Labour could be planning to allow public sector to bid for franchises

[jon0844]

London is mostly buggered due to house pricing. God knows why people want to buy tiny boxes in London for £250,000+ and pat themselves on the back for getting onto the property ladder. No, you're now paying a ridiculous mortgage on a tiny box, and if you have a family and need to upsize, you're still f'd as you can't afford anything else around you.

This problem does need to be sorted. I didn't see that BBC programme last night, but saw some clips, and it showed just how many people are coming here to invest in property. I already knew it was happening, but not on what scale.

It's a joke.

But outside of London and perhaps some other suburban towns or cities, I don't think it's quite that bad.

I had to move out of London to go from a flat to a house with garden, driveway and garage, and I'm glad I did - even with the £3.5k season ticket bill.

I am not pleased that London will end up being a place only for the very rich, and everyone else will gradually be forced to leave (either because they can't afford it anymore, or simply because they can't cope with living in a nasty, tiny, property in some of the rather nasty parts of the capital).

Will people vote because of house prices though? Probably not, because people do still think it's an investment and that it's okay to pay a stupid sum for a house because it's sure to go up in value.

Even IF we managed to start building loads of new properties, it would seem that a large chunk would be purchased off plan before the first bricks were even laid by investors - and which party would want to, or be able to, stop this?

 

[Dave1987]

That sounds awfully like an ideological mantra, something you're very quick to accuse others of. I wouldn't want to live in your ideal "survival of the fittest" pseudo-society.

Its called not letting people who want a free ride in life have one....

I'm still waiting (since post #77) for you to show me where someone - anyone - has claimed that renationalisation would make the railways "perfect".

I have seen many many comments on the BBC HYS forums that make out that nationalisation is automatically better because a private company isn't running the service. Also you fail to even acknowledge that there is anything good about privatisation.

Communism has a "soul base"? What's that about? It sounds funky.

That's auto correct on an Ipad for you thanks.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
My definition of a "fair society" is that all people have enough money to survive on i.e enough money to buy the basics but no luxuries, and those that are not in work must be trying to find work. I watched a documentary recently on people who were having to go to food banks. There were five people featured. All but one of them had huge debts to pay off because they had been living beyond their means and "trying to keep up with the Jones's" to quote a phrase used. The one who had no debts I felt genuinely sorry for. The rest had caused their own problems.

 

[yorksrob]

I suppose that my definition of a fair society would be one where everyone has the opportunity to work and where work is justly rewarded so that people have the means to live a fulfilling life.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I suppose that my definition of a fair society would be one where everyone has the opportunity to work and where work is justly rewarded so that people have the means to live a fulfilling life.

The trouble is, the "middle way" is losing ground to the extremists at both ends of the spectrum (including nationalists of varying hues).

 

[Deerfold]

That's auto correct on an Ipad for you thanks.

Does it not autocorrect that to iPad?

 

[Manchester77]

Article on the BBC 6pm news about this and labours plan.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-28349630

Here is the final wording of the motion to go to Labour's Policy Forum which will be held Friday and Saturday:

"Since the late 1990s there has been significant investment in the railways and passenger numbers have grown sharply. But it is now clear that the rail system is not delivering a fair deal for passengers or the taxpayer, almost 20 years on from the botched privatisation of the railways. Both public subsidy and fares are higher than in other countries, and there is no 'guiding mind' overseeing the railways, planning investment and ensuring results. We have also seen a chaotic franchising process in recent years that has cost millions. To tackle these problems the next Labour government will:

"Review this government's failed franchising process as a priority, after the chaos of recent years, to safeguard taxpayer and passenger interests and put in place a system that is fit for purpose.

"Learn the lessons of East Coast, where we have seen the benefits of a not-for-dividend operator running rail lines, by legislating to allow a public sector operator to be able take on lines and challenge the train operators on a genuinely level playing field to secure value for money for passengers and taxpayers.

"Devolve decisions over the running of regional and local services, including to Scotland and Wales, so that areas can bring together trains, buses, ferries and trams into a single network.

"Tackle the monopoly market for rail rolling stock by giving Network Rail greater responsibility for developing a long term plan for procurement and leasing of new rolling stock.

"Create a new guiding mind for the railways, bringing Network Rail together with a new passenger rail body to contract routes, co-ordinate services, oversee stations and ensure customer satisfaction across the network.

"Ease the pressure on fare payers with the efficiencies these reforms release and by capping annual fare rises on every route, simplifying fare structures and creating a new legal right to the cheapest ticket."

It's not policy yet, of course.

 

[dannypye9999]

Ive heard labour spout up this rubbish so many times before. They also promised to nationalise the railways if they won the 2001 & 2005 elections. Cant believe how many people get manipulated into believing everything that comes out of a politicians mouth these days.

 

[HSTEd]

In other words, do nothing.

They will 'give the public sector a chance' and then ensure that they win no franchises, before closing down the body that will challenge for them - declaring that the mere threat of such a body made the private operators 'raise their game'.

Everything will continue as before.

 

[thenorthern]

Just a question at the moment could local councils bid for franchises?

As in could Nottingham City Council bid for the East Midlands franchise or could it jointly bid with Derby and Leicester City Councils?

 

[455driver]

Ive heard labour spout up this rubbish so many times before. They also promised to nationalise the railways if they won the 2001 & 2005 elections. Cant believe how many people get manipulated into believing everything that comes out of a politicians mouth these days.

Are you trying to tell us that you think Liebore might be telling us porkies just so we vote for them (again)?
Surely not!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Just a question at the moment could local councils bid for franchises?
As in could Nottingham City Council bid for the East Midlands franchise or could it jointly bid with Derby and Leicester City Councils?

Who knows. Possibly.
But the problem will be that Notts/Derby etc would also be involved in specifying and funding the rail operation (in the same way that the proposed Rail North is intended to do in its area).
And you can't have the procurement body awarding contracts to itself as operator.

Any public sector operator would have to be completely at arms length from the franchise authority, making it very similar to a private sector TOC.
So what's the point?
And which councils have an in-house capability to run a TOC?
The councils would also be taking real financial risk - would the local taxpayers want that?

 

[the sniper]

As in could Nottingham City Council bid for the East Midlands franchise or could it jointly bid with Derby and Leicester City Councils?

This idea in the West Midlands has got some momentum already, with 'West Midlands Rail' being a partnership of fourteen Metropolitan District, Shire and Unitary local transport authorities looking to run a post-London Midland 2017 West Mids franchise. Details here: http://www.westmidlandsrail.com/about/

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

This idea in the West Midlands has got some momentum already, with 'West Midlands Rail' being a partnership of fourteen Metropolitan District, Shire and Unitary local transport authorities looking to run a post-London Midland 2017 West Mids franchise. Details here: http://www.westmidlandsrail.com/about/

That's like Rail North and is part of the devolution agenda - it is not intended to be a TOC.
They would specify and let the franchise in conjunction with DfT.