Conference: fast-track Britain

I have two confessions to make.

(1) I am a dabbling transport nerd (favourite London bus route: the 91/N91, and did you know that when the Piccadilly Line was extended in the thirties a public board was put up on the site of the now-Arnos Grove station inviting the public to make suggestions for the name – wouldn’t get that in top-down 21st-century Britain)

(2) Despite (1) I didn’t actually manage to watch the debate with anything like the attention it deserved as I was busily engaged in mainlining Day Nurse.

This is a shame, because the two amendments to the all-singing, all-dancing policy paper were both very interesting.

Amendment 1 would have altered the proposal for maintaining and refining  the train operator franchise system, instead allowing existing franchises to end and then, well, nationalising the railways again. It’s not often an amendment makes that bold a stroke to policy fundamentals. This was moved by Mick Taylor, who spoke, I think, from much the same ideological convictions as he did in support of the Make it Happen amendment yesterday.

Amendment 2 sought to tackle women’s fear of using public transport, by encouraging redesign and modification of public spaces on the transport network, ensuring availability of emergency phones and piloting schemes to allow women (and vulnerable individuals, though I am unclear what criteria this might involve) off buses in between designated stops at night.

Jo Christie-Smith didn’t get to speak in support of the amendment, and her planned speech is here.

Both were defeated – amendment 2 being a close call with two shows of hands – and the motion was carried.

Read more by or more about .
This entry was posted in Conference.
Advert

6 Comments

  • Oooh… yuk! How can the 91 be your favourite bus route? Go 38!

  • dreamingspire 18th Sep '08 - 8:04am

    As only a visitor to London, the 11 is impressive.
    If you don’t have enough space to terminate buses in the city centre, the operator needs to have additional buses available nearby to launch when there is a gap, instead of just whinging (and getting away with it) about congestion.
    Talk of moving much of the country closer to contract services as in London but with a reduced cost burden is gaining ground – but not with the present DfT managing it, and the current Transport Bill doesn’t look good enough to support it.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert

Recent Comments

  • Rif Winfield
    Whatever the multiple roles which the Navy must undertake (and here I fully agree with you, Edward), what is essential is the quantity of vessels. However effec...
  • Nick Baird
    @Jana - there is a huge difference between the relatively confined space of the Black Sea (and the Azov Sea in particular) and the North Atlantic where the area...
  • Steve Trevethan
    Might the "Future of War "and its present state also be affected by decisions relating to deciding who are the actual enemies? Might the Russia-Ukrains war b...
  • Edward marsh
    Thanks for the comment Jana. I’m not sure it’s “wrong” per say as the navy has a wide reach of maritime security responsibilities, many I outlined, the ...
  • James Hargrave
    A timely piece given current events. Chronic underinvestment in our energy resilience (especially gas) has left us very exposed, and assuming that isn't solved ...