During his interview – from the early 1980s I believe – he showed how much he was out of touch with the actual position.
True, many lines did not have many travellers, but in Scotland in particular these lines were a lifeline to many people.
One lady commented that it took a bus longer to get from Hawick to Edinburgh than it did a hearse! Losing their station means the town is further away from another station than any other town in Britain.
In Lincolnshire the loss of nearly all our lines only did one thing. It put more lorries and cars on the roads – apparently what Beeching was after – and we have been reaping the 'benefits' ever since.
There was a reference to trains delivering goods to Plymouth for distribution to villages in Cornwall and Devon. This was uneconomic, said Beeching, so he closed the lines.
In the process, he put more lorries on to roads which in some parts are narrower than those in Lincolnshire, and almost ruined seaside resorts which relied on the railways to bring their visitors.
In Boston, the effects were noticed almost overnight. Instead of regular trains taking fresh fish from Grimsby to London we suddenly noticed a vast increase in lorries going through the town doing the same thing. And this was before John Adams Way.
The railways were losing a terrific amount of money, but the amounts being paid by the government today to franchisees (the majority of that money going to shareholders) is vastly in excess of what we might have been paying if the railways had been left alone.
Yes, hindsight is a wonderful thing.
Would Beeching have made the same decision today? Should we have done away with our coal industry?
On a local note, should we have agreed to forming Lincolnshire County Council? Will we regret selling off all our gas and electricity resources to other countries?
Will future governments look back and say we should not have been allowing a Spanish bank to be taking over all our own banks?
Only time will tell.

OBSERVER
Name and address supplied