East West rail, Bletchley to oxford line

[martinT]

2 hours ago, lmsforever said:

 I hope I will be able to go on a trip Winslow Bletchley when its open.

 

I hope to live long enough to travel from Cambridge to Didcot - but I fear it might be touch & go!

The southern approach to Cambridge is the favoured one (at least by the E W Consortium). If the decision is revoked (as the southern route inhabitants are pressing for) & the northern approach chosen it means the line will pass thro' my village with all the disruption that implies & without the consolation of a station. By comparison the few years of disruption that the A14 ugrade has caused us will seem as nothing!

[TheQ]

52 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

Perhaps my comment was a bit wrong but many lines closed after creative accounting  but at least now some of them are reopening. The programe about Marples was an eye opener in the way it showed how things unfolded was a very sorry story with a sad ending.  

or deliberate changing of the time table, so you couldn't catch connecting trains, or in the case of the MSWJR changing the station the connecting train stopped at, so you had some distance between stations at Cheltenham as well..

[melmerby]

1 hour ago, Michael Hodgson said:

 

Marples is remembered more for his time as Postmaster General and the the introduction of "Ernie", the premium bond and postcodes.

If he is accused of conspiracy, it would be more appropriate to consider whether his role as the Minister of Transport who opened of the first motorways was a conflict of interest with his previous role as MD of a road construction company.  His lot got slung out when Harold won by banging on about 13 years of Tory misrule, but Wilson's lot carried on closing enconomic lines.

It's all been aired before but the Labour party canvassed as part of their election campaign on stopping the Beeching Closures, But IIRC more were closed by them than the previous Tories

 

Marples Ridgway was founded by Ernest Marples & Reginald Ridgway. It was sold in 1964.

He was MoT from 1959 -1964 during which Marples Ridgway had several road building contracts, including the Chiswick & Hammersmith Flyovers.

He owned 80% of the shares when he became MoT and in clear breach of the rules as a minister. He eventually sold them to his wife with an agreement to buy them back later at the same price. During this time the company won contracts one of which was by Ernie's department overiding a lower tender (Accepted by London County Council)  by another company.

 

Conflict of interest? Undoubtably and bordering on Criminality.

 

[keefer]

And Beeching was Marples' brother-in-law

[martinT]

1 hour ago, melmerby said:

It's all been aired before but the Labour party canvassed as part of their election campaign on stopping the Beeching Closures, But IIRC more were closed by them than the previous Tories

 

May be, but don't forget that the unions representing the road haulage workers, the bus company employees, the civil engineering workers, & the car & lorry factory workers had far more clout in the Labour Party than those representing the railway workers.  Indeed Frank Cousins, Gen Sec of the TGWU, was appointed to the Cabinet as Minister of Technology by Wilson in 1964 without even being an MP. (He did subsequently win Nuneaton in a by-election & was briefly an MP).

Edited February 15, 2022 by martinT
typo

[Mike Storey]

If we remain on the subject, which is probably OT, Marples fled the country before criminal proceedings could be progressed against him, for, amongst other things, fraud. So, I doubt any serious defence of his position is realistic. But a defence of Beeching remains feasible, albeit, not in this case.

 

But, such matters could not have been progressed unless general sentiment was contrary. There was a widely held belief, in the 1960's, that railways were history, and roads were the future. That is why the policy was continued by the Labour government from 1964, until the massive change in attitude delivered by the Barbra Castle Transport Act of 1968, under which socially necessary railways were subsidised. 

 

But even this did not save many branch lines, for which no social benefit case was successfully presented. The EWR was amongst those, in its entirety, although not in some of its elements. The ones that did succeed, were those which were covered by, or majority covered by, a single County Council, such as the East Suffolk Line. The EWR even now, would not have survived under those rules. The creation of a single entity, as in EWR Ltd, to drive those collective benefits, across the multiple county and other interests, is what has developed and promulgated it. Until the Treasury "Blue Book" Rules were changed in around the 2016's, which allowed the 1968 Act determinations to be used across wider geography, in England and Wales, were such propositions even allowed to make the first hurdle.

 

This, whilst many of us clamour for earlier re-openings and upgradings to have occurred already, it is not at all obvious how such actions were to have happened. Impatience is one thing, but an acknowledgement of reality is another.

 

 

[Mike Storey]

11 minutes ago, martinT said:

 

May be, but don't forget that the unions representing the road haulage workers, the bus company employees, the civil engineering workers, & the car & lorry factory workers had far more clout in the Labour Party than those representing the railway workers.  Indeed Frank Cousins, Gen Sec of the TGWU, was appointed to the Cabinet ar Minister of Technology by Wilson in 1964 without even being an MP. (He did subsequently win Nuneaton in a by-election & was briefly an MP).

 

Quite. It was the T&GWU which refused to support the NUR/ASLEF strike of 1986, following the Miners' strike of 1984\5 (which the NUR and ASLEF had fully supported), and which allowed, amongst other things, cars to continue to be exported from the West Midlands by road, instead of by rail, and which effectively broke the strike. The NUR never forgave them for that, nor did ASLEF. That explains many of the fissures in the Labour movement even today.

 

[Nearholmer]

Yes, we discussed all this way back up thread, and looking at things with 1960s glasses on, it’s very hard indeed to see a reason for keeping the entire cross-country route. Things were very different then in that MK was still a gleam in a planner’s eye, and by no means guaranteed to “take off” as it has (which has really only happened since about 1995), and I doubt anyone had the faintest idea that the Cambridge to Oxford “growth arc” would arise. What is now one of the fastest developing areas of the country was then a load of damp fields and a brickworks-blighted vale.

[KingEdwardII]

3 hours ago, martinT said:

The southern approach to Cambridge is the favoured one

Yes, although for me, the need for places like Cambourne to be on the line does not sit well with a southern route.

 

Yours, Mike.

[Arun Sharma]

3 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Definitely not the A421; you can go via The Claydons etc., or a bit more scenic via Qauinton and Brill.

 

The cheat method is to start at Winslow, which lops 10 miles off each way!

I have to say that one of the few times I have scared myself on a pushbike was when I was cycling northwards down the hill from Brill. I stopped looking at the speedometer once it reached 37mph.

[Nearholmer]

Yes, that hill is steep in both directions.

[Arun Sharma]

2 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

If we remain on the subject, which is probably OT, Marples fled the country before criminal proceedings could be progressed against him, for, amongst other things, fraud. So, I doubt any serious defence of his position is realistic. But a defence of Beeching remains feasible, albeit, not in this case.

 

But, such matters could not have been progressed unless general sentiment was contrary. There was a widely held belief, in the 1960's, that railways were history, and roads were the future. That is why the policy was continued by the Labour government from 1964, until the massive change in attitude delivered by the Barbra Castle Transport Act of 1968, under which socially necessary railways were subsidised. 

 

But even this did not save many branch lines, for which no social benefit case was successfully presented. The EWR was amongst those, in its entirety, although not in some of its elements. The ones that did succeed, were those which were covered by, or majority covered by, a single County Council, such as the East Suffolk Line. The EWR even now, would not have survived under those rules. The creation of a single entity, as in EWR Ltd, to drive those collective benefits, across the multiple county and other interests, is what has developed and promulgated it. Until the Treasury "Blue Book" Rules were changed in around the 2016's, which allowed the 1968 Act determinations to be used across wider geography, in England and Wales, were such propositions even allowed to make the first hurdle.

 

This, whilst many of us clamour for earlier re-openings and upgradings to have occurred already, it is not at all obvious how such actions were to have happened. Impatience is one thing, but an acknowledgement of reality is another.

 

 

There was an article a few months ago either in Backtrack or possibly Steam Days which looked at the remarkable lack of support from both Oxford and Cambridge Universities for retention of the railway linking them when approached by BR looking to close the line. 

As a resident of Abingdon I am aware of Stagecoach's X5 coach which runs twice an hour between Oxford and Cambridge via Bicester, Buckingham, MK, Bedford and St Neots. I suspect that a study of traffic loadings would show few passengers making the whole trip but most travelling one or two of these legs. I would expect that E-W Railway would be rather similar and logically that type of journey would support proposals to add services from Aylesbury to MK via Calvert, Winslow and Bletchley.

[Nearholmer]

The full end-to-end X5 bus trip is seriously, tediously long-winded, making it probably quicker and less gruelling to go via London. So, while I agree with what you say, I would expect a decently nippy and comfortable train service to “grow its own market” in terms of end-to-end trips to some degree.

 

Could really do with moving Cambridge station, though, ‘cos it’s still a long walk into town.

 

 

Edited February 15, 2022 by Nearholmer

[Northmoor]

3 hours ago, melmerby said:

It's all been aired before but the Labour party canvassed as part of their election campaign on stopping the Beeching Closures, But IIRC more were closed by them than the previous Tories

 

Marples Ridgway was founded by Ernest Marples & Reginald Ridgway. It was sold in 1964.

He was MoT from 1959 -1964 during which Marples Ridgway had several road building contracts, including the Chiswick & Hammersmith Flyovers.

He owned 80% of the shares when he became MoT and in clear breach of the rules as a minister. He eventually sold them to his wife with an agreement to buy them back later at the same price. During this time the company won contracts one of which was by Ernie's department overiding a lower tender (Accepted by London County Council)  by another company.

 

Conflict of interest? Undoubtably and bordering on Criminality.

 

Sorry, but this is about the fourth time I've had to debunk this claim on RMWeb in just the last year.

 

Marples was a very dodgy politician and yes, owning the shares was an unbelievable conflict of interest (it shows both arrogance and the deference of the public and media of the time), but no evidence has ever been produced to show that Ernest Marples sold his company shares to his wife.  That story started as a rumour in 1964 and is still being repeated as fact nearly 60 years later.

[Pete the Elaner]

19 minutes ago, Nearholmer said:

The full end-to-end X5 bus trip is seriously, tediously long-winded, making it probably quicker and less gruelling to go via London. So, while I agree with what you say, I would expect a decently nippy and comfortable train service to “grow its own market” in terms of end-to-end trips to some degree.

 

Could really do with moving Cambridge station, though, ‘cos it’s still a long walk into town.

 

 

 

I am guessing it has been mentioned elsewhere, but some of the existing stations have been earmarked for closure rather than build passing loops which would be required to stop fast trains getting held up by stoppers.

It is a double edged sword: It would be nice to have the stations open, but it is also necessary to provide fast services to attract passengers.

I believe Kempston Hardwick is one of the proposed closures. It is in the middle of nowhere & quite a walk down a very quiet country road from the nearest village, which is Kempston. It is easy to see why it is lightly used.

[martinT]

1 hour ago, KingEdwardII said:

Yes, although for me, the need for places like Cambourne to be on the line does not sit well with a southern route..

I can understand that but the E W Consortium does want to approach Cambridge from the south, & so serving the proposed new station of Cambridge South.  This will serve  Addenbrookes & Papworth Hospitals & the new bio-medical campus that includes Astra-Zeneca's HQ. On arrival at Cambridge (main) station trains will then be able to proceed to Ely & perhaps beyond without reversal. The northern route would join the Ely line north of the relatively new Cambridge North station. Thus times to Cambridge South would be considerably longer. Extending to/from Ely would require reversal. Reversal would be even more of an operating problem for freight trains from Felixstowe, unless a triangular junction was put in somewhere near Cambridge North - but consideration for freight trains is (as I understand it) beyond the remit of EWC.

[lmsforever]

3 hours ago, Arun Sharma said:

I have to say that one of the few times I have scared myself on a pushbike was when I was cycling northwards down the hill from Brill. I stopped looking at the speedometer once it reached 37mph.

lost count number of times I have ridden that hill in bike races during the sixties and seventies ,its hard to climb but good going down especialy in a group of twenty or more !

[rodent279]

3 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

The full end-to-end X5 bus trip is seriously, tediously long-winded, making it probably quicker and less gruelling to go via London. So, while I agree with what you say, I would expect a decently nippy and comfortable train service to “grow its own market” in terms of end-to-end trips to some degree.

 

Could really do with moving Cambridge station, though, ‘cos it’s still a long walk into town.

 

 

I used to live in Bedford, and used the X5 several times to go to MK, Oxford and Cambridge. I never used it to do the full end to end Oxford-Cambridge journey, but I can't believe the train journey was ever faster than the current bus journey. I'd prefer to have been on a train, but it's one of the better inter-urban bus services I've used. I can't remember if there was a connection into ECML services at Sandy or Biggleswade.

[KingEdwardII]

3 hours ago, Nearholmer said:

Could really do with moving Cambridge station, though, ‘cos it’s still a long walk into town

Unfortunately, the placement of Cambridge station is almost entirely down to the machinations of the colleges/university in the Victorian era. It is said that they viewed an easy-to-access railway station as too much of a temptation for the students - and so they insisted on a station a long way from the colleges.

 

Cambridge students have had plenty of opportunities for cursing them ever since...

 

Yours, Mike.

[melmerby]

3 hours ago, Northmoor said:

Sorry, but this is about the fourth time I've had to debunk this claim on RMWeb in just the last year.

 

Marples was a very dodgy politician and yes, owning the shares was an unbelievable conflict of interest (it shows both arrogance and the deference of the public and media of the time), but no evidence has ever been produced to show that Ernest Marples sold his company shares to his wife.  That story started as a rumour in 1964 and is still being repeated as fact nearly 60 years later.

Being pedantic, debunking is providing evidence to the contrary. You haven't provided any evidence, so you can't debunk it.

If you do have evidence publish it and put the record straight.

 

His biographer said he sold his shares to his wife and I would hope that person did the research to back up the claim.

It should be available if you visit Companies House where a company has to declare all those who have a significant interest in a company.

Unfortunately records of that age will still be only on paper.

 

Parliamentary records show that he tried to sell them to Ridgway but was overruled by the Attorney General

He is on record (Hansard) as telling the Commons when asked some time later that he had now sold the shares. He could of course have been lying but Parliament believed him.

 

There were two rumours at the time, the first that he transferred them to an overseas trust that couldn't be traced back to him or he had sold them to his wife.

The wife theory is the one that has gained the most traction.

 

 

[Nearholmer]

9 hours ago, rodent279 said:

it's one of the better inter-urban bus services I've used.

It is good by bus standards, with nice comfy vehicles, but it still takes 3h 40m. Car takes 2h 15m, and even going via London by train and allowing generous time to get between stations only takes 2h 40m.

 

Clearly the bus is better from an environmental and a parking viewpoint, and almost certainly cheapest, especially if cost of parking is taking into consideration, but it isn’t the sort of journey you’d really want to do both ways in a day, to attend a conference or lecture or something.

 

Overall, Oxford and Cambridge are “a long way apart” in travel terms when compared with many other pairs of significant places, which is why I think a good, direct train service could really score.

[Andy Kirkham]

14 hours ago, Arun Sharma said:

As a resident of Abingdon I am aware of Stagecoach's X5 coach which runs twice an hour between Oxford and Cambridge via Bicester, Buckingham, MK, Bedford and St Neots.

This shows how demand has grown in recent decades. I remember in the 1970s the Oxford-Cambridge service was operated by a company called Percivals and I think the service may have been just one a day. At any rate the company's logo was a clockface showing 10:30, which was the departure time from both Oxford and, in the opposite direction, Cambridge.

 

However my favourite Oxford bus company was Charlton-on-Otmoor Services (which would be a nice touch to include in Endeavour)

 

Edited February 16, 2022 by Andy Kirkham

[Arun Sharma]

2 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said:

This shows how demand has grown in recent decades. I remember in the 1970s the Oxford-Cambridge service was operated by a company called Percivals and I think the service may have been just one a day. At any rate the company's logo was a clockface showing 10:30, which was the departure time from both Oxford and, in the opposite direction, Cambridge.

 

However my favourite Oxford bus company was Charlton-on-Otmoor Services (which would be a nice touch to include in Endeavour)

 

The double-decker is ex-London RT 398 of 1946

[caradoc]

2 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said:

This shows how demand has grown in recent decades. I remember in the 1970s the Oxford-Cambridge service was operated by a company called Percivals and I think the service may have been just one a day. At any rate the company's logo was a clockface showing 10:30, which was the departure time from both Oxford and, in the opposite direction, Cambridge.

 

I used the Oxford/Cambridge coach in 1974 and 1975, to get from Oxford to Hitchin and Cambridge for spotting purposes, by then it was a joint operation by Percivals of Oxford and Premier Travel of Cambridge. IIRC there were a few journeys each day, but as you say nothing like today's frequency, although I believe the X5 was downgraded during Covid, both in terms of the timetable and the vehicles used. 

 

[rodent279]

It also seems to be an Oxford-Bedford service, with a separate 905 service to Cambridge.