"Britain wants to return Nationalization" claims Sky

[Bittern]

From Sky News.

Thoughts?

 

[asylumxl]

Pretty obvious stuff isn't it.

 

[adamp]

Im fine with that. Ha..

 

[TEW]

I'd be in the 23%.

 

[Fincra5]

I like the idea as long as it is properly run. It needs to be run not for profit but for a good service for users. Remember why it was privitized in the first place, the governement messed up with the money.

I don't think RMT needs to put forward the idea of renationalisation for London Underground as they seem to have been doing fine ever since.

 

[Daniel]

I don't think RMT needs to put forward the idea of renationalisation for London Underground as they seem to have been doing fine ever since.

Well actually London Underground itself is nationalised... it's a publicly run company AFAIK..

On National Rail, the track is maintained by the public company, (network rail), and the services are run by private companies, (the franchises).

On the underground, the track is maintained by the private companies, (tube lines and metronet), and the services are run by the public company, (London Underground).

So if you consider that Metronet was a privatised company... well, that didn't go to well... and let's see what happens with Tube Lines, (if they complete ATO at all...)

 

[monkey]

...then nationalise sky then! the less influence murdoch has the better...

 

[Lampshade]

I'm sitting on the fence, the railways are too profit focussed and run mostly by the 1980s bus barons, we're also customers as opposed to passengers now, just another +1 on their records. There also seems to have been more innovation under British Rail, projects such as the APT etc; things like that won't happen now because it's all run by accountants.

However, I can't really remember before privatisation so I don't really know what to compare it with, I can actually see the current government making a complete balls up of it so much that we'd literally be begging for privatisation again.

 

[Old Timer]

It is unlikely that Railways will ever be Nationalised in the old BR format simply because there is insufficient public money to operate and maintain a working Railway.

The whole logic behind Privatisation was to attract private money into the Railway system so that much needed investment could be financed outside of the public purse.

It is beyond doubt that there could never have been the same amount of money made available to the Industry in the last 15 years by using money from the Treasury.

Governments of all colours have had to be parsimoneous with public money because of the many and varied demands for what is in effect a limited amount of taxation revenue.

The last 12 years have seen enormous amounts spent on public infrastructure in health and education, the largest amount and number of Privatisations ever, whilst at the same time funded by the horrible PFI/PPF arrangements that benefit only the bankers and service Companies who now own pretty much all of our public utilities and buildings.

Even the training of our armed forces is due to be put out for Privatisation shortly in yet another doomed attempt to bring money into the Treasury.

Another thing to be considered is that salaries within the Industry have risen incredibly and in many cases (Network Rail excluded) terms and conditions of employment are far better than ever they would have been had the Railway remained under Nationalisation.

I suspect that the future will bring a much larger degree of vertical integration, which is what the Industry now so desperately needs if it is to become truly successful. The current scenario has failed despite what the Government would like us to believe, and they now see Railways as simply yet another way to claw in money, hence the expected demise of the ECML as predicted by many of us when GNER decided to bail out.

 

[williamn]

It is unlikely that Railways will ever be Nationalised in the old BR format simply because there is insufficient public money to operate and maintain a working Railway.

But we're now spending more public money on the railways than when they were nationalised!

 

[SouthEastern-465]

If the Railways are nationalised again I wonder if "Network SouthEast" will make a comeback or if "Interciry" will return.

Also I am wondering will it be called British Rail again?

 

[gordonthemoron]

the easiest way to nationalise the TOC's would be to keep them public once their franchise expires. However that still leaves the Leasing Companies which is a different kettle of fish entirely

 

[Snapper]

But we're now spending more public money on the railways than when they were nationalised!

But you're not comparing like with like.

As for this survey. I notice nothing is mentioned as to exactly what question was asked of these 1000 people, or how it was worded.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

the easiest way to nationalise the TOC's would be to keep them public once their franchise expires. However that still leaves the Leasing Companies which is a different kettle of fish entirely

You're forgetting the FOCs, which were sold outright, as were many other bits of the industry.

Old Timer is right. The rail industry will never be renationalised. There's no political party which is likely to get elected that will even consider the idea.

 

[mumrar]

There also seems to have been more innovation under British Rail, projects such as the APT etc; things like that won't happen now because it's all run by accountants.

So, out of all of there innovative projects. What actually came to fruition and therefore was not a huge waste of money. I'm struggling beyond mk3s and the HST. They threw money up the wall at gas turbine and tilt research which never saw the light of day, with top speeds projected in excess of what HMRI allows, so were they also reckless towards the safety of this technology? The british rail projects spanned a period of nearly 50 years and covered the transition from steam to diesel and electric, so of course it looks more innovative that the 15 years of privatisation.

 

[daccer]

It seems a strange time to talk about renationalising when all the performance indicators are on an upward curve! Whenever you bring major upheaval to an industry it takes years for it to bed down - the pain of the early years of privatisation has largely passed and the focus now is more on detail than systematic issues. To throw away all that has been learnt for what is a political act seems a little short sighted. The system needs refinement of course and it needs a unifying figure as it is too fragmented but this can be fixed. isnt it a little strange that customer satisfaction rates are around 80% which is nearly the same % who want to scrap the system - democracy in action!

 

[Snapper]

Indeed. That 'innovation' presumably includes all the money wasted on loco classes like the Claytons and the Class 14s which disappeared in the blink of an eye - and all those wonderful marshalling yards and freight concentration depots which lasted not much longer...

 

[yorksrob]

But you're not comparing like with like.

As for this survey. I notice nothing is mentioned as to exactly what question was asked of these 1000 people, or how it was worded.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


You're forgetting the FOCs, which were sold outright, as were many other bits of the industry.

Old Timer is right. The rail industry will never be renationalised. There's no political party which is likely to get elected that will even consider the idea.

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the comment about not comparing like with like.

The bottom line is that privatisation's primary purpose was to reduce the amount of public subsidy to the railway and in this it has consistently failed.

That said I think current economic orthodoxy states that the economic health of a country is partially determined by the proportion of economic activity in the private and public sectors, i.e. public sector bad, private sector good so it has been seen as better to spend more money on "private" companies which are off the governments books, than less on a nationalised service, so this may not change for a while.

Whether privatisation was a good idea in 1994 is of course a different question to whether nationalisation is a good idea today. I have no doubt that the former was a mistake but with regard to the latter it may be a case of the less upheaval the better.

 

[LondonLarry]

I'm not surprised the RMT survey says that most people want the railways renationalised. I'd be curious to find out who these people actually are! Seeing as the RMT are pro-renationalisation anyway, the results aren't a surprise.

 

[Greenback]

Strangely enough, you rarely hear of an organisation commissioning a survey that doesn't get the results that they would like

 

[mrcheek]

Sir Humphrey Appleby explains how you set up an opinion poll:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yhN1IDLQjo

 

[90019]

Sir Humphrey Appleby explains how you set up an opinion poll:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yhN1IDLQjo

That was exactly what I thought of when I red Greenback's post

 

[Greenback]

I wasn't a big fan of the programme, but I've watched the scene and it's spot on!

 

[ivanhoe]

I would argue that re-organisation rather than nationalisation is what is required.Fewer TOC'S , standardised liveries, standardised terms and conditions for rail workers, would in my opinion lead to a better railway for the UK taxpayer. I travelled from Loughborough to Liverpool last Saturday. Leg Loughborough to Leicester EMT, leg Leicester to Nununeaton Cross Country, Leg Nuneaton to Liverpool London Midland (changed at Stafford). God knows how the revenue from my saver ticket was apportioned but there must be people employed to deal with such things. What a waste, in my opinion.

I have respect for all rail staff who make the current system work, but it is not the way any sane person would advocate!

 

[ian959]

The reason why RMT wants re-nationalisation is fairly obvious but the fact that they continue to live in the past is a sign of why they, like all unions, are slowly becoming more irrelevant.

Privatisation has its problems but re-nationalisation is not an answer. How the government handles the franchise system needs to change for sure.

 

[David]

The problem with the system currently is that there is far too many franchises, and that in turn has created a horrendous system that is far too complicated.

1. Southern. Basically all of 3rd rail land.

2. Scotrail. As it is now.

3. Eastern Region. ECML, MML, and Anglian services, plus all East Midlands, Yorkshire and North East local services. (Hull Trains and Grand Central to be merged as well.)

4. North West. WCML, Chiltern, London Midland, plus all West Midlands and North West local services (North Wales Coast and WSMR to be included as well.)

5. Great Western. FGW as it is now, plus South Wales (Valleys, HoW and Marches to be included)

6. Cross Country and TPE. To be run by the 5 main franchises on a shared basis, with the addition of the Norwich - Liverpool service.

In my opinion, this would provide better service integration, and a far easier ticketing system, which in turn would lead to higher passenger numbers, and huge cost savings, as less admin staff would be need to sort out the mess that the ticketing system is currently.

Discuss ....

 

[generalvegitable]

The problem with the system currently is that there is far too many franchises, and that in turn has created a horrendous system that is far too complicated.

1. Southern. Basically all of 3rd rail land.

2. Scotrail. As it is now.

3. Eastern Region. ECML, MML, and Anglian services, plus all East Midlands, Yorkshire and North East local services. (Hull Trains and Grand Central to be merged as well.)

4. North West. WCML, Chiltern, London Midland, plus all West Midlands and North West local services (North Wales Coast and WSMR to be included as well.)

5. Great Western. FGW as it is now, plus South Wales (Valleys, HoW and Marches to be included)

6. Cross Country and TPE. To be run by the 5 main franchises on a shared basis, with the addition of the Norwich - Liverpool service.

In my opinion, this would provide better service integration, and a far easier ticketing system, which in turn would lead to higher passenger numbers, and huge cost savings, as less admin staff would be need to sort out the mess that the ticketing system is currently.

Discuss ....

that would only work as long if the franchises were at least 20 years long

 

[Lampshade]

What you essentially described there for southern is...

Network SouthEast

 

[87015]

that would only work as long if the franchises were at least 20 years long

Its also basically the same regions that BR operated as pre-sectorisation...

 

[Royston Vasey]

Integrating open access operators into a nationalised system would defeat the object of being open access, and as such would be against European law. Open access would continue (and quite possibly flourish) outside any nationalised railway.

One other point, what is the point in the same franchise running commuter services into Liverpool Street and Kings Cross as well as the Edinburgh/Leeds to Kings Cross intercity services? Totally different trains, needs, services, passengers and expectations.

Lots of your proposed franchises make no sense, for all sorts of reasons. Geography is one of a number of reasons for putting different services together but not necessarily one of the best.

 

[David]

One other point, what is the point in the same franchise running commuter services into Liverpool Street and Kings Cross as well as the Edinburgh/Leeds to Kings Cross intercity services? Totally different trains, needs, services, passengers and expectations.

What's the point of the current Great Western franchise then?

They run commuter and local service at various points on their network (Oxford/Newbury/Reading - Paddington, local services around Bristol and Plymouth for example) as well as long distance intercity services (Paddington - Bristol/South Wales/Plymouth).

The same could be said for EMT. Local and commuter services around Derby, Nottingham and Leicester, and a intercity service from St Pancras to Nottingham and Sheffield.