As rail fares go up this week, we asked Survation to find out what the public thinks about privatisation. The results were covered in the Guardian and the Mirror.
Leaving political considerations aside, the level of subsidy necessary to sustain the present set-up is way higher than that given to BR. By all normal considerations privatisation has been a huge waste of money. Only the stupid belief that private=good, public=bad is keeping this system afloat. Nowhere else in the civilised world has the UK model been followed.
The only reason that the present Tory Government refuses to re-nationalise our Railway is because they know it was wrong to nationalise in the first place and they do not have the integrity or honesty to admit that they were, and are, wrong. I have travelled on many railways in Europe and without exception they are infinitely better than ours, for efficiency, cleanliness, punctuality and above all level of fares. We can only match the European standards in the dedication and professionalism of the staff at the operational level. A recent report confirmed that fares in the UK are many times those in other European countries, and it has also been proved that the cost of doing any work or improvements on the UK network under privatisation are three to four times what they were under British Rail, inflation included.
All infrastructure such as transport and communications should be owned and run for the benefit of all.Due to the change from a Market Economy to a Market Society everything is seen through the narrow prism of Markets, a system which will never work as profits go to senior managers and shareholders, and the profit motive shuts unprofitable routes and drives up fares.eg Southern Rail given 20 million the day before announcing a profit of 100 million and the ceo gets a rise to £2.16 million a year! Infrastructure lays the groundwork for the people who generate wealth to travel and communicate effectively and cheaply, and should be subsidised if necessary. The days of knowing the cost of everything and the value (morally, ethically, and rationally) of nothing need to be ended.
I continue to be mystified by the idea that private companies in a state subsidised system are not simply, in effect, paying public subsidy to private investors via dividends. A clearer case of so-called 'socialism for the rich' can hardly be possible. Only not-for-profit companies or similar should be allowed to run state-subsidised industries or enterprises.
I worked for BR and the private railway from 1982-2005. BR was hideously underfunded. One of the reasons why - despite its many, many downsides, privatisation has been a partial success is that it has an independent economic regulator like other utilities, so Network Rail charges are not subject to constant reduction in the way BR budgets were. One guarantee of 'taking back into public ownership' is less funding for the railways. Any politician who says otherwise is naive or lying. BR used to hike fares in the 1980s by way above inflation as the cash-starved BR was being prepared for sale. If BR had the money the industry has now we would all be happy, but this is never going to happen.
Comments
Phil Drake 8 years ago
Leaving political considerations aside, the level of subsidy necessary to sustain the present set-up is way higher than that given to BR. By all normal considerations privatisation has been a huge waste of money. Only the stupid belief that private=good, public=bad is keeping this system afloat. Nowhere else in the civilised world has the UK model been followed.
Reply
David Gibson 8 years ago
The only reason that the present Tory Government refuses to re-nationalise our Railway is because they know it was wrong to nationalise in the first place and they do not have the integrity or honesty to admit that they were, and are, wrong. I have travelled on many railways in Europe and without exception they are infinitely better than ours, for efficiency, cleanliness, punctuality and above all level of fares. We can only match the European standards in the dedication and professionalism of the staff at the operational level. A recent report confirmed that fares in the UK are many times those in other European countries, and it has also been proved that the cost of doing any work or improvements on the UK network under privatisation are three to four times what they were under British Rail, inflation included.
Reply
Richard Birkhead 8 years ago
All infrastructure such as transport and communications should be owned and run for the benefit of all.Due to the change from a Market Economy to a Market Society everything is seen through the narrow prism of Markets, a system which will never work as profits go to senior managers and shareholders, and the profit motive shuts unprofitable routes and drives up fares.eg Southern Rail given 20 million the day before announcing a profit of 100 million and the ceo gets a rise to £2.16 million a year!
Infrastructure lays the groundwork for the people who generate wealth to travel and communicate effectively and cheaply, and should be subsidised if necessary.
The days of knowing the cost of everything and the value (morally, ethically, and rationally) of nothing need to be ended.
Reply
Andii Bowsher 8 years ago
I continue to be mystified by the idea that private companies in a state subsidised system are not simply, in effect, paying public subsidy to private investors via dividends. A clearer case of so-called 'socialism for the rich' can hardly be possible. Only not-for-profit companies or similar should be allowed to run state-subsidised industries or enterprises.
Reply
Richard Talbot 8 years ago
I worked for BR and the private railway from 1982-2005. BR was hideously underfunded. One of the reasons why - despite its many, many downsides, privatisation has been a partial success is that it has an independent economic regulator like other utilities, so Network Rail charges are not subject to constant reduction in the way BR budgets were. One guarantee of 'taking back into public ownership' is less funding for the railways. Any politician who says otherwise is naive or lying. BR used to hike fares in the 1980s by way above inflation as the cash-starved BR was being prepared for sale. If BR had the money the industry has now we would all be happy, but this is never going to happen.
Reply