Good thread and it's well worth reading the paper (it's linked in the last post).

Some of my own comments in this thread

First, it's really good to see that the paper has either adopted the policies of or has come to the same conclusion as @Common_Weal's paper on rail nationalisation.

If we don't own all parts of the network, we can't strategically plan for it.

https://t.co/EOF30mfq7i
Excellent to see the plan include measures of how we get to the stations too. That has been too often omitted from previous attempts to do this kind of thing.
Also good to see some thought on intra-city travel as well as inter-city (again, something too often omitted) though I'll come back to that point.
And any plan that moves us away from cars being the default mode of travel is an improvement.
I do have a few critiques or areas identified for further work.
First, when it comes to commuting, we're yet to see the long term impact of Covid. Perhaps the default method of travel there should be to not travel. If home working (or local remote office hubs) becomes the permanent norm for many, demand on transit could stay low.
We shouldn't forget the busses too. Whilst CW hasn't yet gotten round to it, our plan for the rail paper was to follow it up with an integrated transport plan across all public transport methods.
Start with a universal payment card that gives access whatever the method (I believe this is already Green policy?) and then nationalise the bus networks and integrate them into transport ministry. Then the taxis too (especially if the alternative means robot-Uber).
I'm less enthused about TramTrains linking the rail network to the intra-city road network. Yes, it avoids overhead lines, but they are less disruptive to install than ground level tracks.
I'd probably prefer hybrid trolleybuses. Running on panto for most of the day but able to leave it and run on battery for low demand routes or to re-route around blockages.
And an electric or hydrogen bus can, of course, go wherever the roads already are so should be kept in mind for their place in this plan too.
This is why I like an integrated transport strategy. Different routes will suit different methods and, yes, while it's fine to weigh along a pyramid of priorities, as a passenger I ultimately only want to get from A to B in time. I'm a little more neutral on method.
I'm glad that the paper does mention those points on integrated transport and through-ticketing, but it could use a little more emphasis.
On those tracks, be mindful of the whole-of-life carbon footprint of the plan. Conventional steel is costly in that respect. Hydrogen-coked steel now exists but we need to invest and develop Scotland's sector. We'll need it anyway for the rest of the GND.

https://t.co/nU3M7NNMwd
And be wary of putting more passenger trains on freight lines. As passenger trains run faster than freight and commuters complain when they stop, the freight needs to stop to let passengers pass. Too many passenger trains and the freight train can't reach the next passing place.
Overall though, excellent work here. Certainly a lot better than previous transport strategies which have boiled down to "Let's build more traffic jams". Go and read the paper.

More from Politics

We’ve been getting calls and outreach from Queens residents all day about this.

The community’s response? Outrage.


Amazon is a billion-dollar company. The idea that it will receive hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks at a time when our subway is crumbling and our communities need MORE investment, not less, is extremely concerning to residents here.

When we talk about bringing jobs to the community, we need to dig deep:
- Has the company promised to hire in the existing community?
- What’s the quality of jobs + how many are promised? Are these jobs low-wage or high wage? Are there benefits? Can people collectively bargain?

Displacement is not community development. Investing in luxury condos is not the same thing as investing in people and families.

Shuffling working class people out of a community does not improve their quality of life.

We need to focus on good healthcare, living wages, affordable rent. Corporations that offer none of those things should be met w/ skepticism.

It’s possible to establish economic partnerships w/ real opportunities for working families, instead of a race-to-the-bottom competition.
Handy guide for Dominic Raab and other Brexiteers, and for anyone keen to replace our EU trade with trade with the rest of the world on WTO terms...


You can't magic away the vast distances involved. Clue: we fly in only 1/192th of our trade compared to the amount that arrives via sea


But even if you invented a teleporter tomorrow, WTO terms are so bad, so stacked against us, that a no-deal Brexit will be a total economic disaster


And while the Brexiteers fantasise, real jobs are being lost, investments are drying up, companies are moving assets to the EU27 or redomiciling. All already happened and happening right now, not in some mythical


Of course, there are many, many myths that Brexiteers perpetuate that are total fiction. You've seen a couple of them already. The thread below busts a whole lot

You May Also Like