upcoming North Shropshire By-Election.

The Conservatives know that it only takes a combination of negative electoral factors - such as sleaze and changing attitudes towards Brexit for example - to shave off a few percentage points from their vote, along with the above understanding between Labour and the Lib Dems, to bring what currently look on paper to be very safe Conservative seats back into the play as the marginals they often used to be again. Indeed, their ultimate fear is that Geoffrey Cox will either be forced out or call it a day as Torridge and West Devon MP^▸ (Member of Parliament), ushering in a Lib Dem By-Election victory that would be seen as a "turning point" moment which opens the door for them to ultimately regain their former seats across the South West. Such an outcome would be a political catastrophe for the Conservatives - For example, people often forget that it was less than a decade ago that 4 out of the 5 Somerset constituencies were Lib-Dem held.

This is why if you look, you can see the "Red Wall" tactic of using rail policy levers for political purposes creeping in further south as well. The future passenger potential of Okehampton comes largely from surrounding areas that used to be Conservative/Lib Dem marginals. Tavistock is a major town in Geoffrey Cox's Torridge and West Devon constituency. The recently-approved Edginswell railway station is in the traditional bellweather constituency of Torbay, which is also benefitting from significant government regeneration money. New Forest East was in play during the Blair years, and the potential Labour and Lib Dem voters are concentrated in the Waterside area of the constituency, while the incumbent Conservative MP is one of the most dedicated Brexit Spartans. I could go on, but you get the drift.

However, the above are very much specific political initiatives to serve specific political purposes - the "Okehampton misdirection" as Mark A puts it - and not indicative of any desire for a wider, more enlightened rail policy, whether based on the need to combat the Climate Emergency or not, largely because in general terms the government simply doesn't feel the political/electoral pressure on environmental issues to the extent that Robin believes that it does. This is why I believe that The Conversation article that Bmblbzzz posted is bang on the money when comparing the government's rail strategy with the other countries mentioned, and why when Robin asks the question "What western developed country could possibly get away with wholesale rail closures and forcing people on to the roads at this time?", unfortunately my answer has to be "Potentially the UK^▸ (United Kingdom)".

This is also why I would endorse grahame's call for people to keep their eyes open to the potential need to defend their rail service.

On learning from history, it is worth remembering that last time we had a significant Treasury-led effort to slash the amount of money the railways were costing back in 2006, a public report was published advocating mass closures and service withdrawals in the North, at the same time as significant service cuts were being proposed in what is now our GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) area. Furthermore, grahame and I found out through FOI^▸ (Freedom of Information) that internal reports existed that indicated that the proposed service cuts in our area were just the tip of the iceberg, and that detailed business case assessments had been prepared for line & station closures and service withdrawals in our area too. Indeed, the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) even went so far as to publicly advertise for a Closures Manager.

During this period, a very similar proposal to withdraw the Bristol-Waterloo services was put forward, and the hugely successful campaign that prevented this was widely seen as a catalyst that helped cause the DfT to think twice about going forward with the negative agenda above.

Fast forward to 2021, and hopes of a positive rail future for the North have been severely dented, and the modern-day campaign to save the Bristol-Waterloo service has been ignored and rode roughshod over. Therefore, I strongly suspect that no forum member - not even Robin - would bet the farm on there not being similar internal closure/service withdrawal reports in existence regarding today's rail network, or that those who may consider that they have "won" the battle of Waterloo might not be emboldened to act upon those reports.

Obviously I get that there are differing views among forum members as to exactly where the balance of overall blame should lie, but I think we are largely agreed that - as was the case in 2006 - we are once again witnessing a significant Treasury-led effort to slash the amount of money the railways are costing. And as I said elsewhere, the year prior to the Serpell Report saw the lowest number of passenger journeys of the second half of the 20th century, the lowest level of passenger miles, and the lowest level of passenger revenue for 14 years - coincidentally nearly the same time as has now passed since these kind of measures were last proposed in 2006.

Serpell also cut his teeth as a Treasury mandarin, moving to the Ministry of Transport, ultimately becoming Permanent Secretary, and being around to implement some of the Beeching cuts.

He therefore would have had much the same background, experience and attitude as those who currently wield ultimate decision-making power over today's rail network.

In my view then, it is helpful of grahame to republish the Serpell maps, as it serves as a invaluable reminder to us all of the lessons of history, and as he says, of the need to ensure the things do indeed move forward rather than back.

Of course, it may be that they do think again about crossing one too many red lines in this respect, but what has happened with the "Waterloos" this time round does make the prospect of them going further more likely than back in 2006, and several members on here will remember only too well that that was a close enough run thing.

Marchwood (if i may be indulged on the Waterside minority exemption)

I suspect it might well end up being called plain old "Tavistock" when the government propel reopening the line from Bere Alston to there up to the top of their reopening list - Tavistock being a major town in the Torridge and West Devon constituency, where a by-election at some point is both highly likely and "must-win" for the Conservatives.

I think DfT^» (Department for Transport - about)/SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) recently sent you a message that, if the railways were ever really run with the customer in mind, they certainly aren't now.

Yes.

As I've said before, it is extremely rare that anybody tries to go maskless on trains here in Brittany, but one young lady did try it last night on the 1744 from Guingamp to Carhaix. It lasted less than 5 minutes after strong rebukes from two nearby passengers, with another turning round to me further up the train and saying "Did you see that? She wasn't wearing a mask!"

Never mind, there are only 29 days of 2021 left after all.

Interestingly, the year prior to the Serpell Report saw the lowest number of passenger journeys of the second half of the 20th century, the lowest level of passenger miles, and the lowest level of passenger revenue for 14 years.

Serpell also cut his teeth as a Treasury mandarin, moving to the Ministry of Transport, ultimately becoming Permanent Secretary, and being around to implement some of the Beeching cuts.

He therefore would have had much the same background, experience and attitude as those who currently wield ultimate decision-making power over today's rail network.