Julian Bray is delighted to have his biographical entry included in the latest edition of Debretts People of Today .... ... PETERBOROUGH TRIBUNE Holding officialdom to account. THE DIGITAL NEIGHBOURHOOD WATCH BLOG. Over 3/4 of a million page hits, and 3,400 blogposts. We have over 1,680 supporters in the Stanground, Park Farm, Fletton, Cardea (South Stanground) area alone. Our reach covers the whole of the former Unitary Authority and beyond. Our amazingly resourceful supporters send through reports and pictures, over 50 minimotos / motorcycles have been taken off footpaths and the Green Wheel thanks to their unstinting efforts. The current campaign is logging vehicles totally blocking the footway and impacting on fire engine access. (We've given up on grass verge parking, as PCC isn't currently listening !!!) Make no mistake. We WILL expose and/or detect crime; highlight significantly anti-social behaviour; detect fraud, corruption or injustice; disclosing significant incompetence or negligence; protect people's health and safety; prevent people from being misled by some statement or action of an individual or organisation, In short, these elements (and other factors) help to make up what is known as the public interest and disclosing information that assists people to better comprehend or make decisions on matters of public importance. Join our conversation Park Farm Neighbourhood Watch is totally independent and not connected with the Cambridgeshire Neighbourhood Watch which at January 2018 can only show since Feb 2011 45,000 hits! whereas our hit rate (or pageview counter ) records at Jan 2018 some 750,329 page hits and has now (MAY 2018) risen to 760,132. YOU MAY NOW VIEW PETERBOROUGH TRIBUNE OVER A SECURE WEB LINK: PASS IT ON!

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

East Coast Main Line? Oh Dr Beeching, here we go again!


The Reshaping Of British Railways Dr Richard Beeching  (HMSO: 1963)

Is the golden age of rail returning?

Julian Bray writes: The news today that the East Coast Mainline is to be offered up as a franchise to yet another private rail consortium, taking over from the state railway operator after National Express handed back the franchise,  really does present a real opportunity for the City of  Peterborough.  But if only our councillors (of all political shades and opinions) would stop and think for a moment, and try to understand what the railway can do for us in the future, and hopefully learn from the repeated mistakes of the past..

In the 1960's Dr Richard Beeching, was a technical director with Imperial Chemical Industries (ICI), an international  chemicals and paint company (Dulux), it had gone through a period of change and Dr. Beeching masterminded the change programme, for the chemical company!

He was hired by the then Transport Minister Sir Earnest Marples ( the Marples of Marples Ridgeway, a  major road builder - with little or no love for the railways ! )  Fifty years ago, Dr Beeching rapidly produced a 38 page report, for the British Transport Commission, which literally decimated what was known as British Railways. We would all have cars in the future and freight would be mopped up by the new motorways  - being built in part, by Marples Ridgeway...)

In crude terms, as Beeching scrawled the plan, directly onto  a wall atlas of the UK, any lines going from left to right, and right to left, in the United Kingdom would be scrapped. Only a few lines 'up and down' would be retained. The plan if followed would see the railways in profit by the 1970's!

Dr. Beeching, it is said, completed his research in less than a week, SEVEN DAYS, and only physically visited a handful of railway stations. The Forword and Summary of his report are reproduced below and a link to the full report has also been included. It makes even in 2013, chilling reading.

Click on the read more icon below 

One of the 'up and down' routes retained was the East Coast Main Line (ECML)  - the Royal Scot route - running through Peterborough, the railway ran all the way up to Edinburgh, and Peterborough was considered a very important railway town. It is still important, and will become more so as we explain below.

Once again the ECML is in the news and it isn't just the award of a new franchise, the weather might now just be playing directly into our hands. Its' not escaped the weather scientists notice, that throughout the recent snow storms, the heavy snow and blizzards have NOT been on our side of the country, but on the west coast and running all the way up to Scotland and the western isles. This pattern is likelt to be repeated in the future.

Even the route for the original High Speed Train through Birmingham, and now the proposed HST northern extension, the future earmarked land sites, have all without exception been cloaked in deep impenetrable snow drifts. A high speed train with a snowplough bolted on the front, might to a normal thinking person, not be a bankable proposition, but that is precisely what the Coalition Government is proposing. Just plain daft in fact.

In Parliament

Stewart Jackson (Peterborough, Conservative)
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effects on the East coast mainline of the construction of High Speed 2; and if he will make a statement.

Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 26 March 2013, c1003W)

Simon Burns (Chelmsford, Conservative)
High Speed 2 will transform journey times, capacity and connectivity between major cities of the north, midlands and London. Journey time improvements will be possible from new classic-compatible high speed trains serving destinations on the east coast main line north of Leeds following completion of phase two of the scheme. HS2 will also free up space for additional commuter, regional and freight services on the east coast main line offering more opportunity for services to meet local needs. Latest estimates published in August 2012 suggest HS2 will deliver benefits of £2 for every £1 spent, including impacts on the east coast main line.

Snow joke...Will this be bolted onto the front of the new High Speed Trains? 

One theory gaining credence, is that the Gulf Stream has moved south, and is now likely to stay there for many years to come, sucking in the cold unseasonable weather. If this is true, then our local politicians really need to wake up.  Instead of playing around with pizza cafes and retail therapy, should be banging on Downing Streets door, underlining the fact that our side of the country, is now so ripe for inward investment of all types AND has a proven better climatic future that the West Coast will ever have.

Some may say this is a long shot, but we live in very strange times. 13 million euros are currently in flight via the RAF, to bail out our military families caught up in the Cyprus financial crisis. No one really saw that one coming or Russian high rollers having their bank deposits seized. So why should climate conditions in the UK, not have a few more surprises in store for us all?

In thirty years time, our children could well be enjoying the climate the French Riviera  currently enjoys, and whole tracts of the UK west coast permanently underwater due to floods, soil erosion, failing coastal defences and the Uk population moving East following the better climate offered along the East Coast !

The Reshaping Of British Railways Dr Richard Beeching  (HMSO: 1963)


The formulation of plans for the reshaping of British Railways has been foreshadowed by
numerous references in Parliament, and in other places, ever since the Prime Minister [Harold McMillan - 10 January 1957 to 18 October 1963 ], speaking in the House on 10th March, 1960, said: —

'First the industry must be of a size and pattern suited to modem conditions and prospects. In
particular, the railway system must be remodelled to meet current needs, and the
modernisation plan must be adapted to this new shape;'

It may appear that the lapse of three years between the date when the original reference was
made to the necessity for reshaping the railways and the emergence of a plan is excessive, but
there are two reasons why it took so long.

In the first place, attention was devoted to the reorganisation of the British Transport
Commission structure. As a result, it was not until the latter part of 1961, after the first steps
had been taken to give effect to the structural reorganisation described in the White Paper on
Reorganisation of the Nationalised Transport Undertaking (Cmnd. 1248), that positive steps
were taken towards planning the future shape of the railways.

Secondly, there had never before been any systematic assembly of a basis of information
upon which planning could be founded, and without which the proper role of the railways in
the transport system as a whole could not be determined. The collection of this information
was itself a massive task and it is, perhaps, more surprising that it was brought to a useful
stage in just over a year than that it should have taken so long.

Throughout these investigations and the preparation of this report the British Railways Board
has had it in mind that its duty is to employ the assets vested in it, and develop or modify
them, to the best advantage of the nation. Also, because the ultimate choice of what is
considered most advantageous must be made by the nation, it is a basic responsibility of the
Board to provide, as objectively and comprehensively as possible, information which makes
clear the range and nature of the choice.

In general, people will wish to base a choice between alternative modes of transport upon
consideration of quality of service and the cost of obtaining it. It must be recognised,
however, that, in the transport field more than in many others, the judgment of some quality
factors is largely subjective, that individual convenience and total social benefit are not
necessarily compatible, and that competing forms of transport cannot be costed on strictly
comparable bases.

For these reasons, none of the major proposals for reshaping the railway
system which are made in this report is based upon attempted close judgments between ratios
of quality to cost for competing systems of transport. Proposals have, on the other hand, been
influenced by major differences in the more measurable aspects of service quality, such as
speed and reliability. They have also been influenced by major disparities in cost arising from
the inherent characteristics of the various forms of transport, and by major disparities
between the value of the service provided, measured in terms of what people are prepared to
pay for it, and the cost of providing it.

It is, of course, the responsibility of the British Railways Board so to shape and operate the
railways as to make them pay, but, if it is not already apparent from the preceding
paragraphs, it must be clearly stated that the proposals now made are not directed towards achieving that result by the simple and unsatisfactory method of rejecting all those parts of
the system which do not pay already or which cannot be made to pay easily. On the contrary,
the changes proposed are intended to shape the railways to meet present day requirements by
enabling them to provide as much of the total transport of the country as they can provide
well. To this end, proposals are directed towards developing to the full those parts of the
system and those services which can be made to meet traffic requirements more efficiently
and satisfactorily than any available alternative form of transport, and towards eliminating
only those services which, by their very nature, railways are ill-suited to provide.
The point at issue here is so important that it is worthwhile to emphasise it by expressing the
underlying thought in a different way.

The profitability or otherwise of a railway system is dependent on a number of external
influences which may change markedly from time to time, important among them being
decisions affecting the freedom of use, cost of use, and availability of roads. For this and
other reasons, it is impossible to plan the maximum use of railways consistent with
profitability, for years ahead, without some risk that it will prove, in the event, that services
have been over-provided and that overall profitability is not achieved. On the other hand, to
retain only those parts of the existing system which are virtually certain to be self-supporting
under any reasonably probable future conditions would lead to grave risk of destroying assets
which, in the event, might have proved to be valuable.

Confronted with this dilemma, arising from the impossibility of assessing future conditions
and future profitability very reliably, the Railways Board have put forward proposals for
reshaping the system which arc conservative with regard to closures and restrainedly
speculative with regard to new developments, but which are all directed towards shaping the
system to provide rail transport for only that part of the total national traffic pattern which
costing and commonsense consideration show to have characteristics favourable to rail

The plan is not carried to the stage where it purports to answer the question, 'How much of
the railway can ultimately be made to pay?'. This answer will emerge only after experience
has shown how much benefit springs from elimination of those parts of the system which are
obviously unsound, and the extent to which the good parts of the railways' system and traffic
can be improved by:

cost savings, better quality of service, better operating methods, and attraction of favourable
traffic. Nevertheless, the firm proposals included in the plan are expected to lead to
substantial improvements in the financial position. Perhaps even more important, they set a
clear course for the railways, in a general direction which must be right and which can be
followed with vigour without any danger of eliminating too much or of incurring grossly
wasteful expenditure before the position can be reviewed.

The changes proposed, and their phasing, arc certainly not too drastic if regarded as a means
of correcting the present departure of the railways from their proper role in the transport
system as a whole. It is recognised, however, that changes of the magnitude of those
proposed will inevitably give rise to many difficulties affecting railway staff, the travelling
public, and industry. The Railways Board will do all that it can to ameliorate these
difficulties, consistent with its responsibility for making railways an efficient and economic
component in the transport system, but the Board knows that it will not be able to solve all
problems unaided


The Report describes the investigations carried out, the conclusions which were drawn, and 
the proposals which are made for the purpose of reshaping British Railways to suit modern 

The thought underlying the whole Report is that the railways should be used to meet that part
of the total transport requirement of the country for which they offer the best available means,
and that they should cease to do things for which they are ill suited. To this end, studies were made to determine the extent to which the present pattern of the railways' services is
consistent with the characteristics which distinguish railways as a mode of transport,
namely:— the high cost of their specialised and exclusive route system, and their low cost per
unit moved if traffic is carried in dense flows of well-loaded through trains. As a result, it is
concluded that, in many respects, they are being used in ways which emphasise their
disadvantages and fail to exploit their advantages.

The proposals for reshaping the railways are all directed towards giving them a route system,
a pattern of traffics, and a mode of operation, such as to make the field which they cover one
in which their merits predominate and in which they can be competitive.

To this end, it is proposed to build up traffic on the well-loaded routes, to foster those traffics
which lend themselves to movement in well-loaded through trains, and to develop the new
services necessary for that purpose. At the same time, it is proposed to close down routes
which are so lightly loaded as to have no chance of paying their way, and to discontinue
services which cannot be provided economically by rail. These proposals are, however, not so
sweeping as to attempt to bring the railways to a final pattern in one stage, with the associated
risks of abandoning too much or, alternatively, of spending wastefully.

Although railways can only be economic if routes carry dense traffic, density is so low over
much of the system that revenue derived from the movement of passengers and freight over
more than half the route miles of British Railways is insufficient to cover the cost of the route
alone. In other words, revenue does not pay for the maintenance of the track and the
maintenance and operation of the signalling system, quite apart from the cost of running
trains, depots, yards and stations. Also, it is found that the cost of more than half of the
stations is greater than the receipts from traffic which they originate.

Amongst traffics, stopping passenger services are exceptionally poor. As a group, they are
very lightly loaded and do not cover their own movement costs. They account for most of the
train miles on much of the lightly loaded route mileage, but also account for a considerable
train mileage on more heavily loaded routes, and are one of the main causes for the continued
existence of many of the small and uneconomic stations.

Fast and semi-fast, inter-city passenger trains are potentially profitable and need to be
developed selectively, along with other forms of traffic on trunk routes. High peak traffics at
holiday periods are, however, very unremunerative. They are dying away and provision for
them will be reduced.

Suburban services feeding London come close to covering their full expenses, but give no
margin to provide for costly increases in capacity, even though they are overloaded and
demand goes on increasing.

Suburban services feeding other centres of population are serious loss makers, and it will not
be possible to continue them satisfactorily without treating them as a part of a concerted
system of transport for the cities which they serve. Freight traffic, like passenger traffic, includes good flows, but also includes much which is unsuitable, or which is unsuitably handled by the railways at present. The greater part of all  freight traffic is handled by the staging forward of individual wagons from yard to yard,
instead of by through-train movement. This is costly, and causes transit times to be slow and
variable. It also leads to low utilisation of wagons and necessitates the provision of a very
large and costly wagon fleet.

Coal traffic as a whole just about pays its way, but, in spite of its suitability for through train
movement, about two thirds of the total coal handled on rail still moves by the wagon-load.
This is very largely due to the absence of facilities for train loading at the pits, and to the
multiplicity of small receiving terminals to which coal is consigned. Block train movement is
increasing, but substantial savings will result from acceleration of the change. This depends,
in turn, upon provision of bunkers for train loading at the pits, bunkers for ship loading at the
ports, and of coal concentration depots to which coal can be moved by rail for final road
distribution to small industrial and domestic consumers.

Wagon-load freight traffic, other than coal, is a bad loss maker when taken as a group, but
over half of it is siding-to-siding traffic, much of which moves in trainload quantities, and
this makes a good contribution to system cost. One third of the remainder moves between
sidings and docks, and this falls just short of covering its direct costs. The remaining 30 per
cent. of the whole passes through stations, at one or both ends of its transit, and causes a loss
relative to direct expenses which is so large that it submerges the credit margin on all the rest.
Freight sundries traffic is also a bad loss maker. It is handled at present between over 900
stations and depots, which causes very poor wagon loading and a high level of costly
transhipment of the freight while in transit. Railways handle only about 45 per cent. of this
traffic in the country, and do not select the flows which are most suitable for rail movement.
If they are to stay in the business, British Railways must concentrate more upon the inter-city
flows and reduce the number of depots handling this form of traffic to not more than a

Study of traffic not on rail shows that there is a considerable tonnage which is potentially
good rail traffic. This includes about 8 m. tons which could be carried in train-load quantities,
and a further 30 m. tons which is favourable to rail by virtue of the consignment sizes,
lengths of haul, and terminal conditions. In addition, there is a further 16 m. tons which is
potentially good traffic for a new kind of service—a Liner Train service—for the combined
road and rail movement of containerised merchandise.

Preliminary studies of a system of liner train services, which might carry at least the 16 m.
tons of new traffic referred to above and a similar quantity drawn from traffic which is now
carried unremuneratively on rail, show such services to be very promising and likely to
contribute substantially to support of the main railway network, if developed.

The steps proposed, to achieve the improvements referred to above, are:—

(1) Discontinuance of many stopping passenger services.

(2) Transfer of the modern multiple unit stock displaced to continuing services
which are still steam locomotive hauled.

(3) Closure of a high proportion of the total number of small stations to passenger

(4) Selective improvement of inter-city passenger services and rationalisation of

(5) Damping down of seasonal peaks of passenger traffic and withdrawal of
corridor coaching stock held for the purpose of covering them at present.

(6) Co-ordination of suburban train and bus services and charges, in collaboration
with municipal authorities, with the alternative of fare increases and possible
closure of services.

(7) Co-ordination of passenger parcels services with the Post Office.

(8) Increase of block train movement of coal, by:—
a inducing the National Coal Board to provide train loading facilities at
b inducing the establishment of coal concentration depots, in
collaboration with the National Coal Board and the distributors.

(9) Reduction of the uneconomic freight traffic passing through small stations by
closing them progressively, but with regard to the preservation of potentially
good railway traffics, and by adjustment to charges.

(10) Attraction of more siding-to-siding traffics suitable for through-train
movement by operating such trains at the expense of the wagon forwarding
system and by provision of time-tabled trains, of special stock, to meet
customer requirements.

(11) Study and development of a network of "Liner Train" services to carry flows
of traffic which, though dense, are composed of consignments too small in
themselves to justify through-train operation.

(12) Concentration of freight sundries traffic upon about 100 main depots, many of
them associated with Liner Train depots, and carriage of main flows of
sundries on Liner Trains, probably coupled with passenger parcels, and
possibly Post Office parcels and letters.

(13) Rapid, progressive withdrawal of freight wagons over the next three years.

(14) Continued replacement of steam by diesel locomotives for main line traction,
up to a probable requirement of at least 3,750/4,250 (1,698 already in service
and 950 on order at present).

(15) Rationalisation of the composition and use of the Railways' road cartage fleet.
These various lines of action are strongly interdependent. If the whole plan is implemented
with vigour, however, much (though not necessarily all) of the Railways' deficit should be
eliminated by 1970.

POLICE 101, Emergency 999, Crimestoppers 0800 555 111 & PBOROtrib NEWSDESK 01733 345581, E&OE
Post a Comment




The Peterborough Tribune supports:

Reporters Without Borders (RSF) an international non-profit organisation working to defend the freedom to be informed and to inform others throughout the world.

Today, 30 years since its creation, RSF has enough experience and on-the-ground support to defend press freedom on a global scale. RSF accomplishes its work through its wide network of correspondents established in 130 countries, its 12 offices (Vienna, Brussels, Rio de Janeiro, Helsinki, Berlin, Madrid, Stockholm, Geneva, Tunis, Washington DC, London, and Paris) and its consultative status at the United Nations, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe.

As a leading defender of press freedom and freedom of information, RSF alternates public interventions and effective behind-the-scenes actions.

THE HIGH COURT has ruled....People have a right to lampoon and criticise politicians and public officials under the Human Rights Act, the High Court has ruled.

We have the full High Court judgment, saved as a page on here. l

ampoon (lampoon) Pronunciation: /lamˈpuːn/ verb [with object] publicly criticize (someone or something) by using ridicule, irony, or sarcasm: the actor was lampooned by the press noun a speech or text lampooning someone or something: the magazine fired at God, Royalty, and politicians, using cartoons and lampoons.

Derivatives: lampooner noun lampoonery noun lampoonist noun Origin: mid 17th century: from French lampon, said to be from lampons 'let us drink' (used as a refrain), from lamper 'gulp down', nasalized form of laper 'to lap (liquid).

UPDATES: Post are transmitted from a variety of remote sources, immediately published on servers in the USA, additions, updates and any corrections added later on the blog version only.

Editorial policy: WE DON'T CENSOR NEWS, we will however come down hard on lawbreakers, all forms of ASB - Anti Social Behaviour, and anyone or group who seek to disturb or disrupt our neighbourhoods and communities, or in anyway abuse, take unfair advantage or financially disadvantage our citizens.

We support the Park Farm Neighbourhood Watch and digitally carry the messages from this independently resourced Neighbourhood Watch Scheme. A scheme operated following written guidelines to us directly from the Home Office.

We are openly but constructively critical of all political parties (actual and sham), pressure groups, overbearing 'jobsworths' and those who seek to waste public funds, abuse public office, ramp up expenses, BUY VOTES and/or engage in any form of directed or robotic voting.

Whilst accepting that many in Public Office perform a valuable service and make a worthwhile contribution, there are others who are frankly rubbish. Although Julian Bray is the editor, there are several Blog administrators / correspondents who actively contribute by remote transmission to this blog.

So it could be some days before the copy (content) is seen by the Editor and properly formatted. We consider all representations and correct any facts that are clearly deficient.


NUJ Code of Conduct

The NUJ's Code of Conduct has set out the main principles of British and Irish journalism since 1936.

The code is part of the rules and all journalists joining the union must sign that they will strive to adhere to the it.

Members of the National Union of Journalists are expected to abide by the following professional principles:

A journalist:

1 At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed

2 Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair

3 Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies

4 Differentiates between fact and opinion

5 Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means

6 Does nothing to intrude into anybody's private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest

7 Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence and material gathered in the course of her/his work

8 Resists threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information and takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his duties before the information is public knowledge

9 Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person's age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation

10 Does not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any commercial product or service save for the promotion of her/his own work or of the medium by which she/he is employed

11 A journalist shall normally seek the consent of an appropriate adult when interviewing or photographing a child for a story about her/his welfare

12 Avoids plagiarism The NUJ believes a journalist has the right to refuse an assignment or be identified as the author of editorial that would break the letter or spirit of the code.

The NUJ will fully support any journalist disciplined for asserting her/his right to act according to the code

The NUJ logo is always a link to the home page.

(As modified at Delegate Meeting 2011)


Rights Holder Charter
Version: January 2009 v.3
This Rights Holder Charter (“Charter”) sets out the terms and conditions governing the relationship between Julian Bray, Park Farm Neighbourhood Watch blog entitled Peterborough Tribune (PBROTRIB) on the Blogger and other platforms, and an individual or company making a Contribution to PBROTRIB (“Rights Holder”). The purpose of this document is to ensure that the Charter terms are
incorporated into to all Contracts with each Rights Holder, so both parties areclear as to how PBROTRIB may use content. This Charter does not apply to content submitted:
· using a feature or interactive service that allows
the individual to upload to and display content on any of PBROTRIB websites
(including social sites), apps, WAP sites or any web address owned or operated
by PBROTRIB as may link to the terms accessible at
(User-Generated Content (“UGC”)); or
This Charter applies to all Rights Holder Contributions, except where the Rights Holder is already subject to a separate
written agreement with PBROTRIB in relation to Contributions, or where PBROTRIB
has agreed in writing to vary or amend the Charter due to exceptional circumstances. Formation of the Contract

By sending PBROTRIB a Contribution you are making
an offer to PBROTRIB to use the Contribution.’ PBROTRIB’s use of the
Contribution is acceptance of your offer and creates a Contract on the terms of this Charter. Submission of a Contribution by you is an acknowledgement that
you agree to the terms of this Charter. If you do not agree to the Charter you must email us as soon as possible to raise your objection and withdraw your
submitted Contribution, otherwise you will be deemed to have accepted the Charter terms.
Contract: the agreement between PBROTRIB and the Rights Holder relating to the Contribution incorporating this Charter and the Special Terms (where applicable);
Contribution: material (written, audio, visual, video or audiovisual) created by the Rights Holder and will be
classified as either Material You Send Us or Material We Request From You;
Credit: for Material You Send Us “© [insert name of Rights Holder and Year]”;
Publication: means one or more publications owned or operated by PBROTRIB. Licence: the licence granted by the Rights Holder to PBROTRIB
as set out in the Licence sections of this Charter;
Personal Data: has the same meaning as provided in section 1 of the Data Protection Act 1998;
Material You Send Us: a Contribution as set out under the Material You Send Us paragraph;
Material We Request From You: A Contribution as set out under the Material We Request From You paragraph; Rights Holder: name of the of the individual or company which has created the relevant Contribution; Special Terms: written terms between PBROTRIB and the Rights Holder relating to the Contribution that are not set out in this Charter and/or vary this Charter; and User-Generated Content: content submitted by an individual through a feature that allows the individual to upload material to any of PBROTRIB websites or social sites.
Conflict with other Agreements: If there is any inconsistency between any of the provisions of this Charter and the Special Terms, the Special Terms shall prevail. To be clear, where no Special Terms are agreed in writing, the Charter will apply without variation. Sending us a Contribution –
The information Rights Holders please provide To PBROTRIB When sending us a Contribution, please provide the following information:
Your Full Name;
Your Full Address; and Your Contact Telephone Number and Email Address.

We will not be able to provide Credits where a
Rights Holder has not provided the relevant information.

Material You Send Us

Material You Send Us is a Contribution that is
received by PBROTRIB from a Rights Holder. The Contribution may be solicited or unsolicited. The following are examples of Material You Send Us:
PBROTRIB has seen the Rights Holders’ photograph on a third party website. PBROTRIB contacts the
Rights Holder and asks to use the photograph. (Solicited). A Rights Holder speculatively submits a range of photographs to and for PBROTRIB’s use. The Editor may or may not decide to use one or more of the photographs. (Unsolicited) Material You Send Us does not include UGC, Material We Request You To Send Us or material that is governed under any
other relationship between the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to accept any Material You Send Us for review and if accepted for review is under no obligation to offer a Contract. Should PBROTRIB decide that it wishes to use the Contribution, it will be governed by the terms of this Charter. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to use the Contribution. If you wish to submit a speculative Contribution to us, please
contact the appropriate PBROTRIB title. Please note that PBROTRIB will not be able to acknowledge receipt of your Contribution and any submission is at the Rights Holder’s own risk.
Material You Send Us – Licence Terms
PBROTRIB believes that Material You Send Us is the
Rights Holder’s property and that the Rights Holder should not need to give up all its rights for the Contribution to be used by PBROTRIB. Therefore, by
sending us a Contribution, the Rights Holder grants the following irrevocable licence in perpetuity to PBROTRIB: The right to publish, reproduce, licence and sell the Contribution as part of the Publication throughout the world in the following formats:
-- the physical printed Publication;
-- in a replica layout in any electronic format of
the Publication;
-- on the website version of the Publication;
-- in any PBROTRIB apps delivering the Publication
to a reader; and
-- on any PBROTRIB social media pages.
-- The right to publish extracts or the whole of
the Publication (which may or may not include the Contribution) when promoting PBROTRIB’s business or subscriptions in media advertisement, show cards and other promotional aids. The Right to authorise The Newspaper Licensing Agency and similar reprographic rights organisations in other jurisdictions (“RROs”) to distribute or license the distribution of your Contribution throughout the world in any language(s) for RROs’ licensed acts and purposes as amended from time to time, and to keep available your Contribution through such RROs. The unlimited right to amend, edit, select, crop, retouch, add to or delete any part of the Contribution, in any format, whether electronic or otherwise, including the right to remove or amend any meta data associated with the Contribution.

The right to store the Contribution electronically.
In return for the licence granted in relation to the Material You Send Us, PBROTRIB will endeavour to provide the Credit with the Contribution. The licence granted to PBROTRIB shall survive any termination of the agreement between PBROTRIB and the
Rights Holder. Material We Request From You
Material We Request From You is a Contribution that
has specifically commissioned by PBROTRIB. PBROTRIB will contact a Rights Holder and
commission them to provide a Contribution in relation to a brief. An example of Material We Request From You is: PBROTRIB needs a photograph of a country building. PBROTRIB instructs the Rights Holder to attend the venue and take picture of the building. Material We Request From You does not include UGC, Material You Send Us or material that is governed under any other relationship between the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB . The Rights Holder will provide its own equipment and materials to fulfil its obligation for Material We Request From You. PBROTRIB is under no obligation to use the Contribution. Material We Request From You –
Assignment and Licence
PBROTRIB believes that Material We Request From You should be PBROTRIB ’s property as PBROTRIB has requested the Rights Holder’s services and instructed them to create the Contribution on its behalf. However, PBROTRIB acknowledges that the Right Holder may need a licence from PBROTRIB to
use the Contribution for limited purposes. Therefore, in submitting Material We Request From You to PBROTRIB , the Rights Holder assigns to PBROTRIB with full title, right and interest all existing and future intellectual property rights in the Contribution. In return, PBROTRIB will endeavour to give a Credit to the Rights Holder and PBROTRIB grants the Rights Holder a non-exclusive, non-transferable licence to use the Contribution in its own online and offline portfolio, provided that the following copyright notice is applied to the Contribution “©Peterborough
Tribune, used under limited licence”.
General notes about Rights: Any rights granted to PBROTRIB or the Rights Holder under this Charter shall survive termination of the Contract for any reason. Rights Holder Promises The Rights Holder promises: that it owns the Contribution and / or is (and will continue to be) authorised to grant the rights to PBROTRIB; nothing in the Contribution is blasphemous, discriminatory, defamatory, untrue, misleading or unlawful; that the Contribution complies with the NUJ Code of Professional Conduct and the Independent
Press Standards Organisations Editors’ regulations and Code of Practice; the Contribution does not contain any virus, Trojan horse, hidden computer software or similar; the Contribution does not infringe the intellectual property rights of any third party; where the Contribution contains Personal Data, all
the necessary consents in compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998 have been obtained; where the Contribution contains images of children under the age of 16, written parental consent has been obtained and can be provided on request; and maintain and comply with, at all times, the highest ethical standards in the preparation, creation and delivery of the Contribution.
Complaints In the event that a complaint is raised in relation to a Contribution, the Rights Holder agrees to co-operate fully with any internal or external investigation or process. Status. The Rights Holder is an independent contractor and nothing in the Charter shall render the Rights Holder an employee, worker,
agent or partner of PBROTRIB. The Rights Holder is responsible for any taxes/national insurance payable in relation to any services provided under the Charter.
Indemnity The Rights Holder shall keep PBROTRIB indemnified in full against all loss incurred or paid by PBROTRIB as a result of or in connection with any claim made against PBROTRIB by a third party:
arising out of, or in connection with the Contribution, to the extent that such claim arises out of the breach of this or any terms of this Charter (including any Special Terms); and for actual or alleged infringement of a third party's intellectual property rights arising out of, or in connection with the use of the Contribution except in so far as the claim arises as a result of changes made by PBROTRIB or a breach of the Licence by PBROTRIB.
Variation of the Charter No variation of any term of this Charter will be effective, unless it is set out in writing (letter, fax or email) and signed by
a relevant authorised representative of PBROTRIB. If you wish to submit a Contribution and are unable to agree with the terms of this Charter or if you
have any questions regarding this Charter, please contact a relevant authorised representative of the PBROTRIB publication.
Problems & Disputes In the event of a problem or dispute in relation to a Licence and/or in connection with this Charter, in the first instance the Rights Holder and the Editor will look to resolve the dispute amicably. Application of the Charter Unless otherwise agreed, this Charter shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and English courts will have exclusive jurisdiction