Andy Burnham in pledge to renationalise railway network

[455driver]

Will the railways be privatised before the coal mines ?

In all seriousness, would it actually be possible and practical to re-nationalise the railways?

would the TOC's ( including Dutch & German State Railways ) be crying to the European Courts ?

I could see it getting very smelly............

Why, once the franchise runs out they just take it back into state ownership, no 'getting smelly' as the contract (franchise) would have ended.

 

[NSEFAN]

The only requirements from the EU are that accounting of operations and infrastructure are done separately, and that open access operators may bid for paths on the network. Both these requirements could easily be met by having a state-owned company to run services at an arms-length, a la East Coast. I would support such a measure on the grounds that whoever runs the show knows what they're doing. The government is ultimately in charge in any case, but they need to understand the implications of what they're saying before agreeing to a ton of projects which later turn out to be unworkable. There is a difference between a National Transport Strategy and day-to-day micromanglement.

 

[jon0844]

This would be great news for the NHS and education. Once we ran the railways, whenever money was tight we know where the cuts would happen first - saving teachers and doctors from cuts that little bit longer!

 

[deltic]

In calling for nationalisation it is often not clear what politicians mean. I cant see any government going back into running train services - rather if it happens we are likely to see contracting out of rail services as per London Overground and DLR where the state sets fares and frequency and the private sector provides rolling stock and runs the service.

 

[matt_world2004]

This would be great news for the NHS and education. Once we ran the railways, whenever money was tight we know where the cuts would happen first - saving teachers and doctors from cuts that little bit longer!

Although the same happens now. There is a huge taxpayer subsidy for the railways. NSE in its last years of operation was running an surplus on farebox revenue. The aim should be to have a self funding railway with the profit making parts funding the socially useful parts.

 

[colchesterken]

Great news goes to show Corbyn it influencing labour policy and he has not even won yet
Could we get him to make a speech about energy companies they could not be nationalised as there is not enough money but regulators could pressure then to have less tariff's and make it easer for smaller companies
I get mine from the Co op

 

[RichardN]

Call me cynical, but this may just be some desperate attempt to win support back off Corbyn, who does seem to be walking away with the victory. Mr Burnham is trying to prove that he can do left-wing policies as well

Burnham favourite by a reasonable margin at on a well known betting exchange.

Corbyn 28% to 29% implied probability.
Burnham 40% to 41% implied probability.
Cooper 27% to 27.5% implied probability.
Kendal 1.2% to 1.3% implied probability.

These don't add up to 100% as there are things that could derail the process I guess. The reason for the range is the back/lay spread. Over half a million pounds has been gambled on the 'event'.

 

[Aldaniti]

Don't believe him. When an MP's lips move it means they're telling lies.

 

[Western Lord]

In calling for nationalisation it is often not clear what politicians mean. I cant see any government going back into running train services - rather if it happens we are likely to see contracting out of rail services as per London Overground and DLR where the state sets fares and frequency and the private sector provides rolling stock and runs the service.

Basically, thats what happens now.

 

[HowardGWR]

Basically, thats what happens now.

Yes, I wonder when that is going to dawn on some people. Reading newspaper articles and comments, it's clear many have no idea who owns what.

 

[sonorguy]

Great news goes to show Corbyn it influencing labour policy and he has not even won yet
Could we get him to make a speech about energy companies they could not be nationalised as there is not enough money but regulators could pressure then to have less tariff's and make it easer for smaller companies
I get mine from the Co op

Thread drift slightly..... It doesn't show him influencing policy at all, as Andy Burnham knows that to actually go down the Corbyn route for most things is to commit electoral hari-kiri.

All it is is Andy Burnham saying anything to claw back some of the Labour left's votes. It's a verbatim regurgitation of a pledge made by Ed Milliband and part of the raft of policies that was comprehensively rejected by the public in the general election. Just because someone else says it doesn't make it any more palatable for most people.

I actually don't see any of the current Labour contenders fighting the next general election. I suspect that Milliband senior will reappear at some point in the next few years, much sooner if Corbyn is elected.

Back on topic...... I'm not convinced the majority of the public are that bothered who owns/runs trains as long as they're reliable, affordable, convenient etc and as such it's a 'policy' to appeal to internal party politics rather than the electorate.

 

[Senex]

Don't believe him. When an MP's lips move it means they're telling lies.

Not just the MPs -- the (so-called) Lords as well.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Back on topic...... I'm not convinced the majority of the public are that bothered who owns/runs trains as long as they're reliable, affordable, convenient etc and as such it's a 'policy' to appeal to internal party politics rather than the electorate.

I'm rather for nationalisation of things like railways, power-supply, etc (and certainly land), but very much put off by how very badly we seem to run anything nationalised in this country. (Anyone remember the ten-year wait for a telephone -- and yes, that was personal experience in the late 1950s?)

 

[Domh245]

Although the same happens now. There is a huge taxpayer subsidy for the railways. NSE in its last years of operation was running an surplus on farebox revenue. The aim should be to have a self funding railway with the profit making parts funding the socially useful parts.

Even the currently profitable franchises wouldn't make enough profit to be able to subsidise the entire network. If you want the railway to be entirely self-funding, you can expect to either have Beeching Mk2, or a rise in prices to reflect demand. Even if you cut out all of the unnecessary bureaucracy and drop investment to the bare minimum to stop the tracks falling apart, the railway still won't be entirely self sufficient

 

[southern442]

Call me cynical, but this may just be some desperate attempt to win support back off Corbyn, who does seem to be walking away with the victory. Mr Burnham is trying to prove that he can do left-wing policies as well

You took the words right out of my mouth. I don't mind the Labour party (I much prefer the greens myself, especially as they came up with the modern equivalent of this idea in the first place) but I really can't see any of these candidates being strong leaders except for Jeremy Corbyn, who will scare voters off. Where's Chucka Umunna when you need him?

 

[WatcherZero]

All Andy has said is he would allow public sector operators to bid, which was exactly Labour policy at the last General Election....

 

[cactustwirly]

Realistically, what will nationalisation achieve?

 

[matt_world2004]

Even the currently profitable franchises wouldn't make enough profit to be able to subsidise the entire network. If you want the railway to be entirely self-funding, you can expect to either have Beeching Mk2, or a rise in prices to reflect demand. Even if you cut out all of the unnecessary bureaucracy and drop investment to the bare minimum to stop the tracks falling apart, the railway still won't be entirely self sufficient

That's because they are franchises. With a profit and rival company attribution element being factored into the costs. If NSE was making profit at the end of its existence why do busy routes need subsidies now?

 

[Wolf]

I really can't see it Happening due to the incredible costs involved. If it was complete nationalisation then they would have to pay all staff in the same job the same pay. So take drivers for examlple, there Is now a massive difference in the salaries of drivers across the different companies and I somehow can't see the government having the money to up the pay of every single driver in the country to the rate of the currently best paid drivers. Drivers are drivers and although we drive different routes and different traction, something tells me there not going to up the salary of all northern drivers to bring it on a level with say east Coast drivers saleries. And what's the alternative? How would they be able to justify paying different staff doing the exact same job working for the same company different wages. And something else tells me their not going to achieve bringing down the wages of east Coast drivers to the level of northern drivers, even though I must add the latter is still a very good salary. I can't see a way around this, apart from carry on letting private companies run the railway and employ their own staff and set their own wages.

 

[route:oxford]

(Anyone remember the ten-year wait for a telephone -- and yes, that was personal experience in the late 1950s?)

Yes, we finally got a phone in 1984 - after my parents joined the waiting list for a line in 1969.

 

[matt_world2004]

One thing if you want to doubt the sincerity of andy Burnham's policy idea. He has announced nationalosation on the day a nationalised railway company goes on strike. Seems like a hollow annoumcement IMO.

 

[HH]

That's because they are franchises. With a profit and rival company attribution element being factored into the costs. If NSE was making profit at the end of its existence why do busy routes need subsidies now?

If it was. I don't believe any numbers unless I've examined them up close and personal - and that's never possible with anything published by the government.

Anyway the busy routes don't get subsidies now.

 

[ivanhoe]

Yes, we finally got a phone in 1984 - after my parents joined the waiting list for a line in 1969.

We only had to wait 6 months in 1971. Sure you really waited 15 years? Did you live in the middle of nowhere? By the time BT was privatised, there was hardly any waiting lists

 

[Bald Rick]

That's because they are franchises. With a profit and rival company attribution element being factored into the costs. If NSE was making profit at the end of its existence why do busy routes need subsidies now?

See other threads about the cost of the railway. The only truly profitable parts of the railway are Thameslink and SWT, the latter only just.

 

[Domh245]

And with the amount of disruption from London Bridge, combined with the new trains and all the associated changes in staffing, as well as lumping it together with southern, thameslink might be more marginal as well?

 

[Dave1987]

Bet people will start moaning how awful the railway is once it's nationalised etc etc. the grass is always greener.

 

[matacaster]

You took the words right out of my mouth. I don't mind the Labour party (I much prefer the greens myself, especially as they came up with the modern equivalent of this idea in the first place) but I really can't see any of these candidates being strong leaders except for Jeremy Corbyn, who will scare voters off. Where's Chucka Umunna when you need him?

Chukka and Vaz would personally be able to supply sufficient grease for the entire rail network.

 

[Dan27]

The only reason Burnham is saying he'll nationalise the railways is that Corbyn is doing exactly the same thing.

It really doesn't matter though, both of them wont win the 2020 election.

 

[Oxfordblues]

Anyone proposing renationalisation clearly has no understanding of the current rail freight business.

Before Privatisation, when a freight contract came up for renewal the British Rail sales representative would visit the customer and offer a revised rate for the traffic, usually an increase to take account of inflation. The client then had the option of accepting the increase or transferring the traffic to (usually cheaper) road haulage. BR was the monopoly supplier of rail freight service. It was a "take-it-or-leave-it" approach and countless customers chose to leave it.

After Privatisation the customer can pick and choose the optimal railfreight operator for their business. They can play one off against another to get the best price and/or performance delivery. No longer are potentially-profitable but inconvenient flows priced-out of rail haulage.

As a result rail freight has steadily increased in volume and value. Renationalisation would almost certainly reverse that trend. Can you imagine for example if a new British Rail were only allowed to order British-built locomotives?

 

[thenorthern]

Burnham has now said he will abolish Tuition Fees, its getting stranger by the day.

Back to the railways though under Labour there was the collapse of Railtrack, the temporary nationalisation of Connex South Eastern and temporary nationalisation of the East Coast Mainline. All of which were instances which if happened under the Conservatives then Labour would call for re-nationalisation. I think under Labour there were at lease 20 franchise renewals but didn't choose to re-nationalise in that time.

Labour won't ever re-nationalise

 

[Surreyman]

The only reason Burnham is saying he'll nationalise the railways is that Corbyn is doing exactly the same thing.

It really doesn't matter though, both of them wont win the 2020 election.

Agreed, though the irony is that the difference between the 2 leadership contenders is that Corbyn is probably sincere in his belief and intentions!