Read the article. Two quotes in the article

"But as the number of prescriptions is increasing, the overall cost is falling, largely as a result of more generic drugs being given to patients, rather than brand-name equivalents."

and by Professor Roger Walker, Wales’ chief pharmaceutical officer,

“Paracetamol is a highly effective treatment for pain resulting from a range of both acute and chronic illnesses. It is often used in older patients for managing chronic pain associated with conditions like osteoarthritis.

“In some circumstances the patient may require a thorough clinical examination before a diagnosis is reached and paracetamol prescribed. This is not an unnecessary or avoidable cost regardless of whether the patient receives an expensive medicine or paracetamol.

“Likewise the patient may require careful counselling from their pharmacist regardless of the cost of the medicine.

“The majority of prescriptions for paracetamol are for repeat supplies and to include the cost of a GP appointment in this is inappropriate."

I have a relative who is being prescribed paracetamol along with about 15 other drugs for chronic conditions. The vast majority of prescriptions are for such chronic ongoing conditions and are not for your average joe trying to save 15p! Think beyond the headline.

Jeremy

I've highlighted the bit in bold that I think puts a new slant on what you may think I was trying to say. In other words, I am talking about when no other drugs are prescribed by doctors, just paracetamol on its own.

Who is this Jantra mug?
Total chump.
Northside Manchester is capital of culture.
Pathetic inept opinion.
If his economics are as misleading as his art.
Dismissed, your fired, shown the door.
big up appeasement
let the dawg sizzle
maybe Snoop will catch you in the boiler house one night.
Ymlaen

why a chump? because my views are different than yours. how mature.


please do not tell me you are suggesting Cardiff is the equivalent of M/cr in terms of culture?

statement of fact or your opinion?


i'm from the austrian school. think of Switzerland, Hong Kong, Norway then compare that to the trotskyist nations of Cuba and the Stalinist North korea. then ask yourself where would you prefer to live?


really? i reckon I'll still be posting here for a lot longer yet


WTF

Jantra compares Manchester with London - yeah right.
Jantra needs to spend more time with his kids and less time in cyber space.

We have a better art gallery than manchester, a better opera, a better castle, a better cathedral, bigger media industry, more famous nightlife, TWO indigenous languages, a nascent parliament, the home of our national football and rugby teams, a place where visitors feel safe, cardiff singer of the world. Manchester has Oasis(gone), the hacienda(gone), New Order (only two good tunes) and Coronation St, how fantastic!. We are a capital city whereas Manchester is an ugly place, ugly women, terrible haircuts. Look at the UK cities that britons want to visit and Liverpool is above Manchester! The main reason foreign visitors go to Mancland is because it has the Uks third biggest airport. If it had Cardiff's airport it would be as visited as Hull or Stoke. A deeply unpleasant place with none of the charm of Liverpool, Newcastle or our own wonderful CARDIFF!
http://www.travelodge.co.uk/press_releases/press_release.php?id=446

The first two, not at all; for a start I can't say I share much love for Manchester or marriage... or kids quite frankly! Plus a check of IP addresses would reveal we're two separate people. The third? While it was only recently that I discovered this forum and as someone who has until now virtually read rather than written, I can't say it's that either. It must be said however that posts by Jantra as well as those by every other poster on this forum have largely been amiable or at least interesting and worth reading; although i'm not sure I can say that extends to you or, assuming they're a different person, Ci Snoop.

It's fine to disagree and have a debate but quite frankly you're actually being quite nasty, nonsensical as well as overly petty. If you can't be civil, regardless of how others are acting, then don't bother.

PS Paragraphs are not your enemy.

Well you've entered the fray now with your own inimitable style and nonsensical name. I hope to cross swords with you, I have no doubt whatsoever that your antagonism towards me springs from some unconscious foible of yours that you are unlikely ever to understand, transcend or address.
PS Paragraphs are your enemy, your prose has the phrasing of Spooner and the cadence of a wounded Booby in mating season.

Jantra, I believe that before you have mentioned that we cannot compare Wales to countries such as Norway because of their oil wealth. Changed your tune rather quickly dear boy

How so? If you are referencing my statement regarding economic models that's altogether different. Saying wales could never emulate Norway due to norways oil reserves is not mutually exclusive with the statement that nations that have adopted the Austrian school of thought have tended to do better than those who have adopted a monetarist or dare I say it a Keynesian approach.

As always, you're looking for an argument that just isn't there.

I don't know where to start with this post Mr Ad hominem i really don't. Cardiff is a good city, it has lots to offer and does punch above its weight compared to similar sized cities, that is for sure. Let us not kid ourselves that Cardiff is actually more than it is.

have you been to the Lowry?



bigger media industry[/quote]
utter bollocks, try media city in Salford quays


give over you plonker. Manchester's nightlife is far more well known that anything Faliraki in the rain can throw up.


you can only have one indigenous language. But even if you could have two, you'll appreciate English originated in England and not Cardiff


corrected for you


Wow, fancy that in a capital city. manchester has:

Manchester United (the biggest club in the world)
Manchester City (the richest club in the world)
Oldham
Wigan
Bury
Rochdale
Stockport
Bolton

thats just football! football in Manchester dwarfs all other sports in Wales combined.



have you ever been out in M/cr, its perfeectly safe.


fair enough


they were london - work out what that means before you go on about they were from Burnage


M/cr has far more to offer than that.


once again corrected for you


corrected once again


it is very industrial, no surprise, given its heritage. It also has areas that Cardiff and Wales could only dream of, both in the city centre and in the suburbs.


careful now, you're just trying to be confrontational


aw bless, did youth fashion pass you by


of course it is. Mcr is the most subscribed university city in the UK, why is that? its a great place to be that is why. It has an eclectic life that is for sure, for students, far artisans, for the gay community, Mcr has it all. It has the biggest entrance to a china town outside of the USA.


an airport that is a distance dream for us Welsh. its the thrid biggest due to commerce, industry and agglomeration


but it has ringway, because ringway is a requirement for a city that is known worldwide


honestlyl, have you ever been there. to suggest M/cr has no culture...how about the arts, science and industry (the home to the industrial revolution), its contribution to modern science (it is the biggest research university by far), it has around 60k student IIRC, it certainly is the largest university in the UK - there is a reason for that.

to suggest Cardiff is better than M/cr is nonsense. i'm proud of Cardiff, i sing its praises and we have lots going for us, but honestly, we as a city and a nation have a long way to go before we can even begin to emulate what M/cr has provided. talk about delusions of grandeur.

Born grew up in Cardiff, studied and lived in Manchester and elswhere... now back in Cardiff.

Was in Manc on weekend - it is a fabulous, vibrant and demographically & culturally diverse city region. Royal Exchange, Lowry, Northern Qtr, Media City, Manchester Gallery, Opera, Cornerhouse, Museum of Science and Industry, University, etc, etc Top 2 Prem clubs; all in all a well connected vibrant and major European City.

I like Cardiff - I like Manchester. Its not a bun fight?

Machester

rutherford split the atom
the worlds first computer
the worlds first inudstrialised city
home of the worlds most famous football team
the halle orchestra
the lowry arts centre
more overseas visitors than anywhere except london / Edinburgh
more UK visitors than everywhere except London
a fantastic nightlife, second to none
a music scene second to none (even the Byrds sang about Mcr on 8 miles high)

Cardiff is good, it really does punch above its weight, but really, you need to get out and visit places before adding comment. you just sound parochial

no its not. i just happen to like Mcr and because it is jantra that likes mcr, Mr Ad Hominem takes umbrage and Mcr becomes his new bete noir

I lived in Haslingden for over a decade, and in Hazel Grove for 6 years, so I know Manchester, and I don't like it. The crime rate and gang culture is quite unpleasant. Being in a bowl facing west, it also rains a lot, whereas Cardiff is in the rain shadow of the hills to north a.nd west. Yes, I have been to the Lowry. Have you been to the National Museum of Art? The collection of art at the Lowry doesn't reallystand up to that at our massively undervalued gallery, and if you knew the slightest thing about art you would recognise that. Cardiff has the biggest media industry outside London
http://www.ukstudy.com/destinations/cardiff/

Manchester is not the biggest research university, what made you think that? According to this it's ranked 6th for research behind those lesser lights of Oxford and Cambridge http://www.thecompleteuniversityguide.co.uk/league-tables/rankings
Do you think that anyone from this forum
http://www.manchester-forum.co.uk/
posts "we really are second rate in Manchester, the local poiticians and business people are useless, we aren't doing as well as [insert name of city here]?
Of course they don't, because it would wind people up. And Jantra, talking about yourself (or an alter-ego) in the third person is a sign that you have enormous psychiatric problems. A personality disorder. If you don't believe me Google it. Enjoy your meds, you need them.

Gents, this thread is now off the off topic scale!!

In an effort to try and get this topic back on track and prevent the forum hitting the buffers...

"The Railways Act 2005 gave the Welsh Assembly Government responsibility for passenger rail services in Wales and Borders from April 2006, with the power to specify the services and regulated fares for all trains that run within Wales, or to and from Wales, under the Wales and Borders franchise. The Act also gives the Assembly Government powers to fund the improvement of rail services where this is to the benefit of Wales. In addition, the Welsh Assembly Government has powers to fund rail freight schemes that transfer freight from road to rail and deliver environmental benefits, under the Freight Facilities Grant scheme. However, the Welsh Assembly Government is not responsible for the operation, maintenance or renewal of the railway infrastructure. This is the responsibility of Network Rail which is funded largely through access charges and DfT grants in England and Wales."

http://wales.gov.uk/docs/det/publications/070715wrpaexsumen.pdf

Mr Ad Hominem

M/cr University receives the 2nd highest research grant funding in the UK after Oxford. It comes ahead of Cambridge and UCL. I have no idea how your list is compiled or what is being measured - however I am basing my assertion on research grants and endowments.

As others say, this is off topic. you dislike M/cr, you seem to think that Cardiff is comprable or even better. I disagree, lets leave it there.

Barden

how does WG go about transferring freight from road to rail (even light rail), if it cannot develop infrastructure. It seems as if with that statement WG are caught between a rock and a hard place?

also, if NR are responsible for the network, how did WG manage to open up the Ebbw Vale and Rhoose lines?

NR are still responsible for all UK track/maint, etc. How this is specified and funded differs across the UK though.

The 2005 act did enable the WG to fund enhancement schemes. However this is still a non devolved matter and no block grant transfer for the responsibility was put in place. So the VoG line and EV line was funded from block grant funds that would otherwise be spent on Health, Education, etc. So whilst £20~£50M schemes are in theory possible to fund by WG; schemese like the £300M VLE are really only affordable from a DfT purse - and will stay as such until powers and funding for this are devolved to WG ( as they were to Scotland in 2005)

You asked this question months ago and I answered it. The EV line was paid for by Obj.1 EU funding and CORUS legacy funding, matched by WAG funding. The VOG line was paid for by WAG and the VOG council out of the VOG's transport budget and the WAG's devolved GENERAL transport budget that through parsimony they were able to use to fund these SMALL schemes. Rail infrastructure has not been devolved to the WG. Network Rail's operations for Wales were hived off in the autumn to complement the slightly less recent creation of an all-Wales franchise. We have NEVER had a proportion of the England and Wales rail infrastructure budget devolved.

M you beat me to it

Mr Ad hominem

firstly, if I asked it months ago then I don't remember it. This does not infer in any way that you did not answer it, just that i don't remember it.

Secondly, I have asked several times in this thread for someone to clarify what 'infrastructure' actually meant, given the EV, CWL line being opened by WG.

Rather than just answer the question, we ge your usual responses which includes ad hominem attacks, vitriol, bile, bilge...all of which are emetic and quite frankly necrotic.

finally, thanks for finally taking the time out to answer my question.

just out of curiosity, how many miles of electrified rail does Devon, Cornwall, Dorest or Cumbria have?

Cumbria has the West coast mainline. Dorset has the line electrified to Bournemouth and Weymouth. There are no major conurbations or metro areas in devon and cornwall, and the existing rail infrastructure (and even the historical one) is nowhere near as extensive as in South Wales. Look at a map of Britain's network pre-Beeching.
http://www.joyce.whitchurch.btinternet.co.uk/maps/BR1961c.jpg

cumbria only has the mainline because its on the mainline. surely you can see that.

the point was that when you are on the periphary, as we are in Wales, then we cannot expect as much infrastructure expenditure compared to the more populous areas of the UK.

I wonder whether those in the highlands and islands look at Wales with envy with our one motorway and international airport?


it is all relative.

another question if i may...what benefits will be garnered by electrifying the valleys lines or the GWR line, other than kudos?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/5892821/Electrified-rail-network-the-benefits.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_electrification_system

Scroll down to.the World Electrification section in the Wiki.article for a list of the benefits. A quarter of the world's rail network is electrified, and half of all rail traffic is powered by.electricity. Considering Wales had the world's first passenger rail line:
http://www.welshwales.co.uk/mumbles_railway_swansea.htm
And the world's first steam locomotion railway:
http://www.irsociety.co.uk/Archives/59/Penydarren.htm

we are lagging somewhat, and Westminster is to blame.

Knowing what I know, the BCR for electrifying the entire SW Rail network (VLE and GWML to Swansea) has a BCR well in excess of that calculated for HS2 - which, according to the FT this AM, has been adjusted down by the DfT to just 1.2:1

Not just Kudos( of which there will be some to dish out!) but real measurable operational and economic benefits.

fancy that, Mr A reads the right of centre telegraph.

The whole left/right paradigm is designed to enslave people, just like capitalism and socialism are. Political parties are always infiltrated by military or economic interest groups. There is no perfect way to run or inhabit the world given that today's world is already history by tomorrow. Anyone who thinks that they have the answer is kidding themselves. I just try to be mindful and live in the now.

The main benefits of electrification are;

* The trains are cheaper to run - there is no heavy fuel tank to cart around
* Lighter trains = less damage to rails, therefore cheaper maintenance costs
* Faster acceleration which makes for quicker journey times (this is important where stations are close together like the Valley lines)
* No local pollution

New trains which aren't 30 year old bus bodies on wheels would also be a massive step forward

It's reckoned that the GWML electrification will pay for itself in costs savings in 40 years so I guess a similar story for the Valleys.

you are either organ morgan or hovis presley. no one else writes with such eloquence - or such left of field thinking

Jantra, I am not one of your CCMB adversaries. If I followed you onto that board or vice versa that would make me a Stalker (incidentally one of the few decent people in the public eye to come out of Manchester). I am happy to stick to Cardiff stuff BUT there is a story in the Daily Fail today about the problems the precious BBC staff are having with crime at Media City in Salford. I want to move to Pembrokeshire and feel safe. UK cities are rough, violent places.

Cardiff is in the UK, Cardiff is a city. do you feel safe in Cardiff?

I am concerned for you, i'd not want to think of you feeling vulnerable

Sorry to go off topic but i think while the BBC cardiff bay maybe bigger then BBC at MediaCity in Manchester. MediaCity Manchester offers alot more then just the BBC.
The current development is only 36 acre's of the 200 acre site with future expantion depending on something to do with the railway i think. But there is also ITV there ( coronation street ) and about 40 other smaller media companies i believe.
Also in 2010 the BBC announced the breakfast program would move there. It's claimed this will create 10k of jobs and cost £1 billion for the move.
Anyway back on subject.
I can't remember much about the last time i traveled by rail or the diffrence's between electric and diesel engines. But i presume electric engines would reduce both air and noise pollution? If so with the valley services travelling so close to homes and buisnesses it could benefit atleast 1 million people.

Unless the electricity is generated by "green" methods eg wind hydro or tidal then the pollution is displaced to where the electricity is generated. However removing diesel pollution in urban areas is definitly a big plus and should have medical/cost benefits in itself.

I would also expect a reduction in noise pollution, no diesel thud when stationery but the electric trains do have higher pitch whine when accelerating. But as the diesel has a deeper note I would expect the noise will not be carried as far.

Like you I think the benefits to over a million people should be considerable and should be apparent in any cost benefit analysis.

I work for a company based in Port Talbot that exports millions of pounds worth of freight by rail every week.
Tata would become more efficient and competitive with electrified line.
As would all rail services in Wales.
We need an agreement like the Scots.

the cynic in me says tata would become more competitive if they moved to poland

anyway, thanks one and all for providing me with reasons why trains are good for the economy. i'm not sure I agree with all of them, as really an economy only grows when you are productive....needing less fuel means the fuel companies lose out by an equal amount to the gains made by the train operators so its zero sum. the only real benefit would be shorter journey times but in this day of laptops and mobile telephony being on a train in no longer lost business.

are there any other ways electrified trains add productivity to the economy?

Quicker journey times will make the area accessible to a greater number of people which can only be a good thing in terms of attracting investment to the area. Also, I think perception and image play a significant role - if we have modern infrastructure this should improve the perception/image of south Wales.

I really doubt knocking ten minutes off the journey time (from Paddington) will add any increase to inward investment - not in this day of communication.

Its all about kudos (the perception/image), there's not much else to it.

I agree, its all about perceptions. 10 min is nothing. But an electric train! Gosh - Golly!

If a train company can carry additional passengers, with faster journey times at a lower cost than previously that would seem to be productive.

Any arguement you have against investing in rail would seem to be the same arguement against investing in roads such as the M4 which Jantra has supported.

But if you really believe it is not productive to invest in rail HS2 would be a better target.

The rail infrastructure on the Great Western is at the terminal end of its working life, it has to be replaced. Any replacement infrastructure will have a life of 50 years, would you like to take a punt on the cost of diesel even 10 years hence or worse whether it will even be as available. Of course if time is not an issue lets go back to steam! That will improve the travellers enviroment in the Severn Tunnel.

PS if you commute to Bristol on the train from Cardiff you spend over 1 whole day (24 hours) in the Severn Tunnel.

From reading up on the plan to electrify The northern Hub.

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/6472.aspx

It shows not only would there be a reduction in travel times but also an increase in the amount of trains availble.
Replacing diesel trains would cut carbon emissions by 75,000 tonnes a year. Although from somewhere else i read electric trains use more energy then diesel but any polution generated could be hundreds of miles away.

However reading this story i find concerning.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1241318/BREAKING-NEWS-Hundreds-stranded-Eurostar-train-breaks-Channel-Tunnel-again.html

Is the snow in the valley's the right type!!!

Jefferson

Thanks for the links. I still don't (fully) buy in to the economic benefits argument - perhaps Cambo/Jeremy can assess the following and explain if my thought processes are incorrect:-

Lower train carbon emissions, whilst good for the environment, results in the exhausts of fuel combustion increasing at the electricity power stations. I am not sure whether this is a zero sum game or not.

Lower fuel costs for the train companies since they are buying less fuel. The benefit for the train company is offset by the lack of turnover from the fuel supplier so again this is a zero sum affair. Since most petrochemicals are based offshore, the actual impact is going to be negative in this respect as the turnover may not be subject to UK corporation tax but the cost to the train operator may be subject to corporation tax relief! The same applies to maintenance costs: lower costs for the train operators means lost business for the maintenance contractors.

The journey times may decrease from say Cardiff - Paddington by ten minutes but given the connectivity we have today will this really mean more business opportunities? Businesses are cutting their travel costs considerably. 10 years ago a well known UK high street bank used to apply a standard rate of 15% for Travel to all projects, nowadays this is more like 5% with travel only being permitted in two of the four weeks of each month and even then only if telecommunication cannot be used. I truly doubt whether saying we are 10 minutes nearer Paddington will have any impact. What may have an impact is a direct link to Heathrow!

Noise pollution - or lack thereof - is obviously a win. But having lived next to a train line, I'd say most poeple would just get used to it after living there for a short period of time.

My concern is that some people see electrification of the Valleys and GWR lines as going to provide some major economic impetus but outside of the initial investment I cannot see how, in today's world, such investment will provide long term economic benefits. This does not mean we should not do it as infrastructure should be upgraded, just that it may not be the panacea some are hoping for. I view the following

GDP = private consumption + investment + government spending + (exports - imports)

if we assume all other things being equal in the Welsh context, then investment should see a rise in GDP. However, my concern is that the investment will create jobs which will then create a rise in "imports" from England for goods and services that we Welsh require but do not produce our self. So whilst the Welsh economy may have a shot in the arm with the investment in infrastructure, we need to make sure that money stays in Wales by spending that money on Welsh product further stimulating demand in the Welsh economy. Given the nature of how our economy is so intrinsically linked with England's', this is going to be a difficult task to achieve.

Currently First Great Western. Rolling stock has 117 British Rail Class 43 (HST) or intercity 125. These were built by BREL from 1975 to 1982.
In December 2005, First Great Western. announced that all its Class 43 power cars would receive the new MTU V16 4000 engine. The MTU engine offers improvements over the existing Paxman 12RP200 'Valenta' engines, with reduced noise, smoke and exhaust emissions, improved reliability and fuel efficiency.
But i wonder with the advancements in regenerative braking within the last few years if any of the services First great Western or the Valley lines use this technology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regenerative_brake
There may well be other energy saveing or other reasons to convert to electricity i don't know.

The benefits of rail electrification have been listed in other posts above. Electrification has been adopted by most countries in the world as soon as they could afford it, many in the 19th century. All of the world's great cities have one or more of these:
A monorail/driverless overhead train system
A tram system
An underground rail network
An overground metro rail network serving suburbia
An overground express commuter network
Connection to an inter-city rail network, connecting it with the other major cities within the nation.
A super High-speed continental rail station.

London has all of the above, all electrified. Most cities in western Europe have at least one of the above, including much smaller cities like Grenoble, which opened a tram system in 1987, and the city of Jaen in southern Spain which completed a tram system last year. Electrification of railways is a "no brainer", so anyone questioning its value would do well to consider why every rich city and nation has invested heavily in this technology for the past 150 years.

I'd say kudos more than anything Mr Appeasement, not a lot more than that really. a modern vibrant city will have an electric transport infrastructure. its about perception...


edit: i suppose even if the economic benefit is shifted from the fuel suppliers to the train operators by lower fuel bills, this benefits the customer by (hopefully) lower ticket costs. however, this is not an economic benefit as its simply taking money that would have gone to the fuel supplier and passing it to the consumer / train operator.

still, better in the hands of the consumer than the fuel oligarchs

They'll charge what ever they want unfortunately. Fuel costs have nothing to do with it. Compare metro prices for Rome, Barcelona and London for example.

Single ticket in Rome 1€
Single ticket in Barcelona 80€
Single ticket in London £1

London has more tourists and it has a bigger population catchment than Barcelona and Rome combined.

Take the news that the track from Queens Street station to the Bay is the most expensive in Wales gives the impression that they will charge what ever the hell they want. Although Queens Street - Bay line is diesel and the above metros are all electric.

I'm not sure which single ticket in London is £1, if you're talking tube the cheapest Oyster fare is £2.20 single, £4.30 cash. Trains vary but nothing is £1!

not a bad article that sums up a few key issues, an imagikne if anything costs are the same if not widening to favour electric;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/5892821/Electrified-rail-network-the-benefits.html

on the valleys line the increased acceleration of electric trains will make a big difference in a variety of ways. Its not about perception unless you want to continue a stupid debate, cost beenefit ratio maybe, but not perception.

Eric

Why so terse? I'm asking a genuine question about what the economic benefits are? this far all that has been stated are lower fuel costs which transfer value from fuel suppliers to train operators and customers, lower train emissions transferred to power statiOns, lower noise and shorter times. The last is debatable whether it truly adds value given today's communication.

There must be some real tangible benefits otherwise why would governments do it?