Forthcoming Parliamentary Written Questions include (link below) :
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmordbk2/61009o01.htm

Chris Grayling (Epsom & Ewell): To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what assessment he has made of the impact on passenger numbers of the proposed cutbacks to the rail service from Melksham.

My answers to the first two questions would be:

Any closed or disused line should be protected from development so that future rail reinstatement is possible

The same answer for the third one - this talk of rubber highways seems to be a cheap way of reducing congestion (like opening up hard shoulders on motorways)   I note that this idea has attracted quite a bit of publicity in the motoring press.  Suddenly the car brigade have cottened on to the fact they might be able to drive their tin boxes down the tracks


I look forward to the answer, although I suspect the question will be dodged and they will talk about how much they have spent on the west coast or something

Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what feasibility studies he has carried out to investigate whether any stretch of disused railway could be utilised as a highway to reduce congestion; and if he will make a statement; [91161]

(2) how many miles of disused railway track bed are undeveloped and available for sale or for an alternative use; [91162]

(3) what trials (a) have taken place and (b) are scheduled to take place on the feasibility of allowing cars to use disused rail lines; where such trials are taking place; and when he expects an evaluation to be carried out. [91163]

Mr. Tom Harris: We estimate that there are fewer than a hundred miles of redundant trackbed that has not been either retained for possible future use or sold. Much of what remains comprises small parcels of land unsuitable for conversion into roads. The Department has not therefore carried out any recent studies into the possibility of using any of this land in this way.

The DfT may not have carried out any recent studies , but both HoldFast & Network Rail have (link below.)
http://www.savethetrain.org.uk/forum/index.php?topic=267.msg707#msg707

What a pointless answer - of COURSE the withdrawing of a single coach in a franchise that operates some 400 or 500 coaches won't have a big impact on the overall figures. But then it wouldn't make a huge difference in the cost of operating the franchise either;  I think the premium payment difference if the DfT had specified an appropriate service would have been less that a quarter of one percent.

You're right, Lee - the answer makes no mention at all of the effect of the withdrawl of most services on the passengers on the route (110,000 journeys per annum and counting), nor its effect on the towns of Melksham (24,000), Chippenham, Trowbridge.

Dear Dr Ladyman, if the changes will have neglible effect and the cost saving is so small, why oh why are you buggering up the public transport structure in a fast growing ares such as West Wilts.   Is it to make a point of some sort, is it out of spite, or do you have other plans for the rail capacity?   Your own consultants report (which probably cost you more that the saving you'll make) recommended 4 trains each way a day PLUS two peak hour trains. But we have been given just a pre-peak train in the morning and a post-peak train in the early evening.