Train Drivers UK

Taxes

The OAPs are paying the increase in their already high wages, from their, now disallowed, WFP!!

MaizieD

Rolling stock is leased. Which I gather is something of a problem, but I haven't explored it any depth.

State owned Network Rail owns the infrastructure, so no problem there

www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/about-us/

Leasing sound logical, it has to be paid for of course and it depends on the terms and how efficient the trains are in practice. At least leasing is predictable short term contract, if cars are an indicator interest rates are quite high

I’ll be honest, imo, no utilities or our transport systems should be privately owned and I think it’s been disastrous

MaizieD

^Bringing it back as a nationalised industry will take time and resources as would other renationalisations ^

Renationalising Rail is much more straightforward than renationalising, say, water, Wyllow, because that train companies have fixed term franchises. Once the franchise term is up the state takes that franchise back into public ownership. No costs involved.

The East Coast mainline has been taken back into public ownership twice in the last 20 years. I don't know how it's doing at present but the first time it returned a healthy profit to the treasury. 😀

The state currently runs a few other franchises.

Thanks for that reminder, Maizie (ie, limited term franchise), and whats happened on the East coast rail.

Rolling stock is leased. Which I gather is something of a problem, but I haven't explored it any depth.

State owned Network Rail owns the infrastructure, so no problem there

www.networkrail.co.uk/who-we-are/about-us/

No cost?.

Railtrack owns the track and signaling.

Who owns rolling stock and station facilities?.

Bringing it back as a nationalised industry will take time and resources as would other renationalisations

Renationalising Rail is much more straightforward than renationalising, say, water, Wyllow, because that train companies have fixed term franchises. Once the franchise term is up the state takes that franchise back into public ownership. No costs involved.

The East Coast mainline has been taken back into public ownership twice in the last 20 years. I don't know how it's doing at present but the first time it returned a healthy profit to the treasury. 😀

The state currently runs a few other franchises.

Allira

Are rail services in other countries nationalised?
We rarely use the trains now although we used to and someone was telling me last night how utterly dire the service is now, others compared it to the efficiency of the service in European and other countries.

Drastic measures are needed.

Japan has very few rail subsidies, the US spends very little, and freight is not subsidized. The UK is average in Europe, we have a very old infrastructure and after the HS2 chaos I don’t see many more changes soon.
The cost of new railway routes to todays standards is mind boggling, when it’s cheaper to fly from London to Edinburgh than by train in a fraction of the time without subsidy, it’s hard to justify.

Maisie

Don’t you realize that if you privatize an industry the investors want an income from that investment, they cannot borrow the money they need without that. The objective of any company is to make money not to provide a public service.

I'm not stupid, David. Of course I know that.

In my opinion all utilities should be brought back into public ownership, the cost will be high and we would know exactly who to blame - or maybe even praise if they get it right

I absolutely agree with you.

I note that the chair of the last report into the rail service, the Williams Shapps Report 2022, has backed to current government's plans to bring rail back into public ownership. And Williams, the chair, was CEO of privatised British Airways.

It never made sense to divide up our small country into rail chunks and have different bodies controlling different bits, and money going into shareholder profits not back into the service. It's crated chaos. Bringing it back as a nationalised industry will take time and resources as would other renationalisations so its only realistic for the government to take just the railways on for now.

As an experiment in capitalism, it has proved to be a disaster all round.

“They've managed to make enough to pay dividends to shareholders...

Nationalisation will stop that nonsense.”

Maisie

Don’t you realize that if you privatize an industry the investors want an income from that investment, they cannot borrow the money they need without that. The objective of any company is to make money not to provide a public service.

The successive governments have been very poor at regulating PFIs, no better example is the water industry where companies have been prevented from investing to keep bills down. Yes dividends have been paid, without them investors don’t invest.

The only advantage I can see is that it gives the government someone else to blame when it goes wrong. In my opinion all utilities should be brought back into public ownership, the cost will be high and we would know exactly who to blame - or maybe even praise if they get it right

Are rail services in other countries nationalised?
We rarely use the trains now although we used to and someone was telling me last night how utterly dire the service is now, others compared it to the efficiency of the service in European and other countries.

Drastic measures are needed.

David49

MaizieD

David49

7 franchises are Government operated, operating profits for private are controlled government, so companies cannot pay extra wages unless either higher fares or increased subsidy is approved.

While operating profits are controlled by the regulator it doesn't follow that the TOCs can't pay higher wages.

It does if they want to stay in business, many have ended up loss making and handed back the operating to others including the government.

If the railways are all taken back into public ownership a lot of extra investment is going to be needed, not on the scale of the water industry but a significant amount.

They've managed to make enough to pay dividends to shareholders...

Nationalisation will stop that nonsense.

Jane43 Transport for London is run by the Greater Authority, and London Underground Limited is owned by the GLA as a subsidiary company, but there are several private companies who operate the bus services, overground trains and trams that run in London, so they don't actually own Transport for London.

MaizieD

David49

7 franchises are Government operated, operating profits for private are controlled government, so companies cannot pay extra wages unless either higher fares or increased subsidy is approved.

While operating profits are controlled by the regulator it doesn't follow that the TOCs can't pay higher wages.

It does if they want to stay in business, many have ended up loss making and handed back the operating to others including the government.

If the railways are all taken back into public ownership a lot of extra investment is going to be needed, not on the scale of the water industry but a significant amount.

David49

7 franchises are Government operated, operating profits for private are controlled government, so companies cannot pay extra wages unless either higher fares or increased subsidy is approved.

While operating profits are controlled by the regulator it doesn't follow that the TOCs can't pay higher wages.

7 franchises are Government operated, operating profits for private are controlled government, so companies cannot pay extra wages unless either higher fares or increased subsidy is approved.

Some of the operating companies are not privately owned, eg Transport For Wales which is owned by the Welsh Government and Transport For West Midlands which is owned by the West Midlands Combined Authority, also transport For London which is owned by Greater London Authority.

Nandalot

I thought it was the train operating companies that pay their own drivers. National Rail is responsible for track and leasing it the separate companies.

I thought this too, I just didn’t know who was funding their latest pay increases, the govt or the train companies

Nandalot

I thought it was the train operating companies that pay their own drivers. National Rail is responsible for track and leasing it the separate companies.

I would assume that, too. But the government will be paying those who work for the state run companies, such as LNER.

I thought it was the train operating companies that pay their own drivers. National Rail is responsible for track and leasing it the separate companies.

So government money?

I understood that Network Rail pay the drivers.
Network Rail is a non- departmental public body of The Dept of Transport.