Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 "Waterloo" Campaign here
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 01:15 17 Jan 2022
- Novak Djokovic: Tennis star deported after losing Australia visa battle
* Britain's most dangerous roads
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 19/01/22 - MTUG - regular meeting
28/01/22 - FOSBR AGM - ONLINE
04/02/22 - Call for Evidence GBR closes
05/03/22 - Railfuture, Severnside - BWT

On this day
17th Jan (2018)
~ Byron Bay Railroad Company launched its solar train (*)

Train RunningCancelled
22:57 London Paddington to Bristol Parkway
Delayed
21:43 London Paddington to Swansea
PollsOpen and recent polls
Open to 17/01 17:40 How strong do you like your coffee?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
January 17, 2022, 01:17:53 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[206] South Western Railways Waterloo - Bristol services axed
[68] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[64] E-scooter trials - but rental only. What do members think?
[59] Planning error?
[48] Alrewas - campaign for station at National Memorial Arboretum
[41] Orange and purple zones
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 [60] 61 62
  Print  
Author Topic: Portishead Line reopening for passengers - ongoing discussion  (Read 297567 times)
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4545


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #885 on: November 11, 2021, 10:33:01 am »

According to the North Somerset Times article bradshaw referred to, local MP (Member of Parliament) Liam Fox thinks XR (Crossrail) and Insulate Britain will try to block the reopening:

Quote
"It appears that there is no specific reason for the delay on environmental grounds and, indeed, it would be possible to go ahead with the DCO (Driver Controlled Operation) (development consent order) immediately except for one potentially serious factor.

"Government advisers believe that there is a strong chance that environmental activist groups might seek a judicial review over the whole project on 'environmental grounds'.

Meanwhile North Somerset leader (and FoSBR» (Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways - site) member) Don Davies says:

Quote
I would say that we are now becoming extremely sceptical that the project will ever move forward to completion, so leaving our second largest town with entirely inadequate sustainable transport links."
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
johnneyw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1827


Still want to be a train driver when I grow up


View Profile
« Reply #886 on: November 11, 2021, 10:52:28 am »

Have XR (Crossrail) and Insulate Britain responded to this?
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3706


View Profile
« Reply #887 on: November 11, 2021, 12:09:28 pm »

It also mentions a campaign to replace the railway with a 'busway'.
Quote
The Portishead Busway Campaign, headed by Barry Cash, proposes that the railway line be repurposed to allow buses to follow the route to the Cumberland Basin before joining the road network.
The name Barry Cash rings a bell as one that crops up regularly in local news, though I don't know it's the same Barry Cash. Anyway, how does Mr Cash and his Busway Campaign propose that buses run along an active freight railway?
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
bradshaw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1096



View Profile
« Reply #888 on: November 11, 2021, 01:58:19 pm »

Is this the one?
https://bishopstonbarry.net/2020/02/26/portishead-railway-line/

The Twitter thread is here
https://twitter.com/respros/status/1458718247352680450?s=21
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4545


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #889 on: November 11, 2021, 02:53:15 pm »

Here is Liam Fox's full statement (dated 1st Nov):

Quote
Thank you for your letter about the delay to Portishead railway. Like you, I am extremely disappointed by this course of events.

Since the explanation given in the written ministerial statement about “environmental reasons” for the delay was very vague, I asked for further ministerial information.

It appears that there is no specific reason for the delay on environmental grounds and, indeed, it would be possible to go ahead with the DCO (Driver Controlled Operation) (development consent order) immediately except for one potentially serious factor.

Government advisers believe that there is a strong chance that environmental activist groups might seek a judicial review over the whole project on “environmental “grounds. While this may seem absurd given the clear benefits that the railway would bring, we have seen from recent events with groups like Extension Rebellion and Insulate Britain that they are far from rational in their decision taking. It is entirely possible that they would object to any new transport project.

The six-month delay that has been announced is to allow for a full environmental impact to be undertaken to the extent that the government believes it would be able to resist any calls for a judicial review.

It is, perhaps, worth explaining exactly what a judicial review could mean in terms of time delay.

The time between filing a judicial review application and getting a decision from the court on permission is about 3 to 5 months. If permission is granted and the government decides to defend the claim (as they obviously would in this instance) then the full hearing generally take as somewhere between 9 to 15 months.

If this were to happen, the opening of the railway could be sent back for a considerable length of time.

My own opinion is that it is becoming too easy for pressure groups to challenge every decision by a democratically elected government in the courts and I expect legislation to be brought forward to deal with this issue shortly.

Meantime, the current six-month delay, while unwelcome, looks like the least unacceptable way to proceed with the minimal chance of substantial delay to the opening of the Portishead line that we all want to see.
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3706


View Profile
« Reply #890 on: November 11, 2021, 03:19:09 pm »

Looks like it. From reading that, it's not a totally crazy nor off the wall idea. But the solution to running alongside the freights to and from the docks is going to require careful timetabling. Or maybe not, as he only envisages a peak-hours service:
Quote
The recent IPCC report once again highlighted the need to reduce the use of fossil fuels. When all fossil fuel use is included, a full bus is by far the most efficient and least polluting form of transport.* However, a nearly empty bus is the worst. This is a good reason to only run the service during the rush hours.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4545


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #891 on: November 11, 2021, 06:04:11 pm »

Looks like it. From reading that, it's not a totally crazy nor off the wall idea. But the solution to running alongside the freights to and from the docks is going to require careful timetabling. Or maybe not, as he only envisages a peak-hours service:
Quote
The recent IPCC report once again highlighted the need to reduce the use of fossil fuels. When all fossil fuel use is included, a full bus is by far the most efficient and least polluting form of transport.* However, a nearly empty bus is the worst. This is a good reason to only run the service during the rush hours.

I'll leave it to others to argue whether it's a good idea to run buses along (not alongside!) railway tracks. I think we have discussed this before, the last time Mr Cash's ideas surfaced.

Cash refers to a 'recent IPCC report', but the report he cites is a 2009 report published by the IOP (Institute of Physics) in the USA. This seems to say that trains are (or rather were) the same as or better than buses to operate, but other factors such as the need to build stations and other rail infrastructure tip the balance towards buses. Without being able to drill down into the underlying figures (the link's broken) it's hard to know how true this is in 2021, or for a line which was mostly completed in 1867.
Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3706


View Profile
« Reply #892 on: November 11, 2021, 06:07:44 pm »

Looks like it. From reading that, it's not a totally crazy nor off the wall idea. But the solution to running alongside the freights to and from the docks is going to require careful timetabling. Or maybe not, as he only envisages a peak-hours service:
Quote
The recent IPCC report once again highlighted the need to reduce the use of fossil fuels. When all fossil fuel use is included, a full bus is by far the most efficient and least polluting form of transport.* However, a nearly empty bus is the worst. This is a good reason to only run the service during the rush hours.

I'll leave it to others to argue whether it's a good idea to run buses along (not alongside!) railway tracks. I think we have discussed this before, the last time Mr Cash's ideas surfaced.

Cash refers to a 'recent IPCC report', but the report he cites is a 2009 report published by the IOP (Institute of Physics) in the USA. This seems to say that trains are (or rather were) the same as or better than buses to operate, but other factors such as the need to build stations and other rail infrastructure tip the balance towards buses. Without being able to drill down into the underlying figures (the link's broken) it's hard to know how true this is in 2021, or for a line which was mostly completed in 1867.
Sloppy language on my part, sorry. I was using "alongside" in the sense of "in conjunction with" not "geographically adjacent to".
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4088


View Profile
« Reply #893 on: November 11, 2021, 08:21:14 pm »

Here is Liam Fox's full statement (dated 1st Nov):

Quote
Thank you for your letter about the delay to Portishead railway. Like you, I am extremely disappointed by this course of events.

Since the explanation given in the written ministerial statement about “environmental reasons” for the delay was very vague, I asked for further ministerial information.

It appears that there is no specific reason for the delay on environmental grounds and, indeed, it would be possible to go ahead with the DCO (Driver Controlled Operation) (development consent order) immediately except for one potentially serious factor.

Government advisers believe that there is a strong chance that environmental activist groups might seek a judicial review over the whole project on “environmental “grounds. While this may seem absurd given the clear benefits that the railway would bring, we have seen from recent events with groups like Extension Rebellion and Insulate Britain that they are far from rational in their decision taking. It is entirely possible that they would object to any new transport project.

The six-month delay that has been announced is to allow for a full environmental impact to be undertaken to the extent that the government believes it would be able to resist any calls for a judicial review.

It is, perhaps, worth explaining exactly what a judicial review could mean in terms of time delay.

The time between filing a judicial review application and getting a decision from the court on permission is about 3 to 5 months. If permission is granted and the government decides to defend the claim (as they obviously would in this instance) then the full hearing generally take as somewhere between 9 to 15 months.

If this were to happen, the opening of the railway could be sent back for a considerable length of time.

My own opinion is that it is becoming too easy for pressure groups to challenge every decision by a democratically elected government in the courts and I expect legislation to be brought forward to deal with this issue shortly.

Meantime, the current six-month delay, while unwelcome, looks like the least unacceptable way to proceed with the minimal chance of substantial delay to the opening of the Portishead line that we all want to see.

So he wants to use this as an excuse to make the UK (United Kingdom) into a dictatorship.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3706


View Profile
« Reply #894 on: November 11, 2021, 08:25:17 pm »

As with so much, these changes to judicial review are a re-announcement.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5897


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #895 on: November 13, 2021, 08:47:32 pm »

For "environmental groups" read "Barry Cash". HIs pet idea is to lay rubber along the length of the railway, so that First Bus and others can run buses along it. I don't think for a moment that he has even the remotest chance of changing anyone's mind about passenger trains, even though he is supported in principle by First Bristol's former MD James Freeman.

If he, or anyone else for that matter, launched a judicial review against the scheme, I see no reason why it couldn't be dealt with within a couple of months, nor why work could not start before the hearing. DfT» (Department for Transport - about) taking extra time on the DCO (Driver Controlled Operation) should ensure an easy passage through the court. I wonder if it protesters or fear of protesters that is causing the nervousness.

I also think Don Davies could have used more supportive words, rather than saying that
Quote
he and other senior executives are 'extremely sceptical' that the project will come to fruition, despite £25million of taxpayers money already being spent on it.
Logged

Now, please!
ellendune
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4088


View Profile
« Reply #896 on: November 13, 2021, 10:18:15 pm »

As with so much, these changes to judicial review are a re-announcement.
I think rather that they a drip drip of the idea in the hope that we forget that they are seeking to make it impossible to challenge any decision of the government. After all they tried t5o prorogue Parliament on one occasion to prevent it from acting against their will.   
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 5897


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #897 on: November 13, 2021, 11:01:42 pm »

Quote
While this may seem absurd given the clear benefits that the railway would bring, we have seen from recent events with groups like Extension Rebellion and Insulate Britain that they are far from rational in their decision taking.

Extension Rebellion is a new one on me, presumably formed to stop conservatories, unless, of course, insulated?


So he wants to use this as an excuse to make the UK (United Kingdom) into a dictatorship.

Hard cases make for bad law. I find it hard to think that a law could be drafted to stop protests against an infrastructure project ending up before a court, but that wouldn't have a bad effect somewhere else. After all, a judicial review isn't about whether an idea is a good one or a bad one, but a review of whether the person making the decision has done so properly, within the limits of his/her powers, and in accordance with the law of the land. Our judiciary is fiercely independent of the executive, and would quickly find ways around such an arrangement.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2021, 11:20:35 pm by TonyK » Logged

Now, please!
eightonedee
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1168



View Profile
« Reply #898 on: November 14, 2021, 08:21:59 am »

There's a confusion here between two different things.

Judicial review is the process for challenging a decision of a public sector or other decision making body,  normally on procedural grounds.  That though is very widely interpreted as a result of its wider use in the last 50 years or so. So many decisions have been challenged on the broad basis that they did not take some important consideration into account ( such as environmental issues) or that an aggrieved party to a decision making process reckons that what they have said has not been adequately considered.

The so-called right to protest is a matter of criminal law. The reality is that most who claim to exercise it know that they will be breaking the law.
Logged
Red Squirrel
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4545


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #899 on: November 24, 2021, 04:31:36 pm »

North Somerset council has responded to the DfT» (Department for Transport - about)'s request for further information by updating it's Environmental Statement (again). Among other things, N Som say we don't need to worry about the 4th Carbon Budget any more because that applies to a timeframe that will have passed by the time work starts on the railway...

The DfT has invited comments on N Som's response.

Barry Cash's 'Portishead Busway Campaign' have submitted a lengthy response. The dates on the Planning Inspectorate website are a bit hard to follow, but this may be to the DfT's invitation.

And so it goes on.

Logged

Things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could.
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: 1 ... 58 59 [60] 61 62
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page