Reader views (14)

 Add your view

Greenwich Waterfront Transit should have been ditched years ago. It went from a possible tramway, to segregated busway, to a bus service, and all the effort and money on planning and consultations has been wasted. The scheme stumbled from delay to delay after short sighted opposition from residents of West Thamesmead and the Royal Arsenal to the detriment of the wider area.

It is another cruel blow for all Thamesmead which is destined to remain a strangely isolated backwater with high levels of poverty, deprivation and social problems, but the scheme that should not have been allowed to stumble along for so long and the money wasted on endless consultations invested in local bus services instead.

- Donald, Abbey Wood

How can the Greenwich Waterfront Transit scheme just be ditched like that? What a disgrace. Living in Thamesmead now means you are condemned to further misery, lack of investment, poor transport and ultimately ongoing poverty. Boris Johnson, you are a joke.

- James.Silley, Woolwich

Where's the money on improving the road network? It's a disgrace that since 2000 when Red Ken took over not 1 major Road Improvement Scheme to improve Congestion has been started. I thought Boris would change that but, alas, it seem not

- Dan, London

The problem now is the sheer wastage of money on over-long planning, reports and more reports, Quangos and other blood-sucking parasites. They managed to build most of the Bakerloo, Piccadilly and Northern lines in about 3 years around 1902. Including the planning.
So far the Crossrail hasn't dug a foot of tunnel, yet they've spent enough money to build all those old lines, and it's taken how long? 20 years?
We are in a state of bureaucratic decay, like the Byzantine Empire. We need to slash and burn.

- Alex Mckenna, Manchester

For never-ending planning and poorly focused spending of our taxes and fare revenues, TfL can employ almost anyone. However, to deliver on these complex projects and provide value for money to us the users and payers requires hiring high calibre engineers - let's hope TfL do so.

- Mike, london

As long as the network, trains and stations are safe I have no problem with Tfl trying to reduce its spending however this is only a short term measure and the money will have to be found at a future date and the costs will be even higher.

- Mike Melbourne, Bedford England

Surely they should focus on the central London first and leave all the new extensions for what they are: a nice side benefit for hwne times are good again. But the core central London system deserves better.

- Georgie, Islington, London

Go see Network Rail they've got bucket loads of cash to spare

- Wallytrader, London

Scrapping the GWT is a sensible and very welcome development. This was vehemently opposed by Royal Arsenal residents as it added no value to the residents but involved the destruction of their quality of life by creating a high frequency bus route inside a residential area. The plan would have destroyed community space enjoyed by all of Woolwich and a massive increase in noise and pollution experienced inside bordering homes. It was a plan which had passed its sell by date with the opening of DLR and the change in use of the Royal Arsenal from industrial to residential. Its "Olympic Deliverable" status was misleading as it did not connect the venues in question and had seemingly confused the Royal Arsenal with Royal Artillery Barracks. It is gratifying to read that common sense has prevailed.

- Lauren Smith, Woolwich,UK

Does no-one in the higher echelons of TfL have a GCSE in Maths? Scrap the ineffective expensive middle-management and used the money saved to actually DO something. While you're at it, review some of the activities (or lack of) of senior management too .....

- Marianne, SW France

Looks like the right priorities. We can live with tatty stations provided they are not overcrowded to danger levels. Concentrate the reduced resources on the track, signalling, and trains, so we don't have to spend so long on the platforms or spend so many hours packed like sardines in the carriages.

- Nigel, London

TfL have not done their 'best to balance the books' as Boris Johnson asserts. This organisation continues to pay inflated salaries and bonuses to mediocre management who have achieved very little in recent years. The appetite for luxury offices in prime locations remains a burden on London taxpayers - why is it necessary for TfL to be a tenant of large areas of new office buildings such as the Shard at London Bridge?

- Simon Ellis, London

We should remember that Metronet was part of Gordon Brown's PPP (Private-Public-Partnership) brainchild for funding Underground improvements. Though heavily opposed by those who favoured improving the Underground through other means such as a bond issue, Brown pushed through PPP in 2001, and it has been an immensely-costly fiasco ever since. Billions of pounds spent by Metronet, and very little to show for it (a few new handrailings at Lancaster Gate Station, new elevators that perform even worse than their predecessors at Queensway Station).

- Phil Jones, London UK

Funny, I was just reading about National Rail spending £35billion on improvements and then a few articles down I came over this article. Maybe TFL should ask National Rail for some funding as they seem to have lots of cash to spare.

- Claire, London

Add your comment