Routemasters - an extended rant
Dec. 9th, 2005 01:27 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
brixtonbroodYet another nostalgic splurge by the press on the demise of the Routemaster (like George Best, it's taking its time going, and getting acres of coverage for each lurch towards the grave) has finally prompted me to vent my feelings at length.
a) Disability
Umm, I have mixed feelings on this one. Of the several gazillion buses I've travelled on and seen over the last four years, only two have had wheelchairs on. I don't really doubt the people who claim that it would be more cost-effective to give all wheelchair users an annual Dial and Ride cab allowance. But of course it's not just about wheel-chairs. The only time I've used a Routemaster in the last few years (solo shopping trip to Oxford Street) I was shocked by how narrow the aisle was (bearing in mind that this has a single entrance/exit, so you can't circulate down the bus towards the exit as you can with most modern buses, and have to squeeze back down the aisle again. Regardless of the helping hand of the chirpy cockney conductor, I can't see how a lot of the disabled/elderly/obese/encumbered people I see on the bus every day could have made that journey. I am reminded of Neil Kinnock's line "Do not be old, do not get fat, do not have kids".
b) Buggies
This is of course why I get so het up about this. The abolition of the Routemaster (along with the huge improvement in bus frequencies) has transformed our lives - making journeys that would have posed unthinkable challenges into simple, cheap, green days out.
I'm lucky enough that I could probably afford to learn to drive (without having too many accidents), or spend enormous amounts on black cabs - but what about the many young mothers who can't afford that - living miles from a staircase-riddled tube system? These are some of the poorest and most disadvantaged people in London, and the ability to shop, to visit relatives, to register their baby's birth, or just to have a day out at the park is pretty essential I'd have thought.
c) Bendy buses
The Routemaster is not being withdrawn to replace it with bendy buses! Specifically, the 159 route, which is the one which finished yesterday, will have modern double deckers in future. There are bendy buses on about 3 routes in London, and they have not been desperately popular, even now they've stopped exploding, but the fact that people don't like them is not a reason to keep the Routemaster - the vast majority of London buses are modern double deckers, in a variety of designs (too many for my taste, as I can never remeber whether I need to get the Phil & Ted buggy on at the back).
d) Conductors
Yes it's lovely to have a uniformed staff member on all buses to answer questions, help old ladies with their bags, and discourage dubious behaviour and actual crime. But it costs a lot of money. London tax payers have paid a lot of money to fund the bus revolution, and for the most part it's money well-spent, as more people have been drawn to use a faster, more frequent, and frequently cheaper service. Bus occupancy numbers have risen visibly which is impressive given that there are so many more buses running. If all those buses were operated by two people rather than one, then that would require a huge amount of money, which the public might not be prepared to pay. My personal feeling is that we could do with more staff members on some buses, but only some. I'd much rather they saved the money to spend on transport police on the 3am bus from Trafalgar Square, and perhaps even to make the old ladies feel safer on the 3:30pm bus taking the sixteen year olds home from school, rather than running the sort of bus that absolutely requires a conductor 24 hours a day, even at 10:30am taking me and the kids to renew our library books.
e) The Today Programme and the media in general
Yes their vox pops found overwhelming nostalgic support for the Routemaster. Because they carried them out on Routemasters! There's a reason they didn't find the likes of me - because I can't get on the ##### things! Also, see point c, the 159 route will not have bendy buses on it so any chat about how horrible they are is irrelevant. Also, this is not the last journey for the Routemaster and the end of an era, they'll still be run on two tourist-friendly routes.
f) Aesthetics
It's a mode of transport! If you want pretty and historic, look in a museum, or go on a "heritage" tourist bus. I do think that far too much of this debate is driven by people for whom buses are things to look at from the back of a black cab and who haven't travelled by bus since 1963. Yes pretty is nice, but safe, cheap, reliable, warm, accessible are higher on my list of priorities. I will vote for pretty only when the two alternatives are evenly matched on the other criteria (OK I might bend a tiny bit on cost). Ditto fun.
I think that's it, but I reserve the right to post codicil rants when there's a particularly stupid article tomorrow.
a) Disability
Umm, I have mixed feelings on this one. Of the several gazillion buses I've travelled on and seen over the last four years, only two have had wheelchairs on. I don't really doubt the people who claim that it would be more cost-effective to give all wheelchair users an annual Dial and Ride cab allowance. But of course it's not just about wheel-chairs. The only time I've used a Routemaster in the last few years (solo shopping trip to Oxford Street) I was shocked by how narrow the aisle was (bearing in mind that this has a single entrance/exit, so you can't circulate down the bus towards the exit as you can with most modern buses, and have to squeeze back down the aisle again. Regardless of the helping hand of the chirpy cockney conductor, I can't see how a lot of the disabled/elderly/obese/encumbered people I see on the bus every day could have made that journey. I am reminded of Neil Kinnock's line "Do not be old, do not get fat, do not have kids".
b) Buggies
This is of course why I get so het up about this. The abolition of the Routemaster (along with the huge improvement in bus frequencies) has transformed our lives - making journeys that would have posed unthinkable challenges into simple, cheap, green days out.
I'm lucky enough that I could probably afford to learn to drive (without having too many accidents), or spend enormous amounts on black cabs - but what about the many young mothers who can't afford that - living miles from a staircase-riddled tube system? These are some of the poorest and most disadvantaged people in London, and the ability to shop, to visit relatives, to register their baby's birth, or just to have a day out at the park is pretty essential I'd have thought.
c) Bendy buses
The Routemaster is not being withdrawn to replace it with bendy buses! Specifically, the 159 route, which is the one which finished yesterday, will have modern double deckers in future. There are bendy buses on about 3 routes in London, and they have not been desperately popular, even now they've stopped exploding, but the fact that people don't like them is not a reason to keep the Routemaster - the vast majority of London buses are modern double deckers, in a variety of designs (too many for my taste, as I can never remeber whether I need to get the Phil & Ted buggy on at the back).
d) Conductors
Yes it's lovely to have a uniformed staff member on all buses to answer questions, help old ladies with their bags, and discourage dubious behaviour and actual crime. But it costs a lot of money. London tax payers have paid a lot of money to fund the bus revolution, and for the most part it's money well-spent, as more people have been drawn to use a faster, more frequent, and frequently cheaper service. Bus occupancy numbers have risen visibly which is impressive given that there are so many more buses running. If all those buses were operated by two people rather than one, then that would require a huge amount of money, which the public might not be prepared to pay. My personal feeling is that we could do with more staff members on some buses, but only some. I'd much rather they saved the money to spend on transport police on the 3am bus from Trafalgar Square, and perhaps even to make the old ladies feel safer on the 3:30pm bus taking the sixteen year olds home from school, rather than running the sort of bus that absolutely requires a conductor 24 hours a day, even at 10:30am taking me and the kids to renew our library books.
e) The Today Programme and the media in general
Yes their vox pops found overwhelming nostalgic support for the Routemaster. Because they carried them out on Routemasters! There's a reason they didn't find the likes of me - because I can't get on the ##### things! Also, see point c, the 159 route will not have bendy buses on it so any chat about how horrible they are is irrelevant. Also, this is not the last journey for the Routemaster and the end of an era, they'll still be run on two tourist-friendly routes.
f) Aesthetics
It's a mode of transport! If you want pretty and historic, look in a museum, or go on a "heritage" tourist bus. I do think that far too much of this debate is driven by people for whom buses are things to look at from the back of a black cab and who haven't travelled by bus since 1963. Yes pretty is nice, but safe, cheap, reliable, warm, accessible are higher on my list of priorities. I will vote for pretty only when the two alternatives are evenly matched on the other criteria (OK I might bend a tiny bit on cost). Ditto fun.
I think that's it, but I reserve the right to post codicil rants when there's a particularly stupid article tomorrow.