1. Joined up government
a. Central government is promoting good public transport links.  Loss of some peak and all off peak trains at Charing completely negates this policy.
b. Central government is encouraging people off the roads and onto public
       transport.  Again, the SRA proposals will have exactly the opposite effect.
c. Charing is one of the three key parishes in the Ashford Borough earmarked for development under John Prescott's proposals for 30,000 more houses in the Borough over the next 30 years.  One of the key requirements for this
      development is its infrastructure, in particular the rail service.  Development of 49 new dwellings and six shops is already taking place in Charing and
      further development is expected under the Ashford Local Development Framework 2006.  Inevitably, many of the new residents will need to
       commute by train for work education and leisure.  In the light of this
       development it makes no sense to drastically cut train services.  (Appendix A - copy of relevant page of developer's brochure). The stopping service on this line is vital for the future growth of Ashford.
d. These proposals are contrary to the undertakings set out in the Channel Tunnel Rail Link Bill.
2. Knock on effect for other stations
a. Commuters who generally use the peak services may also wish to use off peak trains because they occasionally go in late, come home early, work late, wish to socialise where they work etc. They will not wish to find themselves in the situation of leaving their car at Charing and then having to return to another station, so inevitably these people will stop using Charing altogether. Instead they will travel from Ashford, Pluckley or Headcorn, thus exacerbating the
       already bad parking situation at these stations and adding to road congestion and pollution.
3.   Journey times
a. Whilst it is appreciated that faster journey times from Ashford to London might be welcome for Ashford residents, they are of little benefit for the users of Charing station.  A twenty-minute journey into Ashford plus allowing time to park would add on as much time as the fast train would save. 
b. Passengers would arrive at St Pancras rather than Victoria or Blackfriars and then have to undertake an underground journey, further adding to the travel time. 
c. Cost implications also need to be considered.  Parking fees, (parking at
      Charing is free) higher train fares and underground travel would add
      considerably to the cost of travel. 
d. People who buy houses in Charing and wish to commute to London do so in the full knowledge of the journey time.  They buy here because they wish to live in the country, yet have a regular train service to the part of London to which they want to go.  Not only would these proposals be devastating for the people who already use the line, they would also have a detrimental
      effect on those who may wish to move to Charing in the future and would lead to a drop in house prices.
e. At present, stopping the trains at the four rural stations on this line which are currently under threat, only adds 7 minutes in total to the journey time to London.  Even with the new sliding door trains this would only rise
      marginally.  As these trains would be running anyway but not stopping, 7 minutes is a small price to pay when weighed against the devastation that will be caused to hundreds of people if the trains do not stop.
f. Faster journey times could be achieved by utilising the suggestions made in the Maidstone East Line Study for Maidstone Borough Council, Tonbridge and Malling Council and KCC P 41 6.17 & 18.1& 2 (Appendix B - copy of

(Continued on page 17)