Age of the train may come
Page 12
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
GIVEN time and money, rail could offer a viable alternative to road transport in London. This was the message given by Bill Bradshaw, director of strategic development of British Rail. Also in attendance were Steven Howard, chief development officer of Freightliners and Brian Arundel, headquarters officer of the National Union of Railwaymen.
The cost of building new terminals and Freightliner depots would be expensive, said Brian Arundel, "but when compared with the benefits that will be brought to the environment, the price is a small one."
The funding of a new London railway network would have to come from both private and public capital, Mr Hall suggested. "BR is not blessed with money and has not got the financial backing to cope with the amount needed."
The railway is not ideally suited to moving all types of freight, Mr Hall added. "For the shorter journeys rail is not as economical as road transport, but trans-London hauls are usually of a fair distance, and so can compete with alternative modes."
How much it would cost to use the proposed rail system is not known, Mr Hall said. Companies using rail would have to pay indirectly towards the costs of the transhipment depots and the general upkeep of the network.
If lorry weight restrictions came into being, there would be an immediate increase in the amount of land available at rail heads, Mr Hall said. Firms would want to buy this land in order to be as near to the rail heads as possible and cut down their road transport costs.
Taking up a Road Haulage Association argument, Inquiry chairman Derek Wood suggested that giving lorries on Freightliner business an exemption from a ban would not be fair on the rest of the transport industry, and would swamp all of London with 32.5 tonne lorries on Freightliner trips.