|
The following appeared in todays "Echo"
No substance to ‘bus only’ fears
I am aware that troubling letters have appeared recently in the Echo regarding plans to make Cowbridge Road East bus only, or one way systems, supposedly in line with the emerging deposit LDP “local plan” documents.
I want to start by saying that these statements are mistaken and inaccurate. Also, I would like to clearly outline the council’s position and allay any such concerns for residents and local business interests.
Overall, relating to the wider transport plans for a potential rapid transit (tram/bus) link to the city centre, I can categorically and unequivocally stipulate that there are currently no definitive proposals on the table at present.
Indeed the options presented in the LDP evidence have no formal status as development proposals and consequently, therefore, there is no clear evidence to support a specific option recommendation.
Indeed, the options do not indicate any policy steer on route alignments or transport mode options that could be proposed.
In sum, therefore, a very significant amount of study and feasibility work is still required before proposals could be presented to the council and, in this context, it is crucial for the local community to understand there is no clear evidence to support any specific option proposal.
However, to clarify the position further we are confident that it is possible to categorically rule out in future any proposals for a bus only use along Cowbridge Road East.
Also, we are able to rule out in future any proposals to introduce large scale one-way circulation traffic proposals in this area, as well. We are able to say this because we are confident that to ensure a prosperous and welcoming environment for those using and living in the area such options would be detrimental.
Overall, the council is committed to improving these important local neighbourhood centres, to make them more accessible, nicer and more welcoming places to shop and visit.
We have an ongoing programme of seeking to invest in these centres and make improvements where we can.
In view of this we are pleased to be able to put local residents’ minds at rest by categorically denying any substance to these unnecessary and totally unfounded claims.
Ramesh Patel
Cardiff county councillor for Canton Ward and cabinet member for strategic planning, transport & highways
As I read it Councillor Patel is effectively saying that the transport options in the LDP aren't worth the paper they are printed on, which corresponds with the comment made to me by a council official at an LDP "consultation" session. It also appears to categorically rule out the one way
and bus only options mooted for Cowbridge Road East, in which case why are they even in the LDP documentation?
However is this really the case? There are a lot of politicians weasel words and careful phrasing in this letter (.... currently no definitive proposals on the table at present.)
It is no wonder that people have so little faith in the LDP process.
Good to hear that buses don't form the spine of the west Cardiff transport plans, this does sound a bit wishy washy though and does suggest we're not even a short distance down the road (rail?) towards the Metro.
I assume today's pic of the day is one of the options being discussed
What is the point of the LDP? this patel guy doesn;t have a clue? what a poorly written letter, why have an LDP. if they are not going to use it?
I am going to spend all my time planning to build a snow dome, not really going to happen it's only written on paper!
Cllr Patel can huff and puff all he wants to.
The simple fact is that a bus corridor along Cowbridge Rd East is one of the three options for the 'north west corridor' in the Metro plans. True, it may only have been included to 'make up the numbers' and evidence suggests that Tram/Train will be the preferred option but while the plans remain on the table Cllr Patel can hardly complain if his political opponants use them against him.
did anyone else see the subsidy amounts this week - 9.33 a journey for rail journeys in wales. Its unsustainable, There is no chance of any type of metro system. a slow build up of news stations, tweaks here and there at best.
a tram has no chance whatever.
we need some realism.
the metro plan was drawn up and gathered support and had no fundamental finance in it.
It doesn't surprise me that the subsidy is do high. We have a geographic spread the size of Wales with 3m paying passengers yet places like greater Manchester or Birmingham have to fund the same sort of pax numbers over a much smaller geographic area. This is why Cardiff needs to be allowed to grow.
our trains being fully reliant on diesel also means that they are going to be more expensive than other parts of the UK. England has more electric trains and more people.
It could also show that Wales is more car reliant. Train times in Wales are dreadfully slow. It takes about twice as long to get from Carmarthen to Cardiff by train than by car and the same can be said for some of the Valleys trains.
The privatisation of the railways has been a complete disaster.
What has privatisation got to do with it? Wales just doesn't have enough critical mass
Quoting what the rail union said. It's hardly been a success.
Is there actually such a thing?
Hang on - Wales effectively has two rail networks - the Valleys services centred on Cardiff - and the mainly rural services covering the rest. It is the rural network which requires huge subsidies as it does not and can not reach a critical mass.
But the Valleys network has a more significant mass and with growing usage effectively cross subsidises the rural network. I would suggest splitting the Wales & Borders network into two as it would help make a clearer case for Cardiff Metro.
I am not suggesting that rural network should be abandoned, only that we should better visibility of its costs.
Exactly right. I should imagine at the subsidy on lines west of Carmarthen, the HOW line and the Cambrian and Cambrian Coast lines are pretty hefty. There are good social and economic reasons for keeping those lines open but they must skew the overall numbers.
Of course you make a valid point but the welsh is a single franchise so all subsidies have to be considered as one
used to do a lot of work in the rail industry and yes some of the rural routes have a slightly higher subsidy, but not as much as you would think due to frequency of service etc.
the only route that came close to making money when it was devolved was Cardiff Manchester, nothing else made money including the valley lines.
the costs of running train services really would make your eyes water.
This illustrates the sinister trend of transferring wealth by stealth and by compulsion.
Monopoly private employers and the public sector , both of which are heavily unionised, are using their power to transfer wealth to those who work there. Both in the form of pay ( the £40k pa train driver, the £250k pa vice chancellors etc etc) but also pensions.
This is, perhaps, most vividly illustrated by pensions. Someone who does not enjoy a public sector pension tries to save money for his retirement ......only to find he is forced ( that's forced) to hand over that money to pay , instead, for the retirement of people in the public sector who are no more deserving of it than he is himself. And it's HIS money. HE earn't it by his own hard work. But the result is he lives in poverty in retirement whilst the person he has been forced to hand his money to enjoys a relatively comfortable time.
It's a huge injustice, and I'm very surprised that there is not more outrage out there. Perhaps that's due to ignorance. Let's see how much public sector workers would have to save if pensions were on a level playing field, shall we........... ?
To get a retirement income of only £2,900 p.a index linked at age 60 the public sector worker would have had to have SAVED OUT OF HIS OWN INCOME about £100,000. So the train driver, who will retire on, say, £30k pa would have had to have SAVED over £1 million pounds to get that ( i.e. on top of his mortgage, kids, car bills etc). The G.P. retiring on £75,000 pa would have had to have saved over £2.5 million. .
The amounts are staggering. The reality is that neither of them could have done it.
There is pension apartheid in the UK. It's wrong.
it gets worse URBANO. whilst everyone else has to work until 65 or beyond there are some who think they should be able to retire at 60 (or even 55) and draw their pensions in full. The pension apartheid is very much a case of public sector / private monopoly versus everyone else and it really is a huge transfer of wealth without justification.
You're right, of course, on the age point.
Which makes it even worse,unjust and scandalous.
And it will be interesting to see what response, if any, we get from those on this forum who delight in giving you a hard time for daring to point out some economic home truths. I suspect a lot of them simply don't understand the economic realities of pensions.
Bit quiet so far.
Was only winding you up, Jantra.
And as for pensions, it seems that I'll be working until I'm 70 the way things are going. Gordon Brown has a lot to answer for.
Strangely quiet still, isn't it?!
Still nothing,Jantra. Strangely quiet aren't they?!
What's all that supposed to mean? Do you understand it, Jantra?
Jantard
as always, your posts are colourful and descriptive but as usual a little way off the mark. Public sector pensions are paid for by current year taxation other than the LGPS schemes which are supposedly funded but still provide a final salary annuity. That means that pensions are paid by those who weren't recipients of the services provided by the pensioners. Why should I pay tax today to pay the pension of a public sector worker who worked yesterday? I want my taxes spent on services today not shoring up yesterday's pension deficit.
why should a doctor retire at 60 on 60k per annum which costs the taxpayer £1.5-£2m over the retirement? why should everyone else have to work to 65 and beyond and not afford their own pensions because they are so highly taxed to fund the bullet proof public sector pensions? The public sector is over staffed as it is with 5.5m people currently working in it - it should really be around 3m if we were to match the Germans in efficiency and productivity. That means we can't all work for the state as the state doesn't have the jobs and the state is certainly not the best at delivering what the people need.
Not so sure, Jantra. Seems the most likely explanation, as I can't understand a word of it.
To clarify.
Why should private sector taxpayers struggling to fund their pension and facing poverty in retirement be forced to hand over £2.5m ( TWO AND A HALF MILLION POUNDS) to fund a doctor's (lavish)retirement?
Why the apartheid?
Why not a level playing field?
Still nothing,Jantra!
Still nothing....
Just to remind everyone, the questions are:
Why should private sector taxpayers struggling to fund their pension and facing poverty in retirement be forced to hand over £2.5m ( TWO AND A HALF MILLION POUNDS) to fund a doctor's (lavish)retirement?
Why the apartheid?
Why not a level playing field?
CARDIFFWALESMAP
- FORUM |