The high level talks about Bolton's 'cattle truck' trains that the government doesn't want you to know about - because 'it's a serious meeting'

The Bolton News: A crowded Bolton train A crowded Bolton train

BOLTON’S three MPs will take part in a meeting with the Department for Transport to look at overcrowding on the town’s trains — but The Bolton News has been banned from attending.

We have been campaigning since December for transport bosses to drastically improve our “cattle truck” trains after operators announced they were axing services and reducing the number of carriages during peak hours.

Bolton MPs David Crausby, Julie Hilling and Yasmin Qureshi have secured a meeting with Secretary of State for Transport, Patrick McLoughlin, on March 5 to discuss whether it would be possible to install more carriages on the lines.

But after Mr Crausby requested that The Bolton News be allowed to report on the meeting, the DfT said that we would not be allowed in.

A DfT spokesman said: “This is a serious meeting to discuss and work through transport issues with operators, the local transport authorities and MPs, not a press conference.

“Decisions or policy developments that arise about local services at Bolton will of course be announced publicly, including through the local media.”

Our Let’s Get Back on Track campaign — which has collected almost 1,000 signatures and hundreds of horror stories from fed-up commuters — has brought the issue of overcrowding into the spotlight.


MORE:


Over the past three months we have met with train operators, attracted the backing of Bolton’s top politicians and even raised the problem with Prime Minister David Cameron — who promised to look into the issue.

But after speaking to the DfT the office remained defiant that press should not be allowed to report on the decisions being made for Bolton residents.

Mr Crausby said he was flabbergasted about why The Bolton News was not given permission to attend.

He said: “The Department for Transport told me it would be more constructive with just the MPs.

“I don’t think it’s fair. I think in this modern age of open government I really don’t see why The Bolton News — having launched the campaign and having secured a promise from the PM that he would do something about it — can’t be there.

“The Bolton News should be entitled to see what action is taking place.”

Now, we need your help.

We need to collect as many signatures as we can ahead of the March 5 meeting so that our MPs can make sure the voice of Bolton train users is heard.

They will also raise the petition in parliament, before bringing into the steps of Number 10 Downing Street.

To sign the petition, call into our town centre offices or download your own copy and collect signatures.

People can also sign an online petition on our website here.

Forms can be picked up from The Bolton News office in the Wellsprings building next to the town hall.

Please return completed petitions to Let’s Get Back On Track, Editorial Department, The Bolton News, The Wellsprings, Civic Centre, Bolton, BL1 1AR.

If you would like to have a petition in your shop, call 01204 537239.

Comments (52)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:01pm Wed 19 Feb 14

cliff4treasurer says...

They probably knew the reporting would have been of a poor standard perhaps.
They probably knew the reporting would have been of a poor standard perhaps. cliff4treasurer
  • Score: 4

1:08pm Wed 19 Feb 14

boltonchap says...

Why bother trying BN? All you usually do is reprint press releases.
Why bother trying BN? All you usually do is reprint press releases. boltonchap
  • Score: 8

1:10pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Old Boltonian says...

Do we really expect these sneering toff Tories to take any notice at all of us or our MPs? They regard us with a mixture of anger and contempt, disbelieving that we don't vote Tory up here . That's why we get the crumbs from the Home Counties table, at best. These talks will come to nothing, as usual. Mind you, if we were some nice little Tory town in the South ( list any from scores) we'd get action and better infrastructure over night. Just look at the money being poured into the South now the floods have affected the Tory voters. Roll on 2015.
Do we really expect these sneering toff Tories to take any notice at all of us or our MPs? They regard us with a mixture of anger and contempt, disbelieving that we don't vote Tory up here . That's why we get the crumbs from the Home Counties table, at best. These talks will come to nothing, as usual. Mind you, if we were some nice little Tory town in the South ( list any from scores) we'd get action and better infrastructure over night. Just look at the money being poured into the South now the floods have affected the Tory voters. Roll on 2015. Old Boltonian
  • Score: 16

1:10pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Lee3695 says...

I attend a number of meetings on a daily basis and can understand why the DfT may be reluctant to disclose the detailed discussions that take place. However, as a rail commuter and someone who is going to have to live with the outcome of whatever these politicians and the DfT come up with and probably finance it as well, I do think it is in the DfT's interests to allow the discussions to be reported. The TfGM Metrolink and Rail commitee report into this issue acknowledges commuters along the Bolton line (yes there are some commuters who begin their journeys outside of Bolton), will be subject to a reduction in service levels in order to improve long-distance services. No suitable mitigation of this is available until after the 2015/2016 timetable change, when presumably electric services will commence. However this will be subject to the availability of cascaded rolling stock from the 'Thameslink' franchise, being released following a particularly protracted procurement process. I do agree with Mr Crausbys view that this does fly in the face of aleged 'Open Government, but having dealt with t he DfT, sadly this is not surprising'.
I attend a number of meetings on a daily basis and can understand why the DfT may be reluctant to disclose the detailed discussions that take place. However, as a rail commuter and someone who is going to have to live with the outcome of whatever these politicians and the DfT come up with and probably finance it as well, I do think it is in the DfT's interests to allow the discussions to be reported. The TfGM Metrolink and Rail commitee report into this issue acknowledges commuters along the Bolton line (yes there are some commuters who begin their journeys outside of Bolton), will be subject to a reduction in service levels in order to improve long-distance services. No suitable mitigation of this is available until after the 2015/2016 timetable change, when presumably electric services will commence. However this will be subject to the availability of cascaded rolling stock from the 'Thameslink' franchise, being released following a particularly protracted procurement process. I do agree with Mr Crausbys view that this does fly in the face of aleged 'Open Government, but having dealt with t he DfT, sadly this is not surprising'. Lee3695
  • Score: 9

1:11pm Wed 19 Feb 14

FreedomOfSpeech1945 says...

Now you know how it feels BN to not be allowed to comment or have a say. Just like we feel when you disable comments on certain stories. We all have an opinion and we should be free to have a say. Also, all you do is slate the railway network, so why should you be allowed?
Now you know how it feels BN to not be allowed to comment or have a say. Just like we feel when you disable comments on certain stories. We all have an opinion and we should be free to have a say. Also, all you do is slate the railway network, so why should you be allowed? FreedomOfSpeech1945
  • Score: 32

1:42pm Wed 19 Feb 14

I, Ludicrous says...

I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.
I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in. I, Ludicrous
  • Score: 1

2:09pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Julian Thorpe says...

I, Ludicrous wrote:
I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.
Newspapers (such as ourselves) are the eyes and ears of the public. Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to, but for whatever reason cannot (ie council meetings, court hearings, etc - these are public hearings, but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to sit through such things, which is why we do it for you).

In this case we don't want to "stick our oar in" - we want to tell you what our elected leaders are doing to sort out our overcrowded trains. By not allowing us in, the government is preventing us from telling you what they are doing for you - you, who pay their wages and put them where they are.
[quote][p][bold]I, Ludicrous[/bold] wrote: I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.[/p][/quote]Newspapers (such as ourselves) are the eyes and ears of the public. Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to, but for whatever reason cannot (ie council meetings, court hearings, etc - these are public hearings, but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to sit through such things, which is why we do it for you). In this case we don't want to "stick our oar in" - we want to tell you what our elected leaders are doing to sort out our overcrowded trains. By not allowing us in, the government is preventing us from telling you what they are doing for you - you, who pay their wages and put them where they are. Julian Thorpe
  • Score: 10

2:16pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Puffin-Billy says...

The Department for Transport, in their wisdom, have deemed that what they have to discuss is of such serious import to the economy, and to the safety and well-being of the people of Bolton, that the presence of Bolton News reporters would not dignify the proceedings, or be in the public interest, and that they should not be allowed into the meeting.

Dangerous and chaotic conditions on Bolton’s railways, have for many years meant hellish journeys for taxpayers trying to get to and from work in today’s struggling economy.

The Department for Transport’s own propaganda says: “Rail is vital to the UK’s economic prosperity. If rail services are inefficient and do not meet people’s needs for routing or frequency, business and jobs suffer…”

Yet it would appear that the Department for Transport do not trust their own propaganda machine, and that they have little faith in the ability of a free press to report to the public what the government have to say.

It is plain that the Department for Transport, and the Secretary of State for Transport, Patrick McLoughlin have something to hide.
The Department for Transport, in their wisdom, have deemed that what they have to discuss is of such serious import to the economy, and to the safety and well-being of the people of Bolton, that the presence of Bolton News reporters would not dignify the proceedings, or be in the public interest, and that they should not be allowed into the meeting. Dangerous and chaotic conditions on Bolton’s railways, have for many years meant hellish journeys for taxpayers trying to get to and from work in today’s struggling economy. The Department for Transport’s own propaganda says: “Rail is vital to the UK’s economic prosperity. If rail services are inefficient and do not meet people’s needs for routing or frequency, business and jobs suffer…” Yet it would appear that the Department for Transport do not trust their own propaganda machine, and that they have little faith in the ability of a free press to report to the public what the government have to say. It is plain that the Department for Transport, and the Secretary of State for Transport, Patrick McLoughlin have something to hide. Puffin-Billy
  • Score: 8

2:38pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Mick England says...

Quote "Our job is, among other things, to report news of
public interest to the people of Bolton from places and
people that they should have access to" Well that's news to me Julian from my standpoint looking back over the last twelve months or so, you have suppressed more than you've reported! If you are true to your word then everything "of public interest" should be both reported and debated openly without any censorship or banning going on!
Quote "Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to" Well that's news to me Julian from my standpoint looking back over the last twelve months or so, you have suppressed more than you've reported! If you are true to your word then everything "of public interest" should be both reported and debated openly without any censorship or banning going on! Mick England
  • Score: 8

3:00pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Jim271 says...

Austwitz had a better train service.
Austwitz had a better train service. Jim271
  • Score: 3

4:01pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Julian Thorpe says...

Mick England wrote:
Quote "Our job is, among other things, to report news of
public interest to the people of Bolton from places and
people that they should have access to" Well that's news to me Julian from my standpoint looking back over the last twelve months or so, you have suppressed more than you've reported! If you are true to your word then everything "of public interest" should be both reported and debated openly without any censorship or banning going on!
Well, we have "suppressed" racist comments on this website, I suppose, and shall continue to do so.

Not really the same thing, is it?
[quote][p][bold]Mick England[/bold] wrote: Quote "Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to" Well that's news to me Julian from my standpoint looking back over the last twelve months or so, you have suppressed more than you've reported! If you are true to your word then everything "of public interest" should be both reported and debated openly without any censorship or banning going on![/p][/quote]Well, we have "suppressed" racist comments on this website, I suppose, and shall continue to do so. Not really the same thing, is it? Julian Thorpe
  • Score: 3

4:21pm Wed 19 Feb 14

MarkAllRead says...

Julian Thorpe wrote:
I, Ludicrous wrote:
I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.
Newspapers (such as ourselves) are the eyes and ears of the public. Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to, but for whatever reason cannot (ie council meetings, court hearings, etc - these are public hearings, but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to sit through such things, which is why we do it for you).

In this case we don't want to "stick our oar in" - we want to tell you what our elected leaders are doing to sort out our overcrowded trains. By not allowing us in, the government is preventing us from telling you what they are doing for you - you, who pay their wages and put them where they are.
The meeting is surely to discuss the options, for people to put their opinions and findings forward and for them to eventually come to a conclusion or solution. Whilst I'm keen for the Bolton News to report on the outcome of this meeting, it does seem fair enough that the BN isn't present within these meetings.
[quote][p][bold]Julian Thorpe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I, Ludicrous[/bold] wrote: I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.[/p][/quote]Newspapers (such as ourselves) are the eyes and ears of the public. Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to, but for whatever reason cannot (ie council meetings, court hearings, etc - these are public hearings, but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to sit through such things, which is why we do it for you). In this case we don't want to "stick our oar in" - we want to tell you what our elected leaders are doing to sort out our overcrowded trains. By not allowing us in, the government is preventing us from telling you what they are doing for you - you, who pay their wages and put them where they are.[/p][/quote]The meeting is surely to discuss the options, for people to put their opinions and findings forward and for them to eventually come to a conclusion or solution. Whilst I'm keen for the Bolton News to report on the outcome of this meeting, it does seem fair enough that the BN isn't present within these meetings. MarkAllRead
  • Score: -3

4:25pm Wed 19 Feb 14

MarkAllRead says...

Julian Thorpe wrote:
Mick England wrote:
Quote "Our job is, among other things, to report news of
public interest to the people of Bolton from places and
people that they should have access to" Well that's news to me Julian from my standpoint looking back over the last twelve months or so, you have suppressed more than you've reported! If you are true to your word then everything "of public interest" should be both reported and debated openly without any censorship or banning going on!
Well, we have "suppressed" racist comments on this website, I suppose, and shall continue to do so.

Not really the same thing, is it?
I agree Julian. Whilst it is frustrating when I spend time commenting on a story only to return a few hours later to find that all posts have been removed, I can understand why you sometimes have to do it. Unfortunately there are people on here who take things too far and post racist and abusive stuff. There are posters out there who deliberately mistype swear words in order to circumvent the swear filters. These people really need to have a long hard look at themselves.
[quote][p][bold]Julian Thorpe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mick England[/bold] wrote: Quote "Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to" Well that's news to me Julian from my standpoint looking back over the last twelve months or so, you have suppressed more than you've reported! If you are true to your word then everything "of public interest" should be both reported and debated openly without any censorship or banning going on![/p][/quote]Well, we have "suppressed" racist comments on this website, I suppose, and shall continue to do so. Not really the same thing, is it?[/p][/quote]I agree Julian. Whilst it is frustrating when I spend time commenting on a story only to return a few hours later to find that all posts have been removed, I can understand why you sometimes have to do it. Unfortunately there are people on here who take things too far and post racist and abusive stuff. There are posters out there who deliberately mistype swear words in order to circumvent the swear filters. These people really need to have a long hard look at themselves. MarkAllRead
  • Score: -5

4:41pm Wed 19 Feb 14

I, Ludicrous says...

Julian Thorpe wrote:
I, Ludicrous wrote:
I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.
Newspapers (such as ourselves) are the eyes and ears of the public. Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to, but for whatever reason cannot (ie council meetings, court hearings, etc - these are public hearings, but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to sit through such things, which is why we do it for you).

In this case we don't want to "stick our oar in" - we want to tell you what our elected leaders are doing to sort out our overcrowded trains. By not allowing us in, the government is preventing us from telling you what they are doing for you - you, who pay their wages and put them where they are.
Well, don't you just love the smell of a burning martyr?! The piece above has little to do with the actual important matters to hand, it's simply look-at-me self-indulgent claptrap, how badly done to you feel, and an exercise in throwing toys out of the pram.

What I and I suspect many others simply want to know are the outcomes of the meeting and how they might effect us.

Whether or not you and your mates get a ringside seat is of absolutely no importance whatsoever.
[quote][p][bold]Julian Thorpe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I, Ludicrous[/bold] wrote: I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.[/p][/quote]Newspapers (such as ourselves) are the eyes and ears of the public. Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to, but for whatever reason cannot (ie council meetings, court hearings, etc - these are public hearings, but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to sit through such things, which is why we do it for you). In this case we don't want to "stick our oar in" - we want to tell you what our elected leaders are doing to sort out our overcrowded trains. By not allowing us in, the government is preventing us from telling you what they are doing for you - you, who pay their wages and put them where they are.[/p][/quote]Well, don't you just love the smell of a burning martyr?! The piece above has little to do with the actual important matters to hand, it's simply look-at-me self-indulgent claptrap, how badly done to you feel, and an exercise in throwing toys out of the pram. What I and I suspect many others simply want to know are the outcomes of the meeting and how they might effect us. Whether or not you and your mates get a ringside seat is of absolutely no importance whatsoever. I, Ludicrous
  • Score: -5

4:42pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Mick England says...

Julian Thorpe wrote:
Mick England wrote:
Quote "Our job is, among other things, to report news of
public interest to the people of Bolton from places and
people that they should have access to" Well that's news to me Julian from my standpoint looking back over the last twelve months or so, you have suppressed more than you've reported! If you are true to your word then everything "of public interest" should be both reported and debated openly without any censorship or banning going on!
Well, we have "suppressed" racist comments on this website, I suppose, and shall continue to do so.

Not really the same thing, is it?
You also suppressed the white trash story to name just one, and nothing racist was said on there! To be critical of religion isn't racism!
[quote][p][bold]Julian Thorpe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mick England[/bold] wrote: Quote "Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to" Well that's news to me Julian from my standpoint looking back over the last twelve months or so, you have suppressed more than you've reported! If you are true to your word then everything "of public interest" should be both reported and debated openly without any censorship or banning going on![/p][/quote]Well, we have "suppressed" racist comments on this website, I suppose, and shall continue to do so. Not really the same thing, is it?[/p][/quote]You also suppressed the white trash story to name just one, and nothing racist was said on there! To be critical of religion isn't racism! Mick England
  • Score: 5

5:10pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Iluminati says...

Of course they wouldn't let the BN in. The council elections are knocking on the door, and everything's has to be put on ice, until after the elections!
Let's be clear about it the three MP's won't be getting any joy out of the MfT before the elections. All they're going to get is some old waffle and a pat on the back. It's an old political manoeuvre, and it always works and it always stinks. The BN should start a campaign to force the issue onto a national level. As more pressures as better the chances of getting some sort transparency.
Of course they wouldn't let the BN in. The council elections are knocking on the door, and everything's has to be put on ice, until after the elections! Let's be clear about it the three MP's won't be getting any joy out of the MfT before the elections. All they're going to get is some old waffle and a pat on the back. It's an old political manoeuvre, and it always works and it always stinks. The BN should start a campaign to force the issue onto a national level. As more pressures as better the chances of getting some sort transparency. Iluminati
  • Score: 8

5:41pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Beyond News Forum says...

Just typical freedom of the press from a government point of view that really is in touch with 'in the public's interest' - and exactly why democracy is dead in the water.
Just typical freedom of the press from a government point of view that really is in touch with 'in the public's interest' - and exactly why democracy is dead in the water. Beyond News Forum
  • Score: 9

5:48pm Wed 19 Feb 14

steverock6@sky.com says...

The current crop of politicians like to keep everything secret from the public who pay their wages (especially the recent huge increase) unless a discussion is about national security or contracts the information should be available to the public free speech is a thing of the past and to some of those who have made comments about this do you want everything done behind your backs or do you want to know whats going on you can't have it both ways! This is not just about the government being secretive its your Labour MP's also none of them are lily white
The current crop of politicians like to keep everything secret from the public who pay their wages (especially the recent huge increase) unless a discussion is about national security or contracts the information should be available to the public free speech is a thing of the past and to some of those who have made comments about this do you want everything done behind your backs or do you want to know whats going on you can't have it both ways! This is not just about the government being secretive its your Labour MP's also none of them are lily white steverock6@sky.com
  • Score: 11

6:04pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

Iluminati wrote:
Of course they wouldn't let the BN in. The council elections are knocking on the door, and everything's has to be put on ice, until after the elections!
Let's be clear about it the three MP's won't be getting any joy out of the MfT before the elections. All they're going to get is some old waffle and a pat on the back. It's an old political manoeuvre, and it always works and it always stinks. The BN should start a campaign to force the issue onto a national level. As more pressures as better the chances of getting some sort transparency.
Funnily enough the Local Elections have nothing to do with MP's or Westminster its between the political parties, local councillors/local town halls and the voters..

And lets not forget that only 33% of the local seats are up for election and not 100%!!!

So Illuminati has got something wrong!!!
[quote][p][bold]Iluminati[/bold] wrote: Of course they wouldn't let the BN in. The council elections are knocking on the door, and everything's has to be put on ice, until after the elections! Let's be clear about it the three MP's won't be getting any joy out of the MfT before the elections. All they're going to get is some old waffle and a pat on the back. It's an old political manoeuvre, and it always works and it always stinks. The BN should start a campaign to force the issue onto a national level. As more pressures as better the chances of getting some sort transparency.[/p][/quote]Funnily enough the Local Elections have nothing to do with MP's or Westminster its between the political parties, local councillors/local town halls and the voters.. And lets not forget that only 33% of the local seats are up for election and not 100%!!! So Illuminati has got something wrong!!! BWFC71
  • Score: -31

6:05pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.
And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors!
[quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.[/p][/quote]And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors! BWFC71
  • Score: -39

6:08pm Wed 19 Feb 14

FreedomOfSpeech1945 says...

BWFC71 wrote:
FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.
And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors!
Yes because they are scared of people speaking the truth. People are allowed an opinion.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.[/p][/quote]And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors![/p][/quote]Yes because they are scared of people speaking the truth. People are allowed an opinion. FreedomOfSpeech1945
  • Score: 7

6:11pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.
And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors!
Yes because they are scared of people speaking the truth. People are allowed an opinion.
Nope because everytime they try to let the discussion take place the more extreme people start spurting out offensive language and racist taunts which has happened too many times. And because the paper has to uphold the law, even via online, it becomes much safer to not allow comments then being taken to court and sued.

Therefore, to be fair, the paper is NOT to blame but certain posters and the law!!!
[quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.[/p][/quote]And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors![/p][/quote]Yes because they are scared of people speaking the truth. People are allowed an opinion.[/p][/quote]Nope because everytime they try to let the discussion take place the more extreme people start spurting out offensive language and racist taunts which has happened too many times. And because the paper has to uphold the law, even via online, it becomes much safer to not allow comments then being taken to court and sued. Therefore, to be fair, the paper is NOT to blame but certain posters and the law!!! BWFC71
  • Score: -48

6:19pm Wed 19 Feb 14

FreedomOfSpeech1945 says...

BWFC71 wrote:
FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.
And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors!
Yes because they are scared of people speaking the truth. People are allowed an opinion.
Nope because everytime they try to let the discussion take place the more extreme people start spurting out offensive language and racist taunts which has happened too many times. And because the paper has to uphold the law, even via online, it becomes much safer to not allow comments then being taken to court and sued.

Therefore, to be fair, the paper is NOT to blame but certain posters and the law!!!
Yeah okay. Like I said, people are free to have an opinion, whether it be for or against certain aspects of OUR community. The End.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.[/p][/quote]And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors![/p][/quote]Yes because they are scared of people speaking the truth. People are allowed an opinion.[/p][/quote]Nope because everytime they try to let the discussion take place the more extreme people start spurting out offensive language and racist taunts which has happened too many times. And because the paper has to uphold the law, even via online, it becomes much safer to not allow comments then being taken to court and sued. Therefore, to be fair, the paper is NOT to blame but certain posters and the law!!![/p][/quote]Yeah okay. Like I said, people are free to have an opinion, whether it be for or against certain aspects of OUR community. The End. FreedomOfSpeech1945
  • Score: 9

6:26pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Old Boltonian says...

Iluminati wrote:
Of course they wouldn't let the BN in. The council elections are knocking on the door, and everything's has to be put on ice, until after the elections!
Let's be clear about it the three MP's won't be getting any joy out of the MfT before the elections. All they're going to get is some old waffle and a pat on the back. It's an old political manoeuvre, and it always works and it always stinks. The BN should start a campaign to force the issue onto a national level. As more pressures as better the chances of getting some sort transparency.
Shouldn't that be 'IlluminatUS' ?, unless of course, there's more than one of you.
[quote][p][bold]Iluminati[/bold] wrote: Of course they wouldn't let the BN in. The council elections are knocking on the door, and everything's has to be put on ice, until after the elections! Let's be clear about it the three MP's won't be getting any joy out of the MfT before the elections. All they're going to get is some old waffle and a pat on the back. It's an old political manoeuvre, and it always works and it always stinks. The BN should start a campaign to force the issue onto a national level. As more pressures as better the chances of getting some sort transparency.[/p][/quote]Shouldn't that be 'IlluminatUS' ?, unless of course, there's more than one of you. Old Boltonian
  • Score: 8

6:47pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
BWFC71 wrote:
FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.
And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors!
Yes because they are scared of people speaking the truth. People are allowed an opinion.
Nope because everytime they try to let the discussion take place the more extreme people start spurting out offensive language and racist taunts which has happened too many times. And because the paper has to uphold the law, even via online, it becomes much safer to not allow comments then being taken to court and sued.

Therefore, to be fair, the paper is NOT to blame but certain posters and the law!!!
Yeah okay. Like I said, people are free to have an opinion, whether it be for or against certain aspects of OUR community. The End.
Actually no they are not as there are laws in place as to what people can and cannot say and these laws have been in place for centuries.

To say freedom of speech is absolutely wrong as there has never been freedom of speech!

Plus there are racial laws, hatred laws and many other smaller laws that the paper has to adhere to, thus, it does have to be careful as to what it can and cannot allow and also this website does have its own rules which posters have to adhere to. Thus again, when you sign up, you lose even more so-called freedom to speech because you have to tick to agree, and understand, the rules!
[quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: We all know that BN have a certain soft spot for our ethnic friends.[/p][/quote]And this is the reason why some threads and plenty of comments gets surpressed by the editors![/p][/quote]Yes because they are scared of people speaking the truth. People are allowed an opinion.[/p][/quote]Nope because everytime they try to let the discussion take place the more extreme people start spurting out offensive language and racist taunts which has happened too many times. And because the paper has to uphold the law, even via online, it becomes much safer to not allow comments then being taken to court and sued. Therefore, to be fair, the paper is NOT to blame but certain posters and the law!!![/p][/quote]Yeah okay. Like I said, people are free to have an opinion, whether it be for or against certain aspects of OUR community. The End.[/p][/quote]Actually no they are not as there are laws in place as to what people can and cannot say and these laws have been in place for centuries. To say freedom of speech is absolutely wrong as there has never been freedom of speech! Plus there are racial laws, hatred laws and many other smaller laws that the paper has to adhere to, thus, it does have to be careful as to what it can and cannot allow and also this website does have its own rules which posters have to adhere to. Thus again, when you sign up, you lose even more so-called freedom to speech because you have to tick to agree, and understand, the rules! BWFC71
  • Score: -50

7:12pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Brumas says...

I see yet again that MP's have got their blinkers on and are pursuing one aspect of the Transport Infra Structure, which no doubt needs sorting out for the commuters sake. But why oh why are they not thinking outside the box and asking why the government to also consider constructing Junction Seven on the M61 Motorway, incorporating it into the Anderton Services. Which would alleviate some of the problems caused at junction six by the users from Adlington and south Chorley area's, in their commuting's from Manchester. Then before I get any knockers, consider that the M60 has junctions averaging every 1-5 miles. Plus why is there no junction seven in the first place, why leave it out if it was never intended to be completed, it certainly is needed now. Amen.
I see yet again that MP's have got their blinkers on and are pursuing one aspect of the Transport Infra Structure, which no doubt needs sorting out for the commuters sake. But why oh why are they not thinking outside the box and asking why the government to also consider constructing Junction Seven on the M61 Motorway, incorporating it into the Anderton Services. Which would alleviate some of the problems caused at junction six by the users from Adlington and south Chorley area's, in their commuting's from Manchester. Then before I get any knockers, consider that the M60 has junctions averaging every 1-5 miles. Plus why is there no junction seven in the first place, why leave it out if it was never intended to be completed, it certainly is needed now. Amen. Brumas
  • Score: 0

7:12pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

This is what I received in my email, today, iwth regards to the overcrowding on the Bolton line. It comes straight from the DfT! Basically no matter what is going to said in private they are passing the blame back onto Northern Rail and TfGM!!! This is how the Government thinks about human life!!!

Thank you for your email of 27 January to Stephen Hammond MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, regarding Bolton train services; I have been asked to respond.

When the Northern franchise was let in 2004 there was not expected to be any growth in passenger demand. Since the start of the franchise Northern has seen passenger numbers increase by around 40% across the franchise. Although the popularity of the railway is to be welcomed, it has led to some trains being crowded, particularly at peak times. Additional carriages were provided to Northern in 2008 and 2011 because of this growth.

Within their franchise agreement, Northern is required to use all reasonable endeavours to provide a minimum number of places on around 250 peak services each week day. The delivery of this capacity is monitored by Northern and discussed regularly with the DfT and Transport for Greater Manchester as well as other stakeholders.

The train service between Manchester and Bolton is sponsored and specified by Transport for Greater Manchester. You may wish to make your concerns known to them if you have not done so already.

It is important to remember that safety is the first priority of rail operations and a recent European Union report found that the UK has the safest rail network of all EU members – see http://ec.europa.eu/
commission_2010-2014
/kallas/headlines/ne
ws/2013/01/doc/swd(2
013)-10-part3.pdf for details.

With regard to the safety implications of overcrowding, I should explain that the body that monitors and enforces compliance with health and safety legislation on Britain’s rail network is the Office of Rail Regulation (‘ORR’).

It is for each train operating company to use its train fleet to best match the train capacity to the passenger demand expected on individual services. Operators are required to use all reasonable endeavours to minimise overcrowding.

ORR has advised me that there is no legal limit on the number of passengers that can travel on a train. This is because trains differ from other modes of transport, such as buses and aeroplanes, where passenger numbers can affect stability. Trains are designed to operate safely and effectively even when they are loaded to maximum capacity.

The structural design of rail vehicles takes account of the maximum load including crowded conditions. In addition, the interior design contain features that minimise passenger injury in the event of an accident

It is true that in the event of a serious accident – a rare event in itself – on a heavily loaded train, it is an inescapable fact that the more passengers there are on the train, the greater the number of passengers at risk. However, research into a number of train accidents has shown that crowding itself did not contribute to the severity of the incident or to any injuries incurred.

You may wish to look at the policy statement issued by ORR on its website at
http://www.rail-reg.
gov.uk/upload/pdf/tr
ain_crowding_positio
n_statement.pdf

As you may be aware, the Department for Transport has also announced additional investment in the railways of Northern England over the next few years. This includes electrification between Liverpool and Manchester, in Lancashire and in due course, between Manchester and York via Huddersfield. The works to deliver electrification between Manchester, Newton-le-Willows and Liverpool are under way. As well as offering longer trains and faster journeys on these routes, electrification means that diesel trains currently used between Liverpool, Manchester and Blackpool will become available to provide additional capacity for passengers across the railways of Northern England.

The second section of the Liverpool to Manchester line – between Liverpool and Newton-le-Willows – will be available for use by electric trains from December 2014. Once electric trains are able to operate on the Liverpool to Manchester line, it will be possible for the diesel trains used on local services along the route to transfer to provide additional capacity for passengers on other routes. It will be for the rail industry to develop plans for the redeployment of these diesel trains after 2014.

If Northern were to provide additional diesel trains for services between Bolton and Manchester prior to December 2014, they would have to come from within the Northern fleet or from a Rolling Stock Company. The Northern Franchise Agreement requires the operator to use its entire fleet of trains (allowing for normal maintenance) at peak times. It is for Northern to determine, based on the passenger demand on individual services, whether any changes can be made to reallocate carriages between the routes that they operate.

As I said, Transport for Greater Manchester sponsor and specify local services within Greater Manchester. If diesel rolling stock can be made available prior to December 2014, it would be for them to work with Northern on how best carriages might be redeployed from other local train services. It would be for Transport for Greater Manchester and the operators to develop the business case and any necessary funding for the provision of additional carriages for train services that call at Bolton.

Kind regards

Alistair Hobbs
Correspondence Manager
Rail Commercial
This is what I received in my email, today, iwth regards to the overcrowding on the Bolton line. It comes straight from the DfT! Basically no matter what is going to said in private they are passing the blame back onto Northern Rail and TfGM!!! This is how the Government thinks about human life!!! Thank you for your email of 27 January to Stephen Hammond MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, regarding Bolton train services; I have been asked to respond. When the Northern franchise was let in 2004 there was not expected to be any growth in passenger demand. Since the start of the franchise Northern has seen passenger numbers increase by around 40% across the franchise. Although the popularity of the railway is to be welcomed, it has led to some trains being crowded, particularly at peak times. Additional carriages were provided to Northern in 2008 and 2011 because of this growth. Within their franchise agreement, Northern is required to use all reasonable endeavours to provide a minimum number of places on around 250 peak services each week day. The delivery of this capacity is monitored by Northern and discussed regularly with the DfT and Transport for Greater Manchester as well as other stakeholders. The train service between Manchester and Bolton is sponsored and specified by Transport for Greater Manchester. You may wish to make your concerns known to them if you have not done so already. It is important to remember that safety is the first priority of rail operations and a recent European Union report found that the UK has the safest rail network of all EU members – see http://ec.europa.eu/ commission_2010-2014 /kallas/headlines/ne ws/2013/01/doc/swd(2 013)-10-part3.pdf for details. With regard to the safety implications of overcrowding, I should explain that the body that monitors and enforces compliance with health and safety legislation on Britain’s rail network is the Office of Rail Regulation (‘ORR’). It is for each train operating company to use its train fleet to best match the train capacity to the passenger demand expected on individual services. Operators are required to use all reasonable endeavours to minimise overcrowding. ORR has advised me that there is no legal limit on the number of passengers that can travel on a train. This is because trains differ from other modes of transport, such as buses and aeroplanes, where passenger numbers can affect stability. Trains are designed to operate safely and effectively even when they are loaded to maximum capacity. The structural design of rail vehicles takes account of the maximum load including crowded conditions. In addition, the interior design contain features that minimise passenger injury in the event of an accident It is true that in the event of a serious accident – a rare event in itself – on a heavily loaded train, it is an inescapable fact that the more passengers there are on the train, the greater the number of passengers at risk. However, research into a number of train accidents has shown that crowding itself did not contribute to the severity of the incident or to any injuries incurred. You may wish to look at the policy statement issued by ORR on its website at http://www.rail-reg. gov.uk/upload/pdf/tr ain_crowding_positio n_statement.pdf As you may be aware, the Department for Transport has also announced additional investment in the railways of Northern England over the next few years. This includes electrification between Liverpool and Manchester, in Lancashire and in due course, between Manchester and York via Huddersfield. The works to deliver electrification between Manchester, Newton-le-Willows and Liverpool are under way. As well as offering longer trains and faster journeys on these routes, electrification means that diesel trains currently used between Liverpool, Manchester and Blackpool will become available to provide additional capacity for passengers across the railways of Northern England. The second section of the Liverpool to Manchester line – between Liverpool and Newton-le-Willows – will be available for use by electric trains from December 2014. Once electric trains are able to operate on the Liverpool to Manchester line, it will be possible for the diesel trains used on local services along the route to transfer to provide additional capacity for passengers on other routes. It will be for the rail industry to develop plans for the redeployment of these diesel trains after 2014. If Northern were to provide additional diesel trains for services between Bolton and Manchester prior to December 2014, they would have to come from within the Northern fleet or from a Rolling Stock Company. The Northern Franchise Agreement requires the operator to use its entire fleet of trains (allowing for normal maintenance) at peak times. It is for Northern to determine, based on the passenger demand on individual services, whether any changes can be made to reallocate carriages between the routes that they operate. As I said, Transport for Greater Manchester sponsor and specify local services within Greater Manchester. If diesel rolling stock can be made available prior to December 2014, it would be for them to work with Northern on how best carriages might be redeployed from other local train services. It would be for Transport for Greater Manchester and the operators to develop the business case and any necessary funding for the provision of additional carriages for train services that call at Bolton. Kind regards Alistair Hobbs Correspondence Manager Rail Commercial BWFC71
  • Score: -56

8:06pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

Remember, no one is here to be liked about to given an individual opinion that is within the rules of the website and within the law!
Remember, no one is here to be liked about to given an individual opinion that is within the rules of the website and within the law! BWFC71
  • Score: -33

8:57pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Southfield 62 says...

Enough of politics, our MP's need to go demanding action. Facts are the thameslink project in london will receive over the next few years 1140 new carriages, Cross Link (another London Project) are to receive 585 new carriages, First Great Western are to receive 189 new carriages and East Coast Main Line are to receive 497 new carriages. London Midland will receive an additional 40 carriages along with Transpennine Express will receive another 40 carriages. Of the nearly 2500 carriages on order, guess how many will travel via Bolton. Exactly None. They are either for London,London and the South West, London and Midlands, or the east coast main line. The carriages that TPE have procurred are for the Manchester Airport to Scotland Service via WIGAN. If ever there was a bigger waste of trains, this is it. Virgin operate a very good and usually half full train service to both Edinburgh and Glasgow from Wigan. Why oh why have TPE been allowed to procure 40 carriages then go and waste them on a line that already has far more seats than passengers. If there was to be a silver lining to this, most of the new trains for first great western are replacing the old HST trains. They may be old but they have loads of life in them yet. How about taking out the first class carriages leaving about 6 standard carriages and handing them over to Northern to run them. They could replace the dreadful "leyland bus on tracks" claptrap things.
Enough of politics, our MP's need to go demanding action. Facts are the thameslink project in london will receive over the next few years 1140 new carriages, Cross Link (another London Project) are to receive 585 new carriages, First Great Western are to receive 189 new carriages and East Coast Main Line are to receive 497 new carriages. London Midland will receive an additional 40 carriages along with Transpennine Express will receive another 40 carriages. Of the nearly 2500 carriages on order, guess how many will travel via Bolton. Exactly None. They are either for London,London and the South West, London and Midlands, or the east coast main line. The carriages that TPE have procurred are for the Manchester Airport to Scotland Service via WIGAN. If ever there was a bigger waste of trains, this is it. Virgin operate a very good and usually half full train service to both Edinburgh and Glasgow from Wigan. Why oh why have TPE been allowed to procure 40 carriages then go and waste them on a line that already has far more seats than passengers. If there was to be a silver lining to this, most of the new trains for first great western are replacing the old HST trains. They may be old but they have loads of life in them yet. How about taking out the first class carriages leaving about 6 standard carriages and handing them over to Northern to run them. They could replace the dreadful "leyland bus on tracks" claptrap things. Southfield 62
  • Score: 4

9:10pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

Southfield 62 wrote:
Enough of politics, our MP's need to go demanding action. Facts are the thameslink project in london will receive over the next few years 1140 new carriages, Cross Link (another London Project) are to receive 585 new carriages, First Great Western are to receive 189 new carriages and East Coast Main Line are to receive 497 new carriages. London Midland will receive an additional 40 carriages along with Transpennine Express will receive another 40 carriages. Of the nearly 2500 carriages on order, guess how many will travel via Bolton. Exactly None. They are either for London,London and the South West, London and Midlands, or the east coast main line. The carriages that TPE have procurred are for the Manchester Airport to Scotland Service via WIGAN. If ever there was a bigger waste of trains, this is it. Virgin operate a very good and usually half full train service to both Edinburgh and Glasgow from Wigan. Why oh why have TPE been allowed to procure 40 carriages then go and waste them on a line that already has far more seats than passengers. If there was to be a silver lining to this, most of the new trains for first great western are replacing the old HST trains. They may be old but they have loads of life in them yet. How about taking out the first class carriages leaving about 6 standard carriages and handing them over to Northern to run them. They could replace the dreadful "leyland bus on tracks" claptrap things.
See where you are coming from, but from this month Rail magazine it is published that Barroness whatshername has stated that no new, or second hand coaches or units will be given to northern rail, except for those earmarked from Thameslink (which will be near 30years of age when we get them). Also it has been stated that the spare diesel units that will become free with the introduction of the third-world-2nd-hand electric trains may not be able to stay with Northern and could be deployed to diesel only routes in the South East of the country!!! Plus the Bus-trains (aka Pacer Class 142's) HAVE to be withdrawn by 2019 under the DDA. Also with regards to no new diesel units being bought, what about the lines that are NOT being electrified such as the Blackburn line, the line between Wigan and Southport etce tc etc does that mean they will have to suffer with the 30+ year old rolling stock and what happens when they finally die????

the DfT seem to be giving out too many mis-informations - is this to confuse the issue so that no one knows what is actually going to happen or t hide something else?

BTW, I have seen one of the new electric trains that TPE now has - the coaches are actually smaller than those on the diesel units and with less seats!!! So how can the DfT claim to be bigger and carry more???

Too many lies coming from the department!!!
[quote][p][bold]Southfield 62[/bold] wrote: Enough of politics, our MP's need to go demanding action. Facts are the thameslink project in london will receive over the next few years 1140 new carriages, Cross Link (another London Project) are to receive 585 new carriages, First Great Western are to receive 189 new carriages and East Coast Main Line are to receive 497 new carriages. London Midland will receive an additional 40 carriages along with Transpennine Express will receive another 40 carriages. Of the nearly 2500 carriages on order, guess how many will travel via Bolton. Exactly None. They are either for London,London and the South West, London and Midlands, or the east coast main line. The carriages that TPE have procurred are for the Manchester Airport to Scotland Service via WIGAN. If ever there was a bigger waste of trains, this is it. Virgin operate a very good and usually half full train service to both Edinburgh and Glasgow from Wigan. Why oh why have TPE been allowed to procure 40 carriages then go and waste them on a line that already has far more seats than passengers. If there was to be a silver lining to this, most of the new trains for first great western are replacing the old HST trains. They may be old but they have loads of life in them yet. How about taking out the first class carriages leaving about 6 standard carriages and handing them over to Northern to run them. They could replace the dreadful "leyland bus on tracks" claptrap things.[/p][/quote]See where you are coming from, but from this month Rail magazine it is published that Barroness whatshername has stated that no new, or second hand coaches or units will be given to northern rail, except for those earmarked from Thameslink (which will be near 30years of age when we get them). Also it has been stated that the spare diesel units that will become free with the introduction of the third-world-2nd-hand electric trains may not be able to stay with Northern and could be deployed to diesel only routes in the South East of the country!!! Plus the Bus-trains (aka Pacer Class 142's) HAVE to be withdrawn by 2019 under the DDA. Also with regards to no new diesel units being bought, what about the lines that are NOT being electrified such as the Blackburn line, the line between Wigan and Southport etce tc etc does that mean they will have to suffer with the 30+ year old rolling stock and what happens when they finally die???? the DfT seem to be giving out too many mis-informations - is this to confuse the issue so that no one knows what is actually going to happen or t hide something else? BTW, I have seen one of the new electric trains that TPE now has - the coaches are actually smaller than those on the diesel units and with less seats!!! So how can the DfT claim to be bigger and carry more??? Too many lies coming from the department!!! BWFC71
  • Score: -49

9:12pm Wed 19 Feb 14

FreedomOfSpeech1945 says...

It's all lies. The Victorian's did it right with a massive rail network and sufficient coaches!
It's all lies. The Victorian's did it right with a massive rail network and sufficient coaches! FreedomOfSpeech1945
  • Score: -1

9:30pm Wed 19 Feb 14

asptec says...

BWFC71 wrote:
This is what I received in my email, today, iwth regards to the overcrowding on the Bolton line. It comes straight from the DfT! Basically no matter what is going to said in private they are passing the blame back onto Northern Rail and TfGM!!! This is how the Government thinks about human life!!!

Thank you for your email of 27 January to Stephen Hammond MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, regarding Bolton train services; I have been asked to respond.

When the Northern franchise was let in 2004 there was not expected to be any growth in passenger demand. Since the start of the franchise Northern has seen passenger numbers increase by around 40% across the franchise. Although the popularity of the railway is to be welcomed, it has led to some trains being crowded, particularly at peak times. Additional carriages were provided to Northern in 2008 and 2011 because of this growth.

Within their franchise agreement, Northern is required to use all reasonable endeavours to provide a minimum number of places on around 250 peak services each week day. The delivery of this capacity is monitored by Northern and discussed regularly with the DfT and Transport for Greater Manchester as well as other stakeholders.

The train service between Manchester and Bolton is sponsored and specified by Transport for Greater Manchester. You may wish to make your concerns known to them if you have not done so already.

It is important to remember that safety is the first priority of rail operations and a recent European Union report found that the UK has the safest rail network of all EU members – see http://ec.europa.eu/

commission_2010-2014

/kallas/headlines/ne

ws/2013/01/doc/swd(2

013)-10-part3.pdf for details.

With regard to the safety implications of overcrowding, I should explain that the body that monitors and enforces compliance with health and safety legislation on Britain’s rail network is the Office of Rail Regulation (‘ORR’).

It is for each train operating company to use its train fleet to best match the train capacity to the passenger demand expected on individual services. Operators are required to use all reasonable endeavours to minimise overcrowding.

ORR has advised me that there is no legal limit on the number of passengers that can travel on a train. This is because trains differ from other modes of transport, such as buses and aeroplanes, where passenger numbers can affect stability. Trains are designed to operate safely and effectively even when they are loaded to maximum capacity.

The structural design of rail vehicles takes account of the maximum load including crowded conditions. In addition, the interior design contain features that minimise passenger injury in the event of an accident

It is true that in the event of a serious accident – a rare event in itself – on a heavily loaded train, it is an inescapable fact that the more passengers there are on the train, the greater the number of passengers at risk. However, research into a number of train accidents has shown that crowding itself did not contribute to the severity of the incident or to any injuries incurred.

You may wish to look at the policy statement issued by ORR on its website at
http://www.rail-reg.

gov.uk/upload/pdf/tr

ain_crowding_positio

n_statement.pdf

As you may be aware, the Department for Transport has also announced additional investment in the railways of Northern England over the next few years. This includes electrification between Liverpool and Manchester, in Lancashire and in due course, between Manchester and York via Huddersfield. The works to deliver electrification between Manchester, Newton-le-Willows and Liverpool are under way. As well as offering longer trains and faster journeys on these routes, electrification means that diesel trains currently used between Liverpool, Manchester and Blackpool will become available to provide additional capacity for passengers across the railways of Northern England.

The second section of the Liverpool to Manchester line – between Liverpool and Newton-le-Willows – will be available for use by electric trains from December 2014. Once electric trains are able to operate on the Liverpool to Manchester line, it will be possible for the diesel trains used on local services along the route to transfer to provide additional capacity for passengers on other routes. It will be for the rail industry to develop plans for the redeployment of these diesel trains after 2014.

If Northern were to provide additional diesel trains for services between Bolton and Manchester prior to December 2014, they would have to come from within the Northern fleet or from a Rolling Stock Company. The Northern Franchise Agreement requires the operator to use its entire fleet of trains (allowing for normal maintenance) at peak times. It is for Northern to determine, based on the passenger demand on individual services, whether any changes can be made to reallocate carriages between the routes that they operate.

As I said, Transport for Greater Manchester sponsor and specify local services within Greater Manchester. If diesel rolling stock can be made available prior to December 2014, it would be for them to work with Northern on how best carriages might be redeployed from other local train services. It would be for Transport for Greater Manchester and the operators to develop the business case and any necessary funding for the provision of additional carriages for train services that call at Bolton.

Kind regards

Alistair Hobbs
Correspondence Manager
Rail Commercial
The business case is that the trains are dangerously overcrowded, there has been no investment and action has been needed for several years
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: This is what I received in my email, today, iwth regards to the overcrowding on the Bolton line. It comes straight from the DfT! Basically no matter what is going to said in private they are passing the blame back onto Northern Rail and TfGM!!! This is how the Government thinks about human life!!! Thank you for your email of 27 January to Stephen Hammond MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Transport, regarding Bolton train services; I have been asked to respond. When the Northern franchise was let in 2004 there was not expected to be any growth in passenger demand. Since the start of the franchise Northern has seen passenger numbers increase by around 40% across the franchise. Although the popularity of the railway is to be welcomed, it has led to some trains being crowded, particularly at peak times. Additional carriages were provided to Northern in 2008 and 2011 because of this growth. Within their franchise agreement, Northern is required to use all reasonable endeavours to provide a minimum number of places on around 250 peak services each week day. The delivery of this capacity is monitored by Northern and discussed regularly with the DfT and Transport for Greater Manchester as well as other stakeholders. The train service between Manchester and Bolton is sponsored and specified by Transport for Greater Manchester. You may wish to make your concerns known to them if you have not done so already. It is important to remember that safety is the first priority of rail operations and a recent European Union report found that the UK has the safest rail network of all EU members – see http://ec.europa.eu/ commission_2010-2014 /kallas/headlines/ne ws/2013/01/doc/swd(2 013)-10-part3.pdf for details. With regard to the safety implications of overcrowding, I should explain that the body that monitors and enforces compliance with health and safety legislation on Britain’s rail network is the Office of Rail Regulation (‘ORR’). It is for each train operating company to use its train fleet to best match the train capacity to the passenger demand expected on individual services. Operators are required to use all reasonable endeavours to minimise overcrowding. ORR has advised me that there is no legal limit on the number of passengers that can travel on a train. This is because trains differ from other modes of transport, such as buses and aeroplanes, where passenger numbers can affect stability. Trains are designed to operate safely and effectively even when they are loaded to maximum capacity. The structural design of rail vehicles takes account of the maximum load including crowded conditions. In addition, the interior design contain features that minimise passenger injury in the event of an accident It is true that in the event of a serious accident – a rare event in itself – on a heavily loaded train, it is an inescapable fact that the more passengers there are on the train, the greater the number of passengers at risk. However, research into a number of train accidents has shown that crowding itself did not contribute to the severity of the incident or to any injuries incurred. You may wish to look at the policy statement issued by ORR on its website at http://www.rail-reg. gov.uk/upload/pdf/tr ain_crowding_positio n_statement.pdf As you may be aware, the Department for Transport has also announced additional investment in the railways of Northern England over the next few years. This includes electrification between Liverpool and Manchester, in Lancashire and in due course, between Manchester and York via Huddersfield. The works to deliver electrification between Manchester, Newton-le-Willows and Liverpool are under way. As well as offering longer trains and faster journeys on these routes, electrification means that diesel trains currently used between Liverpool, Manchester and Blackpool will become available to provide additional capacity for passengers across the railways of Northern England. The second section of the Liverpool to Manchester line – between Liverpool and Newton-le-Willows – will be available for use by electric trains from December 2014. Once electric trains are able to operate on the Liverpool to Manchester line, it will be possible for the diesel trains used on local services along the route to transfer to provide additional capacity for passengers on other routes. It will be for the rail industry to develop plans for the redeployment of these diesel trains after 2014. If Northern were to provide additional diesel trains for services between Bolton and Manchester prior to December 2014, they would have to come from within the Northern fleet or from a Rolling Stock Company. The Northern Franchise Agreement requires the operator to use its entire fleet of trains (allowing for normal maintenance) at peak times. It is for Northern to determine, based on the passenger demand on individual services, whether any changes can be made to reallocate carriages between the routes that they operate. As I said, Transport for Greater Manchester sponsor and specify local services within Greater Manchester. If diesel rolling stock can be made available prior to December 2014, it would be for them to work with Northern on how best carriages might be redeployed from other local train services. It would be for Transport for Greater Manchester and the operators to develop the business case and any necessary funding for the provision of additional carriages for train services that call at Bolton. Kind regards Alistair Hobbs Correspondence Manager Rail Commercial[/p][/quote]The business case is that the trains are dangerously overcrowded, there has been no investment and action has been needed for several years asptec
  • Score: 2

9:54pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

Asptec - but that is the problem, according to the DfT, the ORR advuse that there is no legal limit as to how many a carriage can hold and as such the rail companies are not breaking the law with squashing as many people into a carriage!!!

Goes to show how much they consider a human life to be!!! Or is it a case of the more they can kill off the more they can save n pensions and thus give themselves a bigger pay-rise for a job well done!
Asptec - but that is the problem, according to the DfT, the ORR advuse that there is no legal limit as to how many a carriage can hold and as such the rail companies are not breaking the law with squashing as many people into a carriage!!! Goes to show how much they consider a human life to be!!! Or is it a case of the more they can kill off the more they can save n pensions and thus give themselves a bigger pay-rise for a job well done! BWFC71
  • Score: -118

10:12pm Wed 19 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
It's all lies. The Victorian's did it right with a massive rail network and sufficient coaches!
But the Victorian didn't do it right.

there was no rail network. they were all separate companies who fought for customers and business. If anything it was more of a loss maker than what it is today. How many lines and stations opened and closed within 20 years because of the competition and rivalry! There were very few companies that worked together.

It was only after WW1 that the trains companies started to work together which, after massive losses became a public/state owned network under the banner of British Rail. But then look at Dr Beeching and the cuts he made and the dwindling number of customer right up until the late 1990's!

Northern Rail state, as a matter of fact, that since they took over the franchise in 2004 the number of customers has gone up, on their network, by just over 40%. Yet if they micro-sized that down to lines and branch lines, the average increase on ALL services through Bolton is up by over 120%!!! That's how bad the crushing is in the peak time nowadays, and it is now very rare to get a seat on the train during the off-peak as well!
[quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: It's all lies. The Victorian's did it right with a massive rail network and sufficient coaches![/p][/quote]But the Victorian didn't do it right. there was no rail network. they were all separate companies who fought for customers and business. If anything it was more of a loss maker than what it is today. How many lines and stations opened and closed within 20 years because of the competition and rivalry! There were very few companies that worked together. It was only after WW1 that the trains companies started to work together which, after massive losses became a public/state owned network under the banner of British Rail. But then look at Dr Beeching and the cuts he made and the dwindling number of customer right up until the late 1990's! Northern Rail state, as a matter of fact, that since they took over the franchise in 2004 the number of customers has gone up, on their network, by just over 40%. Yet if they micro-sized that down to lines and branch lines, the average increase on ALL services through Bolton is up by over 120%!!! That's how bad the crushing is in the peak time nowadays, and it is now very rare to get a seat on the train during the off-peak as well! BWFC71
  • Score: -73

10:48pm Wed 19 Feb 14

NigelMcFarlane says...

There is some naivety and/or cynicism here. The idea that any journalist from anywhere would be allowed to attend a meeting between a Secretary of State and THREE elected Ministers, at which that Department's policy and its commercial implications are discussed, is totally laughable and Mr Crausby would (or should) have known that when he made the request.
And on the broader issue - having commuted in London for a number of years and here between Bury and Manchester before Metrolink existed and on this very line (from Farnworth) daily for the last few years, I simply don't understand why this is suddenly an issue. Crowding here is no worse than other places at rush hour. No-one ever said commuting was pleasant, and it was just as unpleasant 25 years ago on the train from Whitefield. Even now I can remember going from Denmark Hill to Victoria in the mid 90s and it was just like it is now.
As for fewer trains - many commuters knew of the plans for this line, and the implications, more than 12 months ago, and no-one seemed interested then. Where were the vocal protesters (yes, including you, BN) when these decisions were first revealed? It;s no good making all this noise once they've been taken. This whole campaign seems a bit cynical and, ultimately, doomed.
There is some naivety and/or cynicism here. The idea that any journalist from anywhere would be allowed to attend a meeting between a Secretary of State and THREE elected Ministers, at which that Department's policy and its commercial implications are discussed, is totally laughable and Mr Crausby would (or should) have known that when he made the request. And on the broader issue - having commuted in London for a number of years and here between Bury and Manchester before Metrolink existed and on this very line (from Farnworth) daily for the last few years, I simply don't understand why this is suddenly an issue. Crowding here is no worse than other places at rush hour. No-one ever said commuting was pleasant, and it was just as unpleasant 25 years ago on the train from Whitefield. Even now I can remember going from Denmark Hill to Victoria in the mid 90s and it was just like it is now. As for fewer trains - many commuters knew of the plans for this line, and the implications, more than 12 months ago, and no-one seemed interested then. Where were the vocal protesters (yes, including you, BN) when these decisions were first revealed? It;s no good making all this noise once they've been taken. This whole campaign seems a bit cynical and, ultimately, doomed. NigelMcFarlane
  • Score: 1

10:54pm Wed 19 Feb 14

Tim Burr says...

All the minus "scores"..99% are by the same loon.

The 'debate' of over crowding on the trains has been argued since Adam was a lad. Ruth Kelly, post being saved by the local Veritas mob (or where they still UKIP back then?) was making empty promises regarding extra carriages eons ago and nothings changed. So now I head to Wigan or Preston and jump on a Pendalino.
All the minus "scores"..99% are by the same loon. The 'debate' of over crowding on the trains has been argued since Adam was a lad. Ruth Kelly, post being saved by the local Veritas mob (or where they still UKIP back then?) was making empty promises regarding extra carriages eons ago and nothings changed. So now I head to Wigan or Preston and jump on a Pendalino. Tim Burr
  • Score: 5

12:29am Thu 20 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

DavidJacobs - possibly named after the failed TV star

Lack of intelligence - 3 separate degrees and a teaching degree!!!! (not bad for someone with dyslexia)!!! Able to converse in 5 languages (English, Welsh, French, German and Dutch) and currently learning Mandarin!!! I have even lived and worked abroad in Germany, France and The Netherlands - have a successful job and even part own 2 companies in The Netherlands.


I drink once a week a maximum of 3 pints on a Friday evening and do not do drugs - apart from caffeine and cocoa! I don't even take medicine as I like to have a healthy body and mind 9hich includes going to the gym 4 times a week!!!!


Therefore your assume I have problems - it looks as though you have just made a complete **** of yourself.

It seems to me you have the problem - the problem of not facing up to the real world and seeing what the real truth is, rather than seeing it through rose-tinted spectacles!

I do have a number of a good friend who is a professional psychologist who could help you with your paranoia and jealousy and lack off facing up to the real truth and not facing that facts are just that facts and not hear'say which is what you live on.

Also if you want advice on how to better yourself from your pitiful life then give me a call on +31 637 632 895 or email me on m262ah@yahoo.co.uk or FB me - screen name Nicholas Marsden! I have many ways of improving you life, getting you that dream job and most importantly helping you get that holiday home in Spain or Portugal! (seriously speaking here)

Remember one should never assume as 100% of the time assumptions are wrong!!!

But thanks for the vote as you have proved to FreedomofSpeech that I am more popular than he wants to believe!
DavidJacobs - possibly named after the failed TV star Lack of intelligence - 3 separate degrees and a teaching degree!!!! (not bad for someone with dyslexia)!!! Able to converse in 5 languages (English, Welsh, French, German and Dutch) and currently learning Mandarin!!! I have even lived and worked abroad in Germany, France and The Netherlands - have a successful job and even part own 2 companies in The Netherlands. I drink once a week a maximum of 3 pints on a Friday evening and do not do drugs - apart from caffeine and cocoa! I don't even take medicine as I like to have a healthy body and mind 9hich includes going to the gym 4 times a week!!!! Therefore your assume I have problems - it looks as though you have just made a complete **** of yourself. It seems to me you have the problem - the problem of not facing up to the real world and seeing what the real truth is, rather than seeing it through rose-tinted spectacles! I do have a number of a good friend who is a professional psychologist who could help you with your paranoia and jealousy and lack off facing up to the real truth and not facing that facts are just that facts and not hear'say which is what you live on. Also if you want advice on how to better yourself from your pitiful life then give me a call on +31 637 632 895 or email me on m262ah@yahoo.co.uk or FB me - screen name Nicholas Marsden! I have many ways of improving you life, getting you that dream job and most importantly helping you get that holiday home in Spain or Portugal! (seriously speaking here) Remember one should never assume as 100% of the time assumptions are wrong!!! But thanks for the vote as you have proved to FreedomofSpeech that I am more popular than he wants to believe! BWFC71
  • Score: -83

12:37am Thu 20 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

NigelMcFarlane wrote:
There is some naivety and/or cynicism here. The idea that any journalist from anywhere would be allowed to attend a meeting between a Secretary of State and THREE elected Ministers, at which that Department's policy and its commercial implications are discussed, is totally laughable and Mr Crausby would (or should) have known that when he made the request.
And on the broader issue - having commuted in London for a number of years and here between Bury and Manchester before Metrolink existed and on this very line (from Farnworth) daily for the last few years, I simply don't understand why this is suddenly an issue. Crowding here is no worse than other places at rush hour. No-one ever said commuting was pleasant, and it was just as unpleasant 25 years ago on the train from Whitefield. Even now I can remember going from Denmark Hill to Victoria in the mid 90s and it was just like it is now.
As for fewer trains - many commuters knew of the plans for this line, and the implications, more than 12 months ago, and no-one seemed interested then. Where were the vocal protesters (yes, including you, BN) when these decisions were first revealed? It;s no good making all this noise once they've been taken. This whole campaign seems a bit cynical and, ultimately, doomed.
I was there from when they were first announced and no one listened until it happened!!!!

Quite pitiful at the time as I did seem like a lone voice - but only when it did actually happen that other took notice and they thought they were the first. I was campaigning with NR, DfT and even TPE long before the BN and the MP's!!!! Yet it seems I may have been classed as a troublemaker by most - so what am I now as I am suddenly part of the majority because everyone else has joined the bandwagon!!!

Even now I am campaigning with regards to the parking when the car park closes this year- but again I am just a lone voice until it happens and people suddenly realise there is nowhere to park for Bolton Station!!!!!

I m ahead of the game, and most are still way behind, and yet \I get called a loon by the minority on here for the exact facts and figures I use to get my points across - even the letter I received in my email today (published further up) has been mocked - but that is what the DfT have expressed and they have no interest therefore this private meeting, I know, will lead to nothing!!!

But I will continue and will eventually win people over - normally after the event, but my voice is still there auctioning and campaigning!
[quote][p][bold]NigelMcFarlane[/bold] wrote: There is some naivety and/or cynicism here. The idea that any journalist from anywhere would be allowed to attend a meeting between a Secretary of State and THREE elected Ministers, at which that Department's policy and its commercial implications are discussed, is totally laughable and Mr Crausby would (or should) have known that when he made the request. And on the broader issue - having commuted in London for a number of years and here between Bury and Manchester before Metrolink existed and on this very line (from Farnworth) daily for the last few years, I simply don't understand why this is suddenly an issue. Crowding here is no worse than other places at rush hour. No-one ever said commuting was pleasant, and it was just as unpleasant 25 years ago on the train from Whitefield. Even now I can remember going from Denmark Hill to Victoria in the mid 90s and it was just like it is now. As for fewer trains - many commuters knew of the plans for this line, and the implications, more than 12 months ago, and no-one seemed interested then. Where were the vocal protesters (yes, including you, BN) when these decisions were first revealed? It;s no good making all this noise once they've been taken. This whole campaign seems a bit cynical and, ultimately, doomed.[/p][/quote]I was there from when they were first announced and no one listened until it happened!!!! Quite pitiful at the time as I did seem like a lone voice - but only when it did actually happen that other took notice and they thought they were the first. I was campaigning with NR, DfT and even TPE long before the BN and the MP's!!!! Yet it seems I may have been classed as a troublemaker by most - so what am I now as I am suddenly part of the majority because everyone else has joined the bandwagon!!! Even now I am campaigning with regards to the parking when the car park closes this year- but again I am just a lone voice until it happens and people suddenly realise there is nowhere to park for Bolton Station!!!!! I m ahead of the game, and most are still way behind, and yet \I get called a loon by the minority on here for the exact facts and figures I use to get my points across - even the letter I received in my email today (published further up) has been mocked - but that is what the DfT have expressed and they have no interest therefore this private meeting, I know, will lead to nothing!!! But I will continue and will eventually win people over - normally after the event, but my voice is still there auctioning and campaigning! BWFC71
  • Score: -90

1:40am Thu 20 Feb 14

SleepingThunder says...

Can we keep use of the quote button to a minimum please.It sends me & the post off track.
Can we keep use of the quote button to a minimum please.It sends me & the post off track. SleepingThunder
  • Score: -39

6:49am Thu 20 Feb 14

Marzi30 says...

Julian Thorpe wrote:
I, Ludicrous wrote:
I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.
Newspapers (such as ourselves) are the eyes and ears of the public. Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to, but for whatever reason cannot (ie council meetings, court hearings, etc - these are public hearings, but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to sit through such things, which is why we do it for you).

In this case we don't want to "stick our oar in" - we want to tell you what our elected leaders are doing to sort out our overcrowded trains. By not allowing us in, the government is preventing us from telling you what they are doing for you - you, who pay their wages and put them where they are.
The Bolton News is indeed supposed to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton, when then do you propose to run a story on the continued failings of Cliff Morris and his inept Councillors as they run this once great Town into the ground rather than pander to and suck up to everything they do ?
[quote][p][bold]Julian Thorpe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I, Ludicrous[/bold] wrote: I don't know why the BN is so miffed at not being allowed into the meeting. It's the purpose of the paper to report on the outcome of the meeting, not to stick its oar in.[/p][/quote]Newspapers (such as ourselves) are the eyes and ears of the public. Our job is, among other things, to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton from places and people that they should have access to, but for whatever reason cannot (ie council meetings, court hearings, etc - these are public hearings, but not everyone has the time, ability or inclination to sit through such things, which is why we do it for you). In this case we don't want to "stick our oar in" - we want to tell you what our elected leaders are doing to sort out our overcrowded trains. By not allowing us in, the government is preventing us from telling you what they are doing for you - you, who pay their wages and put them where they are.[/p][/quote]The Bolton News is indeed supposed to report news of public interest to the people of Bolton, when then do you propose to run a story on the continued failings of Cliff Morris and his inept Councillors as they run this once great Town into the ground rather than pander to and suck up to everything they do ? Marzi30
  • Score: 3

7:09am Thu 20 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

Well we have now found the person using the macro program for the thumbs down, haven't we DavidJacobs?

As you seem to register and then your only comments are personal abuse towards e, and then within 5 minutes ALL my posts on this and another thread are near the -100!!!!

Thanky ou for giving yourself away, I am sure Julian will be able to do something about it now, and everyone else will be pleased to see the back you!
Well we have now found the person using the macro program for the thumbs down, haven't we DavidJacobs? As you seem to register and then your only comments are personal abuse towards e, and then within 5 minutes ALL my posts on this and another thread are near the -100!!!! Thanky ou for giving yourself away, I am sure Julian will be able to do something about it now, and everyone else will be pleased to see the back you! BWFC71
  • Score: -95

7:29am Thu 20 Feb 14

Lee3695 says...

SleepingThunder wrote:
Can we keep use of the quote button to a minimum please.It sends me & the post off track.
I quite agree with Sleeping Thunder on this issue. It does seem threads on this forum can go off-track about the article subject and regulalry seem to degenerate into slanging matches between a small number of commenters. As previously stated, these comments do seem to have a propensity to become abusive quite quickly and add nothing at all to the debate the article has been written about. Could I ask commentators keep on-track (excuse the pun) and keep things civil and to the point?
[quote][p][bold]SleepingThunder[/bold] wrote: Can we keep use of the quote button to a minimum please.It sends me & the post off track.[/p][/quote]I quite agree with Sleeping Thunder on this issue. It does seem threads on this forum can go off-track about the article subject and regulalry seem to degenerate into slanging matches between a small number of commenters. As previously stated, these comments do seem to have a propensity to become abusive quite quickly and add nothing at all to the debate the article has been written about. Could I ask commentators keep on-track (excuse the pun) and keep things civil and to the point? Lee3695
  • Score: -38

7:31am Thu 20 Feb 14

gigglebox3 says...

i applaud you BWFC71 for sticking to your guns with FOS 1945 - he/she does seem to have issues!!
i applaud you BWFC71 for sticking to your guns with FOS 1945 - he/she does seem to have issues!! gigglebox3
  • Score: -60

8:52am Thu 20 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

Thanks gigglebox (this is my daytime username as I cannot log on via facebook on this PC).

But would just like to point out that considering FOS1945 thinks its a popular contest then I am quite happy with the result (although it may only be 1 person with a macro program) but it does mean I end up in triple figures of people voting compared to those who tend to throw insults, and just register to abuse me (i.e. David Jacobs - 8 posts and every single one aimed at abusing me!! - I am honoured to make such an impact) who get 10 or less!!!!!

But lets get bcak to the point fo what this news story is about and people can, and do, make a difference when it comes to those in power. Yes I agree that BN shouldn't actually be at the top level talks but even I know the outcome with the l;etter I received from DfT (and conflicting stories that have been published in the latest edition of the "Rail" magazine. - What I would like to know, and I will be writing back to the DfT over this, is who is actually lying or telling the truth and what is the exact process as all DfT, TfGM and teh Train Operating Companies are blaming each other and passing the buck!!!
Thanks gigglebox (this is my daytime username as I cannot log on via facebook on this PC). But would just like to point out that considering FOS1945 thinks its a popular contest then I am quite happy with the result (although it may only be 1 person with a macro program) but it does mean I end up in triple figures of people voting compared to those who tend to throw insults, and just register to abuse me (i.e. David Jacobs - 8 posts and every single one aimed at abusing me!! - I am honoured to make such an impact) who get 10 or less!!!!! But lets get bcak to the point fo what this news story is about and people can, and do, make a difference when it comes to those in power. Yes I agree that BN shouldn't actually be at the top level talks but even I know the outcome with the l;etter I received from DfT (and conflicting stories that have been published in the latest edition of the "Rail" magazine. - What I would like to know, and I will be writing back to the DfT over this, is who is actually lying or telling the truth and what is the exact process as all DfT, TfGM and teh Train Operating Companies are blaming each other and passing the buck!!! The Righteous One
  • Score: -57

9:00am Thu 20 Feb 14

ke1979 says...

All of the matters raised in this thread are trivial in comparison to Helen Flanagan's new hairdo. I wonder what she is up to today ? Can't wait for our regular Flanagan fix.
All of the matters raised in this thread are trivial in comparison to Helen Flanagan's new hairdo. I wonder what she is up to today ? Can't wait for our regular Flanagan fix. ke1979
  • Score: 2

9:21am Thu 20 Feb 14

Tim Burr says...

Posted at 7:31am Thu 20 Feb 14 - in under 2 hours -65 'scores'.
Posted at 7:09am Thu 20 Feb 14, score -97.

Somebody has serious issues on this site.
Posted at 7:31am Thu 20 Feb 14 - in under 2 hours -65 'scores'. Posted at 7:09am Thu 20 Feb 14, score -97. Somebody has serious issues on this site. Tim Burr
  • Score: -19

9:58am Thu 20 Feb 14

thomas222 says...

BWFC71 wrote:
Well we have now found the person using the macro program for the thumbs down, haven't we DavidJacobs? As you seem to register and then your only comments are personal abuse towards e, and then within 5 minutes ALL my posts on this and another thread are near the -100!!!! Thanky ou for giving yourself away, I am sure Julian will be able to do something about it now, and everyone else will be pleased to see the back you!
I thought you & t r 1 said it was me and my ukip mates who were macro whatever it is..... you are sados.
[quote][p][bold]BWFC71[/bold] wrote: Well we have now found the person using the macro program for the thumbs down, haven't we DavidJacobs? As you seem to register and then your only comments are personal abuse towards e, and then within 5 minutes ALL my posts on this and another thread are near the -100!!!! Thanky ou for giving yourself away, I am sure Julian will be able to do something about it now, and everyone else will be pleased to see the back you![/p][/quote]I thought you & t r 1 said it was me and my ukip mates who were macro whatever it is..... you are sados. thomas222
  • Score: 38

4:04pm Thu 20 Feb 14

George X says...

The Righteous One wrote:
Thanks gigglebox (this is my daytime username as I cannot log on via facebook on this PC).

But would just like to point out that considering FOS1945 thinks its a popular contest then I am quite happy with the result (although it may only be 1 person with a macro program) but it does mean I end up in triple figures of people voting compared to those who tend to throw insults, and just register to abuse me (i.e. David Jacobs - 8 posts and every single one aimed at abusing me!! - I am honoured to make such an impact) who get 10 or less!!!!!

But lets get bcak to the point fo what this news story is about and people can, and do, make a difference when it comes to those in power. Yes I agree that BN shouldn't actually be at the top level talks but even I know the outcome with the l;etter I received from DfT (and conflicting stories that have been published in the latest edition of the "Rail" magazine. - What I would like to know, and I will be writing back to the DfT over this, is who is actually lying or telling the truth and what is the exact process as all DfT, TfGM and teh Train Operating Companies are blaming each other and passing the buck!!!
So why is it that you think you cant log in on that particular pc ? it would take 20 seconds to do, a child could do it and it would save you having to explain yourself over and over and over again.
Or is there another reason ???
[quote][p][bold]The Righteous One[/bold] wrote: Thanks gigglebox (this is my daytime username as I cannot log on via facebook on this PC). But would just like to point out that considering FOS1945 thinks its a popular contest then I am quite happy with the result (although it may only be 1 person with a macro program) but it does mean I end up in triple figures of people voting compared to those who tend to throw insults, and just register to abuse me (i.e. David Jacobs - 8 posts and every single one aimed at abusing me!! - I am honoured to make such an impact) who get 10 or less!!!!! But lets get bcak to the point fo what this news story is about and people can, and do, make a difference when it comes to those in power. Yes I agree that BN shouldn't actually be at the top level talks but even I know the outcome with the l;etter I received from DfT (and conflicting stories that have been published in the latest edition of the "Rail" magazine. - What I would like to know, and I will be writing back to the DfT over this, is who is actually lying or telling the truth and what is the exact process as all DfT, TfGM and teh Train Operating Companies are blaming each other and passing the buck!!![/p][/quote]So why is it that you think you cant log in on that particular pc ? it would take 20 seconds to do, a child could do it and it would save you having to explain yourself over and over and over again. Or is there another reason ??? George X
  • Score: 1

4:09pm Thu 20 Feb 14

The Righteous One says...

because one computer does not allow facebook and as such any peripherals that come from facebook, such as signing on to here, cannot be done and only allows signing in with email address.

Whereas my non-work laptop is a facebook login and when I switch on it automatically logs me in on here!!!!
because one computer does not allow facebook and as such any peripherals that come from facebook, such as signing on to here, cannot be done and only allows signing in with email address. Whereas my non-work laptop is a facebook login and when I switch on it automatically logs me in on here!!!! The Righteous One
  • Score: -34

5:06pm Thu 20 Feb 14

rickyman49 says...

Jim271 wrote:
Austwitz had a better train service.
This statement abuses the memory of those who perished at the nazi death camp.The deportees were locked into cattle trucks and had lottle or no food or water for days during the journey before being unloaded and sent to the gas chambers or worked to death.
Please do not compare Northern Rail however uncomfortable with deprtation cattle trucks.
[quote][p][bold]Jim271[/bold] wrote: Austwitz had a better train service.[/p][/quote]This statement abuses the memory of those who perished at the nazi death camp.The deportees were locked into cattle trucks and had lottle or no food or water for days during the journey before being unloaded and sent to the gas chambers or worked to death. Please do not compare Northern Rail however uncomfortable with deprtation cattle trucks. rickyman49
  • Score: -12

8:09pm Thu 20 Feb 14

FreedomOfSpeech1945 says...

Vote UKIP
Vote UKIP FreedomOfSpeech1945
  • Score: 13

10:34pm Thu 20 Feb 14

BWFC71 says...

FreedomOfSpeech1945 wrote:
Vote UKIP
How would UKIP resolve he problem of over-crowding on the Bolton line?

In fact they do not support the HS2 due to the cost of it being built BUT they do support a high-speed line between Essex and Newcastle via Central London which would cost almost 3 times as much as HS2!!!

Therefore they are more for the South East than the North West!!!
[quote][p][bold]FreedomOfSpeech1945[/bold] wrote: Vote UKIP[/p][/quote]How would UKIP resolve he problem of over-crowding on the Bolton line? In fact they do not support the HS2 due to the cost of it being built BUT they do support a high-speed line between Essex and Newcastle via Central London which would cost almost 3 times as much as HS2!!! Therefore they are more for the South East than the North West!!! BWFC71
  • Score: -44

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree