Connect with us


How Elizabeth line will slash journey times across London

By Ted Thornhill and Charlie Bayliss For Mailonline

Published: 07:55 EST, 20 December 2017 | Update..

By Ted Thornhill and Charlie Bayliss For Mailonline

Published: 07:55 EST, 20 December 2017 | Updated: 11:29 EST, 20 December 2017

© Getty Images

The fastest journey from Paddington to Tottenham Court Road – using the Circle Line to Euston Square then walking – currently takes 20 minutes, but on the Elizabeth line this will take just four. And to Bond Street just three, compared to the current quickest, which is 15.

  • Journey times from London Paddington to Tottenham Court Road will be slashed from 20mins to 4
  • A new Tube map has been released to mark one year from the opening of the Elizabeth line
  • The line, which stretches more than 60 miles under the capital, will have a total of 41 stations
  • Fifteen trains will run through the tunnels every hour for the £14.8 billion Crossrail project

The new Tube map has been released to mark a one year from the opening of the Elizabeth line, which will stretch more than 60 miles under the capital and stop at 41 stations

In December 2018 life in London is going to become a lot zippier – thanks to the opening of the Elizabeth line.

New trains will cross the capital, from Heathrow Airport in the west to Abbey Wood and Shenfield in the east, with Tube journey times slashed by up to 80 per cent in some cases.

For example the fastest journey from Paddington to Tottenham Court Road – using the Circle Line to Euston Square then walking – currently takes 20 minutes, but on the Elizabeth line this will take just four. And to Bond Street just three, compared to the current quickest, which is 15.

And from the same station to Stratford the journey time comes down from 31 minutes to 18, while it will take just 10 minutes to reach Liverpool Street from the mainline station hub and 17 to get to Canary Wharf.

Another huge reduction will be from Canary Wharf to Liverpool Street. At the moment it takes 21 minutes, but the swish new Elizabeth line trains will get there in six.

Meanwhile, passengers jumping on a train at Abbeywood, which is at the end of the south-eastern section, will be able to get to Heathrow Airport 42 minutes quicker than they can at the moment.

It currently takes 93 minutes.

Passengers there will also see a 20-minute reduction in journey times to Canary Wharf and a 19-minute reduction for trips to Bond Street, which is currently 44 minutes.

And workers at Canary Wharf jetting off from Heathrow will get an extra 16 minutes in duty free, because journey times to the airport will drop from 55 minutes to 39.

It’s not all positive though.

If you live in Shenfield the Elizabeth line doesn’t offer any reductions in journey times to Paddington, Bond Street or Canary Wharf – though you will be able to reach Heathrow 60 seconds faster.

© Getty Images

The Crossrail project has cost £14.8 billion and is one of the most drastic improvements to the London Undergroud system in decades. The line will be fully operational by December 2019 although some services will begin next year

A new Tube map, meanwhile, has been revealed to mark one year until the Elizabeth line is opened.

The addition of the purple line is the newest and perhaps most radical change London Underground has seen in years.

Fifteen trains each hour will run through the newly built tunnels under London in the £14.8 billion Crossrail project, which has been funded by the Department for Transport and Transport for London (TfL).

TfL estimates the line will be used by 200 million passengers each year and increase rail capacity in the capital by 10 per cent

© Getty Images

A general view of the westbound platform at the Farringdon Crossrail station, on December 19, 2017, in London. The original schedule was that the first trains would run in 2017, but in 2010 the government delayed this to 2018 in order to save £1billion

© Getty Images

Construction workers make adjustments to the eastbound track at Farringdon Crossrail station on December 19, 2017. Travel times to places in the capital and as far away as Reading and Heathrow Airport will be reduced when the line is up and running

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan said: 'It’s truly exciting that in only a year London will see the opening of one of the biggest new transport projects in a generation.

'The new map being unveiled shows how the first phase of the Elizabeth line will connect to key parts of the transport network in the heart of central London, substantially reducing congestion on other key Tube lines as London’s population grows.'

All new trains will have a walk-through feature and be fully air conditioned, with live information and free WiFi. All 41 stations on the line will be step-free from street to platform. Ten new stations have been built to serve the new line, while the other 31 have been refurbished.

Rail minister Paul Maynard said: 'Seeing the Elizabeth line on the Tube map for the very first time is exciting confirmation that we are closer than ever to delivering a transformative change in London’s rail network.

'That means better, faster journeys for over half a million passengers per day, as well as offering new connections that will link people to Heathrow, Gatwick and Luton.'

© Getty Images

Passenger escalators are seen in an entrance hall as work continues at the Farringdon Crossrail station, on December 19, 2017 in London, England

© Getty Images

When the service is fully functional in December 2019, a train every two and a half minutes will stop at the station in peak times to allow passengers to travel through to Paddington, and then onto Heathrow or Reading in the west and Shenfield or Abbey Wood in the east

© Getty Images

Journey times will be to many locations in the capital will be reduced when the line is operational. For example, it will only take eight minutes as opposed to the current 25 to get from Farringdon to Canary Wharf, while Farringdon to Bond Street will only take four minutes as opposed to the current 18 minutes

One of the other stations to benefit from the introduction of the Elizabeth line is Farringdon, which has undergone major reconstruction work ahead of the opening next year.

The central London station will be one of the busiest in the UK, connecting with Thameslink and London Underground to provide links with outer London, the home counties, the City, Canary Wharf and three of London’s five airports.

Two new ticket halls will be connected by underground mined platforms and the western end will be located on the corner of Farringdon Road and Cowcross Street to provide access to and from the Thameslink ticket hall.

A pedestrian priority plaza will also be installed between the Elizabeth line and Underground ticket halls at the western end of Cowcross street.

The station will open in December 2018 when services begin through central London. Trains will terminate at Paddington in the west and Abbey Wood in the east.

When the service is fully functional in December 2019, a train every two and a half minutes will stop at the station in peak times to allow passengers to travel through to Paddington, and then onto Heathrow or Reading in the west and Shenfield or Abbey Wood in the east.

© Getty Images

One of the newly built passenger thoroughfares is seen as work continues at Farringdon Crossrail station. Thirty stations will be refurbished as part of the project. As well as the capital, the line also stretches into the home counties of Berkshire, Buckinghamshire and Essex

© Getty Images

By 2018 Farringdon will be Britain’s busiest station, with a sevenfold increase in commuters and 140 trains per hour passing through

Original Article

The post How Elizabeth line will slash journey times across London appeared first on News Wire Now.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Saudi women in Sydney: Sisters’ bodies lay undiscovered for a month

Australian police are baffled after the bodies of two Saudi women, believed to have lain undiscovered for a month, were found in a Sydney apartment.

Sisters Asra Abdullah Alsehli, 24, and Amaal Abdullah Alsehli, 23, were found dead on 7 June in separate beds at home in the suburb of Canterbury.

Police, who were called to the property for a welfare check, said the women are believed to have died in early May.

But despite “extensive inquiries”, they still do not know how or why.

The sisters moved to Australia from Saudi Arabia in 2017 and may have sought asylum, The Sydney Morning Herald reported. Police refused to confirm this, saying they do not comment on residential status.

A human rights organisation said it should be established whether the women fled Saudi Arabia because of domestic violence or harsh laws governing women. However, there is no evidence this is the case.

Police said they had been in contact with the women’s family, which is assisting them with inquiries.

Lina al-Hathloul, head of monitoring and communications at Saudi human rights organisation ALQST, said it “would not be the first case” of Saudi women who were killed abroad after fleeing domestic violence.

“There are no protections for women who are victims of domestic violence in Saudi Arabia, so they flee abroad,” she told the BBC.

She added: “I’m not saying that is the case here, just that we need a thorough investigation. It is frustrating not to have any information.”

According to the Sydney Morning Herald, there had been signs that something was wrong.

Last year, the women told their building manager they thought someone was tampering with their food deliveries, the paper reported.

A plumber who visited the apartment also said he believed there was “something mysterious” going on, and that police had been called in the past over concerns for the women.

New South Wales Police issued a renewed plea to the public on Wednesday, saying “any piece of information” could be the key to solving this case.

The local community is close-knit, police said in a statement, asking anyone who may have known or seen the women to come forward.

A report from Australian current affairs programme Four Corners in 2019 found 80 Saudi women had tried to seek asylum in Australia in recent years. Many of them were fleeing male guardianship laws.


Read from:

Continue Reading


Australia election: Why is Australia’s parliament so white?

Australia is one of the most multicultural nations in the world, but it’s a different story in the country’s politics, where 96% of federal lawmakers are white.

With this year’s election, political parties did have a window to slightly improve this. But they chose not to in most cases, critics say.

Tu Le grew up the child of Vietnamese refugees in Fowler, a south-west Sydney electorate far from the city’s beaches, and one of the poorest urban areas in the country.

The 30-year-old works as a community lawyer for refugees and migrants newly arrived to the area.

Last year, she was pre-selected by the Labor Party to run in the nation’s most multicultural seat. But then party bosses side-lined her for a white woman.

It would take Kristina Kenneally four hours on public transport – ferry, train, bus, and another bus – to get to Fowler from her home in Sydney’s Northern Beaches, where she lived on an island.

Furious locals questioned what ties she had to the area, but as one of Labor’s most prominent politicians, she was granted the traditionally Labor-voting seat.

Ms Le only learned she’d been replaced on the night newspapers went to print with the story.

“I was conveniently left off the invitation to the party meeting the next day,” she told the BBC.

Despite backlash – including a Facebook group where locals campaigned to stop Ms Kenneally’s appointment – Labor pushed through the deal.

“If this scenario had played out in Britain or the United States, it would not be acceptable,” says Dr Tim Soutphomassane, director of the Sydney Policy Lab and Australia’s former Race Discrimination Commissioner.

“But in Australia, there is a sense that you can still maintain the status quo with very limited social and political consequences.”

An insiders’ game

At least one in five Australians have a non-European background and speak a language at home other than English, according to the last census in 2016.

Some 49% of the population was born or has a parent who was born overseas. In the past 20 years, migrants from Australia’s Asian neighbours have eclipsed those from the UK.

But the parliament looks almost as white as it did in the days of the “White Australia” policy – when from 1901 to the 1970s, the nation banned non-white immigrants.

“We simply do not see our multicultural character represented in anything remotely close to proportionate form in our political institutions,” says Dr Soutphomassane.

Compared to other Western multicultural democracies, Australia also lags far behind.

The numbers below include Indigenous Australians, who did not gain suffrage until the 1960s, and only saw their first lower house MP elected in 2010. Non-white candidates often acknowledge that any progress was first made by Aboriginal Australians.

Two decades ago, Australia and the UK had comparably low representation. But UK political parties – responding to campaigns from diverse members – pledged to act on the problem.

“The British Conservative Party is currently light years ahead of either of the major Australian political parties when it comes to race and representation,” says Dr Soutphomassane.

So why hasn’t Australia changed?

Observers say Australia’s political system is more closed-door than other democracies. Nearly all candidates chosen by the major parties tend to be members who’ve risen through the ranks. Often they’ve worked as staffers to existing MPs.

Ms Le said she’d have no way into the political class if she hadn’t been sponsored by Fowler’s retiring MP – a white, older male.

Labor has taken small structural steps recently – passing commitments in a state caucus last year, and selecting two Chinese-Australian candidates for winnable seats in Sydney.

But it was “one step forward and two steps back”, says party member and activist Osmond Chiu, when just weeks after the backlash to Ms Le’s case, Labor “parachuted in” another white candidate to a multicultural heartland.

Andrew Charlton, a former adviser to ex-PM Kevin Rudd, lived in a harbour mansion in Sydney’s east where he ran a consultancy.

His selection scuppered the anticipated races of at least three diverse candidates from the area which has large Indian and Chinese diasporas.

Party seniors argued that Ms Kenneally and Mr Charlton – as popular and respected party figures – would be able to promote their electorates’ concerns better than newcomers.

Labor leader Anthony Albanese also hailed Ms Kenneally as a “great Australian success story” as a migrant from the US herself.

But Mr Chiu says: “A lot of the frustration that people expressed wasn’t about these specific individuals.

“It was about the fact that these were two of the most multicultural seats in Australia and these opportunities – which come by so rarely – to select culturally diverse candidates were squandered.”

He adds this has long-term effects because the average MP stays in office for about 10 years.

The frustration on this issue has centred on Labor – because the centre-left party calls itself the “party of multiculturalism”.

But the Liberal-National government doesn’t even have diversity as a platform issue.

One of its MPs up for re-election recently appeared to confuse her Labor rival for Tu Le, sparking accusations that she’d mixed up the two Asian-Australian women – something she later denied. But as one opponent said: “How is this still happening in 2022?”

Some experts like Dr Soutphommasane have concluded that Australia’s complacency on areas like representation stems from how the nation embraced multiculturalism as official policy after its White Australia days.

The government of the 1970s, somewhat embarrassed by the past policy, passed racial discrimination laws and “a seat at the table” was granted to migrants and Indigenous Australians.

But critics say this has led to an Australia where multiculturalism is celebrated but racial inequality is not interrogated.

“Multiculturalism is almost apolitical in how it’s viewed in Australia,” Dr Soutphommasane says, in contrast to the “fight” for rights that other Western countries have seen from minority groups.

What is the impact?

A lack of representation in parliament can also lead to failures in policy.

During Sydney’s Covid outbreak in August 2021, Fowler and Parramatta electorates – where most of the city’s multicultural communities reside – were subject to harsher lockdowns as a result of a higher number of cases.

How will things change?

Liberal MP Dave Sharma, the only lawmaker of Indian heritage, has said all parties – including his own – should better recruit people with different backgrounds. He called it a “pretty laissez-faire attitude” currently.

Mr Albanese has urged Ms Le to “hang in there”, insisting she has a future.

But more people like Ms Le are choosing to speak out.

“I think I surprised a lot of people by not staying quiet,” she told the BBC.

“People acted like it was the end of my political career that I didn’t toe the party line. But… none of that means anything to me if it means I’m sacrificing my own values.”

She and other second-generation Australians – raised in a country which prides itself on “a fair go” – are agitating for the rights and access their migrant parents may not have felt entitled to.

“Many of those from diverse backgrounds were saying they felt like they didn’t have a voice – and that my case was a clear demonstration of their suppression, and their wider participation in our political system.”

She and others have noted the “growing distrust” in the major parties. Polls are predicting record voter support for independent candidates.

“This issue…. matters for everyone in Australian society that cares about democracy,” says Mr Soutphommasane.

“If democratic institutions are not representative, their legitimacy will suffer.

Read from:

Continue Reading


Scott Morrison effectively ditches his promise to establish a federal anti-corruption commission

Scott Morrison has effectively abandoned his promise to establish a federal anti-corruption watchdog, confirming he would only proceed with legislation in the new parliament if Labor agreed to pass the Coalition’s heavily criticised proposal without amendments.

Morrison pledged before the 2019 election to legislate a federal integrity body in the parliamentary term that has just ended. The prime minister broke that promise, failing to introduce his own proposal before the 46th parliament was prorogued.

On the hustings on Wednesday, Morrison was asked – given his previous undertaking to create the body – whether he would promise to put his proposal to a vote in the next parliament in the event the Coalition won the 21 May election.

Morrison declined to make that promise. “Our position on this hasn’t changed,” the prime minister said. “Our view has been the same – when the Labor party is prepared to support that legislation in that form, then we will proceed with it.”

The prime minister has attempted to inoculate himself from criticism about breaking an election promise by saying he tabled the integrity commission proposal in the parliament.

Tabling an exposure draft, which is what the prime minister did, is not the same as introducing finished legislation to the House of Representatives or the Senate that is then debated and voted on.

As well as repeatedly fudging what happened in parliament, Morrison has also created the impression the proposal can only proceed if Labor agrees to its passage without amendments.

All governments routinely introduce legislation for debate without any undertaking that it will be passed by the opposition. Labor favours a stronger model than the Coalition’s proposal.

Morrison’s lack of urgency on the issue created tensions within government ranks. Late last year, the Tasmanian Liberal MP Bridget Archer crossed the floor to support independent MP Helen Haines’ bill to establish a federal integrity commission. Archer accused the government of “inertia” over the issue.

At that time, Archer said she was “perplexed” at her own government’s failure to release a revised bill almost three years after it was promised before the last election.

While Morrison clearly wants to move on from the issue, he will face renewed pressure from crossbench independents if the coming election is close enough to deliver a hung parliament.

A number of independents running against Liberals in metropolitan seats have made it clear that establishing a credible national integrity commission will be a key demand in the event any new government – Liberal or Labor – is seeking agreements for confidence and supply.

Haines blasted Morrison’s comments on Wednesday. “Mr Morrison broke an election promise to introduce an anti-corruption commission and his pathway to creating one is still as vague as it was in the last parliament,” she said.

The crossbench independent said it was “nonsense” for the prime minister to claim that he could not proceed unless Labor agreed with the Coalition’s proposal without seeking any amendments. “It would appear we are in the same void as we were before,” Haines said.

Read from:

Continue Reading