Why does this current U.K. Government hate rail so much.

[yorksrob]

No we can't all agree on that at all, as mentioned there is the small matter of HS2 that seems to have escaped your attention and whether we like it or not there has been a considerable drop in usage post pandemic. I'm not suggesting everything is perfect but I doubt it would be any better under any other government.

But we were always assured that HS2 came out of a separate budget from the mainline railway !

It’s not as if Sunak was averse to splashing out cash during Covid, and a lot of that was essentially money down the drain.

I fear the thing about railways is more ideological, in particular towards unions.

Yes, there's an ideological element as well.

 

[Carlisle]

The government has been very supportive of rail, until very recently . generally, this is not the 70,s or early 1980,s.
Its unfortunate costs have risen too much, services have been disrupted by strikes and presumably the brakes have to go on, most Civil Servants , simply don’t get the complexities of cutting 10%, of the budget , in and industry with 70/80%fixed costs, but it’s easier to order cuts now most is re-nationalised .
I just about remember 1976, BR were so short of money they shut the Cheltenham-Stratford line to save £10,000 in track repairs.
We are simply not in that position today.

Where’s the Like button

 

[Master29]

No we dont all agree. The present government have pumped £billions into the railways and its not always clear what the taxpayer is getting for that money. There is no love/hate that comes into it, purely politics.

Pumped billions into pfa's consultants fees and various patsy groups and yet has very little to show for it.

 

[chris_in_salop]

Lord alone knows what politicians or senior civil servants dealing with policy across the board and a wide range of organisations make of the railway. I wouldn't blame them if, on the basis of decades of performance, they assumed that every railway staff member was incompetent.

The railway hardly inspires confidence that many spent on it is money well spent.

In the last decade there has been huge once-in-a-generation investment in things like electrification and sorting out the bottleneck of Manchester city centre. And what do we have to show for all this public cash spent?

Of course, it's probably all someone else's fault.

 

[Master29]

The government has been very supportive of rail, until very recently . generally, this is not the 70,s or early 1980,s.
Its unfortunate costs have risen too much, services have been disrupted by strikes and presumably the brakes have to go on, most Civil Servants , simply don’t get the complexities of cutting 10%, of the budget , in and industry with 70/80%fixed costs, but it’s easier to order cuts now most is re-nationalised .
I just about remember 1976, BR were so short of money they shut the Cheltenham-Stratford line to save £10,000 in track repairs.
We are simply not in that position today.

But why even mention the strikes? The government have not been supportive of the railways recently at all. Yes, billions may have been spent but the run down nature of the UK network is a case of sorry neglect lasting for years. You mention that case in 1976 which shows the point. What position are we in would you say?

 

[HSTEd]

The government have not been supportive of the railways recently at all.

Over the last 25 years, the railway has had the largest injection of public money in a very very long time.

Just because the industry has squandered it does not mean that it did not happen.

Yes, billions may have been spent but the run down nature of the UK network is a case of sorry neglect lasting for years.

The fault is on the railway for failing to spend such a bounty in a sensible manner.

 

[Master29]

Over the last 25 years, the railway has had the largest injection of public money in a very very long time.

Just because the industry has squandered it does not mean that it did not happen.

The fault is on the railway for failing to spend such a bounty in a sensible manner.

So as always not our fault but someone else's. The Conservative mantra. I never said it didn't happen but as you rightly point out squandered and remind me who had the final decision for the IEP fiasco? That money wasn't given because the Government wanted to be nice. It had to be spent because it was necessary.

 

[Railsigns]

Over the last 25 years, the railway has had the largest injection of public money in a very very long time.

Just because the industry has squandered it does not mean that it did not happen.

The fault is on the railway for failing to spend such a bounty in a sensible manner.

So it's all the railway's fault, and absolutely nothing to do with the crass fragmented structure imposed on it, or the extraction of profit by private companies. Of course.

Remind me, when the Tory government under Major promised that privatising the railways would reduce their dependence on public subsidy but the subsidy in fact increased threefold, is it because they lied to us or because they were clueless? Either way, it reflects extremely badly on them.

 

[Mikw]

The rail service seems to be like the rest of services, starved.
I remember in the 80's there was a string of accidents, i sincerely hope we're not going back there.

 

[jojoseph72]

No we can't all agree on that at all, as mentioned there is the small matter of HS2 that seems to have escaped your attention and whether we like it or not there has been a considerable drop in usage post pandemic. I'm not suggesting everything is perfect but I doubt it would be any better under any other government.

1) I didn’t ignore HS2, I don’t think is unreasonable to say that this government is working as hard as possible to slow the progress of HS2 down and constantly trimming it.
2) Yes numbers are down, but not down significantly, with number rebounding fast. Last figures I saw showed rail hovering around the 90% mark if not higher compared to pre-pandemic. With in some cases passenger numbers exceeding pre-covid.
Some articles/tweets below talking about the strong U.K. rail passenger number rebound.

Rail passenger numbers on a record post Covid high – averaging over 98% daily in April

www.riagb.org.uk

https://twitter.com/seatsixtyone/status/1658050849665429505?s=46&t=_tw3_-3e3NdGPfMpfI3EEQ

https://twitter.com/philatrail/status/1658064523356504064?s=46&t=_tw3_-3e3NdGPfMpfI3EEQ

What this equates to with revenue is around a 10-20% when compared to pre-pandemic, as shown with the link below.

https://twitter.com/philatrail/status/1658071622224433153?s=46&t=_tw3_-3e3NdGPfMpfI3EEQ

Meaning with revenue down around 20% and numbers down 10% it would make sense to invest in the network to encourage users back whether that be for business or for leisure, rather than trimming it to its bare bones.

Personally if we go down the path of ripping it to its bare bones we will save a few £££ now, but pay through the back teeth in the future when we need to increase services all again.

 

[Clarence Yard]

I’m no defender of the present Government (or many of their predecessors, come to that!) but some of the cost increase has been because of non-railway specific legislative change forced onto the industry. The safety and access policies have had a big effect on the way we now carry out several functions and added to the bottom line cost of running a railway.

Cost increase has also occurred through poor decision making by the DfT. Increased services on the promise of extra revenue that has never materialised. Over reliance on the good times continuing so expenditure gets authorised which never realises it’s intentions - the IEP project is a good example of this.

I could go on, especially with NR and its less than lean ways of doing things but in general the DfT likes to run trains (but at a cheaper cost than now) but the Treasury has a more sceptical view of Rail, backed up by broken promises (by the DfT and their predecessors) over several decades about what benefits will accrue.

Rail is always going to be an expensive mode to fund, whatever the structure, whoever runs it. But it needs political will at both DfT and Treasury to keep the funding taps open. Currently the DfT is trying everything it can to avoid serious reductions and line closures because, otherwise, it will have no other financial option. The Treasury are not giving them free money to cover the funding gap.

 

[Bevan Price]

It is not all the fault of the Governmemt; the Treasury does not like spending money. Anything that requires them to spend money now is "bad". And Governments tend to "obey" treasury requirements. **

As I have commented before, Barbara Castle and the Wilson government cannot take much blame for continuing the Marples-Beeching closures - they had no choice. Partly encouraged by hostile pro-Tory press, a financial crisis developed soon after Wilson's Labour Government was elected in 1964. One consequence was that the international "money industry" required UK to cut public spending - and that included a requirement to continue with rail closures.

** - Not directly related to rail, but I suspect that the Treasury is even now planning how to raise tax on electric road vehicles, in order to replace the large sums currently raised from tax on petrol and diesel fuel.

 

[HSTEd]

So as always not our fault but someone else's. The Conservative mantra.

Half that time was under a Labour Government?

The railway has been fundamentally unable to modernise itself for 25 years, you can't blame all that on the post 2010 Governments.

I never said it didn't happen but as you rightly point out squandered and remind me who had the final decision for the IEP fiasco? That money wasn't given because the Government wanted to be nice. It had to be spent because it was necessary.

The political decisions in the IEP programme are the only reason we have a functioning intercity railway service as it is!

If the government had not insisted on bi mode trains where would be when the Great Western modernisation programme fell to pieces due to NR's fundamental inability to deliver?

50 year old HSTs struggling on whilst hundreds of shiny EMU carriages sit in sidings unable to go anywhere.

 

[Energy]

Hate is a strong word, the DfT got the same budget while other departments had it cut. The cuts recently are due to inflation and the drop in commuting.

Switching to more battery units should help cut costs (Northern in particular...) and looking into why Network Rail costs are higher compared to European operators. At least MML electrification is going well.

 

[43066]

It’s not as if Sunak was averse to splashing out cash during Covid, and a lot of that was essentially money down the drain.

I fear the thing about railways is more ideological, in particular towards unions.

Indeed. It’s purely ideological - the constant hand wringing about how the railway is too expensive is laughable when you look at how much has been squandered in other areas.

A sensible and pragmatic government would have settled the disputes, rolled back interference, and perhaps allowed a modest real terms increase in budgets to help attract people back.

But instead we have Grant Shapps last openly lying, telling us passenger numbers are 40% down.

The railway hates the government more so it all balances out haha.

That’s certainly true. It’s difficult to find anyone of any political persuasion who doesn’t think the government are doing a terrible job on all fronts.

The fault is on the railway for failing to spend such a bounty in a sensible manner.

That’s funny, it’s only a few months ago you were in favour of the government spending goodness knows what rolling out DOO over the entire network to “break the unions”.

A great demonstration of ideological zeal dressed up as concern over finances.

 

[railfan99]

Having had close dealings with many politicians over the years, albeit in a different Western country, it's apparent that few from any party use rail much, many only so doing for a 'one station trip' photo opportunity.

On board a tram in Melbourne a few years back, I had to show a former senior Federal Coalition (conservative) politician how to use touch on a myki smartcard. I wasn't surprised he didn't know, but fortunately had always got on well with him so I managed not to grimace.

Unfortunately, unionists continually going on strike in the UK is like a red rag to a bull to centre-right politicians, even though (in theory) it may "save money" as (in my country) replacing trains with road coaches is cheaper. In the UK on busier lines, due to the volume of passengers, you would find 'replacing rail' a lot harder, if not impossible, with a further problem being insufficient buses and available drivers.

I agree re individualism. Many politicians I've known couldn't understand how I can live in inner Melbourne without a car, and how my family is more materially affluent for instead using mass transit.

The problem for your Conservative Party is a significant portion of many communities use rail for leisure, and many (though fewer than pre-COVID) for work trips. Cuts/cancellations are not electorally ideal.

I know some disagree, but in England in September 2022 I though patronage was excellent on many lines, even out to and back from Sheringham of all places. Despite strikes, patronage has further grown since then.

 

[SteveM70]

It really irks me that the government trot out the same tired old lines like “our railways are currently not financially sustainable, and it is unfair to continue asking taxpayers to foot the bill”, whilst every penny they spend on the roads is seen as investment

 

[btdrawer]

My understanding of the problem is something like this:

State spending has expanded a lot in recent years, due to a combination of an ageing population, the Baumol effect, and the triple lock on pensions. We also have less fiscal headroom than we did in the early 2010s due to rising inflation and borrowing costs, plus the Treasury has its own 'fiscal rules' which it insists on sticking to, albeit changing them every now and then. This means there is a desire in government to limit borrowing; how much is warranted by the economic climate and how much is ideology I honestly don't know. But what matters is that this means either spending has to be cut, or taxes have to rise.

It's no secret that this government really doesn't want to raise taxes anymore (the backbenchers would revolt); but they also don't want to cut day-to-day spending on things like health, education, pensions, etc. as people care deeply about this stuff. So capital expenditure is the first place they raid instead, with railways being an obvious target, since most people don't care about the investments being made as the effects are felt far in the future, and besides, only a minority of the public use trains anyway.

And to be clear, targeting capital expenditure in spending cuts isn't a new or exclusively Tory strategy: Alistair Darling did the exact same thing following the Great Recession. Politically it makes sense, but the cost of this short-termism builds up over time, and is probably a factor in explaining why the UK has such poor productivity.

 

[Irascible]

They hate just about everything, to be fair.

No, no, they love filching public money. Has the scheme involving rail run out of sinkholes finally?

 

[HSTEd]

That’s funny, it’s only a few months ago you were in favour of the government spending goodness knows what rolling out DOO over the entire network to “break the unions”.

A great demonstration of ideological zeal dressed up as concern over finances.

I really don't want to get into yet another DOO argument, but the reality is that a one off spend on DOO installation would free the railway from employing large numbers of very expensive staff for the rest of time.

In the long term DOO would save vast sums of money given it would allow substantial reductions in railway headcount (on the order of 'thousands' of staff according to the RMT, at the time of McNulty there were 6,800).

 

[bramling]

One of the big issues for government at the moment is they no longer have the defence budget to raid for cash for the 2 budgets sucking the country dry, NHS and benefits, so everywhere else has to reduce spending because in general the political views of the UK is wanting US levels of tax and European levels of public services... No government can balance that.

This I think is probably quite close to how things are.

Whilst the NHS seems sacred, in terms of welfare it’s a bit more nuanced. Many voters *don’t* want their tax funding excess welfare, however governments run frit because they know this is still likely to be a politically charged issue - not to mention that cutting certain types of welfare would likely cause significant cohesion issues.

So, as you say, a very difficult set of demands to reconcile, especially with the four-year political cycle. Railways simply don’t feature highly in all that.

It’s probably fair to say that we can add to that the current government who seem to see the population as a bunch of plebs who are there to be humoured.

 

[142blue]

Question

Does anyone know what Starner and Labour would bring to the industry

 

[Ken H]

I wish they’d tell us where they’ve spent the record tax burden we are experiencing at the moment, they can’t have spent it all on PPE, parties and speeding fines!

Furlough, underwriting loans to business, track and trace, PCR and LFT testing, Nightingale hospitals with no staff and no patients, vaccinations.

 

[dan5324]

It really irks me that the government trot out the same tired old lines like “our railways are currently not financially sustainable, and it is unfair to continue asking taxpayers to foot the bill”, whilst every penny they spend on the roads is seen as investment

Roads are more accessible to people than the railways, in more ways than one. Plus the roads are way more intensely used.

 

[JamieL]

Question

Does anyone know what Starner and Labour would bring to the industry

The Leeds leg of HS2 would be restored for one. Most importantly it would move away from ideological intransigence and dishonest misrepresentations regarding the rail strikes practised by the current Tory regime.

 

[E27007]

!) the railway is costing the exchequer a lot of money in rising subsidies.
2) the number of issues with railway franchises folding / handing back the keys is an embarrassment to the Govt and Civil Service.
3) NR cannot be trusted to deliver , West Coast and Great Western Electrification projects
4) Conservative voting commuters are rattling the chains of their elected MPs over rising fares and under-performing services,

 

[GardenRail]

Yet if there was an election next week, the Conservatives would get in.

The Leeds leg of HS2 would be restored for one.

Would it though...... Really? I don't remember Labour doing anything revolutionary to the railway industry last time they had chance.

 

[deltic]

Having had close dealings with many politicians over the years, albeit in a different Western country, it's apparent that few from any party use rail much, many only so doing for a 'one station trip' photo opportunity.

The situation in the UK Is very different, many MPs are regular rail users traveling from their constituencies to London on a weekly or daily basis.

 

[JamieL]

Yet if there was an election next week, the Conservatives would get in.

Would it though...... Really? I don't remember Labour doing anything revolutionary to the railway industry last time they had chance.

You are probably right about the Tories winning - the have all the levers and media support to push their case.

Didn't Labour initiate the HS2 project? And the West Coast Modernisation Project.

 

[yorksrob]

Over the last 25 years, the railway has had the largest injection of public money in a very very long time.

Just because the industry has squandered it does not mean that it did not happen.

The fault is on the railway for failing to spend such a bounty in a sensible manner.

Whatever the merits of that spending, it's been accompanied by an unprecedented increase in passenger usage.

The Tory party has squandered a lot of this expenditure on such money-go-round wheezes as rolling stock leasing, so they are primarily to blame for their own policy failures.

My understanding of the problem is something like this:

State spending has expanded a lot in recent years, due to a combination of an ageing population, the Baumol effect, and the triple lock on pensions. We also have less fiscal headroom than we did in the early 2010s due to rising inflation and borrowing costs, plus the Treasury has its own 'fiscal rules' which it insists on sticking to, albeit changing them every now and then. This means there is a desire in government to limit borrowing; how much is warranted by the economic climate and how much is ideology I honestly don't know. But what matters is that this means either spending has to be cut, or taxes have to rise.

It's no secret that this government really doesn't want to raise taxes anymore (the backbenchers would revolt); but they also don't want to cut day-to-day spending on things like health, education, pensions, etc. as people care deeply about this stuff. So capital expenditure is the first place they raid instead, with railways being an obvious target, since most people don't care about the investments being made as the effects are felt far in the future, and besides, only a minority of the public use trains anyway.

And to be clear, targeting capital expenditure in spending cuts isn't a new or exclusively Tory strategy: Alistair Darling did the exact same thing following the Great Recession. Politically it makes sense, but the cost of this short-termism builds up over time, and is probably a factor in explaining why the UK has such poor productivity.

The problem is, it's the revenue expenditure that's being cut on the railway, meaning a deterioration in day to day services.