advertisement


Train nationalisation or not ?

We seem to be a nation good at inventing things but not perfecting/running them.

Maybe we should get the Swiss in to run it for us?
I recall being on a Swiss train recently and there was an air condition leak dripping over the window inside . i was rather shocked as everything seems so superb on there . I do love the names they use too 😄

 
We seem to be a nation good at inventing things but not perfecting/running them.

Maybe we should get the Swiss in to run it for us?
The SBB did consider getting involved at one point, but then backed out:

 
It’s a very complicated picture, we will still need some private sector involvement. Overall our rail service is better than it was under BR, the unions still have the power to call strikes & disruption (I’m making no judgement here).

Rail stations are definitely better than they were in many cases (look at Kings Cross).

Ultimately I just want better service, I’m not a regular commuter & generally I get where I need to be for a reasonable price. What bugs me is delays & tech issues.
 
Don't worry, it seems they are not going to re-nationalise absolutely everything. Millions will still be syphoned off.

 
I recall being on a Swiss train recently and there was an air condition leak dripping over the window inside . i was rather shocked as everything seems so superb on there . I do love the names they use too 😄

Comes of being in the Italian-speaking canton Ticino - Ferrovie Autolinee Regionali Ticinesi (Ticino Regional Train and Bus Lines).

They are good, but these things happen - I've had cases of the air-conditioning not working at all in summer, and of course you can't open the windows any more.
 
Last edited:
I joined the PO in 1982 and by then it was making a damn good profit. I was with it for 22 years and they made a loss of £450mm for one year only.
I don't think we are comparing like-with-like. I guess that the PO once separated from its telecoms unit that was subsidising it had to change its working model. When I joined the GPO on Monday to Friday we had three postal deliveries a day one around 6am another around 8:30am and a third around 11:30am. On Saturday just two deliveries. This was on the outskirts/boarder of a city with country lanes at the end of the road.

Of course this quality of service had to be abandoned. Just like everything else standards of public service have dropped dramatically.

DV
 
I don't think we are comparing like-with-like. I guess that the PO once separated from its telecoms unit that was subsidising it had to change its working model. When I joined the GPO on Monday to Friday we had three postal deliveries a day one around 6am another around 8:30am and a third around 11:30am. On Saturday just two deliveries. This was on the outskirts/boarder of a city with country lanes at the end of the road.

Of course this quality of service had to be abandoned. Just like everything else standards of public service have dropped dramatically.

DV
The quality of service of all postal services in Europe were constantly monitored for internal and international deliveries. I worked for them between 1982-2004 and the UK came out on top for every year. They also made a profit for every year but one.

As regards to the number of daily deliveries, what happened was that the first delivery accounted for the lions share making the last two redundant. Strangely enough the number of deliveries made during WW1 was five per day. The number of deliveries was always agreed with HMG.

Having said that, even when I left in 2004 the writing was on the wall. Volumes had reduced by 5%pa for the two previous years and were still reducing due to the internet. The money was moving from letters (Royal Mail) to parcels (Parcelforce) and it was deemed that this trend was certain to continue.

By the time Mandelson was taking charge, the then volumes were inadequate to sustain one business let alone two or more. The pension deficit was £10.7bn and not one company expressed any interest to compete with the complete operation and the main concern was cherry picking within the M25. Mandelson diverted the pension deficit into HMG coffers and gave it protected status to appease the unions who were still against any privatisation.

On this basis there was absolutely no logical reason to continue with the privatisation.
 
Royal Mail look like they are reverting to multiple daily deliveries.

Friday we had three separate deliveries.

First was regular postman.

Second 3 pm Amazon delivery by Royal Mail

Third 4.10 pm Amazon delivery by Royal Mail.

The two second deliveries were by younger staff on an afternoon shift.
 
It always amazes me that the UK, which gave the world the railways, has made such a howling mess of them. It was the British who laid out the basis for the Swiss railway system in the min-19th century, and this has developed into one of the world's best systems, in fact, as one commentator described it, Switzerland in reality is one giant train set, in which succeeding generations of fathers and sons have added new rolling stock and track.

The Swiss recognise the railway as a valuable public service and are prepared to spend serious money to make sure that they all work well and have the latest equipment. Something like 50% of Switzerland's railway mileage is in private hands, but the federal and cantonal governments are prepared to put their hands in their pockets and help out with major projects. One recent example is the second Albula Tunnel. The Rhätische Bahn in canton Graubünden in eastern Switzerland is the second biggest railway network after the federal SBB and its century-old Albula Tunnel en route to St. Moritz was becoming dangerous. The solution? Bore another one alongside it and once that is in operation repair the old one. The technical problems were immense - it including freezing the strata through which water was coming but it is nearly complete:


The Swiss can make this mixed public/private system work very well, so why not the UK? It always seems to come down to penny-pinching. I remember when high-speed railways became an issue. The UK tried to do it with the APT, running on normal track, and we all know what happened to that. On the other side of La Manche, the SNCF jumped in, boots and all, and built a custom track for exclusively high-speed trains. We know whose approach worked.

Being a certified trainspotter, I think the problem with the UK rail network is just that. You where first, the network is now very old and isn't where it's most needed today.

The Swiss also has a meticulous timetable planning:

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/the-swiss-timetable-is-due-to-meticulous-planning/34102496

Tilting trains? They work very well in Sweden on existing track...
 
^^ This...

The British peoples' taxes paid for all of the track line laying nationwide.
We really need to get away from the idea that tax pays for things. The government pays for things out of the money it creates out of thin air. The idea that it is paid for out of our earnings is the ruse used to justify ideological cuts to public services.
 
My thinking on this is that a rush to nationalise the railways may fall foul of the same sort of disjointed thinking that triggers a rush to privatise - it's possible to do a good and a bad job of privatising stuff, and looking at the results, it's pretty clear that there are good examples and pretty dire examples too (i'm looking at you Thames Water).

So, rather than assume that any sort of nationalisation of the railways will be better than the currently disjointed and confusing structure we have at the moment, i'd rather there be a discussion about what form that would take. It's best to remember that the railways were a private enterprise originally, and were nationalised in 1948. British Rail were the butt of jokes in the 70s (to be fair, there was lots of crumbling infrastructure elsewhere as well). We should ideally be in a position to review the previous nationalisation, see what worked and what didn't, and form a plan which actually provides some sort of benefit. There are plenty of other countries who have nationalised railways, and we would do well to examine what has proven to work.
 
I bang on about Japanese trains all the time but it's interesting to me as an example of how things can be done differently
I saw a documentary about a Japanese train accident recently.
It suggested that drivers could be put under intolerable management pressure to keep to the timetable, to the point of mental breakdown.

".. to make up for a lost 90 seconds, a 23-year-old train driver, it became increasingly clear on Tuesday, was speeding when his train jumped off the tracks". NYT 27/4/05

There's no Mick Lynch to stand up for them there.
 
Being a certified trainspotter, I think the problem with the UK rail network is just that. You where first, the network is now very old and isn't where it's most needed today.

The Swiss also has a meticulous timetable planning:

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/democracy/the-swiss-timetable-is-due-to-meticulous-planning/34102496

Tilting trains? They work very well in Sweden on existing track...
The beauty of the Swiss timetable is that it is totally integrated. You get off the SBB train and the narrow-gauge private train will be waiting for you. And where that ends there may be the Postauto. It fails more often these days, because they're trying to push so many more trains down the line. Obviously they can't do what the SNCF did and build dedicated high-speed lines, because there simply isn't the space, but they have other ways. Our local line is Basel - Liestal. To speed things up and avoid the minor stations between Pratteln and Liestal, they built a tunnel so that the through trains could avoid these stations and leave them to the local trains. And now Liestal station is undergoing a massive rebuilding to provide two extra lines exclusively for the through trains and a new platform for the local trains.

There's no doubt that tilting trains work on existing track - the SBB has 44 pendolino units:

https://www.sbb.ch/en/travel-information/services-on-train/our-trains/icn.html

based on the Italian design originally built for the direttissima Rome-Florence line. The originals were so unreliable that they acquired the nickname pannolino (Panne being the German for breakdown) and the SBB threatened to sue Fiat, which built them. However, the bugs seem now to be ironed out of them, and they're rather nice trains in which to ride.

The British simply seem to have done them rather badly - I believe that they stopped the APTs tilting because, if the mechanism failed on two oncoming APTs in the opposite sense, they'd hit each other.
 
I saw a documentary about a Japanese train accident recently.
It suggested that drivers could be put under intolerable management pressure to keep to the timetable, to the point of mental breakdown.

".. to make up for a lost 90 seconds, a 23-year-old train driver, it became increasingly clear on Tuesday, was speeding when his train jumped off the tracks". NYT 27/4/05

There's no Mick Lynch to stand up for them there.
No doubt that Japanese train drivers are intensively trained and have a lot expected of them.

On the other hand they have a safety record most countries would be envious of.
 
I think that it’s the right thing to do.
My only concern is to wonder why the Tories are allowing it to happen, being the skeptic that I am.

Is that because it’s already been so asset stripped and under-invested in, that it’s going to need a shed load of public funding to sort out, before the Tories come back in another decade to sell it off again on the cheap to their mates?
 
As for Thames Water, if public money is going to be used to bail it out, does that mean that it will first be written off as bankrupt and the shareholders given zip?
After all, they have been the ones taking their dividends, so I don’t understand why they should receive anymore benefit?

Additionally, dumping a loss into the finance area might help dissuade some levels of future abuse
 
It got us cleaner and newer rolling stock and cleaner, more modern stations.

But it has cost us commuters a s**t-tonne.
Inaccurate. Some stations were renewed but that has consistently only happened when local authorities have stepped in and used the media and consumer groups to apply pressure. The number of stations currently maintained to any kind of standard at all which are effectively run by “The friends of … station” is staggering. Where stations have been “modernised” the steps taken rarely involve such basic things as accessible step free access throughout and around the station; the signage remains dismal; a lack of tactiles on platforms; a lack of maintained or accessible toilets; lack of audible public address; lifts out of order and with no natioinally agreed contract for repair and so on. Privatisation led directly to the only applicable standards being guidance and so what we have is a complete and utter mess. Sure, some “showcase” stations have had big makeovers but these are largely south of central England and, again, have nothing like decent standards or even a consistent approach.

If you’re so convinced on rolling stock then you might want to have a look at the last date Pacer trains ran in Greater Manchester as but one example. Wales a great example of how rolling stock was literally flogged to the point of scrap.
 


advertisement


Back
Top