But remember paying cash into a bank is not free.  A business I work with has to pay 1.4% to pay in or withdraw cash.  That is in addition to the costs of the account holder having to manage the cash themselves before paying it in. 

I know about the tides, but I am not conscious of them of a day to day basis perhaps because I live in north Wiltshire on the 125m contour line.  Even if all the ice sheets melt and the sea rises by 70m I am still not sure that I would need to be conscious of them here!

If you could turn trains round at Slough that wouldn't be no use as passengers would have no way of onward travel. Old Oak Common should have links into London. 

Not with the Treasury running the railways as they do now - there would not be enough trains!

If someone is reporting an incident at the crossing then you want them to use the right name.  It may be obvious in this case, but consistency is important.   

The one thing that is the same today as with the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) days is that the Treasury has a tight reign on costs and no interest in growing the business to increase income. Whatever changes are to come this micro managed control on costs - rather than bottom line - must be resisted otherwise we will be back into the managed decline of the BR days. 

When we have a chief secretary to the Treasury believes they are reducing debt as a proportion of GDP over a five year period and is blindsided in a broadcast interview when presented with OBR figures that contradict her.  This therefore means they are breaking their own fiscal rules. You couldn't make it up. I reiterate my point about a bunch of amateurs.

The politicians may say they are funding these things from the savings from HS2, but I am sure the civil servants inside the Treasury will be accounting for it the proper way.  In short they are doing even more borrowing to fund revenue. 

You can't do that because HS2 is Capital expenditure and supporting bus services is revenue.

Breaks all the norms of accountancy and local government finance laws. No successful business would spend capital on revenue - if it does its a Ponzi scheme! Basically you do not expend capital on revenue because that is not sustainable as you only have so much capital.

Of course that does not stop our present bunch of amateurs who call themselves our government advocating changing the law to allow this as a solution to stopping local authorities going broke, but that is another story. 

Yes the line north of Severn Beach was closed in the 1960's and a significant number of houses and the M49 have been built over the first 800 metres of the trackbed. 

Yes but those of us who have worked on standards for the last 30 years have a colon separator engrained in us as that is the ISO standard which is also adopted by BSI^▸ (British Standards Institute) as a British Standard.

So my nerdishness would grate at the use of a full stop!

The poll seems to have been misworded. If the you agree that they want it to run onto the election surely its a yes?

Nor me

So here is LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about)'s view of fares simplification what do we make of that:



Super off-peak fare abolished to Waverley. So results in a fare increase - but not for Haymarket so there is a money saving offer. 

Even if it will cost less in the end because more people will travel

Actually they are pains to state that they are NOT insolvent.  Presumably they have looked at the future and decided that things don't look good, but for now they are are OK.