No Frills Train Travel Expanding?

The British transport operator FirstGroup has applied for two more “open access” services outside the main train operating contracts as the government attempts to increase competition on the rail network and cut fares. Open access means the operator takes full commercial risk, running services on infrastructure owned by a third party, on a chosen route that is not subject to a rail franchise set by the Department for Transport.

Just what the railways need if they are to come into their own again!  

FirstGroup began running an open access service through its Lumo business between London and Edinburgh in October 2021, which has carried more than 2.5 million passengers so far. It says train cancellations are among the lowest in the industry. Encouraged by the success of Lumo, FirstGroup said it had recently submitted applications to the Office of Rail and Road for a new Hull Trains service between London and Sheffield, which could start in 2026, and a new Lumo service between Rochdale and London, which could begin in 2027.

I've travelled to Edinburgh on Lumo, and yes, it's a very no-frills service. Take food with you, as the trolly service only does drinks and crisps - if you want a sandwich you need to have ordered it on their website before boarding. But when every train station is full of places to pick up a sandwich, is that such a hardship? 

It has also applied for the extension of a number of Lumo’s daily services to and from Glasgow; for an additional, eighth return service on Hull Trains between London and Hull and for an extra sixth return Lumo service between London and Newcastle. If successful, these services will more than double its open access capacity over the next three to five years.

And this can only be a good thing, surely? 

Sharon Graham, the Unite general secretary, said this strengthened the case for public ownership.

Oh. Of course. I was forgetting the rail unions. 

She added: “FirstGroup is extracting colossal profits from our bus and rail networks at the expense of passengers and workers. It makes no sense to pour billions of pounds into subsidising public transport and then allow third-party operators to profiteer from them by running down jobs and services.”

How are they doing that, when they are giving passengers what they want - cheap, reliable service?  

The Royal We, Amelia?

Shops don’t simply give us what we want – they make us want it.

Speak for yourself! Nothing that has been advertised or stocked in supermarkets made me buy (or want) Hallowe'en tat. This house was free of pumpkin candles and furry spiders and plastic skeletons. And of trick and treaters, thanks mostly - I suspect - to the bad weather. Not that the sweets will go to waste, the tech guys in the office will make short work of them on Friday!

But if you like that, go to it! Why not? Life’s too short to live it according to misanthropes like ‘Guardian’ columnists. 

The Mob Wins...

The Essex pub that refused to remove its display of golliwog dolls has been forced to close after Heineken and Carlsberg told the owners to stop serving their beer and a maintenance firm refused to work on site.

Now, following the controversy Mrs Ryley and her husband Chris, have vowed to shut the pub down for good and move home to Turkey.

Do 'racists' choose to move to other countries populated by the people they supposedly hate, then? 

'I feel gutted, totally and utterly gutted. Hurt, upset,' she said of the closure. 'We've had a few bits of hate, which I personally don't understand.

'The young people these days don't understand, from years ago where did the Gollys originate from, it's such a shame.'

It's not just the young people, Mrs Ryley. If only it was... 

A Carlsberg spokesperson told MailOnline today: 'We believe pubs should be an enjoyable place for everyone and we will take steps to seek removal of our beers from venues who do not share our values.

'Whilst we do not directly supply the pub in question, after being made aware of the police investigation we contacted our third-party distributor to make our views clear.'

Heineken ordered the pub to stop serving its beer on April 20 citing the 'abhorrent display' that allegedly goes 'against everything the company stands for'.

Remember when companies were only interested in a profit margin? That, too, it seems, has gone the way of the golly on the jam jar... 

Why Do They Need The Tail To Wag The Dog?

Former Tory leader Iain Duncan Smith, MP for Chingford and Woodford Green, said: “I would get rid of it (WFH) now. People have got to be encouraged back into the office.

“The infrastructure in London is desperately in need of people going back to the office — shops, small food outlets, restaurants, entertainment — all these things that make London vibrant are all flat at the moment.”

Make up your mind, I thought it was all the stabbings that did that?! 

Sir Bob Neill, Tory MP for Bromley and Chislehurst, said WFH guidance should go by January 26 “at the latest and earlier if hospitalisations continue to decline”.

He told the Standard: “The hospitality and retail sectors in central London are being crippled and, thanks to the success of the vaccine campaign, albeit that we have more to do there, we must be planning to move steadily back to normality as soon as possible.”

Why 'must' we be planning that? What if WFH is the new normal? What if workers aren't the only ones to benefit?

Ros Morgan, chief executive of the Heart of London Business Alliance, said: “Work from home guidance has hollowed out the centre of London and meant that our businesses and cultural venues had a really difficult December — an option for office workers to come back would bring a much-needed boost to our capital. Central London stands ready to welcome people back — so let’s remove the barriers as soon as we can and help bring London back to life.”

Everyone seems to be forgetting that these services grew up in the first place to service a need - if the need diminishes because the working culture is changing, then they need to adapt to serve the new need or die out. Not demand that workers and firms regress to serve them up with a captive market.

That's not capitalism, and it's certainly not progress either.  

It's That Royal 'We' Again...

Sarah Wilson thinks the pandemic was a great thing:

Do you remember what we did? We stopped consuming. And we really rather loved it.

Really? I thought there'd been an immediate run on Amazon and eBay and Just Eat. Not to mention online entertainment, or does it not count if pixels are flowing into the house rather than parcels..? 

In April discretionary spending dropped by 30% in Australia. In early May 52% of us told the researchers behind the BCG’s Global Consumer Sentiment survey that we planned to “reduce spending on luxury products even after the crisis is over”. We told others that, post-pandemic, we’d focus spending on meaningful, simple experiences with each other and buy less stuff.

Yeah, yeah. 'We' tell ourselves every year we'll give Veganuary a shot too, yet the ramainder shelf in supermarkets stays packed with unbought PlantChef and Wicked ready meals...  

But it didn’t stick. And this truth has been hammered home as we start the new year. By early June we were spending like mad people, back to pre-pandemic levels. Consumer confidence reports released on 12 January showed spending on goods went up 13.3% year on year, and consumer confidence was at a 13-month high.

Whoever thought we wouldn't? 

It’s 2021; can we call it as it is? Drop the C-bomb? We were hoping to be freed from capitalism.

Who's 'we'? Clearly, 'we' weren't! 

To my mind, we become so trapped in the cult that we struggle to imagine how to release ourselves, or a better world beyond it. But we are going to have to.

Oh? Really? 

It’s worth casting our mind back to early Covid and the hope, lightness and connection we felt as we go forward into the abject uncertainty of 2021. Because, and here’s the Great Revelation in it all, that was us. That was who we are.

It appears it was who circumstance forced us to be, temporarily. But now we're back, baby! 

All 'Advertising Stereotypes'..?

...or will white men still be portrayed as bumbling fools who can't find their way around the kitchen?

Unilever has said it will tackle advertising stereotypes and work with more businesses run by women and other under-represented groups as part of a wider inclusivity drive.

Shouldn't they choose business that give a good service or provide viable deals for the company? Isn't that how capitalism is supposed to work? 

Dave Ingram, its chief procurement officer, said Unilever had set a target of spending €2bn (£1.8bn) a year with companies owned and managed by women, under-represented minority ethnic groups, people with disabilities and the LGBTQI+ community by 2025.

Whether they are any good, or not? Good lord, has the woke virus spread further and faster than Covid? 

Unilever will also increase the number of advertisements that feature or are created by people from diverse groups. The move would “help tackle the prevalence of stereotypes that are often perpetuated through advertising, and promote a more inclusive representation of people”, it said.

Frankly, this just means more adverts that are unrepresentative of the real world that people can see around them - a world where everyone's a mixed race couple.  

Unilever has also set a target of only working with businesses that pay employees at least a living wage or income by the end of the decade. Hitting this ambitious target would involve working with farmers, suppliers, NGOs and governments to bring about systemic change.

Remember when businesses existed just to make a profit for their shareholders?