Can Sir Keir Starmer revive the Labour Party? (Vol. 2)

[Tom8]

monkfish1 said:

Killer2005 said:

Newsnight running that Labour will be running to nationalise the railways if they win the election.

An easy zero cost thing to do.

The headline belies the reality that it already is, to all intents, nationalised. NOTHING happens without DFT say so. Just wait for the franchises that are still in private hands to run out, then transfer them to the operator of last resort. Which is governmet owned.

You can be sure the actual trains will stay in private hands though.

Zero cost? Really?

I am no fan of privatised rail however I also remember the very dark days of British Rail. Be careful what you wish for.

[Hants PHer]

Tom8 said:

I am no fan of privatised rail however I also remember the very dark days of British Rail. Be careful what you wish for.

Indeed. However, I'm sure that Louise Haigh (Shadow Secretary of State for Transport) would do a marvellous job of running the railways, what with her years of experience in the rail industry (not), and her long history of trade union involvement. Bet Mick Lynch can't wait.

[Tom8]

Hants PHer said:

Tom8 said:

I am no fan of privatised rail however I also remember the very dark days of British Rail. Be careful what you wish for.

Indeed. However, I'm sure that Louise Haigh (Shadow Secretary of State for Transport) would do a marvellous job of running the railways, what with her years of experience in the rail industry (not), and her long history of trade union involvement. Bet Mick Lynch can't wait.

Yes, left wing government running a national institution. What could possibly go wrong?

[Gecko1978]

I think the issue they will face is nationalused or not there is less money in rail ways with WFH now embedded. Iirc we are 80% pre covid and that won't change now. So 20% fall in revenue

[vaud]

Gecko1978 said:

I think the issue they will face is nationalused or not there is less money in rail ways with WFH now embedded. Iirc we are 80% pre covid and that won't change now. So 20% fall in revenue

And in a tight economy companies will restrict expensable business travel, enforce lowest advance ticket price, etc

[shed driver]

Tom8 said:

Yes, left wing government running a national institution. What could possibly go wrong?

As opposed to the private sector running a national institution with a massive subsidy. What could possibly go wrong?

SD.

[Mr Penguin]

shed driver said:

As opposed to the private sector running a national institution with a massive subsidy. What could possibly go wrong?

SD.

We are talking about nationalising the purple slither on this graph. I would hardly call a 2% margin massive unless the subsidy is quite a lot more than 2% and they otherwise run at a loss (which is always borne by taxpayers).

[S600BSB]

Tom8 said:

monkfish1 said:

Killer2005 said:

Newsnight running that Labour will be running to nationalise the railways if they win the election.

An easy zero cost thing to do.

The headline belies the reality that it already is, to all intents, nationalised. NOTHING happens without DFT say so. Just wait for the franchises that are still in private hands to run out, then transfer them to the operator of last resort. Which is governmet owned.

You can be sure the actual trains will stay in private hands though.

Zero cost? Really?

I am no fan of privatised rail however I also remember the very dark days of British Rail. Be careful what you wish for.

Data actually shows that BR was more reliable than the privatised companies. Take that. Hopefully taking the water companies back into public ownership will happen to the same timescale.

[119]

And what percentage of the travelling population use rail?

I bet less than 5%.

Not exactly appealing is it.

[valiant]

S600BSB said:

Data actually shows that BR was more reliable than the privatised companies. Take that. Hopefully taking the water companies back into public ownership will happen to the same timescale.

Indeed. Its fun to mock BR as the bad old days but they did a hell of a lot more with less and knew how to run a railway.

Yep, customer care was an after thought and catering could best be described as 'challenging' but for the actual running of the railway, they did very well with the resources available and during a time when union muscle was a hell of a lot more stronger than it is now.

[Speed 3]

Mr Penguin said:

We are talking about nationalising the purple slither on this graph. I would hardly call a 2% margin massive unless the subsidy is quite a lot more than 2% and they otherwise run at a loss (which is always borne by taxpayers).

That graph and the 20% reduction in volume post covid highlight the existential threat to rail whether nationalised or not. Virtually all of those costs can be considered fixed for a rail network operating a set timetable. Thus the 20% fall in revenue represents a similar rise in government costs/subsidy. There's going to be some tricky decisions to be made on routes, frequency & capacity to get some and not all of those fixed costs down. Don't think it'll be Beeching style but will be an enormous problem for Keir, especially when coupled with Green & Roads policies, let alone the Unions.

[Mr Penguin]

Other countries would send people to see how BR ran the railways because they did so much with so little. However that is no guarantee that a nationalised railway will perform well now, after thirty years of privatisation and technology improvements. In any case, Labour are also not planning to return to that structure and have said that they will have some private involvement.

[JagLover]

valiant said:

S600BSB said:

Data actually shows that BR was more reliable than the privatised companies. Take that. Hopefully taking the water companies back into public ownership will happen to the same timescale.

Indeed. Its fun to mock BR as the bad old days but they did a hell of a lot more with less and knew how to run a railway.

Yep, customer care was an after thought and catering could best be described as 'challenging' but for the actual running of the railway, they did very well with the resources available and during a time when union muscle was a hell of a lot more stronger than it is now.

Passenger numbers grew 128% post privatisation, until the onset of Covid. So if they were more reliable it was at far lower numbers.

[chrispmartha]

119 said:

And what percentage of the travelling population use rail?

I bet less than 5%.

Not exactly appealing is it.

Isn’t the point to make them better so it is appealing.

[philv]

chrispmartha said:

119 said:

And what percentage of the travelling population use rail?

I bet less than 5%.

Not exactly appealing is it.

Isn’t the point to make them better so it is appealing.

It's a train.
Other than making them all like the hogwarts express, how much more appealing can it get?

[Mr Penguin]

Speed 3 said:

That graph and the 20% reduction in volume post covid highlight the existential threat to rail whether nationalised or not. Virtually all of those costs can be considered fixed for a rail network operating a set timetable. Thus the 20% fall in revenue represents a similar rise in government costs/subsidy. There's going to be some tricky decisions to be made on routes, frequency & capacity to get some and not all of those fixed costs down. Don't think it'll be Beeching style but will be an enormous problem for Keir, especially when coupled with Green & Roads policies, let alone the Unions.

If they make cuts to services then they have to look at where the people who use those trains will go. Beeching is unpopular but a lot of what was eventually cut was simply unused (one line had four passengers a week, some smaller routes had two lines when they could have even got away with none). I don't think there is much fat left in terms of lines and the least used stations are unmanned stations on lines that are otherwise in use so there is very little saving to removing them.

[chrispmartha]

philv said:

chrispmartha said:

119 said:

And what percentage of the travelling population use rail?

I bet less than 5%.

Not exactly appealing is it.

Isn’t the point to make them better so it is appealing.

It's a train.
Other than making them all like the hogwarts express, how much more appealing can it get?

To be better value for money and actually run on time - or in some cases run at all.

Have you ever used some of the trains in Europe? Getting the TGV down to Bordeaux was one of the best travel experiences Ive had.

The Hogwarts express would be very unappealing ;-)

[Mr Penguin]

chrispmartha said:

To be better value for money and actually run on time - or in some cases run at all.

Have you ever used some of the trains in Europe? Getting the TGV down to Bordeaux was one of the best travel experiences Ive had.

The Hogwarts express would be very unappealing ;-)

The TGV runs on entirely on booked seats (like a plane), so for one thing if you want to get the train and it happens to be fully booked then you are out of luck. No option for standing. Their local trains do not get much love at all.

German trains are infamously bad.

[Gecko1978]

chrispmartha said:

philv said:

chrispmartha said:

119 said:

And what percentage of the travelling population use rail?

I bet less than 5%.

Not exactly appealing is it.

Isn’t the point to make them better so it is appealing.

It's a train.
Other than making them all like the hogwarts express, how much more appealing can it get?

To be better value for money and actually run on time - or in some cases run at all.

Have you ever used some of the trains in Europe? Getting the TGV down to Bordeaux was one of the best travel experiences Ive had.

The Hogwarts express would be very unappealing ;-)

Most train journeys are like mine 45 mins into city for work. I don't care about wifi or catering or the ambiance of the train. I need it to run on time but really what I want is nit to use it at all. Currently I am 1 day a week in the office suits me fine.

So your wonderful TGV trip to Bordeaux is irrelevant when most trips are commuting.

[768]

philv said:

It's a train.
Other than making them all like the hogwarts express, how much more appealing can it get?

They belong with horses. Put them in a field for niche enthusiasts.