"Abolish the railways!" (The Spectator)

[Howardh]

What we should be looking at is the opposite - how many of the old beeching cut lines can be turned into busways (por even rail again), even if interrupted by buildings they could leave the busway and return. I'm sure there are excellent examples of where that could be done, which would be far more constructive than "ABOLISH THE RAILWAYS!!"

 

[Bantamzen]

Flying is also to some extent subsidised (ridiculously) and there's a lot fewer fixed costs (the air being generally free for example). The railway will always have more fixed costs and if various governments continue to put the cost onto the farepayer well the result is inevitable.

Not sure why airlines receiving subsidies is ridiculous, the industry employs a lot of people & helps drive tourism which brings in plenty of revenue. Its kind of the point of subsidies, invest into an industry with the aim of a net gain. And as I understand it, airspace is not free. Most, if not all countries charge airlines for flying through their airspace. OK there are no infrastructures to maintain at 38,000ft, but aircraft are much more expensive & cost far more to run & maintain.

HS2 getting continuously scaled back is a massive shame, but even internally within the UK, London-Birmingham & Manchester are big flows; just look at how busy HS1 has gotten, despite the premium rates.

HS2 being constantly being scaled back is a huge concern, or at least should be. Because it demonstrates how easily politicians will walk away from investments at the drop of a hat. And let's face it, even the Manchester section isn't entirely safe, that could be next if HM Treasury demands lots more future savings.

 

[Magdalia]

I don't use the southern section a lot, but I get the busway from Longstanton to the Science Park and back most days and a lot of buses are full and standing.

Yes without the hospital and college traffic there would be less people on it, but... those things exist so I'm not sure what your point is. I can imagine any number of theoretical worlds where there's no demand for the busway. How does that help?

I'm not making a point, apart from establishing the facts, so that others can have an informed debate.

The facts are cuts to services, and very few buses using the busway. At the southern end the Stagecoach service is half what it was before the pandemic, and the through Royston service has been chopped. As a user, you will know better than me about the service on the northern side, but, before the pandemic the through service from Trumpington to/from St Ives on its own provided the 6 buses per hour on the northern side that is now the full service, without including any buses starting from Central Cambridge.

 

[yorksrob]

people look at air fares but forget the other expenses of flying. getting to and from the airport. maybe parking. cost of eating/drinking at the airport (not cheap).

Indeed. I can walk to my local station in Yorkshire and be in the middle of another town in Kent within around four hours and two changes. Try doing that by plane !

The mechanics of getting around the country by train are pretty good most of the time I find. It's the high fares and lack of capacity that lets it down.

 

[A S Leib]

St. Albans Abbey would be better used as a busway with buses running between the respective town/city centres and not just connecting the outskirts of one with the outskirts of the other, though light rail would also work.

I'm sure we can think of more.

Replace Hemel Hempstead and Apsley stations with a single one more central to the town centre and frequent buses to St. Albans?

 

[lachlan]

Given the taxpayer has saved the rail industry for 2 years, paying pretty much all the salaries, there is a lot of real anger at the strikes for a 10% pay rise. You could probably get a million buses for the price of hs2. I'd like to see some lines replaced with motorway bus lanes to see how it works out.

A million buses would not add the capacity that HS2 does.

 

[JamesT]

Indeed. I can walk to my local station in Yorkshire and be in the middle of another town in Kent within around for hours and two changes. Try doing that by plane !

The mechanics of getting around the country by train are pretty good most of the time I find. It's the high fares and lack of capacity that lets it down.

On the flip side, I can do a full day's work in the office in Oxford, then get a flight from Birmingham to Edinburgh and be with my family in the central belt that day. Admittedly easier when Flybe had more flights per day, but still not something the train can get anywhere close to.

 

[yorksrob]

On the flip side, I can do a full day's work in the office in Oxford, then get a flight from Birmingham to Edinburgh and be with my family in the central belt that day. Admittedly easier when Flybe had more flights per day, but still not something the train can get anywhere close to.

True. That said Birmingham to the central belt should also be fairly decent timewise.

 

[JamesT]

True. That said Birmingham to the central belt should also be fairly decent timewise.

It's 4-4.5 hours for Birmingham to Edinburgh. Even with the faff of being early for check-in and collecting bags at the other end, the plane will knock a good couple of hours off that.

 

[yorksrob]

It's 4-4.5 hours for Birmingham to Edinburgh. Even with the faff of being early for check-in and collecting bags at the other end, the plane will knock a good couple of hours off that.

So it does !

Looking at NRE it seems that all of those journeys take the scenic route up the East Coast.

Perhaps the railway could up its game by providing something more direct via Carstairs !

 

[cambsy]

The railways, will never be abolished, as they are too important to the UK economy, and the road network couldn’t cope with the extra traffic, abolishing the railways, would put on it. the roads are already often gridlocked, prone to delays, and struggling with demand already, and with the move to greener transport etc, it would be political suicide to abolish the railways. I can see tough times ahead for the railways, as the government might well try to claw back money, in these hard times, after Covid, and the strike threat by RMT, will only harm the railways going forward, and likely causer more service cuts, than the government would have done with out the strikes.

I think the government, would be very short sighted, to cut services too much, just as the UK, is opening up after Covid, but I know the travel demands have changed after Covid, from peak time demands, to more leisure orientated travel, which the railways will need to adapt to, but I can see, the railways, getting back to pre covid levels, and exceeding them eventually, long as the DFT keeps cool head, and helps the railways, ride out these tough times.

There are other forms of transport of transport, like buses-coaches, or airplanes, but these aren’t up to taking over the role of the railways, as the road network, is no where near, reliable enough journey time wise etc, as often subject to delays and bad congestion, and flying, while in limited circumstances, is quicker and better, they are not possible for town to town etc, or short journeys, and by time got to airport and caught plane, they often offer little time savings over the train, unless one is going over long distances, so tough luck for the spectator, in my opinion the railways are here to satay, and probably out last the spectator.

 

[JamesT]

So it does !

Looking at NRE it seems that all of those journeys take the scenic route up the East Coast.

Perhaps the railway could up its game by providing something more direct via Carstairs !

I was looking on Trainsplit, where it was giving me that kind of timings on Avanti going up the west coast.

 

[yorksrob]

I was looking on Trainsplit, where it was giving me that kind of timings on Avanti going up the west coast.

It's giving me times of four hours. It does seem a disproportionately long time for the distance (compared to Leeds - Kings Cross, which is slightly shorter in distance but less than two and a half hours).

Incidentally, looking at times today with the replacement bus, the journey appears to be taking six hours - and they say diversions take too long !

 

[tornado]

Yes some tiny branches do become somewhat questionable, although they were of course often linked up to larger network before. St Ives is very seasonal and packed in the summer.

Frequency is the issue more than anything else, and buses might be able to do that better than any rail option in these very specific locations.

I don't know the Cornish branches well - I've only done one of them (Falmouth) - but I expect these might be further examples of where a properly integrated bus network using the branch as a bus only road would serve things better than the railway.

However, it is edge cases - mostly shortish branch lines - where this might be true. The Conwy Valley would be a further outlier - that would potentially be best replaced with a cycleway with electric buses on the largely uncongested main road as part of a revised "Sherpa'r Wyddfa" network - there is no nice way to cycle those journeys.

Just to add, there is only 1 twisty undulating road in and out of St Ives (Cornwall) which gets absolutely clogged in summer. There's no room for a bus lane, so the buses just sit in traffic in peak season. The train is quicker and more reliable. Every time I've taken the bus I've regretted it.

It's also probably the case in a lot of smaller towns that sticking a bus route on raods that have no room for an extra lane, and where there is only 1 or 2 ways in and out, won't work.

 

[Bantamzen]

Yes that too - would like to see people regularly walk up to airport ticket desks (if they’re even staffed) to buy a flight!

Most last minute airline tickets will be bought online I imagine. Just for comparison I have just searched for a single flight from Leeds Bradford Airport to Malaga, and a single ticket from Baildon to Kings Cross, both leaving this afternoon.

The flight would rush me £58.83, whilst the train would cost me £67.50. Now I will say this was just a cursory search, I'm sure the use of other search engines might find cheaper train fares. But I think it is fair to say that the plane represents slightly better value than the train in this instance, and shows that even late bookings don't have to cost the earth.

 

[Ken H]

Most last minute airline tickets will be bought online I imagine. Just for comparison I have just searched for a single flight from Leeds Bradford Airport to Malaga, and a single ticket from Baildon to Kings Cross, both leaving this afternoon.

The flight would rush me £58.83, whilst the train would cost me £67.50. Now I will say this was just a cursory search, I'm sure the use of other search engines might find cheaper train fares. But I think it is fair to say that the plane represents slightly better value than the train in this instance, and shows that even late bookings don't have to cost the earth.

I think flights come on meduim expensive. Then get expensive then drop significantly just before departure as they seek to fill the plane. Ryanair practically give late tickets away in the hope they will make money by upselling. No so the train who charge full whack for a train they know will be half empty, cos they want the expensive full fare from someone making an 'emergency' journey.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Perhaps the railway could up its game by providing something more direct via Carstairs !

On Monday, there appear to be 7 Birmingham New Street -> Edinburgh services operated every two hours by Avanti via the WCML. Last one is at 1815 and arrives 2222.

Via the ECML with XC, there's another 12 hourly trains. Last one is at 1803 arriving 2303.

 

[Ex-controller]

As others have said, abolishing the entire rail network is not a realistic proposition. It’s simply not practical nor does it make economic sense. The railway itself may not be profitable - especially the case in Scotland where I am - but that doesn’t rule out a wider economic contribution to the economy, acting as a ‘loss leader’. The village of Mallaig gets far more footfall because of the existence of the West Highland Line than it otherwise might, to take an example.

However, such articles do play a wider role. During the ASLEF dispute with ScotRail where overtime wasn’t worked and they had an initial demand of 10%, there was an opinion price by an Andy McIver in the Herald. McIver runs a communications company, Message Matters, who act on behalf of various companies, institutions and their owners, management etc. The article basically lambasted the drivers for daring to demand a pay increase, and suggested that strikes be banned with an independent tribunal deciding public sector pay rises (as ScotRail drivers are public sector). Where was the justification in a train driver earning £52,000 per year?

The opinions in the spectator article do hold a certain weight in some right wing/management/wealth owning circles, despite their impractical nature. The reason for this is clear. The railway is one of the few renaming heavily unionised areas of industry, where many workers earn a decent salary and enjoy a good standard of living, with minimal threat to their job. They have a level of security and even job satisfaction that others could only dream of, mainly because the security that those sectors once enjoyed has already been decimated, resulting in a real terms decline in pay and conditions. In short, the people who the spectator represent don’t like being stopped from lording it over the minions, especially when they dare to unionise and stand up for themselves.

Their solution in such a scenario amounts to advancing a scorched earth policy. They know it’s unlikely to happen - although can’t be ruled out if they thought it was necessary - but in putting it out there they hope to create enough doubt and fear that those workers who do stand up for themselves might think twice, or perhaps others out there might raise their head above the parapet and agree that the railways should be culled.

Another example of this thinking is a recent Twitter post with stats showing the proportion of the population who had travelled by train in the last year, by region. One of those regions was Greater London, which understandably has quite a high proportion. Other regions were what you’d expect: SW England, NW England, Wales, Scotland and so on. All of these regions had quite low proportions.

Of course, what these stats didn’t show was that within these regions there were still large cities and Urban areas, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Birmingham, Glasgow etc where the presence of suburban rail networks meant more of the population would travel freqntly by train. This was masked by the much lower levels of usage elsewhere in each region, precisely for the purpose of showing that, outside of London at least, the train was no longer important nor useful.

I’m not suggesting we’re going to have an imminent cull of the rail network, but I would suggest it had a bit of a battle on its hands. Post Covid drops in commuting, the growth in working from home, the encouragement (in Scotland at least) or 15 minute neighbourhoods, and the general discouragement of travel for environmental reasons, mean that it’s a difficult time for the railway these days. Even natural allies like Green parties have now shifted their focus to active travel over use of public transport.

Those who are actively opposed will view the current climate as an opportunity to advance their viewpoint, but hopefully with strong enough advocates out there, and some imaginative thinking ti ensure the rail service is kept as relevant as possible to people, it come back round again. Vital will be ticketing, timetabling, costs and ease of access. There has to be an acceptance that the railway will never be a money maker, but can be a loss leader supporting the wider economy to grow. There also has to be an acceptance of all in the railway that we need to be reasonable in getting the public back. We’re all on the same team in that regard - certain grades only look out for themselves and this line of thinking needs to be cautioned against.

It’s a tough time but these challenges can be overcome with a bit of effort and forward thinking. I hope that over time this comes to fruition.

 

[Gems]

If you want to find an idiotic journalist you can always bank on the spectator to come up trumps.
Coming to think of it. Didn't Doris Johnson once write for them?
I rest my case.

 

[Ken H]

Classic clickbait. How many on here have read the article, and therefore exposed to the advertising. If so, its done what they intended.
And they wonder why no-one trusts the media any more.

 

[Jimini]

If you want to find an idiotic journalist you can always bank on the spectator to come up trumps.
Coming to think of it. Didn't Doris Johnson once write for them?
I rest my case.

He was the editor from 1999-2008 aye.

 

[ungreat]

I tend not to read stuff from the mainstream media as its usually inaccurate but I am aware of its content.

 

[InOban]

On Monday, there appear to be 7 Birmingham New Street -> Edinburgh services operated every two hours by Avanti via the WCML. Last one is at 1815 and arrives 2222.

Via the ECML with XC, there's another 12 hourly trains. Last one is at 1803 arriving 2303.

And before he points out that it's easier for him to get Birmingham Airport, these trains also call at the adjacent station where parking is cheaper than at the airport.

 

[stuu]

people look at air fares but forget the other expenses of flying. getting to and from the airport. maybe parking. cost of eating/drinking at the airport (not cheap).

When I went to Newcastle from Somerset in April, the choice was XC (£190 for two), or easyjet (£60 for two) and a coach to Bristol airport (£15). Eating/drinking at stations/on trains is no cheaper than airports: at Bristol TM the other day the cafe on p10 wanted £2.75 for a 500ml coke.

 

[Ken H]

When I went to Newcastle from Somerset in April, the choice was XC (£190 for two), or easyjet (£60 for two) and a coach to Bristol airport (£15). Eating/drinking at stations/on trains is no cheaper than airports: at Bristol TM the other day the cafe on p10 wanted £2.75 for a 500ml coke.

at a station you can nip out and find an outlet that charges normal prices. Airport you cant.

 

[stevetay3]

Don’t forget if Borris was once editor everything in that rag must be the whole truth and nothing but the truth Boris never lies does he

 

[70014IronDuke]

The Spectator has turned into a right wing luddite publication recently.

Only recently?

Actually, the questions he asks are reasonable. I'm sure many people, who have little understanding of the issues involved, are asking them. The issue is he makes no serious, well-informed attempt to answer them.

I have a suspicion that the editor needed to fill space in a hurry and was, in effect, using this for click-bait. I mean, who, seriously, would illustrate this with a scene from the 1920s (?) featuring what looks like a Robinson GC locomotive - although I wonder where it is? Could it be Retford?

Still, I agree that any serious-minded magazine should not need to do this, whether left- or right-leaning.

 

[whoosh]

When I went to Newcastle from Somerset in April, the choice was XC (£190 for two), or easyjet (£60 for two) and a coach to Bristol airport (£15). Eating/drinking at stations/on trains is no cheaper than airports: at Bristol TM the other day the cafe on p10 wanted £2.75 for a 500ml coke.

Likely because 'Select Service Partner' own the shops/franchises of shops at both.

 

[TPO]

It seems that many commenters on this thread are not familiar with the Spectator.... it is a publication that publishes OPINION pieces from many different perspectives.... left and right wing. For example, there's articles where the author expresses why they believe Russia will win the war with Ukraine, others who explain why they think Ukraine will defeat Russia and others who think the whole thing will end in a stalemate. The commentators have varying levels of "expertise" in their subject, the less switched on ones get a lot of calling-out in the comments section of the online edition.

Yes the Speccie was generally supportive of Brexit (whilst also publishing Remain pieces) but the general approach of the publication is not right-wing. No, it's generally "libertarian" and biased towards discussing the difficult questions and grey areas that social media and even more mainstream media generally avoid as they stick to which ever pole of opinion they prefer. Within the general libertarian theme there's room for a lot of views- right, left, centre and others. There's more to opinion than left/right, indeed these days the libertarian/authoritarian axes are often more important but are ignored- to our peril. Also bear in mind that Brexit views are NOT a proxy for left/right- there were for many years strong views from parts of the Left (e.g. Tony Benn) why being in the EU was not good for the UK.

The article you refer to has provoked a lot of discussion in the comments on the on-line version of the Spectator- mainly of the flavour of "you cannot abolish the railways they are important" so again I suggest not making lazy assumptions about Speccie readers. Believe it or not, some of us* want to read opinion pieces which cover a wide ground and offer arguments from both sides- ideally well argued and not shouty; although equally there is room for articles which float a fairly provocative piece as a starter for comment (the article discussed here being of the latter type).

Much as I believe there is a need for railways, where the article is along the right lines is in helping (albeit indirectly and probably inadvertently) to open a debate about what the railways should be for- and how that might best be funded.

There's a strong justification (in my view) to have a lot more light rail/metro-type systems in cities (in the regions, not just London), and a more luxury/leisure orientated offering for long distance. Perhaps not the fastest- but comfortable. There's also freight to consider (how a modern freight railway could be run and what it could do- looking forward not back and considering the hub-and-spoke model used by the likes of Amazon) and changes in suburban/commuting/traveling patterns, and then the "socially necessary" services for more rural areas.

If those of us who see the value of railways don't lead this discussion, vested interests (not those supportive of the railway) will fill the vacuum. But we must look ahead- not just come across as not wanting change for the sake of not wanting change. And not bogging down into details of specific prices for specific journeys at this stage, as on its own that's not really a good basis of the justification for retaining rail. All transport modes have pros/cons and in the end, we choose each time we travel based on a complex mix (even if we are not conscious of the way we make that choice). But that doesn't take away the need to consider the fundamental question of "what is/should be our railway be for?" and "how do we make sure it does those things well?"

Finally, sometimes the not-so-obvious approach is needed. I am reminded of the experience of the South Wales Valleys Lines in the early 1980s. BR had basically given upon them corporately, but as a last-ditch attempt to sort them out, a local manager was allowed by Swindon to try out a radical new idea: cut fares and increase service levels at the same time. "It'll never work" was the "expert" thinking..... but it did work. That's basically how the Valley Lines became a suburban metro, and why they are not just here now but more lines opened.

Certainly a debate is required, and I'd like those who see a positive future for the railways to lead it- not by nit-picking over different modal prices for a journey but looking more widely at what we want from the railway, for whom- and how we use general taxation and government policy to support that in the same way that general taxation supports a range of the basic things that constitute civilised society and access to it.

TPO

*Disclaimer: I subscribe to the Spectator (usually on a special offer, when the offer ends cancel it and within a week another one will appear in my email inbox) and I enjoy reading a range of different views in it; where I don't agree, I like to think properly about why that is so. I also consume a range of other media, and don't just believe what I read.........

 

[robert thomas]

There's an unfair comparison gong on here!

If the busway had had the same financial support as the railways have had then peak services on the northern section would be something like every 3-4 mins (per the April 2020 timetable that never happened) and the range of links off guideway would have included everything you mentioned plus a lot more. Instead the service level was reduced and is slowly building back up in line with passenger numbers (unlike on the railways, which have stayed much more the same regardless of passenger levels).

And the fact that the busway serves the centre, the college, the hospital, two railway stations and three park and ride sites is surely evidence of its comparative strength?

Out of interest how much does Stagecoach have to pay to access the busway or is it provided free of charge?