I WOULD suggest that John Thomson is entirely missing the advantages of the car over public transport. He states that his journey time was no quicker than if the trains had been running normally but surely it must be better to travel door to door than have the worry of getting to the rail station at a certain time and also arranging further transport at the end of the train journey.

I WOULD suggest that John Thomson is entirely missing the advantages of the car over public transport.

He states that his journey time was no quicker than if the trains had been running normally but surely it must be better to travel door to door than have the worry of getting to the rail station at a certain time and also arranging further transport at the end of the train journey.

Also, any luggage taken would have only been handled once and certainly for a shorter distance than using other forms of transport.

I fail to see what extra stress was involved in using a car.

Mr Thomson does not say how many people were travelling with him but I am sure the cost of the journey by car per person would have been cheaper.

The fact that Mr Thomson found it impossible to do a U-turn at a roundabout close to the hotel he was staying at says more about his driving skills than the state of the traffic.

Maybe he should embrace the future and stop looking backwards. Improving rail infrastructure, as he suggests, would involve public money being poured into privately owned companies. Not a good idea I would say.

The motor car is here to stay, most owners have them as necessity, not as a luxury. Having invested large sums of money in them it does not seem logical to leave them at home in the garage and then struggle with the problems of public transport.

ALAN BOURN

Pakefield