Gransnet forums

News & politics

Publicly owned rail services?

(65 Posts)
Siope Sat 13-May-23 09:26:10

Why do people always regard nationalised services as one way money pits?

Why don’t more people realise the present contract model is just that?

MaizieD Sat 13-May-23 09:24:19

Government has to spend money before it can tax it back. If the government didn't continually spend into the economy the suppy of money available to everyone would get smaller and smaller as companies and individuals took their profits out of the economy and the government took it out via taxation.

MaizieD Sat 13-May-23 09:19:17

A good bus and rail service would require investment at first, but when established it could be at least partially financed by heavier taxes for those who insist on using cars for every journey.

So where would the fares that people paid be going? Into thin air?

And the tax paid by the transport workers and the companies supplying goods and services to the nationalised transport systems?

Why do people always regard nationalised services as one way money pits?

Luckygirl3 Sat 13-May-23 08:53:13

Ah - the wheel is starting to come full circle.

Oopsadaisy1 Sat 13-May-23 08:38:11

The much maligned Mr Beeching was employed by the Government to investigate and report on the numbers of people using the railways, it was the Government that closed the stations not him!
The reason the various Utility companies were privatised was because they were badly run, now they are Privatised they are even worse.
Do we think that this Government will do a better job?

Siope Sat 13-May-23 08:18:06

Worryingly, the government plan to enshrine a ‘privatised profits, thanks to public subsidies’ model in law later this year. They have a Bill which will create an entity called ‘Great British Railways’ which will oversee rail operating contracts (franchises were ended some time ago) and ensure that in England, the private sector, which includes other countries’ state owned services, benefits from what is a state subsidised natural monopoly, and which will make future state ownership virtually impossible.

Chocolatelovinggran Sat 13-May-23 07:55:29

Yes, many European countries seem to have a government led rail service which seems better than ours. Hopefully, such a move would encourage more joined up thinking on road v rail journeys, bearing in mind the environmental impact of endless road building.

Doodledog Sat 13-May-23 07:32:06

I would love to see a renationalised rail service. I don’t drive and it is becoming increasingly difficult to get around. When you see films of the past, it is noticeable that every village has a station and it is possible to get from anywhere to anywhere else on public transport. I wish we could go back to those days and get rid of a lot of cars. They pollute the air, and are responsible for both accidents and isolation for those unable to access out of town facilities.

A good bus and rail service would require investment at first, but when established it could be at least partially financed by heavier taxes for those who insist on using cars for every journey. It’s difficult to avoid car use now, but that would be different if we had cheap, clean and reliable public transport.

Casdon Sat 13-May-23 07:15:28

It’s been renationalised in Wales, and we are seeing improvements to services and more investment.

Ashcombe Sat 13-May-23 07:13:58

Many other countries have successful government-run railways so we could learn from them. Despite prohibitive fares in the UK, people want to use rail travel. We currently have the crazy situation where many journeys are cheaper by air!

NanaDana Sat 13-May-23 06:55:08

I'm old enough to remember the Dr. Beeching rail cuts of the 60's, when some 5,000 miles of track and around 2,300 stations were closed. I was living in the popular seaside resort of Silloth at the time, on the Solway coast on the branch line from Carlisle. When the line was axed, the town's economy virtually died overnight.. a fate common to many other places in a similar position. The car was king, and road transport was the future. With the benefit of hindsight, the policy was perhaps both extreme and unduly focused exclusively on cost-savings. As for Nationalisation, a simple return to the old model would be disastrous in terms of the drain on the public purse, but selectively, there may well be busy routes and networks which could lend themselves to introduction of a modified methodology, and which could still be profitable . Alternatively, if the fine focus on profitability was widened in order to view the railways as a Government-funded public service, it might be possible to extend the Nationalised network and to accept that there will be costs. There would certainly be ecological benefits as road transportation was reduced, plus the movement of people and freight would certainly help to underpin local industries. A complex equation, but certainly worth a close look.

Whitewavemark2 Sat 13-May-23 06:09:56

I’d settle for a publicly owned water supply, and clean up the filth everywhere. What a state we are in!

TwiceAsNice Fri 12-May-23 23:05:28

Whatever they do it can’t be worse than the appalling rail services at the moment

MaizieD Fri 12-May-23 23:00:58

Our main train company in the NE has been 'renationalised' twice now. It seems to work just fine.

Glorianny Fri 12-May-23 22:17:51

News yesterday that the government will take Trans-Penine railways back into public ownership at the end of May when the contract ends. It isn't the first time this has happened to a service. Isn't it time we admitted that privatisation hasn't worked and we had a decent publicly owned rail servic? bright-green.org/2023/05/11/calls-for-whole-railway-to-be-brought-into-public-ownership-after-transpennine-nationalisation/