Crowded trains U-turn fury

Exclusive Neal Keeling

June 30, 2009

| Submit Comments | Comments (39) | Previous | Next

Train Overcrowding on the Bolton to Manchester service

THE Government has gone back on its pledge to provide 180 new train carriages in a bid to ease overcrowding in Greater Manchester.

Department for Transport officials have informed local transport bosses that a maximum of only 106 will be provided in what insiders believe is part of the government's review of public spending.

The original figure was announced in January 2008, by the then Transport Secretary and Bolton West MP Ruth Kelly.

The reduction was described as `outrageous' by Coun Keith Whitmore, chairman of the Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority (GMITA).

He said: "There is a debate on the rail service on Wednesday at the House Commons and we have alerted all of Greater Manchester's MPs to it, after this totally outrageous decision.

"Officials from the DfT asked that we keep this confidential but there is no way we will agree to that.

"This will be a campaign issue. We are not prepared to let this go. If we do not get the number of carriages first promised acute overcrowding, which has already been highlighted in places like Bolton, will continue."

Outrageous

Last year it was announced 180 carriages would be offered to Northern Rail as part of a government deal to introduce 1,300 new carriages across England between this year and 2014.

At the time the minister said passenger numbers had grown by 40 per cent in a decade and so the government would be investing £10bn to increase capacity on railways.

After taking over the franchise in 2006, Northern Trains attracted 23 per cent more passengers in its first two years of operation.

The extra carriages were planned to help ease overcrowding on routes serving areas including Rochdale/ Milnrow, Stalybridge, Hyde North, Redditch North, Stockport, Manchester Airport, Eccles, Urmston, and Salford Crescent.

Coun Whitmore added: "This news is bad enough but the sting in the tail is that the DfT has also told us that in the future the five trains that run on the Oldham and Rochdale loop line must be paid for by us if they are to remain in the conurbation."

The problem of overcrowding is not only confined to rush hour and peak periods. Free travel for the over 60s has caused overcrowding even during off-peak hours.

A spokesman for the DFT said: "The procurement process is under way and we will make an announcement in due course."

Neal.keeling@men-news.co.uk

| Submit Comments | Comments (39) | Previous | Next

Showing comments 1 to 25 and replies | View All

want to leave, Stretford (30/06/2009 at 08:18)

Yet again the North gets the cuts and they are spending £16 billion on Crossrail in London. Disgraceful.

Horatio Dogsbody, Flixton (30/06/2009 at 08:47)

Anyone who subscribes to Modern Railways and studies 'Informed Sources' would be aware that the much trumpeted 1,300 carriages were as much to do with spin as to reality and actuallly involved moving various types of existing rolling stock around between the various franchisees as well as some already committed new orders.

As the railways have effectively been given away to private companies, the old British Railways smashed into a hundred pieces, it is up to the shareholders of those companies to provide the rolling stock at their risk and expense, not the taxpayer.

Treble99 (30/06/2009 at 08:58)

Meanwhile in other news the Government pledges another £80 billion for London.
The sooner we stop paying our taxes and declare independence for the peoples Republic of Mancunia the better.

Hamish Macbeth, Whitefield (30/06/2009 at 09:10)

The Country is broke...
The Government is adept only at spinning, recycling monies to make multiple announcements with the same cash.
"the Government pledges another £80 billion for London" will be some old money rehashed as a new investment - else the £80 billion will be pledge for when a different Government is in power, one a bit more financially astute, and the investment will be pulled

john davis (30/06/2009 at 09:18)

Well there's no surprise there, as this government promises to do loads of things and never does, remember the 1997 pledge , "TOUGH ON CRIME, TOUGH ON THE CAUSES ON CRIME" In labour terms this means releasing prisoners early to commit yet more crime, having silly OAP Judges sitting in major trials where the Police and everyone else has worked very hard and then the Judge gives a ridiculously low sentence. The brilliant scenario of not having enough prison spaces for proper criminals but we will use up 60,000 cells for people who haven't paid their TV licence or similar trivial matters. Bet the 2012 Olympics goes over budget and the Queens 60 years on the Throne , now there's one occasion to chuck 500 million away. This country makes you want to puke.

Voice of Sanity (30/06/2009 at 09:23)

Hazel Blears what have you done !

Daniel H, Salford Quays (30/06/2009 at 09:51)

Well let's not get too heated, the 106 extra trains they will provide, will undoubtedly make a huge difference....

dessie, manchester (30/06/2009 at 10:00)

while we throw money at the olmpics and keeping asylum seekers in nice hostels and waste money on stupid things we will always be broke, the best way to to tell the rail companies weve had enough is to dont use them for a day and see how much they lose!!!!

Not a Number, just down the road (30/06/2009 at 10:14)

I hadn't heard of the land grab by GMPTE

Redditch North indeed!

Seriously - the promise of extra carriages was always spin, and made up of several repeated announcements of the same potential rebalancing, in the hope that the media dn the public would swalow it every single time

The politicians still don't get it do they? - You've been rumbled!!!!!!!

Bury Pensioner., Bury. (30/06/2009 at 10:23)

I suppose the 'Southern Softies' will get the rest of what we should have had.

Horatio Dogsbody, Flixton (30/06/2009 at 10:25)

"Well let's not get too heated, the 106 extra trains they will provide, will undoubtedly make a huge difference..."

Carriages - to be attached to existing trains throughout the whole of northern England for a company which runs hundreds of trains - not extra trains to increase the service level.

Rob Wilson (30/06/2009 at 10:25)

Surprise surprise!

Back in the car it is then!!!

Tameside John (30/06/2009 at 10:31)

Oldham Loop close to heavy rail later this year something to do with Metrolink so I don't see how those 5 trains will run.

Yet again Manchester isn't London so what do we expect, yes you can, no you cant, yes you can, no you cant etc.

The political football continues.

chillbill, oldham (30/06/2009 at 11:10)

As someone who is loosing the railway station as part of Metrolink this is a nother body punch.

Brook Lands (30/06/2009 at 11:19)

Hope everyone who voted no to congestion charges is happy now.

nyb, ex manc (30/06/2009 at 11:41)

London is like a gigantic leech sucking the money away from the rest of the country.

Mike S, Manchester (30/06/2009 at 11:46)

Yes I am happy I voted no to the congestion charge, so that I don't have to pay yet another tax, the proceeds of which would only go to servicing a huge loan / administration costs, rather than investment in public transport.

The government just doesn't care about the North (apart from Scotland of course, where the senior ministers hail from). Time to look into working from home methinks.

Ran Droid, Manchester (30/06/2009 at 11:55)

@Brook Lands

What exactly has this got to do with the congestion charge? This is just another New Labour lie, one of many, nothing to do with the CC at all.

Oh, and you may want to check that much of what was promised if we voted 'yes' is happening *anyway*, so not only has this zero to do with the CC, it's now obvious the CC was never even needed to get the investment in the first place!

Pushkin (30/06/2009 at 12:02)

This government knows that it can do whatever it wants in Manchester as they'll still get voted in no matter what.

Rt Hon Dr Rev MC Spanner MP QC FCA FRICS JP OK (30/06/2009 at 12:18)

"Hope everyone who voted no to congestion charges is happy now"

If we had voted yes we would have had the charge and the government would have still withdrawn it's investment. Don't kid yourself.

dog hardy, manchester (30/06/2009 at 12:36)

Visited Manchester 1st time for ages,into by train on the Crewe line.Iwas amazed on returning home that not asingle train passed into MANuntil Alderley Edge and it was rush hour.Startling thig was the train going towards Wilmslow was a deisel PACER A 2 CARRIAGE CATTLE TRUCKvirtually due to enter a packed Wilmslow.These so called trains would be laughed at on the continent and should have been condemned as unsafe yrs ago.This was a train on a line where billions have been spent modernising and electrifying going into what could be described into 2nd most influential in this country.I bet y wouldn,t find a cattle truck like these around the LONDON area or the S/EAST

Brook Lands (30/06/2009 at 13:12)

Ok, so we were offered a way to improve dramatically public transport in the area and all we had to do was pay a charge if we were selfish enough to want to drive into town in the morning on the way to work.

But we said no. Everyone wants things to improve but no-one wants to actually pay for it or to have to give something up.

Now we're in a recession and we all have to tighten our belts (including shock horror the govt, wouldn't matter if it was Labour or anyone else), what do people fancy, less teachers, less doctors, less nurses, less police or less train carriages?

nyb, ex manc (30/06/2009 at 13:12)

Why is everything so Londoncentric in this damned country, it's the only city which seems to count. In the United States, there are powerhouse cities all over the country e.g New York, Chicago, LA, Philadelphia, Seattle,, San Francisco, Boston, Baltimore, Atlanta, Miami, etbloodycetera.

In the UK, or at least England since Scotland managed to struggle free of Westminster, we have historic cities like, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, Bristol, Birminghamn, Newcastle, etc, and they are kept in servitude to the Almighty London. Any central investment outside London is hidebound with restrictions, while money pours into London regeneration like a Tsunami.

Why?

rocketmanu, Ex Old Trafford (30/06/2009 at 13:26)

The money from the CC charge would have been syphoned off to London anyway.

Viva the republic of Manchester!!

Mike S, Manchester (30/06/2009 at 14:22)

Brook Lands - I have to disagree. Us taxpayers are paying more than enough already - we've never been taxed more in history. However, it's going towards, for example, fighting an illegal war on false pretences in Iraq, Trident (whilst telling other countries they can't have nuclear weapons), an ID card scheme that no-one wants, an Olympics which will only (possibly) benefit London but likely bankrupt the entire country, ridiculously lax immigration policies when the country's already bursting at the seams. The list goes on.

How can anyone believe this government any more? Manchester gets the super casino. Then it gets taken away, but promised a Covent Garden of the North in its place. Then that gets taken away. What are the latest (fanciful) proposals for the site? Then the TIF (which was originally promised in full as a grant in Labour's manifesto for the last election) which the government (in conjunction with the labour council in its pocket) blackmailed us with, saying there was no alternative should we not volunteer to another tax which would be at least as much as council tax at the then current prices.

()

Report

News