2024 election and party Railway policies

[Bevan Price]

If Labour win the next election, it will have problems:-

1. The "National Purse" will be nearly empty, so just as in 1964 and 1997, there will be a difference between what it would like to do, and what it can actually afford to do. And railways will have a lower priority than NHS, Social Care, Education and Defence, etc..

2. Labour would also hope to win the following election(s), so it cannot afford to be seen as in the pocket of the Trades Unions. So do not expect any large, "way above inflation" pay offers for rail staff. NHS staff are probably the only ones who might get favourable treatment. ASLEF may need to learn the lesson of Scargill v. Thatcher - "sometimes you are not going to be allowed to win." (however vaild your claims may be).

3. So, for rail passenger services, it will almost certainly be "wait until TOC contracts expire". Existing stock to remain "on hire", but maybe a start to new stock "owned by the railway".

 

[irish_rail]

If Labour win the next election, it will have problems:-

1. The "National Purse" will be nearly empty, so just as in 1964 and 1997, there will be a difference between what it would like to do, and what it can actually afford to do. And railways will have a lower priority than NHS, Social Care, Education and Defence, etc..

2. Labour would also hope to win the following election(s), so it cannot afford to be seen as in the pocket of the Trades Unions. So do not expect any large, "way above inflation" pay offers for rail staff. NHS staff are probably the only ones who might get favourable treatment. ASLEF may need to learn the lesson of Scargill v. Thatcher - "sometimes you are not going to be allowed to win." (however vaild your claims may be).

3. So, for rail passenger services, it will almost certainly be "wait until TOC contracts expire". Existing stock to remain "on hire", but maybe a start to new stock "owned by the railway".

To be fair, Aslef are not after a major above inflation payrise. 5 percent would do fine after 5 years of 0 percent. Most drivers are realistic enough to know below inflation rises are all we are going to get for next couple of years at best.

 

[Trestrol]

If Labour win the next election, it will have problems:-

1. The "National Purse" will be nearly empty, so just as in 1964 and 1997, there will be a difference between what it would like to do, and what it can actually afford to do. And railways will have a lower priority than NHS, Social Care, Education and Defence, etc..

2. Labour would also hope to win the following election(s), so it cannot afford to be seen as in the pocket of the Trades Unions. So do not expect any large, "way above inflation" pay offers for rail staff. NHS staff are probably the only ones who might get favourable treatment. ASLEF may need to learn the lesson of Scargill v. Thatcher - "sometimes you are not going to be allowed to win." (however vaild your claims may be).

3. So, for rail passenger services, it will almost certainly be "wait until TOC contracts expire". Existing stock to remain "on hire", but maybe a start to new stock "owned by the railway".

Don't forget "There is no money left" note left by Labour in 2007/8. Labour will probably have to stick to conservative spending plans for two years, as just like a super tanker you can't just do a u turn.

 

[urbophile]

Anecdotal evidence suggests that if the Tories get back in, they'll make the trains run on time.

What have they been doing for the last 14 years then?

How could Labour have "stopped privatisation"? They took office on 2nd May 1997. All the contracts had been signed and executed by the end of March 1997. There was nothing to stop.

My memory might be at fault, but I seem to think that they didn't make any manifesto promise to renationalise. Maybe if they had, Major's government might have thought again. But then I don't know how these things work.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Again my memory may also be faulty but they didn't as far as I can recall show any particular interest in railways until they were trying to scrape together enough support for a third term in the mid 2000s, which of course they got but again, correct my failing memory if you must but they didn't seem to actually follow through with any of the things they showed a fleeting interest in after that election other than perhaps the odd 15 year franchise here and there for stop and as the ones that were were almost entirely let on a no growth basis UK can't really credit them for doing anything revolutionary

 

[Railsigns]

What have they been doing for the last 14 years then?

Stirring up culture wars, lining their own pockets at our expense, stripping away our rights, and running the country into the ground.

 

[75A]

Isn't that what they all do?
At least your Parliament sits, our will fall out again before Christmas no doubt.

 

[Kite159]

Again my memory may also be faulty but they didn't as far as I can recall show any particular interest in railways until they were trying to scrape together enough support for a third term in the mid 2000s, which of course they got but again, correct my failing memory if you must but they didn't seem to actually follow through with any of the things they showed a fleeting interest in after that election other than perhaps the odd 15 year franchise here and there for stop and as the ones that were were almost entirely let on a no growth basis UK can't really credit them for doing anything revolutionary

Agreed, electrification wise wasn't the only major section wired up during that period Crewe to Kidsgrove due to being used as a diversionary route for WCML upgrades? It was only near the end of the third term did they start the ball rolling with more electrification projects?

 

[thenorthern]

Agreed, electrification wise wasn't the only major section wired up during that period Crewe to Kidsgrove due to being used as a diversionary route for WCML upgrades? It was only near the end of the third term did they start the ball rolling with more electrification projects?

Even then it was only electrified because the line was closed as part of the WCML upgrade through Stoke-on-Trent in 2003.

Again my memory may also be faulty but they didn't as far as I can recall show any particular interest in railways until they were trying to scrape together enough support for a third term in the mid 2000s, which of course they got but again, correct my failing memory if you must but they didn't seem to actually follow through with any of the things they showed a fleeting interest in after that election other than perhaps the odd 15 year franchise here and there for stop and as the ones that were were almost entirely let on a no growth basis UK can't really credit them for doing anything revolutionary

A big part of the early 2000s on the railways was the West Coast upgrade. Also back then there were plans for a lot of new light rail networks.

 

[Snow1964]

A very strange one, DfT have this week (14 Feb) decided to publish an award for 2022-2025 Procurement Rail Advisor Support for Passenger service contracts.

Why now ?

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/Notice/Attachment/3acd34d3-1692-42ec-b5f6-183f912c6222

Procurement Rail Advisor Support for Passenger Service Contracts [Award]

Provision of procurement rail advisory support for the Passenger Service Contracts... A Contract Award Notice by DFTC Department for Transport. Value £700K.

bidstats.uk

 

[Snow1964]

Reported that the list of MPs standing down is now 100

63 conservatives (average age 56.6)
17 Labour (average age 70.1)
9 SNP
7 Independent
2 Sinn Fein
1 Green
1 Plaid Cymru

100 MPs to stand down at the next general election

More than 60 are Conservatives and they include former prime minister Theresa May.

www.bbc.co.uk

(probably going to auto-merge)

Thursday 25 March

Guardian is reporting Labour will announce a Nationalisation within 5 years policy

Labour will fully nationalise the train network within five years of coming to power, with a pledge to guarantee the cheapest fares as part of “the biggest reform of our railways for a generation”.

One of Labour’s first major acts in government will bring all passenger rail into national ownership under Great British Railways as contracts with private operators expire, a plan endorsed by the architect of the Conservatives’ own rail plan.

Labour will announce it plans to cut waste and claw back shareholder dividends, saving £2.2bn. It will establish a watchdog, the Passenger Standards Authority, to scrutinise the new system. Passengers will be offered best-price ticket guarantees, automatic delay repay and digital season tickets across the network.

Labour promises rail nationalisation within five years of coming to power

Party pledges to bring all passenger rail – but not rolling stock – into public ownership as contracts with train operators expire

www.theguardian.com

 

[urbophile]

Passenger rail without rolling stock - how bizarre! Why not nationalise the whole lot?

 

[BrianW]

Passenger rail without rolling stock - how bizarre! Why not nationalise the whole lot?

I think you'll find it's about money!! Those Train Operating Companies (is that the right expression?) that are not already in public ownership have contracts (franchises?) that are due to expire within the five-year period, and thus don't need to be 'bought out'- no 'compensation'. Whereas the stock owning/ leasing companies ...?
I don't admit to knowing the financial 'structures' or strictures- maybe someone somewhere does?
It'll be hard to undo the machinations of years of privatisation and all the vested interests- longer than 5 years- so it makes sense to do what can be done!

 

[Richardr]

Passenger rail without rolling stock - how bizarre! Why not nationalise the whole lot?

The point about the rolling stock leasing companies is that the government effectively [stupidly] accounts for things on a cash basis, and as a result government investment is in general low. It tries to reduce borrowing, ignoring the asset side of things. It would rather have "off-balance sheet" borrowing - which is achieved by having third parties borrow - hence third party rolling stock leasing companies. The train operating companies are not borrowers.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It'll be hard to undo the machinations of years of privatisation and all the vested interests- longer than 5 years- so it makes sense to do what can be done!

Correct. Start with what you can and do the harder bits later on.

 

[trebor79]

The ROSCos are where all the "profit leaking" happens, but Labours "plan" doesn't address that at all.
I don't see how bringing expired TOC contracts into DOR control when they are already micro-managed by the DfT will result in any noticeable change other than yet another new livery.

As usual a grand announcement with not much behind it.

 

[Harvey B]

The ROSCos are where all the "profit leaking" happens, but Labours "plan" doesn't address that at all.
I don't see how bringing expired TOC contracts into DOR control when they are already micro-managed by the DfT will result in any noticeable change other than yet another new livery.

As usual a grand announcement with not much behind it.

As Per @BrianW And @GRALISTAIR : Renationalising the ROSCO's will cost huge amounts so it's essentially impossible (as things stand) to Renationalise them without buying them out

I do, however, think that renationalising the ROSCO's (or Whatever is going to be left of them) should almost certainly be a 2nd Term objective

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I do, however, think that renationalising the ROSCO's (or Whatever is going to be left of them) should almost certainly be a 2nd Term objective.

Agreed. And if the polls and general country feelings are anything to go by, they should get in for a minimum of two terms. Make a start, then possibly set up a GBR Rolling stock company and go from there.

 

[Thirteen]

I suspect the ROSCOs will have a place in the Labour plan because rolling stock is expensive to acquire outright

 

[Harvey B]

Agreed. And if the polls and general country feelings are anything to go by, they should get in for a minimum of two terms. Make a start, then possibly set up a GBR Rolling stock company and go from there.

I Agree. Besides if You nationalised ROSCO's, Mail, Water and Energy in one go, it would Bankrupt the country into (yet another) recession. The cost of all of that makes the whole lot unfeasable