Labour's Plan for Rail

[Lurcheroo]

You only need to look at nationalised TFW that makes Arriva Trains Wales look like a world class rail operator. I have given up on my line and can only hope my line gets integrated into Merseyrail through Battery 777s We've ended up with refurbished D stock not fit for purpose meanwhile South Wales gets its new fancy Metro with its overspends. what next is cuts as people have found alternative ways to travel as their services can't be relied on

To be fair to nationalised TFW. All of the commitments such as the class 230 for the borderlands line and the south wales metro were all agreed by Private TFW. It was only during Covid where the government took back control.
The only additional things that i can think of that nationalised TFW have done is to get more MK4 rolling stock to have more services operated using them and an extra coach in each set. And in my opinion that’s fantastic because they’re the best trains in the fleet.
They also introduced free travel for children when travelling with an Adult.
And in a somewhat smaller success they re-introduced 4 car working on the Cambrian coast. Even if it only ran 10 times this summer, it was deemed a trial and if they can get it back in next year with more consistency (plus I have heard of 5 Platform renovations to be done by NR so more platforms for 4 cars on), it would be a big improvement to the line considering the passenger numbers it sees during summer.

The operation on the borderlands had become a total joke but things are improving. The whole TFW network should be significantly better when all of the plans are in place but it’s certainly tough going in a lot of places including the Heart of Wales line.

It’s also unfair to compare any version of TFW to ATW as ATW was a no growth franchise whilst TFW are making significant changes and have employed hundreds and hundreds of new staff to support it.

 

[800 Driver]

They had the chance in 1997 to stop privatisation.

They nationalised Railtrack

 

[Goldfish62]

Are Labour seriously proposing to bring the rail freight industry "back into public ownership where it belongs" while leaving a free-for-all in the private road freight industry? Renationalising rail freight would give existing customers no choice in which operator to select and no competition in rates and standards of service. It would only be fair if the entire UK road haulage industry were to be privatised and Labour wouldn't want to take that on. It is I believe disingenuous to suggest that all the work of GBRf, DRS, Colas, Freightliner and DB Cargo might be thrown away for the sake of political dogma.

Nationalising freight would surely be a very bad idea which I can't see any advantage in doing. Even Corbyn Labour shied away from that.

As you say, it's the road haulage industry that's the competition.

A compromise could be government directly investing in already state-owned DRS.

 

[800 Driver]

The National Policy Forum gives some major clues. The party is committed in the policy framework to a 'nationalised railway' which would suggest a GBR type organisation. I would argue it doesn't rule out private concessions or GBR itself being able to bid for concessions to run the actual trains.

With regards to the Treasury, yes they will want to maintain cost controls over day to day expenditure, but it's pretty clear where Labour is in power (Wales, London, Manchester) they will divert funding away from roads (well cars) and towards rail and in a bigger way buses.

Keir is going to call today for more powers for local authorities, so I'm sure transport will be one of those powers that is devolvable, which would give the potential for regional mayors to run TPE type rail services.

Rachel Reeves set out plans to change the planning system to promote infrastructure that will boost productivity. If they manage to change planning laws (which I think they will be able to more easily than Tories, Gove's plans are always kiboshed by shire Tories, Labour don't have that issue), then it will make new infrastructure projects more affordable and quicker too deliver. Also Rachel didn't rule out spending on infrastructure (which is different to day to day spending), she basically set out a plan for super charging public private partnerships, which the last Labour Govt used to rebuild much of the country in the late 90s / 00s). If I was a betting man I would say Northern Powerhouse Rail will be a bigger priority than HS2 BHM - Man. Having said that Rachel's review of HS2 and what went wrong, could also be used as a spring board to eventually get it back on track, though they will not commit to that in any way before the election (as the Tories have set it as a trap).

 

[Bantamzen]

Labour have been out of power more than long enough to have developed a comprehensive & detailed strategy on their plans for the railways should they be in power in 2025. What they actually have is "dunno yet mate"...

I sometimes wonder is they actually want to be in power, or are just enjoying the less stressful and demanding role of opposition? Its for reasons like this that I will not assume Labour will win, they seem more than capable of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

 

[Halifaxlad]

Labour's plan is clearly not yet detailed enough to publish, but it's "coming" - possibly in time for their election manifesto, but maybe not even then.

Basically HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail 'in full' as its their favorite phrase!

 

[class26]

Basically HS2 and Northern Powerhouse Rail 'in full' as its their favorite phrase!

Then they are going to have to find a way of stopping Sunak selling off the land

 

[Goldfish62]

Labour have been out of power more than long enough to have developed a comprehensive & detailed strategy on their plans for the railways should they be in power in 2025. What they actually have is "dunno yet mate"...

I sometimes wonder is they actually want to be in power, or are just enjoying the less stressful and demanding role of opposition? Its for reasons like this that I will not assume Labour will win, they seem more than capable of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Oh, I'm sure they do want power now. But I also agree that the outcome of the next election is by no means a certainty.

The problem for railways and transport as a whole is that the Shadow Transport Secretary isn't up to the job.

 

[Bantamzen]

Oh, I'm sure they do want power now. But I also agree that the outcome of the next election is by no means a certainty.

The problem for railways and transport as a whole is that the Shadow Transport Secretary isn't up to the job.

Well they are in good company with their opposite number in the House...

 

[The Ham]

Probably one of the "easy wins" is to get a deal with the unions so that there's no more strikes, as that would bring back more rail passengers (it's no surprise that rail use by business is at 50% if you can't be sure that in 2 months time your trip isn't going to be on a strike day - that's not too say I would expect it back to 100% just because the strikes were off, even 5 or 10 percentage points higher would be a good start).

The other would be room at the lessons from the MML electrification and lean them and apply them to more electrification (i.e. fairly slowly build up your capacity to do it and make sure you've got a good understanding of where everything is).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

What is the current thinking of the Welsh Government on transport matters? Will that be the same as stated in the Labour shadow minister's statement?

The WG pretends all the time it is a sovereign state and complains at every diktat from Westminster, especially the funding.
In some policy areas (railways and NHS) they have discovered there isn't the money to fund what they want, and have ordered cutbacks.
When it come to a battle between trains and hospitals (which are in a dire state), I think we know which will win.
In another area of transport policy, we are still reeling from the imposition of the new 20mph speed limit for urban roads.

At the Labour conference, I see they voted for a union-led motion to nationalise railways and energy.
The shadow minister then said it wouldn't happen for energy.

 

[Magdalia]

Labour have been out of power more than long enough to have developed a comprehensive & detailed strategy on their plans for the railways should they be in power in 2025. What they actually have is "dunno yet mate"...

That's easily explained.

A strategy needs to know the starting point. That has changed so much, and so frequently, since 2019, that any plan quickly becomes outdated. The starting point changed again last week, with the cancellation of the northern part of HS2, and it will probably change again before the next general election.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Then they are going to have to find a way of stopping Sunak selling off the land

How do a party in Opposition do that?

 

[66701GBRF]

A compromise could be government directly investing in already state-owned DRS.

Not really fair on the rest of the FOCs.

 

[physics34]

The Gordon Brown era hid borrowing in PFI type schemes to ensure they met their self imposed borrowing rules, whereas at the moment the country has a horrendous level of borrowing and a horrendous interest bill, so what Labour won't be doing is spending large sums on nationalising anything if they can avoid it.

I always look at London's buses as a clever "political" model, as all the buses and operators are private, but to the public it's just "London buses", just like the London Underground. The London Overground and DLR again have private operators without any controversy.

The railways certainly need 'one mind' at the top rather than the mish mash now, whether privatised, part-privatised or nationalised. We currently dont see any strategy, long term plan, togetherness or value for money for the end user. All under one umbrella should bring that.

 

[Some guy]

Would be good if they stuck to the promises but can never trust a politician. The railways would be way better now if Corbyn was PM he would’ve gone through with his promises. Nationalisation needs to happen there’s too much outsourcing. If you are a member of rail staff you should be under the same 1 company

 

[gg1]

How do a party in Opposition do that?

Sell to the media and general public the idea that it's grossly irresponsible economic vandalism not to preserve the route, with the ultimate aim being to make it a net vote loser for the Tories, especially in their 'red wall' seats.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The Elizabeth Line is operated by MTR as well. I wonder if that might be Labour's preferred option rather than having everything under public control especially with the devolved nations, London and Liverpool. I could see a situation where say Northern and TPE are run as a joint venture between the various places in the North with the more suburban routes in Greater Manchester are run by TfGM.

London Overground is operated by Arriva very successfully as well with high levels of customer satisfaction and service delivery so Labour would be foolish to believe that these arrangements dont work Yes ARL make some profit out of it but the penalties are pretty heinous for non delivery of even basic elements like bins not being emptied as well as service provision. Some people abhor and profit in these arrangements but thats where the incentive comes to manage all the issues. Dont know if TfL see it as value for money but im yet to be convinced that Northern being publically owned now is any better.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Sell to the media and general public the idea that it's grossly irresponsible economic vandalism not to preserve the route, with the ultimate aim being to make it a net vote loser for the Tories, especially in their 'red wall' seats.

Yes, but that is not the same as actually taking measures to prevent the land sale as I originally intimated, as all your suggestion achieves is by the hope of involving third parties to carry out matters. In that case, how will the media and general public, to use your stated examples above, actually prevent the sale. Did you have legal redress in mind?

 

[Mikey C]

Rachel Reeves set out plans to change the planning system to promote infrastructure that will boost productivity. If they manage to change planning laws (which I think they will be able to more easily than Tories, Gove's plans are always kiboshed by shire Tories, Labour don't have that issue), then it will make new infrastructure projects more affordable and quicker too deliver. Also Rachel didn't rule out spending on infrastructure (which is different to day to day spending), she basically set out a plan for super charging public private partnerships, which the last Labour Govt used to rebuild much of the country in the late 90s / 00s). If I was a betting man I would say Northern Powerhouse Rail will be a bigger priority than HS2 BHM - Man. Having said that Rachel's review of HS2 and what went wrong, could also be used as a spring board to eventually get it back on track, though they will not commit to that in any way before the election (as the Tories have set it as a trap).

Like the terrible Tube Lines and Metronet, imposed on London Underground?

 

[gg1]

Yes, but that is not the same as actually taking measures to prevent the land sale as I originally intimated, as all your suggestion achieves is by the hope of involving third parties to carry out matters. In that case, how will the media and general public, to use stated examples, actually prevent the sale. Did you have legal redress in mind?

Yes you're correct, ultimately if the current government are absolutely determined to do it there's nothing (other than any possible legal grounds I'm not aware of) anyone can do to stop it, they have to be persuaded/cajoled. One way of doing this is to turn public opinion against the idea to the point that Sunak's concern for losing additional seats is greater than his desire to sell.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Yes you're correct, ultimately if the current government are absolutely determined to do it there's nothing (other than any possible legal grounds I'm not aware of) anyone can do to stop it, they have to be persuaded/cajoled. One way of doing this is to turn public opinion against the idea to the point that Sunak's concern for losing additional seats is greater than his desire to sell.

It does seem that the thought of losing seats is not a currently a matter of concern to them, with measure taking by them to fight what they see as "the good fight" against perceived political enemies and leaving an oncoming Labour government with extremely difficult problems of all types to solve. It was interesting to note that Labour are well aware of the length of time needed to resolve matters, by their reference to a decade (two terms of Government) to achieve this.

 

[YorkRailFan]

The thing is, is that none of the parties have plans, just look at the Tories, they are actively destroying the railways, Lib Dem says that GBR should be established as a guide path (this is from late September) and mainly goes on about bus services, but that new rail lines should be electrified (like East-West Rail), Labour, as we are discussing here are vague, Reform, Reclaim and others haven't published anything about the railway from what I've seen (if anyone has, please do share), the British Communist Party just outlines the faults but not how they are going to fix it. The issue is, is that railways just aren't a major priority for the major political parties, things like inflation, energy, immigration and what not are bigger priorities, and the average Brit would likely agree with that.

 

[12LDA28C]

Is that strictly true? It stands to reason that driving a 125mph train on a busy mixed traffic route is a different job to trundling up and down a suburban or rural railway at 70mph, and therefore might attract different conditions and pay.

I'm afraid this statement demonstrates a lack of understanding of a driver's job. Working suburban and commuter trains where you might be making 100+ station stops per day and running on restrictive signals much of the time can be much more mentally taxing than driving a few high-speed long distance services on mainly clear signals with very few stops.

 

[Thirteen]

Probably one of the "easy wins" is to get a deal with the unions so that there's no more strikes, as that would bring back more rail passengers (it's no surprise that rail use by business is at 50% if you can't be sure that in 2 months time your trip isn't going to be on a strike day - that's not too say I would expect it back to 100% just because the strikes were off, even 5 or 10 percentage points higher would be a good start).

The other would be room at the lessons from the MML electrification and lean them and apply them to more electrification (i.e. fairly slowly build up your capacity to do it and make sure you've got a good understanding of where everything is).

A deal with the unions should happen within days of a Labour Government getting in.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

A deal with the unions should happen within days of a Labour Government getting in.

I thought that certain executive rail union members were not happy with the current Labour Party leadership, much preferring a Corbyn-style leadership that was nearer to their political beliefs.

 

[Bald Rick]

A deal with the unions should happen within days of a Labour Government getting in

and if it doesn’t?

 

[Bantamzen]

A deal with the unions should happen within days of a Labour Government getting in.

I don't think its going to be that simple, if indeed it would be at the top of an incoming Labour government's priorities which it may not.

 

[Thirteen]

I thought that certain executive rail union members were not happy with the current Labour Party leadership, much preferring a Corbyn-style leadership that was nearer to their political beliefs.

I think that ship has long sailed.

 

[YorkRailFan]

I thought that certain executive rail union members were not happy with the current Labour Party leadership, much preferring a Corbyn-style leadership that was nearer to their political beliefs.

I wouldn't be surprised it that is the case, but the unions likely want a party who is more pro-union than the Tories, and Labour is that party.