http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: "Mind The Gap: London Vs The Rest" en Mon, 18 May 2026 09:46:19 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=3#post-162638 Tue, 19 Aug 2014 11:50:37 +0000 crowriver 162638@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I have a feeling I may have posted some of this elsewhere, but here goes. More on Crossrail.</p> <p>On state funding versus business contributions, some interesting snippets on funding in the National Audit Office report this year:</p> <p><a href="http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/public-accounts/Crossrail.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.parliament.uk/documents/commons-committees/public-accounts/Crossrail.pdf</a></p> <p>"Managing the Department’s financial contribution</p> <p>2.10 The bank account for Crossrail Limited’s work is currently £1.8 billion in surplus as the Department and Transport for London provide funding in excess of Crossrail Limited’s planned spending. When the programme schedule was extended by 18 months (paragraph 2.8) the Department and Transport for London did not extend the payment schedule to Crossrail Limited. Holding a significant cash balance is contrary<br /> to HM Treasury guidance; surplus funds held in the Crossrail bank account cannot be used in the short term to fund the Department’s other objectives, nor returned to HM Treasury to minimise the amount of government borrowing. There are some benefits to the large balance, which Crossrail Limited is using to offset Network Rail’s financing costs and which also allows Crossrail Limited some flexibility to start work early. With the Department’s last payment due in January 2016, the funding should also be protected from potential revision under the next spending review. However, we consider that the level of surplus funding is high and the opportunity costs may outweigh the benefits.</p> <p>Funding for the Crossrail programme<br /> 2.11 Figure 8 overleaf sets out the funding sources and the contributions towards the funding required for the Crossrail programme, which were agreed in principle in 2007. Of the total, £12.5 billion is funding Crossrail Limited’s work, while the remaining £2.3 billion is for work by Network Rail.<br /> 2.12 In addition to its direct contribution of £4.8 billion, the Department is also ultimately responsible for:</p> <p>- expenditure by Network Rail above its £2.3 billion financing;<br /> - expenditure by Crossrail Limited above its £12.5 billion funding; and<br /> - any shortfall in the £480 million of private sector funding that the Department has tried to secure for infrastructure."</p> <p>Worth checking the diagram on page 8. It shows how much will be raised by TfL in business levies, rates surcharges, etc. If you search on the interweb there's a lot of controversy about these charges in the media.</p> <p>Also:</p> <p>"2.15 The Department currently expects that one-third of the private sector funding it negotiated for Crossrail infrastructure will not actually be received (Figure 9 overleaf). The Department negotiated agreements worth a total of £480 million, although it is not clear how the expected City of London Corporation contribution was calculated. These contributions are now likely to total £320 million, 67 per cent of the Department’s expectation. This leaves a potential shortfall of £160 million which the Department will need to meet, from funds it had already set aside for the purpose." </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=3#post-145226 Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:27:13 +0000 chdot 145226@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Depends where you draw the lines!</p> <p>"<br /> Jeremy David Parker (@not3bad)<br /> 11/03/2014 12:27<br /> @EvanHD According to the 2011 census, Greater Manchester's population was just under 2.7million; the West Midlands was 5.6 million?</p> <p>"</p> <p>"</p> <p>Evan Davis (@EvanHD)<br /> 11/03/2014 12:32<br /> @not3bad The West midlands built-up area is different to the government region. sorry that was not clear.</p> <p>"</p> <p>The line between Edinburgh and Midlothian (and Musselburgh) doesn't entirely make 'sense'. </p> <p>Lothian Regional Council made quite a lot of sense for a Edinburgh and the surrounding areas - dealt with Transport. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=3#post-145175 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 19:03:15 +0000 crowriver 145175@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>He'd need a much longer series</em></p> <p>Oh God I do hope not! Thanks, but no thanks Ecan Davis. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=3#post-145172 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 18:02:50 +0000 chdot 145172@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I must have been thinking of the conurbation"</p> <p>Yes, but actually I'm not sure if Ken or GD where <em>actually</em> talking about population! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145171 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 17:57:56 +0000 fimm 145171@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ah, I see. I think I must have been thinking of the conurbation, as AKen says. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145159 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 16:33:03 +0000 chdot 145159@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm saying 5.8 is similar to 4.8. </p> <p>Then there's the Lothians and parts of Fife. </p> <p>"<br /> Glasgow is by far the largest of Scotland's cities, with a population of 584,240 in 2008. The City is located at the centre of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Conurbation, which has a population of 1,755,310. </p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3969" rel="nofollow">http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3969</a></p> <p>"</p> <p>Edinburgh: Population (2012) • City 482,640[1] </p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh" rel="nofollow">http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.urbanrealm.com/news/3390/Edinburgh_to_rival_Glasgow_in_size_by_2035.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.urbanrealm.com/news/3390/Edinburgh_to_rival_Glasgow_in_size_by_2035.html</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145158 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 16:17:08 +0000 AKen 145158@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Glasgow is bigger than its boundaries. There are a lot of areas that are outside the city officially but, for all practical purposes, part of Glasgow.</p> <p>Edinburgh, by contrast, stays within its boundaries, except at Musselburgh. I'm not sure if this makes Glasgow effectively twice the size of Edinburgh but they're not of similar sizes. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145152 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:23:37 +0000 fimm 145152@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I thought Glasgow is a lot bigger than Edinburgh? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145135 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 14:29:13 +0000 chdot 145135@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I hadn't heard of Zipf's Law"</p> <p>Me neither so I looked up -</p> <p><a href="http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf's_law">wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf's_law</a></p> <p>Wasn't sure if ED was using it properly or appropriately (it's a bit technical). </p> <p>UK/England didn't 'conform' in the way that other countries seem to. </p> <p>He was basically saying that UK/England 'should' have a bigger second city. </p> <p>Not clear in what way this would make a difference. </p> <p>An argument is that London has got bigger while other cities declined and Government (based in London) didn't do 'enough'. </p> <p><em>If</em> there was an new city called LiverLeeds it <em>ought</em>to make it easier to get infrastructure spending. </p> <p>In a Scottish context (with or without independence) Zipf's Law might work better <em>apart</em> from the fact that the two largest cities are of similar size - though of course that depends on whether you are talking about population within a certain council boundary or a bigger travel to work area without unified political control of services/transport etc. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145124 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:52:25 +0000 Stickman 145124@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@kaputnik - totally agree! My previous job meant I was in London a lot (usually the City or Canary Wharf). I don't understand how people can put up with it. I used to take great delight in annoying my London-based colleagues by telling them how my commute to work was about 15 minutes by bus or bike, and that I could be out in the hills or at the coast in the evening whilst they were still on the tube home. (And I I was feeling particularly irritated at being in London I would compare house prices/sizes....) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145120 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:22:47 +0000 PS 145120@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Very patronisning to the north. </p> <p>Pretty much said they can't do anything high tech or high wage and should stick to things like the roller disco business and leave the good jobs to london.</em></p> <p>That was not my take on his argument at all. </p> <p>It was about agglomeration and the fact that industry sectors benefit from being concentrated in a particular geographical area. His example was biosciences clustering in Cambridge which, although not The North, isn't London either. Cities that find themselves a niche like that (Edinburgh and finance?) can thrive. However, those towns and cities that can't are not consigned to the economic scrapheap but instead need to focus on realistic areas for the local economy (the rollerdisco example, which is a successful business, versus the speculative office space investment for which there is no demand).</p> <p>As for investment, the Liverpool/Manchester/Leeds corridor would greatly benefit from more infrastructure investment and improved transport links. Their needs should not be drowned out by London's desire for Crossrail 2, 3 and 4.</p> <p>He'd need a much longer series if he was going to cover off every area of the UK. I noticed Cumbria didn't get a mention, but I didn't get too upset by that. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145119 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 13:00:44 +0000 kaputnik 145119@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Having walked from Kings Cross to Bishopsgate this morning I struggle to understand why so many people would <em>want</em> to live in a place like this!</p> <p>We are very spoiled by our built and open environment in Edinburgh, where the sea, the horizon, the hills and the sky can be seen from so many places around the city and all at once. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145114 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:13:32 +0000 cb 145114@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26472423">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26472423</a></p> <p>I hadn't heard of Zipf's Law</p> <p>"the size distribution of cities within countries tends to follow a pattern in which the biggest city is about twice the size of the second city, three times the size of the third city, four times the size of the fourth and so on."</p> <p>(Doesn't apply to the UK which is the point of the article). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145095 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:55:38 +0000 chdot 145095@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I was underwhelmed by the programme. </p> <p>Although he talked about the UK he really meant England and didn't talk much about anything except greater Birmingham and the 'Northern central belt' idea. </p> <p>"Did anyone else find it pretty patronising to the north?" Think it was just patronising to anyone who didn't agree with him. </p> <p>The appearance of <a href="http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_McMillan_(poet)">Ian McMillan</a>, who 'somehow' manages to get by without living in London, didn't add much because ED clearly doesn't understand why <em>anyone</em> wouldn't choose to live (or at least work if they couldn't afford to live there) in a megacity. </p> <p>Conclusion was that 'people shouldn't resent London AND that 'somehow' the rest of the UK (England?) should get a bigger 'share' of infrastructure/development money'. </p> <p>Except that he seemed to think that 'somehow' London should get the same as now and the rest should get more... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145094 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:54:08 +0000 CycleCommute.CC 145094@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Very patronisning to the north. </p> <p>Pretty much said they can't do anything high tech or high wage and should stick to things like the roller disco business and leave the good jobs to london. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145092 Tue, 11 Mar 2014 09:35:41 +0000 crowriver 145092@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Aye, watched it last night (intermittently while various family members interrupted). </p> <p>Did anyone else find it pretty patronising to the north?</p> <p>The only point of any worth Davis seemed to make was the idea of the 'great northern city' spanning the Pennines "like LA". Seems a fair observation, of not entirely original. Folk have said the same about Glasgow/Edinburgh. In north American terms, they would be the same city (like Boston). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145076 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 22:23:29 +0000 chdot 145076@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>ED trying the Manchester Velodrome -</p> <p><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7370/13068834615_8b59629e45.jpg"> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-145075 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 22:02:25 +0000 chdot 145075@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Part 2 now (BBC 2) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144586 Thu, 06 Mar 2014 15:00:46 +0000 crowriver 144586@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/">Chris Dillow's blog</a>.</p> <p>Particularly enjoyed <a href="http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2013/05/on-endogenous-preferences.html">this post on endogenous preferences</a>. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144581 Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:39:15 +0000 crowriver 144581@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@PS, yeah I'm the first to admit I don't know how this works. Did see tables for fixed charges. Station charges differ according to whether 'franchised' (á la Scotrail) or 'managed' (å la Waverley, Glasgow Central).</p> <p>I'm sure someone with more detailed knowledge of the railways would be able to make a stab at an estimate of likely repayments from 2019 onwards... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144572 Thu, 06 Mar 2014 13:35:20 +0000 PS 144572@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@crowriver It sounds like you're looking at variable track access charges. You'd also need to take into consideration the impact of Crossrail on a range of other (often more substantial) charges like fixed track access charges and station access charges. </p> <p>Network Rail's capital expenditure is usually recovered over 30 years but I think I read somewhere that for Crossrail this was upped to 50 years given the scale of the investment. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144564 Thu, 06 Mar 2014 12:40:15 +0000 Stickman 144564@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Or Chris Dillow. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144561 Thu, 06 Mar 2014 12:15:48 +0000 crowriver 144561@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Indeed.</p> <p>Interesting interview with Paul Mason from a couple of years ago <a href="http://www.metamute.org/editorial/articles/rip-roaring-markets-and-massive-inequality-interview-paul-mason">here</a>. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144552 Thu, 06 Mar 2014 11:46:07 +0000 chdot 144552@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well yes. </p> <p>If you want economic journalism with a leftish background you need <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Mason_(journalist)" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Mason_(journalist)</a></p> <p>But he's left the BBC. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144550 Thu, 06 Mar 2014 11:41:22 +0000 crowriver 144550@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yesterday, out of idle curiosity I looked at Evan Davis' Wiki entry (never had cause to before). Some interesting snippets there that I didn't know but pershaps should not have been surprised by. </p> <p>"Davis began work as an economist at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, and while there he was briefly seconded to help officials work on early development of the Community Charge system of local government taxation (better known as the Poll Tax). In 1988 he moved to the London Business School, writing articles for their publication Business Strategy Review. He returned to the Institute for Fiscal Studies in 1992, writing a paper on "Britain, Europe and the Square Mile" for the European Policy Forum which argued that British financial prosperity depended on being seen as a bridgehead to the European Union.<br /> In 1993, Davis joined the BBC as an economics correspondent. He worked as economics editor on BBC Two's Newsnight programme from 1997 to 2001. In the mid-1990s he was a member of the Social Market Foundation's Advisory Council; he is a member of the British-American Project for a Successor Generation.</p> <p>Writing<br /> In 1998, Davis' book, Public Spending, was published by Penguin. In it he argued for the privatisation of public services as a means to increase efficiency. His second book was published in May 2011 by Little Brown, with the title Made In Britain: How the Nation Earns Its Living."</p> <p>All of which seems to place Davis, ideologically and socially, on the right wing of the Blairite faction of New Labour. You know, the bleeding edge that blends imperceptibly with the neoliberal wing of the Conservatives.</p> <p>Not that his background nor his beliefs necessarily invalidate his arguments, of course, such that he made any (rather than assertions, which he made aplenty). However it does rather cast his ode to London as politics rather than the disinterested economics it purports to be. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144494 Wed, 05 Mar 2014 19:32:51 +0000 crowriver 144494@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>On track access charges, I found <a href="http://www.networkrail.co.uk/using-our-network/cp5-access-charges/">tables for the charges to 2019</a> (when Crossrail is due to open). Only figures I could find for London (Overground rail, Crossrail could be dearer I suppose) were from a mere 7p per mile, to over £1.60 per mile. Not sure what the variables are, but I preume relates to peak/off-peak/weekday/weekend, also congestion charging of some sort. So for a full 26 mile run of one train you are looking at (potentially, I don't know how the charges are applied) £1.82 up to £42.64. Assuming a service 15 mins frequency each way, 22 hours per day across the whole length, at the maximum track access charge that is £7.5K per day. £2.7 million per year. At that rate it will take a very long time to pay off £2.3 billion. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144492 Wed, 05 Mar 2014 19:14:27 +0000 crowriver 144492@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@stickman, good question.</p> <p>Probably (IMO) something that doesn't involved gathering around a whiteboard drawing flowcharts with boxes labelled 'home insurance', etc. for Comparethemeerkat.com?</p> <p>@chdot: great find. Well worth a read. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144490 Wed, 05 Mar 2014 18:52:23 +0000 Stickman 144490@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"What we might call a 'real job'"</p> <p>Which is? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144483 Wed, 05 Mar 2014 17:27:43 +0000 crowriver 144483@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>More on Crossrail.</p> <p>In addition to £4.7 billion from central government (ie. "the rest"), it would appear that:<br /> "Network Rail will undertake works costing no more than £2.3bn to the existing national rail network raised through projected operating surpluses from the use of Crossrail services."</p> <p>I have no idea how long it will take for track access charges to repay £2.3 billion, but I'm guessing it's quite a while. One can argue Network Rail is also investing money in rail schemes across the UK, but £2.3 billion is a good chunk of cash being paid by "the rest" toward Crossrail. Or, put it another way, what could Scotland do with £2.3 billion of Networks Rail investment?</p> <p>I make that £7 billion subsidy from "the rest" to London's Crossrail, which as Davies points out, is "local transport" for Londoners.</p> <p><a href="http://www.crossrail.co.uk/about-us/funding" rel="nofollow">http://www.crossrail.co.uk/about-us/funding</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12289&page=2#post-144459 Wed, 05 Mar 2014 15:28:09 +0000 chdot 144459@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"King’s Cross: renaissance for whom?"</p> <p><a href="http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/14020/1/14020.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/14020/1/14020.pdf</a> </p>