I tend to agree that Labour will be an improvement - but perhaps for slightly different reasons than you. What I don't know yet is whether they will prove to be centre-left or more just centre and how that will affect their industrial policy and appetite to invest.
This is heading quite off topic but we have quite enough warfare at the moment and I don't care about the grin.
I think MSL will be scrapped but they'll keep everything that came before in place or maybe amend it. The Winter of Discontent still hangs over Labour so giving the unions more powers or similar to what they had in the past is not likely IMO.
I agree that it seems likely than any incoming Labour government will keep everything else, I suspect even amending anything won't rise to the top of their in-box for parliamentary time any time soon.
Cameron and Johnson played exactly this game too. It's a recognition that it's swing voters that always decide elections (not the party faithful) and so being too far Left or Right is political suicide
OK you carry on voting Tory / Reform or whoever. But don't say I didn't warn you when Beeching style cuts come around the corner. Hopefully it won't be your local branch line culled, time will tell.Lovely. So in my living memory Labour has never reversed the policies of any previous Tory government but we "just have to wait for the next time" eh ? Sir Keir Starmer is going to ride in on his steed ahead of his Socialist phalanx and everything will be right again ?
My local branch runs a train every 2 hours which is useless to me so I get an Uber to the big city. Why would I care if it was cut? Running a bus service every 10 minutes would be cheaper and much more useable.
The way it is structured, even tinkering seems to require parliamentary time for secondary legislation so I'm not convinced - if they are going to invest the effort I think they will repeal it. Yes, relieved that the Tories introduced it I agree with.
Because not everyone can afford to pay for an Uber and would sooner wait for said branch line train. But if your not bothered that the railway gets cut here there and everywhere then you know who to vote for come election day (if Sunak ever has the balls to hold one that is!)
It was more a response to your Beeching cut comment which wasn't relevant to the debate. Some branch lines either need a better service or need to be replaced by a good bus service. I'm bothered that the railway service is some kind of holy grail and is not subject to sensible rules of investment and return when so many other things are in need of investment.
It is rather off-topic, but here we go…
It depends on what legislation is introduced. There have been multipurpose bills in the past. It also depends on if, and how big, a majority Labour get. If it’s repeals, it’s a lot easier than new legislation that introduces brand new laws, or extensive alterations to existing laws.
I'm a qualified accountant (never actually practiced) and I tend towards right of centre (the conservatives need some time of office in my opinion) but I didn't look away.
Beeching was brought in by the Tories but the majority of the closures were carried out by Harold Wilsons Labour government. If you read up on some of this stuff you may be able to dispel some of your illusions.
Integrated ticketing has been explored in Glasgow as well as other places no doubt, but there’s too much self interest from within each transport sector to enable it to happen.
You have just presented a very confused opinion. On the one hand you want the trains to remain, but you are not prepared to support them and choose to use Uber instead. You hate buses and want trains to be busy but you would rather use private taxis. I bet you wish Uber did helicopters so you could follow Rishi Sunak even more closely.
Going well off topic, but let's not forget that it was the 1964 Labour government who promised to reverse Beeching who actually ended up implementing more of the Beeching recommendations than the previous Tory government.
Perhaps, but are we all going to vote for more of the same next year? I like to think folk will at least give Labour a chance, they can't make more of a pigs ear of it than the Tories are doing. Or do we go for another 5 years of this sh*t shower. I'm not saying Labour is perfect, far from it, but they are a darn sight more perfect than the current so called government.
I’d assume something similar to what happens with equivalent laws in France, Italy, Belgium & Spain etc
The current government have been in too long. That statement can apply to the Tories in Westminster, to Labour in Cardiff, and to the SNP in Holyrood. It breeds complacency, no matter what tie is being worn.
Exactly , I think most of the members also completely understand from the companies perspective how the current arrangements do not work for the travelling public .
Reading the legislation and the draft code of practice it appears that it will be the employer that will identify the individual employees that it requires to work in the "work notice" and then it will be the Job of the union to identify which if any of the workers listed are members and then communicate with its members to inform them not to strike and take "reasonable steps" to ensure they do not take part in the strike action . Some of these reasonable steps include requiring picket supervisors to encourage those members to break the strike , and ensure that anyone subject to a work notice are not picketed . Seems quite a lot of responsibility for picket supervsiors who are in many cases just Lay officials or even just Lay members .
This is a very good point. It must be done in a fair way, not just who is the most useful. For example at Plymouth, there are drivers who sign Penzance to London, along with all traction. There are other newer drivers who for now only sign a couple of branch lines and the depot. It would be easy for an employer to insist the same group of drivers with all the route and traction knowledge keep coming in every single strike day, whilst those with less route and traction knowledge will never need come in. There has to be a fair way of doing it (though I still have to say I completely and utterly disagree with it and fear that it will put mental and emotional pressure on drivers that may cause errors).
There are already a number of countries in Europe where this legislation already exists and has done for years, it's not a new thing and it should work just as it does there.
Indeed and Blair's Labour, which is what Starmer's Labour will inevitably be similar to if it wants to be elected, didn't touch much or any of the previous Conservative govt's anti-union legislation.
My point exactly. This will lead to an increase in operational incidents with drivers preoccupied with thoughts of just passing striking colleagues and how they may be treated by others for going into work.
There are also a number of countries in Europe that have integrated their transport, built high speed rail networks, and/or built urban tramways. The UK meanwhile has hourly trains timetabled to leave just before a connecting train arrives, has cut back HS2 to almost nothing, and how much did the Edinburgh tram overspend by? What makes you think that the implementation of this will be any less chaotic and incompetent?
Difference being that Thatcher's reforms were reasonable. Many of those from the last few years were not.
The NHS has had some sort of agreed minimum service for years. Therefore there are more staff in work on a strike day than any other because the service is so routinely understaffed.
It would be very risky for them to do otherwise. Imagine the headlines in the press next time there was a strike: