Great British Rail

[Chippy_Tea]

All over the news this morning will Labour be able to make it work? Something needs to be done the service here has been terrible for many years its so bad my son gave up and bought a cheap car as his timekeeping at work was suffering due to cancellation and late trains.

 

[ClownPrince]

I'm not sure it's possible to make the trains in this country any worse.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Labour has promised to renationalise nearly all passenger rail services within five years if it wins the next election.

It says a new public body would inherit existing contracts when they expire, taking on responsibility for running services.
Automatic refunds for train delays and better internet connection on trains are also planned.
But Transport Secretary Mark Harper said the plans were "unfunded".
Responsibility for running train services was handed to private companies during the 1990s, since when there has been a boom in rail usage since the days of British Rail.
But they have faced heavy criticism over fares and reliability, with critics saying it has led to an inefficient and fragmented system that has failed passengers.

The word "nationalisation" doesn't appear in Labour's plan, but that is what it in effect amounts to.
Under its blueprint, a new arm's length body, Great British Railways (GBR), would take over service contracts currently held by private firms as they expire in the coming years.
GBR would operate services and set timetables, and eventually take over responsibility for maintaining and improving rail infrastructure from Network Rail.

'Transparent and clearer'​

But the party says GBR, like private companies now, would continue to lease rolling stock because it would not be "responsible" to take on the cost of buying it.
Labour is also not planning to nationalise rail freight companies, and would still allow privately financed "open access operators", such as Hull Trains and Lumo, to continue.
Shadow transport secretary Louise Haigh said her party were not "ideologues" and that it was right to use private companies where they add value.
But she said the current system "was not working" and had led to delays and overcrowding.
Labour is also pledging to deliver "a best-price ticket guarantee" ensuring passengers automatically pay the lowest possible amount for tickets when making contactless payments.
Ms Haigh said the guarantee would not necessarily mean cheaper prices, but that the system would be "more transparent and clearer". The government has also said it wants to simplify ticketing.
She also said Labour had no plans to close ticket offices.

Full article - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68889345

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I'm not sure it's possible to make the trains in this country any worse.

I dont think anyone could make ours any worse.

 

[ClownPrince]

Labour has promised to renationalise nearly all passenger rail services within five years if it wins the next election.

It says a new public body would inherit existing contracts when they expire, taking on responsibility for running services.
Automatic refunds for train delays and better internet connection on trains are also planned.
But Transport Secretary Mark Harper said the plans were "unfunded".
Responsibility for running train services was handed to private companies during the 1990s, since when there has been a boom in rail usage since the days of British Rail.
But they have faced heavy criticism over fares and reliability, with critics saying it has led to an inefficient and fragmented system that has failed passengers.

The word "nationalisation" doesn't appear in Labour's plan, but that is what it in effect amounts to.
Under its blueprint, a new arm's length body, Great British Railways (GBR), would take over service contracts currently held by private firms as they expire in the coming years.
GBR would operate services and set timetables, and eventually take over responsibility for maintaining and improving rail infrastructure from Network Rail.

'Transparent and clearer'​

But the party says GBR, like private companies now, would continue to lease rolling stock because it would not be "responsible" to take on the cost of buying it.
Labour is also not planning to nationalise rail freight companies, and would still allow privately financed "open access operators", such as Hull Trains and Lumo, to continue.
Shadow transport secretary Louise Haigh said her party were not "ideologues" and that it was right to use private companies where they add value.
But she said the current system "was not working" and had led to delays and overcrowding.
Labour is also pledging to deliver "a best-price ticket guarantee" ensuring passengers automatically pay the lowest possible amount for tickets when making contactless payments.
Ms Haigh said the guarantee would not necessarily mean cheaper prices, but that the system would be "more transparent and clearer". The government has also said it wants to simplify ticketing.
She also said Labour had no plans to close ticket offices.

Full article - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-68889345

Honestly, don't mind paying more tax if it means stuff starts working again, however not spending money on lining Tory flunkies pockets should easily cover this.

 

[The Baron]

It will be run by the unions again not Labour

 

[Clint]

More pi55 and wind.

 

[starseeker]

I am sure if labours paymasters were not on strike all the time the service would be far ,far better ,as for the labour party making it a success ,i am afraid i am not that delusional to believe it.

 

[Brew_DD2]

I am sure if labours paymasters were not on strike all the time the service would be far ,far better ,as for the labour party making it a success ,i am afraid i am not that delusional to believe it.

The service was sh*te prior to recent strikes. People clearly have short, or rather selective, memories. Other countries seem to manage it, and indeed see our railways as profitable.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

I don't use trains and never have so could I ask regular train travellers if (ignoring strikes) getting from A to B was a better experience pre privatisation?

 

[foxy]

I think this is a very poor move by the Labour Party, didn't work last time and it won't work again. The nonproductive staff will increase, as the minister in charge recruits personnel to buffer any criticisms aimed at the minister.

 

[jof]

I don't use trains and never have so could I ask regular train travellers if (ignoring strikes) getting from A to B was better pre privatisation?

It's not that straight forward.

In school days trains would often be a few minutes late & occasionally cancelled but less so than now. Quite rare to have train failure as mechanically simple trains & if a door stuck, the guard would walk along & give it a kick. The only time we failed to get to school was a couple of snow days (and a week of strikes in the mid 80's when we had to bike there)

Service improved directly after privatisation in the 90's (Mrs was commuting to work then) when we had new rolling stock come in.

Started to drop off around 2011 as those new trains started aging, with trains having to be rebooted because the doors won't shut, broken air con in height of summer, but no opening windows.

Now it's much worse, we have 1/2 the service we had before COVID, trains are often cancelled & I have to take car to rescue my son as he can't get home. No weekend services as constant engineering works & replacement buses. Constant risk of strikes. Prices so high it's cheaper to drive & pay parking the other end.
Oh & if you want a connecting train then the timetables have almost been deliberately set so you have to wait 55 minutes for your connection now.

Train gates down for 5 minutes in the p*ss*ING rain (used to have local signal box where the staff prided themselves on keeping everything moving) due to centralisation of control to Basingstoke & they wonder why we now have a problem with everyone running across when lights start to go red.

Inability to cope when something goes wrong. I put this down to centralisation too. Before the 2000s, if something severe happened further up/down the line they were able to effectively turn trains round at one of the larger stations to keep as much of the local services going as they could, and normally get something running within a couple of hours often with bus replacement runs the stuck part.
But now everything stops. Eventually the big stations get authorised to send people by taxi (happened several times to the Mrs returning from London) but if your at a smaller station youre b*ggered.

(Note, I used to go to school by train from 1979 then used them in the 2000's to commute to work & always pick train over bus when public transport needed)

So yes. They are worse now than the old BR days, but we had about 15 good years of privatised rail at the start.

And don't get me started on train driver pay Vs bus driver pay. Sack the lot of them & fully automate it, but keep the guards as I feel they are key to ensuring disabled & elderly can get on/off & keeping up passenger moral when stuck for hours outside a station.

 

[foxy]

And don't get me started on train driver pay Vs bus driver pay. Sack the lot of them & fully automate it, but keep the guards as I feel they are key to ensuring disabled & elderly can get on/off & keeping up passenger moral when stuck for hours outside a station.

It's the same here, a labor state parliament gets in and the wages go up. Road traffic controllers here get the same wages as air traffic controllers in the UK just for spinning a sign with stop and go on it. Labor government gets in wages rise causing everything else to rise to pay the wages. We have driverless trains in Sydney Metro and Rio Tinto Iron Ore mines. I too can't wait for driverless trains across the board.

 

[Chippy_Tea]

Off topic posts moved to Rowanda thread -

https://www.thehomebrewforum.co.uk/threads/rowanda.104819/

 

[Bitter_Dave]

The idea that nationalisation will increase wages in the long term is far from clear. After privatisation wages in the rail industry went up because it created competition between the rail companies for staff whereas before there was national pay bargaining. The industry is already so regulated in terms of prices and schedules it makes no sense for it to be run by the private sector. Rail is the one industry that is relatively easy to nationalise and so it seems like a no brainer to do this.

 

[dad_of_jon]

tories say labour cant afford to nationalise.

The plan is to not renew contracts once they expire. so what are the outgoing companies going to do with their old rolling stock? no other company will want to buy them if nationalization is on the cards? This should mean an opportunity to buy trains relatively cheap but not buying any crappy unreliable stock. They can work out the difference and get any shortfall built ahead of time. TFW is owned by the Welsh govt so hows that going to work?

 

[stripeyjoe]

The plan is to not renew contracts once they expire. so what are the outgoing companies going to do with their old rolling stock?

The TOCs don’t own the trains, they lease them from one of the two or three privatised rolling stock leasing companies. They are the ones really raking in the profits.

 

[DaleMC]

I think this is a very poor move by the Labour Party, didn't work last time and it won't work again. The nonproductive staff will increase, as the minister in charge recruits personnel to buffer any criticisms aimed at the minister.

It's not working now. I believe Northern, LNER, Southeastern and more all failed and are run publicly, LNER much better than when it was privately operated. The benefits of privatisation tend to only work where there's competition, in rail it's basically a concession for monopolies, it does not work. Although amusingly a large number of rail companies in the UK are run by European state owned operators (Dutch, Italian, German)

Throughout Europe, rail is largely state run, with some disruptors through open access agreements. Can tell you it's much better than here, and better value (not necessarily cheaper) but quicker and cleaner!

 

[foxy]

It's not working now. I believe Northern, LNER, Southeastern and more all failed and are run publicly, LNER much better than when it was privately operated. The benefits of privatisation tend to only work where there's competition, in rail it's basically a concession for monopolies, it does not work. Although amusingly a large number of rail companies in the UK are run by European state owned operators (Dutch, Italian, German)

Throughout Europe, rail is largely state run, with some disruptors through open access agreements. Can tell you it's much better than here, and better value (not necessarily cheaper) but quicker and cleaner!

I guess we are lucky here train travel is cheap and comfortable, I can go from Melbourne to Warrnambool 256 kilometers for $8 at the weekend about 4GBP, and $11 during the week about 5.50 GBP. It's the same price as Swan Hill which is 350 kilometers.
Train and tram are the best way to get around the Metro area I think John Holland a British company runs Metro line and trains are every 10 to 20 minutes my commute is about 40 minutes for $5.00, 2.50 GBP

 

[hoppyscotty]

Well I'm old enough to remember BR and it was significantly worse than what we have today by a significant margin. I don't commute by train so might have a different view if I did, especially if I lived in and around London, but from my perspective rail travel is far far better than it was back in the BR days. Far more investment has actually made it to the ground...stations overhauled and refurbished, new lines, new and upgraded infrastructure, new rolling stock, in the most part, and far better reliability. All this stuff takes time to happen and deliver benefits but at least it's happening. Back in the BR days train breakdowns was regular and eating around on a cold unheated carriage for rescue and I remember once even having to disembark the train in-between stations, walking across a muddy field to a bus to complete my journey, and there was little or no investment in any infrastructure, and what we did invest in was an abject failure and wasted significant chunks of public money.

The only downside is ticket prices, but hey, travel is expensive..all forms of travel has become more expensive over the years so no reason or justification why rail should escape this.

Just cant believe with everything else going on around us at t moment the re-nationalisation of the railways should be anywhere high up enough on the list of priorities that we're even talking about it...just demonstrates its actually a political stunt to appease the more militant and extreme end of the Labour Party.