Doctor Beeching's cuts

[muddythefish]

I'm unclear of the relevance of education to this topic but in any case I do not have the knowledge to comment on that.

The point is, administrations often carry on the policies of previous governments often because they are irreversible and often because they become part of accepted national policy.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Just for fun, here are some figures...

Stations in the Beeching Report Appendix 'B', England and Wales only
Closures by successive Ministers of Transport

Marples (Con) 246
Fraser (Lab) 352
Castle (Lab) 303

Since they were in office for differing periods, these are the average numbers of closures per 100 days while they were in charge

Marples (Con) 43.3
Fraser (Lab) 81.5
Castle (Lab) 36.3

Marples dates are counted from the publication of the Beeching report until he lost office.
Over his whole tenure (pre-Beeching included), his rate is 58.2

Interesting figures. I wonder how many of those ostensibly closed under Fraser had been approved by Marples, the closure process had already started and was irreversible ?

It still amuses me that the Beeching closures recommended by a neo-libertarian industrialist and instigated by a corrupt Conservative transport minister are seen by some as mainly the fault of a Labour government.

But what would you expect from Torygraph readers ?

 

[thewiltog]

The point is, administrations often carry on the policies of previous governments often because they are irreversible and often because they become part of accepted national policy.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



Interesting figures. I wonder how many of those ostensibly closed under Fraser had been approved by Marples, the closure process had already started and was irreversible ?

It still amuses me that the Beeching closures recommended by a neo-libertarian industrialist and instigated by a corrupt Conservative transport minister are seen by some as mainly the fault of a Labour government.

But what would you expect from Torygraph readers ?

Fraser was in office for 15 months - give or take a week or so. Dividing his time into 3 month periods, we get:-

1st - 135
2nd - 137
3rd - 52
4th - 15
5th - 13

So it seems that once he got his feet under the desk properly, the number of closures dropped off dramatically.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I think the point is - they were not irreversible. Whilst there is no contesting the wheels were set in motion by the Right, the Left did absolutely, utterly nothing, nada, zip, zilch, to stop the process despite election promises to do just that.

There was nothing irreversible about any of the closures sanctioned by Castle et al; because the minister has (and had) the final say; and had she chosen to do so, she could have refused some, any or all of those that were placed in front of her.

 

[muddythefish]

Fraser was in office for 15 months - give or take a week or so. Dividing his time into 3 month periods, we get:-

1st - 135
2nd - 137
3rd - 52
4th - 15
5th - 13

So it seems that once he got his feet under the desk properly, the number of closures dropped off dramatically.

Thank you again, pointing to the fact that the closure process on many lines when he took over from Marples was well under way but he slowed the closures significantly later.

Marples was an "interesting" character - I'm surprised no one has made a film about his antics. These days he would be behind bars, although after Fred the Shred I'm not so sure.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think the point is - they were not irreversible. Whilst there is no contesting the wheels were set in motion by the Right, the Left did absolutely, utterly nothing, nada, zip, zilch, to stop the pricess despite election promises to do just that.

.

Barbara Castle refused closure of several lines, including the Looe branch, and introduced the first government subsidies for socially necessary but unprofitable railways in the Transport Act 1968. The act saved many lines from closure in the 1970s onwards. It's a shame the act had not been in force in 1962.

 

[Busaholic]

Barbara Castle was a very interesting politician. She was on the genuine left of the party (i make the distinction because there were others who masqueraded as such to enhance their own positions) yet in 1969 produced the report 'In Place of Strife' which in part aimed to curb the power of the unions in reducing restrictive practices and was opposed at every stage in Cabinet by James Callaghan, a man far to the right of her politically but who had strong backing from the unions, and he won. I would think she would far rather introduce stringent economies to the lines proposed by Beeching to cut but realised this would only have meant more strikes, of which there were many in the 1960s, and so carried on the closure processes.

 

[Lankyline]

Labour's election pledge was to reverse the cuts & they completely ignored that. Whilst Castle introduced "social "subsidy for lines as stated in other posts, they are guilty of closing more lines than the Torys. Don't forget it was initially a report that whilst highlighting economic viability of lines, however flawed the criteria was, it also had to look to the future.

 

[Taunton]

Barbara Castle was a very interesting politician.

Barbara Castle personally fired Gerry Fiennes, thus depriving the railway of the best potential for a chief for a generation.

There's a one-liner in his fascinating and valuable book about indecision at the ministry. That was enough, to her, to dump anybody.

 

[Spamcan81]

Thank you again, pointing to the fact that the closure process on many lines when he took over from Marples was well under way but he slowed the closures significantly later.

Marples was an "interesting" character - I'm surprised no one has made a film about his antics. These days he would be behind bars, although after Fred the Shred I'm not so sure.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---




Barbara Castle refused closure of several lines, including the Looe branch, and introduced the first government subsidies for socially necessary but unprofitable railways in the Transport Act 1968. The act saved many lines from closure in the 1970s onwards. It's a shame the act had not been in force in 1962.

Whilst her "conversion on the road to Damascus" is to be welcomed, one cannot ignore the fact prior that to this she carried on closing lines as part of an administration that had vowed to stop and even reverse Beeching.

 

[Spamcan81]

Fraser was in office for 15 months - give or take a week or so. Dividing his time into 3 month periods, we get:-



1st - 135

2nd - 137

3rd - 52

4th - 15

5th - 13



So it seems that once he got his feet under the desk properly, the number of closures dropped off dramatically.

Completely ignoring the fact that he could have honoured his party's election pledge and said "no" from the word go. Another explanation about the reducing number of closures is that as time went on, there were less lines left to close.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Whilst her "conversion on the road to Damascus" is to be welcomed, one cannot ignore the fact prior that to this she carried on closing lines as part of an administration that had vowed to stop and even reverse Beeching.

Whilst I am 69 and of a greater age than a good number of forum members and was very much around at the time of the post-Beeching events, this point that you make about Barbara Castle is one that seems strangely difficult for some of the younger forum members to accept.

 

[yorksrob]

That's true, but we I'd bet as much as 10p that the prevailing mindset was a quick cull rather than a long, slow lingering death. The main two objectives were an unrealistic desire to find a profitable core network and to justify a massive road building programme. All this was based on the notion that railways had had their day and, like the canals, were pretty much finished.

We know what nonsense that was now, but at the time it was shared wisdom across much of the country, and very few people in decision making positions thought differently, even those involved in running the railway. The 1960's were, after all, the time of looking forward to a modern, bright and science based future. Rail had a very limited role in that futuristic vision.

Quite. I'm reminded of those old "futuristic" television programmes from the 1960's in which everyone is walking around in tin foil. The establishments view of future transport needs had about as much credibility.

 

[muddythefish]

Completely ignoring the fact that he could have honoured his party's election pledge and said "no" from the word go. Another explanation about the reducing number of closures is that as time went on, there were less lines left to close.

Completely ignoring the fact that the closure process was already in train (so to speak) on many lines and was difficult to reverse.

There were plenty more lines left to close - as the Serpell report produced by another Tory government 20 years later showed.

Thankfully, even the notoriously anti-railway Thatcher balked at that one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Barbara Castle was a very interesting politician. .

Barbara Castle was a brilliant woman. Massive intellect. Tough as nails. Should have been Britain's first female PM.

 

[thewiltog]

Completely ignoring the fact that he could have honoured his party's election pledge and said "no" from the word go. Another explanation about the reducing number of closures is that as time went on, there were less lines left to close.

I've been reading the 1964 Labour Party manifesto (available here)

First, a couple of quotes that seem to have been written by different people:-

(snip)...chaos in our transport system. with unused rail and overused road services and an appalling congestion problem in all our cities.
(snip)...axing rail services under the Beeching Plan, have made things worse.

Here's the commitment

Labour will draw up a national plan for transport covering the national networks of road, rail and canal communications, properly co-ordinated with air, coastal shipping and port services. The new regional authorities will be asked to draw up transport plans for their own areas. While these are being prepared, major rail closures will be halted.

Labour will ensure that public transport is able to provide a reasonable service for those who live in rural areas. The studies already mentioned will decide whether these should be provided by public road or rail services.

My bold

Searching Hansard for Tom Fraser's speeches, he said on November 4th 1964 that he had been informed that any closures agreed by the previous minister could not legally be reversed, and this applied to 30 or 40 lines.

So I think it's fair to say that the dramatic reduction in the number of closures after his first few months in office shows that Labour were (are far as possible) taking the manifesto commitment seriously.

 

[341o2]

Quite. I'm reminded of those old "futuristic" television programmes from the 1960's in which everyone is walking around in tin foil. The establishments view of future transport needs had about as much credibility.

Exactly. All those futuristic pics of the happy family speeding down the open road in their car without another vehicle in sight.

When the public started driving en masse to the West Country rather than using the train the reality soon sunk in...stuck for hours on the Exeter bypass

 

[yorksrob]

Exactly. All those futuristic pics of the happy family speeding down the open road in their car without another vehicle in sight.

When the public started driving en masse to the West Country rather than using the train the reality soon sunk in...stuck for hours on the Exeter bypass

Quite, though fortunately I'm on the InterCity 125 so don't have to worry about such things

 

[Ash Bridge]

Quite, though fortunately I'm on the InterCity 125 so don't have to worry about such things

I have to settle for an XC 221, but even that beats road or air travel by a country mile! And I've tried them all.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Exactly. All those futuristic pics of the happy family speeding down the open road in their car without another vehicle in sight.

To watch some car advertisements on the television these days, such an image that you state above appears to still be in the mindset of advertising agencies.

 

[Busaholic]

Quite. I'm reminded of those old "futuristic" television programmes from the 1960's in which everyone is walking around in tin foil. The establishments view of future transport needs had about as much credibility.

When I was newly arrived in Bristol in 1984 I came upon a booklet published by Bristol Omnibus, the local bus company, in 1974 predicting how things would be buswise in ten years' time (i.e. when I was reading it) and it was so way off-the-mark it was hardly credible. Just goes to show how nostrums change in the public transport field and the trendy becomes completely forgotten.

 

[341o2]

To watch some car advertisements on the television these days, such an image that you state above appears to still be in the mindset of advertising agencies.

and most of the other car drivers I encounter