my point was that news papers had made it as a given that this were firm plans.
The original Echo story quotes a Network Rail spokeswoman as follows at the start of the fifth paragraph, so it's hardly buried. And in the web version at least it was headlined 'Honeybourne Line back on track?' Question marks tend not to indicate certainty.
She said: "This is an aspiration rather than a definite plan at this stage."
A point which was repeated, citing Network Rail again, in the follow-up story on the
GWR▸ reaction. I'm not sure how you can say that means the newspaper was indicating it was a firm plan.
In any case, both
DBS» and the RFG are clearly far more interested at this stage in the Honeybourne-Stratford section and the possibilities of a quieter route with more pathing opportunities than Oxford-Banbury-Leamington, never mind the possible provision of a fast passenger link between Oxford and Stratford, two of the biggest tourist destinations in England, as well as a third Worcester-Birmingham route, which would give Evesham better rail links to the West Midlands and linking Worcester with Warwick and Leamington.
And while the GWR may have a point about Network Rail not telling them it was including the mention of the Honeybourne-Cheltenham part of the line in the
RUS▸ document, they know full well - as they acknowledge - about the notion of bringing the route back into the national network and have done for about a decade, since when I was working for the Echo around 2000 we ran a story then about
EWS▸ floating the same ideas as
DB» Schenker did during the RUS consultation last year.
It's not as if preserved railways are not used for freight traffic anyway, eg military vehicles to Redmire and Dereham, traffic in the past from a private siding in Bodmin and the Weardale Railway's current proposal to move opencast coal. Honeybourne would be a different case, since it has potential as a strategic route - something that saw it last into the 1970s even though all local traffic was long gone.
PS: inspector, to quote Ronald Reagan during a 1980 US presidential election debate - there you go again. When it comes to accuracy and clarity, I could mention
scientists working on climate change. There, I've done it.