Were we lied to about Privitisation?

[jon0844]

There's simply no way the civil servants in London can understand the things that need doing in Manchester (or Birmingham, or Leeds, or Sheffield, or Liverpool... etc).

They probably don't even understand the things that need doing beyond Zone 2...!

 

[RichW1]

I hear all your arguments HYPERDERMIC and have applied the necessary research and take your points on board. Maybe it should be pointed out that now it looks like no-body knows what percentage of laws come from the EU but not many seem good. Pressure from the EU encompasses the following: Working time directives, action against UK hedge funds, rules to stop our corporation rate going too low and 'competitive', trading bans on commonwealth trade because of EU membership (pardon our past that could give us a competitive edge!), more billions for the europot - why? in the middle of economic crisis? votes for prisoners through EU human rights legislation, and a ream of economic legislation when I was in the City that would make London less atrractive, to which London told them to get stuffed and rightly so. So, I care little for many of the smaller things that annoy me, but these are the big things the EU wishes to impose on the UK - yeh nice move in the current condition. Everything about the EU is not compatible with UK economic potential. What they do propose might as well be called 'How to kill an economy in a 21st century world'.

All that matters is economic growth potential and competitive edge because out of that comes all the little side-show issues we then all debate and talk about. No growth, no money, nothing to debate. It's primarily an economic argument that forces me to fight the EU tooth and nail. Times like this it would be nice to be Norwegian.

Also there's a lot of attack on London (not from Hyperdermic) - London is a magnet of self sustaining growth - the bigger it gets the more it attracts, that is not the fault of anyone except the people that move there and make it such an economic powerhouse. Yes large budgets are given to London and I agree Manchester gets a raw deal, but neither do I see very good selling coming from the north. Manchester's actually done quite well and I think the future's bright. But if there was more selling from the northern metro area and less complaining about London it would be a great thing. To be honest though I have as much affection for the north as do for London but comparing them is pointless. It's like apples and oranges. Manchester is the only city that's decided to go and do something about it and Manchester's CBD is going to be the only one that counts in the north over the next decade at least because of all the hard work gone in in recent years.

 

[Zoe]

Times like this it would be nice to be Norwegian.

Norway still implement EU Directives.

 

[RichW1]

Ahh yes but it doesn't have to unless related to specific trade issues. Trade is all the EU was meant to do, now we're expected to be one big happy family...yet we share no economic similarities and we now have to put into the pot to bail out trading partners that we have little choice but to trade with. Also Norway can trade with whom ever it chooses.

 

[yorksrob]

Manchester is the only city that's decided to go and do something about it and Manchester's CBD is going to be the only one that counts in the north over the next decade at least because of all the hard work gone in in recent years.

Those of us in Leeds will have something to say about that !

 

[island]

Wolverhampton to Coventry VT Only FIRST CLASS Anytime Return - £9.20

Wolverhampton to Coventry Any Permitted STANDARD CLASS Anytime Return - £9.60 (it's more expensive! )

What would you rather travel in - Standard Class on a class 350 (or worse!) or First Class on a class 390, and keep 40p in your pocket?! I think I know the answer! (even junglejames might agree with me on this one!)

Well no actually, £9.20 is an Anytime Day 1R (VIRGIN TRNS ONLY) and £9.60 is an Anytime Return (ANY PERMITTED); you ought to be comparing to the Anytime Day R (ANY PERMITTED) which is £8.60, as with the £9.60 ticket you can return within a month.

 

[SS4]

Wolverhampton to Coventry VT Only FIRST CLASS Anytime Return - £9.20

Wolverhampton to Coventry Any Permitted STANDARD CLASS Anytime Return - £9.60 (it's more expensive! )

What would you rather travel in - Standard Class on a class 350 (or worse!) or First Class on a class 390, and keep 40p in your pocket?! I think I know the answer! (even junglejames might agree with me on this one!)

In addition if you were doing a day return you'd get a nnetwork day pass for £6.80

 

[LE Greys]

If you are going to do that then why have franchises at all? Why not just sell the routes to different companies with regulation to prevent mergers/takeovers that would remove competition?

That would be a very good idea, also allowing the DfT to wash their hands of the whole mess. The companies would have to get full rights to freight as well, and ideally their own works to maintain their stock (which would be sold and the ROSCOs wound up). Open access could still operate under running powers, and there might have to be a few alterations (merging the GNR and NER for instance). It's workable.

 

[tbtc]

London is a magnet of self sustaining growth - the bigger it gets the more it attracts, that is not the fault of anyone except the people that move there and make it such an economic powerhouse

The reason for the recession/ slump/ spending cuts ring a bell?

The UK economy was overbalanced in favour of London (and in favour of the "City" specifically), which is the reason we got into the mess we did.

The economy needs rebalanced along the lines of the German economy where the Stock Exchange is just one of the economic areas (alongside Manufacturing etc).

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Pressure from the EU encompasses the following: Working time directives, action against UK hedge funds, rules to stop our corporation rate going too low and 'competitive', trading bans on commonwealth trade because of EU membership (pardon our past that could give us a competitive edge!), more billions for the europot - why? in the middle of economic crisis? votes for prisoners through EU human rights legislation, and a ream of economic legislation when I was in the City that would make London less atrractive, to which London told them to get stuffed and rightly so.

We are a major force in the EU and demanded many of the changes which people now complain about (eg expansion to the east/south) to promote the single market.

No laws are "imposed" from Brussels, they are debated at integovernmental level and accepted/rejected at the summits. Usually we gain more than we lose (but you only hear about the losing).

We are not in the Euro so have excluded ourselves from much of the debate. Our age-old solution is devaluation of the un-mighty £, which is why inflation is so high (including new train prices).

A market of 60 million is not viable in the 21st century, Europe is the only option. The commonwealth means nothing today in trade terms, they have all found new, better markets. Our products were not good enough.
Why do you think we own Japanese TV sets, German cars and Chinese everything else? Also why the only new trains we can buy come with German/French/Japanese badges.

The EU is not perfect but the aim of a wide open market is still valid.

 

[yorksrob]

Unfortunately the increasing number of issues decided by qualified majority voting means that more and more decisions are imposed on countries against their will.

Giving states the right to opt in and out of various measures (such as the Euro) offers a far more realistic blueprint for the EU to continue in harmony than "Ever Closer Union".

 

[Rhydgaled]

From what I've read in this topic I think the question 'Were We Lied To' is rather hard to answer. I thought at first I'd say we have been lied to, but actually having read what I have of the topic now I think we haven't. Was privitisation right is another question entirely, to which the answer in my opinion is un-deniably NO. British Rail probablly had it's flaws but the current system most definatly has many flaws, and costs £4bn per anum more.

Privatisation has also given us Meridians, Coradias and Desiros.

And BR gave us Pacers

I think you need to compare like with like here, I've never been on a Meridian but I'm pretty sure many on here who have will prefer BR's equivelent, the Intercity 125, in many respects. Similarly, I've not used Desiros much (444 and 450 a few times) and haven't used BR's equivelent, the 5-WES, in years but from what I remember I think the 5-WES was better. Certainly I'd say a 5-WES beats a 444 on apearance. Finally Coradias (175s), I HAVE had experience of these and while they aren't particularlly bad to travel on (apart from the seats being rock hard, perhaps they are better now as I've yet to travel on a refurbished example) BR's equivelent (158s) is much lighter and just as good in all respects save top speed. The 158 is also much more flexible, thanks to corridor connections at the unit ends, somthing 175s lack.

 

[Oswyntail]

... a debate I was watching before Christmas was rather unflattering to the House, a peer telling the world about the flaws of same-sex marriage and adoption (the subject of the debate was the recognition of the status of codepedents).

Actually, IMHO, that is a GOOD advert for the Lords. There are active debates that involve a FULL range of opinions, which, whether one agrees or not, actually makes for a more comprehensive debate. And, in those areas that I have direct experience in, there is much more expertise in the Lords, which is listened to and considered. There is much less of the party line that ruins Commons debate.

... There's simply no way the civil servants in London can understand the things that need doing in Manchester (or Birmingham, or Leeds, or Sheffield, or Liverpool... etc).

Well, actually, many of them live in those places and are well aware of local issues.And it is surely equally bad to have purely local solutions such as "We in Leeds won't do anything that Sheffield or Manchester have done, and we can ignore Bradford". There has to be an over-arching policy, and standards, that local providers work within.

We need greater devolution and greater regionalism - and less London-centrism - if we want to "rebalance" the economy and the country as David Cameron says he wants to....

That I agree with, subject to my proviso above.

 

[LE Greys]

It's interesting to note that in our last clash with Europe (prisoner votes) the Government decided to stand up to them and they seemingly backed down. That was the European Court of Human Rights. Would (say) the Supreme Court have caused something similar if they had made the same decision?

 

[SS4]

It's interesting to note that in our last clash with Europe (prisoner votes) the Government decided to stand up to them and they seemingly backed down. That was the European Court of Human Rights. Would (say) the Supreme Court have caused something similar if they had made the same decision?

I don't believe they've backed down but rather Westminster has paid the cursory fine and our media, not exactly known for being pro EU, have quietly dropped the issue

 

[LE Greys]

Americans might recognise the following, slightly edited passage.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all people are created equal, that regardless of sex, age, race or religion they are all entitled to certain Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, governments are instituted deriving their powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience has shown, that Humanity are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards to their future security. – Such has been the patient sufferance of these islands; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to return entirely to their own governance without the influence of the European Union. The history of the European Union is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these islands. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.

I could go on, but I won't.

 

[WelshBluebird]

This may have been said before, but it is a 12 page thread, and I haven't read it all yet!

My main problem with privitisation is that the TOC's pass the blame too much. The amount of times I've heard / seen a TOC blame another is amazing really.

 

[dstrat]

The level of subsidies given to the privatised operators now is far, far in excess of what was given to BR. So we give them more money to allow them to skim a bit off each year, increasing year by year to make themselves richer?

Mindless. Or if you are involved in your palms being greased; perfect. The sad thing is I wish I was bleating the old rhetoric of an angry, cynical man.... but its actually the truth. Its all it ever is when it comes the privatisation of public services, huge inefficient use of our money just so a couple of fat wallets can grow.

 

[jon0844]

But the TOCs don't make that much money, at least as a percentage of the money that comes in. It's Network Rail that seems to have suddenly become a place where money disappears in huge amounts.

 

[Rhydgaled]

But the TOCs don't make that much money, at least as a percentage of the money that comes in. It's Network Rail that seems to have suddenly become a place where money disappears in huge amounts.

We still have lost many, many hundereds of millions per franchise to the TOCs since privitisation though. In my opinion though, while Network Rail significantly overprice so much (which needs dealing with), the biggest black hole is the ROSCOs. Many millions per TOC per year going down the drain (roughly about £30m for Arriva Trains Wales' stock I think, over £300m nationally on DMUs alone). Their purpose as far as I can tell is solely a loan to fund the purchase of new rolling stock and allow the government (who effectivly eventually end up paying, via the TOCs, anyway) to spread the cost over the years, but unlike a loan the ROSCOs don't stop charging re-payments when the stock is paid for!!!! In fact, most if not all of the BR stock had been paid for once already, and now we're having to pay for it all over again!!! I'm guessing the annual payments the ROSCOs charge are equivlent to a loan with a fairly high interest rate, but without the leasing costs for each car of an Electrostar (I think they come in at £1.1m a pop per car to buy new) I can't say for sure.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Open Access Operator.

Don't you think it has been a bad thing that the use of such acronyms has reached the levels now encountered....every industry has its own tranche of these....with the result you have just had to be so kind as to answer such a question

Years ago, my wife saw me reading an article with OMO (one man operated to the uninitiated) in the title and asked me why transport magazines were reviewing washing powders:roll::roll:.....nuff said.

 

[tbtc]

We still have lost many, many hundereds of millions per franchise to the TOCs since privitisation though. In my opinion though, while Network Rail significantly overprice so much (which needs dealing with), the biggest black hole is the ROSCOs. Many millions per TOC per year going down the drain (roughly about £30m for Arriva Trains Wales' stock I think, over £300m nationally on DMUs alone). Their purpose as far as I can tell is solely a loan to fund the purchase of new rolling stock and allow the government (who effectivly eventually end up paying, via the TOCs, anyway) to spread the cost over the years, but unlike a loan the ROSCOs don't stop charging re-payments when the stock is paid for!!!! In fact, most if not all of the BR stock had been paid for once already, and now we're having to pay for it all over again!!! I'm guessing the annual payments the ROSCOs charge are equivlent to a loan with a fairly high interest rate, but without the leasing costs for each car of an Electrostar (I think they come in at £1.1m a pop per car to buy new) I can't say for sure.

Hmm... As all new stock is specified by DFT and allocated/cascaded at the nod of the DFT, there's an argument to get rid of ROSCOs altogether and just have the state own the units themselves.

You'd still have private companies bidding to run services, but the state would supply the trains (in the same way that it effectively supplies the track and stations).

Any profits the ROSCOs make would be replaced by either lower fees to TOCs or to cut the state subsidy of the railways.

 

[jon0844]

The ROSCOs really do deserve a lot (most) of the blame for us being stuck with old stock - and stock that really isn't fit for purpose.

Irrespective of whether some stock has 'grandfather rights', is it really right to have inaccessible trains allowed to operator for another 8-9 years when they've probably paid for themselves many times over?

Sure, you get the most you can from something - but within reason. I'm sure there would be more growth in some areas from better rolling stock, given many people aren't forced to go by train.

 

[talltim]

Privatisation has also given us Meridians, Coradias and Desiros.

And BR gave us Pacers

How are Voyagers bad and Meridians good? For the passenger Meridians are just Voyagers with fewer stupidly huge toilets and different colour scheme.

 

[Zoe]

Hmm... As all new stock is specified by DFT and allocated/cascaded at the nod of the DFT, there's an argument to get rid of ROSCOs altogether and just have the state own the units themselves.

Alternatively you could have Network Rail own the stock.

 

[ainsworth74]

Alternatively you could have Network Rail own the stock.

At which point seeing as Network Rail would then own the stock and the track why not simply have them run the trains as well? Seems like it would simplify things somewhat...

And yes Zoe I know the reason is that Europe wouldn't like it but still seems like a good plan to me.

 

[talltim]

It's interesting to note that in our last clash with Europe (prisoner votes) the Government decided to stand up to them and they seemingly backed down. That was the European Court of Human Rights. Would (say) the Supreme Court have caused something similar if they had made the same decision?

As you say, that was the European Court of Human Rights, NOT the EU.
Also they didn't demand that we allowed prisoners the vote, simply that we needed to have a policy on who of them did have the vote (which could be none of them) and not just have a blanket ban.

 

[starrymarkb]

At which point seeing as Network Rail would then own the stock and the track why not simply have them run the trains as well? Seems like it would simplify things somewhat...

And yes Zoe I know the reason is that Europe wouldn't like it but still seems like a good plan to me.

As long as they are accounted for seperately. So you can have NR (Trains) and NR (Infra) both under the same holding company with NR (Trains) paying NR (Infra) for the use of the track from an accountancy point of view.

 

[Rhydgaled]

At which point seeing as Network Rail would then own the stock and the track why not simply have them run the trains as well? Seems like it would simplify things somewhat..

Yep. After that you've just got to sort out Network Rail's out of control costs, merge it with BRB Residuary, rename the whole thing British Rail and bring back some of their (better) liveries (possibly keep one or two of the best post-privatisation liveries too) and you're done!

Hmm... As all new stock is specified by DFT and allocated/cascaded at the nod of the DFT, there's an argument to get rid of ROSCOs altogether and just have the state own the units themselves.

You'd still have private companies bidding to run services, but the state would supply the trains (in the same way that it effectively supplies the track and stations).

Any profits the ROSCOs make would be replaced by either lower fees to TOCs or to cut the state subsidy of the railways.

Yeah, you could just nationalise the ROSCOs and give the TOCs a free lease on the stock as part of their franchise, hence each TOC will start requiring less subsidy. You'd claw back even more if you nationalised the TOCs too, both from their (normally artifical, ie. paid for by a larger subsidy) profits and from getting rid of delay attribution staff, but just getting rid of ROSCOs would be a good start.

 

[LE Greys]

How are Voyagers bad and Meridians good? For the passenger Meridians are just Voyagers with fewer stupidly huge toilets and different colour scheme.

Well, they're Super-duper Voyagers, if I can put it that way. The seating layout is better, the luggage racks were bigger from the off, the plumbing was modified. Basically, lessons learnt from the 220s/221s were applied here. And they're better-looking.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yeah, you could just nationalise the ROSCOs and give the TOCs a free lease on the stock as part of their franchise, hence each TOC will start requiring less subsidy. You'd claw back even more if you nationalised the TOCs too, both from their (normally artifical, ie. paid for by a larger subsidy) profits and from getting rid of delay attribution staff, but just getting rid of ROSCOs would be a good start.

Another possibility would be to allow the TOCs to buy stock directly from the manufacturers provided the contract said that they would have to sell them to a ROSCO if they lost the franchise. That way, the 11-car Pendy issue with Virgin would be settled, they could put their own money up and hope to reclaim it later. The TOC would bear the financial risk on the stock, but not simply have the ability to take it away again at the end of the franchise.