Quote:
Originally Posted by Foghut
Yup I totally agree. I think the important issue is not WHO owns the railway, but that it becomes vertically integrated. You can bet that if the companies running the trains also owned the infrastructure, the blockades would be far less paralysing.....
|
I can see the benefit of intergrating stations and services, but the tracks I think are another kettle of fish, given the fragmented state of the franchises as a whole. Even if it was intercity and regional railways how could you seriously say that one should control upgrades over the other. You would need a controlling franchise on one route and that would be detrimental to the other franchise, which is precisely what we don't need. The reality for vertical intergration, I believe, is that
if it happens it won't be for a while, assuming everyone wanted it, which they clearly don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foghut
....This will never happen with the current government because it just sees franchising as a cash cow, to generate lots of lovely money which it can squander elsewhere, instead of making the franchisees plough their profit back into improving the railway. Under the current system the bidder who wins the franchise is simply the one which undertakes to pay the biggest wedge to the treasury; there is no requirement to provide a decent service - just look at First Great Western (whose stock-shortage fiasco incidentally was actually caused by DfT).....
|
I believe, in order to make the companies see sense a proportion of the profits (50-75%) should be put back into the railways within a 5 year time scale with a clause that any unspent money goes to track/station projects. The problem being that with the current crop of companies running the railway, it would only lead to fares increases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foghut
.....Finally, to me the maddest/saddest thing of all is the current Cost-Attribution system which is supposed to benefit the customer, but actually works against them. When a train is delayed (often by external factors which is not its fault) its calling pattern is slashed to enable it to start its next service on time, thus avoiding a fine. So all the passengers get off and wait ages for the next stopping service, whilst their original train runs fast, but empty, to the end of the line. It's lunacy and it makes me quite ashamed to be a railwayman, as it happens on an almost daily basis.
|
Here, here.
I used to live along the semi fast Thameslink line to Bedford, and whilst the situation is terrible, what makes it worse is that it is always the same stations being left out. First to go on the Bedfords was always Leagrave (unless it was the 1755 from KXTL, The managers train, fast to St Albans, LAP, Leagrave and stops to Bedford), then Harlington and Flitwick, then Harpenden, St.albans, Luton and LAP. So I often found myself seeing 3 Bedford trains go passed before one stopped where I needed. As staff it sucks big time but as a punter it is intolerable.