Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
crash2006

State-Owned Train Company Returns £217M To Taxpayers

Recommended Posts

The conservatives are already in the process of reprivatising East Coast. Ideologically driven of course. Due to be completed before the General Election.

I'd go a step further and say that not only do the railways need to be renationalised, they need to be brought back together. Freight and the plethora of different passenger franchises all operate as independent businesses, with ringfenced staff, yards/facilities and rolling stock. Gone are the days when spare rolling stock and/or staff could be sourced at short notice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is horrific news, profits should be privatised immediately. We couldn't possible have a profitable nationalised sectors governments must tax and not provide profitable sectors that pay for themselves. Socialism gone mad!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/11085643/State-owned-train-company-returns-217m-to-taxpayers.html

How long before they sell it off, seems like the argument for privatisation is failing.

Actually no

The money returned to government was, adjusted for inflation, less then that returned by the previous franchise.

Admittedly that was a basket case, but the losses were private so the taxpayer did not lose out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the government running a train company, surely its job is to govern and not play with choo, choos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the government running a train company, surely its job is to govern and not play with choo, choos.

Becuase it appears they are better and always have been at running them than private operators and they don't govern well either. So you are right to ask

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually no

The money returned to government was, adjusted for inflation, less then that returned by the previous franchise.

Admittedly that was a basket case, but the losses were private so the taxpayer did not lose out.

That's an out and out lie that.

The National Express franchise before defaulted on most of the 1.4 billion bid to run it for 7 and a half years, and even if it had paid properly (and not the 70M odd they ended up paying to wriggle free) that's a return well below this rate and still represents a loss to the taxpayer compared to what nationalisation would have generated.

220M a year return is amazing for a state owned company. If it's not broke why fix it?

Edited by byron78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is the government running a train company, surely its job is to govern and not play with choo, choos.

Because it's making more money than it did privatised.

Because railways always loss money, so some state involvement will always be there (there's no such thing as a truly private railway anywhere worth bothering with).

Perhaps we should privatise roads as well?

Government shouldn't play broom brooms. If drivers want roads let them buy and build their own.

Edited by byron78

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess the money returned to the treasury will eventually find it's way into the hands of the 1% via the banks but at least it shows that not everything has to be privatised in order to make a profit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because it's making more money than it did privatised.

Because railways always loss money, so some state involvement will always be there (there's no such thing as a truly private railway anywhere worth bothering with).

Perhaps we should privatise roads as well?

Government shouldn't play broom brooms. If drivers want roads let them buy and build their own.

Absolutely. Back to the days of the Turnpike Trusts.

PS how would you look in a skirt, bonnet and axe ensemble, Byron?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

privatised rail could work in theory to the benefit of everyone concerned, but not under the current UK model and maybe not in the UK at all

which is a shame, because a government big enough to want to run railways is a government that is too big (imo)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's an out and out lie that.

The National Express franchise before defaulted on most of the 1.4 billion bid to run it for 7 and a half years, and even if it had paid properly (and not the 70M odd they ended up paying to wriggle free) that's a return well below this rate and still represents a loss to the taxpayer compared to what nationalisation would have generated.

220M a year return is amazing for a state owned company. If it's not broke why fix it?

Nonsense

The private equity backers lost the money, national express only lost 70mil because nxec was a limited subsidiary with additional external equity.

The contract was paid up until the point the govt (correctly) pulled the plug

Edited by Si1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense

The private equity backers lost the money, national express only lost 70mil because nxec was a limited subsidiary with additional external equity.

The contract was paid up until the point the govt (correctly) pulled the plug

Links please.

Sounds total nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I meant links proving the company paid in the manner you suggested.

It seems doubtful they'd pay all the fees to secure the franchise, but then bail on running the actual franchise.

It's my understanding they couldn't afford to pay what they bid and so defaulted and folded.

Edit: according to the companies wiki, that's exactly what they did.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Express_East_Coast

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony (or one of the many ironies) is that once the government privatise East Coast, the bid will probably be won by one of the European majority state-owned transport giants, like Arriva (owned by Deutsche Bahn, itself 100% Federal Republic of Germany owned.)

So British tax-payers will be paying a private entity, that is itself owned by a foreign government to run our railways, "profits" are skimmed, bonuses taken by the executive team, and any losses handed back to the British taxpayer to sort out.

It shouldn't surprise anyone, it's the standard neoliberal MO. The only surprising thing is that they still manage to get away with this crap when it has been so widely exposed, discredited and rejected by the majority of the electorate.

The political class just don't seem to be able make the connection between the blind pursuit of a failed ideology, and the breakdown of trust in government itself. It really isn't that difficult to join the dots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   211 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.