tenthofjune

We can argue until the cows come home about the accuracy of the ‘only 10% will pay the congestion charge” claim of the Yes Vote campaign (it’s 20% according to the TIF consultation brochure), but let’s play along.

The pro-toll advocates say that it will only be 10% because others will be able to switch to a viable alternative (I can’t as previously posted). Following this logically through, this means that the remaining 10% are precisely the ones for whom the TIF proposals will not provide a viable public transport alternative.

So basically, the yes campaign are happy to promote the notion that the improvements should be paid for by those who can’t benefit from them.

How is that fair?

I really detest the telephone voting shows that currently pass as Saturday night ‘entertainment’, but my wife watches Strictly Come Dancing. What I do find funny, is the continued survival of John Sergeant (often misspelt ‘Sargent’) and how it’s really starting to annoy the judges.

However, it got me wondering – what if you wanted to intentionally sabotage one of these programmes? What better way to do it than to use their over-reliance on telephone voting against them.

Remember Eurovision 2006 in Athens, when Finland group ‘Lordi’ famously won with a heavy metal rock track? Thousands of viewers across Europe saw the chance to tip the result in favour of the outsider. Whether this was the otherwise silent number of hard rocks fans or Eurovision-skeptics looking to make a fool of the competition, it is not known, but the result was a resounding win for outsider Finland.

What if John Sergeant’s survival is not entirely down to his fan-base, but is in fact due to a long awaited backlash against this kind of show? What better way to discredit Saturday night pseudo-talent-judge-vote shows than to make a complete farce of the selection process by making the judging of any actual skill irrelevant. John Sergeant even alluded to this last night, when he pointed out that they were only playing by the rules – the judges only account for 50% of the vote.

Whether John’s votes come from a disparate number of ‘mischievous viewers’, simply trying to throw a spanner in the works, or an organised number of people intentionally trying to tilt the vote (Top Gear maybe), Len Goodman’s comments last night about people voting for John making a nonsense of the show, have only served to help John’s cause by keeping him out of the bottom two for yet another week.

You’ve got to hand it to the Manchester Congestion Charge ‘Yes Vote’ camp: their lack of targeting their advertising properly is helping to galvanise the ‘no’ vote.

Rule 1: Don’t play to one of the opposition’s main arguments

The pro-toll’s decision to go with the ‘I won’t pay’ adverts has only angered those who will have to pay. Couple that with fact that these have been sited along routes which will not receive funding to provide an alternative and you only reinforce people’s decision to vote no.

Rule 2: Don’t promote a service to those who won’t get it

Now, having realised that, they have switched to a ‘that sounds fair’ slogan, but you have to question the wisdom of large bill-board posters proclaiming the building of Metrolink routes smack in the middle of those areas that will never have the benefit of Metrolink. Again, when the lack of Metrolink is a sore point, this only reinforces a no vote.

Well done – keep it up!

The colours were splendid today, especially coupled with the low sunshine. Click on the images for full size versions.

In the past three weeks, I have contacted a number of people regarding the Manchester Congestion Tax. It is interesting to note the lack of response from the majority, without even the decency of a simple acknowledgement from some.

These details are updated as of 30th November:

Not a very impressive set of figures really; only three replies.

Given Ruth Kelly’s lack of response in the past, I don’t hold out much hope.

I will keep this post updated.

Update: 12th December

Ruth Kelly has finally responded – well sort of…

Only ten minutes after hearing the excellent result of the referendum, I arrived home to a letter from Ruth Kelly, but far from actually replying to my concerns, it would appear that she has simply forwarded my letter to GMPTE whose reply she has simply forwarded back to me without comment. A secretary could have done that!

It clearly stated in my original letter that I was fully aware of GMPTE’s attitude, so what was the point of getting them to repeat their propaganda? Given Ruth Kelly’s support for the TIF bid, it would seem that she is simply sitting on the fence.

If you’re wondering when the Horwich RMI bonfire is this year, forget it, you’ve missed it.

I just found out today that it was held last night (Sunday 26th October), very early for Bonfire Night. Last Year’s was on 4th November.

The person who told us said that there weren’t many people there, not surprising when most people will only now be wondering whether it will be the weekend before or after 5th November.

Have a read of this letter from Howard Bernstein to the DfT in London. In it he clearly states:

Heavy rail rolling stock and associated infrastructure (platform extensions, turnbacks, depots and stabling). These costs are now assumed to be met by the Department directly through the TOCs (Train Operating Companies) and Network Rail rather than through TIF grant to Greater Manchester and Prudential Borrowing cover.

AGMA are actively promoting extra carriages and platform extensions as part of the TIF package, yet they are clearly not.

Anyone who lives near to the Winter Hill transmitter will have noticed that it has undergone a few changes in the last couple of years.

In preparation for the digital switchover in Autumn 2009, new antenna arrays have been installed, while the arrays installed as a temporary measure during the concurrent transmission of analogue and digital TV are being removed. Click on the image on the right for a larger version.

There are also pictures of ongoing work on the mb21 site including the sections of GRP shroud that have been removed.

While looking at the details for Blackpool Illuminations, the guide has an advert for Transpennine Express, claiming a fare for Manchester to Blackpool of only £4 (£8 for the family as the children go free). Hmmm…. not bad, that’s worth considering as an alternative to driving, except for one thing:

That fare is not available!

In reality, the cheapest return for two adults is £25.40, the cheapest single is £25.20, over three times the advertised price.

Even from our local station, Blackrod, it is still £21 return for two adults. Compare that to just under £9 of fuel (even at today’s prices) for a return trip by car, and the train represents a premium of 133% over the car.

When you also consider the reduced flexibility of the rail timetable, and the fact that it would drop us off a couple of miles from where we want to be, the car wins hands down, yet again.

While I was on the Transpennine Express site, they were also advertising Manchester-Glasgow fares for £10 each way, so at a cost of £40 return for two adults, I was interested, especially after my last look at using rail to get to Glasgow, but sadly, the truth is once again different – it still costs a minimum of £120 return for two adults.

How are they allowed to advertise these fares when they are obviously extremely limited?

They even have the cheek to claim that ‘It’s quicker, cheaper, more direct, and less hassle than any other way.’ That’s definitely not the case for more than one person. Even for one person, it is still more expensive and unless the stations are adjacent to your house and destination, then ‘direct’ does not enter into it.

BBC Weather have a new site called Weather Beta. Unfortunately, their geography needs a little work unless Bolton has suddenly moved and displaced Blackburn. (click on the image for a larger view)