Scotrail - possible Abellio early termination vote & renationalisation

[snookertam]

Yes, and though I didn’t support it, Holyrood barely seemed capable of organiseing integration of the relatively small number of BTP staff into Police Scotland, so don’t fill me with confidence they’d do a brilliant job arranging full rail nationalisation either.

In fairness, this move was abandoned due to considerable political opposition as much as anything.

 

[mcmad]

What powers do TS not already have over NR? They already have control over budget for CPs and goals for CPs, no?

Don't expect an answer, this is one of the many myths the SNP and their supporters keep making without being able to back up what changes would result other than increased costs from duplication.

 

[Journeyman]

I'm not keen on handing more stuff to the Scottish Government, given the mess they've made of a lot of things.

 

[68000]

This is out and put political from the Labour Party

 

[68000]

What powers do TS not already have over NR? They already have control over budget for CPs and goals for CPs, no?

Can you show us where TS has control over the budget and goals?

 

[takno]

This is out and put political from the Labour Party

Well they are a political party. What were you expecting? A jumble sale?

 

[68000]

Well they are a political party. What were you expecting? A jumble sale?

Accuracy and consistence (quite a lot for a political party I know). This just proves their hypocrisy

 

[Dr Hoo]

Can you show us where TS has control over the budget and goals?

Well they set the Statement of Funds Available (SOFA) and High Level Output Specification (HLOS) for Scotland under the Railways Act 2005, which the ORR then use for the Periodic Review, producing quite distinct outcomes for Network Rail in Scotland. That’s good enough for me.

 

[Highland37]

Well they set the Statement of Funds Available (SOFA) and High Level Output Specification (HLOS) for Scotland under the Railways Act 2005, which the ORR then use for the Periodic Review, producing quite distinct outcomes for Network Rail in Scotland. That’s good enough for me.

What don't they have control of?

 

[takno]

Accuracy and consistence (quite a lot for a political party I know). This just proves their hypocrisy

They are absolutely consistent. Absolutely nothing the Scottish government does is ever good enough for them, Abellio are absolutely always the bad guys, and they add absolutely nothing to the debate. I don't object to the politics - it's exactly what a political party in the parliament should be doing. I appreciate rather less that they are so phenomenally bad at it.

 

[Highland37]

They are absolutely consistent. Absolutely nothing the Scottish government does is ever good enough for them, Abellio are absolutely always the bad guys, and they add absolutely nothing to the debate. I don't object to the politics - it's exactly what a political party in the parliament should be doing. I appreciate rather less that they are so phenomenally bad at it.

That seems a very childish response. Clearly no political party will always do things they way any person wants all of the time and the opposite will also be true.

 

[takno]

That seems a very childish response. Clearly no political party will always do things they way any person wants all of the time and the opposite will also be true.

I have hope, which is the main reason I'm still a member. The Scottish party line on rail is consistently pathetic though, and the current leadership doesn't show any sign of being capable of improving.

 

[Highland37]

Sorry I don't follow you. A member of what?

 

[mark-h]

I would expect (hope?) that by 2020 Scotrail would have resolved the rolling stock issues (HST and 385 late deliveries). If the Scottish Government took control at that point they would seem to have solved the problem even though it had already been solved.

 

[Mingulay]

I would expect (hope?) that by 2020 Scotrail would have resolved the rolling stock issues (HST and 385 late deliveries). If the Scottish Government took control at that point they would seem to have solved the problem even though it had already been solved.

Leaving specific party politics to one side. Ministers and politicians will not make good managers or strategic planners of rail. Or indeed any buisiness. Why ?

The transport minister has about a 9 month shelf life it seems. So no one has a proper grasp.

They are in the main career politicians who have never had any experience in anything outside politics

They are not too bright in my humble opinion.

How we expect them to mananage rail or indeed anything complex is becoming increasingly apparent they can’t. Ferries. Health Education etc etc

And the opposition parties are no better.

Should be a qualification to become an msp. A proven track record of achievement out side politics

 

[takno]

Leaving specific party politics to one side. Ministers and politicians will not make good managers or strategic planners of rail. Or indeed any buisiness. Why ?

The transport minister has about a 9 month shelf life it seems. So no one has a proper grasp.

They are in the main career politicians who have never had any experience in anything outside politics

They are not too bright in my humble opinion.

How we expect them to mananage rail or indeed anything complex is becoming increasingly apparent they can’t. Ferries. Health Education etc etc

And the opposition parties are no better.

Should be a qualification to become an msp. A proven track record of achievement out side politics

I don't see this description as any different from the leaders of most private industry, and in utilities and rail all the evidence from the past and from other European countries is that if they put the right structures in place they can run the industries fairly well. The performance is often better in fact than whatever board of great and good non-execs private industry can cobble together. In addition to being able to do it just as well, the government is usually aiming to operate in the interests of the users of the service and society at large, where private companies even when run well can often operate only in the interests of a small group of shareholders.

Whatever my political frustrations, the Scottish government is generally fairly well run, delivering services like water with far less cost, drama and ineptitude than has been the experience in England. They have certainly served us better over the last 15 years than, say, the Scottish banking sector

 

[Mingulay]

I don't see this description as any different from the leaders of most private industry, and in utilities and rail all the evidence from the past and from other European countries is that if they put the right structures in place they can run the industries fairly well. The performance is often better in fact than whatever board of great and good non-execs private industry can cobble together. In addition to being able to do it just as well, the government is usually aiming to operate in the interests of the users of the service and society at large, where private companies even when run well can often operate only in the interests of a small group of shareholders.

Whatever my political frustrations, the Scottish government is generally fairly well run, delivering services like water with far less cost, drama and ineptitude than has been the experience in England. They have certainly served us better over the last 15 years than, say, the Scottish banking sector

I think there was a period early on they seemed competent managers of the country. But over time the record is not good

You mention Scottish water. I lived thru a major sewerage replacement work . It was staggering late. Over budget and when commissioned. It did not work. Wrong technology. Scottish water admitted it was a shambles. No defence. 8 years on they are still trying to come up with a soloution. They did 3 such plants all failed. Wasted money 50 million. Keith brown was minister in charge at the time. I wrote to him. Wait for. He said. We have to try new technology. ! A guy very much out his depth. No longer a minister having tried most posts. Now out of harms way as deputy leader !

Banks. I’m with you there. They are a disgrace and the Scottish banking sector was the worst. Recent Fred Goodwin program was an eye opener. Darling came out of it well. But can you imagine if Scotland had been independent when the Scottish banks went down ? We would have been vaporised. Fred was of course being held up by Alex Salmond as a beacon of Scottish expertise. Raises questions ofbAlex and his judgement of those he was close to. Trump at one time. Rupert Murdoch . All now looking like weird choices.

 

[Highland37]

I think there was a period early on they seemed competent managers of the country. But over time the record is not good

You mention Scottish water. I lived thru a major sewerage replacement work . It was staggering late. Over budget and when commissioned. It did not work. Wrong technology. Scottish water admitted it was a shambles. No defence. 8 years on they are still trying to come up with a soloution. They did 3 such plants all failed. Wasted money 50 million. Keith brown was minister in charge at the time. I wrote to him. Wait for. He said. We have to try new technology. ! A guy very much out his depth. No longer a minister having tried most posts. Now out of harms way as deputy leader !

Banks. I’m with you there. They are a disgrace and the Scottish banking sector was the worst. Recent Fred Goodwin program was an eye opener. Darling came out of it well. But can you imagine if Scotland had been independent when the Scottish banks went down ? We would have been vaporised. Fred was of course being held up by Alex Salmond as a beacon of Scottish expertise. Raises questions ofbAlex and his judgement of those he was close to. Trump at one time. Rupert Murdoch . All now looking like weird choices.

You are either trying to create an argument or genuinely don't understand the matters you are raising.

The "Scottish banking sector" has been regulated, controlled (or not) and overseen by the UK since 1707. There was no control from the Scottish Government or Scottish Executive prior to that and at no point has any MSP or any part of the Scottish Government had control over RBS, the disaster or British banking (please stop trying to make out that it was only Scottish problem when the facts don't support you) to avert the crises which happened.

As for your pre-qualification of who should be able to to become an MSP, well that shows a scary, fast and loose view of democracy. Maybe Trump should decide for you? He has a track record and will deliver your treatment plant, and lots more....

Oh dear.

 

[Mingulay]

You are either trying to create an argument or genuinely don't understand the matters you are raising.

The "Scottish banking sector" has been regulated, controlled (or not) and overseen by the UK since 1707. There was no control from the Scottish Government or Scottish Executive prior to that and at no point has any MSP or any part of the Scottish Government had control over RBS, the disaster or British banking (please stop trying to make out that it was only Scottish problem when the facts don't support you) to avert the crises which happened.

As for your pre-qualification of who should be able to to become an MSP, well that shows a scary, fast and loose view of democracy. Maybe Trump should decide for you? He has a track record and will deliver your treatment plant, and lots more....

Oh dear.

Not suggesting it was solely a Scottish banking crisis at all , it was Global. I accept it was under uk regulation and woefully inadequate . But RBS based in Edinburgh courted by Alex S was the biggest bank in the world ! We saw what happened in Iceland . My point is , if were independent at that time we would have been unable to support a bail out. I would suggest Derek MacKay would struggle to cope with that level of financial crisis . Not sure he even finished his degree before starting in politics.

I would think a pre qualification of competence for public service would strengthen democracy. What weakens democracy is when the public lose faith in elected politicians , then you do end up in the nightmare of Trump. I hope we share that sentiment in common ?

It is apparent any challenge to the SNP cause or record provokes you, but I do point out I have little faith in all politicians of all parties .

 

[Highland37]

Whether it was based in Edniburgh or anywhere else in the UK or courted by anyone is irrelevant. It is and was regulated and controlled under the UK system.

I agree with you though about the UK banking crises. Scotland would have had to default had the scale of the actual UK disaster been applied to Scotland alone. However, I don't think it would have even got close to being so bad as it would have been much more tightly regulated. Capitalisation and liquidity fell hugely in the decades preceding the UK crises which also affected many other countries.

Having a degree is irrelevant. Anyone with half a brain cell can get one.

Democracy is about free choice.

 

[takno]

I agree with you though about the UK banking crises. Scotland would have had to default had the scale of the actual UK disaster been applied to Scotland alone. However, I don't think it would have even got close to being so bad as it would have been much more tightly regulated. Capitalisation and liquidity fell hugely in the decades preceding the UK crises which also affected many other countries.

I think that's fairly delusional. Capitalisation and liquidity fell hugely in the banking sector across the world, largely as a result of liberalisation in the US market and the Basel 2 agreement. The UK didn't even particularly lead the way in allowing this. Salmond was worshipping at Fred's feet and crowing about the arc of prosperity and Celtic tigers a matter of months before the whole thing imploded. There is no way he'd have imposed stricter regulation on the industry.

While the quality of government in Scotland has been generally pretty good, Salmond's administration was a low point, and most of the major issues we are dealing with such as Police Scotland were instituted on his watch.

 

[Highland37]

I don't and I note that no Scottish administration has had any control over the banking sector since 1707. Whether the UK "particularly lead" on capitalisation is irrelevant. It happened and this meant that when RBS poned Alasdair Darling, who was perfectly aware of this, to say they didn't have enough money, a house of cards began to fall which he had been part of supporting.

As I am sure you will understand, I disagree with your opinion, that "there is no way he'd have imposed stricter regulation on the industry". That might have been true but it is also irrelevant as it could never have happened given where power than and now lays.

I note that the posters of the "good enough for me" brigade are silent on what powers the Scottish Government doesn't have, on the railways, relative to the British Government. Do you know where the differences are?

 

[JohnR]

What powers do TS not already have over NR? They already have control over budget for CPs and goals for CPs, no?

A question I have asked many times, but have yet to have a satisfactory answer. There might be an argument that timetable planning needs to be devolved - but thats the case for other Routes as well as Scotland. However, it was the independent regulator who told NR to centralise all timetable planning in order to achieve efficiencies - hardly Network Rail's fault.

But yes, in pretty much everything else, Transport Scotland tell NR in Scotland what to do, and how much they are willing to pay for it. As Kenny McAskill once said "he who pays the pipers, plays the tune".

 

[JohnR]

I don't and I note that no Scottish administration has had any control over the banking sector since 1707. Whether the UK "particularly lead" on capitalisation is irrelevant. It happened and this meant that when RBS poned Alasdair Darling, who was perfectly aware of this, to say they didn't have enough money, a house of cards began to fall which he had been part of supporting.

As I am sure you will understand, I disagree with your opinion, that "there is no way he'd have imposed stricter regulation on the industry". That might have been true but it is also irrelevant as it could never have happened given where power than and now lays.

I note that the posters of the "good enough for me" brigade are silent on what powers the Scottish Government doesn't have, on the railways, relative to the British Government. Do you know where the differences are?

At the risk of going off-topic, Alex Salmond is on record as describing Gordon Brown's regulation regime for banking as "gold-plated" and "far in excess of what we would do in an independent Scotland".

Of course that was before the financial crash in 2007/8.

After that he said that Gordon Brown's regulation regime for banking was "pandering to the bankers" and "far more lax than what we would do in an independent Scotland".

So you can take your pick.

 

[Highland37]

Can we be more specific? What powers exactly, does Westminster have that the Scottish Parliament doesn't. Clearly borrowing is one of them and that is closely related to the budget available but there are also railway-specific ones of which I am not sure.

 

[JohnR]

Can we be more specific? What powers exactly, does Westminster have that the Scottish Parliament doesn't. Clearly borrowing is one of them and that is closely related to the budget available but there are also railway-specific ones of which I am not sure.

My understanding - and I could be wrong - is that NR borrows as a UK corporate entity. So if the HLOS and SOFA from Transport Scotland requires borrowing from NR against the asset base, it borrows it. Scotland Route already has an allocation of NR debt against it, does it not?

So even borrowing isnt something we need NR Scotland to be separated out for to achieve.

 

[Highland37]

So just to be clear, there is no, none, nothing, stopping a Scottish Government raising the budget for rail, regardless of what NR says elsewhere and against the wishes of Westminster. No lack of powers anywhere?

 

[JohnR]

So just to be clear, there is no, none, nothing, stopping a Scottish Government raising the budget for rail, regardless of what NR says elsewhere and against the wishes of Westminster. No lack of powers anywhere?

Westminster doesnt get a say. NR's budget, and the HLOS and SOFA's issued by the DfT and Transport Scotland are signed off by the regulator - not "Westminster". If the the regulator doesnt think it appropriate, they dont get approved, and DfT and TS told to think again. ORR is of course mindful of the need for NR not to borrow excessively, so wont just approve a spending splurge on the credit card - and is also there to ensure that operators and taxpayers arnt ripped off - hence the efficiencies they require NR to make over the control period.

 

[Highland37]

No I am not suggesting that the House of Commons votes on it but the powers lay at Westminster, which chooses to exercise these through the Dft etc and the powers of the regulator are set by its remit. Guess who decides that?

So, just to be clear (and thanks!), powers which are not under the control of the Scottish Government or any of its agencies include matters of the Dft, ORR amongst others?

 

[JohnR]

Yes, Westminster has decided that ORR as the regulator gets to decide Network Rail's budget. But if Transport Scotland were to chuck extra money at NR to do stuff, do you think ORR will say "No you dont unless DfT agrees to it"? If NR Scotland were fully hived off, would there not need to be some kind of independent regulator? Are you suggesting a separate ORR for Scotland?

Also, the regulators powers are quite wide ranging, and although they have been given to them by Westminster, they are not dictated to by Westminster - ORR has the power to instigate a periodic review (I believe Tom Winsor threatened the Labour Government with one of these once), and should the Government attempt to overrule the independent regulator, theres no doubt it would lead to a judicial review in the courts, plus the associated impact on other regulators, such as OfCom, OfWat and OfGem - and I'd expect the utilities in those sectors to be up in arms about Government interference in independent regulation.

So really, ultimately, the idea that the Scottish Government has "no powers" over Network Rail is risible. They can - and do - decide what they want Network Rail to do, and they give them the funds to do so. If they wanted the Highland Main line dualled and electrified to Inverness, theres nothing stopping them from chucking £3billion at Network Rail and telling them to get on with it. What powers do YOU think they need? And from whom?