Christ, this is getting on my nerves. A politician has a difficult point put to them. They answer it by ignoring it and (perhaps after a preamble about how everyone really agrees when they don't) say "that's why.... [we're doing something that doesn't answer your point at all, and in fact might be the complete opposite]"

Here's Theresa Villiers to show you how it's done:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/0 ... ment-plans

Everyone else (including Tory MPs on the select committee): you're making things worse.

Theresa Villiers:
"There is a consensus in the rail industry that inefficiency and waste is costing hard-pressed farepayers and taxpayers too much. That is why the government has set out a roadmap for action alongside the industry to deliver real value for money so we can end inflation-busting fare rises and deliver a better service for passengers."

That's pure waffle. "We're doing something about the problem, but I don't know what, so gabble gabble."

Why a "roadmap"? Why not just a "plan"? It's like that type of management-speak where people talk about "ballpark estimates" instead of plain old "estimates."

_________________
"Stop making up quotes and attributing them to me" - Voltaire

Surely they'd want a rail-map?

I'm amazed Villiers said that rubbish herself. If that were me, I'd make a spokesperson say it.

Kevin- LOL. And belated welcome.