Any ideas what the Government is going to suggest?

[bailey65]

I think hs2 should be shelved for now as £32 billion is a hell of a lot of money for one project just so you can get to birmingham half an hour quicker.
If the government had that sort of money to spend on rail they should upgrade what we already have but in this economic climate they certainly haven't got that amount to spare on anything with the national debt as bad as it is and the cost of big projects like this always escalate.

 

[yorksrob]

Would it have been cheaper to build new trains and stations (as well as modernising the network) if it was still fully under Government control?

Or would prices have risen, with staff being paid increasingly more money (great for the staff, obviously) and no need to worry because jobs would have been pretty secure?

Undoubtedly prices would have risen, and staff would have been paid more money (inflation will always be with us). But the only valid comparison would be whether this happenned at a greater or lesser rate compared to what has actually happenned since privatisation, rather than with the situation as it was on the eve of privatisation.

 

[ukrob]

I think hs2 should be shelved for now as £32 billion is a hell of a lot of money for one project just so you can get to birmingham half an hour quicker

Please tell me you don't genuinely believe that is what HS2 is about?

 

[yorksrob]

A very good post.

I believe that there would be far fewer trains and stations under state control, as was the case in the dying years of the clapped out BR.

Under state control, especially under current economic uncertainty, the Government would not risk spending a penny on a new railway station.

Salaries for drivers, guards and other railway staff would be far more of a strain on the government's purse were Unions able to point to European salaries and ask "If them, why not us?" At what cost to income tax would higher salaries be?

And you say this even though BR managed far more route and station reopenings in the ten years proceeding privatisation than have been managed during the fifteen or so since ?

Even though BR built and replaced rolling stock more or less continually up until privatisation threw everything into turmoil.

With regard to salaries, from what drivers have mentioned on here, these seemed to be kept on a fairly tight leash (which to be fair, came with it's own problems), however I don't think you can say that they would have automatically gone up to the same extent.

 

[ainsworth74]

I think hs2 should be shelved for now as £32 billion is a hell of a lot of money for one project just so you can get to birmingham half an hour quicker.

If you look at it as one lump sum maybe but we're only going to be spending as much on it each year as we do currently on Crossrail and the money for HS2 starts being needed as Crossrail finishes. So it's not like we're spending any extra on it just directing already committed money elsewhere.

Also like ukrob you don't honestly think that getting to Birmingham is what it's all about (especially as the figure you've quoted is for getting to Leeds and Manchester as well as Birmingham).

 

[jon0844]

BR managed to make profit on Intercity didn't it? And I heard it was just about turning a profit on NSE.. but what about everything being joined up?

You could argue that profit from one region could subsidise another, but wouldn't it have been just as likely that London and the South East would have had more money spent, at the expense of other regions?

We can argue that this is the case today too, but I can't see how a nationalised railway would have been good for everyone.

 

[yorksrob]

In a way, you're absolutely correct. where part of the railway turns a profit and another part doesn't there will always be parts that lose out in comparison to others when it comes to the investment queue (witness the arguments today about Northern Rails no growth franchise).

It's also true that profitable parts of the railway in effect bail out less profitable parts today, although this inevitably goes via the Government, with all the patronage and interference that that entails. Far better IMO to have the Government topping up.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think hs2 should be shelved for now as £32 billion is a hell of a lot of money for one project just so you can get to birmingham half an hour quicker.

You've been taken in by all the rubbish the antis spout. That £B32 estimate is for the whole Y network, including to Manchester and the NE, not just the first phase, and that first phase includes the leg to Lichfield for the services that will run on to the NW and Scotland via the existing WCML, so there has never been a 'just to Birmingham' aspect to the plans anyway...

 

[bailey65]

HS2 is Still a lot of money when the main business centres are in the south rather than the north current journey times are perfectly adequate the money would be better spent on infrastructure upgrades re openings and replacing dilapidated stock especially where northern and merseyrail are concerned.

 

[Zoe]

HS2 is Still a lot of money when the main business centres are in the south rather than the north current journey times are perfectly adequate the money would be better spent on infrastructure upgrades re openings and replacing dilapidated stock especially where northern and merseyrail are concerned.

The idea is that once HS2 is built businesses will relocate north.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If the railways were still nationalised you would be seeing 20-30% cuts to services, a pay freeze and negative pension changes, like folk in the NHS and teaching are experiencing.
The privatised railway (eg Network Rail's £25Bn credit card, all the new rolling stock etc) is not on George Osborne's Treasury books and therefore not visible to the sovereign ratings agencies.
And all the railways in Europe are having to follow the same model, though they are years behind us and have all the pain to come.
Nationalisation would be a death warrant in today's world.

 

[Flamingo]

Using the NHS as a comparison, and what I am aware of rail wages pre-privatisation and NHS wages at that time, although it is speculation, I would say that rail wages would be less now if the railways had remained under state control.

 

[swt_passenger]

HS2 is Still a lot of money when the main business centres are in the south rather than the north current journey times are perfectly adequate the money would be better spent on infrastructure upgrades re openings and replacing dilapidated stock especially where northern and merseyrail are concerned.

Government spending doesn't work like that at all. They haven't said, 'here's a load of money, what would you like to use it for?'

That's why all those objector's signs around the roadside in Warwickshire that said stuff like 'HS2 or hospitals', 'HS2 or new schools', etc, were all barking up the wrong tree. If HS2 is binned, the money doesn't automatically go back to the existing rail network, it just doesn't work like that.

 

[bailey65]

It will be better when the government finally doesn't fund rail any more the less central government or rather the taxpayer have to pay for the better and the dft haven't been very good at dealing with rail over the years the only thing that shouldn't be privatised is the nhs i think things would be more efficient if self serving politicians weren't involved in rail.

 

[CosherB]

I think hs2 should be shelved for now as £32 billion is a hell of a lot of money for one project just so you can get to birmingham half an hour quicker.
If the government had that sort of money to spend on rail they should upgrade what we already have

(Sigh). If you think HS2 is just about spending £32B to shave half an hour off London to Brum you really have no idea. That's like saying the first phase of the M6 was a ludicrous amount of money just to save a few minutes bypassing Preston.

The money for HS2 is for HS2. It isn't in a big pot marked 'for spending on the railway'. If HS2 doesn't happen, that £32B will go elsewhere. Onto road building, probably. It's called 'politics' and it's what makes the world go around.

Those who hanker after a nationalised railway but with proper government funding might as well hanker after a holiday on the Moon. It would never happen; the railway would have to stand in line at the Treasury, cap in hand, just as BR did, and recieve whatever scraps were cast its way. That is THE MAJOR reason why privatisation, flawed though it was, was such a good thing for the railway.

 

[phil8715]

(Sigh). If you think HS2 is just about spending £32B to shave half an hour off London to Brum you really have no idea. That's like saying the first phase of the M6 was a ludicrous amount of money just to save a few minutes bypassing Preston.

The money for HS2 is for HS2. It isn't in a big pot marked 'for spending on the railway'. If HS2 doesn't happen, that £32B will go elsewhere. Onto road building, probably. It's called 'politics' and it's what makes the world go around.

Those who hanker after a nationalised railway but with proper government funding might as well hanker after a holiday on the Moon. It would never happen; the railway would have to stand in line at the Treasury, cap in hand, just as BR did, and recieve whatever scraps were cast its way. That is THE MAJOR reason why privatisation, flawed though it was, was such a good thing for the railway.

When President Blair and his Labour government swept to power in 1997, 2 Jags Prescott was appointed Sec for State for Transport, wanted to nationalise the railways are per their manifesto but deemed it too expensive and too fragmented to actually impliment it.

I read a book called Broken Railways written by Christian Woolmer gives an interesting insight into rail privitisation.

 

[Zoe]

When President Blair and his Labour government swept to power in 1997, 2 Jags Prescott was appointed Sec for State for Transport, wanted to nationalise the railways are per their manifesto but deemed it too expensive and too fragmented to actually impliment it.

This was not in the 1997 manifesto.

The process of rail privatisation is now largely complete. It has made fortunes for a few, but has been a poor deal for the taxpayer. It has fragmented the network and now threatens services. Our task will be to improve the situation as we find it, not as we wish it to be. Our overriding goal must be to win more passengers and freight on to rail. The system must be run in the public interest with higher levels of investment and effective enforcement of train operators' service commitments. There must be convenient connections, through-ticketing and accurate travel information for the benefit of all passengers.

To achieve these aims, we will establish more effective and accountable regulation by the rail regulator; we will ensure that the public subsidy serves the public interest; and we will establish a new rail authority, combining functions currently carried out by the rail franchiser and the Department of Transport, to provide a clear, coherent and strategic programme for the development of the railways so that passenger expectations are met.

 

[CosherB]

I read a book called Broken Railways written by Christian Woolmer gives an interesting insight into rail privitisation.

Yeah, I read that, too. Woolmer has a some odd ideas; not least, he is not a supporter of HS2. He just didn't understand rail privatisation, why it happened, and why (though far from perfect in itself) it was 'A Good Thing' and really the only way the railway could survive, let alone prosper as it has since privatisation.

 

[ainsworth74]

It will be better when the government finally doesn't fund rail any more the less central government or rather the taxpayer have to pay for the better

Goodbye to half the network then!

 

[yorksrob]

Yeah, I read that, too. Woolmer has a some odd ideas; not least, he is not a supporter of HS2. He just didn't understand rail privatisation, why it happened, and why (though far from perfect in itself) it was 'A Good Thing' and really the only way the railway could survive, let alone prosper as it has since privatisation.

Really, so the railway wouldn't have survived without privatisation as well now. hmmm.

 

[PR1Berske]

Labour did not go into the 1997 election wanting to nationalise the railways. FACT.

Labour did not go into the 2001, 2005 or 2010 elections wanting to nationalise the railways.

 

[jon0844]

But they could say now that they'd have intentions to - and then drop it come the run up to the next election.

At the moment, Labour has only one policy - to slag off whatever the coalition does. At some point, the party will have to say what it would do. I'd love to know what they'd do with the railways, especially given they commissioned the report in the first place.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

But they could say now that they'd have intentions to - and then drop it come the run up to the next election.

At the moment, Labour has only one policy - to slag off whatever the coalition does. At some point, the party will have to say what it would do. I'd love to know what they'd do with the railways, especially given they commissioned the report in the first place.

A bit like the Condemnations policy of blaming everything on Labour (Kettle, Pot anyone).

 

[PR1Berske]

A bit like the Condemnations policy of blaming everything on Labour (Kettle, Pot anyone).

The difference being that the Government, which I support, has every right to blame Labour for dragging this country into the longest, deepest recession in peace times.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

The difference being that the Government, which I support, has every right to blame Labour for dragging this country into the longest, deepest recession in peace times.

Nothing to with the WORLDWIDE recession then, typical Tories, quite like yourself willing to blame everyone and everything without looking at facts and the real reasons, you two are very much suited.

Not to mention the highest unemployment since 97

The Tory war against the working class resumed

The tories created this monster that is privatisation, they ordered your beloved unclean Pacers (give them credit for the Sprinters tho) and now they will destroy the rail industry as well

but at least the Trains may be clean (nope doubt that as well)

 

[PR1Berske]

Nothing to with the WORLDWIDE recession then, typical Tories, quite like yourself willing to blame everyone and everything without looking at facts and the real reasons, you two are very much suited.

Not to mention the highest unemployment since 97

The Tory war against the working class resumed

The tories created this monster that is privatisation, they ordered your beloved unclean Pacers (give them credit for the Sprinters tho) and now they will destroy the rail industry as well

but at least the Trains may be clean (nope doubt that as well)

I am not a Tory, I be a card carrying Liberal Democrat for 12 years (and counting).

Not all countries suffered as we did - the reason why the UK collapsed so harshly was exactly because of Labour's economic illiteracy. To borrow so much, to spend so wildly, and to ignore warnings about costs spiralling in IT projects/PFI schemes etc, Labour did what they always did. As in 1979, again in 2010, Labour left the country on its financial knees.

And yes, privatisation has its faults, but the alternative would be a state run railway costing the country far more for far less, in hock to the Unions, and we all know where that led us last time.

Gordon Brown sold gold cheap and spent money we didn't have through a perverse obsession with headlines. I am glad the Labour Party are not in power- that's the problem with socialism, you always run out of other peoples money.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

I am not a Tory, I be a card carrying Liberal Democrat for 12 years (and counting).

Not all countries suffered as we did - the reason why the UK collapsed so harshly was exactly because of Labour's economic illiteracy. To borrow so much, to spend so wildly, and to ignore warnings about costs spiralling in IT projects/PFI schemes etc, Labour did what they always did. As in 1979, again in 2010, Labour left the country on its financial knees.

And yes, privatisation has its faults, but the alternative would be a state run railway costing the country far more for far less, in hock to the Unions, and we all know where that led us last time.

Gordon Brown sold gold cheap and spent money we didn't have through a perverse obsession with headlines. I am glad the Labour Party are not in power- that's the problem with socialism, you always run out of other peoples money.

If you are a lib dem you have my sympathy, I mean a leader with no power, a ship with no direction keeping the tories in power while your own MP's are not listened to by their leader, I respected the lib dems until they turned into the tory whipping boys

 

[PR1Berske]

If you are a lib dem you have my sympathy, I mean a leader with no power, a ship with no direction keeping the tories in power while your own MP's are not listened to by their leader, I respected the lib dems until they turned into the tory whipping boys

Oh yes, I remember those halcyon days when Tony Blair treated all his MPs with respect and definitely didn't just railroad his crass, jealous, social democrat twaddle through parliament.

White steed of socialism, that Blair, eh? Certainly didn't drag the country into an illegal war or encourage private companies to run schools and hospitals.

 

[class26]

Nothing to with the WORLDWIDE recession then, typical Tories, quite like yourself willing to blame everyone and everything without looking at facts and the real reasons, you two are very much suited.

Not to mention the highest unemployment since 97

The Tory war against the working class resumed

The tories created this monster that is privatisation, they ordered your beloved unclean Pacers (give them credit for the Sprinters tho) and now they will destroy the rail industry as well

but at least the Trains may be clean (nope doubt that as well)

The truth is that whilst there was and is a world wide recession Gortdon Browns reckless and wasteful spending put us in a very bad position when the crisis hit. You mend the roof in the good times, not have a druken orgy.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

The truth is that whilst there was and is a world wide recession Gortdon Browns reckless and wasteful spending put us in a very bad position when the crisis hit. You mend the roof in the good times, not have a druken orgy.

Hmmmm people seem to forget about the late 80s early 90s so easily, labour wasn't and are not perfect but better them then what we have now, anyway back on topic lol one thing everyone should agree on this, every government could have done so much more, so much better for our railways then they have done, years of neglect is the main cause of the railways costs, I know time is running out for my profession which sadly (IMHO) will cost lives and by then mcnumpty would be enshrined like beeching, I read in his report that guards take 5 percent on trains, maybe down south but not up here the figure is a lot higher, for me he has looked at the south and not bothered with the actual infrastructure up here as it will take many a year before the infrastructure is up to his standard