The railways, what must be done?

Lorin Sat May 19, 2007 at 03:31:33 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

This is a question for everyone, I would also be very grateful if a deputy leadership candidate or Gordon Brown would answer this.
I have just used GNER to Travel to York from London.



The train was 40 minutes late.
It was expensive, the toilet didn't flush.
Is this how our rail services should be?

I don't like cars, and I don't drive, trains and buses are my way to get around.

It's cheaper to travel by plane or car than by rail.

If we want a green agenda what must be done?

Private railways are terrible, more people travel by car now.

What do you think is the solution?

In the one of the Labour conferenses a decision was taken to renationalise the railways.
Most of the public want the railways nationalised.
What do you think?



tags: , , , , , , , , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
The railways, what must be done? | 81 comments (81 topical)

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#1)

by jkitleft on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:24:13 PM GMT

I think they should be renationalised. The platforms should be extended. The rail system should be overhauled, as happened in France a number of decades ago, as the rails here are 100 years old. The number of carriages should be increased. For all the money spent on building new lines, we need to replace the existing one's.


Re: The railways, what must be done? (#59)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:02:02 PM GMT

Paid for how?


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#76)

by jkitleft on Mon May 21, 2007 at 06:49:07 PM GMT

how about by getting rid of a £76 billion programme we're never going to use


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#2)

by otware on Sat May 19, 2007 at 04:27:41 PM GMT

Renationalise. Improve the lines. Invest in high speed trains French-style. Look at France, they have a rail network that's arguably the best in the world and it is run by the state. End of story.


Re: The railways, what must be done? (#60)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:02:18 PM GMT

Paid for how?


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#63)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:13:43 PM GMT

Tax payers money, treasury loan, minus the amount of money the privatised rail companies have taken from us.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#3)

by JR on Sat May 19, 2007 at 06:00:00 PM GMT

No renationalisation whatsoever. Better regulation so that one company runs a whole chunk of the network (eg. track, platforms, stations etc.) But most importantly, spend more money on public transport - create a better intercity train network and spend more on city light rail or subway schemes.


Re: The railways, what must be done? (#4)

by Lorin on Sat May 19, 2007 at 06:32:16 PM GMT

So you think its fine for corparations like virgin and gner to make money of transportation? Have you ever traveled on a virgin or gner train? Have you seen how dreadfull the service is? We need to put them back into public ownership, its the only way. JR:I quote your hero Blair in 1997 saying"They sould be run for the public, and they should stay in public ownership for the people of this contry". I couldn't agree more.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#8)

by otware on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:50:37 PM GMT

I use trains on a fairly regular basis, and they are terrible. They are filthy and they stink. There are not enough seats. The rail network is a shambles.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#14)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 04:31:35 PM GMT

"So you think its fine for corparations like virgin and gner to make money of transportation?"

Yes.

"Have you ever traveled on a virgin or gner train?"

Yes.

"Have you seen how dreadfull the service is?"

To be honest no - they've always been good when I've used them, but I'm not denying that there are serious problems with the rail network. State ownership will make things worse. Incompetent future governments will make the network inefficient and uncompetitive. Arguing 'public ownership' is the answer, is a typically lazy leftie response to what is actually a very complex problem.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#18)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:02:33 PM GMT

How will state responsibility for the railways be worse than their private ownership? Rail services will be far more efficiant. Just look at the South East Trains services, the took over from Connex that was even worse than GNER. It was taken into public ownership and fares were reduced, the trains were on time, staff morale went up. But what do new labour do? They re-privatise it!!! Why? The railways were valiued pre-1996 at 6.4 Billion pounds. The tories sold it for 1.9 Billion pounds! We will by it back for that price. Concidering they made some 0.5 billion pounds profiting from privatised rail then we pay them 1.4 billion pounds. And JR: Any comment on what Blair sayed in 1997? Travel GNER, see how much it costs, see how inificiant the services are and then come back to me and tell me we don't need to put them back in public ownership.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#22)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:27:42 PM GMT

The state does have responsibilty for the railways - they just shouldn't own them. Not convinced by your argument at all.

It's the action Blair takes that counts, not what was said 10 years ago.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#30)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 06:39:56 PM GMT

So why do you think it's right for corperations like Virgin or First to make money on the expense of the tax-payer? No offence but if you think privatised rail is best, you should join the conservative party. Majority of the Labour party want the railways back in public hands. As dicision was taken in a party conferense some time back, blair doesn't care about the labour party, he cares about his personnal agenda.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#39)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:26:47 PM GMT

No offence, but why don't you shift to the Socialist Workers if you love nationalisation so much? Don't hijack the Labour party to spread your leftie crap. We've moved on since then.

I'd rather have Richard Branson running the trains than a Tory Transport Secretary.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#43)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:45:10 PM GMT

Well I wont move to the SWP because most of the Labour Party members want the railways renationalised. Richard Branson is a theif, he has stolen billions of british tax-payers money.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#45)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:49:24 PM GMT

Hahaha! Evidence please? Richard Branson is one of the greatest entrepeneurs this country has ever had and is a credit to society. Regardless of what the lefties want a Labour government will never surrender to them and will not renationalise the railways. Want to throw any more wild accusations?


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#47)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:55:22 PM GMT

He may be so, However, he has taken billions of british tax payers money and provided a terrible rail service. You cant seem able to comprehend the fact that it's wrong for a "great entrepeneur" to make money of essential services. And one person was killed in the train de-railment in cumbria because of that. Just compare accidents under the years of BR and the 11 years of Privatisation and then come back to me.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#52)

by DaveS on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:14:40 PM GMT

Why are you picking on that derailment? Simply because it was a Virgin train? One person died which is tragic, but many others didn't because of the fact that the train was "built like a tank" and no windows broke. Sorry, that's a rubbish argument.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#68)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:53:16 PM GMT

It was precisely because Virgin trains are so safe that only one person was killed. Look up previous train disasters (particularly those when the trains were nationalised) and try looking at the casualty figures then.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#50)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:09:25 PM GMT

Jesus JR, you scare me. Because you call people 'lefties' you make them sound like SWP organisers. I don't think you're a Tory (although Sarkozy inklings, could make me retract that statement). And we are 'hijacking' the party? Bull. Considering most Labour supporters are left-wing, if they all left the party, the Labour Party would be on it's knees. And yet, despite outcasting the left, the leadership says 'We're not as bad as the Tories' to make the left fall in line. So before you say to every 'lefty', 'go join the SWP', just consider how much grassroot support Labour would lose.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#69)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:55:39 PM GMT

If the people on the left want to stay in the party then that's fine by me, but just don't try and enforce your views on the moderate majority of the party who actually want the party to be successful. Policies like renationalisation will never happen again under a Labour government and the left needs to accept that.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#77)

by jkitleft on Mon May 21, 2007 at 06:52:22 PM GMT

i could say the same to the 'moderate majority'. And New Labour aren't moderate. We have swung from one extreme to the other. New Labour totally disregard socialism now, and that is not accebtable in a party of the left. They even totally diregard social democracy. This is extreme. So i could say that New Labour shouldn't have enforced their views on a different kind of moderate majority.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#80)

by JR on Tue May 22, 2007 at 01:41:06 AM GMT

No, I totally reject that. New Labour is social-democratic to its core, as am I. Events like Iraq are exceptional.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#9)

by otware on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:54:54 PM GMT

How is it right that private companies should hold a monopoly in something like the railways? It's not like a shop where the consumer has a choice on the highstreet! If the traveller doesn't like the company the tough! It's the only one providing the service they need. What evidence do you have that a privatised network is better than a nationalised one? Look at France for goodness sake!


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#15)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 04:35:43 PM GMT

How is it right that the state should hold a monopoly on the railways? It's not like the armed forces or the police force where only the state can run it! If the traveller doesn't like the state-run network it's tough! It's the only one providing the service they need. What evidence do you have that a nationalised network is better than a privatised one? British trains before they were privatised were still as terrible as they are today, especially compared to French ones!


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#61)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:06:40 PM GMT

Jr, no: the reason privatisation was such a disaster to begin with was because of the confusion over who managed what: the rail infrastructure itself needs to be the responsibility of one national organisation.

The re-acquistion of Railtrack (now Network Rail) by the government (one Stephen Byers, I recall) was one of the most sensible things it has done in unscrambling the botch the Tories made of rail privatisation.

I actually think Network Rail should take back responsibility for stations as well as track, rather than having different operators maintaining (or not) stations to very widely differing degrees of quality.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#70)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:57:18 PM GMT

Yes I agree - as I said before we need one company who can run the whole network rather than splitting it up.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#5)

by jkitleft on Sat May 19, 2007 at 09:20:50 PM GMT

If we don't renationalise them, perhaps there could be worker's and consumer's public-interest companies, or companies with strong consumer representation


Re: The railways, what must be done? (#6)

by swatantra on Sat May 19, 2007 at 09:55:08 PM GMT

The majority view would be to re nationalise, without any doubt. Ask any genuine Labour member. Rail is even more important than foxhunting.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#7)

by Mikael on Sat May 19, 2007 at 10:23:04 PM GMT

"Rail is even more important than foxhunting."

Indeed. But then again, I always felt that the Blair/Brown clique got their priorities wrong!


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#16)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 04:36:29 PM GMT

"Genuine Labour member" - what a stupid and childish remark to make.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#35)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:45:14 PM GMT

as opposed to, calling people commies for not supporting Blair 100% of the time.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#40)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:27:58 PM GMT

Yeh, yeh. Neutral as ever I see.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#51)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:11:06 PM GMT

because you are? Perhaps genuine labour member isn't the best comment to make, but neither is telling anyone slightly to the left of Tony Blair to 'go join the SWP'


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#71)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:57:56 PM GMT

I never pretend to be neutral.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#78)

by jkitleft on Mon May 21, 2007 at 06:53:43 PM GMT

imagine my suprise to learn that.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#81)

by JR on Tue May 22, 2007 at 01:42:51 AM GMT

Am I ever allowed to make one comment without an unfriendly reply by jkitleft?


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#10)

by Glass House on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:57:07 AM GMT

Rail ownership is one of those things that I feel I should have a strong opinion on but don't.

My instinct would be to avoid renationalising, but I'm willing to be persuaded towards a stronger position either way.


Re: The railways, what must be done? (#11)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:25:25 AM GMT

I don't follow the logic against nationalisation. If we all agree that the rail needs massive investment, why should tax payers money be massively invested in the profits of shareholders? Renationalisation is a win-win proposal.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#12)

by otware on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:48:04 AM GMT

Also, I fail to see how a privatised service can actually be integrated to the same extent as a nationalised one. If it's one nationalised entity then it's simple, but when you have multiple different companies owning different sections of track, stations and trains then how do you get them to agree on anything? They want what is best for them, not necessariy the best for the overall railway network.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#17)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 04:41:52 PM GMT

How convincing!

"I don't follow the logic against nationalisation."

Really? That does surprise me. The purpose of allowing private companies to run the trains is to increase competition, which leads to better productivity and a better service for the public. Naturally, it also requires subsidies from the government since it is a public service which is necessary for many people. If a rail company does a bad job at running the network, they can be replaced when the next contracts are up. Also, since these are specialised companies purely dedicated to run the railways, they should be better at it than a government which has other, more pressing concerns and may be inefficient in how they spend taxpayers money. Since private companies want to make some sort of profit, they won't squander taxpayers money like governments would - they squeeze every penny. Renationalisation is a silly, reactionary proposal and one that will never see the light of day.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#19)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:03:28 PM GMT

Erm... Yeah. How do you increase competition if you subsidise it? When should share-holders get tax-payers money? Why should these 'specialised companies' (please take a look at some of these companies by the way) run it better than specialists employed by the government (unless it's a supernatural thing)? "They squeeze every penny" doesn't fill me with confidence for a safe, well-funded and high quality transport system (nor would it fill railway employees with confidence that they will have proper pay and conditions). What did you think of rail privatisation when it was originally anounced? I know that Tony Blair and other heroes of yours were fundamentally opposed to it.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#21)

by Mikael on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:27:00 PM GMT

The thing is that JR is much closer to Thatcherism than to Labourism, let alone traditional Labourism.

Much like Thatcher he supports the complete privatisation of state-owned means of production - not that there are many left to privatise.

Furthermore, he claims to proud New Labour's legacy. Maggie Thatcher once said that her "greatest legacy" was New Labour.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#23)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:30:26 PM GMT

My thoughts on privatisation are exactly in line today with what our party leader Blair thinks and indeed our future leader Brown thinks. Yours are not.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#24)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:31:56 PM GMT

Do you fancy doing a poll of party members, or indeed the public at large on the issue of renationalising the railways. I think you'll find that you're the chap out of touch, JR!


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#26)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:33:23 PM GMT

I think you'll find that on the whole, across all issues my 'platform' is a great deal more 'in touch with the public' than anything a leftie could come up with!


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#27)

by doctordunc on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:35:43 PM GMT

I'll take that as meaning you wouldn't want to test that thesis on the railways then...


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#28)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:41:25 PM GMT

I'm still unsure whether the British public would actually want to nationalise the railways when push comes to shove. They might want it reorganising, but I doubt they'd agree to renationalising if it was ever seriously proposed.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#32)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:06:42 PM GMT

Wrong again! Most of the public and of the Labour party want the railways renationalised!(According to a poll from The Times some time back I think). In addition, the result of this poll speaks for itself, even though there have only been 7 voices cast, if every blogger on this website cast their votes, the results would be similar. If a deputy leadership candidate wants the support of the vast majority of the labour party, he should come out in favour of renationalising the railways. Gordon Brown should do so as well.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#33)

by Mikael on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:39:02 PM GMT

Never mind JR, AWB. He keeps making false claims and contradicting himself. Once he realises that his arguments are beginning to run out of steam, he'll just start hurling insults at you.

JR clearly showed that privatisation is useless and solves nothing:

"British trains before they were privatised were still as terrible as they are today"

Furthermore , he clearly fails to understand that the only way to truly improve public transport is through (re-)natioanlisation, increased investment on part of the state and the introduction of a democratic plan - doing so would not only immensely improve public transport but also create jobs.

As far as I am concerned, re-nationalisation isn't the only measure necessary to improve rail-services. In order to run to the fullest of its capacity, rail and public transport should have a management consisting of delegates appointed by the government(1/3), by the TUC (1/3) and elected by the rail and transport workers (1/3) - some argue that, in addition to that, consumers' organisation should have a right to appoint delegates as well, which is of course a possibility which deserves to be looked at/debated.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#42)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:31:26 PM GMT

Isn't it about time you accused someone of belonging to the National Front?

If nationalising trains is so popular, why aren't hoardes of politicians proposing it? You really are deluded aren't you?


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#41)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:28:55 PM GMT

No chance.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#44)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:49:05 PM GMT

Yep, Majority of people want the railways back. Go ask people in the street if you don't believe me.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#46)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:50:33 PM GMT

I've just spoken to Bob on the Old Kent Road. He said he didn't want it renationalising.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#48)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 09:57:32 PM GMT

Ha Ha Ha. Now I was being serious, I have asked many people and they all want the railways under public ownership.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#67)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:19:54 PM GMT

Sure it's entirely coincidental, but you have exactly the same initials as one Anthony Wedgewood Benn...


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#66)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:18:22 PM GMT

Let's bring back hanging then if you believe everything the "person on the street" should be carried out.

You're right: practically everyone is in favour of the PRINCIPLE of nationalisation. But they suddenly lose a lot of that enthusiasm when the cost of nationalisation - that will use up huge sums of money and improve service not one jot in itself, is spelled out to them.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#36)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:48:53 PM GMT

but you describe 'leftie' as anyone to the left of New Labour. Why must we thank god that we're not in the days of a social-democratic party as i talked of on another thread? Anywho, ask even centrist people, and many of them are in favour of re-nationalisation.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#38)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:51:52 PM GMT

Your absolutely right, I think even most right wingers want the railways renationalised, but won't addmit wrong accept for Thatcher, who has.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#31)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 06:58:15 PM GMT

Even Thatcher has sayed that the privatisation of the railways was "a privatisation too far".


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#65)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:15:30 PM GMT

Maybe she has, but it's rather like unscrambling an omelette.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#25)

by JR on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:32:02 PM GMT

Indeed, I've thought about possible re-nationalising of the railways myself, but came to the firm conclusion that it is not sensible. Thankfully, Blair and Brown did the same.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#49)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:08:16 PM GMT

Here's proof your conclusion is wrong: http://www.guardian.co.uk/pottersbar/story/0,,1204985,00.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paddington_train_crash http://www.guardian.co.uk/traincrash/Story/0,,1186298,00.html Here's how efficiant and reliable it is:"In 2004-2005, 79.6% of trains arrived on time (defined as within 10 minutes of their scheduled arrival time). *On 22 December 2006, First Great Western InterCity service was declared the worst in Britain for delays, according to figures from the Office of Rail Regulation, with more than one in four trains running late. First was also the only train company actually to achieve a year-on-year decrease in performance results


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#20)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:16:14 PM GMT

"Since private companies want to make some sort of profit, they won't squander taxpayers money like governments would - they squeeze every penny" Here are articles you should read: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/6663963.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/mid/6159681.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6190810.stm


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#29)

by DaveS on Sun May 20, 2007 at 05:58:11 PM GMT

Competition only really works when the customer can choose which company to get a service from- for example, if I'm fed up with the service or what I'm paying for a specific phone company, then I can at least go somewhere else for my phone service. I can't do that on trains- the authorities do that for me every so many years. So if I'm fed up with the service or value I'm getting on First Great Western, all I can do is grumble about it and hope that the authorities award the contract to a better company, I don't have the choice to travel with another company (and, indeed, this is the same with buses since nearly all of them are operated by First in the West of England). So, do we introduce competition? Can we introduce competition? Or would it be better to put the railways back under national control? I'm too young to remember British Rail(only 19 you see) As someone who uses public transport to get almost everywhere, I think, there's got to be a better way of doing this.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#62)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:11:03 PM GMT

Paid for how?


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#72)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 12:43:45 AM GMT

Don't renew the contracts and don't put them out to tender when they come up.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#74)

by petercoe on Mon May 21, 2007 at 05:48:25 PM GMT

That's a not unreasonable response, but because of the investment these contracts generate they are for very long periods so we're talking maybe twenty or more years before you'd get your wholesale renationalisation.

Is the Left really saying that they'd be happy to wait such a long time for renationalisation -the comments on this forum seem to imply that they want it all right now?

I'm still unconvinced that this is any more than gesture politics though: it's the quality of service that matters, not who it's provided by. If private companies improve service because the regulatory framework is tougher, are you really saying that this should be overhauled and replaced by a nationalised train operator that in all probability will be less efficient because of the lack of any competition?


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#75)

by Lorin on Mon May 21, 2007 at 06:40:27 PM GMT

But it's not a better service, if the prices were cheap, the trains were on time and people were generally satisfied with the service there would be no need to nationalise them. But that is not the case, therefore, we need to nationalise. Just read about South East Trains and how the service there was the best in the UK, after they took over from Connex.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#79)

by doctordunc on Mon May 21, 2007 at 07:09:07 PM GMT

The competition only exists at the point of franchising anyway, and as you say the franchises last for ages. Once the company has the franchise people aren't going to travel from Leeds to York via Glasgow so they can use Virgin rather than Stagecoach or whatever it is. So the idea that competition leads to more efficiency in the rail service isn't accurate. It leads to good bid writing, and it doesn't really matter whether they can live up to the written bid, because the government will bail them out whatever because they need to maintain the best service possible.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#13)

by Mark Wadsworth on Sun May 20, 2007 at 04:07:24 PM GMT

All things considered, re-nationalising the railways seems a fair idea. Preferebly without compensation for ruthless cheats like GNER (I only travelled with Virgin once and it was cheap-ish and train clean, punctual etc).


Re: The railways, what must be done? (#34)

by Glass House on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:44:05 PM GMT

I read an interesting article about tarmac-ing over the railways and running Coaches along them instead.

Apparently, when you take everything into account, its much more environmentally friendly.

Plus, you could have competition with multiple bus companies running the same 'lines'

Could be worth looking in to.


Re: The railways, what must be done? (#37)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 07:51:49 PM GMT

I think we need an overhaul of the whole transport system. I have one idea for the roads, create a proper cycle network, by knocking some of the curb of the pavements, and put in proper cycle tracks (as they have in many other countries)


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#55)

by Group51 on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:21:25 PM GMT

I hope this is a joke.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#73)

by Glass House on Mon May 21, 2007 at 11:55:20 AM GMT

Why?


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#53)

by Group51 on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:16:24 PM GMT

Network Rail is only in the "private sector" in inverted commas. What it does and doesn't do is set down at high-level by the Department for Transport.

HLOS

It is already within the Government's power to do something about the infrastructure (longer platforms).

The train operators are only licensed franchisee holders. Everything they do and spend money on is set down by the....Department for Transport.

Franchising

So nationalisation is the wrong answer. We already have control, but for some reason we are not implementing the intregrated transport (longer trains, regulated buses, more trams, commuter cycle routes) we said we were going to do.

That's the real problem.


Re: The railways, what must be done? (#54)

by Group51 on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:18:46 PM GMT

Oh, and that is not the preclude the idea of restructuring and simplyflying the railway 'industry'.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#56)

by Lorin on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:25:15 PM GMT

But what about rail costs? What about prices, we want to attract more rail users, not please share-holders.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#57)

by jkitleft on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:32:18 PM GMT

exactly. In France, if people stop going on the trains, what do they do? They lower the prices, and more people get on the trains. They raise the prices here, and the quality doesn't improve, or often get's worse.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#58)

by Group51 on Sun May 20, 2007 at 10:59:02 PM GMT

Who controls 'rail prices'? If you think it is the private sector, then think again.

Guardian News Story

The problem as I see it, is that all the money Labour put into the railways, a huge chunk of the investment got sucked up by the West Coast main line upgrade. Contributary to this was the splintered structures in the railway, but this was nothing to do with passenger services. WCML was so expensive that Ministers are now apparently reluctant to splurge money on it again before Network Rail prove they can spend the money prudently. But we need better services now, we can't really wait, so I think we need to focus on the other things, buses, cycles, trams - to relieve some of the pressure on rail in the short-medium term.


[ Parent ]

Re: The railways, what must be done? (#64)

by petercoe on Sun May 20, 2007 at 11:14:18 PM GMT

Yes absolutely. It's a bit like so much of the original investment in the NHS or schools being initially absorbed by bringing salaries of nurses and teachers up to a vaguely respectable level: absolutely vital to do, but delivering no immediate apparent improvements to service visible to the public.

The same's true of rail, except the amount going in is much less and the rot even more severe, so it's taking much longer to turn round.


[ Parent ]

The railways, what must be done? | 81 comments (81 topical)