Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Labour are Tories too, thanks to everyone's favourite Teflon Man!
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Daily Mail: British fares subsidise rail travellers in Germany!
- Thread starter thenorthern
- Start date
- Status
Labour are Tories too, thanks to everyone's favourite Teflon Man!
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Busaholic
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Jun 2014
- Messages
- 14,078
Mary Dejevsky has article in i newspaper today 'on the decline of Tony Blair'. Can't come fast enough for some of us.
3141
Established Member
I'm old enough to remember the end of WW2, and that's even more frightening!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
But why should that aspect matter so much more than the fact of companies operating in one country being owned by an organisation based in another country?
3141
Established Member
A good point, but it won't have any impact on an anarchist who wants to stir things up.
Only decline? I wish he'd evaporate.
Thatcher was despised by those on the left of politics, I suspect Blair's legacy will be to be despised by both left and right. A horrible man who has left a terrible legacy for this country. I must confess to looking at the Daily Mail website from time to time, if you filter through the crap it does actually produce some useful articles from time to time, particularly those surrounding consumer and animal welfare issues. I can recall a few well written articles that have been of interest to historians and rail enthusiasts over the past couple of years, but I accept that the quality of its current news journalism isn't generally great, and many of its articles are just plain rubbish. Then again, I realised from an early age that the only thing you should believe in the newspapers is the date stamped on the front cover - and one of them even managed to get that wrong once. Now, if there are newspapers that I would never go near, it's The Daily Star, The Sun and The Mirror.
cjmillsnun
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 3,254
And if you looked at my correction that is what I said :roll:
thenorthern
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 May 2013
- Messages
- 4,114
I have noticed in the article that The Daily Mail don't like Serco group even though they are a British company with many assets abroad, Hmmmmmmmmmn.
WhiteJoker
Member
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 32
Can anyone tell me why the rail fares are this high in the UK? I live in the Netherlands, but when I did my internship in London I thought the prices where outrageous, let alone complicated as hell with off-peak, peak, anytime and other limitations.
I live in a small village in the east of the Netherlands, with a direct link to Amsterdam Central station. A single ticket bought from the ticket machine at the station, right before departure, will cost me €15,10. According to NS this route is approximately 88 kilometers. What would a similar distance cost in the UK? Based on distance I tried Sandwell & Dudley to Northhampton (86 km) which would cost €19,80 for an anytime ticket.
If I compare these same two routes with a season ticket (1 month, no strings attached) the UK seems to be cheaper. UK is €252.90, while I would pay €399,- in The Netherlands. Granted I can also buy the Always Free season ticket, which is the same price and grants access to the entire rail network in The Netherlands, 7 days a week. Does something like this exist in Great Britain as well?
I live in a small village in the east of the Netherlands, with a direct link to Amsterdam Central station. A single ticket bought from the ticket machine at the station, right before departure, will cost me €15,10. According to NS this route is approximately 88 kilometers. What would a similar distance cost in the UK? Based on distance I tried Sandwell & Dudley to Northhampton (86 km) which would cost €19,80 for an anytime ticket.
If I compare these same two routes with a season ticket (1 month, no strings attached) the UK seems to be cheaper. UK is €252.90, while I would pay €399,- in The Netherlands. Granted I can also buy the Always Free season ticket, which is the same price and grants access to the entire rail network in The Netherlands, 7 days a week. Does something like this exist in Great Britain as well?
Sadly not unfortunately. I understand that Germany has something similar, although whether this is due to be ditched along with the Bahn card, I don't know.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
It's down to government policy over many years towards the railways.
We used to have a distance-based system like yours, but since about 1970 the railways have been allowed to price by "value", which meant big increases for inter-city lines in particular.
But on the other hand, discount fares became available (off-peak, day return, saver, advance, travelcards etc) to bring the fares back down to something people were prepared to pay.
Since privatisation in 1996, the fare system has been frozen in structure, but fares increase by "inflation+1%" or more as the government want passengers to pay more and the taxpayer less.
Today, the "single fare" is one which is very high, but the theory is that "no-one buys these fares", as they find means of buying a discounted ticket instead.
Season tickets offer a high discount off the basic fare, but are only available for fixed periods (ie no multiple trip tickets) and routes.
There are also "railcard" fares which give 34% off for special groups (students, seniors etc) for an annual subscription.
There is no proper "go anywhere" ticket like the NL monthly ticket.
Our version will cost you £724 for 14 days (and it has restrictions on use).
This is mainly because the operators will not agree to promote it because it could cost them revenue.
Tickets are also biased towards London travel, and therefore peak-hour commuting when trains are full.
Local/regional fares often have the same unreasonable restrictions as London fares, even though the trains are empty.
It's a crazy system, but the government (any flavour) seems incapable of rationalising it for fear of the increased cost to the taxpayer.
RochdalePioneers
Member
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 517
Ah yes the "he sold the gold cheaply, what an idiot story". Or, as revealed by the Daily Telegraph, it was a joint UK US Swiss effort to bail out the London Gold Market after certain bullion dealing banks bet wrong on price moves of gold they didn't actually own.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/financ...own-sold-britains-gold-at-a-knock-down-price/
And the gold sale was in 1999, during the period of constrained public spending when Labour reduced the large public debt they inherited.
WhiteJoker
Member
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2010
- Messages
- 32
Ah ok. Thanks for the explanation. I decided mostly on the day itself where I wanted to go. So that would make it more expensive. I'm a bit undecided if I mind if public transport is subsidised. I could argue that people who never use public transport are also paying for public transport, but so does the road. Even if I don't own a car I still pay taxes which are used for roads.
The lack of multi buy tickets is something I don't like about our rail system, along with the lack of advance purchase tickets valid on multiple operators when not travelling on an Intercity service.
As a result of this and it being complicated in general, I look at ways to play the system to my advantage. Soke railway companies and staff don't like people doing this. Well I don't like the lack of advance purchase fares or multibuy tickets, especially the latter.
I was surprised to read today, think on the BBC news Web Site, that only 5 percentage of commuters don't travel by car to work.
It matters because the playing fields for private companies and nationalised ones are different.
British private companies are allowed to own foreign companies, foreign companies are allowed to own British companies.. Equal footing there.
Our government has decided that a British nationalised rail company is not allowed to bid for domestic or foreign rail contracts but foreign nationalised rail companies are allowed to bid for Britiish and foreign rail contracts.
The net result is that money is bound to flow out of the the British government's coffers due to the imbalance they themselves have created.
muddythefish
On Moderation
- Joined
- 13 May 2014
- Messages
- 1,575
Hindsight makes people seem so clever.
I assume from the above you were filling your boots with gold at the time
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
The "foreign government"''s bid will have been better than the UK competitors, so (in theory) the government is better off (more premium/less subsidy) than awarding the franchise to a UK firm.
And Arriva would argue that they are a British company, and money flows in to the UK from their other European operations.
A fraction then goes to Berlin, but in the meantime the UK taxman takes his cut and jobs in Sunderland are protected.
Like many, I'm heavily critical of the current system. I see prices rising faster than ever for the fares I buy and a worsening of the service. Long-term development of the Railway and public transport services is not taking place at all really, save perhaps the Borders Railway and other Scottish projects, as well as odd ideas in PTEs. Despite this I have not been in favour of all-out nationalisation before, and thought we could do so much better with gradual change. The more time goes on, the more I think this isn't a good idea, passenger rights and what society can get out of the railway as a service is declining. Maybe full nationalisation would help. The Daily Mail aren't capable of insight this deep.
Crazy thing is that nationalised industries in Europe can bid for UK rail franchises but UK nationalised industries can not. It is about time that was challenged in the European courts.
Yes, profits from companies like Rolls Royce go abroad but Rolls Royce are not publicly funded. Without public funding then very few rail services would run in the UK. Once again I will say that our railways are privatised in name only. They TOCS are publicly funded private companies. Rail privatisation was simply a redistribution of funding from the state to private sector. This represents a public handout to private companies.
Yes, profits from companies like Rolls Royce go abroad but Rolls Royce are not publicly funded. Without public funding then very few rail services would run in the UK. Once again I will say that our railways are privatised in name only. They TOCS are publicly funded private companies. Rail privatisation was simply a redistribution of funding from the state to private sector. This represents a public handout to private companies.
Chris Wallis
Member
This.....completely this....
Also, without Tax Payer funding, direct or otherwise, then very few services of any kind would run in the UK.
The answer is really much simpler than the previous explanation you were offered about the ticketing system.
LNW-GW Joint hinted at it but the fundamental reason is that politicians, both the current coalition and previous Labour and Conservative ones, decided to shift more of the burden of funding the railways from taxation to taking it directly out of taxpayers' pockets in the form of fares. All part of a process that began with privatisation, which was also meant to achieve the same end but, because of the complexity of the structure, actually achieved the reverse.
The following is from a Financial Times story about this week's fare rises:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/49620c72-7c96-11e4-aa9c-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz3NkQCh86u
Why would it need to be challenged in the European courts? On what grounds would the government decision to not compete be challenged?
Surely it would just need the government to replace that policy (choosing not to have a publicly-owned rail company capable of bidding for franchises) with a new policy of establishing a public-owned corporation empowered to bid for franchises. For the sake of probity it would have to be set up at arm's length, and not connected to Directly Operated Railways in order to avoid a conflict of interest with their role as the operator of last resort.
An even better step forward would be to award service contracts (where the government body issuing the contract holds the fare box, and simply pays the private operator for their work just like you might pay an electrician to do some work on your house) rather than franchises for all the contracts, not just for London Overground.
LNW-GW Joint
Veteran Member
What UK nationalised industries?
The only public sector transport operators I can think of are:
- London Underground (part of TfL)
- DRS (whose day job as part of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is to recycle nuclear fuel through Sellafield)
- Manchester Airports Group (owns Manchester, London Stansted, East Midlands and Bournemouth airports) - to make a profit for the GM boroughs
- the Welsh Government owns Cardiff airport - to make a loss
All the publicly owned airports operate essentially as limited companies and can be sold at will.
The PTEs and TfL procure transport services but do not run them directly except in the case of TfL/LU.
Which of these would be interested in running a mainline rail TOC?
Are you asking for a Metrolink solution?
Manchester Metrolink is owned by TfGM and run by RATP under contract. RATP profits go to France.
No different to the GA rail franchise.
That is owned by DfT and run by Abellio under contract. Abellio profits go to Holland.
All these "foreign government" operators are operating in the UK as limited companies, not arms of their state.
The TOCs can be bought and sold (like Arriva), and so can the contracts (as in Metrolink, which was originally let to Stagecoach before being sold on to RATP).
In any case under virtually any scenario, the franchises would have to be bid for periodically (competitively).
Employees would not be local/central government staff.
Just my view.
Last edited:
cjmillsnun
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 Feb 2011
- Messages
- 3,254
I think he means DOR
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
DOR is just a recruitment agency on retainer to the Dft reformed into an operating company, it doesn't compete for anything.
NR does have some foreign engineering consultancy contracts as did Virgin Rail (advising US Government on Amtrak) Arriva ran some public bus service contracts in France/Germany even before it was bought, last year it bid for some regional rail operations in France and I think it or another British company has some German local rail franchises.
NR does have some foreign engineering consultancy contracts as did Virgin Rail (advising US Government on Amtrak) Arriva ran some public bus service contracts in France/Germany even before it was bought, last year it bid for some regional rail operations in France and I think it or another British company has some German local rail franchises.
dcsprior
Member
What UK nationalised industries?
The only public sector transport operators I can think of are:
- London Underground (part of TfL)
- DRS (whose day job as part of the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority is to recycle nuclear fuel through Sellafield)
- Manchester Airports Group (owns Manchester, London Stansted, East Midlands and Bournemouth airports) - to make a profit for the GM boroughs
- the Welsh Government owns Cardiff airport - to make a loss
A few more worth mentioning:
* Prestwick Airport is owned by the Scottish Government, as are Highlands and Islands Airports Limited and Caledonian MacBrayne ferries.
* Lothian Buses is owned by the councils in the former Lothian Region area (with The City of Edinburgh owning a majority stake).
* NI railways are still government-owned
Flamingo
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 6,810
Of course, a First had it's American Adventure as well... (But it did end in tears!).
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Have the Daily Mail just spotted that most of our train services are run by the national rail providers of other European countries? Would that be a result of the privatisation that they, their Tory chums and their readers all pushed for? Surely not!
for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap Galatians 6:7
(and while i am on: The number of Labour MP's twittering on this point whilst showing incredible hypocrisy needs to be seen to be believed!)
for whatever a man sows, this he will also reap Galatians 6:7
(and while i am on: The number of Labour MP's twittering on this point whilst showing incredible hypocrisy needs to be seen to be believed!)
Last edited:
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,518
Malta is Malta - the Maltese never like, or agree, on anything. It wouldn't matter which foreign operator ran their buses, they wouldn't like it on principle. The Spanish are about to have a go now.
- Status