The wastes you warn of haven’t happened yet. And there’s no evidence they will. On the contrary: New York’s contractors routinely spend several times as much on the same infrastructure as the contractors of Tokyo, or London, or LA. The burden of proof is on you to explain why bypassing the city’s rent-seeking contractors is a bad thing.

I think it is great that Walder wants to improve bus service. But fixing bus service (countdown clocks, the equivalent of moving red-light cameras) is not that technologically challenging, nor does it appear, barring superior arguments forthcoming from the MTA, to require overseas expertise beyond what we’re already getting from Walder.

Largely, it requires getting Albany people to allow buses to take precedent over car traffic; after that, the technology follows fairly simply. The way NOT to do this is to have people with British accents lecturing upstate political hacks who won’t like it.

Also, we cannot improve buses at the expense of much more expensive investment in subway service. Unfortunately, London has done exactly that — shortchange the subways for years/decades.

The people in NY who are so excited that we may be getting a more British transit system clearly haven’t spent much time in London. As Al notes, the subway service leaves much to be desired.

Right now, we need someone to fight fiercely in Albany, too, to keep the capital-intensive mega projects going so that we can finish things like the 2nd Avenue Subway, etc.

How could anyone disagree with that?

Keep in mind: Smart-card technology is already proven, and has been implemented in places much closer to NY than London, including in Boston. The MTA, pre-Walder, has already done a study on this.

Enforcement of dedicated bus lanes largely comes down to a matter of political will in Albany long before we have to deal with the technicals of how to mount the cameras, etc.

Should we engage experts to advise on these projects on specific areas where we need help?

Sure, but I’m not sure why the rush to sign a contract of long duration rather than first agreeing to fly people over one-off and pay their expenses on an as-needed basis and see how it goes and what value they provide.

Articles in any media a year from now about how TfL people flew back and forth business-class, stayed in fancy hotels, and ate in fancy restaurants are NOT going to help the public’s support of reasonable mass-transit investment.

To that end, advocates who are so desperate for someone to care about transit that they remove all skepticism do not in the end help transit.

As for drowning government — the people who make such comments should explain why I pose a greater danger to sensibly higher mass-transit investment than does New York State’s fraud-filled $50 billion Medicaid program.

Thanks, Ben, for posting the piece.

It is still, just as it was 10 years ago, extortionately expensive, closed for a handful of weeks every year, and shuts down at 11:30 in the evening. It is still virtually impossible to get around London without a large reserve of money, time and patience. Travelling with bags or children is more pain that it’s worth, and if you’re late finishing dinner, London’s “transformed” transport network won’t help you get home, even for the £169 ($277) a month – and that’s not the at the top end of the fare scale.

There is a reason those of us who have lived there for any amount of time find driving is less painful, and almost cheaper.

The system signage certainly got a lot prettier under Jay Walder, there was a new logo, and I think they have podcasts now too. The transit system is still part-time, unreliable and expensive.

There is nothing at all which I have observed in years of using both systems which New York’s subways could beneficially inherit from London’s. Walder bringing his former co-workers from London to New York, at whichever cost, does not bode well for anyone who relies on the MTA.