GBR "delayed"

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Labour will have a mountain of legislation to enact without the railway, and as in 1997 railways might not be a priority.
The government coffers, as will be obvious from recent events, are empty.

Never a truer word was spoken.

 

[Kite159]

GBR in its currently proposed form isn’t compatible with Labour’s pledge to fully renationalise the rail network. There’d certainly be no role for any private firms to play in it if Labour did keep the GBR name.

I think more likely Labour would rip up the legislation and start from scratch with their own new legislation.

They will probably rip it all up (nasty Tory work), set up a committee and that is the last you will hear about it as the committee is quietly forgotten about until they submit a report which will get binned as it doesn't report what they wanted it to read

 

[BrianW]

The Secretary of State for Transport has no time for this; she is spending it, and our money, in defending the PM and preparing herself for promotion to that rile herself, or maybe the next Home Secretary when her predecessor at Transport is transported to #10

Expect the A66 and nothing else. For GBR maybe a Great British Rethink?

 

[Dave W]

The Secretary of State for Transport has no time for this; she is spending it, and our money, in defending the PM and preparing herself for promotion to that rile herself, or maybe the next Home Secretary when her predecessor at Transport is transported to #10

I'm all for a bit of political speculation but this one's a very long shot!

My experience of departmental working is such that I doubt very much all of this work will be binned - in programmes as politically sensitive as GBR things move incredibly quickly and you find the clouds suddenly dissipate to reveal a serious amount of progress. Not saying the progress is necessarily entirely in the right direction...

 

[Thirteen]

I'm all for a bit of political speculation but this one's a very long shot!

My experience of departmental working is such that I doubt very much all of this work will be binned - in programmes as politically sensitive as GBR things move incredibly quickly and you find the clouds suddenly dissipate to reveal a serious amount of progress. Not saying the progress is necessarily entirely in the right direction...

TBF to the SOS, there's been a lot of factors that have delayed the bill plus it's been scrutinised by others outside of Parliament such as the London Assembly.

 

[Bald Rick]

The Secretary of State for Transport has no time for this; she is spending it, and our money, in defending the PM and preparing herself for promotion to that rile herself, or maybe the next Home Secretary when her predecessor at Transport is transported to #10

Well that post moved along quickly!

 

[SamYeager]

Almost certainly starting with the name.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 20 Oct 2022 ==


Yep the SWR-GBR relationship would be similar to the Arriva Rail London-TfL relationship.

There is a difference though in that ARL/London Overground services run largely over Network Rail infrastructure.

English Railways? Transport for England?

 

[winks]

GB Rail sounds a lot better !

 

[Class 170101]

Is there any compelling reason why Network Rail as a body cant absorb the role that GBR is supposed to become, rather than all the faffing about and inevitable upheaval, would that require legislation?

Yes, various existing legislation is the compelling reason. Hence the need for new.

Putting aside the legislation, NR isn't the right organisation to run it, at least not if they think engineers first and customers second.

 

[Bald Rick]

NR isn't the right organisation to run it, at least not if they think engineers first and customers second.

NR is a long way away from engineers first. Although I do agree there needs to be a lot more focus on those who pay the bills, ie passengers and freight users.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

GBR in its currently proposed form isn’t compatible with Labour’s pledge to fully renationalise the rail network. There’d certainly be no role for any private firms to play in it if Labour did keep the GBR name.

I think more likely Labour would rip up the legislation and start from scratch with their own new legislation.

Whilst Labour has said they will nationalise the Railways when you prod deeper all this seems to mean is being franchised TOCs in house.

They don’t seem to have any plans to nationalise open access passenger, freight or the rolling stock companies.

 

[450.emu]

Services may resume now, with Sunak depending on who is appointed Transport Secretary tomorrow... The previous management seemed to be just coping with surviving every day, with all the turmoil of the past two weeks.

British Railways would do as a name, the "Great" is a little grandiose...

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There will still be a lot of legislation to come which may prevent the GBR Bill appearing this session, but Sunak has yet to declare his programme and ministerial team.
We should have a good idea in a week's time when the financial position is clarified.
Rishi will have a very good idea of railway finances, including HS2, from his time at the Treasury, with its tight control of TOC costs.

 

[Thirteen]

I suspect they'll be a new Transport Secretary even though the current one has been more pragmatic compared to Shapps. I have no idea who they will pick though.

 

[Tezza1978]

I suspect they'll be a new Transport Secretary even though the current one has been more pragmatic compared to Shapps. I have no idea who they will pick though.

My gut reaction is that Sunak will be more pro-railways than Truss who didnt have a track record of supporting projects like HS2 and in her very few days in charge/during her campaign only briefly blathered on about road building programmes instead (!!)

Would he give Boris the transport job ?

 

[Thirteen]

My gut reaction is that Sunak will be more pro-railways than Truss who didnt have a track record of supporting projects like HS2 and in her very few days in charge/during her campaign only briefly blathered on about road building programmes instead (!!)

Would he give Boris the transport job ?

The Unions fought with Boris when he was Mayor of London, it wouldn't end well if he was appointed.

 

[zwk500]

My gut reaction is that Sunak will be more pro-railways than Truss who didnt have a track record of supporting projects like HS2 and in her very few days in charge/during her campaign only briefly blathered on about road building programmes instead (!!)

Would he give Boris the transport job ?

Sunak will be rolling back capital spend wherever he can. HS2 is committed, but expect lots of projects to be shelved, hard.

And no, he won't be giving Boris a job. He's a competent enough politician to have got to No. 10, he's not going to appoint the individual who poses the biggest threat of being unseated to a cabinet post. Also Boris doesn't want a seat at somebody else's table.

 

[Brubulus]

Sunak will be rolling back capital spend wherever he can. HS2 is committed, but expect lots of projects to be shelved, hard.

I feel that he will understand the value of new physical infrastructure for the railways, especially the non megaproject stuff such as new regional and commuter lines and electrification. However HS2 will most likely end at Crewe and the new rolling stock bonanza will finish.

 

[BrianW]

Returning, however briefly at this time, could the government be any clearer?:

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2022-10-24/debates/ECCEF9B2-FD8D-424D-B1E7-1526A5884780/GreatBritishRailways

 

[Tezza1978]

I feel that he will understand the value of new physical infrastructure for the railways, especially the non megaproject stuff such as new regional and commuter lines and electrification. However HS2 will most likely end at Crewe and the new rolling stock bonanza will finish.

Would make zero sense for HS2 to end at Crewe. Given the amount spent and the political uproar that would ensue - including in Red Wall seats, you lose a huge % of the benefits of the line if it terminates there

 

[Bald Rick]

My gut reaction is that Sunak will be more pro-railways than Truss

I think that assessment is rather wide of the mark.

 

[py_megapixel]

the new rolling stock bonanza will finish.

It largely has finished. In fact, have any new passenger stock orders been announced since March 2020?

And in any case, that description seems quite heavily centred on London and the South East. The Midlands and the North got nowhere near as much. (I notice your profile says Cambridge: Thameslink, Great Northern and Greater Anglia have all had their fleets fully replaced, but that was far from the norm across the country).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It largely has finished. In fact, have any new passenger stock orders been announced since March 2020?

HS2 rolling stock, contract awarded 9 Dec 2021.
But details are very vague, much like HS2 policy itself.

 

[Tezza1978]

I think that assessment is rather wide of the mark.

I'm not saying that he is the most enthusiastic compared to some others, but he is definitely more keen than Truss. I note he has appointed Mark Harper as Transport Sec who has consistently voted for HS2 also.

 

[irish_rail]

Sunak will be rolling back capital spend wherever he can. HS2 is committed, but expect lots of projects to be shelved, hard.

And no, he won't be giving Boris a job. He's a competent enough politician to have got to No. 10, he's not going to appoint the individual who poses the biggest threat of being unseated to a cabinet post. Also Boris doesn't want a seat at somebody else's table.

If true thats criminal . Hs2 continues to be built and meanwhile the railways that people actually use are crumbling before our eyes. The past 12 months have been by far the worst I can remember from an infrastructure point of view since Hatfield in 2000. Money needs to be spent, and now, on upgrading our railway, and dare I say it, NOT on vanity projects like HS2 which seems less needed than ever.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm not saying that he is the most enthusiastic compared to some others, but he is definitely more keen than Truss. I note he has appointed Mark Harper as Transport Sec who has consistently voted for HS2 also.

Well, talking to the people I do in Government, they are unanimous that Sunak is less railway friendly than his predecessor, who in turn was less friendly still than her predecessor.

 

[Thirteen]

If true thats criminal . Hs2 continues to be built and meanwhile the railways that people actually use are crumbling before our eyes. The past 12 months have been by far the worst I can remember from an infrastructure point of view since Hatfield in 2000. Money needs to be spent, and now, on upgrading our railway, and dare I say it, NOT on vanity projects like HS2 which seems less needed than ever.

It's ironic that you want the railways to be upgraded considering you thought Merseyrail should have kept the outdated Class 507s and 508s.

 

[snowball]

I'm not saying that he is the most enthusiastic compared to some others, but he is definitely more keen than Truss. I note he has appointed Mark Harper as Transport Sec who has consistently voted for HS2 also.

Much though I hate to say a word in favour of Truss, she did make very expansive (and expensive) promises about NPR, beyond anything any other minister has said since Osborne, and more explicit than anything Osborne ever said. She probably didn't understand the implications of what she was saying, but she did say it.

 

[zwk500]

If true thats criminal . Hs2 continues to be built and meanwhile the railways that people actually use are crumbling before our eyes. The past 12 months have been by far the worst I can remember from an infrastructure point of view since Hatfield in 2000. Money needs to be spent, and now, on upgrading our railway, and dare I say it, NOT on vanity projects like HS2 which seems less needed than ever.

Capital expenditure and the maintenance budget are two very different things. I totally agree with you that the existing infrastructure needs the money behind it to stop it falling apart. I also didn't say 'every' project, but 'lots of' them. For example I expect electrification to continue, but slower.

 

[Signal Head]

Is there any compelling reason why Network Rail as a body cant absorb the role that GBR is supposed to become, rather than all the faffing about and inevitable upheaval, would that require legislation?

Network Rail is a Labour construction, and therefore 'riddled with unacceptable socialism' so cannot be allowed to remain.

It also doesn't have 'Great' in the name, and we need that so we can feel important, even though the country is no longer Great, or important.

See also "Take Back Control" !