Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum
.
Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
article index - [here]
 tomorrow - Railfuture Severnside
21/11/2019 - WWRUG / update from GWR
22/11/2019 - TWSW AGM
25/11/2019 - GWR Customer Panel, Plymouth
27/11/2019 - MRUG Melksham Rail User Group
05/12/2019 - Meet the GWR Team, Paddington
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail news GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
November 15, 2019, 08:55:12 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[143] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[130] Cotswold Line - 2019 cancellation and amendments log
[115] Community by bus ... pleasant example
[66] Two Track, Now!
[60] General election - policies on Transport - what should we look...
[38] December 2019 timetable recast
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 [51] 52
  Print  
Author Topic: Portishead Line reopening for passengers - ongoing discussion  (Read 231627 times)
johnneyw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1173


Still want to work on the railways when I grow up.


View Profile
« Reply #750 on: October 16, 2019, 10:31:49 pm »

BBC Radio Bristol reminded me today that the postponed Commons debate on the Portishead Line is due today. Might check out BBC Parliament.

For goodness sakes, what on earth is there to debate?

Who wants to bet me a tenner that Levenmouth reopens before Portishead does?



I had wondered what it's value might be, other than electioneering.  I could understand it if this helped speed up the remaining processes but those are all surely now all beyond any parliamentary debate stage.
Logged

Railway rock n' roll rebel. I once bought a return ticket and didn't go back!
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4616


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #751 on: October 16, 2019, 10:42:08 pm »


For goodness sakes, what on earth is there to debate?


An adjournment debate isn't very often a debate. There is no vote, and no question to be decided. There are 650 MPs, so actually being selected by the Speaker for one is not easy, which could explain why it has been so long between debates. The motion moved by a government whip is "That this House do now adjourn", and the adjournment debate addresses this with a significant degree of thread drift. The member, Dr Fox in this case, then basically makes a statement. Others may ask to make interventions. The Minister concerned, who knows the subject for the day, then makes his erply. The usual right of reply is absent, so when the Minister has finished, the House empties of the few members left, and everyone heads to the bar.

The point of the exercise is to give someone chance to make a substantial statement on a subject close to their hearts, have a response from a minister, and have the whole exchange recorded in Hansard to avoid any question of misinterpretation and raise the profile. I don't know what was said yet - Dr Fox isn't one to hit Twitter the moment he leaves the Chamber, but all will be known soon. Meanwhile, the Doctor gives us a preview.
Logged

Now, please!
chuffed
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1298


View Profile
« Reply #752 on: October 17, 2019, 07:48:15 am »

I watched it , and it was really a rehash of what has gone before. Dr Fox sought assurances,was supported by the 3 Bristol Labour MPs, and the newly appointed rail minister gave his reply. He reassured everyone by saying the money was safe and went on to say it was a heavy rail led project, all other options having been discounted. As a resident of Portishead I was less than impressed to hear Dr Fox say that the population of Portishead would increase by another 8000 in the next decade. He also stated that the density of housing in the marina was double what is normally granted.
Logged
Noggin
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 358


View Profile
« Reply #753 on: October 17, 2019, 09:11:14 am »

I watched it , and it was really a rehash of what has gone before. Dr Fox sought assurances,was supported by the 3 Bristol Labour MPs, and the newly appointed rail minister gave his reply. He reassured everyone by saying the money was safe and went on to say it was a heavy rail led project, all other options having been discounted. As a resident of Portishead I was less than impressed to hear Dr Fox say that the population of Portishead would increase by another 8000 in the next decade. He also stated that the density of housing in the marina was double what is normally granted.

Thank you both for the info, I suppose it is reasonably reassuring that it is still heavy rail and on teh cards. Painfully slow progress though.   
Logged
chuffed
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1298


View Profile
« Reply #754 on: October 17, 2019, 09:32:39 am »

Here it is in full, from Hansard.

16 October 2019Volume 666

 8.34 pm

Dr Liam Fox (North Somerset) (Con)
 
I am grateful for the opportunity to have this debate, especially during the week of the Queen’s Speech. I am also grateful for the dogged and outstanding support that the Portishead railway project has had from the residents of the town itself, from North Somerset more widely, and from the wider region. I am also grateful to my fellow Bristol MPs for being here this evening. I single out and pay tribute to the Portishead Railway Group, whose contribution has been utterly invaluable.

When I last raised this issue in an Adjournment debate in this House, in January 2005, I spoke about the increase in population in Portishead. In the mid-1950s, the town had a population of around 9,000, which had risen to some 15,000 by the time I was first elected in the early 1990s. The population now stands at around 25,000. The power station and the phosphorus works that used to sit on the dock are long gone, with the last stacks having been brought down in 1992. In their place, we now have one of the country’s finest marinas, and we have contributed more than most to the rise in the country’s housing stock.

That housebuilding has not been without controversy. John Prescott, as Housing Minister, ordered that the housing density be doubled, so almost twice as many homes as originally intended were built on this land. That inevitably had consequences for the traffic in the town and parking has been a particular problem. Although the housing density was doubled, the number of parking spaces per home was allocated at the national average of 1.6 per household, when the average in North Somerset, even at the time, was 2.76. It does not take a mathematical genius to work out that the inevitable consequence was a huge deficit in the number of parking spaces available compared with what was needed.

The increased population in what I described back in 2005 as the most overcrowded cul-de-sac in the country—a phrase that has been widely deployed since—has inevitably put pressure on our road system. The A369 is the only A road out of the town, and junction 19 of the M5 is a regularly miserable experience for Portishead commuters, particularly at peak times. The answer to many of our problems, but by no means all, is to reopen the railway line to Portishead, providing additional capacity to our overstretched transport network.

The reopening of Portishead railway is part of the MetroWest project, which was given the go-ahead in July 2012 as part of the city deal under the coalition Government led by David Cameron. Portishead railway was part of MetroWest phase 1, but it has been beset by delays and cost overruns. In 2017, the planned date of the Portishead opening was 2020, yet by then the original cost of £50 million had mushroomed to £116 million. It became quickly clear that it would be beyond the financial scope of North Somerset Council or, indeed, the partnership of four councils to absorb such an increased cost. We were therefore pleased that the former Transport Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling), came to visit North Somerset and indicated that this Government would ensure that additional money became available. I wish to focus on that area ​and some of the technical issues around it so that the Minister can give us categorical assurances where there remain some anxieties.

The proposed allocation of £31.9 million by the Department exactly closed the funding gap. It did not reduce it; it closed it. The four local councils and the West of England Combined Authority have spent, and continue to spend, millions of pounds on the design of the reinstatement of the railway, the necessary environmental studies, and in preparing the development consent order application. For those who may not be familiar with the process, let me describe what this entails. The development consent order process is based on many submission items, one of which is a full funding statement. The statement has had to be generated on the assumption that the Department’s £31.9 million funding share will not be withdrawn. Another item is the business case, which is strong. Its benefit-cost ratio of around 3:1 is almost unheard of for a public infrastructure project. In other words, we know the reinstatement would be an efficient and effective use of public funds to produce a defined benefit. That is a lot more than we can say for many projects funded with taxpayers’ money.

Karin Smyth (Bristol South) (Lab)
 
I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman, my constituency neighbour, both for securing this debate and for allowing me to intervene. He will be aware that, in addition to the football and the rugby, Ashton Gate stadium has hosted a number of entertainment events this year. Investment in transport to and from the ground is critical. As the line goes through south Bristol, it provides an opportunity to open up more local transport provision, so it is not just about what we can get now. We are very supportive of this opportunity, which is critical to us in south Bristol.

Dr Fox
 
I am extremely grateful to the hon. Lady, and she is right that we deserve better public transport in the Bristol area. Bristol is one of only two cities in the United Kingdom, outside London, that produce a net benefit to the economy, and we deserve a level of spending commensurate with that level of economic contribution to the UK economy.

Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
 
I thank the right hon. Gentleman for securing this debate. He was very good to us in Strangford on many occasions in his former position as a Minister, so I wanted to come along to support him tonight.

The right hon. Gentleman has outlined the need for the Portishead railway to be encouraged and rebuilt, based on the population trends, the extra traffic and the pressure on our roads. Does he agree that perhaps it is time for the Government to look at sustaining public transport, be it railways or buses, to take pressure off the roads?

Dr Fox
 
It is not simply a specific case; it is also a generic one. We need to see major improvements in our railway capacity for exactly those reasons and for the environmental benefits that will come from not having the pollutants from slow-moving traffic congesting our towns and villages.

As a result of the Department for Transport announcing its £31.9 million funding share, the four local councils and the West of England Combined Authority have ​now committed to their £84 million share of the funding for the railway project. I make it clear that the railway reinstatement cannot be completed without the Department’s £31.9 million, so can the Minister make a clear commitment tonight that the Department’s funding will be solely on the basis of there being a good business case?

Darren Jones (Bristol North West) (Lab)
 
I am pleased to be here to support the right hon. Gentleman’s case for the Portishead line. Does he agree it is part of what should be a much broader rail network? It is about commuter traffic into and out of Bristol. My Bristol North West constituency is adjacent to his, and there should be a connection to the Henbury loop line so that people can travel between the major areas of employment, as well as travelling into and out of the city.

Dr Fox
 
I completely agree. Our transport network is now an economic rate-limiting step in the Bristol area. I know, and my colleagues will know, of companies that want to grow but are incapable of doing so. We are fortunate to have low levels of unemployment in our area, but it is difficult to get people to come into those areas where growth could occur because our public transport network is so inadequate.

The second issue I would like the Minister to address tonight is the Department’s rail network enhancements pipeline. As the House will know, the RNEP is a multistage process that could lead the Department to adjust its priorities such that its £31.9 million funding share could be either reduced or cancelled. This railway reinstatement is widely accepted as a no brainer in the region and beyond. It has a strong business case, and it is viewed as being of the highest priority in the wider Bristol area. The Department for Transport itself seems to think that the reinstatement of the Portishead line is a major improvement to our railways overall, and so do I. A ministerial commitment on this issue would be most welcome, so will the Minister confirm that the RNEP process will be used only to assure the Department that it is using its money wisely, rather than being used to generate a reason to reduce or cancel the Department’s funding contribution?

The Portishead reinstatement will upgrade 8 km of existing Network Rail freight line to Pill and reinstate the track along 4 km of existing permanent way from Pill to Portishead. Given the length of time it has taken and the amount of money spent, it must be one of the greatest investments in one of the smallest increases in railway track that the House has seen.

Unfortunately, despite the extremely modest nature of this particular project, the reinstatement is subject to the weighty process that applies to major rail improvements. Why? Because the criterion set out in the Planning Act 2008 is pegged at more than 2 km of track on non-railway land. The only reason why more than 2 km of the reinstatement track is on non-railway land is that North Somerset Council wisely decided to purchase the Portbury to Portishead section to ensure future reinstatement. In other words, we are being penalised because of the council’s foresight and confidence that this most worthwhile project would eventually be brought to fruition.

I understand that, unfortunately, the processes operated by the planning inspectorate for the DCO and by the Department for the RNEP clearly have to be followed, ​despite the non-major nature of the reinstatement. I want from the Minister an assurance that everything possible will be done to ensure that the process is as speedy as possible, within the constraints of the law.

Given the urgent need to reduce CO2 emissions, which has been widely discussed recently, will the Minister confirm that he and his officials will do everything they can to speed up the processes, so that the long-standing congestion and environmental pollution that afflict the 50,000-plus people who will directly benefit from the railway and the 130,000-plus people who will indirectly benefit from the railway, can be reduced at the earliest opportunity?

I wish to raise two other brief points. There has been much speculation locally that, rather than a traditional railway, a hybrid of bus, tram and train might be introduced. What is the Minister’s understanding of the likely outcome of any such proposals currently under consideration? There has been a great deal of debate about the relative merits of a range of different alternatives, but we are now seeking an end to the indecision, and clarity about the timescale and nature of the transportation system itself.

When I visited the North Somerset summer show this July, I gave my word that I would raise the issue of Sustrans. I am sure the Minister will be aware that Sustrans has been instrumental in the creation of a national network of cycle routes on quiet roads and traffic-free paths that now extends to more than 17,000 miles. I hope that he and his Department can look into the potential for a dual-use path alongside the planned railway, to see whether we can improve our local facilities further, with all the benefits that that will bring to recreation, transport and health.

As I have said, this project is a no-brainer. It fulfils all the Government’s criteria for reducing road congestion, improving our environment and improving the functioning of our local economy. We are keen to give the Government all those things—if they give us reassurance, clarity and the necessary funding. After all the delay, I would be proud if this Government gave the people of Portishead what they deserve and what they have waited so long to get.

 8.49 pm

The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Chris Heaton-Harris)
 
It is a pleasure to answer the debate of my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox). I thank everyone who has contributed to the discussion, including the Bristol massif, who are lined up on the Opposition Benches—the hon. Members for Bristol North West (Darren Jones), for Bristol East (Kerry McCarthy), and for Bristol South (Karin Smyth)—ably assisted by the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) in his support for his old right hon. Friend. I also congratulate my right hon. Friend on securing this debate on the future of the Portishead railway line and, indeed, the railway group that he named in his speech.

My right hon. Friend has always been an advocate of this important proposal and for improved transport links in and around his constituency. He describes the town of Portishead as one of the fastest growing in the south-west. Its population has risen by more than 3,000 since 2001 and is expected to increase by another 8,000 in the coming decade.​
Reopening the Portishead line is an important part of the MetroWest scheme. This is a project that is led by North Somerset Council and the West of England Combined Authority, which have been leading on devolved matters in the area since 2017. I understand that good progress is being made—the business case for the Portishead line is being developed, and North Somerset Council will very shortly be taking a big step forward by submitting a development consent order for reopening the line to the Planning Inspectorate. I am very confident that our decision to provide £31.9 million of funding, subject to a satisfactory business case, provides the necessary commitment for North Somerset Council to submit the application and supporting funding settlement.

As my right hon. Friend knows, it is the Planning Inspectorate’s responsibility to assess and decide on whether to grant the consents necessary for construction to commence, and he mentioned that in his speech. Once the outcome is known, we expect to carry out a full assessment of the business case for the scheme. He asked me to be as speedy in that process as I possibly can, and I give him the guarantee that my Department will be.

Although the development and delivery of MetroWest and the Portishead route are ultimately the responsibility of the local authorities and have been since their inception, the Government are committed to working closely with Network Rail, North Somerset Council and the West of England Combined Authority to support the reopening of the line and all elements of MetroWest, because improving rail services for the people in the Bristol area and the west of England has been, and will remain, one of the Government’s key priorities. The importance that we place on the Greater Bristol area is demonstrated, I hope, by the recent investments that we have made. For example, we are investing £5 billion into the electrification and upgrade of the Great Western main line, from Paddington through to Bristol Parkway and Cardiff, delivering better services and new trains with thousands more seats.

Modernisation of the line will improve more than 100 million rail journeys each year and stimulate economic growth from London, through the Thames valley, to the Cotswolds, the west country and south Wales. It includes major rail infrastructure projects in the Greater Bristol area, such as the four-tracking at Filton Bank. This, combined with the biggest signalling renewal of its kind undertaken by Network Rail in the Bristol area, has increased capacity and contributed to reducing end-to-end journey times for Bristol to London Paddington services.

Kerry McCarthy (Bristol East) (Lab)
 
I wish to reaffirm my support for what the right hon. Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox) said in his speech. I remember back in 2005, when I was first elected, that we talked about the urgent need for the Portishead line to be reopened. And here we are some 14 years later still waiting. All these rail improvements for Bristol are a really good thing, but we do also need to look at the very short local journeys on the suburban branch line, because they are as important for getting people around as the commuter services.

Chris Heaton-Harris
 
Yes, I agree with the hon. Lady. She is absolutely right in what she says. As a Minister in the Department, I welcome the cross-party nature of the support that is being given to my right hon. Friend and this proposal.​
These services that I was talking about when I took the hon. Lady’s contribution will ensure that the rail network can meet the growing passenger demand and will allow more trains to run in the future. My officials are working with Network Rail to secure funding to upgrade Bristol East junction to support future service enhancements and, importantly, to enable the capacity needed to run the second phase of MetroWest services. These works will also improve the resilience of the network, so passengers in the area will benefit from a more reliable railway.

As my right hon. Friend knows, the coming December 2019 timetable change will bring a significant increase in services making use of this new infrastructure, which is already providing performance benefits along the route.

The investments that we are making in the area are not just on the railways. As I am told by many people who live in and around Bristol, it is an exciting time for Bristol and the wider area. There are plans to develop the Bristol Temple Quarter enterprise zone, including Bristol Temple Meads station, for business, housing and education, including a new university campus. That work is progressing and is being led by the West of England Combined Authority and Bristol City Council. The combined authority will also receive £103 million from the Government through the transforming cities fund to transform connectivity in the city region.

On roads, the area has benefited from £36 million through the local highways maintenance challenge fund. Three separate awards provided by the Government, totalling £113 million, have been provided towards the metrobus scheme, which will provide a 50 km bus rapid transit network in the greater Bristol area.

Then, of course, there is MetroWest. The Government continue to be highly supportive of its development and recognise the benefits it will bring to the area. The plan is that MetroWest will help to reduce congestion in the centre of Bristol, get people out of their cars and create a cleaner environment for people in the city with a decrease in carbon emissions. That demonstrates the Government’s commitment to decarbonisation through moving journeys from road to rail and helps to meet our ambitious, legally binding target of net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Darren Jones
 
Does the Minister recognise that the Mayor of Bristol is doing some extraordinarily important work in trying to meet our air pollution targets? As we have been discussing this evening, the delivery of public transport is a vital part of that. Can the Minister commit to continued support from the Department to help us to meet our air pollution targets in Bristol?

Chris Heaton-Harris
 
I do recognise the work of the Mayor of Bristol that the hon. Gentleman details and I can give him that commitment.

Matt western (Warwick and Leamington) (Lab)
 
Bristol and that area is a fabulous part of the country—I used to live there. The Portishead line is a microcosm of the problem in many regions across the country. Does the Minister agree that one of the great challenges, as we have just heard, is that if we are to improve air quality in our urban areas—our city centres and so on ​—improvement in sub-regional transport, as exemplified by this project, is critical? Does he see that as a greater priority than HS2?

Chris Heaton-Harris
 Share
I will deftly pass on answering the last part of the hon. Gentleman’s question, but I do absolutely see that as critical—100%. That is why we stepped in to provide £31.9 million to bridge the funding gap for the Portishead line element of the project after costs increased.

I thank my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset for acknowledging that that support was over and above what was expected from the Government, which I hope shows our commitment to seeing the line reopened. That support is, obviously, subject to my Department receiving a full business case that demonstrates the benefits for passengers and successfully passes through the Department’s rail network enhancements pipeline process, as he described. That is a process, not an excuse to cancel. I assure him that it will be used as it would be for any other scheme.

I am pleased to say, as my right hon. Friend notes, that the business case for the scheme is looking positive. It is currently at the outline business case or design level. Work is under way by North Somerset Council and the West of England Combined Authority to develop the scheme further to a full business case.

Once that work is concluded and the outcomes of the development consent order are known, the business case will be assessed to ensure that it delivers sufficient passenger benefits and offers value for money for the taxpayer, to inform the Department’s final investment decision. That approach will ensure that we are confident in our decision making, and it is in line with the Government’s approach to funding all major improvements to our railways.

My right hon. Friend will be pleased to hear that outline designs for the project are being been completed and feasibility works are under way to look at timetabling and how the new Portishead services will fit around existing train services in Bristol. Network Rail is continuing to develop strategies for the construction and future maintenance of the line. My officials and I will continue to work closely with the West of England Combined Authority and North Somerset Council to support the ​delivery of all elements of MetroWest as quickly as possible and to ensure the best possible outcomes for the Greater Bristol area.

Our transport investment in the Greater Bristol area, and our work with local authorities to improve transport in the area, does not stop there. My Department last year committed to jointly fund the Greater Bristol area rail feasibility study with the combined authority, which will conclude shortly. The purpose of the study is to address transport priorities in the area, assess the feasibility of a number of proposals and support delivery of a local transport network that can be locally run and sustainable.

The study is looking at a wide range of areas such as station improvements, light rail and tram-train options in the Bristol area and a passenger demand study. That is a positive step towards developing a shared long-term vision for transport in the area and determining how best to meet the needs of passengers, the rail industry and all interested stakeholders. We will continue to support local authorities in the area, again because rail in the Bristol area and the west of England is a priority for the Government and the subject of significant investment.

I am aware of the benefits of reopening the railway to Portishead and of the need for an improved local rail service in the area. I look forward to continuing to work with the combined authority and North Somerset Council to support the scheme’s delivery.

My right hon. Friend asked whether other options such as light rail could be considered. No, this is a rail solution—a heavy rail solution. He also mentioned the Sustrans plans for the local area. I met the chief executive officer of Sustrans today, and I look forward to developing all the proposals with that organisation that will get people out of cars and on to bicycles and, we hope, walking as well.

I should conclude, before I am timed out, by thanking everybody who took part in the debate. I thank my right hon. Friend again for securing this debate on the future of Portishead railway. I hope that, like me, he feels it has a very bright future indeed.
Logged
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4616


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #755 on: October 17, 2019, 11:14:38 am »

This is good, and extremely well worked. A bit of reading between the lines:

The first paragraph sets the scene. This has cross-party support at local as well as national level, has the support of the great majority of the local community, and is backed by a tireless community group. Also, Dr Fox himself. Lest we forget, he is properly referred to as the Rt Hon gentleman, reminding us that as a Privy Counsellor, he has the ear of the Queen if push comes to shove.

The next three paragraphs address his party's traditional road-building stance, rubbish the opposition gently, and explain why a Conservative government should align itself with a very expensive public transport project that ends in a Labour-run city.

Paragraph 5 is critical to the whole project. Costs have soared beyond the usual red line for cancellation, but it is still an extremely good project, even if it was approved under the coalition government, and later smiled upon by Chris Grayling. He goes on in the next paragraph to say how generous the government has been, how well the councils have managed the project and what a whopping great BCR it has.
He ends by damning MetroBust with very faint praise.

Up pops Karin Smyth: "Can we have a station at Ashton Gate please?" To which the Doctor replies: "I'm not falling for that one - ask WECA. But I've made a note, and I like Bristol. Hopefully, they will vote Tory next time."

Next the Irish intervention: "Thanks for the billion quid investment, which is why I'm here. Can we have a shiny new monorail system in my village please? And we'll support your next plan?" To which the Doctor says: "All in good time, maybe, but shut up for now. I like railways and public travel generally, but I want to cement the government contribution to the Portishead line, then we'll talk behind closed doors."

Darren Jones next: "Don't forget Henbury! And don't forget which constituency I represent! Or that Bristol has a north-west." The Doctor agrees with him, in a way that isn't exactly agreeing with his point, then gets the discussion back on thread, and starts with the technical stuff. Irksome bureaucracy, but necessary, or every Tom, Dick and Isambard would be building railways all over the place. Then comes a point of information - I didn't know that about the 2 km of non-railway land, nor that North Somerset had potentially delayed the project by buying the trackbed. Is Elfan ap-Rees doing a face-palm and saying "D'oh!" as he reads this, or did the council save it from development?

Two more paragraphs down, the Doctor remembers to mention pollution. You can tell he is old-school (as am I in this regard) because of his mention of CO2 emissions, rather than the trendier "carbon emissions", which I reserved for people throwing buckets of powdered graphite or soot around. Having established his environmental credentials - although he didn't say "sustainable" once - he moves on to quash the fanciful notions of others to pave the route for buses or downgrade to light rail, and begs the minister's confirmation, before throwing in a cyclepath for good measure, and summing up.

If the minister is annoyed at having his post-parliamentary pint delayed by half an hour, he doesn't show it. It gives him the opportunity to get down with da kidz with his new nickname for the local opposition by bigging up the Bristol Massive - although it gets ponced up in translation. Massif Attaque? He then quotes some figures that look short of a zero, and reminds everyone what a wonderful government we have, throwing money at railways like a three-handed lunatic, what with the election coming up, and reminds an adoring public of the...

Kerry McCarthy: "Shut up. The Severn Beach Line could do with a bit more investment too."

The Minister apologises for getting carried away, before carrying on getting carried away, even at one point referring to MetroBust as a "rapid transit network."

Darren Jones: "Don't forget the Mayor!"

Minister: "I had forgot the Mayor."

Matt "Great" Western: "Can I just say that this is the first time I have been on television? Scrap HS2."

Minister: "Bugger off. Yes, we will commit to building the Portishead line, and possibly trams or tram-train in Bristol too, but this is definitely heavy rail. Now - who fancies a pint? I'm spitting feathers."
Logged

Now, please!
chuffed
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1298


View Profile
« Reply #756 on: October 17, 2019, 11:18:56 am »

Spot on and very witty analysis from a very well informed and erudite correspondent, with a wicked sense of humour! Grin
Logged
Red Squirrel
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3250


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #757 on: October 17, 2019, 11:33:42 am »

Quote
Does the Minister recognise that the Mayor of Bristol is doing some extraordinarily important work in trying to meet our air pollution targets?

Hansard's autocorrect obviously doesn't recognise the word 'impotent'...

Logged
johnneyw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1173


Still want to work on the railways when I grow up.


View Profile
« Reply #758 on: October 17, 2019, 12:04:22 pm »

I noted with some disappointment that my local Bristol West MP seems to have not shown up there yesterday. Frankly, I'm not totally surprised at that.  Despite there being several existing and potential MetroWest stops in the constituency, all their flyers that I get through the door give little real indication that my MP treats this as a priority.
Logged

Railway rock n' roll rebel. I once bought a return ticket and didn't go back!
Red Squirrel
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3250


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #759 on: October 17, 2019, 12:23:30 pm »

Well... she asked a question about MetroWest in June 2018.

She's also been trying to get funding for step-free access to Severn Beach line stations, among other things. According to her blog:

Quote
The government cancelled electrification of the train line to Bristol Temple Meads. As a result, polluting diesel trains will still be running into the heart of the city.

This is particularly insulting for people living near the train lines in Lawrence Hill, one of the most deprived parts of Bristol. They had months of disruption and noise from electrification works, but will see no benefit from it.

This morning I asked the Department for Transport whether people in Lawrence Hill will receive any compensation for this inconvenience. The answer showed little understanding of the problem. Watch it here.

Even worse, residents of Lawrence Hill, Easton and Clifton who need step-free access are unlikely to be able to fully use these stations any time soon. I have been pushing Network Rail to grant Access for All funding to improve facilities for wheelchair users, parents with pushchairs and disabled people at Lawrence Hill, Stapleton Road and Clifton Down. These bids were rejected. I have since written to Department for Transport directly to ask this decision to be reconsidered.

I will continue to press the government on this, particularly when it comes to the least well-off parts of my constituency. These areas are most reliant on public transport, so when the system discriminates against some passengers, it seems particularly unfair.

Source: Thangam Debonnaire's blog


Logged
johnneyw
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1173


Still want to work on the railways when I grow up.


View Profile
« Reply #760 on: October 17, 2019, 01:00:58 pm »

Well okay, although that would be the minimum contribution I'd expect for such an important project for Bristol's future.
I know I'm just reading between the lines that I've been fed but I am still left with the impression that my MP is not enthused enough to be amongst those at the forefront of the campaigning.



Edit: Minor sentence correction.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2019, 01:07:42 pm by johnneyw » Logged

Railway rock n' roll rebel. I once bought a return ticket and didn't go back!
TonyK
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4616


The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!


View Profile
« Reply #761 on: October 17, 2019, 01:25:07 pm »

I noted with some disappointment that my local Bristol West MP seems to have not shown up there yesterday. Frankly, I'm not totally surprised at that.  Despite there being several existing and potential MetroWest stops in the constituency, all their flyers that I get through the door give little real indication that my MP treats this as a priority.

Twitter suggests that she was in Bristol, meeting with Lawrence Hill GPs, Thangham style. She and Kerry McCarthy speak with one voice on many local issues. Lawrence Hill is a bit of a Cinderella in Bristol West constituency, so I will assume her meeting was important, and that Kerry spoke for the sisterhood. I can't think what she could have added, in fairness.

Well... she asked a question about MetroWest in June 2018.

She's also been trying to get funding for step-free access to Severn Beach line stations, among other things. According to her blog:

I once helped the TM give a fairly substantial lady, with at least one bad leg and a stick, a bunk-up from the platform to the train at Stapleton Road, then we had to help her down at Lawrence Hill, where the steps are steep. She obviously knew what she was in for, but I agree entirely with step-free access and platforms level with the door being a priority.

Hansard's autocorrect obviously doesn't recognise the word 'impotent'...

It may be that voice recognition software is used. If that is the case, then despite the mishearing of that word, it has come on in leaps and bounds since my former department tried it out some 20 years ago. As is usual there, they dispensed with the human staff before seeing how reliable it was going to be, although I still use it myself occasionally.

That day when the system went live was the last day I ever saw a Thai pissed in the office.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2019, 01:43:11 pm by TonyK » Logged

Now, please!
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 27072



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #762 on: October 22, 2019, 09:38:17 pm »

From the North Somerset Times

Quote
Railway line reopening a Government 'priority' with hopes of ending 'miserable' M5 congestion

The line is due to reopen in 2023 - four years later than scheduled - with North Somerset Council awaiting a Development Consent Order from the Planning Inspectorate.

Dr Fox took the opportunity to emphasise the importance of the £116million scheme to MPs, and to praise the 'dogged support' of campaigners.

He said: "In the mid-1950s, the town had a population of around 9,000, which had risen to some 15,000 by the time I was elected in the early 1990s. The population now stands at around 25,000.

"The increased population in what I described back in 2005 as the most overcrowded cul-de-sac in the country has inevitably put pressure on our road system.

If another 4 years is a "priority", I dread to think what timescales there might be on other projects ...
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Vice Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, on the board of TravelWatch SouthWest and of RailFuture
chuffed
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1298


View Profile
« Reply #763 on: October 22, 2019, 11:58:53 pm »

He could have said JFDI !
Logged
Red Squirrel
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3250


There are some who call me... Tim


View Profile
« Reply #764 on: November 08, 2019, 03:25:58 pm »

Quote
“Nationally significant” rail scheme on track for Portishead
07 Nov 2019, 12:02 pm

Getting the train to Bristol is another step closer for people in Portishead.

The application for a Development Consent Order for the £116m MetroWest phase 1 scheme is being submitted to the Planning Inspectorate by North Somerset Council along with a formal letter of support from West of England Mayor Tim Bowles.

The DCO application seeks powers to build and operate the disused section of railway from Portishead to Pill, gain environmental consent to undertake works to the existing freight railway through the Avon Gorge and obtain powers for the compulsory acquisition of land.

Relaunching train services from Portishead with new stations at Portishead and Pill is a key part of the MetroWest programme of transport improvements across the region being led by the West of England Combined Authority (WECA) and North Somerset Council.

Benefits of the wider MetroWest scheme include:

181,000 fewer car trips in the opening year, increasing to 278,000 fewer car trips a year by 2036
A reduction of 7.5 million car kilometres in the opening year
958,980 passenger trips by rail in the opening year increasing to 1,295,103 passenger trips by 2036
Bringing more than 50,000 people within the immediate catchment of the two new stations at Portishead and Pill
Providing better access to employment and educational opportunities
Upgrading the existing train service at 16 stations across three rail corridors, directly benefiting 180,000 people within a 1km catchment
Creating 514 new direct permanent jobs and temporary jobs during construction
Providing £3 of quantified benefits for every £1 invested to deliver the scheme, putting the scheme in the high value for money category
Enhancing the regional economy by £264m in the first ten years.
Leader of North Somerset Council, Cllr Don Davies, said the council was committed to investing in local infrastructure: “The Portishead line is a nationally significant project that will deliver wide ranging environmental and economic benefits to our region. Once completed, MetroWest Phase 1 will connect an additional 50,000 residents directly to the national rail network and will improve the level of service for a further 180,000 residents on the Severn Beach and Bath corridors.”

Patricia Greer, Chief Executive of the West of England Combined Authority, said: “Reaching this milestone puts us within touching distance of the long awaited re-opening of the Portishead to Bristol line. It is also a significant moment in the wider MetroWest project, which will improve rail services for people right across the West of England.

“We are making major investments through MetroWest to give our region the rail network it deserves. From Severn Beach to Portishead and Henbury to Bath, we will be helping cut congestion, improve air quality and keep people moving. Making MetroWest a reality is only possible thanks to everyone involved working together, from the West of England Combined Authority and North Somerset Council to the Department for Transport and Network Rail.”

The Secretary of State for Transport is expected to make a decision within 18 months.

Subject to final business case approval, construction work is expected to start on the Portishead to Bristol line in December 2021 and take around two years to complete.
Source: North Somerset Council
Logged
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 ... 49 50 [51] 52
  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