THE rail timetable implemented — one might say, imposed — in December, 2008, has diminished the service at Lostock Station. On Tuesday, April 21, between 5 and 6.30, Northern Rail put up two staff members to speak to commuters arriving at Lostock. The two people there were approachable.

But, in my opinion, it is not Northern Rail which is the problem; that company is the victim of the sequence of the extra capacity demands of Virgin at Manchester Piccadilly, the inability of Piccadilly Station to accommodate these, Virgin's success in pushing for more platform space, the consequent timetable changes, apparently implemented from London, the failure of GMPTE to stand up for the feeder services into Piccadilly, or possibly even to spot the potential problem and the failure of any regulator to oversee what was being implemented.

The role of the authorities in putting in place these timetable changes needs to be examined. At the Heaton and Lostock Forum, we were told of similar problems experienced at least a year earlier in a North East conurbation. Why were no lessons learnt in London about this? Did the decision-makers not know, or not care?

Who knew what and when? Did anyone care what happened “out in the sticks”? What is the role/power of GMPTE? What is the role/power of the regulator?

More platforms at Piccadilly would help. There is a mothballed station, Mayfield Station, with four platforms, right next to Piccadilly. Could that be brought back into service to coincide with the availability of new rolling stock? How much would it cost? What is the value of rail infrastructure per person/voter in Greater London compared with that in Greater Manchester?

As far as the capacity of the branch lines into Piccadilly is concerned, we in Bolton need more carriages on existing services, and also more frequent services. Both are constrained by lack of rolling stock. I understand that British rolling stock was sold to New Zealand, where it is working well. Meanwhile, we are told that the UK needs to wait several years for more carriages. How did this happen?

Is anyone willing to answer the questions above?

As far as the “problem” of people wanting a rapid suburban service, with fewer stops, is concerned — has anyone asked them? Within a fairly large tolerance, I would be content for journeys to be a little longer, stopping at more stations on the way (two minutes per stop), if the result was more trains which stopped at Lostock.

Also, one observes the farce of an enlarged car park at Lostock station being opened to coincide with a cut in services for Lostock rail users, some of whom are now using Bolton or Horwich Parkway stations. This does not help in persuading anyone that this debacle is in some way planned for the greater good of the network, let alone the people of Bolton.

Margaret Collier Bolton