Graham Ellis - my blog
Great Bristish Railways and what might it mean locally?
Wednesday 16th September 2026 - West Wiltshire Rail User Group addressed by Peter West OBE who worked for the railways until his "retirement" a coupls ot years ago, and who for two decades was the Department for Transport's lead civil servant on the Great Western Franchise. Peter and I have known each other for around 20 years, often taking different views and resulting is different outcomes, but both with a love of the railway and a need to take it forward for the future. I wrote "retirement" in quotes as Peter is now a director of the Severnside Community Rail Partnership - as I understand it that's a voluntary role - and also retains very much a professional interest; we have met several times as we share that mutual interest.
Peter's talk slides - excellent and looking nationwide - are shared (here) ... but then how does that translate to locally / our region?
Six current campaigns/issues came up as we were speaking - not specific in the notes or shared as such, but certainly with a large number of people around and very much in listening mode, so not really confidences. There is a theme about learning from the past but looking to the future - I have mentioned this elsewhere beyond "Frequent Posters"
1. Somerton. A reminder that a request to reopen and restart the service here gives a signal of looking back not forward; Peter commented that the old service was about 5 trains each way per day - far too thin for future requirements. Further, most of the services were local, going no further than Westbury and that would be highly unlikely to be the major flow at a new station in Somerton/Langport, nor would it combine the flows like the old service did from other smaller (long gone) stations.
2. Corsham. Peter was of the view that the removal of the Bristol -> Oxford service, just before the became the DfT» 'person' for the (F)GW(R) area, was a mistake driven by a DfT desire to improve performance stats as it was just about the least reliable service coming into the Greater Western franchise. I got the impression that the removal was NOT spearheaded by First, who had just taken over Thames Trains and were removing a vanquished competitor on the Bristol -> Didcot section. We all know (discussed) how Wiltshire Council had invested heavily into works for a new station, and were really upset at how that investment was lost, and how that has made them wary of rail investment for the 20 years since.
3. The Corsham experience is a warning flag for other overlap areas between the (new) GBR▸ and other national operators such as TfL» and TfW▸ and how they - TfL in particular - are not thrilled with potential unplanned flexibility in their agreements to operate over GBR tracks and are looking to tie down contracts very tight to insure that their trains can run in appropriate ways. The view expressed was that this might be OK short term, but is likely to stifle medium and long term development.
4. "The Waterloos" - request for Bristol -Bath - Bradford-on-Avon - Trowbridge - Clapham Junction - Waterloo through service. The new GBR will have operating divisions and they are expected to be laid out very much as the diagram in Peter's presentation - at least in the South. And that gives us back - again - a "Southern Railway/Great Western Railway" or "Southern Region/Western Region" or "SW[TR]/[F]GW[R]" setup. And although both divisions will be part of the GBR parent, co-operation between them may be far more limited than we wish. Not a comment from Peter - my thought - that the interfaces over the years have not been kind to the overlap areas between the companies / divisions.
5. Melksham. Peter described the setup prior to 2005 as "a set of 5 random trains per day"; I don't totally agree / given the number of trains the timings were not *that* bad. However, the current service (up from 2 to 9) is seen as being thin but not random in the same way. I suggested that the rise from 3,000 to 75,000 journeys per annum from Melksham was only a step and in future years we should be looking towards 350,000 which would require a "metro" frequency, and Peter did not disagree. We travelled back from Trowbridge to Melksham after the meeting with a former mayor and former deputy mayor of Melksham; a dozen joined the train at Trowbridge and perhaps 6 to 10 left at Melksham (I was queueing to get off - no count). Noting a) that the meeting had been very informative to the much more generalist local notaries and b) that the train, though thinly used, was expected to be much busier as it left Swindon on the return and c) passengers - such as Peter - headed beyond Swindon and so the economics of the service are not just the local line economics but go rather beyond.
6. WECA border turn back. A discussion on mayoral and regional boundaries, and how there was a though / question from WECA about turning back the services they were adding / supporting at the boundary of their authority, but how common sense has rather prevailed, and how services are running beyond not only to the benefit of the mayoral authorities (bringing in people from the wider travel-to-work area) but also those other areas. A word of caution - that similar needs to work in future, and across between areas of different views and political complexion where the political scene changes perhaps multiple times within the planning and implementation times of the railway.
Strategic Wiltshire Freight Policy / Consultation - Melksham view
My notes for and after Melksham Town Council Planning Committee on 15th September. I asked (in public questions) addressing item 9 on the agenda:"" Melksham lies in the middle of England and on the only designated trunk road and rail links for freight through Wessex from the Solent and BCP (Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole). These links also provide the trunk freight corridors from Trowbridge, Warminster and Westbury to the M4 and northward (road) and from the Somerset Stone quarries to the Heart of England (rail).
"" Will the Town Council's Planning Committee please make an input to this consultation, which closes on 23rd September, acknowledging these links and requesting that the freight action plan provides strategic support for significant infrastructure improvements on both the rail and road corridors to not only handle the projected increased freight traffic in an environmentally friendly way, but also handles projected passenger traffic which shared the infrastructure? ""
The discussions lasted the best part of half an hour on this (delighted - a longer term topic but being taken very seriously). There was general agreement that with the growth in housing that is expected in Warminster / Westbury / Trowbridge / Melksham and passenger and freight traffic looking to move up and down to the M4 corridor and north beyond, road (and rail) needs to be updated to cope. And that it makes sense to ensure that facilities to cope with long and short distance freight, and long and short distance passenger traffic, be considered for a joint solution. And "do nothing" is not a solution.
Some more base data
One councillor (who's ward actually includes Melksham Station) suggested that freight traffic on the road was the problem, with rail freight just being a "nice to add" optional extra; certainly, road congestion and traffic is far more noticed and mentioned in Melksham. In order to check his assertions, I did some follow up research and it came up with some surprising results.
On traffic levels: The A350 is said to carry around 3,000 lorries per day each with a maximum kerb weight of 44 tons (let's call that 30 tons load). The railway line carries around 12 freight trains a day with a maximum load weight of 4,000 tons. So those figures are 90,000 tons by road and 48,000 tons by rail. We notice the road traffic because it comes though Beanacre and North Melksham in many smaller containers ("lorries") but we don't notice the rail traffic because it comes through in a very few trains. In practise, there is a lot of empty ("returns") working, and many trains and lorries are sizes and loaded below the maximum weights.
On improvement costs: The budget for a Melksham bypass would be around £350 million at current rates, and a dynamic loop on the railway would come in at circa £60 million. For the wider area, you're looking at perhaps a similar cost to improve the road from Yarnbook through to Frome Market on the A36, and you would be looking at perhaps another £40 million for an extra platform track as Westbury and perhaps a waiting loop at Staverton / Bradford Junction. Big sums all, but yet better value for ton turns out to be rail.
It strikes me that the emphasis put on road in the meeting highlights the severe intrusion of the lorries in Beanacre and Melksham's North Ward, whereas the trains pass through almost unnoticed, so councillors looking for future support and votes from their electorate may concentrate on road solutions even though they are more expensive and less efficient per heavy haul ton.
Conclusion
The conclusion reached by the committee was a unanimous vote to delegate the drafting and submission of the response to the officers, supporting the need for major improvements in both road (i.e. bypass on new alignment) and rail (i.e. at one loop and perhaps more on existing alignment). The whole response be tuned to, but not to copy, the thorough work already done to be used as an informing base.
Further commentary and options
The question should be asked "do we really need both". Sadly, the answer is "yes". Both are at or approaching saturation point, already acting as tourniquets on goods, and passengers through (and to and from) Melksham to the detriment of the quality of life, economy and environment of our area and stretching way beyond. The two traffics are different and not easily or effectively switchable between modes. And growth over the next 10 to 40 years is predicted to be such that the tourniquet throttling our area would only get worse if nothing is done.
Why the route through Melksham? Because on both road and rail it is the only sensible and available trunk route on a north-south axis for a long distance. And it's already there in many parts and within the existing strategy. Rail improvements especially can allow substantial freight and passenger traffic increases within the current "rail land" curtilage ans with little disturbance. This makes sense and is in line with government policy at a high NPPF level. The road improvements ("Melksham Bypass") at a local level are more expensive and more problematic in terms of new land taken, but I am moved to share the opinion that a change that will relieve future pressure is necessary.
On rail, I'll go more specific here because in many ways it's an area I have more background and it's the hidden dragon which can be developed and tamed far quick, cheap and nonintrusive improvement than the road changes. It is worth adding to the project - at least passive infrastructure provision - for
(a) at least one further loop,
(b) bringing disused platforms at both Westbury and Chippenham back into use,
(c) completing triangles at both Thingley and Bradford Junction using the line of routes which were in use until 1946/1990,
(d) extra stations where substantial housing close to the railway may be built and
(e) electrification so that power production is moved away from mobile, on-train, fossil fuelled provision which is inefficient, restricts performance envelopes, is not environment friendly and leads to high wear and tare, cleaning and maintenance costs,
(f) Passenger road / rail networking to enable passengers to make their first / final "mile" as efficient as practical.
I am not advocating for general freight handling at stations on the Melksham Area, but I do commend the whole aspect of provision of space on existing railway land for a freight hub there; smaller local provision is best handled by road where we have a much wider network, with some concentration for long distance higher volume and weight goods.
Published Friday, 18th September 2026
Public participation question for Melksham Town Council / Planning Committee / 15th September 2026
On Agenda item 9 - "To consider a response to Wiltshire Council’s Freight Action Plan consultation (deadline 23 September 2026)"Melksham lies in the middle of England and on the only designated trunk road and rail links for freight through Wessex from the Solent and BCP (Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole). These links also provide the trunk freight corridors from Trowbridge, Warminster and Westbury to the M4 and northward (road) and from the Somerset Stone quarries to the Heart of England (rail).
Will the Town Council's Planning Committee please make an input to this consultation, which closes on 23rd September, acknowledging these links and requesting that the freight action plan provides strategic support for significant infrastructure improvements on both the rail and road corridors to not only handle the projected increased freight traffic in an environmentally friendly way, but also handles projected passenger traffic which shares the infrastructure?
On the map accomanying this article, from the consultation (Appendix A) - "Wiltshire HGV Route Network"
Green - Strategic Routes
Yellow - County Roads
Purple - Local Access
Grey - not in the HGV route network
You may like to note in meeting preparation
a) This consultation input is due before the next full council meeting, and separate to local plan input which has a later cut off date
b) Written Statement on rail freight by the Secretary of State for Transport on 8th September 2026 which brings forward some targets https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/rail-freight-growth-2040-target
c) Road corridors mapped out no longer show the A36 to Bath (for A46 and Bristol connections) to be trunk
d) Projected routing for a new Melksham bypass routes traffic away from Melksham Town Parish, although it remains in the Melksham Community Area
e) Network Rail, LTP4, Bath and Wiltshire Metro all call for infrastructure improvements to substantially increase rail capacity, and Network Rail and HMG plans call for phasing out of diesel-only trains, which account for all freight and regular passenger services through Melksham at present. The section from Chippenham to Trowbridge is already a bottleneck even at current traffic levels (last Thursday night - queues of trains waiting to get through, for example)
f) Written early on 10th September to give maximum notice of question. I will be visiting the local plan road show in Devizes today (why is it not coming to Melksham?) and may follow up on that, and happy to provide links / references is needed prior to next Tuesday
To: CEO, MTC as notice of question. Courtesy copy to Saffi Rabey as Committee Chair. Please feel free to share.
Graham Ellis
48 Spa Road, Melksham, SN12 7NY
graham@sn12.net
07974 925928 or 01225 708225
My emailling policy: https://grahamellis.uk/email
Published Thursday, 10th September 2026
20 years ago - last TransWilts commuter train. Progress since.
Twenty years ago today, 9th September 2006, Melksham lost its commuter train service from Swindon - leaving us with just two trains each way per day at times that a train could be spared off what were deemed "more important lines", and were pretty useless (frankly) here. What has followed? It took seven years to get a trial service back by adding a single (one carriage) train shuttling up and down every 2 or 3 hours. That succeeded beyond target and was made permanent 3 years later, but passenger numbers stopped growing in part because the train was overcrowded to the extent that more people physically couldn't get on the (only) peak service. The train is now two or three times as long, the platform at Melksham Station has been extended, and passenger journeys are 25 times what they were, but that is still just a tenth of the numbers they should be and are seen at other stations in the area - Bradford-on-Avon, Chippenham and Trowbridge.
We can characterise it that we have moved from a useless service after 9th September 2006 to a sparse service with significant issues, but useable in many cases, as at 9th September 2026.
Outstanding issues are ...
1. Train reliability. 90% of trains run but on an infrequent service we really need 98% plus
2. Train frequency. We need a minimum of one train each way per hour and (really) two
3. Unfriendliness to new users of station and information and ticketing systems
We have moved forward - those issues are nothing like as dire as they were in 2007, and they are generally acknowledged, appreciated, and projected to be addressed in upcoming strategies. And they need to be. With population growth, the Melksham area is no longer just a little market town of around 12,000 which it was in 1966 when the station was originally closed under the Beeching Axe. These days, it's around 29,000 and under Government and a new local plan, we might anticipate that the population of the contiguous urban area may be between 40,000 and 45,000 on 9th September 2036. Whilst individual personal mobility needs may have shrunk a little, both road and rail capacities are "squeaking at the seams" and major attention needs to be given - not only to the acknowledged ideas but, NOW, to starting real actions to address them.
1. Train reliability is being addressed - and yet we have been told it "is being addressed" for the last 20 years and it remains stubbornly high. The "need" for a private company like First to make a profit and employ resources (staff and trains) as possible, and to move those resources to other more lucrative lines when there's a shortage is admitted. Come December, the operation is nationalised. The workforce will remain the same - excellent staff on the line and at stations when they are available (can't praise them enough) but a management that must have a question mark over it as to whether, having had 20 years to fix the reliability, it can do so with government rather than private equity direction. We will have to see and work with them to at least ensure it's at least stable - and to improve the customer experience when something goes wrong.
2. Train frequency needs enhanced infrastructure. The line was reduced to a single track from the junction near Chippenham ("Thingley") to the junction near Trowbridge ("Bradford") in 1967, with no signals in between so that trains ca't follow behind each other, and with no places for trains to pass each other or wait for a "slot" if the line is not available. With a single line, realistically, you can run one train each way every 40 minutes. If the line were double and signalled for the purpose, a headway of 8 minutes would be well within grasp. As a knock-on, that's going to require capacity at Westbury, Swindon and places between to be able to handle the extra trains, and/or re-instatement of triangle junctions at Bradford and Thingley to let some trains run to and from Bath and Bristol - which will bring up other capacity issues at those stations. Huge extra topic here - freight through Melksham, noting HMG's targets to increase rail freight massively
3. Let's face it, Melksham Station is at the back end of the business park, unstaffed and scarcely friendly. Whilst it's only a 10 minute walk from the Town Bridge, it feels like it's way out, accessed via an underpass which isn't as bad as it was (but!). There are no buses, no taxis unless booked, no loos, and no-one to help and re-assure you. The place is peppered with signs telling you what you can't do. There is not even a timetable to tell you - should you go to Swindon, Chippenham, Bristol Temple Meads, Trowbridge, Bath Spa or London (Paddington) - the most popular destinations - what time the trains come back!
Fixing each of these helps fix or mitigate the others!
* A more frequent service will reduce the upset caused by a cancellation - a 30 minute delay is less catastrophic than a delay from 15:39 to 18:10, for example.
* Extra Infrastructure will allow much more freight as well as more passenger service, and will make the service more reliable because the congestion and waiting issues will be reduced
* A real live person - a volunteer at the station with a little knowledge and a strong FAQ to fall back on - will allow for a loo to be provided, return timetable information given, and suggested actions advised in the event of delays or cancellations. Much is known / planned here - see (here) and (here)
Published Wednesday, 9th September 2026
School parking and school streets - Melksham South Ward
The Melksham News today highlights the School Streets Scheme that's coming into force for an 18 month trial, and the previous edition included a very wordy legal advert from Wiltshire Council listing new parking / yellow lines restrictions in and near the vicinity. The article is at https://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/school-streetsThere has been, undoubtedly, a congestion, driving and parking issue around the Aloeric school for many years. The school predates the age when a high proportion of parents drove their children to school, and indeed these days parent can choose a school for which the only practicl access from their home is by private car. Which makes for a bit of a problem that the school was never designed to cope with.
I wish the initiative well; whilst I worry about a number of issues, something really needed to be done. Lots of cars manouvering around and lots of children and parents on foot weaving in and out of them is a recipe for a serious accident, and I can't see myself any better solution - I can't ask "why don't you xxxx?". But I worry about people accessing the vets and pub businesses there, and carrier deliveries. I worry about the zone and the yellow lines simply moving the cars and congestion into neighbouring streets. I worry about the cost and paperwork of setting up and monitoring all the various exemptions. And I worry about parents feeling a little miffed and picked on when they seem to be just about the only group which is NOT exempt. Fingers crossed that it will work.
The problem in not unique to the Aloeric School - the streets around Melksham Oak are also a sea of parked parents in the afternoon as they wait to collect their children. For the senior school, walking, cycling, public transport options may be there and could - I'm sure - be improved; there has been progress on that, but it can get worse as well as better as Melksham grows. Good to see plans for new housing, as they are approved, include public transport / bus provision, and it will make sense for school time journeys to run via Melksham Oak like the x34 does already.
Carrots not sticks are needed. The current solution feels too much like a stick. And there are potential carrots around. Better paths and school access to Hazelwood Road, and via Orchard Gardens to cut down on driving. An agreement with the pub to let their car park be used for pickups / drop offs at what's a quiet time of day in the pub trade. Perhaps a tuning of the x34 and local bus, though that limited resource is perhaps bette used at The Oak.
Published Wednesday, 26th August 2026
I'm a "Digital Creator" - what does that mean?
Graham Ellis - on FacebookPublic transport advocate and campaigner, retired IT trainer, retired hotelier and retired Town Councillor
Digital Creator * Melksham * The City University
Facebook describes me as a "Digital Creator". What does that mean?
On Facebook, a digital creator label on a profile means the user has Professional Mode turned on, which is a setting that helps people build a public presence and access performance analytics.
What the Label Indicates
Professional Mode Active: Facebook often enables this category automatically or prompts users to turn it on when they share public videos, Reels, or get a larger following.
Public Content: Profiles with this tag are set up to reach people outside their immediate circle of friends, pushing posts into wider feeds.
Access to Tools: It unlocks dashboard insights, follower data, and potential monetization features (though having the label does not mean the user is actively earning money or is a professional).
Common Misconceptions
Not Always Intentional: Many users report that Facebook assigned the "digital creator" title to their personal profile automatically without them asking for it.
Not Necessarily an Influencer: While some use it to build a brand or share original art, videos, and blogs, others are just regular users whose accounts defaulted to this setting.
And what does Google tell me?
What Digital Creators Do
Content Production: Research, write, film, and edit multimedia assets for platforms like YouTube, TikTok, or blogs.
Community Building: Interact with followers through comments, direct messages, and dedicated community spaces.
Business Operations: Manage publishing schedules, analyze performance metrics, and handle contracts
What do I make of that?
* I am happy with the Facebook "Digital Creator" label though it is not something I actively sought.
* I am happy with a wider readership that just my friends - much of what I write is potentially useful to others, especially some of the niche stuff that may come up in searches, and things I write and tag as public are thought through with that being considered. As I share widely, I am very much aware to respect the privacy of family, friends, and others, and issues such as copyright and the various safety-on-line and laws on permissable content.
* The insights tools and follower data are useful to me in helping provide feedback - telling me which posts gain tractions and which are whistling in the wind, for example. It's also useful to see things like the age mixes on popular posts. There is not necessarily a correlation between the number of reads, the number of likes, and the number of comments and helping to understand which posts are seen and read, but not generating a response, is useful. Long factual posts often get well read, but the "likes" come on short follow up comments that highlight one particular aspect.
Published Tuesday, 25th August 2026
Road works and bus services around them
Road work season!
* The 271 and 273 (and once-a-day 272 diversion) are skipping Whitley for a period of up to six weeks. The Zigzag (69 with an occasional 68) provides a much-reduced service through Whitley, with a need to change in Atworh if you're headed to or from Bath.
* The 271/2/3 are terminating early in Bath / outbound from the Guildhall until November - not serving the Railway Station on Manvers Street or the Bus Station. If you're headed to / from a change in Bath (trains, other buses, RUH) you'll probably want to walk across the city. A few routes (13, 228) are continuing to the bus station but they are sparse, and if you're going to the RUH the x76 - one service, Monday to Friday only, may work for you if you are lucky.
* The x34 soutbound out of Melksham toward Trowbridge is being diverted away from Semington Road past Berryfield for three weeks, resuming its normal route at the Police Station. Northbound buses are NOT diverted. Official recommendation is for returing home is to catch the bus to the police station and double back, but that can involve a long wait - especially at the weekend. The 12:08 bus on route 15 (Monday to Saturday) DOES still serve Berryfield, diverted in via the Police Station.
Oh dear! The buses are so important to many people who don't have the mobility to walk up to a mile to an alternative stop - that's why a lot of people use the bus - a necessity.
The bus operators, and to some extent the local authorities, are at the mercy of the utilities who - with certain notice - can dig up the roads as necessary. The utilities are - as I understand it - oblidged to provide car and business access to places within the work area, with an allowance made for them to delay traffic / divert it around if they have to. They are not obidged to provide access to buses that would normally pass through. The bus operators cannot divert their buses up to each end of the works - nowhere to turn around, and the timetable would go to pot for everyone. The Unitary Council, who are the local transport authority here, don't have the budget to buy in an extra service / vehicle to fill in the gaps. So no-one has the tools or structure to do much.
Local co-ordination - and Melksham Without are active in promoting this - may bring some compromises such as extra temporary bus stops, working with Wiltshire Council. But, sadly, there's no magic wand here and we / you have to make do as best you can with an inferior service - perhaps impractically inferior - during the works. This can (we know) put an extra load onto the Community Bus team, Link services to help people get to hospital, etc. Many people in the various organisations DO do their best to help, but there is no ideal solution and perhaps systemic change might be requires? There is certainly a balancing act between keeping the roads open and the safety of the workforce.
Published Monday, 17th August 2026
Observed in Europe. Would it work for Melksham?
Over the last 3 months, I have had the pleasure of travelling to many places in Europe. And although I am now retired from being a Town Councillor, I can't help but notice things and wonder how they might work, or might be best avoided, for Melksham. I remain active in transport and environment groups and with a keen interest in looking forward to a more sustanable and better future.
A water feature which entertains all the time and which chilren run and out of. Reggio de Calabria.
A Market Square with a fountain and table and chairs set out around, and traffic free. Wernigerode.
A small, simple, low cost station where never the less trains stop and pass each other going in different directions. Manowo.
Free parking at the station for people catching the train. Koszalin.
Specialist spices for sale in the market. Rotterdam Blaak.
Horse drawn taxi. Delft.
High density housing set around a green and pleasant park, with shops and public transport just across the way. Rosnowo.
A segratated area for safer wild-ish water swimming. Rosnowo.
A short train that connects with the longer distace ones and shuttles up and down to connect smaller communities into the national network. Mielno.
Lovely seafood. Wernigerode.
A river frontage with water taxisnup and down the waterway. Rotterdam.
Public stages and performances. Kolobrzeg.
Miniature brass artwork / sculptures. Kolobrzeg.
Dog park / exercise area with low level features that all dogs can safely entertain themselves with. Reggio de Calabria.
Music at the station - a piano for peoole to make use of themselves. Leipzig.
A shoe shop. Utrecht.
Cycling culture. Utrecht.
Long distance traun. Utrecht.
Clear waymarking from the town and the leisure areas to the station. Vlissingen.
Cobbled Market Square. Zittau.
Crossing the tracks changing between trains on the level. Zgorzelec.
Flowers at the station. Mariazell.
Cafe making a feature of famous local people. St Polten.
Making a feature of the river. Rheinfalls.Published Thursday, 13th August 2026
Tax on hotel guests staying overnight?
The Government has proposed legislation to allow councils at a "strategic" level to levy an overnight guest tax on tourists in England. These extra charges, already allowed in Scotland and common place in Europe, are just a small amount each night for each person, but they mount up. We have just paid €2.80 each Beherbergungssteuer per night in Leipzig - total €11.20 for the stay which may not sound a great deal, but these little charges add up. The idea of the charges is that they provide funding for local council services for the area being visited rather than the extra costs all falling on the residents - in other words that they help keep local council tax rates down, and more fairly spread the local income for services provided / supported locally. For tourist areas, I can understand the desire to have the visitor pay more equitably for the services they use - why should the residents of Bath or Stratford-upon-Avon pay for the extras street cleaning necessitated by the flood of guests? Indeed, there is logic for some sort of levy even on day visitors - but I'm not sure how practical that would be; it is being done - something of a geographic special case - in Venice for the peak months at least.
In Rostock, and in Zittau, I am heartened to see that payment of the tourist tax brings you a card which allows you to use local public transport without further charge. It makes sense. Guests in a town don't know the public transport and it's a hurdle for them to find out how to pay and not get caught by rules they don't know. It makes sense to encourage guests who drive into hotels to leave their cars there and encourage people stopping overnight to use trams, buses, and local trains to get around within the city. And it brings extra riders and income to the public transport / mass transit systems allowing them to run more economically, with fixed costs shared over more riders. Bonus perhaps of more frequent services for local use, and service that otherwise would not be viable can run.
An argument is made that says that hotel businesses have enough trouble making end meet without this extra 'tax', which will put people off coming to the town / area, and it's hard enough for those businesses as it is. We ran our place as, essentially, a hotel for over a decade. I don't think we would have seen much of a loss of custom for an extra £2 of £4 per day, especially if it applied at all other places locally. We WERE often chosen for being significantly lower cost than Bath, but assuming they also had an overnight guest tax it would not have effected our business. Tax localised to Melksham Town and, yes, it might have lead to some loss of custom to Beechfield House and TravelLodge, both of which are in Melksham Without.
One of the biggest costs of running a hotel is staffing - especially a place with a few rooms. There is talk of a room tax putting staff out of work, but in practise it's the cost of employing - salaries, taxes, training and other ancillaries that make a huge difference. Especially where staff are on duty for a handful of guests or perhaps for a late checkin. What we have noted, travelling around Europe for the last three months, that modern systems, efficiencies and changes have been made to allow overnight hospitality venues to function with a smaller team. Door entry codes, and lock boxes with keys are now common place and accepted. Rooms are typically serviced less frequently - on request / every 3 days perhaps automatically. Gone are the daily tidies. And it's this cost of staffing, and the need to be able to offer reasonable or competitive priced accommodation, that influences how places run these days. Not any extra tax on guests who - if they are coming to the town or area - will pay it no matter where they stay.
Published Monday, 3rd August 2026
On Government approval for 300 homes at Snarleton Farm
**Breaking news** - from the Melksham News: Government approves 300 homes at Snarlton Farm despite Neighbourhood Plan conflict. Plans for up to 300 homes on the edge of Melksham have been approved after the Secretary of State overturned Wiltshire Council’s decision to refuse the development. The government has allowed an appeal by Catesby Estates for the proposed development on land at Snarlton Farm, east of Eastern Way, despite the site being outside the settlement boundary and not allocated for housing in the Joint Melksham Neighbourhood Plan 2.Not a decision that is welcomed in the parishes or county, but it does not come as a surprise to me. Like many others, I put a lot of volunteer hours into the Neighbourhood Plan, and others at a wider and at a more skilled level have put uncounted paid hours into both helping the community put together the Neighbourhood Plan, and the Local Plan for the whole or Wiltshire. But whilst that gives us a degree of 'say' and influence, it does not make (any) of us - or the team as a whole - the ultimate arbitter. But just because we can't have everything we want, it does not mean we can't have or influence in our direction much of it.
The Neighbourhood Plan stands, and still provides a strong framework for how those new homes and associated infrasturcture will be tuned. We need to take as much local benefit from that as we can, whilst at the same time welcoming new residents to Melksham as they become "locals" too. And there are elements of that in the system. This site for these 300 homes is far from the worst that was looked at by neighbourhood and local plans and it was always going to be a tough one to defend with the Local Plan for Wiltshire having taken so long to come to examination that it failed there because the current government has shifted the goal posts. The current Wiltshire Council are now taking aim at the new goal, hoping to be quick enough to score this time; the previous and current administrations, as I understand it, are broadly aligned and both frustrated by the changes. But not letting themselves - correctly in my view - throwing up their hands in hooror at the current decision and giving up.
These should be read as personal comments and views. I was, for a while, a volunteer member of the Neighbourhood Plan steering group, representing the Town Council. That came to an end with the end of my term as a Town Councillor and I was glad to see the plan go on and be "made" a few months later. I still take an interest and friends keep me informed out of, perhaps, kindness and because I'm also far freer to comment and explain than those who remain in post - paid or volunteers. We have some really excellent people who's heart and professionalism and dedication is to be admired, and at the time that "battles" are "lost" (I hate those competitive words) we should them, admire them and support and work with them for the post-decision times so that we make the very best for the future of Melksham.
Published Wednesday, 29th July 2026