Last party on the Circle Line

[Chris M]

I've been away for the weekend and this evening was my first trip on LU since the ban came into force. On the Central Line train I was on there were three 20-something white men drinking cans of fosters between Tottenham Court Road and Liverpool Street, and a male and female east Asian couple in their early 20s who were drinking what looked like an alcopop who got on at Leytonstone and travelled further east than I did. None of them were causing any problems to anyone else.
The person being loud and obnoxious on Stratford platform did not appear to be drinking (although he almost certainly had been).

[Deleted]

Bearing in mind we can all get on a train already totally smashed, determined to punch a train operator in the face without having to take a can or bottle with us, this has to be one of the most pointless pieces of legislation enacted. At least if the perpetrators have the cans and/or bottles with them it's fairly obvious to LUL staff and other passengers that inebriation may have taken place and they can steer clear or keep an eye on them wherever possible.

"Drunk and disorderly" covered all that surely?

The main problem as I see it is littering with empties when they can't be bothered to take them away to dispose of. Littering is still an offence isn't it although there'll still be soft drink containers, papers, partly eaten burgers and dirty nappies (oh yes). Without doubling the staff available and BTP as well I can't see how you can possibly control this.

It's a bit like the phone-in-the-car thing. Why bother singling it out when it was already covered by driving without due care and attention. I notice they didn't make "applying lipstick via the rear view mirror" a separate offence.....

Anyway, I'd just like to put on record my complete support for all of you on LUL having to cope with this rising tide of complete tossers who have little or no regard for public or other peoples property, feelings or well being. A difficult job under difficult circumstances.

Richard

[towerman]

Is it any wonder kids are like they are today?One of the revellers(tossers) interviewed by The London Paper was a teacher.One of them came up with one of the most stupid comments "I didn't vote for Johnson so why should I obey his laws?"Would they say that if the person they voted for had their laws ignored because someone didn't vote for them.I also noticed all the people interviewed were all middle class professionals.

[superteacher]

What an embarrasment to the teaching profession. Yes, I was there, but only in the capacity of being curious, and the hardest stuff I drank was Lucozade!

All this rubbish about "it's a free country!" In my opinion, it's too free in some ways, and the product of this are the moronic twats who turned out on Saturday night! I'd like to round up all the rubbish they left on Saturday night, and sprinkle it acorss their front gardens.

[rrbs]

I travelled today in DM5703 which is completely devoid of ads and most line diagrams also missing, those that are there are half peeled off. I confess I was of the apparent corporate LU view that it'll all pass off calmly, however it seems nobody bothered to assess 'worst case' and certainly nobody had the balls to withdraw the Circle at 9pm when it was obvious it was all going wrong. Hell we cope every other weekend without the Circle anyway!

Oh and the cab door of 5703 has 'Ken's Wake' written across the back of it....

[21146]

My first journey by booze-free bus was on a 97 yesterday. And as I sat down my foot crunched on a squashed Special Brew can. And this was the seat nearest the driver on the lower deck. So he was obviously well-interested.

But most litter on public transport is caused by the free papers, but until LU gets out of the lucrative "Metro" contract I can't see this being flagged up as a problem anytime soon. The inside of many cars look like a waste paper dump after the AM peak now.

[21146]

Jun 2, 2008 23:00:40 GMT @rrbs said:

it seems nobody bothered to assess 'worst case' and certainly nobody had the balls to withdraw the Circle at 9pm when it was obvious it was all going wrong.

I wonder if there was a "political" aspect to this? I mean LU senior bosses want to keep their jobs as much as anyone else and withdrawing the Circle (and then the DR, H&C?) could have been reported as "Boris' ban causes chaos for thousands of ordinary passengers". Which it did of course, though the blame on Sat ultimately lies with those idiots who cannot control themselves after a few drinks or use the anonymity of the crowd to carry out acts they'd never usually consider (think Poll Tax riots, Stop the City etc).

They did seem mainly to be white 20-something professionals or aspiring professionals but I won't hold that against them. The "Leeds Service Crew" of 45-somethings(!) certainly don't fit that category but were just as objectionable in behaviour when they used LU whilst playing Millwall a few months' ago.

Given what I was told by Northern Line T/OP who was receiving "all call" radio messages from the L/C, I'd also be interested of the reasons used for the various service disruptions that night and if these were carefully chosen: (e.g. defective train [door off runner], overcrowding [lots of drunks], person ill on train [another drunk] to avoid directly referring to the "Last Night.." event, at least until it was realised that it was too big to hush up).

I presume that LU *did* have some sort of contingency plan but the message to the public had been "no extra staff" and inferring that basically nothing was going to happen so there was a lot a face to be lost here given the way things turned out.

(PS - What time does the Pullman car leave Baker Street for Verney Junction?)

[chris]

To be honest I thought this party looked quite good! **prepares to be shot down by arrows fired from all angles!!** Out of the 'thousands' that turned up only 17 arrests were made, and if we look at what happens when crowds get together at football matches (especially rangers fans) we get mobs, violence and much worse damage to property. I daresay the atmosphere was much friendlier than a normal night on the tube and very few other events will bring so many Londoner's together. Yes there was mess and it will take some clearing up, but it's a light hearted night in an uptight world and i'd have loved to have been a part of it.

[Phil]

Jun 3, 2008 11:25:13 GMT @chris said:

To be honest I thought this party looked quite good!

I think you miss the point Chris - the system was just totally overloaded thanks to the blogs etc.. Even if the punters had all been sober they STILL wouldn't all have got on those selected trains at the same time.

Numbers were the primary problem; but the fact that many of them couldn't control themselves was what caused the disruption as a result.

[superteacher]

Jun 3, 2008 11:25:13 GMT @chris said:

To be honest I thought this party looked quite good! **prepares to be shot down by arrows fired from all angles!!** Out of the 'thousands' that turned up only 17 arrests were made, and if we look at what happens when crowds get together at football matches (especially rangers fans) we get mobs, violence and much worse damage to property. I daresay the atmosphere was much friendlier than a normal night on the tube and very few other events will bring so many Londoner's together. Yes there was mess and it will take some clearing up, but it's a light hearted night in an uptight world and i'd have loved to have been a part of it.

I think a lot of normal people that I saw felt threatened and intimidated by what went on. At Baker Steet, there was certainly an uneasy atmosphere, which was far from friendly.

No Chris - what I saw was downright dangerous. I mentioned the person on the roof of the C stock in my earlier post, but there were people standing on the couplers between the interconnecting doors while the train was moving. Someone could easily have died. And it may have been a minority of people that caused trouble, but the simple fact is that if some irresponsible idiots hadn't posted the party on the web, that minority would not have been there in the first place.

Lu should have acted and suspended the service - any fool could see what was coming. Would the revellers have then jumped on the Central for a trip to Epping or Hainault - I don't think so.

[Deleted]

Jun 3, 2008 16:46:15 GMT superteacher said:

Lu should have acted and suspended the service - any fool could see what was coming. Would the revellers have then jumped on the Central for a trip to Epping or Hainault - I don't think so.

Some probably would - then they would end up spending a long cold night at Epping!

[towerman]

Some silly cow wrote in one of the give away papers "I was there, it was friendly and good natured" by her reckoning WW2 was a minor tiff.

[Deleted]

Or maybe if they heard about a lock in at epping!

[superteacher]

Jun 3, 2008 18:28:19 GMT @somerhimpson said:

Or maybe if they heard about a lock in at epping!

Last train to Epping, then a lock in - in Loughton sidings for the night!

[Deleted]

Not a bad idea!

[Chris W]

Incidentally, how does LU want a passenger witnesses someone swigging from a can of special brew on a tube to react when no staff are available in the same car...

• ask the drinker to stop and run away when told of go forth & multiply/threatened
  
• ask the drinker to stop and press the emergency alert button when told to go forth & multiply/threatened
  
• do nothing in the first place

Sorry, but has to be asked just to confirm that Joris Bohnson has carefully thought this through with LU before implementing the first thing that came into his head... how much trouble is caused by those drinking alcohol on LU as opposed to those already pi$$ed

I'm not saying that there isn't logic to the alcohol ban, but how does he expect this to be policed other than asking others to do it for him... with him taking the credit if successful or blaming others if not!

[21146]

Operate the PEA and keep pressing it each time the T/Op resets it until action is taken. Otherwise the witness is likely to be abused/assaulted by the drinker.

[Deleted]

People have a choice - pull the alarm and delay the whole train or turn a blind eye and get to where they're going. In the past i've unknowingly run trains with the windows put in but never knew til the terminus because people know that telling you means it goes out of service.

If I get pulled down for someone drinking then i'll take action. However it's more than likely that the rest of the time i'll be concentrating so hard on the road ahead and my PTI that I won't notice people getting on with beers......

[Deleted]

Jun 3, 2008 22:45:08 GMT @prakash said:

People have a choice - pull the alarm and delay the whole train or turn a blind eye and get to where they're going. In the past i've unknowingly run trains with the windows put in but never knew til the terminus because people know that telling you means it goes out of service.

I have found that some people come up and tell you about broken windows etc when they are getting off, knowing as you said that you will tip them out if they come forward earlier..

[Deleted]

GOOD NEWS:

www.thelondonpaper.com/cs/Satellite/london/news/article/1157152229193?packedargs=suffix%3DArticleController

Plans are afoot for a repeat performance THIS Saturday.

Great given that there are 80,000 Foo Fighters at Wembley as well.

A station colleague has already asked - and was denied - extra staff for the night.

I'm back at work on Friday and will be speaking to the H&S rep regarding refusal to work

[SE13]

BTP and The Met could be in for quite a busy night!

[Deleted]

Considering some people would rather sit on a train that's on fire than risk delaying their journey, I think the number of PEAs for this will be very low!

In answer to Chris W, I would say that you should always use the PEA if someone threatens you in any way.

[21146]

There is at least a proper LU contingency plan now with various silver and bronze control (sorry, "team leader") station and train sites identified.

[tubeprune]

Random thoughts:

Perhaps Facebook should be taken to court for allowing illegal acts to be planned on their website. Ebay is being prosecuted for allowing fake goods to be sold on theirs.

In any case, it is a sad reflection on society that an attempt to reduce anti-social behaviour by a minority is ridiculed by a larger number of people acting illegally.

Perhaps there should be a website which organises law-abiding people to demonstrate against drinking or being drunk on public transport.

We are riddled with un-enforceable laws - not interfering with train doors is my favourite, being intoxicated on a train is another. They are really only there to make sure the company doesn't get sued if someone hurts themselves falling over when drunk etc.

[21146]

I'm sure this sort of mass-activity will soon peter out now that the one-off novelty value has worn off. You don't hear much about those shops/pubs that continued to charge/accept pre-decimal LSD money these days, nor the pubs that were going to openly flout the smoking ban (though mine does, every night, after the 2300 bell).

But what won't stop is the small number of vagrants, borderline functioning alcoholics, chavs, eastern European workmen (not being racist, but there is some sort of cultural thing here) and kids going up west 'clubbing' on a Sat night having what will now be an illicit drink on the Underground. Which is where this thread came in really. If mass disruption *does* carry on it'll be a wonderful example of the "law of unforeseen circumstances".

I think the smoking ban (on LU) worked better because it was introduced in two stages. Smokers could still get their 'fix' whilst waiting on platforms, also LU effectively blamed the 40-odd dead at Kings Cross on a careless smoker (and not, heaven fore-fend, the cuts in L&E and cleaning staff which had been going since LRT had taken over in 1984...) which brought a "moral" aspect to the debate in LU's favour.

[Deleted]

But this has all been done before, but without all the drama/injuries etc. The Space Hijackers have done a few which have mostly gone without comment/delays/police action and so on, mainly because they took responsibility for their actions and made people feel welcomed to the group (they even have rules).

The only other issue I would like to raise is that open alcohol containers/drinking on public transport is still not illegal. It hasn't been added to the conditions of carriage or railway bylaws yet so any move to evict people from trains busses etc. falls into the realm of TfL policy rather than law. Staff can ask people to stop but there's no legal reason for them to comply, it's then if the person fails to leave at a member of staff's request they've broken the law due to trespass, which is a civil not a criminal matter, so BTP can be called to assist but whoever still can't be taken down the cells.

Essentially Boris' made a f'ing hash of it and made all your lives much more difficult until next year when it's a proper law for proper people. Not that drinking on the train is the issue anyway, surely the issue is morons getting wrecked down at weatherspoons (or another cheap nasty venue) then getting on the train?

EDIT: I am possibly wrong but I can't figure the terminology, does it mean you can't be drinking if you're already drunk, and does that make sense?
www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/5004.aspx

4. Intoxication and possession of intoxicating liquor
No person in a state of intoxication shall enter or remain on the railway.
Where reasonable notice is, or has been given prohibiting intoxicating liquor on any train service, no person shall have any intoxicating liquor with him on it, or attempt to enter such train with intoxicating liquor with him.
Where an authorised person reasonably believes that any person is in a state of intoxication or has with him intoxicating liquor contrary to this Byelaw, the authorised person may:
(i) require him to leave the railway; and
(ii) prevent him entering or remaining on the railway until the authorised person is satisfied that he has no intoxicating liquor with him.

[Deleted]

Right that makes sense, so basically if i plan a barbeque and go to pick some drinks from a supermarket up to take home, and have to take the tube i'm screwed? Hmmm.

[SE13]

Jul 7, 2008 7:15:36 GMT @nosmoking said:

Right that makes sense, so basically if i plan a barbeque and go to pick some drinks from a supermarket up to take home, and have to take the tube i'm screwed? Hmmm.

As I understand it, only if the drinks containers are open.....

**EDIT**

The terms of carriage state:

• on our buses, in our bus stations, on Underground trains and in Underground stations, you must
not consume alcohol or be in possession of an open container of alcohol.

[Ben]

Not trams though

[Deleted]

The team at Liverpool Street were not heavy handed enough in breaking up this illegal "party". They should have had police back up much sooner. Why bring misery to us passengers for a sheer minority who want to "enjoy" themselves? Go Boris!!