Labour to nationalise train operators - ongoing discussion, merged posts

[whole diary]

[TonyK]

I'd like to understand what differences would customers notice if the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) were renationalised and how would it improve the service they receive?

Is anyone here able to clarify that?

It will be nice to see the new uniforms.

[plymothian]

In all likelyhood, the difference we will see will be dictated by the whims of the government at the time and thus changes every 5 years. 

Currently, we have one of the most anti-rail PMs in office.  I don't believe there will be wholesale reform of fares, services or stock under any government spending plan.  If the railways were fully nationalised today, the service would probably be remarkedly worse than it is.

And I don't really understand why Mick Lynch wants to see the railways fully under government control.  Disputes will become more frequent as public servants.  Or maybe that is why.

Nationalisation is therefore not a panacea.

[Electric train]

In all likelyhood, the difference we will see will be dictated by the whims of the government at the time and thus changes every 5 years. 

Currently, we have one of the most anti-rail PMs in office.  I don't believe there will be wholesale reform of fares, services or stock under any government spending plan.  If the railways were fully nationalised today, the service would probably be remarkedly worse than it is.

And I don't really understand why Mick Lynch wants to see the railways fully under government control.  Disputes will become more frequent as public servants.  Or maybe that is why.

Nationalisation is therefore not a panacea.

The GBR^▸ (Great British Railways) model is for the trains to be operated by the private sector under a management contract, the stations will be branded GBR.   The services will be "operated by xyz on behalf of GBR" same model as London Overground and Elizabeth Line

Its unlikely a Labour Government will depart from the above GBR model, it brings the overall control under one wholly Government owned company, but leave room for competitive tendering of the service provision to manage costs

[TaplowGreen]

Political rhetoric in a lead up to a GE is one thing the practical delivery of a policy after the GE is another

This is the most important aspect.  I have very little faith that any party will do what they promise they will.

I'd like to understand what differences would customers notice if the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) were renationalised and how would it improve the service they receive?

Is anyone here able to clarify that?

It's interesting (telling?) that a week has gone by and yet despite considerable clamour from some quarters for renationalisation, no-one has been able to articulate how it would improve service for customers.

I did enjoy some of the witty replies though! 

[IndustryInsider]

The honest answer…

Given the number of known unknowns, and no doubt a few unknown unknowns, I thought it too broad a question and didn’t consider it worth the effort of putting time into a reply.

[GBM]

The honest answer…

Given the number of known unknowns, and no doubt a few unknown unknowns, I thought it too broad a question and didn’t consider it worth the effort of putting time into a reply.

"Yes, Minister"/"Yes, Prime Minister"

[TaplowGreen]

The honest answer…

Given the number of known unknowns, and no doubt a few unknown unknowns, I thought it too broad a question and didn’t consider it worth the effort of putting time into a reply.

Tonight Matthew, IndustryInsider will be........Sir Humphrey Appleby!

[IndustryInsider]

Hacker and Sir Humphrey would no doubt be able to do a much more competent job than the current shower! 

[TonyK]

It's interesting (telling?) that a week has gone by and yet despite considerable clamour from some quarters for renationalisation, no-one has been able to articulate how it would improve service for customers.

I did enjoy some of the witty replies though! 

You might be able to buy a second-class return to the sunlit uplands, I suppose. Younger members of this forum may be surprised to learn that even in the glory days of British Rail, there were times that a train didn't run/didn't run properly/was overcrowded/broke down. I think it would have been 1974 when I heard the announcement, presumably on the announcer's last shift before retirement, that the train to Weybridge had been cancelled "because of a bloody cock-up", so it wasn't all as rosy as the tint in some folks' hindsight spectacles. Even before privatisation, it was common to have a whole smorgasbord of fares on offer to confuse or confound the traveller.

Privatisation may or may not have saved the railway or made it better, that's a debate for another day. Passenger numbers have soared since then, but whether that was because of or in spite of privatisation is anyone's guess. It follows that nobody can really say what renationalising the industry will do for standards. The one thing that will change if it happens is the blame game. At present, your journey can be affected by the actions or omissions of either the train operator whose train you caught or expected to catch, or the actions of omissions of another ToC, or the network operator, or a third-party contractor, and so on. If the railway is a single entity, then in the absence of sabotage, the fault for your inconvenience lies with that single entity. They can send your money back, and won't have to work out who should pay what contribution to the refund.

[TaplowGreen]

It's interesting (telling?) that a week has gone by and yet despite considerable clamour from some quarters for renationalisation, no-one has been able to articulate how it would improve service for customers.

I did enjoy some of the witty replies though! 

You might be able to buy a second-class return to the sunlit uplands, I suppose. Younger members of this forum may be surprised to learn that even in the glory days of British Rail, there were times that a train didn't run/didn't run properly/was overcrowded/broke down. I think it would have been 1974 when I heard the announcement, presumably on the announcer's last shift before retirement, that the train to Weybridge had been cancelled "because of a bloody cock-up", so it wasn't all as rosy as the tint in some folks' hindsight spectacles. Even before privatisation, it was common to have a whole smorgasbord of fares on offer to confuse or confound the traveller.

Privatisation may or may not have saved the railway or made it better, that's a debate for another day. Passenger numbers have soared since then, but whether that was because of or in spite of privatisation is anyone's guess. It follows that nobody can really say what renationalising the industry will do for standards. The one thing that will change if it happens is the blame game. At present, your journey can be affected by the actions or omissions of either the train operator whose train you caught or expected to catch, or the actions of omissions of another ToC, or the network operator, or a third-party contractor, and so on. If the railway is a single entity, then in the absence of sabotage, the fault for your inconvenience lies with that single entity. They can send your money back, and won't have to work out who should pay what contribution to the refund.

Succinctly then, Delay/Repay would be dealt with centrally.

[ellendune]

Younger members of this forum may be surprised to learn that even in the glory days of British Rail, there were times that a train didn't run/didn't run properly/was overcrowded/broke down.
....

Privatisation may or may not have saved the railway or made it better, that's a debate for another day. Passenger numbers have soared since then, but whether that was because of or in spite of privatisation is anyone's guess. It follows that nobody can really say what renationalising the industry will do for standards.

The one thing that is the same today as with the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) days is that the Treasury has a tight reign on costs and no interest in growing the business to increase income. Whatever changes are to come this micro managed control on costs - rather than bottom line - must be resisted otherwise we will be back into the managed decline of the BR days. 

[Noggin]

Younger members of this forum may be surprised to learn that even in the glory days of British Rail, there were times that a train didn't run/didn't run properly/was overcrowded/broke down.
....

Privatisation may or may not have saved the railway or made it better, that's a debate for another day. Passenger numbers have soared since then, but whether that was because of or in spite of privatisation is anyone's guess. It follows that nobody can really say what renationalising the industry will do for standards.

The one thing that is the same today as with the BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) days is that the Treasury has a tight reign on costs and no interest in growing the business to increase income. Whatever changes are to come this micro managed control on costs - rather than bottom line - must be resisted otherwise we will be back into the managed decline of the BR days. 

Not just managed decline, but also the distortions that come from the inevitable politicisation of investment. Money will go to big ticket projects in politicians' favourite areas, whilst rural stations will fall to bits for want of a few quid spending on them and no-one will be interested in investment for "posh southerners" in places like Somerset, Devon and Cornwall - even though most of us know how sorely it's needed.

Incidentally, roughly 100 stations have been added to the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) rail network since 2000. For all that its investment in rail is lauded, the figure for France is something like 82, but they are almost all Metro, tram, RER and TGV^▸ (Train a Grande Vitesse). A quick look at the list of openings suggests there's almost nothing suburban/rural, though perhaps there's less to reopen as there was less closed?

The German figure is better at 118. 

[WSW Frome]

Always worth remembering that any proposed form of "renationalisation" will not recreate a fully integrated BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) in the previously accepted sense. Labour is really only talking about nationalising the passenger TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s (when contracts expire) and perhaps integrating them better with Network Rail to form ?GBR^▸ (Great British Railways).

Large parts of the overall rail operation are now fully in private hands and unlikely to be brought into public ownership. These include ROSCO^» (Rolling Stock Owning Company - about)'s + suppliers of new trains with/without maintenance contracts, infrastructure contractors, repair workshops, freight operations, open access passenger operators.

[TaplowGreen]

[/quote]


Incidentally, roughly 100 stations have been added to the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) rail network since 2000. For all that its investment in rail is lauded, the figure for France is something like 82, but they are almost all Metro, tram, RER and TGV^▸ (Train a Grande Vitesse). A quick look at the list of openings suggests there's almost nothing suburban/rural, though perhaps there's less to reopen as there was less closed?

The German figure is better at 118. 
[/quote]


That's genuinely very interesting, really had no idea we'd gained 100 stations in the last 20 years.

[paul7575]

That's genuinely very interesting, really had no idea we'd gained 100 stations in the last 20 years.

Gets lost in the background noise while people make waves about inconsequential closures such as at Newhaven Marine…

Paul