Cameron wants to privatise roads (again)
Discussion
I own a house in Germany so I drive there a lot. They have roads to die for. They seem to resurface them when I think they don't really need to. When a particular road comes to the top of the list it seems to get resurfaced. That way none get so bad that it takes forever to do it. I'm sure there roads are not run privately
Why don't we ask the Germans to help us with our roads because we don't seem to have any bloody idea!
Why don't we ask the Germans to help us with our roads because we don't seem to have any bloody idea!
pistonpie said:
our road system is terrible, yes - does anyone know how roads are funded in countries such as France or Germany, where the roads are of a high standard? if they're funded this way, then I can see it being a good idea...but if not, then this will be a disaster..
It was mentioned on the news this morning that we are at odds with most of the developed world by having a 100% state owned road network (bar the M6 toll).wikipedia said:
The status of motorways in France has been subject of debate through years, from their construction until recently. Originally, the Autoroutes were built by private companies mandated by the French government, and followed strict construction rules as described below. They are operated and maintained by mixed companies held in part by private interests and in part by the state. Those companies hold concessions, which means that Autoroutes belong to the French state and their administration to semi-private companies.
Can someone give me an example of a large essential service that is actually managed better at the same or lower cost by the private sector than the public sector?
I mean things like Rail, Road, Water, Electricity, Gas, Rubbish collection, etc.
I don't like the public sector but I also don't see that privatisation has been a success in any of the above essential services?
I mean things like Rail, Road, Water, Electricity, Gas, Rubbish collection, etc.
I don't like the public sector but I also don't see that privatisation has been a success in any of the above essential services?
Road User Charging is being taken seriously by governemnt and introducing toll roads is a mechanisim to get there. Treasury is already doing some serious thinking about how the Road Fuel Tax take is going to reduce over time and that income stream needs to be replaced.
As some have already said, it is already private companies tdoing the major engineering work on the road network, contracted to the Highways aganecy in the case of trunk roads and local councils in the case of local roads. Giving them long term contracts to maintain roads (that they have built or imporved) does give some long-term bugetary certainty, allowing for longer term policy decisions to be made. I worry that government might see this as a way of shifing financial risk onto a contractor, but they often don't recognise that even if the financial risk can be moved, the project risk often remains with the customer.
On tolls, they need to be dynamic. Traffic flow around Birmingham could be substantially sorted with dynamic tolls, so that when the old M6 is coming to a standstill, the toll road becomes virtually free. Prices can then revert to 'extortionate' when traffic is flowing freely on both roads. This model, of course, cannot apply to the Dartford Crossing, because there is no alternative - and charging in this case is pointless as it can have no effect whatsoever on congestion (OK, some modellers will point to a slight effect of people priced off the road, but that is not an ideal outcome either).
As some have already said, it is already private companies tdoing the major engineering work on the road network, contracted to the Highways aganecy in the case of trunk roads and local councils in the case of local roads. Giving them long term contracts to maintain roads (that they have built or imporved) does give some long-term bugetary certainty, allowing for longer term policy decisions to be made. I worry that government might see this as a way of shifing financial risk onto a contractor, but they often don't recognise that even if the financial risk can be moved, the project risk often remains with the customer.
On tolls, they need to be dynamic. Traffic flow around Birmingham could be substantially sorted with dynamic tolls, so that when the old M6 is coming to a standstill, the toll road becomes virtually free. Prices can then revert to 'extortionate' when traffic is flowing freely on both roads. This model, of course, cannot apply to the Dartford Crossing, because there is no alternative - and charging in this case is pointless as it can have no effect whatsoever on congestion (OK, some modellers will point to a slight effect of people priced off the road, but that is not an ideal outcome either).
Donkey62 said:
I'm all for privatised motorways if it removes the idiotic local council level of civil servants from most of decisions because that is where taxes are wasted at not just for roads but everything.
If they privatised roads someone ultimately would be accountable for failings in saftey, running, location of routes, upkeep and staff to operate it unlike currently method of passing the buck to another civil department until its lost in the system.
Where in the UK do local authorities have control of motorways? If they privatised roads someone ultimately would be accountable for failings in saftey, running, location of routes, upkeep and staff to operate it unlike currently method of passing the buck to another civil department until its lost in the system.
As for your comments about privatisation, you clearly haven't been paying attention to the train wreck that is our current railway system. Privatisation = even more parties with their nose in the swill to pass the buck between
Anyway, finding money for road repairs - fine. We don't need new roads in this country, we need to educate people in proper lane discipline to efficiently use the road network we already have. As far as major arterial routes that suffer gridlock, both gubbermint and business should be working in partnership at looking at alternatives to the daily cattle market (e.g. tax incentives for working at home, out of town/regeneration area office developments and car sharing).
jazzyjeff said:
We don't need new roads in this country, we need to educate people in proper lane discipline to efficiently use the road network we already have. As far as major arterial routes that suffer gridlock, both gubbermint and business should be working in partnership at looking at alternatives to the daily cattle market (e.g. tax incentives for working at home, out of town/regeneration area office developments and car sharing).
Nail: Head: Well and truly hit!Some economists will produce the necessary manipulated modelling to demonstrate that this scheme surpasses cost-benefit analysis. Thereafter to be handsomely rewarded with a prestigious Chair somewhere, a guaranteed research income, plus a lump sum into an offshore account. The remainder will exhibit quantitative evidence to denounce the proposed scheme.
ploz said:
On tolls, they need to be dynamic. Traffic flow around Birmingham could be substantially sorted with dynamic tolls, so that when the old M6 is coming to a standstill, the toll road becomes virtually free. Prices can then revert to 'extortionate' when traffic is flowing freely on both roads.
Where would the incentive be for someone to build a toll road if they could only charge when the traffic was flowing freely on the state owned road?ploz said:
This model, of course, cannot apply to the Dartford Crossing, because there is no alternative - and charging in this case is pointless as it can have no effect whatsoever on congestion (OK, some modellers will point to a slight effect of people priced off the road, but that is not an ideal outcome either).
They should just open the gates when it's really busy and let people through for free.Morningside said:
I bet it will only be England that gets this 
You say that like its a bad thing, not a guy to bear a grudge but Thatcher tried her "poll tax" on the Scots for a year to see how unpopular that was going to be, you seem to want Scotland to pay for its own stuff in other areas, save "you" a fortune by leaving our roads alone, win win surely? I assume that's what you meant? 
A leading advantage of privatisation is that competition forces private companies to provide a good-value, efficient service.
Where is the competition here? For example, I can hardly see people using the M1 over the M4 because "it's better value". When you only have one main motorway in between points A and B, how can there be any competition? One of the main benefits of privatisation is completely inapplicable in this case.
Where is the competition here? For example, I can hardly see people using the M1 over the M4 because "it's better value". When you only have one main motorway in between points A and B, how can there be any competition? One of the main benefits of privatisation is completely inapplicable in this case.
Puggit said:
Labour talked about things like this, along with road pricing. All quietly dropped because they are such vote losers.
There will be some form of u-turn on this...
There was talk recently of road pricing for trucks !!! aparently so the plague of foriegn lorrys have to pay there way There will be some form of u-turn on this...
voicey said:
ploz said:
On tolls, they need to be dynamic. Traffic flow around Birmingham could be substantially sorted with dynamic tolls, so that when the old M6 is coming to a standstill, the toll road becomes virtually free. Prices can then revert to 'extortionate' when traffic is flowing freely on both roads.
Where would the incentive be for someone to build a toll road if they could only charge when the traffic was flowing freely on the state owned road?voicey said:
ploz said:
This model, of course, cannot apply to the Dartford Crossing, because there is no alternative - and charging in this case is pointless as it can have no effect whatsoever on congestion (OK, some modellers will point to a slight effect of people priced off the road, but that is not an ideal outcome either).
They should just open the gates when it's really busy and let people through for free.There's a very simple solution to this and it's called hypothecation.
The government currently collect £49 billion (I'll say that again in case you missed it ... £49 BILLION) in various car taxes ... VED etc. They spend £9 billion on the roads. What we need is for them to spend on the roads what they collect in cra related taxation.
Oh sorry ... I forgot .... they seem to have already spent it on other stuff. It seems that we can't have roads without holes (or enough roads even) ... because the money has already gone on various government handouts and in paying private companies enormous amounts of cash to build hospitals at ten times the price it would normally cost so that our great grand kids can continue to enjoy still paying for them 35 years down the line.
Rant over.
The government currently collect £49 billion (I'll say that again in case you missed it ... £49 BILLION) in various car taxes ... VED etc. They spend £9 billion on the roads. What we need is for them to spend on the roads what they collect in cra related taxation.
Oh sorry ... I forgot .... they seem to have already spent it on other stuff. It seems that we can't have roads without holes (or enough roads even) ... because the money has already gone on various government handouts and in paying private companies enormous amounts of cash to build hospitals at ten times the price it would normally cost so that our great grand kids can continue to enjoy still paying for them 35 years down the line.
Rant over.
Deranged Granny said:
A leading advantage of privatisation is that competition forces private companies to provide a good-value, efficient service.
Of course it does. Why, one only has to look at the railways and how how the miracle of the private sector has made them so very cheap, clean, comfortable and quick.Nurse! My medication is wearing off!
Alfa numeric said:
voicey said:
ploz said:
On tolls, they need to be dynamic. Traffic flow around Birmingham could be substantially sorted with dynamic tolls, so that when the old M6 is coming to a standstill, the toll road becomes virtually free. Prices can then revert to 'extortionate' when traffic is flowing freely on both roads.
Where would the incentive be for someone to build a toll road if they could only charge when the traffic was flowing freely on the state owned road?voicey said:
ploz said:
This model, of course, cannot apply to the Dartford Crossing, because there is no alternative - and charging in this case is pointless as it can have no effect whatsoever on congestion (OK, some modellers will point to a slight effect of people priced off the road, but that is not an ideal outcome either).
They should just open the gates when it's really busy and let people through for free.As far as the Blackwall tunnel is concerned, there are renewed plans for another 'Lower Thames Crossing' which will be even more tempting for those coming down the M11. However, in terms of congestion, the peaks for Dartford and Blackwall usually (road works excepted) coincide, so it is then just a choice of sitting in traffic in the East End or Essex.
ploz said:
If the political justification for road charging is to manage congestion, then the resultant policy must reflect that. A charging structure that allows the operator to keep putting prices up to maintain income as traffic reduces is doomed to fail on both economic and congestion grounds.
Agreed, but why would a company drop its prices just as demand is increasing? Plus the government would doubtless get a better price for the contract if prices rose along with demand, and I'm sure that a few more miles of queues might be worth a few more million in their eyes.ploz said:
As far as the Blackwall tunnel is concerned, there are renewed plans for another 'Lower Thames Crossing' which will be even more tempting for those coming down the M11. However, in terms of congestion, the peaks for Dartford and Blackwall usually (road works excepted) coincide, so it is then just a choice of sitting in traffic in the East End or Essex.
Agreed, I'm only going by my own experience. I've often (but not always) found it quicker to cut through London.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff