Heartland
Member
Putting aside the difficult issue of Driver Only Operation, if that is possible, the decision to cancel trains by Southern is in itself is a step in to new territory and there must be a debate now as to is this act justified. The selective cancellation has affected more commuters than others leading them to chose alternative services. I was a the National Archives yesterday and travelled back on a underground service from Kew Gardens at 1800. The train was already busy with all seats taken and people standing and this was only after leaving Richmond, where the train started.
It is true that the number of people using trains has increased, but should any rail franchise treat their customers in such a way. It appears to be a decision driven more for the needs of the shareholders, and profit,than the users. There is is also the thorny issue of what can the DfT do. Members who read this group may have different opinions that support or disagree with the present franchise system. It is one where although there is a degree of control by the DfT, but should the current Southern/Thameslink arrangement be cancelled and the dormant DOR be reinstated to step in the breach again like they did with East Coast.
It is true that the number of people using trains has increased, but should any rail franchise treat their customers in such a way. It appears to be a decision driven more for the needs of the shareholders, and profit,than the users. There is is also the thorny issue of what can the DfT do. Members who read this group may have different opinions that support or disagree with the present franchise system. It is one where although there is a degree of control by the DfT, but should the current Southern/Thameslink arrangement be cancelled and the dormant DOR be reinstated to step in the breach again like they did with East Coast.
Last edited: