Should the railways be nationalised?
Poll: Should the railways be nationalised?
Total Members Polled: 471
Discussion
Du1point8 said:
They actually maintain it rather than leave it for 40-50 years and then watch the infrastructure go to s
t.
Plus they think in advance and dont need special trains and track built (we have a difference size track to everyone else), etc. etc.
And most people won't care if the answer is nationalised or privatised so long as that is fixed and they can get cheap rail travel on demand.t.Plus they think in advance and dont need special trains and track built (we have a difference size track to everyone else), etc. etc.
This topic has already been discussed somewhere on PH and I made the point at the time that various EU directives require countries to have open access, another point is non of the passenger companies own anything so a government would have to find huge sums of money just to use the existing rolling stock. Almost everything used in the day to day running of trains is rented, from traincrew accommodation to photocopiers. What about rates of pay, I've been driving trains for 37 years so well remember the days of BR, terms and conditions just for drivers now vary considerably across companies before you even being to look at all the other contracts in place.
Du1point8 said:
They actually maintain it rather than leave it for 40-50 years and then watch the infrastructure go to st.
Plus they think in advance and dont need special trains and track built (we have a difference size track to everyone else), etc. etc.
Agree the first paragraph - think BR!t.Plus they think in advance and dont need special trains and track built (we have a difference size track to everyone else), etc. etc.
Second paragraph certainly isn't true. The Stephensons had a big influence on French railways who also 'drive on the left' and have the same guage - but different rolling stock profile.
Problem
Tickets cost seem high
Trains run late
Always massively overcroded.
Why?
The Govts over 50-70 years invested nothing in the railways - so rather than continuous investment there was nothing except if something broke and couldn't be patched up.
What does that all mean?
Trains run late/break down often - it's not the trains which break down instead it's the points on the track and all track related issues. Why is this a problem it's all down to lack of continuous investment so if it's all shaved now you simply cannot wholesale change the points as the railways would simply be out of action for months to years while the work is carried out - how do people get to work? As such they have to make marginal step changes over a protracted timescale. So this isn't franchise operates fault it is Network rail which is privatised.
Massively overcrowded - our platforms are short so cannot run longer trains to create more capacity
We have a Victorian railway which is essentially in the same state
We cannot go for double decker trains to instantly double capacity as all the bridges are too low and also all the electrification is also too low.
We run different width track than anyone else in the world so we have to have bespoke trains at higher cost.
Take Eurostar as an example of a brand new track (30years old now) fast efficient big capacity only breaks down due to lorry foorss in he tunnel and people smuggling.
So prices will simply not decrease unless you take it out of general taxation and force those who don't use it to subsidise tickets for those that do all for the greater good. Are you who doesn't use it willing to pay say £1k extra tax a year for this benefit?
Tickets cost seem high
Trains run late
Always massively overcroded.
Why?
The Govts over 50-70 years invested nothing in the railways - so rather than continuous investment there was nothing except if something broke and couldn't be patched up.
What does that all mean?
Trains run late/break down often - it's not the trains which break down instead it's the points on the track and all track related issues. Why is this a problem it's all down to lack of continuous investment so if it's all shaved now you simply cannot wholesale change the points as the railways would simply be out of action for months to years while the work is carried out - how do people get to work? As such they have to make marginal step changes over a protracted timescale. So this isn't franchise operates fault it is Network rail which is privatised.
Massively overcrowded - our platforms are short so cannot run longer trains to create more capacity
We have a Victorian railway which is essentially in the same state
We cannot go for double decker trains to instantly double capacity as all the bridges are too low and also all the electrification is also too low.
We run different width track than anyone else in the world so we have to have bespoke trains at higher cost.
Take Eurostar as an example of a brand new track (30years old now) fast efficient big capacity only breaks down due to lorry foorss in he tunnel and people smuggling.
So prices will simply not decrease unless you take it out of general taxation and force those who don't use it to subsidise tickets for those that do all for the greater good. Are you who doesn't use it willing to pay say £1k extra tax a year for this benefit?
Welshbeef said:
Take Eurostar as an example of a brand new track (30years old now) fast efficient big capacity only breaks down due to lorry foorss in he tunnel and people smuggling.
OT, but in my experience that is so far off the mark as to be hilarious. I think it's broken down about 70% of the time I've been on it.Worst seats ever designed as well.
PRTVR said:
I think they should be nationalised, but using the German system, that is that the company is ran to private rules but is government owned, I do not think they would work without subsidies.
State capitalism isn't the same as nationalising. If we wanted to adopt the German model, the State would need to buy an existing franchise or bid for one using a new company and have it run independent of Government influence in a private market (just with shares owned by the State). I like Germany's set-up, but nationalised it ain't.
Welshbeef said:
Problem
Tickets cost seem high
Trains run late
Always massively overcroded.
Why?
The Govts over 50-70 years invested nothing in the railways - so rather than continuous investment there was nothing except if something broke and couldn't be patched up.
What does that all mean?
Trains run late/break down often - it's not the trains which break down instead it's the points on the track and all track related issues. Why is this a problem it's all down to lack of continuous investment so if it's all shaved now you simply cannot wholesale change the points as the railways would simply be out of action for months to years while the work is carried out - how do people get to work? As such they have to make marginal step changes over a protracted timescale. So this isn't franchise operates fault it is Network rail which is privatised.
Massively overcrowded - our platforms are short so cannot run longer trains to create more capacity
We have a Victorian railway which is essentially in the same state
We cannot go for double decker trains to instantly double capacity as all the bridges are too low and also all the electrification is also too low.
We run different width track than anyone else in the world so we have to have bespoke trains at higher cost.
Take Eurostar as an example of a brand new track (30years old now) fast efficient big capacity only breaks down due to lorry foorss in he tunnel and people smuggling.
So prices will simply not decrease unless you take it out of general taxation and force those who don't use it to subsidise tickets for those that do all for the greater good. Are you who doesn't use it willing to pay say £1k extra tax a year for this benefit?
Bit in bold Tickets cost seem high
Trains run late
Always massively overcroded.
Why?
The Govts over 50-70 years invested nothing in the railways - so rather than continuous investment there was nothing except if something broke and couldn't be patched up.
What does that all mean?
Trains run late/break down often - it's not the trains which break down instead it's the points on the track and all track related issues. Why is this a problem it's all down to lack of continuous investment so if it's all shaved now you simply cannot wholesale change the points as the railways would simply be out of action for months to years while the work is carried out - how do people get to work? As such they have to make marginal step changes over a protracted timescale. So this isn't franchise operates fault it is Network rail which is privatised.
Massively overcrowded - our platforms are short so cannot run longer trains to create more capacity
We have a Victorian railway which is essentially in the same state
We cannot go for double decker trains to instantly double capacity as all the bridges are too low and also all the electrification is also too low.
We run different width track than anyone else in the world so we have to have bespoke trains at higher cost.
Take Eurostar as an example of a brand new track (30years old now) fast efficient big capacity only breaks down due to lorry foorss in he tunnel and people smuggling.
So prices will simply not decrease unless you take it out of general taxation and force those who don't use it to subsidise tickets for those that do all for the greater good. Are you who doesn't use it willing to pay say £1k extra tax a year for this benefit?
https://youtu.be/CXv-wy1oft8
If you have sime time, watch railwatch from 1989.
Why would you want to go back to that??
If you have sime time, watch railwatch from 1989.
Why would you want to go back to that??
The UK has experience of ineffective organisation and management under both public and private ownership. Neither has to be a model for the future.
Starting from a position of political doctrine seems a bit odd. Can any normal same person really be emotionally invested in the collective ownership of the rail system? One would hope pragmatism would be the first concern.
We have to accept that market forces are never going to be particularly effective within a public transport system. E.g. there is never going to be timely competition between several firms for my train fare between Shrewsbury and Euston. Over the short term companies will hold monopoly positions in bits of the system. Regardless of whether it is held by the state or in the private sector, the monopoly position is unavoidable. Therefore we will always be stuck with heavy state intervention in the railway.
I'd have thought incremental improvement is the way forward. Not very exciting, but far less risky and disruptive than unleashing some dogmatic revolution.
Starting from a position of political doctrine seems a bit odd. Can any normal same person really be emotionally invested in the collective ownership of the rail system? One would hope pragmatism would be the first concern.
We have to accept that market forces are never going to be particularly effective within a public transport system. E.g. there is never going to be timely competition between several firms for my train fare between Shrewsbury and Euston. Over the short term companies will hold monopoly positions in bits of the system. Regardless of whether it is held by the state or in the private sector, the monopoly position is unavoidable. Therefore we will always be stuck with heavy state intervention in the railway.
I'd have thought incremental improvement is the way forward. Not very exciting, but far less risky and disruptive than unleashing some dogmatic revolution.
I'll look forward to the railways striking like the tube workers during the holidays...
Are things really that bad on the railways? I don't use trains very often, but from my experience I thought the cost was reasonable & the service was fine. For £41 I thought it was more cost effective to get the train from Newcastle to Leeds for the weekend instead of taking the car and paying for petrol & parking.
Are things really that bad on the railways? I don't use trains very often, but from my experience I thought the cost was reasonable & the service was fine. For £41 I thought it was more cost effective to get the train from Newcastle to Leeds for the weekend instead of taking the car and paying for petrol & parking.
Gogoplata said:
I'll look forward to the railways striking like the tube workers during the holidays...
Are things really that bad on the railways? I don't use trains very often, but from my experience I thought the cost was reasonable & the service was fine. For £41 I thought it was more cost effective to get the train from Newcastle to Leeds for the weekend instead of taking the car and paying for petrol & parking.
costs me roughly £85-90 return Hull/Kings Cross.Are things really that bad on the railways? I don't use trains very often, but from my experience I thought the cost was reasonable & the service was fine. For £41 I thought it was more cost effective to get the train from Newcastle to Leeds for the weekend instead of taking the car and paying for petrol & parking.
Similar trip in Finland costs me €60 return (Helsinki/Tampere)
One way, overnight sleeper from Tampere to Rovaniemi (10 hours overnight with car and having a sleeper cabin) €49
It does seem expensive to me and not a reasonable price.
Edited by Du1point8 on Sunday 20th September 15:33
Gogoplata said:
I'll look forward to the railways striking like the tube workers during the holidays...
Are things really that bad on the railways? I don't use trains very often, but from my experience I thought the cost was reasonable & the service was fine. For £41 I thought it was more cost effective to get the train from Newcastle to Leeds for the weekend instead of taking the car and paying for petrol & parking.
Reading to Paddington 45ish milesAre things really that bad on the railways? I don't use trains very often, but from my experience I thought the cost was reasonable & the service was fine. For £41 I thought it was more cost effective to get the train from Newcastle to Leeds for the weekend instead of taking the car and paying for petrol & parking.
In Rush hour £50.90 return
Off peak it's I think £28 each.
Kind of makes a family outing to the natural history museum (free) very expensive plus parking the car at the station/taxi down.
I feel in principle all infrastructure should be nationalised.
Regardless of any EU directive on allowing outside bids/owndership for things etc.
The fact historically they have been run badly is a separate issue.
The principle should always be that its owned by the country , for the benefit of its users.
The hard part is getting the then public sector workers to do it to a standard without unions wanting strikes every 2 mins, and not having so many layers of management that the costs are so high that people consider privatising it to try and provide a cheaper better service.
I accept that the currently private services still have many of these issues. But some of that may be a legacy of the previous nationalised system.
Ultimately the same old storey, so highly unlikely. And so frustrating from an outside perspective.
If the service was done to a standard and considered value for money then i dont feel anyone would even care about this topic.
On occasion we consider using the rail service to go to neighbouring towns, but as a family of 4 even with a friends and family railcard its cheaper to drive and pay for parking.
Looked at taking the rail for my wife and i to go to Edinburgh from Bradford area. Again the cost was such id rather pay £30 of diesel, and £50 in parking and use the savings towards a meal out.
That sums it up for me.
Regardless of any EU directive on allowing outside bids/owndership for things etc.
The fact historically they have been run badly is a separate issue.
The principle should always be that its owned by the country , for the benefit of its users.
The hard part is getting the then public sector workers to do it to a standard without unions wanting strikes every 2 mins, and not having so many layers of management that the costs are so high that people consider privatising it to try and provide a cheaper better service.
I accept that the currently private services still have many of these issues. But some of that may be a legacy of the previous nationalised system.
Ultimately the same old storey, so highly unlikely. And so frustrating from an outside perspective.
If the service was done to a standard and considered value for money then i dont feel anyone would even care about this topic.
On occasion we consider using the rail service to go to neighbouring towns, but as a family of 4 even with a friends and family railcard its cheaper to drive and pay for parking.
Looked at taking the rail for my wife and i to go to Edinburgh from Bradford area. Again the cost was such id rather pay £30 of diesel, and £50 in parking and use the savings towards a meal out.
That sums it up for me.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff