TSR MHoC General Election September 2012

You're not answering the question again. Is it cost effective?

ATOC produced a Report back in 2009 entitled Connecting Communities and the Campaign for Better Transport recently produced a Report regarding the Policy side.

The biggest mistake was selling of the land

Costs will be looked at in our evaluations

Another line for in fill Electrification is the Goblin AKA The Gospel Oak-Barking Line
Under the Lib Dem's plan, the Central section of EWR will go ahead following he RL Government's HLOS

We will identify other lines for reopenning and Electrification

But how do you intend to right that? I mean if this land has been sold then do you plan on spending millions trying to requisition land that belonged to the railways before?

What about those lines since pulled up? Those lines since electrified into different transport routes. Local routes?

Under EU estimates that would cost £4bn and would also be illegal because the EU Commission ruled against reintroducing train services to Barking in Case 7-93, June 8th 2010. Your policy is in direct contradiction of EU Law, you should be sacked as Transport Spokesperson.

That's exactly the point. We oppose commercialised pornography because we see it as degrading and bad for society. Thus, taking away the opportunity for online distributors to make money from it is the only way to rectify this. We believe porn should be shared in an empathetic and respectful manner, but that hardly means we're opposed to it. If anything, it shows that we care about it enough to want to amend the issues surrounding it.

Honestly, if you'd bothered to read the bill in the first place, you would have realised this long ago.

Under EU estimates that would cost £4bn and would also be illegal because the EU Commission ruled against reintroducing train services to Barking in Case 7-93, June 8th 2010. Your policy is in direct contradiction of EU Law, you should be sacked as Transport Spokesperson.

I will look at that in more detail, there have been many people who have argued the Electrification of the Goblin

Interesting point there.



Would you defy your beloved EU in order to get what your desired policy?

There is nothing on Goblin in EU Law, The only judgement on that date by the ECJ relates to Vodafone and 7/93 relates to something else not the Railways

If you don't believe me then check the ECJ

Don't state cases without looking at them first JPKC

Fine, but hypothetically speaking would you defy the EU on transport policy if you had to in order to get your policy through?

and this is an issue almost all liberal people disagree with you on. It is such a backward religious way of thinking that porn is degrading to anyone. Women should be able to do what they like with their bodies.

I was criticizing the failures and another crticism on Beeching is that Great Central and other lines which would have been useful diversionary route now was closed.

I'm not disputing that women should be allowed to do what they like with their bodies. What I am disputing though, is women being treated merely as objects of sexual desire whose sole purpose it is to satisfy men. If you honestly believe that women should be treated in that way, then I'm afraid it is you who is backward and religious.

No because the Party's policies fully comply with EU Rail Policy and Law.

But how do you intend to rectify that?

They aren't being treated like objects they are ACTING.

Oh, of course! I suppose the people who watch porn are acting as well, aren't they?

Hypothetically speaking though, if any of your policies contravened EU law, would you abide by EU law or would you disregard EU law for what your party would see as the good of the country?

You can't fully reinstate the lines that closed because some have been built on but new lines will serve towns that were cut from the Network, ATOC suggested Ringwood in Hampshire, Hythe in Hampshire and many others . The report I mentioned identified 14 schemes with BCR over 1. BCR is Benefit Cost Ratio