Bruce Napier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On 13 Jul 2007, at 19:35, Brian Dominic wrote: > >>> That seems to me to be remarkably un-urgent. >>> >> ........ because it's a freight-only line with an alternative route >> available, and "they're only pleasure boaters".............. >> >Not quite right, AIUI. The Newmarket to Ely passenger service has been >replaced with buses. Restoration of the rail service will take longer >than restoring the navigation, which only depends on making the bridge >safe, not reconstructing it.
You're making my point. If the railway had to pay a substantial per-hour compensation fee for the time its activities block the navigation, then the railway would have a strong incentive to get the navigation reopened quickly, i.e. not *after* it gets the trains running again. You can bet that would be the case if a train fell off a bridge over a motorway. Malcolm Nixon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>How much is Network Rail (or whatever) paying EA, per hour of course, >>as compensation for blocking the navigation? > >Probably not a lot, as the civil servants and politicians didn't put >it into the Railway privatisation legislation. ISTM that BW charges for closures to its navigations, though (although probably not enough). Isn't this yet another reason to transfer the EA navigations to BW? Adrian Adrian Stott 07956-299966
