Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
It is a fallacy that the train operators and the freight operators run in the UK without subsidy. They are all subsidised to a degree - as Network Rail is a government company. Apply the duck test. If it looks and quacks - its a duck. The debate as to how much the government spends and in its comparable form will always rage. In British Rail days the subsidy raged and any investment projects were controlled the Department of Transport - they set the targets such as the hurdle rate and then cut the figures back when they reckoned that things were getting out of control. This led to the "under investment" mantra - whereas commentators like Ford will argue that BR had the cash and spent it - quickly. remember that few Nationalised Railway Companies made money - British Rail did - shed loads of it during the lawson boom of the 1980's. The money which was spent was directed toward to where the priorities where - Intercity had a big chunk; the secondary (regional) railways were re-equipped with lightweight multiple units which in effect enabled many lines to take a maintenance holiday - a policy which was to come back and haunt Railtrack. Freight however was somewhat neglected apart from a few new locomotives. Those wishing to have wagons were told to lease or buy their own with few exceptions (English China Clay being one in my part of the world). After privitisation and the split up - you factor in various companies trying to make their 15%; an immature market and tight construction industry and private companies finding that BR was not exactly inefficent and bingo costs rise. Also add in that there has never been an asset register; the condition of signalling and rails was carried in peoples heads and not on paper and as a result Railtrack found to its collective horror that actually it was a heavy engineering company and not a go getting property asset manager. The rolling stock lease is in effect backed by the government - the ROSCOs will aim for the most go-anywhere train in theory so that the residual value will be higher. The lease for the stock will basically be transferred across for one TOC to another. Where there are several Train Operators under the same ownership there will be a certain amount of cascading from one operator to another. There is strong resentment from some quarters that rolling stock which was basically written off by British Rail is now subject to leasing costs. As for Employees all are now subject to TUPE (Transfer, Undertakings and Protection) legislation - European Law now dictates how British Law handles its employees. They are simply moved across on the same conditions and then the new employer must try and negotiate with the Unions as to the changes. Open Access - the policy must be set - what sort of timetable between A and B do you want. I was astonished to find on a recent trip to Vancouver BC that there is the best part of 20m Can dollars of bi-level stock sitting in the yard and the commuter trip seems to be four one way then four the other - no day trips or back workings. That would not be tolerated here - the stock would be used for unremunerative off peak services so it earned a return and any subsidy paid would reflect that. Or the operator would then ask for a certain amount of protection if asked to operate these services and would be granted it as the public purse is not a black hole - therefore cross subsidization will take place and anybody who wants to run a competing service would be restricted. If any other UK posters would like to comment I would be grateful.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag