Nationalisation and privatisation

[jon0844]

I have a better idea for a new tax to subsidise the Railways.

Every employer who requires an employee to start work at 0900 will pay a levy for that employee. The levy reduces on a geometric scale the further away from 0900 the required start time is such that, if it's 0700 it's nil and if it's 1100 it's nil.

Every employer who requires an employee to finish work at 1700 will pay a levy for that employee. The levy reduces on a geometric scale the further away from 1700 the required finish time is such that, if it's 1500 it's nil and if it's 1900 it's nil.

A nice idea, but I expect employers would abuse things by making the employee pay somehow - or adjusting work hours and paying less etc.

I think the Government would be better off giving an incentive to an employer, not a levy. Some way to encourage more home working, flexi time working, or just having it so that a company should stagger work hours and have nn% of employees start/end at one time and nn% at another (maybe multiple 'bands') - which, if more companies did it, would naturally stagger work hours.

 

[Metrailway]

I wonder how many of those will follow our example of splitting everything into hundreds of individual companies.

The European Commission's proposed fourth railway package has been watered down significantly, but it would still be far reaching.

It will mandate full institutional separation between train operators and infrastructure operators. They can still, however, be owned by the same holding group, albeit with a 'Chinese Wall', in certain member states (e.g Germany, but not Britain).

It will mandate the opening up of the domestic passenger services in member states which require a public service contract by competitive tendering. This would effect 66% of rail passenger km in Europe. There will also be the expansion of open access to domestic passenger rail.

The current (state owned) incumbents would also be required to sell old rolling stock cheaply to potential competitors (if there is interest), instead of scrapping or selling abroad. This is to aid the entry of potential competitors into the rail market.

 

[yorksrob]

The European Commission's proposed fourth railway package has been watered down significantly, but it would still be far reaching.

It will mandate full institutional separation between train operators and infrastructure operators. They can still, however, be owned by the same holding group, albeit with a 'Chinese Wall', in certain member states (e.g Germany, but not Britain).

It will mandate the opening up of the domestic passenger services in member states which require a public service contract by competitive tendering. This would effect 66% of rail passenger km in Europe. There will also be the expansion of open access to domestic passenger rail.

The current (state owned) incumbents would also be required to sell old rolling stock cheaply to potential competitors (if there is interest), instead of scrapping or selling abroad. This is to aid the entry of potential competitors into the rail market.

I do doubt whether these territories would go for competitive tendering if they were still self governing countries.

 

[Oscar]

Well how do Arriva run their business in Europe then? eg Sweden.
FYRA in the Netherlands (KLM part owner) - pity they bought the wrong train .
DB Schenker outside Germany.
NTV/Italo in Italy.
LEO in the Czech Republic.
All the private freight companies in Europe.
Eurotunnel.
Veolia.

Not as comprehensive a privatisation as in the UK but still significant and increasing.
Added to which even government-owned operators are required to function as arms-length limited companies - the SNCF and DB of today are not the same as they were.

These are either open access operations or private companies running management contracts. DB Regio / private companies tender for management contracts from Germany's Bundesländer (regional governments) - this equates more to the TfL model than the DfT model. The Bundesländer/Verkehrsverbünde set the timetables and prices (resulting in a much more integrated system where companies operating concessions have less influence) and the contracted operator can only take a certain percentage as profit. DB Fernverkehr (long distance rail) is similar to an open access operation and pays track access charges to DB Netz - there have been several allegations of corruption, given that both organisations are owned by the same holding group.

 

[Pugwash]

I have a better idea for a new tax to subsidise the Railways.

Every employer who requires an employee to start work at 0900 will pay a levy for that employee. The levy reduces on a geometric scale the further away from 0900 the required start time is such that, if it's 0700 it's nil and if it's 1100 it's nil.

Every employer who requires an employee to finish work at 1700 will pay a levy for that employee. The levy reduces on a geometric scale the further away from 1700 the required finish time is such that, if it's 1500 it's nil and if it's 1900 it's nil.

Why not pay drivers for split shifts, if peak demand is between 7 and 9.30 and 4 and 7.30 lets employ drivers on those hours.

 

[transmanche]

I have a better idea for a new tax to subsidise the Railways.

Every employer who requires an employee to start work at 0900 will pay a levy for that employee. The levy reduces on a geometric scale the further away from 0900 the required start time is such that, if it's 0700 it's nil and if it's 1100 it's nil.

A nice idea, but I expect employers would abuse things by making the employee pay somehow - or adjusting work hours and paying less etc.

I think the Government would be better off giving an incentive to an employer, not a levy. Some way to encourage more home working, flexi time working, or just having it so that a company should stagger work hours and have nn% of employees start/end at one time and nn% at another (maybe multiple 'bands') - which, if more companies did it, would naturally stagger work hours.

How about; all those people who say that we shouldn't put the clocks back to GMT in the winter and that we should adopt CET are asked to work from 08:00-16:00 instead of 0900-17:00.

That way they (effectively) get what they want, without us moving timezones - and we get a significant number of people shifting their working hours.

 

[Railsigns]

Added to which most other countries are busy privatising their railways, to a greater or lesser degree.

I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim (post #23) that "most other countries are busy privatising their railways, to a greater or lesser degree."

In the US Amtrak North East corridor is being privatised.

Russia is privatising its railways over four years: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/23/us-russia-privatisation-fact-idUSBRE85M0BL20120623

Serious talk in India about privatisation as a means to tackle corrupt rail ministers recently though nothing from the Indian government itself as far as I know.

NSW in Australia is further privatising its network among other states.http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2012/12/15/rail-d15.html

Come on, even 'Communist' China is privatising its railways:

http://www.scmp.com/article/517261/investors-board-railway-privatisation-express

Either you think there are fewer than ten countries in the world or you're misunderstanding the meaning of the word "most".

In fact if you look around almost everywhere privatised their railways between the late 80s and during the 90's (Japan, Sweden, New Zealand, most of South America, etc..).

I'm glad you mentioned New Zealand. That's one country that privatised their railways in the 1990s then subsequently renationalised them. So it can be done.

 

[WatcherZero]

Which has begun demerging again since 2011 with engineering operations privatised, passenger operations transferred to a local government under a franchise model and commercial land sold off. They also have other tendered operators like Veolia.