|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Dec 14, 2008 8:29:57 GMT
On the same day that I stood waiting for a bus for half an hour outside Bristol Temple Meads station and marvelling at the gridlocked cars unable to move even when the lights turned green because of cars waiting in front of them, and which had to wait three turns at green before being able to proceed - my bus of course being held up by all the gridlocked one-person cars, who wouldn't be gridlocked at all and would get to their destination much more quickly if they all used the bus instead and released their choking grip on the road - on this same day, the people of Manchester in their wisdom voted 79%-to-21% against introducing a congestion charge scheme ( news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7778110.stm ) and thereby lost a £2.8 billion package of investment in public transport. In my view a triumph of short-term selfishness over the long-term good of the city, on the part of both the voters and the politicians for giving them a referendum in the first place, when they should have had the courage to do the right thing regardless of its unpopularity. My only car-related comfort in the news this week is that the makers of the worst-polluting cars in the world look less likely to get bailed out of their problems by the US Government than they did a week ago. Martin
|
|
|
Post by Andy Turnbull on Dec 14, 2008 15:10:32 GMT
A touch disappointing but sadly not exactly unexpected.
Andy
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Dec 14, 2008 16:18:53 GMT
Unless public transport becomes cheaper, cleaner, safer, less cramped (on trains) and more reliable people will stay in their cars. And I can't blame them.
-Ralph
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Dec 14, 2008 19:09:53 GMT
I can and do. Many/most drivers need to realise they are part of the problem and that by making some sacrifices they can actually be part of the solution for future generations, rather than unrealistically demanding that the solution come solely from others (i.e. the public transport system spontaneously healing itself, given where it is now, without drivers having to give up anything until it's all hunky-dory).
Some drivers have no realistic alternative but to drive. Many however do, but refuse to put themselves out voluntarily, thereby making those with no choice and those using buses or bikes suffer by clogging up the roads.
In Bristol on Friday, they'd have got along faster by walking, and with hindsight I would have walked to the other side of the centre if I'd known the bus wouldn't get through the jam to me for half an hour.
Many people as healthy as me drive shorter distances into Cardiff city centre than the two mile stretch I walk each day. I have no hesitation in blaming them.
I work in an office whose employees, by the nature of the work, care a lot more about the environment than the average person. As a result, there is a culture of not driving unless absolutely necessary. More people commute by public transport, walk, cycle or car share, than in the office next door whose business isn't of an environmental nature. People with no realistic alternative still drive, of course, but the others don't suffer or are miserable because they've chosen not to drive. Not driving doesn't ruin their lives. Changing people's habits is in some cases just a matter of culture and education.
I'll admit it does help if those around you all think the same way, so you're not having to do it in isolation, but for many drivers the state of the public transport system is not a good enough excuse in my book.
Martin
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Dec 14, 2008 19:53:15 GMT
Sometimes people need to drive to get jobs. I've had to pass on being able to apply for dozens of good jobs as they insisted applicants drive - whether it's necessary to drive or not to do the job. I choose not to drive, but if I did my employment prosects would be significantly greater.
RE: The public transport system. I can only speak for Glasgow and surrounding area to the west, but the buses and trains are often unsafe to use at certain times due to anti-social behaviour. That's why I don't have a problem with people avoiding such services to use their cars, where idiots aren't going to shout/swear at them, spit, smoke or drink (when it's banned on buses) or start a fight. Just the other day, there was a drug deal for crack cocaine going on in the bus! It was around 11am. The users were harmful only to themselves, but it was potentially a nasty situation. Folk don't want to put with that to get to work, etc.
-Ralph
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Dec 14, 2008 20:04:58 GMT
Sometimes people need to drive to get jobs. I've had to pass on being able to apply for dozens of good jobs as they insisted applicants drive - whether it's necessary to drive or not to do the job. There should be a law against that. And nobody get me started on the great unspoken agreement between the British media and British public to get outraged and demand things be done about everything that kills children in this country - except cars. 'Cos if they gave proportionate media attention to child deaths on the road to other causes of child death, we'd all have to admit (me included, as I accept lifts and use taxis when I know it won't contribute to rush-hour congestion) that we consider those deaths - which occur every day in Britain - an acceptable price to pay for the way we like to live our lives. I've never felt unsafe on a bus, but I've never been on one in Glasgow. Martin
|
|
|
Post by legios on Dec 14, 2008 20:52:13 GMT
I am one of those folk who work in a line of work where it is, in practical times, often necessary to be able to drive. In fact, if I went for a similar job in just about any other housing organisation I would absolutely have to be able to drive. A lot of the work in the Housing sector would be pretty much impossible if we attempted to rely on public transport - which doesn't reliably or usefully serve some of the areas in which we operate. That said, although I am able to drive I avoid doing so wherever feasible. I make use of public transport wherever possible. This is both by choice - it lowers my carbon footprint and my general impact on the biosphere, as well as meaning I don't have the added stress of actually driving - and by necessity, as the costs of running a car would eat heavily into my income and severely curtail my ability to treat myself occasionaly or to save for the future.
I do find myself oft stunned at the decisions taken in regards to public transport planning it must be said. Edinburgh's tram-system is a good example. The current plans call for it to be operational by 2011, and to connect the port-side shopping centre in Leith (also the location of many Civil Service offices) to Princes Street and its shops, and eventually to connect out to the airport. Plans to run it out to reach things like the main hospital have been pretty much shelved without trace. It also won't run that close to most of the main concentrations of Edinburgh residents. I like the idea of a tram system, and think it is potentially a very good method of public transport. I just wish that it actually reached out to the places that people actually live.
I have to say that I have felt unsafe on buses in Glasgow myself- hence the reason that I have a tendency to walk pretty much everywhere when I am through there. I've only once felt unsafe on a train though - on the way back from Edinburgh one Sunday night. I got on a train that turned out to be full of people singing about how they wanted to "kill the f*c**ng English" (they were on their way back from a Wales/South Africa Rugby match). I found a jump-seat near the door and kept my mouth firmly zipped and just nodded comradely at folk whenever they caught my eye.
Other than that my public transport experiences have been mostly marked by their rather variable reliability and other consequences of underinvestment. (Not that this should surprise us - after all, public transport has long since ceased to be primarily an exercise in moving people from A to B. Increasing dividend payments will, naturally, take precedence over other concerns).
Karl
|
|
|
Post by Fortmax2020 on Dec 15, 2008 15:08:51 GMT
As someone happily without a car I am all in favour of increased promotion of public transport. My local bus company has however just hiked their prices up 20% as people using them has fallen off (and as the price of fuel drops...). I'm not sure how this is supposed to encourage more bus use in the city especially as the numbers dropped off about the time of another price increase we had on the buses earlier this year.
That combined with the fact I cannot have visitors who come with a car park outside my own flat because I don't have a car myself when if I did they could leads me to become increasingly frustrated with how people who do their best to make use of public transport are constantly being given the short straw in things when it should really be the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by Bogatan on Dec 15, 2008 17:10:31 GMT
When public transport works its wonderful. I honestly think London is amazing in that respect at least. The Oyster system, the underground and the buses on the whole work amazingly well. 90p journeys irrelevant of how far make the buses affordable to most and I dont remeber ever feeling unsafe on one. When I lived in Tooting I generally biked to work in Putney even at 5 am in the morning but when I did use the buses I could be reasonably confident of arriving on time.
Let compare that to Hull. First there are only buses. You might think that would make it simple, but it doesnt there isnt a unified transport system because we have two bus companies. Generally theres a good coverage in fairness but too often there are gaps where there should be buses but arent. The cost is horrendous. Stagecoach costs £1.20 per trip (they have recently brought in return tickets and zonal pricing though the inner zone is a tiny area and not really that much cheaper) EY Buses is even more expensive. The only way to travel cheap is to get 10 trip tickets or unlimited weekly tickets. These bring the price down but can only be used with the company who sold it so getting from one place to another often means going via the city centre instead of takinga direct rout and changing along the way.
When I worked at Asda there were no buses early enough to get me to work, without a bike I would have needed to drive or get a taxi. Even if I could have got a bus the only route I could take was one that went through the city centre but when it did I would have to buy another ticket even though I never got of the bus.
We have just got a new bus interchange which is very nice but the fact is that the city remains cut in two bus companies and by route that see the city east and west of the river as two different systems.
Essentially its an expensive nightmare that is only used by those with no other choice or the lucky few who have local routes of use to them so I really cant blame anyone who chooses to use a car.
Also on the congestion charge thing, generally I favour it but having spent time in central london I find it hard to imagine its made much of an improvement in terms of fewer cars. Of course thats whats funding public transport which does work. Really not sure of any green benefits though.
Andy
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Dec 15, 2008 17:37:54 GMT
90p a journey! Wow!
In Glasgow 2-journey tickets are £2.85, all-day tickets are £3.20. Which is a bit of a problem for low earners/those on benefits.
I walk when I can. It's cheaper and I like walking, though there are plenty of areas where walking is not safe.
-Ralph
|
|
|
Post by karla on Dec 15, 2008 22:05:22 GMT
its only 90p on off-peak though! Its also free fare after you've used your oystercard 3 times on buses in the same day hope they still do that doesn't apply to underground though
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Dec 16, 2008 7:40:56 GMT
I'll happily admit I have nothing but admiration for the London underground, even if normal people do turn into blank-faced zombies for the duration of their journey on it, quite different from the way they relax on buses and normal trains from my experience. But a city like London only works because of the underground, and outside rush hours it's very pleasant to use.
Interesting to hear about the two bus companies in Hull. Cardiff Bus and Newport Bus interact quite well, in that some services of each travel from one city centre to the other, but you can get a return or day ticket on one and use it coming back on the other.
All-day tickets are £3 within Cardiff.
Martin
|
|
|
Post by Fortmax2020 on Dec 20, 2008 22:12:27 GMT
If you dislike them stealing money from you switch to public transport now and help create the demand for the services you want?
|
|
|
Post by karla on Dec 20, 2008 22:49:49 GMT
I wouldn't mind driving a bus, just to bully everyone else on the road
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Dec 21, 2008 11:29:06 GMT
If you dislike them stealing money from you switch to public transport now and help create the demand for the services you want? Isn't that the problem, thousands of people every morning being crammed like sardines into too few railway carriages? That is certainly part of the problem in many areas. But in many other places there are half-empty buses during rush-hours, being held up by queues of cars carrying just one person. The experience that triggered my initial rant in this thread was on a Bristol bus less than half full being caught up in car gridlock - and that with a half hour gap between buses. The solution in parts of the country where there are both overcrowded public transport systems _and_ car gridlock is certainly not just for drivers to get out of their cars and try to squeeze onto trains and buses already full to the limit. And I don't believe it is to build more roads either, concreting over what green remains, since car numbers always seem to increase to fill the roads, however many are built. Road building would probably even encourage some of the people now on buses and trains to switch back to cars. I believe that in those areas, the solution is a combination (depending on what is and isn't practical in each case) of: more people walking/cycling when only travelling a few miles; greater investment in public transport (partially subsidised by taxing motorists - sorry Paul); more flexible working hours, so that the rush hours gets more evenly spread across the day; better planning (both by authorities and individuals) so that people travel shorter distances between home and work; and in some instances, more working from home. Even when it involves public transport, regular long-distance commuting should be seen as a sign of a bad planning that needs to be ironed out of the way this country works. Even putting environmental and financial considerations to one side, the time it takes to commute is time gone from your life. But I admit that's a long way off. Martin
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2008 18:48:31 GMT
The roads into Leicester are about the best for public transport. On many of the main roads there are specific 'bus lanes' in which only buses are allowed to travel down thus cutting congestion out completly for public transport. There are also 'Park and Ride' services in the area which allow people to safely park their car in a specific area just prior to the city centre and take a bus into the city.
Unfortunatly, the public transport iself isn't too much up to scratch. Buses come late or sometimes don't arrive at all and even in the morning youths get on the bus, sit on the back seat, light up a cigarette and talk non stop for the entire bus journey about getting drunk liberally applying many swear words into their conversations as well.
|
|
|
Post by karla on Dec 21, 2008 18:59:18 GMT
oooooo i've always like the idea of park and ride, it sounds so cute. Could write a song "I'm gonna park my car and ride the bus YEAH! ride the bus YEAH!"
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Jan 23, 2009 18:25:57 GMT
I had two unpleasant bus trips yesterday. On the first, I made one of the Great Mistakes when using public transport, ie sit up the back. But the front half of the bus was full. On buses, most anti-social behavour happens up the back. So I got stuck beside the lads shouting sectarian songs, who got louder as more people got on. While there, I made another Great Mistake of public transport: I tried to read a book. If I had a penny for the number of times I've been hassled on public transport for daring to utalise my literary skills, I could have a very nice meal at a very swish restaurant. As I walked off the bus it was to shouts of: "HE'S GONE! HE'S FUCKING GONE! HE'S FUCKING GONE AT LAST! HE'S FUCKING GONE!"
Later, on another bus, we had the ned brigade with their loud music and smoking. The latter has been banned on buses for many years, long before the general smoking ban of March 2006 began. Even when the driver came out his cab for a word the reaction was: "FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU! AHM NO FUCKING DOIN' ANYTHING! FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU! NO FUCKING DOIN' ANYTHING! FUCK OFF! FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU! FUCK YOU!" My nerves were frazzled by the end of the 40-minute journey.
The greatest barrier to people switching from their cars to public transport is (more so than price) making them safe and pleasant to use. I would pay more to use the services of a company which put security on their buses/trains/penny farthlings.
-Ralph
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Feb 19, 2009 11:59:04 GMT
RE: Public transport, a recent report on UK rail fares relative to Europe: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7897903.stmPersonally, I find it insane that when travelling from Scotland to England or Wales it's usually significantly cheaper to fly than take the train! Sometimes even cheaper than taking the bus! Which I just can't wrap my head around. -Ralph
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Feb 19, 2009 19:00:25 GMT
Bizarrely, and unprecedentedly, I just bought a single train ticket from Cardiff to London for a weekday in less than a fortnight's time, during peak hours (leave 7.25am, arriving Paddington about 9.30am)... and it cost £14.50. Normally only open tickets are available, whether I book longer in advance or closer to the time of the trip, and it costs about £80.
All I can think of is that every so often they make cheap tickets available, which will sell out really quickly, and it's complete luck if you happen to be buying at the right time to get them.
Martin
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Feb 20, 2009 10:08:14 GMT
Jings. It is rather silly. A more transparent and easily understandable pricing system is a must, I think. What is mad about train fares long-distance is that on-the-day-fares are so stratospheric compared to pre-booking in advance. It ignores the spontaneous nature of needing to travel, which can arise due to job or family issues. If you want to travel in your car, it costs the same any day you like to go. Also, bear in mind that it is often impossible to pre-book if your return journey falls on a Sunday.
I love trains. I find them to be comfortable and relaxing when travelling cross-country. But, sadly, nine times out of ten, going by plane is significantly cheaper!
It's very frustrating. I rely on public transport. I would like more people to use it, but alas I find it difficult to persuade people when the cost is so much higher than cars and is often (in my experience, so this is a generalisation) filthy and/or a haven for anti-social behaviour. I don't want a car!
-Ralph
EDIT: A recent return train journey to Edinburgh from 3 miles outside Glasgow cost more than a flight to Cardiff. Madness!
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Mar 27, 2009 10:55:34 GMT
With very little press interest, daily ticket bus fares are going up 30p on Monday in Glasgow and surrounding areas, a rise well above inflation due to "rising fuel costs". No mention is made of making the buses more reliable, cleaner or more importantly safer to use. Politicians strangely quiet. Yeah, there's an agenda to promote public transport use. Sure there is. Bullshit.
-Ralph
|
|