Construction of new Waitrose causes tailbacks in Swindon

This Is Wiltshire: Traffic jams along Devizes Road, Old Town, as a result of the road diversions due to the new Waitrose supermarket which is under  construction at the Wichelstowe development Buy this photo » Traffic jams along Devizes Road, Old Town, as a result of the road diversions due to the new Waitrose supermarket which is under construction at the Wichelstowe development

BUMPER to bumper traffic has been causing a headache for commuters in Old Town as road closures have caused long tailbacks during rush hour.

Queues have been stretching back along County Road, Kingshill Road and Croft Road as cars are being diverted around the construction works, which began on December 2.

Mill Lane and Foxham Way have been closed to traffic to make way for highways construction work ahead of the new Waitrose store being built at the Wichelstowe development.

Until now, the council has kept Foxham Way open while only Mill Lane was closed, but essential work must now be undertaken on both roads until the middle of January.

And the council has apologised for not giving advance notice to commuters of the road closures, which is usually done with visible road signs. While not compulsory for the council, it is common practice.

Workers will break during the Christmas period, when the road will reopen with a temporary set of traffic lights.

Keith Williams, cabinet member for highways, strategic transport and leisure, said: “This is essential work for Waitrose to open. We are working as fast as we can, and people are working on Saturdays to get it completed.

“Unfortunately we have to hold our hands up on this one. We were given late notice of the length of the work, so we did not have time to put the signs up that we would normally do to give people advance warning.

“Some people have asked if we could keep one lane open, but that would cause an internal weakness in the road surface when it is built.”

Coun Nadine Watts, (Lab, Old Town), said: “It is disappointing that the council failed to give motorists who use Foxham Way advance notice of this road closure.

“I can absolutely understand the frustrations that motorists and local residents in Old Town will have with short-term increased traffic pressures on Croft Road and Kingshill Road.

“The Highways Department have tried to keep Foxham Way open for as long as possible.

“What I would say is that once the roadworks are completed, I think people will agree that it will be worth it, as we will be closer to getting a fantastic new Waitrose store for Swindon.

“I know a lot of local residents are excited about this and it will be particularly beneficial to Wichelstowe residents who will have new jobs and a new supermarket on their doorstep.”

A spokesman for Swindon Council said: “A new roundabout is being built at the junction of Mill Lane and Foxham Way as part of the work to deliver the new Waitrose supermarket, which has meant the road has had to be closed for safety reasons.

“The work will go on until the middle of January next year, although the road will re-open over the Christmas period with traffic controlled by temporary lights from 5pm on December 20. It will be closed again from 10am on January 2.

“We normally like to give advance notice of road closures with signs along the route, but we didn’t on this occasion, for which we apologise.”

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:11am Fri 6 Dec 13

bexxx_87 says...

No advanced warning was very poor. As a resident of Wichelstowe I found out on the morning it was closed via a facebook community page.

Monday night (the first night is was closed) there were commuters driving aimlessly around Wichelstowe trying to find their way out after being diverted into the area.

I even saw a car try to turn right out of Wichelstowe onto the road, from where he was at the lights there wasn't even a no right turn sign, he literally nearly drove into the barrier and then had to do a 3 point turn on the junction!!

As for the closure, it's annoying but temporary, I hope this firmly rids SBC of any ideas they had of making this a bus lane in commuting hours or this will be a permanent problem!!
No advanced warning was very poor. As a resident of Wichelstowe I found out on the morning it was closed via a facebook community page. Monday night (the first night is was closed) there were commuters driving aimlessly around Wichelstowe trying to find their way out after being diverted into the area. I even saw a car try to turn right out of Wichelstowe onto the road, from where he was at the lights there wasn't even a no right turn sign, he literally nearly drove into the barrier and then had to do a 3 point turn on the junction!! As for the closure, it's annoying but temporary, I hope this firmly rids SBC of any ideas they had of making this a bus lane in commuting hours or this will be a permanent problem!! bexxx_87

8:30am Fri 6 Dec 13

Wildwestener says...

This has had knock on effects all over town, queues all the way back the Asda in West Swindon for example over last few days. There is also problems wherever roadworks are needed. It just goes to show Swindon is full to capacity and does not have the infrastructure it needs to cope with all the extra traffic we will have foisted on us by the planning free-for-all in across the town.
This has had knock on effects all over town, queues all the way back the Asda in West Swindon for example over last few days. There is also problems wherever roadworks are needed. It just goes to show Swindon is full to capacity and does not have the infrastructure it needs to cope with all the extra traffic we will have foisted on us by the planning free-for-all in across the town. Wildwestener

9:04am Fri 6 Dec 13

EmmBee says...

This shows that the proposal to turn the Rushy Platt end of the road into a bus gate is flawed. Why have a modern road just sitting there during rush hour and not be used? The argument that "Rushy Platt residents won't be able to get out of their estate" doesn't wash - put up some traffic lights for god's sake.
This shows that the proposal to turn the Rushy Platt end of the road into a bus gate is flawed. Why have a modern road just sitting there during rush hour and not be used? The argument that "Rushy Platt residents won't be able to get out of their estate" doesn't wash - put up some traffic lights for god's sake. EmmBee

9:15am Fri 6 Dec 13

Davethered says...

Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now. Davethered

9:40am Fri 6 Dec 13

Arrowfield says...

Not so long ago there was an article in the Adver saying people were not making use of the Wichelstowe bypass- looking at Kingshill Road each morning this week I would disagree.
Not so long ago there was an article in the Adver saying people were not making use of the Wichelstowe bypass- looking at Kingshill Road each morning this week I would disagree. Arrowfield

9:43am Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Davethered wrote:
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Totally agree.

Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them.

Total lunacy.
[quote][p][bold]Davethered[/bold] wrote: Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them. Total lunacy. Ringer

10:32am Fri 6 Dec 13

Minty5692 says...

This grid lock will occur every day if the Redpost end of the road is closed to all but Buses during peak times as indicated on the signage there. This road needs to be open 24/7 !
This grid lock will occur every day if the Redpost end of the road is closed to all but Buses during peak times as indicated on the signage there. This road needs to be open 24/7 ! Minty5692

10:38am Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

Ringer wrote:
Davethered wrote:
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Totally agree.

Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them.

Total lunacy.
How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.
[quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davethered[/bold] wrote: Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them. Total lunacy.[/p][/quote]How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty. Phantom Poster

10:55am Fri 6 Dec 13

A.Baron-Cohen says...

The birthing process is painful but hopefully this is going to be worth the wait and pain.
However, I feel for the traders in Old Town, it does put you off going there knowing the traffic is terrible.
The birthing process is painful but hopefully this is going to be worth the wait and pain. However, I feel for the traders in Old Town, it does put you off going there knowing the traffic is terrible. A.Baron-Cohen

11:07am Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Davethered wrote:
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Totally agree.

Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them.

Total lunacy.
How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.
Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element).

Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network.

So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too.

That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use.

Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.
[quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davethered[/bold] wrote: Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them. Total lunacy.[/p][/quote]How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.[/p][/quote]Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element). Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network. So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too. That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use. Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now. Ringer

11:32am Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Davethered wrote:
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Totally agree.

Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them.

Total lunacy.
How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.
Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element).

Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network.

So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too.

That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use.

Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.
Tax is tax is tax. None of it is ringfenced for roads. People who pay for bus fares are taxed. If they save money from it then they spend that money, which is taxed. Guess what - some of that tax is spent on roads. It doesn't come directly from fuel and excise duty. So motorists don't 'own" the roads to the exclusion of all others.

So the payment of excise duty is irrelevant. However I would guess that a large proportion of people who commute to work have their own car or their partner has.
[quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davethered[/bold] wrote: Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them. Total lunacy.[/p][/quote]How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.[/p][/quote]Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element). Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network. So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too. That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use. Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.[/p][/quote]Tax is tax is tax. None of it is ringfenced for roads. People who pay for bus fares are taxed. If they save money from it then they spend that money, which is taxed. Guess what - some of that tax is spent on roads. It doesn't come directly from fuel and excise duty. So motorists don't 'own" the roads to the exclusion of all others. So the payment of excise duty is irrelevant. However I would guess that a large proportion of people who commute to work have their own car or their partner has. Phantom Poster

12:10pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Dommo says...

I thought there was always going to be a supermarket there, just 'which one' was the question. If so, why wasn't this all done when the road was originally constructed?
I thought there was always going to be a supermarket there, just 'which one' was the question. If so, why wasn't this all done when the road was originally constructed? Dommo

12:18pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Davethered wrote:
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Totally agree.

Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them.

Total lunacy.
How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.
Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element).

Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network.

So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too.

That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use.

Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.
Tax is tax is tax. None of it is ringfenced for roads. People who pay for bus fares are taxed. If they save money from it then they spend that money, which is taxed. Guess what - some of that tax is spent on roads. It doesn't come directly from fuel and excise duty. So motorists don't 'own" the roads to the exclusion of all others.

So the payment of excise duty is irrelevant. However I would guess that a large proportion of people who commute to work have their own car or their partner has.
The big difference being that it is illegal to drive your car on public roads if you haven't paid your VED. It is a tax to use the roads which you do not pay if you do not use the roads.

It is therefore only realistic to expect that money to be used to provide and maintain the roads you're being forced, by law, to pay a tax on using.

But the fact remains, anyone who pays tax should be able to use all of the available road network. Buses and taxis should not have a special bit roped off for their own exclusive use, it's that simple.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
[quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davethered[/bold] wrote: Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them. Total lunacy.[/p][/quote]How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.[/p][/quote]Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element). Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network. So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too. That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use. Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.[/p][/quote]Tax is tax is tax. None of it is ringfenced for roads. People who pay for bus fares are taxed. If they save money from it then they spend that money, which is taxed. Guess what - some of that tax is spent on roads. It doesn't come directly from fuel and excise duty. So motorists don't 'own" the roads to the exclusion of all others. So the payment of excise duty is irrelevant. However I would guess that a large proportion of people who commute to work have their own car or their partner has.[/p][/quote]The big difference being that it is illegal to drive your car on public roads if you haven't paid your VED. It is a tax to use the roads which you do not pay if you do not use the roads. It is therefore only realistic to expect that money to be used to provide and maintain the roads you're being forced, by law, to pay a tax on using. But the fact remains, anyone who pays tax should be able to use all of the available road network. Buses and taxis should not have a special bit roped off for their own exclusive use, it's that simple. Scrap the bus lanes, now. Ringer

12:39pm Fri 6 Dec 13

A.Baron-Cohen says...

Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Davethered wrote:
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Totally agree.

Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them.

Total lunacy.
How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.
Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element).

Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network.

So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too.

That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use.

Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.
Tax is tax is tax. None of it is ringfenced for roads. People who pay for bus fares are taxed. If they save money from it then they spend that money, which is taxed. Guess what - some of that tax is spent on roads. It doesn't come directly from fuel and excise duty. So motorists don't 'own" the roads to the exclusion of all others.

So the payment of excise duty is irrelevant. However I would guess that a large proportion of people who commute to work have their own car or their partner has.
The big difference being that it is illegal to drive your car on public roads if you haven't paid your VED. It is a tax to use the roads which you do not pay if you do not use the roads.

It is therefore only realistic to expect that money to be used to provide and maintain the roads you're being forced, by law, to pay a tax on using.

But the fact remains, anyone who pays tax should be able to use all of the available road network. Buses and taxis should not have a special bit roped off for their own exclusive use, it's that simple.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
It is not because you or I pay VED that we have a particular privilege, bus lanes are not ideal but it is the best system without plaguing the network with road works.
In a perfect world, with the amount of VED, fuel duties, VAT.. we pay, we should have the best roads in the world, but as someone said tax is tax.
The same is true of National Insurance contributions, there is no certainty that we will get a pension even if we pay all our life NIC, these are taxes just like VED.
[quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davethered[/bold] wrote: Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them. Total lunacy.[/p][/quote]How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.[/p][/quote]Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element). Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network. So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too. That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use. Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.[/p][/quote]Tax is tax is tax. None of it is ringfenced for roads. People who pay for bus fares are taxed. If they save money from it then they spend that money, which is taxed. Guess what - some of that tax is spent on roads. It doesn't come directly from fuel and excise duty. So motorists don't 'own" the roads to the exclusion of all others. So the payment of excise duty is irrelevant. However I would guess that a large proportion of people who commute to work have their own car or their partner has.[/p][/quote]The big difference being that it is illegal to drive your car on public roads if you haven't paid your VED. It is a tax to use the roads which you do not pay if you do not use the roads. It is therefore only realistic to expect that money to be used to provide and maintain the roads you're being forced, by law, to pay a tax on using. But the fact remains, anyone who pays tax should be able to use all of the available road network. Buses and taxis should not have a special bit roped off for their own exclusive use, it's that simple. Scrap the bus lanes, now.[/p][/quote]It is not because you or I pay VED that we have a particular privilege, bus lanes are not ideal but it is the best system without plaguing the network with road works. In a perfect world, with the amount of VED, fuel duties, VAT.. we pay, we should have the best roads in the world, but as someone said tax is tax. The same is true of National Insurance contributions, there is no certainty that we will get a pension even if we pay all our life NIC, these are taxes just like VED. A.Baron-Cohen

12:44pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is.

It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones.

Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is. It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones. Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane. Scrap the bus lanes, now. Ringer

12:54pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Davey Gravey says...

We need to encourage people to use public transport, not put them off.
Scrapping bus lanes is a short term solution that would not work anyway.
We need to encourage people to use public transport, not put them off. Scrapping bus lanes is a short term solution that would not work anyway. Davey Gravey

12:55pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

Ringer wrote:
But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is.

It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones.

Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant.

If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.
[quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is. It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones. Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane. Scrap the bus lanes, now.[/p][/quote]Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant. If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring. Phantom Poster

1:13pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Wiltshirereader says...

Dommo wrote:
I thought there was always going to be a supermarket there, just 'which one' was the question. If so, why wasn't this all done when the road was originally constructed?
Probably because that would involve SBC using common sense which they seem to be devoid of!
[quote][p][bold]Dommo[/bold] wrote: I thought there was always going to be a supermarket there, just 'which one' was the question. If so, why wasn't this all done when the road was originally constructed?[/p][/quote]Probably because that would involve SBC using common sense which they seem to be devoid of! Wiltshirereader

1:47pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is.

It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones.

Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant.

If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.
And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty.

A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.
[quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is. It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones. Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane. Scrap the bus lanes, now.[/p][/quote]Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant. If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.[/p][/quote]And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty. A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are. Ringer

1:48pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Davey Gravey wrote:
We need to encourage people to use public transport, not put them off.
Scrapping bus lanes is a short term solution that would not work anyway.
People have had decades of being told to use public transport, being taxed out of their cars and pernicious schemes like the retarded 'bus lane' idea... and it STILL doesn't work because public transport is an inconvenient and expensive joke.
[quote][p][bold]Davey Gravey[/bold] wrote: We need to encourage people to use public transport, not put them off. Scrapping bus lanes is a short term solution that would not work anyway.[/p][/quote]People have had decades of being told to use public transport, being taxed out of their cars and pernicious schemes like the retarded 'bus lane' idea... and it STILL doesn't work because public transport is an inconvenient and expensive joke. Ringer

2:02pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is.

It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones.

Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant.

If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.
And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty.

A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.
Ok, so tell me the number of this mythical bus which runs empty and at what time I can see it?

Why are busses an expensive joke? I used to commute 120 miles a day by car, so believe me, I know what expensive is!

So you drive a car and bus lanes inconvenience you - just get over yourself. Life is not all about YOU!
[quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is. It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones. Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane. Scrap the bus lanes, now.[/p][/quote]Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant. If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.[/p][/quote]And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty. A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.[/p][/quote]Ok, so tell me the number of this mythical bus which runs empty and at what time I can see it? Why are busses an expensive joke? I used to commute 120 miles a day by car, so believe me, I know what expensive is! So you drive a car and bus lanes inconvenience you - just get over yourself. Life is not all about YOU! Phantom Poster

2:55pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is.

It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones.

Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant.

If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.
And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty.

A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.
Ok, so tell me the number of this mythical bus which runs empty and at what time I can see it?

Why are busses an expensive joke? I used to commute 120 miles a day by car, so believe me, I know what expensive is!

So you drive a car and bus lanes inconvenience you - just get over yourself. Life is not all about YOU!
Actually, you are completely wrong.

Bus lanes incovenience EVERY motorist that isn't a bus or taxi... ie, the vast majority. So, it's therefore very much NOT about me at all. I'm fortunate that I don't have to drive much and can largely choose when I make my journeys, it's those who have to work 9 to 5 and travel by car that would benefit most from the scrapping of bus lanes, not me.

Why are buses an expensive joke? Because they're inconvenient, they pollute the environment, run around empty for most of the day and fares are too high. Apart from that, they're brilliant.
[quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is. It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones. Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane. Scrap the bus lanes, now.[/p][/quote]Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant. If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.[/p][/quote]And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty. A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.[/p][/quote]Ok, so tell me the number of this mythical bus which runs empty and at what time I can see it? Why are busses an expensive joke? I used to commute 120 miles a day by car, so believe me, I know what expensive is! So you drive a car and bus lanes inconvenience you - just get over yourself. Life is not all about YOU![/p][/quote]Actually, you are completely wrong. Bus lanes incovenience EVERY motorist that isn't a bus or taxi... ie, the vast majority. So, it's therefore very much NOT about me at all. I'm fortunate that I don't have to drive much and can largely choose when I make my journeys, it's those who have to work 9 to 5 and travel by car that would benefit most from the scrapping of bus lanes, not me. Why are buses an expensive joke? Because they're inconvenient, they pollute the environment, run around empty for most of the day and fares are too high. Apart from that, they're brilliant. Ringer

3:29pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is.

It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones.

Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant.

If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.
And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty.

A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.
Ok, so tell me the number of this mythical bus which runs empty and at what time I can see it?

Why are busses an expensive joke? I used to commute 120 miles a day by car, so believe me, I know what expensive is!

So you drive a car and bus lanes inconvenience you - just get over yourself. Life is not all about YOU!
Actually, you are completely wrong.

Bus lanes incovenience EVERY motorist that isn't a bus or taxi... ie, the vast majority. So, it's therefore very much NOT about me at all. I'm fortunate that I don't have to drive much and can largely choose when I make my journeys, it's those who have to work 9 to 5 and travel by car that would benefit most from the scrapping of bus lanes, not me.

Why are buses an expensive joke? Because they're inconvenient, they pollute the environment, run around empty for most of the day and fares are too high. Apart from that, they're brilliant.
How selfless! I notice that you still haven't given me the number of the bus which runs empty during rush hours.

Why are bus fares too high? Compared with what?

If you complain about bus fares then surely you want bus lanes in order to keep the fares lower. But the complaint about bus fares was needless rhetoric, wasn't it? Much like the mythical rush hour pry bus!
[quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is. It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones. Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane. Scrap the bus lanes, now.[/p][/quote]Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant. If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.[/p][/quote]And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty. A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.[/p][/quote]Ok, so tell me the number of this mythical bus which runs empty and at what time I can see it? Why are busses an expensive joke? I used to commute 120 miles a day by car, so believe me, I know what expensive is! So you drive a car and bus lanes inconvenience you - just get over yourself. Life is not all about YOU![/p][/quote]Actually, you are completely wrong. Bus lanes incovenience EVERY motorist that isn't a bus or taxi... ie, the vast majority. So, it's therefore very much NOT about me at all. I'm fortunate that I don't have to drive much and can largely choose when I make my journeys, it's those who have to work 9 to 5 and travel by car that would benefit most from the scrapping of bus lanes, not me. Why are buses an expensive joke? Because they're inconvenient, they pollute the environment, run around empty for most of the day and fares are too high. Apart from that, they're brilliant.[/p][/quote]How selfless! I notice that you still haven't given me the number of the bus which runs empty during rush hours. Why are bus fares too high? Compared with what? If you complain about bus fares then surely you want bus lanes in order to keep the fares lower. But the complaint about bus fares was needless rhetoric, wasn't it? Much like the mythical rush hour pry bus! Phantom Poster

3:41pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is.

It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones.

Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane.

Scrap the bus lanes, now.
Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant.

If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.
And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty.

A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.
Ok, so tell me the number of this mythical bus which runs empty and at what time I can see it?

Why are busses an expensive joke? I used to commute 120 miles a day by car, so believe me, I know what expensive is!

So you drive a car and bus lanes inconvenience you - just get over yourself. Life is not all about YOU!
Actually, you are completely wrong.

Bus lanes incovenience EVERY motorist that isn't a bus or taxi... ie, the vast majority. So, it's therefore very much NOT about me at all. I'm fortunate that I don't have to drive much and can largely choose when I make my journeys, it's those who have to work 9 to 5 and travel by car that would benefit most from the scrapping of bus lanes, not me.

Why are buses an expensive joke? Because they're inconvenient, they pollute the environment, run around empty for most of the day and fares are too high. Apart from that, they're brilliant.
How selfless! I notice that you still haven't given me the number of the bus which runs empty during rush hours.

Why are bus fares too high? Compared with what?

If you complain about bus fares then surely you want bus lanes in order to keep the fares lower. But the complaint about bus fares was needless rhetoric, wasn't it? Much like the mythical rush hour pry bus!
Any bus you care to drive past between about 10am and 3pm. How would I know what number they are?

Buses are expensive for what you get in return. The last time I was forced to use one it cost something like £1.90 to travel about half a mile. The person with me paid and, guess what? We were the only people on there other than the driver.

And, yes, unlike you, I am thinking of others/the majority when I say... scrap the bus lanes, now.

What's a 'rush hour pry bus'?
[quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: But as I just pointed out to you, VED is ONLY payable if/when you drive a car on public roads. It is therefore reasonable to expect that money to be used to ensure a better road network - but barely 20% actually is. It's not that which I have a particular problem with, as we all know the government wastes just about every penny we give them through their numerous theft methods. The problem is with bus lanes that largely remain unused throughout the day while other motorists sit there burning fuel and going nowhere in congested roads directly next to the unused ones. Most buses run around virtually empty for the majority of the day in any case. It's quite often possible to see cars with more people in them than the bus that's just sailed past them in the bus lane. Scrap the bus lanes, now.[/p][/quote]Buses pay excise duty as well. But in any case it just goes into a general tax pot, so is not relevant. If the complaint is that busses drive past empty then that's an argument for restricting the time they are enforced. I'm pretty sure that during rush hour busses are not empty - so that argument is a red herring.[/p][/quote]And rush hours last about 4 hours per day... which means that for the 8 hours we're banned from using bus lanes they are little used by buses that often run completely empty. A totally ridiculous way to utilise the road network and I have absolutely no idea why anyone would even attempt to defend such a daft idea while our roads remain as congested as they are.[/p][/quote]Ok, so tell me the number of this mythical bus which runs empty and at what time I can see it? Why are busses an expensive joke? I used to commute 120 miles a day by car, so believe me, I know what expensive is! So you drive a car and bus lanes inconvenience you - just get over yourself. Life is not all about YOU![/p][/quote]Actually, you are completely wrong. Bus lanes incovenience EVERY motorist that isn't a bus or taxi... ie, the vast majority. So, it's therefore very much NOT about me at all. I'm fortunate that I don't have to drive much and can largely choose when I make my journeys, it's those who have to work 9 to 5 and travel by car that would benefit most from the scrapping of bus lanes, not me. Why are buses an expensive joke? Because they're inconvenient, they pollute the environment, run around empty for most of the day and fares are too high. Apart from that, they're brilliant.[/p][/quote]How selfless! I notice that you still haven't given me the number of the bus which runs empty during rush hours. Why are bus fares too high? Compared with what? If you complain about bus fares then surely you want bus lanes in order to keep the fares lower. But the complaint about bus fares was needless rhetoric, wasn't it? Much like the mythical rush hour pry bus![/p][/quote]Any bus you care to drive past between about 10am and 3pm. How would I know what number they are? Buses are expensive for what you get in return. The last time I was forced to use one it cost something like £1.90 to travel about half a mile. The person with me paid and, guess what? We were the only people on there other than the driver. And, yes, unlike you, I am thinking of others/the majority when I say... scrap the bus lanes, now. What's a 'rush hour pry bus'? Ringer

6:13pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

So your complaint is about buses travelling empty when off peak, when there isn't much traffic and the bus lanes are irrelevant anyway! Are you really telling me that you get stuck in major traffic jams between 10am and 3pm? In any case, I have no objection to restricting the use of bus lanes to peak hours only.

So you travelled in a bus which wasn't full! Big deal, that's how public transport works - do you really expect the fleet of buses to be full all day long?

How many people would take a bus to travel half a mile - didn't you think of walking? The official AA running costs of the cheapest car per mile is 70p at less than 5K miles per year. With a bus you can travel anywhere in Swindon for a day £3.60 - you think that's expensive in comparision?

You are speaking for the majority, are you? Such arrogance!

A "pry bus" is what you get when you type "empty bus" when you use this bloated advertising heavy website on a phone (I guess "Advertiser" in the paper title is fairly accurate!)
So your complaint is about buses travelling empty when off peak, when there isn't much traffic and the bus lanes are irrelevant anyway! Are you really telling me that you get stuck in major traffic jams between 10am and 3pm? In any case, I have no objection to restricting the use of bus lanes to peak hours only. So you travelled in a bus which wasn't full! Big deal, that's how public transport works - do you really expect the fleet of buses to be full all day long? How many people would take a bus to travel half a mile - didn't you think of walking? The official AA running costs of the cheapest car per mile is 70p at less than 5K miles per year. With a bus you can travel anywhere in Swindon for a day £3.60 - you think that's expensive in comparision? You are speaking for the majority, are you? Such arrogance! A "pry bus" is what you get when you type "empty bus" when you use this bloated advertising heavy website on a phone (I guess "Advertiser" in the paper title is fairly accurate!) Phantom Poster

7:19pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Ringer says...

So, you are now admitting that buses run empty during most of the day, despite attempting to suggest I was making that up earlier.

I think we're done here.
So, you are now admitting that buses run empty during most of the day, despite attempting to suggest I was making that up earlier. I think we're done here. Ringer

9:04pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

Ringer wrote:
So, you are now admitting that buses run empty during most of the day, despite attempting to suggest I was making that up earlier.

I think we're done here.
Sorry, where did I say that? I asked:

I notice that you still haven't given me the number of the bus which runs empty during rush hours

You still haven't. Saying "I think we're done here" just shows what a fool you've made of yourself and that you now want to slink away, pretending you're leaving with some sort of dignity.

The fact is that buses run full during peak hours, which means that bus lanes work . But why does it matter to you? But I forgot, you are a self-less soul who only concerns themselves with the plight of others!
[quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: So, you are now admitting that buses run empty during most of the day, despite attempting to suggest I was making that up earlier. I think we're done here.[/p][/quote]Sorry, where did I say that? I asked: I notice that you still haven't given me the number of the bus which runs empty during rush hours You still haven't. Saying "I think we're done here" just shows what a fool you've made of yourself and that you now want to slink away, pretending you're leaving with some sort of dignity. The fact is that buses run full during peak hours, which means that bus lanes work . But why does it matter to you? But I forgot, you are a self-less soul who only concerns themselves with the plight of others! Phantom Poster

9:21pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

Having looked at your other posts, I would guess that your aversion to buses is that you think they are full of potential muggers. You show total paranoia regarding crime and violence! Chill out! The majority of the population survive very well into old age without ever being mugged or burgled!

Things today are no worse than they were in the 60's (in those days you'd be slashed in the face for looking at someone the wrong way) , it's just that now we have pillocks like you trying to drum up a "fear of crime" crusade.
Having looked at your other posts, I would guess that your aversion to buses is that you think they are full of potential muggers. You show total paranoia regarding crime and violence! Chill out! The majority of the population survive very well into old age without ever being mugged or burgled! Things today are no worse than they were in the 60's (in those days you'd be slashed in the face for looking at someone the wrong way) , it's just that now we have pillocks like you trying to drum up a "fear of crime" crusade. Phantom Poster

9:44pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Phantom Poster says...

Is there anything worse than someone who misquotes a question to them and then scurries off like a pathetic coward. Don't know why I even tried to engage in conversation with such a tosser.
Is there anything worse than someone who misquotes a question to them and then scurries off like a pathetic coward. Don't know why I even tried to engage in conversation with such a tosser. Phantom Poster

10:12pm Fri 6 Dec 13

Empty Car Park says...

If Ollie is so certain of his ban the bus campaign, he should mention it at his next council meeting
If Ollie is so certain of his ban the bus campaign, he should mention it at his next council meeting Empty Car Park

10:38pm Fri 6 Dec 13

roberto5 says...

Anyway back to the main story, it took me nearly 45 mins to drive from the Outlet Village to Wroughton, traffic awful and will continue all this weekend.
Anyway back to the main story, it took me nearly 45 mins to drive from the Outlet Village to Wroughton, traffic awful and will continue all this weekend. roberto5

11:07am Sat 7 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Empty Car Park wrote:
If Ollie is so certain of his ban the bus campaign, he should mention it at his next council meeting
Your inability to read is fairly legendary, but please try a little bit harder not to show yourself up - nobody has mentioned banning buses.

But don't let what's actually be written and discussed prevent you from logging on solely to have a little pop at me.
[quote][p][bold]Empty Car Park[/bold] wrote: If Ollie is so certain of his ban the bus campaign, he should mention it at his next council meeting[/p][/quote]Your inability to read is fairly legendary, but please try a little bit harder not to show yourself up - nobody has mentioned banning buses. But don't let what's actually be written and discussed prevent you from logging on solely to have a little pop at me. Ringer

11:10am Sat 7 Dec 13

Ringer says...

Phantom Poster wrote:
Is there anything worse than someone who misquotes a question to them and then scurries off like a pathetic coward. Don't know why I even tried to engage in conversation with such a tosser.
You said:


So you travelled in a bus which wasn't full! Big deal, that's how public transport works - do you really expect the fleet of buses to be full all day long?


No, I don't expect fleets of buses to be full all day long. And I know that they're not.

So do you, as you've just pointed out that it would be very unexpected for them to be full all day long.

Which means you've admitted that some of them do run around empty during the day. Which means you've agreed with and supported my entire point.

I'd imagine the fact that you've just tied yourself up in knots, negated your own claims and corroborated my claims is the reason you've become so frustrated that you've felt the need to resort to personal insults and abuse.

Better luck next time.
[quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: Is there anything worse than someone who misquotes a question to them and then scurries off like a pathetic coward. Don't know why I even tried to engage in conversation with such a tosser.[/p][/quote]You said: [quote] So you travelled in a bus which wasn't full! Big deal, that's how public transport works - do you really expect the fleet of buses to be full all day long? [/quote] No, I don't expect fleets of buses to be full all day long. And I know that they're not. So do you, as you've just pointed out that it would be very unexpected for them to be full all day long. Which means you've admitted that some of them do run around empty during the day. Which means you've agreed with and supported my entire point. I'd imagine the fact that you've just tied yourself up in knots, negated your own claims and corroborated my claims is the reason you've become so frustrated that you've felt the need to resort to personal insults and abuse. Better luck next time. Ringer

11:39am Sat 7 Dec 13

anotherimigrant says...

Shame these so many council employee's hiding from us and using these pages for a public slanging match.

keep your political clap trap for your silly council house meetings where you get paid expenses that you don't deserve.
Shame these so many council employee's hiding from us and using these pages for a public slanging match. keep your political clap trap for your silly council house meetings where you get paid expenses that you don't deserve. anotherimigrant

4:16pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Betty Bo says...

If any of these quotes are from council employees/leaders think they are very childish....in fact think you're all pretty childish......!
If any of these quotes are from council employees/leaders think they are very childish....in fact think you're all pretty childish......! Betty Bo

5:04pm Sat 7 Dec 13

nobody says...

Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Davethered wrote:
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Totally agree.

Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them.

Total lunacy.
How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.
Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element).

Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network.

So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too.

That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use.

Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.
Completely wrong, every tax payer whether a car driver or not subsidises the UK road network, the taxes raised from car drivers in no way sufficient to pay for the roads and associated costs(which most people ignore).
[quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davethered[/bold] wrote: Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them. Total lunacy.[/p][/quote]How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.[/p][/quote]Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element). Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network. So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too. That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use. Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.[/p][/quote]Completely wrong, every tax payer whether a car driver or not subsidises the UK road network, the taxes raised from car drivers in no way sufficient to pay for the roads and associated costs(which most people ignore). nobody

9:04pm Sat 7 Dec 13

moonshine50 says...

Yes absolutely stupid by SBC once more. I could'nt believe what I kept seeing down by that Wichelstowe development. Raised kerbs in a curve taking over from what was once the west lane in Foxham Way ? Weird !
And why build it right on top of the road as I've said before.
And knowing the area required a district centre then why could'nt the council put in the necessary infrastructure to suit in advance? Including extra drainage and power connections. WHY? WHY?WHY?
Yes absolutely stupid by SBC once more. I could'nt believe what I kept seeing down by that Wichelstowe development. Raised kerbs in a curve taking over from what was once the west lane in Foxham Way ? Weird ! And why build it right on top of the road as I've said before. And knowing the area required a district centre then why could'nt the council put in the necessary infrastructure to suit in advance? Including extra drainage and power connections. WHY? WHY?WHY? moonshine50

9:45pm Sat 7 Dec 13

villageoldman says...

SBC planning dept has a lot to answer, millions us tax payers have to find to pay for this land locked area..poorly thought out , poorly executed. Shops in a field ??
SBC planning dept has a lot to answer, millions us tax payers have to find to pay for this land locked area..poorly thought out , poorly executed. Shops in a field ?? villageoldman

10:51pm Sat 7 Dec 13

Ringer says...

nobody wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Phantom Poster wrote:
Ringer wrote:
Davethered wrote:
Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.
Totally agree.

Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them.

Total lunacy.
How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.
Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element).

Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network.

So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too.

That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use.

Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.
Completely wrong, every tax payer whether a car driver or not subsidises the UK road network, the taxes raised from car drivers in no way sufficient to pay for the roads and associated costs(which most people ignore).
You're saying that £50bn is less than £12bn?

Interesting maths.
[quote][p][bold]nobody[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phantom Poster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ringer[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Davethered[/bold] wrote: Bus lane , what a laugh that is . if they cut any more services , there won't be any buses left to use it. Time to do away with all bus lanes in swindon , now.[/p][/quote]Totally agree. Most buses run around virtually empty and Swindon's road network simply does not have the capacity to sustain the luxury of large areas of roads used about an hour a day and unavailable to the vast majority of motorists who actually paid for them but have to sit in traffic jams looking at the empty, unused road right next to them. Total lunacy.[/p][/quote]How do motorists directly pay for reads? You do realise that there is actually no such thing as "road tax', don't you? Even if there were, many people travel by bus or cycle and also pay vehicle excise duty.[/p][/quote]Are you joking? British motorists had over c.£50bn per year in Vehicle Excise Duty, Fuel Duty and VAT on fuel (and the tax element). Of that, around £9bn is reinvested or spent on the road network. So, yes, I'd suggest that the motorist very much do pay for the roads, plus lots of other things too. That's great that bus users and cyclists may sometimes also pay VED (although I find it unlikely in the case of most bus users), but what I don't quite understand is why that should grant them a special lane of their own that nobody else is allowed to use. Bus lanes are a joke. We know that because John Prescott was a big fan of them. Scrap them all, now.[/p][/quote]Completely wrong, every tax payer whether a car driver or not subsidises the UK road network, the taxes raised from car drivers in no way sufficient to pay for the roads and associated costs(which most people ignore).[/p][/quote]You're saying that £50bn is less than £12bn? Interesting maths. Ringer

4:30pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Empty Car Park says...

Quote from Councillor D...
I'd imagine the fact that you've just tied yourself up in knots, negated your own claims and corroborated my claims is the reason you've become so frustrated that you've felt the need to resort to personal insults and abuse.

Oh the irony :-)

It's very funny

LOL
Quote from Councillor D... [quote]I'd imagine the fact that you've just tied yourself up in knots, negated your own claims and corroborated my claims is the reason you've become so frustrated that you've felt the need to resort to personal insults and abuse.[/quote] Oh the irony :-) It's very funny LOL Empty Car Park

10:26pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Sir Fawn Maker says...

2 thoughts about bus lanes

1. if the bus gets cut, the bus lane stays in for "special journeys only" whatever they are

2.Bus lanes should be 24/7 or got rid off completely. Look at Queens Drive after 7.00 pm and see what proportion of traffic uses the "now legal" bus lanes. The number of near misses I've had with people suddenly cutting in from the middle lane when they pass BK (as you have to before 7) to go up Drive Rd because they don't / can't read/understand the concept of it not being a bus lane all day.
2 thoughts about bus lanes 1. if the bus gets cut, the bus lane stays in for "special journeys only" whatever they are 2.Bus lanes should be 24/7 or got rid off completely. Look at Queens Drive after 7.00 pm and see what proportion of traffic uses the "now legal" bus lanes. The number of near misses I've had with people suddenly cutting in from the middle lane when they pass BK (as you have to before 7) to go up Drive Rd because they don't / can't read/understand the concept of it not being a bus lane all day. Sir Fawn Maker

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree