Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
fru-gal

Exclusive: Government to renationalise East Coast rail after string of failures

Recommended Posts

42 minutes ago, PopGun said:

Don't worry. The government will whip it back into shape only to sell the franchise off to someone else to ruin it again.

I think even the tories have noticed that public/private isn't working out so well, and that their voters aren't that happy with it either.

Heh - here's my 'featured' comment from the Grauniad from several months back:
 

Quote

For the tories, the free market has become such an ideological nirvana that they keep throwing money at it to make it work. Whatever your politics, that's both amazing and stupid (and, in fairness, many grassroots tories afaict are just as appalled).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

I think even the tories have noticed that public/private isn't working out so well, and that their voters aren't that happy with it either.

Heh - here's my 'featured' comment from the Grauniad from several months back:
 

 

From BBC News website: "The aim was to use a period of state control to establish a new public-private partnership from 2020, he (Grayling) said."

ie - PPP didn't work so we'll take it back, run it for a bit, then start a whole new PPP that won't work either.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, RentingForever said:

From BBC News website: "The aim was to use a period of state control to establish a new public-private partnership from 2020, he (Grayling) said."

ie - PPP didn't work so we'll take it back, run it for a bit, then start a whole new PPP that won't work either.

Call the cavalry - we need more faces and palms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RentingForever said:

From BBC News website: "The aim was to use a period of state control to establish a new public-private partnership from 2020, he (Grayling) said."

ie - PPP didn't work so we'll take it back, run it for a bit, then start a whole new PPP that won't work either.

 

I think he means, get it back into profit so that his friends at Virgin can get the franchise again once in profit from 2020, so basically socialise any losses and privatise any gains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

I think even the tories have noticed that public/private isn't working out so well, and that their voters aren't that happy with it either.

Heh - here's my 'featured' comment from the Grauniad from several months back:
 

 

Socialism doesn’t work, unless it’s of the corporate type.

Nice comment btw. Mine never feature due to my anti blairite tendencies 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having taken a franchise away from South West Trains and given it to South Western, using the same trains with a different livery and the same staff wearing a different uniform didn't quite get the improvement as they envisaged....I suppose its time for the government to give something else a go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, PopGun said:

Socialism doesn’t work, unless it’s of the corporate type.

Nice comment btw. Mine never feature due to my anti blairite tendencies 

Full-blown socialism? Probably not, but then neither does full-blown capitalism. Ironically (possibly - or at least it must be ironic for one of them), it turns out that capitalism and socialism both work best when they're competing with each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

Full-blown socialism? Probably not, but then neither does full-blown capitalism. Ironically (possibly - or at least it must be ironic for one of them), it turns out that capitalism and socialism both work best when they're competing with each other.

I was being churlish towards the Daily Mail element, i.e. those who use corporate socialism as an example of capitalism when it really isn't, yet deride socialism...Those who defend the privatisation of utilities but fail to understand that their taxes still underwrite liabilities (i.e crown protection of pension funds). Me thinks they fail to understand either.

I'm not sure what full blown socialism is tbh outside the myth production factory. I think most on this site can agree the best of both worlds is preferable, rather than the worst which seems inflicted on us currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stagecoach/Virgin have invested far more than the DfT did, in less than half the time too, with customer service scores increasing. Better of two evils I'm afraid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5739723/More-experts-renationalised-East-Coast-fiasco.html

What a ******ing surprise. If the private companies can't make money with the amount they charge, they pass it back to the public sector until they are in profit, then Chris Grayling some Government spiv gives the franchise back to the private sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The franchising system is bonkers really, encouraging companies to cough up ridiculous sums to get the franchise which make it look next to impossible to recoup that cost. It'll continually fail whilst the factor deciding the winner is how unaffordable they're prepared to make their business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

The franchising system is bonkers really, encouraging companies to cough up ridiculous sums to get the franchise which make it look next to impossible to recoup that cost. It'll continually fail whilst the factor deciding the winner is how unaffordable they're prepared to make their business.

Hard to see how it could work. You can't have the benefits of competition when there isn't any competition. Publicly owned is the lesser of two evils in such cases - they only screw the customer by accident; private enterprise will do it as a mission statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, tomandlu said:

Hard to see how it could work. You can't have the benefits of competition when there isn't any competition. Publicly owned is the lesser of two evils in such cases - they only screw the customer by accident; private enterprise will do it as a mission statement.

I suppose you could ask how it worked before nationalisation. The main driver towards nationalisation was, as far as I know, that the rail companies were left teetering after the war rather than from any fundamental problem with the system. But so much else has changed that it may only be of historical interest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

I suppose you could ask how it worked before nationalisation. The main driver towards nationalisation was, as far as I know, that the rail companies were left teetering after the war rather than from any fundamental problem with the system. But so much else has changed that it may only be of historical interest.

Wikipedia's not much help, but the general impression I get is that there were so many factors that a single clear narrative is probably neither valid nor accurate. One pre-war detail of interest is that competition did grow - rail vs. roads - with the rail companies declaring that the environment was unfair, particularly for haulage, since the government subsidised road-building. Must have been a bugger for them - if they competed on price, they'd not have enough money to maintain and invest the infrastructure.

Splitting off into railtrack (infrastructure maint.) and private companies to actually run the services isn't a terrible idea - it's just that unless there are actual competing services on each line, how is the free-market meant to actually do its job?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, tomandlu said:

Wikipedia's not much help, but the general impression I get is that there were so many factors that a single clear narrative is probably neither valid nor accurate. One pre-war detail of interest is that competition did grow - rail vs. roads - with the rail companies declaring that the environment was unfair, particularly for haulage, since the government subsidised road-building. Must have been a bugger for them - if they competed on price, they'd not have enough money to maintain and invest the infrastructure.

A particular pain for the pre-war railway companies was that they were forced to pay rates to the councils where they had stations and other premises. They accepted that this was OK for council-provided services such as refuse collection from their stations, depots, etc., but many councils made it quite clear that a chunk of the cash received from the railways was used by the councils to subsidise bus and tram services, which at the time they ran. And which therefore undercut suburban rail, rendering it a loss-maker....

Edited by Shrink Proof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UK railways prove less profitable than private operators once hoped

Passenger numbers on South Western dropped by 16.3 million in 2017 compared with the year before, adding to the woes faced by FirstGroup. First told investors its plans were based on annual passenger growth of almost 7%. Instead, South Western has seen an unprecedented fall in passenger numbers: 16.3 million fewer people took SWT train journeys in 2017 compared with the year before. Some of that decline was the result of major engineering disruption but the rapid decline in season ticket sales was a surprise.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/may/18/uk-railways-prove-less-profitable-than-private-operators-once-hoped

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the real story is the number of passengers hasn't increased as expected (probably due to a combination of technology to reduce business travel and lack of money for leisure)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, reddog said:

I think the real story is the number of passengers hasn't increased as expected (probably due to a combination of technology to reduce business travel and lack of money for leisure)

I am sure people do the sums before using the train..... taking into account accessibility, convenience, time and reliability, connectivity......the fare structure is far too complicated, people don't like to feel cheated by being overcharged..... sometimes journeys have to be taken at short notice.....not booking a holiday.

Costs associated with trains are cost and time getting to station, cost and available space to park near station if unreliable bus service or no bus service....cost and time to get from the station to destination....and once at destination might want to travel to other destinations nearby......

😉

Not surprised by this......shows what support there is of our train services.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/end-portishead-bristol-metrowest-rail-1580347

Edited by winkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, winkie said:

I am sure people do the sums before using the train..... taking into account accessibility, convenience, time and reliability, connectivity......the fare structure is far too complicated, people don't like to feel cheated by being overcharged..... sometimes journeys have to be taken at short notice.....not booking a holiday.

Costs associated with trains are cost and time getting to station, cost and available space to park near station if unreliable bus service or no bus service....cost and time to get from the station to destination....and once at destination might want to travel to other destinations nearby......

😉

Not surprised by this......shows what support there is of our train services.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/end-portishead-bristol-metrowest-rail-1580347

But remember, when the government says it's spending, it tells us that it's investing in roads, but subsidising railways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shrink Proof said:

But remember, when the government says it's spending, it tells us that it's investing in roads, but subsidising railways.

....do governments have the money to do all the things they make us believe they would like to do but can't......;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 301 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

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.