In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>
>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>> etc.
>
>Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers in-station on
>the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>Roland.

Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
--
Roland Perry

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:42:50 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <ttffdh$2teka$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:22:25 on Sun, 26 Feb
>2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>On 26/02/2023 10:10, Recliner wrote:
>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 20:00:57 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <v3kkvh1v8l0ettrtkm99ttn1hopcu9qe95@4ax.com>, at 18:17:42 on
>>>>> Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 10:49:25 +0000, Graeme Wall
>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 25/02/2023 10:09, Scott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri, 24 Feb
>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area arrangements
>>>>>>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland were in
>>>>>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible. It
>>>>>>>>>>>would be the
>>>>>>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would stay in the
>>>>>>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU regulations
>>>>>>>> with the inevitable consequence of leaving the single market. This
>>>>>>>> was my biggest concern.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We were assured at the time by one, then senior, politician that we
>>>>>>> would remain in the single market, it would be the easiest deal ever.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "Taking back control" nonsense originally was only about immigration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not my recollection. I thought it was about getting rid of EU red
>>>>>> tape and making our own laws (which inevitably was going to put us in
>>>>>> conflict with the single market). .
>>>>>
>>>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single issue
>>>>> vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-immigration, £350m for
>>>>> the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever greater federalism"; as well
>>>>> as stuff to do with a golden future making independent trade deals and
>>>>> getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>>>
>>>> I agree entirely - and all depending on who was speaking at the time.
>>>>
>>>> I have just heard the ERG chair on Sky News saying we need to
>>>> 'expunge' EU law from Northern Ireland. Clearly his aversion goes far
>>>> beyond immigration.
>>>>
>>> Yes, the ERG seems to have got steadily more hardline. As has been
>>>said of
>>> them before, there's no point in trying to reach an agreement with them —
>>> they swallow any concessions, and then just demand more.
>>> Sunak was smart enough to appoint a couple of former ERG leading
>>>lights to
>>> the ministerial team doing the NI negotiations, hoping that the ERG would
>>> accept any final deal that their former leaders had negotiated, but they
>>> still won't. So he's probably going to have to ride roughshod over them,
>>> get the best deal he can (far better than the deal Boris got) and dare them
>>> to try and bring him down.
>>
>>Unfortunately I don't think he has the political nerve to succede in
>>facing down both the ERG and the DUP and both groups are spiteful
>>enough to bring down the government if they don't get what they want.
>>
>>At this stage does he care enough to even try. He could walk away now
>>into anyone of a number of highly paid jobs with the added bonus of
>>multi-million dollar speech engagements in prospect.
>
>He doesn't actually need any conventional income, he's quite
>spectacularly independently wealthy. Which in the current kind of
>circumstance is probably a good thing, because he'll keep his nerve.

Yes, he certainly doesn't need this or any job, so can afford to take more risks in the hopes of sorting out the Brexit
mess that Boris. He's probably reconciled to being only a two-year PM, and would like to have some real achievements to
his name. Cracking this NI Protocol conundrum is the key to sorting out a lot of other sore points with the EU, and he's
now tantalisingly close, much more than Boris or Liz could ever have got. If he does crack this, he could make rapid
progress on many other issues that stalled under Boris.

When he does cease to be PM in 18 months or so, he certainly won't need to resort to making speeches to earn money. I
assume he'll return to the hedge fund industry. Or he could do something like running a billionaire family charity.

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:23:16 +0000, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> wrote:

>On 24/02/2023 09:01, Bob wrote:
>
>> This would be analogous to the situation of Sweden with respect to the
>> Euro. Unlike Denmark and the UK which negotiated an explicit opt-out of
>> Eurozone membership, Sweden committed to joining. In a reverse-Greece,
>> they manipulate their government finance figures, so that they never
>> quite manage to meet the criterea for membership of the Eurozone,
>> though. They are, of course, totally committed to the idea of joining
>> the Euro zone, and of course the EU would never admit a country to the
>> Euro that doesn't meet the criterea, so they remain with the SEK, and
>> life goes on.
>
>I've seen it reported the the Czech Republic (and Poland?) have met the
>criteria to join the euro, but for domestic political reasons didn't get
>round to filling in the forms to do so, and the European Commission
>basically looked the other way as there are bigger issues to worry about
>at the moment.

Ditto Sweden.

On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>
>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>> etc.
>>
>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>> in-station on
>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>> Roland.
>
> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.

Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
platforms involves passng through two gatelines.

Robin

On 26.02.23 12:55, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ttfdj6$2t6qr$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:51:16 on Sun, 26 Feb
> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>
>>>>>>>>> I meant a mixture of railway modes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why would that affect the price cap or rail card discount?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The tube fare between A and B (via perhaps C) isn't necessarily
>>>>>>> the  same  as the National Rail fare between A and B (via perhaps
>>>>>>> D). So the fare  you are discounting by a third won't be the
>>>>>>> same. But at least it'd be  clear which of the two to discount.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, if you changed modes part way, rather than sticking to
>>>>>>> one  mode  all the way, the undiscounted fare is difficult to
>>>>>>> know especially  when  the system can't tell where you made the
>>>>>>> modal  circumstances there are no barriers to go through where
>>>>>>> you change  modes).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hence the Oyster readers on interchange routes in stations like
>>>>>> Farringdon  and Stratford.
>>>>>
>>>>> But not, as we've discussed before, at SPILL.
>>>>
>>>> Please remind me — why would they be needed?
>>>>
>>>>> There may be other
>>>>> locations not provisioned as well. Wimbledon probably has them (hence
>>>>> the complicated, and confusing for some visitors, rules about touching
>>>>> in/out/sideways when changing there. Does Stratford have them for the
>>>>> cross-platform changes with the Central Line (I haven't been to
>>>>> look at
>>>>> that specific aspect).
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure, but why would they be needed?  LE and LU are treated
>>>> as  one.
>
>>>  Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster
>>> [or  CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the
>>> Oyster  or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>
>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree &
>> Borhamwood etc.
>
> No, you need it wherever people actually physically change trains.

If you change trains at St Pancras, you pass through a gateline, which
does the job of validating.

Robin

On 26/02/2023 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <88CcnXQ9QpMVomb-nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 11:16:24 on Sun, 26 Feb 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
> remarked:
>> On 25/02/2023 20:00, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single issue
>>> vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-immigration, £350m
>>> for  the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever greater federalism";
>>> as well  as stuff to do with a golden future making independent trade
>>> deals and  getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>
>> And don't forget lexit - IMHO too many people treat lexit as a joke,
>> but "the EU is forcing privatisation of state industries" was a real
>> thing.
>
> Of all the dozens of disparate reasons (including "it means we'll
> be allowed to ban the export of live animals", and "Tampon Tax")
> I haven't heard that particular one before.

Some of the rail unions pushed it, and I've seen variants in other
sectors. And it's not actually untrue (ask SNCF), although there are
workarounds by directly awarding contracts to the state company.

--
Arthur Figgis

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:58:26 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>
>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>> etc.
>>
>>Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers in-station on
>>the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>Roland.
>
>Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>the passageway at Farringdon, of course.

Yes, they made a mistake there, by forgetting that particular interchange.

> Let alone all the necessary
>interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.

I think most are covered, but it's possible that one or two are not, or it may be simply that the readers aren't always
well placed.

On 26/02/2023 12:21, Recliner wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:23:16 +0000, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 24/02/2023 09:01, Bob wrote:
>>
>>> This would be analogous to the situation of Sweden with respect to the
>>> Euro. Unlike Denmark and the UK which negotiated an explicit opt-out of
>>> Eurozone membership, Sweden committed to joining. In a reverse-Greece,
>>> they manipulate their government finance figures, so that they never
>>> quite manage to meet the criterea for membership of the Eurozone,
>>> though. They are, of course, totally committed to the idea of joining
>>> the Euro zone, and of course the EU would never admit a country to the
>>> Euro that doesn't meet the criterea, so they remain with the SEK, and
>>> life goes on.
>>
>> I've seen it reported the the Czech Republic (and Poland?) have met the
>> criteria to join the euro, but for domestic political reasons didn't get
>> round to filling in the forms to do so, and the European Commission
>> basically looked the other way as there are bigger issues to worry about
>> at the moment.
>
> Ditto Sweden.

Though Sweden has an "official" pseudo-opt out.

--
Arthur Figgis

On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 18:23:09 +0000, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:

>On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 10:09:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
><recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 22:12:40 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 23/02/2023 21:26, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 17:56:42 +0000, Charles Ellson
>>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 13:35:48 +0000, Scott
>>>>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 13:05:52 +0000, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 23/02/2023 09:53, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> It's more complicated than that. For example, I think English bus passes
>>>>>>>>>>> remain valid on the Sheffield trams. And London trams are priced as buses,
>>>>>>>>>>> but English bus passes aren't valid on them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> When I went to Edinburgh last year, I was expecting to be able to use my
>>>>>>>>>> bus pass - most of normal people don't spend our time reading timetables
>>>>>>>>>> and T&C. :-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If you think that's bad, just wait till the SNP get their way and you
>>>>>>>>> will need your biometric passport to enter the Shengen area before you
>>>>>>>>> get close to any bus in Edinburgh :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Should read Schengen of course.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The only government that has threatened such restrictions is the one
>>>>>>>> to the south.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, but the SNP wants to rejoin the EU so EU (Schengen) rules would
>>>>>>> apply - arguably :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, Scotland would remain in the CTA, along with rUK, Ireland and various
>>>>>> islands.
>>>>>>
>>>>> I thought joining Schengen was compulsory when joining the EU now?
>>>>
>>>> No, not all EU members are in Schengen, and not all Schengen members are in
>>>> the EU, or have any intention of joining.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> How are we going to organise the border for those crossing it on the train.
>>>>
>>>> No different to the Dublin-Belfast trains.
>>>>
>>> Republic of Ireland is not in Schengen so totally different.
>>>
>>
>>And nor will Scotland. It will remain in the CTA. So, exactly the same as
>>the Irish example.
>
>My hypothetical (*) question was what would happen if Scotland joined
>Schengen (which some believe is a condition for new members).
>(*) recognising that other hypotheses exist also.

I wonder if there's any evidence that future EU members have to commit to joining Schengen? Given the near
impossibility of having a workable Schengen border on this island, it would make it impossible for Scotland to join,
unless rUK also joined Schengen, which seems highly unlikely.

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:52:41 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <ttfak0$2svo9$7@dont-email.me>, at 10:00:32 on Sun, 26 Feb
>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I meant a mixture of railway modes.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Why would that affect the price cap or rail card discount?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The tube fare between A and B (via perhaps C) isn't
>>>>>>>>>>>necessarily the same as the National Rail fare between A and
>>>>>>>>>>>B (via perhaps D). So the fare you are discounting by a third
>>>>>>>>>>>won't be the same. But at least it'd be clear which of the two to discount.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> However, if you changed modes part way, rather than sticking
>>>>>>>>>>> one mode all the way, the undiscounted fare is difficult to
>>>>>>>>>>>know especially when the system can't tell where you made the
>>>>>>>>>>>modal change (in the circumstances there are no barriers to
>>>>>>>>>>> modes).
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hence the Oyster readers on interchange routes in stations like
>>>>>>>>>> Farringdon
>>>>>>>>>> and Stratford.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But not, as we've discussed before, at SPILL.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Please remind me — why would they be needed?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There may be other
>>>>>>>>> locations not provisioned as well. Wimbledon probably has them (hence
>>>>>>>>> the complicated, and confusing for some visitors, rules about touching
>>>>>>>>> in/out/sideways when changing there. Does Stratford have them for the
>>>>>>>>> cross-platform changes with the Central Line (I haven't been to look at
>>>>>>>>> that specific aspect).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure, but why would they be needed? LE and LU are
>>>>>>>>treated as one.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> EL trains don't go outside the cc card area. So, any cross-platform
>>>>>> interchanges at Stratford are between trains running in the ccc area.
>>>>>
>>>>> But you can later change to a train that does go outside the area (or
>>>>> are there relevant validators at Shenfield, Ealing Broadway etc?
>>>>
>>>> https://oysterfares.com/payg-comes-to-marlow-ealing-broadway-changes/
>>>
>>> And Shenfield? Also Romford, where one can change from the EL, to GA
>>> trains for Southend.
>>
>>There's nothing new about that.
>
>It doesn't matter if it's new, but that it's broken.

Is it? It seems to be working pretty well, even if there are the occasional glitches.

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:06:46 +0000, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> wrote:

>On 26/02/2023 12:21, Recliner wrote:
>> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:23:16 +0000, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On 24/02/2023 09:01, Bob wrote:
>>>
>>>> This would be analogous to the situation of Sweden with respect to the
>>>> Euro. Unlike Denmark and the UK which negotiated an explicit opt-out of
>>>> Eurozone membership, Sweden committed to joining. In a reverse-Greece,
>>>> they manipulate their government finance figures, so that they never
>>>> quite manage to meet the criterea for membership of the Eurozone,
>>>> though. They are, of course, totally committed to the idea of joining
>>>> the Euro zone, and of course the EU would never admit a country to the
>>>> Euro that doesn't meet the criterea, so they remain with the SEK, and
>>>> life goes on.
>>>
>>> I've seen it reported the the Czech Republic (and Poland?) have met the
>>> criteria to join the euro, but for domestic political reasons didn't get
>>> round to filling in the forms to do so, and the European Commission
>>> basically looked the other way as there are bigger issues to worry about
>>> at the moment.
>>
>> Ditto Sweden.
>
>Though Sweden has an "official" pseudo-opt out.

I think this demonstrates, yet again, that EU 'rules' can be applied selectively when it suits, even without formal
opt-outs.

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:51:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <ttfajq$2svo9$5@dont-email.me>, at 10:00:26 on Sun, 26 Feb
>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ttdcte$2jsla$5@dont-email.me>, at 16:27:26 on Sat, 25 Feb
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ttcm4v$2hmas$6@dont-email.me>, at 09:58:55 on Sat, 25 Feb
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <tt8lst$1vjde$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:30:05 on Thu, 23 Feb
>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <2nnevhpvn21642069bmvpef37r5adtu8nj@4ax.com>, at 12:43:35 on
>>>>>>>>> Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 12:21:09 +0000, Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 23/02/2023 11:44, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From the TfL website:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Your National Railcard gives you discounts on the Tube, DLR,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> London Overground, Elizabeth line and National Rail services"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But from the card's T&C:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Railcard discounts do not apply to Season tickets, train
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> company promotional tickets, Eurostar tickets, and most London
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Underground and DLR tickets."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> All Tube trips are included.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The first part certainly implies that some or all Tube trips are
>>>>>>>>>>> included, but how does that reconcile with "Railcard discounts do
>>>>>>>>>>> not apply to ... most London Underground ... tickets"? Genuine
>>>>>>>>>>> question; I'm not trying to pick holes in anyone's argument.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The key word is *tickets*. Oyster card users don't have tickets.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh, I see, the relevant word being "fares".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cc card users also don't get the discount, as there isn't yet a way of
>>>>>>>>>> registering a rail card to a cc card.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It might mean that rail tickets with a Maltese cross attract a
>>>>>>>>>>> discount despite being valid on the Tube, but "London Underground
>>>>>>>>>>> tickets" valid only on the Tube[1] do not, but other comments imply
>>>>>>>>>>> that it is much more liberal.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Registered Oyster users get the rail card discount, others don't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, only off-peak; so not Monday to Friday from 0630 to 0930 and
>>>>>>>>> from 1600 to 1900.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which is slightly more generous than a cardholder might have
>>>>>>>>>expected in
>>>>>>>>> the morning, but will come as a disappointment for those traveling in
>>>>>>>>> the evening peak.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why would they be disappointed? The railcard discount applies
>>>>>>>>after 09:30
>>>>>>>> M-F, and at any time on weekends and public holidays.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because as it says above: "not ... from 1600 to 1900".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where?
>>>>>
>>>>> Look seven or eight lines of text up. (Oh, and it's a quote from the TfL
>>>>> website).
>>>>
>>>> You are confused. The railcard discount applies all day after 0930:
>>>>
>>>> - At any time on weekends and public holidays
>>>> - After 09:30, Monday to Friday
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/free-and-discounted-travel/national-railcard-
>>>>discount
>>>
>>> I suspect the contradiction arises from small-print overtaking the
>>> curator of that fairly generic cut'n'pasted page.
>>>
>>> Here's the TfL fares finder (I've used the 2023 tab, as March is
>>> approaching, and the 2022 tab is the same except for slightly lower
>>> fares):
>>>
>>> http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Railcard-single-fare.jpg
>>
>>And?
>
>It says (this is getting tedious) the railcard discount is off-peak
>only, and doesn't include the evening peak.
>
>Or are you seriously saying that the other site is pedantically
>correct in saying "after 9.30", while nevertheless omitting the
>"but not between 1600 to 1900"?

I suspect it's the single fare finder that's misleading. After all, the rail card discount is applied to the caps for
all day after 0930.

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 26/02/2023 11:18, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>> On 26/02/2023 09:14, Scott wrote:
>>
>>> I have just heard the ERG chair on Sky News saying we need to
>>> 'expunge' EU law from Northern Ireland.  Clearly his aversion goes far
>>> beyond immigration.
>>
>> How long a game do they need to play before time and demographics mean
>> NI simply solves itself (or at least becomes someone else's problem)?
>>
>
> About 20 years for demographics to solve the problem, about 18 months,
> possibly a lot less, for it to become SOP.

According to a speaker I heard at a conference about 5 years ago (an Irish
Professor of Law talking about Brexit) the primary school and labour force
populations are already majority Catholic/Nationalist.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <do8mvhh54hn9ru757djb6emqqilgnuka8i@4ax.com>, at 09:17:08 on
> Sun, 26 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 19:57:14 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <m7kkvhp6kk4f1n8pqffm90bap80hthn9d4@4ax.com>, at 18:20:29 on
>>> Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 16:10:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <bfnjvh5ec006arb9hga19p7q6apbkiqvt0@4ax.com>, at 10:09:36 on
>>>>> Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri, 24 Feb
>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area arrangements
>>>>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland were in
>>>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible. It would be the
>>>>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would stay in the
>>>>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU regulations
>>>>>
>>>>> Not the whole lot, which would make it impossible for us to trade with
>>>>> the EU at all.
>>>>
>>>> No, not the whole lot. I said 'departing' meaning some changes. It
>>>> was clear (to me at least) that making changes would jeopardise our
>>>> ability to remain in the single market.
>>>
>>> Depends of which changes were going to be made.
>>
>> True. But my concerns at the time are is now supported with the
>> benefit of hindsight.
>
> Do you mean others now agree with the concerns you had at the time, now
> *they* have the benefit of hindsight?
>
> Here's a note I made soon after the referendum:
>
> "[They won because] they harnessed people's grievances, but without
> properly explaining how satisfactory remedies could be delivered".

Yes, it’s usually called populism. “Vote for me and I’ll fix everything.”

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 11:51:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <ttfajq$2svo9$5@dont-email.me>, at 10:00:26 on Sun, 26 Feb
>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ttdcte$2jsla$5@dont-email.me>, at 16:27:26 on Sat, 25 Feb
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ttcm4v$2hmas$6@dont-email.me>, at 09:58:55 on Sat, 25 Feb
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <tt8lst$1vjde$5@dont-email.me>, at 21:30:05 on Thu, 23 Feb
>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <2nnevhpvn21642069bmvpef37r5adtu8nj@4ax.com>, at 12:43:35 on
>>>>>>>>> Thu, 23 Feb 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 12:21:09 +0000, Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 23/02/2023 11:44, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> From the TfL website:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Your National Railcard gives you discounts on the Tube, DLR,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> London Overground, Elizabeth line and National Rail services"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But from the card's T&C:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Railcard discounts do not apply to Season tickets, train
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> company promotional tickets, Eurostar tickets, and most London
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Underground and DLR tickets."
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> All Tube trips are included.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The first part certainly implies that some or all Tube trips are
>>>>>>>>>>> included, but how does that reconcile with "Railcard discounts do
>>>>>>>>>>> not apply to ... most London Underground ... tickets"? Genuine
>>>>>>>>>>> question; I'm not trying to pick holes in anyone's argument.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The key word is *tickets*. Oyster card users don't have tickets.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Oh, I see, the relevant word being "fares".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Cc card users also don't get the discount, as there isn't yet a way of
>>>>>>>>>> registering a rail card to a cc card.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It might mean that rail tickets with a Maltese cross attract a
>>>>>>>>>>> discount despite being valid on the Tube, but "London Underground
>>>>>>>>>>> tickets" valid only on the Tube[1] do not, but other comments imply
>>>>>>>>>>> that it is much more liberal.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Registered Oyster users get the rail card discount, others don't.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> However, only off-peak; so not Monday to Friday from 0630 to 0930 and
>>>>>>>>> from 1600 to 1900.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Which is slightly more generous than a cardholder might have
>>>>>>>>>expected in
>>>>>>>>> the morning, but will come as a disappointment for those traveling in
>>>>>>>>> the evening peak.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Why would they be disappointed? The railcard discount applies
>>>>>>>>after 09:30
>>>>>>>> M-F, and at any time on weekends and public holidays.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because as it says above: "not ... from 1600 to 1900".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where?
>>>>>
>>>>> Look seven or eight lines of text up. (Oh, and it's a quote from the TfL
>>>>> website).
>>>>
>>>> You are confused. The railcard discount applies all day after 0930:
>>>>
>>>> - At any time on weekends and public holidays
>>>> - After 09:30, Monday to Friday
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>https://tfl.gov.uk/fares/free-and-discounted-travel/national-railcard-
>>>>discount
>>>
>>> I suspect the contradiction arises from small-print overtaking the
>>> curator of that fairly generic cut'n'pasted page.
>>>
>>> Here's the TfL fares finder (I've used the 2023 tab, as March is
>>> approaching, and the 2022 tab is the same except for slightly lower
>>> fares):
>>>
>>> http://www.perry.co.uk/images/Railcard-single-fare.jpg
>>
>>And?
>
>It says (this is getting tedious) the railcard discount is off-peak
>only, and doesn't include the evening peak.
>
>Or are you seriously saying that the other site is pedantically
>correct in saying "after 9.30", while nevertheless omitting the
>"but not between 1600 to 1900"?

No, I think the Single fare finder page message is incorrect.

On 25/02/2023 20:17, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 25/02/2023 16:10, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <bfnjvh5ec006arb9hga19p7q6apbkiqvt0@4ax.com>, at 10:09:36
>> on Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri, 24 Feb
>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area arrangements
>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland were in
>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It would be
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>
>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would stay in the
>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>
>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU regulations
>>
>> Not the whole lot, which would make it impossible for us to trade with
>> the EU at all.
>
> Apparently exactly what Mogg wants.
>
>
Apparently.

Quite frankly I don't think Mogg and his cronies understand the
consequences of their actions or if they do put keeping their wealth
away from UK regulations above the good of the UK.

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:

>On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>
>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>> etc.
>>>
>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>> in-station on
>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>> Roland.
>>
>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>
>Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>platforms involves passng through two gatelines.

Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can touch in and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.

So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London Terminals ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing
to continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to touch-in at that point, even though they are continuing
on TL. In an ideal world, there would be pads on the train that knew where they were at the time of the touch, but if
not, distributed along the platform.

On 26/02/2023 11:42, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ttffdh$2teka$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:22:25 on Sun, 26 Feb
> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>> On 26/02/2023 10:10, Recliner wrote:
>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 20:00:57 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <v3kkvh1v8l0ettrtkm99ttn1hopcu9qe95@4ax.com>, at
>>>>> 18:17:42 on
>>>>> Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 10:49:25 +0000, Graeme Wall
>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 25/02/2023 10:09, Scott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri,
>>>>>>>>> 24 Feb
>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area
>>>>>>>>>>> arrangements
>>>>>>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland
>>>>>>>>>>> were in
>>>>>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It
>>>>>>>>>>> would be the
>>>>>>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would
>>>>>>>>> stay in the
>>>>>>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU
>>>>>>>> regulations
>>>>>>>> with the inevitable consequence of leaving the single market.  This
>>>>>>>> was my biggest concern.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We were assured at the time by one, then senior, politician that we
>>>>>>> would remain in the single market, it would be the easiest deal
>>>>>>> ever.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The "Taking back control" nonsense originally was only about
>>>>>>> immigration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Not my recollection.  I thought it was about getting rid of EU red
>>>>>> tape and making our own laws (which inevitably was going to put us in
>>>>>> conflict with the single market). .
>>>>>
>>>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single issue
>>>>> vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-immigration,
>>>>> £350m for
>>>>> the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever greater federalism"; as
>>>>> well
>>>>> as stuff to do with a golden future making independent trade deals and
>>>>> getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>>>
>>>> I agree entirely - and all depending on who was speaking at the time.
>>>>
>>>> I have just heard the ERG chair on Sky News saying we need to
>>>> 'expunge' EU law from Northern Ireland.  Clearly his aversion goes far
>>>> beyond immigration.
>>>>
>>>  Yes, the ERG seems to have got steadily more hardline. As has been
>>> said of
>>> them before, there's no point in trying to reach an agreement with
>>> them —
>>> they swallow any concessions, and then just demand more.
>>>  Sunak was smart enough to appoint a couple of former ERG leading
>>> lights to
>>> the ministerial team doing the NI negotiations, hoping that the ERG
>>> would
>>> accept any final deal that their former leaders had negotiated, but they
>>> still won't. So he's probably going to have to ride roughshod over them,
>>> get the best deal he can (far better than the deal Boris got) and
>>> dare them
>>> to try and bring him down.
>>
>> Unfortunately I don't think he has the political nerve to succede in
>> facing down both the ERG and the DUP and both groups are spiteful
>> enough to bring down the government if they don't get what they want.
>>
>> At this stage does he care enough to even try. He could walk away now
>> into anyone of a number of highly paid jobs with the added bonus of
>> multi-million dollar speech engagements in prospect.
>
> He doesn't actually need any conventional income, he's quite
> spectacularly independently wealthy. Which in the current kind of
> circumstance is probably a good thing, because he'll keep his nerve.

Which is why I wonder whether he will be particularly bothered to try
and fight it through. If it gets too nasty, and it will, he can just say
sod it and get on the next plane to California.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 26/02/2023 11:45, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <88CcnXQ9QpMVomb-nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 11:16:24 on Sun, 26 Feb 2023, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
> remarked:
>> On 25/02/2023 20:00, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single issue
>>> vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-immigration, £350m
>>> for  the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever greater federalism";
>>> as well  as stuff to do with a golden future making independent trade
>>> deals and  getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>
>> And don't forget lexit - IMHO too many people treat lexit as a joke,
>> but "the EU is forcing privatisation of state industries" was a real
>> thing.
>
> Of all the dozens of disparate reasons (including "it means we'll
> be allowed to ban the export of live animals", and "Tampon Tax")
> I haven't heard that particular one before.

Given, at the time, they already had been, I can't see what attraction
that would have had.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 26/02/2023 13:25, Recliner wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 18:23:09 +0000, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 10:09:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 22:12:40 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 23/02/2023 21:26, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 17:56:42 +0000, Charles Ellson
>>>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 13:35:48 +0000, Scott
>>>>>>>>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 13:05:52 +0000, MB <MB@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 23/02/2023 09:53, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> It's more complicated than that. For example, I think English bus passes
>>>>>>>>>>>> remain valid on the Sheffield trams. And London trams are priced as buses,
>>>>>>>>>>>> but English bus passes aren't valid on them.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> When I went to Edinburgh last year, I was expecting to be able to use my
>>>>>>>>>>> bus pass - most of normal people don't spend our time reading timetables
>>>>>>>>>>> and T&C. :-)
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If you think that's bad, just wait till the SNP get their way and you
>>>>>>>>>> will need your biometric passport to enter the Shengen area before you
>>>>>>>>>> get close to any bus in Edinburgh :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Should read Schengen of course.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The only government that has threatened such restrictions is the one
>>>>>>>>> to the south.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes, but the SNP wants to rejoin the EU so EU (Schengen) rules would
>>>>>>>> apply - arguably :-)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No, Scotland would remain in the CTA, along with rUK, Ireland and various
>>>>>>> islands.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought joining Schengen was compulsory when joining the EU now?
>>>>>
>>>>> No, not all EU members are in Schengen, and not all Schengen members are in
>>>>> the EU, or have any intention of joining.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How are we going to organise the border for those crossing it on the train.
>>>>>
>>>>> No different to the Dublin-Belfast trains.
>>>>>
>>>> Republic of Ireland is not in Schengen so totally different.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And nor will Scotland. It will remain in the CTA. So, exactly the same as
>>> the Irish example.
>>
>> My hypothetical (*) question was what would happen if Scotland joined
>> Schengen (which some believe is a condition for new members).
>> (*) recognising that other hypotheses exist also.
>
> I wonder if there's any evidence that future EU members have to commit to joining Schengen? Given the near
> impossibility of having a workable Schengen border on this island, it would make it impossible for Scotland to join,
> unless rUK also joined Schengen, which seems highly unlikely.

Would solve the Northern Ireland problem twice over, no trade border
between NI and Scotland and no Union not to be a proper member of. By
the time the DUP had worked that conundrum out they'd be demographically
redundant anyway.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 26/02/2023 14:46, Coffee wrote:
> On 25/02/2023 20:17, Graeme Wall wrote:
>> On 25/02/2023 16:10, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <bfnjvh5ec006arb9hga19p7q6apbkiqvt0@4ax.com>, at 10:09:36
>>> on Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri, 24 Feb
>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area
>>>>>>> arrangements
>>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland were in
>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It would
>>>>>>> be the
>>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>
>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would stay in
>>>>> the
>>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>
>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU regulations
>>>
>>> Not the whole lot, which would make it impossible for us to trade
>>> with the EU at all.
>>
>> Apparently exactly what Mogg wants.
>>
>>
> Apparently.
>
> Quite frankly I don't think Mogg and his cronies understand the
> consequences of their actions or if they do put keeping their wealth
> away from UK regulations above the good of the UK.
>
>

If you had three guesses, what would you do with the other two?
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 14:50:10 +0000, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 26/02/2023 11:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ttffdh$2teka$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:22:25 on Sun, 26 Feb
>> 2023, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 26/02/2023 10:10, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 20:00:57 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <v3kkvh1v8l0ettrtkm99ttn1hopcu9qe95@4ax.com>, at
>>>>>> 18:17:42 on
>>>>>> Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 25 Feb 2023 10:49:25 +0000, Graeme Wall
>>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 25/02/2023 10:09, Scott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri,
>>>>>>>>>> 24 Feb
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area
>>>>>>>>>>>> arrangements
>>>>>>>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland
>>>>>>>>>>>> were in
>>>>>>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It
>>>>>>>>>>>> would be the
>>>>>>>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would
>>>>>>>>>> stay in the
>>>>>>>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU
>>>>>>>>> regulations
>>>>>>>>> with the inevitable consequence of leaving the single market.  This
>>>>>>>>> was my biggest concern.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We were assured at the time by one, then senior, politician that we
>>>>>>>> would remain in the single market, it would be the easiest deal
>>>>>>>> ever.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The "Taking back control" nonsense originally was only about
>>>>>>>> immigration.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Not my recollection.  I thought it was about getting rid of EU red
>>>>>>> tape and making our own laws (which inevitably was going to put us in
>>>>>>> conflict with the single market). .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> People have different recollections, because it wasn't a single issue
>>>>>> vote. There were at least four major themes: anti-immigration,
>>>>>> £350m for
>>>>>> the NHS, wonky bananas, and opposing "ever greater federalism"; as
>>>>>> well
>>>>>> as stuff to do with a golden future making independent trade deals and
>>>>>> getting to keep more of our own fish.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree entirely - and all depending on who was speaking at the time.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have just heard the ERG chair on Sky News saying we need to
>>>>> 'expunge' EU law from Northern Ireland.  Clearly his aversion goes far
>>>>> beyond immigration.
>>>>>
>>>>  Yes, the ERG seems to have got steadily more hardline. As has been
>>>> said of
>>>> them before, there's no point in trying to reach an agreement with
>>>> them —
>>>> they swallow any concessions, and then just demand more.
>>>>  Sunak was smart enough to appoint a couple of former ERG leading
>>>> lights to
>>>> the ministerial team doing the NI negotiations, hoping that the ERG
>>>> would
>>>> accept any final deal that their former leaders had negotiated, but they
>>>> still won't. So he's probably going to have to ride roughshod over them,
>>>> get the best deal he can (far better than the deal Boris got) and
>>>> dare them
>>>> to try and bring him down.
>>>
>>> Unfortunately I don't think he has the political nerve to succede in
>>> facing down both the ERG and the DUP and both groups are spiteful
>>> enough to bring down the government if they don't get what they want.
>>>
>>> At this stage does he care enough to even try. He could walk away now
>>> into anyone of a number of highly paid jobs with the added bonus of
>>> multi-million dollar speech engagements in prospect.
>>
>> He doesn't actually need any conventional income, he's quite
>> spectacularly independently wealthy. Which in the current kind of
>> circumstance is probably a good thing, because he'll keep his nerve.
>
>Which is why I wonder whether he will be particularly bothered to try
>and fight it through. If it gets too nasty, and it will, he can just say
>sod it and get on the next plane to California.

No, I think he's determined to fight it through. He's invested a lot of personal hours working on the detail of the
proposed agreement (unlike oven-ready Boris), and many more hours personally taking the DUP through those details and
comparing it with their list of musts. If he pulls this off, it's very much his personal triumph, finally achieving what
his four Tory predecessors failed to do (arguably, Major and Thatcher were also both brought down on this issue).

Unlike Boris, he's worked hard to establish a bond with the EU leaders, particularly UVL. For example, UVL and both the
Sunaks have Stanford MBAs, so they're almost members of an alumni club, and UVL is a keen horsewoman, like both Sunak
daughters (UVL named one of her children's horses Cockney). And one of UVL's seven children is currently studying at
Oxford University, from which Sunak has a first class degree. UVL and her husband are both doctors, like Sunak's dad.
He's built on these links to establish a bond of trust, something Boris had no interest in doing (in fact, he stitched
up his supposed friends, the DUP, something Sunak is trying to fix).

On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 14:30:16 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> On 26/02/2023 11:18, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>>> On 26/02/2023 09:14, Scott wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have just heard the ERG chair on Sky News saying we need to
>>>> 'expunge' EU law from Northern Ireland.  Clearly his aversion goes far
>>>> beyond immigration.
>>>
>>> How long a game do they need to play before time and demographics mean
>>> NI simply solves itself (or at least becomes someone else's problem)?
>>>
>>
>> About 20 years for demographics to solve the problem, about 18 months,
>> possibly a lot less, for it to become SOP.
>
>According to a speaker I heard at a conference about 5 years ago (an Irish
>Professor of Law talking about Brexit) the primary school and labour force
>populations are already majority Catholic/Nationalist.

Not only that, but the DUP seems to be trying to alienate most of the Protestant population as well.

On 26/02/2023 15:01, Graeme Wall wrote:
> On 26/02/2023 14:46, Coffee wrote:
>> On 25/02/2023 20:17, Graeme Wall wrote:
>>> On 25/02/2023 16:10, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <bfnjvh5ec006arb9hga19p7q6apbkiqvt0@4ax.com>, at 10:09:36
>>>> on Sat, 25 Feb 2023, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 13:16:32 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <tt9tfh$25ttp$5@dont-email.me>, at 08:45:37 on Fri, 24 Feb
>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> UK and Ireland have had passport free common travel area
>>>>>>>> arrangements
>>>>>>>> since Ireland became independent. In a case where Scotland were in
>>>>>>>> Schengen and rUK was not, that would not be possible.  It would
>>>>>>>> be the
>>>>>>>> same issue that plagues NI today for goods, but for people.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes, which is why Scotland would stay in the CTA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I used to think that in event of Brexit, then "the UK would stay
>>>>>> in the
>>>>>> Single Market" for similar reasons. And look what happened.
>>>>>
>>>>> I interpreted 'taking back control' as departing from EU regulations
>>>>
>>>> Not the whole lot, which would make it impossible for us to trade
>>>> with the EU at all.
>>>
>>> Apparently exactly what Mogg wants.
>>>
>>>
>> Apparently.
>>
>> Quite frankly I don't think Mogg and his cronies understand the
>> consequences of their actions or if they do put keeping their wealth
>> away from UK regulations above the good of the UK.
>>
>>
>
> If you had three guesses, what would you do with the other two?
Which other two?

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 13:57:43 +0100, Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>
>> On 26.02.23 12:58, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ttff2h$2teg0$5@dont-email.me>, at 11:16:33 on Sun, 26 Feb
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Completing a journey ('tapping out') that you started with Oyster [or
>>>>>> CCC], and changing onto a train bound for somewhere outside the Oyster
>>>>>> or CCC area, hence needing independent ticketing.
>>>>>
>>>>> For that use case, you'd want the validator to be at the first/last
>>>>> (depeding on direction) station in the Oyster zones rather than at a
>>>>> central location, so Dartford, Swanley, New Barnet, Elstree & Borhamwood
>>>>> etc.
>>>>
>>>> Yes, and this is hardly a new issue. All that's changed is that the ccc
>>>> zone has expanded, so the boundary stations are further out. This will
>>>> continue, of course. So there will need to be Oyster readers
>>>> in-station on
>>>> the new boundaries, on platforms and interchange passages, just as there
>>>> already are at the previous boundary stations. Strangely enough, TfL had
>>>> somehow managed to work this out for itself, without any guidance from
>>>> Roland.
>>>
>>> Except you've just admitted they hadn't worked it out, most obviously on
>>> the passageway at Farringdon, of course. Let alone all the necessary
>>> interchange stations further out. Where I initially mentioned SPILL, but
>>> this last few days have been casting the net a bit further out.
>>
>> Farringdon allows transfer between London Undergronud services and
>> Thameslink services without passing through a gateline. That's not
>> possible at StP because to get to the Thameslink platforms from the LU
>> platforms involves passng through two gatelines.
>
> Roland wants validators on the TL platforms so TL passengers can touch in
> and out of the Oyster zone, switching from/to
> some other TL ticket. They will remain on TL, ideally on the same train.
>
> So, for example, someone coming from Cambridge with a London Terminals
> ticket (valid as far as KGX or SPI) and wishing
> to continue on the same train to, say, London Bridge, needs to touch-in
> at that point, even though they are continuing
> on TL. In an ideal world, there would be pads on the train that knew
> where they were at the time of the touch, but if
> not, distributed along the platform.
>

Or perhaps eventually you can just have a mobile phone app that knows
exactly where you are and saves all the bother. With your phone acting as a
radio beacon they ought to know where you are.