70% 'back rail renationalisation', say the RMT

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Most people are in favour of returning the railways to public ownership, with just 23% supporting privatisation, according to a poll.

A survey of more than 1,000 people for the Rail Maritime and Transport union (RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers)), found seven out of 10 of those questioned backed renationalisation.

The state of the railways will be debated by the TUC conference in Liverpool later this week.

The RMT will be calling for support for full rail renationalisation.

RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said the poll showed the government is "out of step with the voters" on who owns and runs the rail network.

He said: "If Labour are serious about re-engaging with their core supporters, they can prove it by making a bold statement on public ownership of the railways."

[Btline]

Hardly suprising. I expect the 23% are Chiltern, c2c and Scotrail passengers.

Now we've had a huge improvement (overall, with some exceptions) in rolling stock quality, and more services, but else can the operators offer the British rail network other than higher prices.

It seems that TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) with a vision are few and far between. Chiltern, Scotrail and Virgin all have impressive plans. What does - say - SWTs^▸ (South West Trains) have other than slapping the Waterloo concourse underground?

[Mookiemoo]

To be honest - i'd like it renationlised

Holding the whole country to ransom over an issue is far less easy to justify than a single operator.  The RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) etc are far too powerful against individual TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)'s.

AS for services - the old BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) needed a shake up - but I can see how a nationalised 21st century operator would be a good thing.

As an aside - I was in Daventry today - had to get  train to Long Buckby and cycle 4.5 miles

I do not know but I suspect Daventry is close or larger than Melksham

But has NO train service!  It does have a rail line that is not used though.......

[Btline]

There is no cooperation between TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company)!

If things go tits up at Bristol, and you have FGW^▸ (First Great Western) Groupsave fares to Worcester, in BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) days the Station Master would let you get a XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) service to Cheltenham. But these days the "Train Manager" of the XC service says no when you try to board.

Now the Station "Manager" has to ring upteen people to organise a bus.

Nothing links up. Instead of an integrated network, we have Southern only fares, more restrictions.

We have a separate company running the track, so if there is a points failure, the signelmen at X can't ring the station staff at Y to ask them to set the points to allow a skeletal service to run. They have to send a van by road.

And now we have ticket office cuts, TVMs^▸ (Ticket Vending Machine) which DONT WORK and Celia pronouncing "London" incorrectly as "Landen".

[inspector_blakey]

Obviously it's impossible to be sure, but I suspect that if British Rail were still in existence it would be cutting back as well given the current economic situation. After all, it took some fairly savage cuts in government funding in its time. All of the tings you mention would probably be happening were the system nationalized or not. I'm not necessarily arguing against nationalization (I'm actually pretty agnostic on that issue), just saying that a nationalized industry would be having to deal with exactly the same problems as a privatized railway right now.

And Btline, you can't possibly be suggesting that much of mainland Europe has got it right with their nationalized railways, can you...?   

[paul7575]

Hardly suprising. I expect the 23% are Chiltern, c2c and Scotrail passengers.

Now we've had a huge improvement (overall, with some exceptions) in rolling stock quality, and more services, but else can the operators offer the British rail network other than higher prices.

It seems that TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) with a vision are few and far between. Chiltern, Scotrail and Virgin all have impressive plans. What does - say - SWTs^▸ (South West Trains) have other than slapping the Waterloo concourse underground?

It isn't Scotrail, Virgin, or SWT's responsibility to rebuild the infrastructure, and Virgin aren't doing anything as far as I can tell - which is why the Pendolino lengthening project was a separate contract.  Scotrail run the trains specified and bought by the Scottish Government - the improvement plans for Scotland are not Scotrail's plans.  Chiltern are required to produce improvements to the railway but only because of the specific requirements of their twenty year franchise. Network Rail have a vast amount of work about to start in SWT's area - but as you don't read up on any of the facts, why bother commenting?

Paul

[Super Guard]

And now we have ticket office cuts, TVMs^▸ (Ticket Vending Machine) which DONT WORK and Celia pronouncing "London" incorrectly as "Landen".

I love the way Celia says London Paddington... very sexy... my other favourite being Leeeeeeds 

[willc]

I do not know but I suspect Daventry is close or larger than Melksham

But has NO train service!  It does have a rail line that is not used though.......

This railway line would be where exactly? The line through Daventry closed in 1958. You may have been confused by all those road signs in the area for Daventry International Rail Freight Terminal, but this is actually at Crick, just south of Rugby, and nowhere near Daventry.

[Btline]

VT^▸ (Virgin Trains - former franchises) have stated that they would spend "some m/billions" [can't remember] on upgrading the WCML^▸ (West Coast Main Line). In their onboard magazine, they state they would add an extra track as for as Rugby, build a link to HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) and Heathrow at Wembley.

Was Chiltern's Oxford service part of their agreement? They currently have plans/pipedreams to extend to Milton Keynes, Rugby and to an M6/M1 parkway. Is this in their contract?

Of course the whole BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) vs Private is all speculation. We don't know what would have happened. Although I don't think it was a coincidence that the old 50/60s stock was replaced AFTER privatisation! As I said, the improvements to rolling stock have been huge.

[willc]

As I have pointed out previously, Virgin are very good at 'investing' other people's money, not their own. They have not put a penny into any infrastructure work.

And Paul is quite correct, the Chiltern franchise agreement is conditional upon them fulfilling a series of pledges to improve infrastructure and services and explore new opportunities, Oxford being an example.

[bemmy]

Of course the whole BR^▸ (British Rail(ways)) vs Private is all speculation. We don't know what would have happened.

Exactly.

We didn't have a modern European railway under BR because it was all about cutting costs in the short term. We haven't got a modern European railway from privatisation because it's all about maximising profits in the short term. If the Tory government had allowed BR to borrow more easily and invest sensibly, they could have improved the railway instead of privatising it.

However I'm against re-nationalisation because Labour would make a mess of that as well, and it would work out very costly. I think the privatised railway could be made to work better, with a more effective franchising system and more long term investment.