Andy Burnham

[Paulpowersleftfoot]

You aren't going to nationalise rain clouds are you?

;)

Free tooting popular front brollies

 

[Blue Mist]

Thing is ... (with your argument ) is that you've focused on the bus network 'having to make a profit' .... Its an essential service and the only pressure on it should be to break even. Rascals right ... if we put in place an expanded MetroLink network (bit like the underground where you have the ability to move between lines without having to go into the town centre) integrated it with a bus network then that would negate the need for people to drive into the City Centre. People would make that decision of their own accord.

Its crazy that it costs less to fly to Ibiza with Ryanair than it does to get a day return from Sale to Manchester.

In terms of buying the buses back ..... how were they acquired by the bus companies in the first place? Were the given or sold?

I mention profit and not break even because you need money for re-investment, not only in new buses.
The buses were bought from the council by the private companies when privatisation came in, it would cost an obscene amount of money to buy them back which is why Burnham isnt proposing that (Rascal is ) Burnham wants to do the London system where private companies are run by the council. That will not work in Manchester (IMO)
I fully agree that if there is a decent system people will use it rather than drive, Rascal was living up to his name and basically wanting us to be forced to take the bus
I do not think you can give the Tube in London as an example. The majority of it is antiquated but londoners have no choice but to use it. What they do benefit from is the billions spent on infrastructure, Crossrail etc that the north never get. We are still running diesel trains !! The Manchester Leeds link is desperate for investment but that is another argument. I am saying buses will not improve under Burnhams plan, his model is flawed and full of political rhetoric without any sensible ideas.

 

[Rascal]

I mention profit and not break even because you need money for re-investment, not only in new buses.
The buses were bought from the council by the private companies when privatisation came in, it would cost an obscene amount of money to buy them back which is why Burnham isnt proposing that (Rascal is ) Burnham wants to do the London system where private companies are run by the council. That will not work in Manchester (IMO)
I fully agree that if there is a decent system people will use it rather than drive, Rascal was living up to his name and basically wanting us to be forced to take the bus
I do not think you can give the Tube in London as an example. The majority of it is antiquated but londoners have no choice but to use it. What they do benefit from is the billions spent on infrastructure, Crossrail etc that the north never get. We are still running diesel trains !! The Manchester Leeds link is desperate for investment but that is another argument. I am saying buses will not improve under Burnhams plan, his model is flawed and full of political rhetoric without any sensible ideas.

I do not want to force you on to a bus. You can walk, run, cycle, skateboard, space hopper, pogo stick, work from home etc.

I have a car, I rarely use it, I only have a car because public transport is rubbish. If public transport was better I would get rid of my car. Quite often in the summer i get public transport to Salford Royal, I get a bus to the station, a train to town, a tram to Eccles and a bus to the hospital and then on the way back have a load of beers in town. Doing it that way benefits the local economy and saves on emissions. Its actually cheaper for me to do public transport because I am spacker and have a travel pass and railcard.

What we need to do is vote NIP and get the infrastructure of the North invested in rather than our taxes going on London vanity projects.

 

[Rascal]

You aren't going to nationalise rain clouds are you?

;)

Its a good idea :))

 

[aguero93:20]

I mention profit and not break even because you need money for re-investment, not only in new buses.

Breaking even would cover the cost of investment.

 

[mancityvstoke]

Can't carry loads of tools and hardware on the bus.

 

[Blue Mist]

Breaking even would cover the cost of investment.

That is just another way of saying you have to make a profit. OK you then spend it on re investment but it is still making a profit. But it wouldn't work like that and more importantly that is not Burnhams plan.

 

[Blue Mist]

Can't carry loads of tools and hardware on the bus.

Can't even get on a bus in a wheelchair if someone with a pram is on and won't get off.

 

[aguero93:20]

That is just another way of saying you have to make a profit. OK you then spend it on re investment but it is still making a profit. But it wouldn't work like that and more importantly that is not Burnhams plan.

No it's not mate, you don't need to make a profit to cover investment, investment is a cost of running a business.

 

[Rascal]

Can't carry loads of tools and hardware on the bus.

And you shouldn't have too.

Work vans would be exempt, unless they are driven by rags, fuck them they can carry their own the tools if they have a job, the scruffy cunts.