Time to renationalise?
 

I'd be interested to hear views on McNulty report and the fact that it will imoact on rail workers (of which I am one). I have to say I found the assertion on the BBC website that McNulty thought rail workers are overpaid, a strange one. Yes there are some well paid people on the railway but clerical grades and ticket office workers are not amongst them, yet it is likely from what I read, that this is where the axe will fall.

One possible answer is renationalization which could drive down duplication of costs and remove the so called profit from the railway (which is funded by our taxes anyway). What are the up sides to this? What are the down sides?

All comments welcome.

Well I for one have let my views known on other threads.
Railways are never meant to be profitable and are an aid to the movement of people and goods that help the bigger ecconomy to benefit. It is my view that they should be re-nationalized to serve the people of this country and should be subsidized.
Get goods and people off the roads and onto the rails at a cost that is realistic. Others in Europe manage the same and have a far superior rail network than the UK could ever dream of! Just where did it all go so wrong for us here, in what was once the world leading authority on railways!
Best wishes
Phil

Look at any Government run operation and it's NEVER the excess number of MANAGERS that gets pruned

check out my old firm the NHS to see what I mean

I have to agree with Phil, if the government had given half the amount of money to British rail that they have contributed to private rail companies in subsidies, i feel sure we would have a better and cheaper rail system.
Most governments in Europe realise that railways are not going to make money but recognise the fact that they are able to move people and goods in vast quantities. Wake up Britain!

Totally agree Phil.
It was reported on the BBC News this morning that the annual rail fare from London to Woking costs in excess of £3,000 and that a similar fare in Italy costs just over £300. Appears to me our European counterparts have got this one right. It's got nothing to do with profit.....has it?
Stuart

There has been a long discussion on another forum on this issue. It generated an excellent and well informed response.

Beware of simple solutions. SNCF are in big trouble. They have proved to many experts that a nationalised railway is incapable of penetrating the logistics market for freight movement.

The railway can no longer deliver the complete door to door product, that is done worldwide by logistics companies, not state owned institutions.

These private sector companies prefer to work with their own recources and with their own kind -that is why Tesco goods on rail are moved by Eddie Stobart. There are many other examples all over the world.

Passenger trains can work with state ownership but SNCF for one, apart from the TGV's, is a poor quality operator on many other services.

Good Topic:cool:
More people are travelling on our railways (with a third less reduction of the system following the Beeching Era) (1 point to privatisation), They run generally more on time (2 points to Privatisation), and are a lot cleaner (3). Profits to a public service are totally wrong (1 point to re nationalisation), and too much is 'syphoned' off for bonuses (2 points to re nationalisation). Fixed formations/over crowding don't work at crucial times (3 points to BR days then)
For me, I'll go for a nationalised system with profits totally re invested back into the network, with more 'flexible' stock formations, but with all 'slack' removed...problem solved :D

Sorry to take you up on this ACE.

BR was in the process of fixed formations long before privatisation. There was a huge public outcry at over crowding, when the first sprinters hit the rails. The central Wales route lost its loco hauled trains - many up to six and more coaches - to two car 150's.

Fixed formations are now the recognised way - across the world - to achieve savings and improve operating efficiency. BR's policy on the high density routes (still used today) was to price people off the railway at peak times rather than increase capacity.

Re nationalisation won't change that I'm afraid.

Re. Belmont Rd's opinion on overcrowding in B.R's day, this was true but the fault was the governments in not giving financial aid as they do now for the private companies, by the way, i recently stood all the way from Stafford to Southampton and my partner has stood many times from Leeds to New St. B-ham.
As many of you are aware some modern main stock such as Pendilino's are hired in from companies owned by the Banks, therefore generating indirect income to other private corporations. I think we should give BR a chance with the same financial support as private companies get.

Would nationalisation put money into say Sir Richard Branson's pocket. Its all about money these days especially, only have to look at gas, electric and now water companies wanting meters in homes to bump the bills up. Not to mention the increase in stealth taxes etc.