You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
He claimed Alex Salmond had shown a "lack of political will" on the issue
I read this far before clocking the article was from 2012
Just seen an update from our island ferry committee which highlights some of the issues that will run into the next few years across the network:
MV Hebridean Isles (Islay/Colonsay) is being retired this month with no immediate replacement - this means our main ferry Isle of Mull is being diverted and leaving us with only 30% service over much of the winter.
The Isle of Mull is next up for retirement in 2025, but with no new ship it means that the temporary replacement ferry is likely to be heavier - the problem is that Craignure pier isn’t strong enough but Argyll & Bute Council aren’t planning a replacement until 2029, so in the mean time, there’s a risk of damage to the pier which could permanently impact on services.
Ferry fares are due to increase by 10% but fares only cover a third of total operating costs and there’s increasing fiscal pressure from Government.. Tourist fares are likely to increase more in time (islanders presently don’t receive discounted fares) Calmac operating model is pretty inefficient, sometimes needing twice as much crew as comparable services in other countries.
Calmac operating model is pretty inefficient, sometimes needing twice as much crew as comparable services in other countries.
This is one of the things that make them uncompetitive. Most of the ferries have a full time crew, who live aboard for 2 weeks or so, then have two weeks off. Most of the services finish before 10pm, and start around 6am. Perfect for two 8 / 9 hour shifts, but why are there staff onboard for 24 hours? Some can be done with one shift, I think the Gigha ferry is one that isnt manned overnight, the Mull and Arran ferries have no need for Staff to sleep onboard, surely there are Staff available within commuting distance of the port. It is one of the reasons why the two delayed ferries are costing so much, one deck was purely for Staff accommodation, adding an awful lot of weight to the boat, making it less efficient, adding to the cost, and continuing with the poor practice of 24 hour manning, when it isnt required.
The counter claim is that having the crew living onboard allows them to redistribute the fleet at the drop of a hat
surely there are Staff available within commuting distance of the port.
Why do you suppose that? How many islanders do you imagine hold the necessary SOLAS or MCA qualifications and competencies?
Just to confirm... I recently retired from Calmac as an engineer. We had Officer staff travelling from as far away as Canada and Spain to work on the boats. There is a dearth of qualified staff available throughout the industry and there is no possibility of having sufficient local staff.
Larger boats also have live aboard staff as it's simply impractical to do otherwise. There are always jobs to be done after sailing has finished and machinery runs all night .
There is a dearth of qualified staff available throughout the industry and there is no possibility of having sufficient local staff.
I'm assuming that there are more lucrative gigs than Calmac as well? Or is that what attracts folk from so far away.
Employment is an issue on islands and much of the west coast, it's interesting there's not more locals heading to City of Glasgow College for the training and certs they need.
This is one of the things that make them uncompetitive. Most of the ferries have a full time crew, who live aboard for 2 weeks or so, then have two weeks off. Most of the services finish before 10pm, and start around 6am. Perfect for two 8 / 9 hour shifts, but why are there staff onboard for 24 hours?
My uncle/mums brother was on a number of Cal Mac ferries (not sure what he did.) and he used to take his camper van to live in at the harbours/ports as he lives near ardrishaig, he mostly worked around the kintyre/mull area if I recall correctly.
Just to confirm… I recently retired from Calmac as an engineer.
You’ll probably know my uncle I mentioned above, K MacInnes
@somafunk
...No , the guys who live overnight in the camper vans are on the " wee boats" as they are known. I was on the " big boats" .
Regarding lack of suitability qualified staff .. to give you some idea ; in my year at Glasgow Nautical College there were three classes, some 120 students doing Engineering alone. Within 3 years all the Government incentives had been stopped and the year intakes were down to about 25/30.
I was made redundant on Christmas eve in my final year.
As for more lucrative employment. Definitely, working tax free on either vessels or oil rigs is a huge incentive.
Previously I worked for Stenaline and we had to use Polish Agencies to man the Engine room. Otherwise we would not have sailed.
I know quite a few people who work for Calmac - there would be more jobs available if more ferries were home ported here, but they aren’t - all the big ferries are home ported on the mainland. The pay and conditions are quite good. Speak to old timers about ferry reliability and they’ll tell you that they rarely cancelled despite the weather - big, flat sided and flat-bottomed boats aren’t that good in rough weather, but Calmac’s management appear to be more focussed on carrying weegies to Brodick for the weekend that providing a reliable, resilient service to islanders. The general view is that for the inner isles like Mull, we’d be better with a fleet of 3-4 smaller ferries than one small, one big that we currently have. In the summer they could work longer hours, whilst down to 2 in the winter.
Employment is an issue on islands and much of the west coast, it’s interesting there’s not more locals heading to City of Glasgow College for the training and certs they need.
If they're going to nautical college why would they waste their time with Calmac when they can go away and work for on the tankers, box boats or cruise liners tax free? When I was there we used to joke about working the Arran ferry. I don't know anyone who went to the ferries after college.
Ferry fares are due to increase by 10% but fares only cover a third of total operating costs and there’s increasing fiscal pressure from Government.. Tourist fares are likely to increase more in time
As a tourist I was surprised how cheap it was for 4 of us to do a day trip from Oban to Mull with a car. I'd initially looked at just going across as foot passengers and getting the bus up to Tobermory but there didn't appear to be any logic in the bus times considering when the ferry arrived or departed, and taking the car was far more convenient and barely any more expensive. The same seems to be true for most of the other west coast ferries and makes taking a car almost the default option. Even for Gigha there was a queue for non-islander cars that waited for the next ferry rather than travel on foot.
Somewhere cheap using sweatshop labour might have seemed a good idea to the accountants
It's a false premise to suggest that any shipyard outside Scotland would be a sweatshop. A tender that didn't have its thumb on the scale for a Scotchy McScotch shipyard owned by a friend of Salmond might even have resulted in a higher headline price at time of contracting...and the chance they'd have been competent enough to deliver on time and at the contracted price without dodgy extensions and bailouts.
That the SNP butchered the procurement in so many ways so that the "home bidder" being unfairly unfavoured wasn't the only problem is undeniable.
Ship - port incompatibility is a common problem it seems. I heard that the Australian government has taken delivery of two big ferries for the Bass Straight. Only problem, they are too big for one of the terminals, the Tasmania one IIRC. They will be in Leith over our Winter while the mess is sorted out.
@pca
It’s a false premise to suggest that any shipyard outside Scotland would be a sweatshop.
But that is NOT what I said - read what you quoted again... non-definitive verb and described the low cost options; but IF you dance to the tune of the cheap as possible argument, it opens up later questions about losing Scottish jobs whilst workers in a poorer part of the world lose their lives building our ships. Procurement decisions in the public eye are horrible as 9 times out of 10 someone vocal will claim you got it wrong.
That the SNP butchered the procurement in so many ways so that the “home bidder” being unfairly unfavoured wasn’t the only problem is undeniable.
I'm not sure I've seen any actual evidence that the SNP were directly involved in the procurement process. Its just as likely to me that CMAL and civil servants buggered that up without needing to involve a minister!
SNP?
"The newly unredacted sections show ministers were warned the failure to get a guarantee from Ferguson Marine could enable a "disappointed competing bidder" to argue "in accepting a lesser refund amount from a financial institution the cost saving of this to FMEL makes it no longer a level playing field"."
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/politics/snp-ministers-warned-rigged-ferguson-28827873
The SNP also chose the highest bid despite being warned of risks
"With no such guarantee in place, and despite the yard being the most expensive of seven bids, Scottish ministers nonetheless approved the awarding of the contract to Ferguson Marine. Since then, Audit Scotland have found there is ‘insufficient documentary evidence’ to explain why Scottish ministers accepted the contract risks in 2015. "
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-snps-ferry-fiasco-is-a-very-scottish-sham/
Most of the ferries have a full time crew, who live aboard for 2 weeks or so, then have two weeks off. Most of the services finish before 10pm, and start around 6am. Perfect for two 8 / 9 hour shifts, but why are there staff onboard for 24 hours? Some can be done with one shift, I think the Gigha ferry is one that isnt manned overnight, the Mull and Arran ferries have no need for Staff to sleep onboard, surely there are Staff available within commuting distance of the port.
Live aboard crew offers flexibility - if you need certainty that the boat is in a certain place at a certain time for a crew change, or for your crew to get off at night it becomes more likely that they will cancel services when running late / poor forecast whilst a live aboard crew can just stay if the boat gets “stuck” somewhere. It also means you can move boats around the fleet easier. Moving Heb Isles from Arran to Stornoway for example - how do you do that without accommodation for the crew in all the options. Of course some islanders think that would be better because “their” boat would stay where it “belongs” rather than being borrowed for another route.
Speak to old timers about ferry reliability and they’ll tell you that they rarely cancelled despite the weather – big, flat sided and flat-bottomed boats aren’t that good in rough weather, but Calmac’s management appear to be more focussed on carrying weegies to Brodick for the weekend that providing a reliable, resilient service to islanders.
isn’t nostalgia a great thing! Do they also hark after the days when cars were craned on and off most boats going to an island or when rather than artic trucks moving goods to / from the islands, puffers carried everything in the hold? The tourists v local argument is clearly an emotive one, but most of the time is a tricky argument - you can probably have a resilient service with fewer tourists if you are willing to pay more per ticket, with far fewer, less frequent services. Less tourists = less income = less work = depopulation = less ferry demand = poorer services.
the thing is - despite everyone claiming to know exactly what is needed:
1. No political party has laid out a detailed, deliverable alternative.
2. No commercial operator (or island cooperative) has come up with an alternative service that competes on flexibility/reliability/satisfaction even if it was a foot only, or freight only service.
so I stick to what I was saying earlier it’s far easier to shout from the side lines about what should be done (often considering only 1 route you particularly care about) than it is to run an entire network: balancing commercial income, lifeline services, safety and comfort, staff retention, flexibility for large events etc.
" No commercial operator (or island cooperative) has come up with an alternative service that competes on flexibility/reliability/satisfaction even if it was a foot only, or freight only service
- Actually Roy Pederson who seems to be qualified has proposed an alternative way.
"In his submission, Mr Pedersen calls for adoption of the “Norwegian model”, based on shortest feasible sea crossings using ferries with minimal “live-ashore” crewing and high frequency schedules."
https://www.stornowaygazette.co.uk/business/ferries-expert-laments-a-public-finance-waste-4598010
The ferry situation is nothing compared to the A 9 . A never ending talk/ promise about dualing upgrade . And just look at the high speed train line down south. Has the UK ever delivered on time, in budget or fit for purpose . Would have been ok if it was all contracted out to the Spanish .
Has the UK ever delivered on time, in budget or fit for purpose
Queensferry crossing and Borders railway? ? electrification of the Glasgow / Edinburgh trains?
Just don't mention the Edinburgh trams ( tho in its current form its actually quite good and well used)
It never rains, it pours.
Substandard paintwork found on the Glen Sannox. In this pic the paint has been sprayed over a wire brush.
"‘Paintwork in the major machinery spaces, the engine room and generator room, is also a mess and needs fixed. The area was not properly cleaned and they sprayed over nuts, bolts, dirt – you name it.‘There’s even a wire brush stuck in the paint. The parts were fitted before they were painted, so the sequencing was all wrong.’ "
https://www.****/news/article-14005785/New-ferry-farce-huge-pumps-one-vessel-taken-repair-other.html
Clydebuilt.
Surely the accommodation problem would be better and cheaper to solve by just having an accommodation block in the ports? You could still move boats around wherever you liked and save the expensive space on the boats for passengers / cargo?
How does CalMac compare to the Northlink - Orkney/Shetland ferry routes?
The Isle of Mull is next up for retirement in 2025
To make me feel old, my P6 teacher (at Ardgowan Primary if anyone cares) was married to one of the foremen at Ferguson’s so my class was taken to see the Isle of Mull launched.
Surely the accommodation problem would be better and cheaper to solve by just having an accommodation block in the ports? You could still move boats around wherever you liked and save the expensive space on the boats for passengers / cargo?
In every port? So Brodick, Ardrossan, Cambeltown, Troon, Oban, Mull, Tiree, Coll, Barra, Stornoway, Islay (both Port Askaig and Port Ellen?), Wemyss Bay, Rothesay, Kennacraig, Tarbet, Mallaig, Lochboisdale, Lochmaddy, Ullapool - with space for 15-30 depending which boats go there - (and more in Oban). All needing land, planning permission, etc. If you don't do all of those (and the various dry dock facilities they use) you don't have their current flexibility to redeploy at a moments notice. I'm not saying that solution is wrong - but its not quite as obvious as it first sounds, and some of its advocates have a sub-plot of "well if the boat need to get back to its home port each night our boat will stop getting borrowed". I think there are other complications - when you have a crew on full time 2 weeks on 2 off (or whichever pattern they use) there is no expectation that the crew have to get off at a specific time for childcare / elderly relatives etc - their employment contracts are seafarers ones, but if you have a "day crew" you have much more headaches like that - and also probably more likely to have crew "phone in sick" in the morning / sleep in etc. Scotrail get screwed up majorly with those issues - ships must be worse, the non standard design means your need to familiarise yourself with the vessel not just get dropped in.
Actually Roy Pederson who seems to be qualified has proposed an alternative way.
“In his submission, Mr Pedersen calls for adoption of the “Norwegian model”, based on shortest feasible sea crossings using ferries with minimal “live-ashore” crewing and high frequency schedules.”
Has he got any or all of the political parties to adopt has proposal as their manifesto pledge? Has he got together a group of venture capitalists to fund a competitive offering and win the next tender? Or convinced Western Ferries (who do operate that sort of model Gourock to Dunoon) to expand its services and squeeze Calmac even on all the small ferries in the clyde...? No... so its easy words that aren't a reality. Shortest possible sea crossings means quite a few of your existing terminals/ports are in the wrong place, or need new terminals on the other side. Presumably that means a route like Tiree (Currently Oban-Coll-Tiree) becomes something like Tiree to West Mull / Drive to East Mull / Ferry to Oban. Or Tiree to Coll / Coll to Mull / Drive to East Mull / Ferry to Oban or Mull to Morvern / Corran Ferry... is that what islanders want? with current road infrastructure and public transport is that realistic? Similarly with Arran - Lochranza has a ferry - but it doesn't go where that most people want to get to - in fact to get to major population centres it goes over the road which will probably be the next transport infrastructure screw up - the Rest and be Thankful . Scotland is not Norway: they invested oil money wisely, they build tunnels...
It might even be the right solution if you are starting fresh with a brand new fleet, but they aren't they have to have the ability to shuffle vessels not just for breakdowns but routine maintenance etc. I'm not saying its crazy talk or can't be done but its not ideology thats made CMAL/Calmac/ScotGov etc adopt the current model - if anything "Island Jobs for Island People" and training Scots as mariners at the Nautical College in Glasgow should have been SNP policy wins. I would love to see a network of small ferries linking lots of places - I think networks are really important for economic development, but I don't think Islanders want to wait 20 years for such a major investment project even if the rest of the country would think that was the priority for spending.
Queensferry crossing and Borders railway? ? electrification of the Glasgow / Edinburgh trains?
Borders railway? Technically I guess but they had to spend more money later on trains that could actually use it.
Similarly EGIP was a cut cut down shade of the original proposal.
Borders railway? Technically I guess but they had to spend more money later on trains that could actually use it.
Similarly EGIP was a cut cut down shade of the original proposal.
And Queensferry Crossing was technically delivered on time - but I think they were (maybe still are) still doing some snagging work years later. It was specced for the traffic load at the date of the order, not even the forecast at the date of completion. So not a total catastrophe, but it is not an shining example of success.
" It was specced for the traffic load at the date of the order, not even the forecast at the date of completion. So not a total catastrophe, but it is not an shining example of success."
It was deliberately not specced as dual 3 lane because they wanted to force the public to use public transport.
""In Transport Scotland's business case for the project [Transport Scotland] stated that the project was not intended to increase the capacity of the route for traffic and that increased demand for travel across the Forth will need to be met by public transport''.
Which IMO was a spectacularly bad choice because while I am not a regular user it would apperar likely that a majority of bridge traffic are not on journeys easily done by public transport.
It was deliberately not specced as dual 3 lane because they wanted to force the public to use public transport.
and not increase traffic in general - the jams on the M8 and into Edinburgh are bad enough without generating more traffic. Building more roads in general does not reduce congestion - it increases it in other areas as total traffic increases
Not everyone using the bridge starts or finishes in Edinburgh. As for better roads leading to more congestion I haven't noticed the increased congestion on the dualled sections of the A9, or the M74 or the M8/M74 junction area where major improvements were carried out a decade or so ago.
Why anyone thought replacing a bridge built for 1960s traffic (and a planned increase) with the same capacity bridge 4 decades later was a good idea, who knows?
ts a well known phenomenon. Increased capacity on roads gets used and thus causes congestion elsewhere - and tell me where the extra traffic coming off a 3 lane bridge would go ?
Kirkcaldy?
Have you ever been stuck on the M8/M74/77 junction biggest disaster ever in road planning. Car park every night
and tell me where the extra traffic coming off a 3 lane bridge would go ?
Its already there. 2 lanes from Newbridge, 2 from the city, plus A904 at south end. At north you have 2 lanes from Dunfermline, 2 from M90, 2 from A92 + inverkeithing. The bridge is a 2 lane bottleneck in a system much wider everywhere else.
sajama55
Free Member
Have you ever been stuck on the M8/M74/77 junction biggest disaster ever in road planning. Car park every nightPosted 35 minutes ago
All depends on timing mind you…
Exited office basement car park this afternoon at 415, in my EV, parked at house in East Kilbride 22 minutes later, fuel cost 17 pence..
Office on Bothwell st, straight onto Kingston Bridge, M77, GSO, home.
You know what’s needed at Queensferry? A ferry. The jetty is still there. And I’m sure access roads could be added. Would make the commute north more interesting.
"Have you ever been stuck on the M8/M74/77 junction biggest disaster ever in road planning. Car park every night"
How bad would it be if all that traffic heading for Newton Means and Ayrshire was still on the old A77 through Giffnock which is where we would be if we followed the new roads don't help theory?
“Have you ever been stuck on the M8/M74/77 junction biggest disaster ever in road planning. Car park every night”
The issue is that 'one more lane' encourages 'one more car' so that 'one more person can choose to live in one place and commute by car to another place for work' over and over and over again.
Exactly Matt. A90 into Edinburgh, Edinburgh bypass and M8 is already badly congested. There is nowhere for the extra traffic to go
@sparksmcguff Wasn't there something about a passenger ferry between Leven and Portobello or did I hallucinate that?
Have you ever been stuck on the M8/M74/77 junction biggest disaster ever in road planning. Car park every night
I raise you A814 Expressway eastbound trying to get to the M8 eastbound at Charing Cross. You're choices are wait in a huge, barely moving queue in lane 1, or be that guy and go down lane 2 and try to cut in later (no it's not a merge situation) or various u-turn attempts at Anderston.
There have been a couple of prposals for a ferry from portobello to leven. I think there was even a hovercraft running for a while. Too small to make a significant difference.
A90 into Edinburgh, Edinburgh bypass and M8 is already badly congested. There is nowhere for the extra traffic to go
The M8 should be a toll road with congestion pricing. It's nuts that taxpayers subsidise private cars' use of the motorway which delays bus and lorry service along it and competes with the parallel train track.
The issue is that ‘one more lane’ encourages ‘one more car’ so that ‘one more person can choose to live in one place and commute by car to another place for work’ over and over and over again.
I understand this but doing exactly that can be a social mobility and career chance of a lifetime for a young person, in the absence of good public transport that reaches beyond the city areas. Which it doesn't and won't.
It was for me so just shouting out to not be an I'm alright Jack and quietly stand by while the ladder is pulled up based on logic like this.
" It’s nuts that taxpayers subsidise private cars’ use of the motorway"
Most taxpayers are private car users. £37M taxpayers 33M cars.
Motoring taxes are more than the cost of roads maintainance.
Tax £25Bn Roads spending £12BN
https://www.racfoundation.org/motoring-faqs/economics#a18
Yeah I think there was a hovercraft trial running for a bit, memory fails me. Was it stagecoach operating it?
Then there was a stooshie cos the operator wanted SG to pay for the upkeep I think. Prams and balls springs to mind and here we are.
Used to work a lot in fife and live in Leith. If I was beyond say cowdenbeath I would stay overnight in fife, just wasn't worth the misery.
"I raise you A814 Expressway eastbound trying to get to the M8 eastbound at Charing Cross"
Which of course is caused by long standing repairs on the 50 year old section east of Charing Cross where 4 lanes are reduced to two. This in fact demonstrates that insufficient capacity causes congestion.
Irc. And road spending is a small part of tbe total cost of motoring.
Its widely accepted that new roads equala increased traffic equals increased congestion in areas around thenew roads. This is not controversial.
Which of course is caused by long standing repairs on the 50 year old section east of Charing Cross where 4 lanes are reduced to two. This in fact demonstrates that insufficient capacity causes congestion.
It’s not unfortunately. It was there before the roadworks and it’ll be there after. Certainly made worse (no rat run through the West End option now) but certainly not new
MV Caledonian Isle now properly broken, not just a bit so not expected until the summer. This means on Mull we’re down to just the Loch Frisa all winter, about a third of our ‘normal’ capacity which creates all sorts of problems with deliveries and any urgent trips as it’ll be fully booked way in advance. We have enough problems with a poorly stocked, over-priced supermarket, so there’s shortages of fresh produce for weeks on end, and what does arrive has a very short use-by date.
Its widely accepted that new roads equala increased traffic equals increased congestion in areas around thenew roads. This is not controversial.
since ~1930 too
Motoring taxes are more than the cost of roads maintainance.
Tax £25Bn Roads spending £12BN
The cost of roads is a lot more than the mere maintenance cost - just look at the £110m upgrade being discussed here. VED and fuel duty aren't hypothecated any more than stamp duty on house sales are ringfenced for housing. They are taxes, not usage fees. When the state provides use of a public asset for a fee less than it costs to provide it - that's a subsidy.
The state currently charges zero (£0) to use the M8 - every driver is subsidised on every journey. And that's nuts when the state is also subsidising trains that run along all the same towns, and is trying to encourage buses along the same route that are delayed by private cars!
The state could solve congestion and increase uptake of public transport overnight simply by charging tolls at a level that reduces private car usage to a point where existing infrastructure can cope. But instead we'd rather build ONE MORE LANE BRO at massive expense...
The cost of roads is a lot more than the mere maintenance cost
Exactly. The cost of excess motoring in the UK goes way beyond maintenance and even beyond construction and engineering costs and the cost of car storage in our cities and towns. There is a social, health and environmental cost. There are landscape, heritage, and wellbeing costs and the huge cost of lost opportunities. Many of these costs are cumulative and this amplifies the cost of undoing our motornormativity and of putting it all right in the future.
Supposedly the Glen Sannox is finally going to be handed over to CalMac today
I hope that's true, but it's not hit the news yet here on Arran.
Supposedly the Glen Sannox is finally going to be handed over to CalMac today
Do they all go for a wee cruise up the Clyde in the new whip?
A wee cruise to Birkenhead for dry docking according to where I read this, because of course.
and not increase traffic in general – the jams on the M8 and into Edinburgh are bad enough without generating more traffic. Building more roads in general does not reduce congestion – it increases it in other areas as total traffic increases
I am aware of the rationale. I’m sceptical that it was logical in this case, but even if it was speccing if so if was under capacity at completion rather at capacity at completion was just naive - it’s not like there is some wonderful magic alternative: I doubt most of that traffic is going town centre to city centre. Presumably those that do, typically don’t use the M8, as it would be quite a bit of extra journey.
have you tried any of the these journeys on public transport:
One of the urban sprawl housing estates in Dunfermline to Leith / Rosyth to Roslin / Dalkeith to Glenrothes / Livingston to Methil / Dalgety Bay to Little France and be certain of arriving there for say 8am or not leaving until after 7pm.
the same is true for the M8 toll suggestion - it’s easy to get from the centre of Bathgate to the centre of Glasgow but have you tried getting from an East Kilbride housing estate to a Bathgate Industrial Estate? Or from Airdrie to Newbridge? Or Port Glasgow to Blackburn? Have you been in any of those towns when there is problem in the m8? They will all get more traffic if tou pay to use what is essentially the “town bypass”.
pricing people out their cars only works if the alternatives are actually realistic. The train service (at least pre Covid) was dreadful, massively overcrowded, unreliable, poorly connected to other services and often expensive despite the subsidies. Congesting them out of their cars probably does work better (I “never” drive into Edinburgh and rarely in Glasgow because of that) but the FRB isn’t a city centre - it’s an arterial route.
pricing people out their cars only works if the alternatives are actually realistic
Several considerations - first, there is the long running Treasury view that public transport is a luxury rather than an essential public utility and driver of growth (which of course has also led to such blunders as bus deregulation); second, there is screaming (and sometimes death threats) from a minority of drivers whenever there is any suggestion of restricting driving, or removing parking to put in bike lanes/bus lanes/whatever which then causes councillors to bottle it, and thirdly, in the nicest possible way, no matter how good the alternatives are, carrot with no stick does not work, and driving has to be made less convenient before people will use them.
Ultimately, we lack an integrated transport strategy and the current situation is not good for individuals, for air quality, for the planet, or for the economy (as car dependence excludes those who can’t or can’t afford to drive, making it harder for them to eg. get better jobs or any job, time spent stuck in a traffic jam isn’t economically productive, and the oil and car companies are largely based overseas so money spent on this goes out of the economy).
But this is all off topic.
Poly - lots of those journeys are actually pretty simple with a short walk or cycle ride included, I do similar regularly
just for fun I looked up a couple
Dunfermline to leith. 2 stations in dunfermline plus rosyth so nowhere is more than 20 odd mins walk from a station. 2 trains an hour. 30 mins to haymarket. change platforms, tram to leith - every 7 mins. longest its going to take in total is 1.15 hours. You wouldn't be able to drive it in that time in peak times.
Rosyth to roslin
train to waverly, bus to roslin. total journey time under 2 hours. slower than driving in peak times but perfectly possible and not that much slower as at peak times the roads towards edinburgh and the bypass are very congested
pricing people out their cars only works if the alternatives are actually realistic. The train service (at least pre Covid) was dreadful, massively overcrowded, unreliable, poorly connected to other services and often expensive despite the subsidies. Congesting them out of their cars probably does work better (I “never” drive into Edinburgh and rarely in Glasgow because of that) but the FRB isn’t a city centre – it’s an arterial route.
You can of course move house or job to something easier as a journey.
Very easy for me to say that, but decisions have to be made. Until recently it was completely normal to want to live in one place with greenery and good school, but drive to the city centre where all the big employers were. Post pandemic, working from home, people choosing different office locations etc, I can see a slight shift in that assumption. Maybe we will see businesses and people move to places on rail and bus routes, or close enough to walk or cycle. Maybe businesses will realise that the city centre location has it's downsides etc.
thread is a microcosm of Scottish transport policy .......
....discussion of rural lifeline links gets hijacked by metropolitan central belt naval gazing....
🙂
Fair point!
thread is a microcosm of Scottish transport policy …….
….discussion of rural lifeline links gets hijacked by metropolitan central belt naval gazing….
Guilty as charged!
to come back to the ferries then. to me it seems like multiple issues:
Under investment for a long time
Botched procurement of the latest ferries
The service trying to please too many folk leading to pleasing none
I do not know if this is done but one thing I would like to see in the future is differential pricing for locals freight and tourists. ~Raise significant money without penalising locals
any talk of a tourist tax on the islands....
As someone who visits the Hebrides once every couple of years I wouldn't object to an extra £5 or £10 per night on accommodation to go to community stuff like transport etc
Quite a few places talking about it in UK now....
They have differential pricing in eg. the Canaries, and it’s always been a bit of a mystery why eg. Edinburgh doesn’t have a tourist tax.
I suspect if Glen Sannox/Glen Rosa had been anything like on time, there would have been at least two more ferries built in Port Glasgow so they’d not be in the mess they’re in now with a number of vessels coming to the end of life.
there was an attempt to put a tourist6 tax in Edinburgh that failed and never happened for reasons I forget. Now there is Scottish Govenment legislation to back it and another attempt is being made
I suspect if Glen Sannox/Glen Rosa had been anything like on time, there would have been at least two more ferries built in Port Glasgow so they’d not be in the mess they’re in now with a number of vessels coming to the end of life.
Agreed. The budget would have gone further, buying two more ferries on top of the Turkish built ones..
Argyll & Bute Council are currently consulting on a visitor levy, which many are now calling a “host tax”. The simplest solution would be to put a levy on the ferry ticket, but for whatever reason can’t be done. There are 3,500 residents on the island, but our council tax gets consumed paying for facilities and cleaning up the waste of the 600,000 visitors per year. Likewise, to pay for a new pier as the old one is knackered.
Most islanders don’t resent the visitors as most bring valuable revenue, but we are getting increasing numbers of campervans and motorhomes who ‘wild’ camp, shit in the bushes and leave their mess behind - this new levy however doesn’t apply to them.
There was this scheme https://www.highland.gov.uk/info/20027/highland_campervan_and_motorhome_scheme
It would be polite to say it wasn't a runway success.
That would be the Visitor Levy (Scotland) Act 2024. Came into force in July, IIRC it is down to local authorities to choose to use the powers and implement the levy.
I do not know if this is done but one thing I would like to see in the future is differential pricing for locals freight and tourists. ~Raise significant money without penalising locals
it’s not done, I’m not sure it’s actually a great idea - it feel like a them and us situation. But I see no reason why regular travellers can’t get a season ticket / discount on “bulk” travel.
however if it was up to me foot passengers would go free and vehicle fares would increase! I’d like to see free public travel for everyone in Scotland.
calmac ferries are cheap as chips for foot passengers anyway
You can of course move house or job to something easier as a journey.
Seriously - I ended up with a 180km round trip commute because after over 10 years of trying I finally got a job that was not just for a few weeks. Getting work can be very, very difficult. Fortunately although expensive, there was a good train service for that journey.
it’s not done, I’m not sure it’s actually a great idea – it feel like a them and us situation.
Yes, but there is a difference between residents (for whom the ferry is a lifeline) and tourists (who are not going to notice a small surcharge on the ferry) and as above Navieras Armas have a discounted rate for Canarians IIRC.
there was an attempt to put a tourist tax in Edinburgh that failed and never happened for reasons I forget
Wasn't it people wailing about how a tourist tax would deter people from attending the internationally renowned arts festival in a city that's very much on the American 'Europe' trail?