http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

Labour backs plans to return railway network to public control

Sweeping reform would begin with renationalisation of key routes and
end franchising of services

Plans to bring the national rail network back under public ownership
in order to halt big fare increases and prevent private companies
siphoning off huge profits will be considered by Labour as part of its
policy review, the Observer can reveal.

An independent thinktank report out on Monday, which puts forward a
detailed plan for effective renationalisation, was warmly welcomed by
the party's transport spokeswoman, Maria Eagle, who said the study was
timely and put forward a "coherent case for reform".

The changes would amount to the biggest overhaul of the train system
since British Rail was broken up in the mid-1990s and be seen as a
deliberate pitch by Ed Miliband's party for millions of "commuter
votes" in key marginal seats ahead of the next election.

If adopted by Labour it would mean ending franchises as they come up
for renewal on the east coast, west coast and midland mainlines –
ousting the likes of Sir Richard Branson from one of the country's
most profitable routes – and bringing the running of trains and
infrastructure under one publicly owned and accountable company.

Entitled Rebuilding Rail, the report by Transport for Quality of Life
argues that rail operations and infrastructure should be reintegrated,
franchising phased out and a democratic role given to passengers, the
workforce and elected local and regional authorities.

It says that the current fragmented system – under which the publicly
owned Network Rail runs the infrastructure and private companies
compete for franchise contracts to run trains – is failing taxpayers
and passengers while benefiting private train operators and their
shareholders, who are guaranteed taxpayer funds if profits fall below
a certain level.

The authors estimate that £1.2bn of public money has been lost each
year as a direct result of privatisation and fragmentation, money that
could have allowed fares to be 18% lower than at present. UK rail
passengers, who already pay the highest fares in Europe, face further
increases of at least 6% from next January.

Making it clear that Labour agreed with many ideas in the report,
which was funded by the main rail unions, Eagle said: "Under the
current system we have unaccountable train companies given a licence
to print money to operate a monopoly service at high cost to
passengers in an industry that still relies on £4bn from taxpayers
every year.

"Increasingly franchises are run by subsidiaries of the German, French
and Dutch state railways with profits helping deliver ticket prices in
those countries that are a third of ours. Labour's policy review is
therefore looking at all options to make our railways work better for
passengers with nothing ruled out, including whether the
not-for-dividend model that works for rail infrastructure should be
extended to rail services."

END QUOTE

For the rest of the article, go to:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 00:05:25 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

Labour backs plans to return railway network to public control

Sweeping reform would begin with renationalisation of key routes and
end franchising of services

Plans to bring the national rail network back under public ownership
in order to halt big fare increases and prevent private companies
siphoning off huge profits will be considered by Labour as part of its
policy review, the Observer can reveal.

An independent thinktank report out on Monday, which puts forward a
detailed plan for effective renationalisation, was warmly welcomed by
the party's transport spokeswoman, Maria Eagle, who said the study was
timely and put forward a "coherent case for reform".

The changes would amount to the biggest overhaul of the train system
since British Rail was broken up in the mid-1990s and be seen as a
deliberate pitch by Ed Miliband's party for millions of "commuter
votes" in key marginal seats ahead of the next election.

If adopted by Labour it would mean ending franchises as they come up
for renewal on the east coast, west coast and midland mainlines –
ousting the likes of Sir Richard Branson from one of the country's
most profitable routes – and bringing the running of trains and
infrastructure under one publicly owned and accountable company.

Entitled Rebuilding Rail, the report by Transport for Quality of Life
argues that rail operations and infrastructure should be reintegrated,
franchising phased out and a democratic role given to passengers, the
workforce and elected local and regional authorities.

It says that the current fragmented system – under which the publicly
owned Network Rail runs the infrastructure and private companies
compete for franchise contracts to run trains – is failing taxpayers
and passengers while benefiting private train operators and their
shareholders, who are guaranteed taxpayer funds if profits fall below
a certain level.

The authors estimate that £1.2bn of public money has been lost each
year as a direct result of privatisation and fragmentation, money that
could have allowed fares to be 18% lower than at present. UK rail
passengers, who already pay the highest fares in Europe, face further
increases of at least 6% from next January.

Making it clear that Labour agreed with many ideas in the report,
which was funded by the main rail unions, Eagle said: "Under the
current system we have unaccountable train companies given a licence
to print money to operate a monopoly service at high cost to
passengers in an industry that still relies on £4bn from taxpayers
every year.

"Increasingly franchises are run by subsidiaries of the German, French
and Dutch state railways with profits helping deliver ticket prices in
those countries that are a third of ours. Labour's policy review is
therefore looking at all options to make our railways work better for
passengers with nothing ruled out, including whether the
not-for-dividend model that works for rail infrastructure should be
extended to rail services."

END QUOTE

For the rest of the article, go to:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

I'll believe it when I see it. Maybe they've conveniently forgotten to
mention how they will achieve it without tripping over EU rules which
will come as an "unexpected surprise" when they try it ?

On 01/07/2012 00:15, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 00:05:25 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

Labour backs plans to return railway network to public control

Sweeping reform would begin with renationalisation of key routes and
end franchising of services

Plans to bring the national rail network back under public ownership
in order to halt big fare increases and prevent private companies
siphoning off huge profits will be considered by Labour as part of its
policy review, the Observer can reveal.

An independent thinktank report out on Monday, which puts forward a
detailed plan for effective renationalisation, was warmly welcomed by
the party's transport spokeswoman, Maria Eagle, who said the study was
timely and put forward a "coherent case for reform".

The changes would amount to the biggest overhaul of the train system
since British Rail was broken up in the mid-1990s and be seen as a
deliberate pitch by Ed Miliband's party for millions of "commuter
votes" in key marginal seats ahead of the next election.

If adopted by Labour it would mean ending franchises as they come up
for renewal on the east coast, west coast and midland mainlines –
ousting the likes of Sir Richard Branson from one of the country's
most profitable routes – and bringing the running of trains and
infrastructure under one publicly owned and accountable company.

Entitled Rebuilding Rail, the report by Transport for Quality of Life
argues that rail operations and infrastructure should be reintegrated,
franchising phased out and a democratic role given to passengers, the
workforce and elected local and regional authorities.

It says that the current fragmented system – under which the publicly
owned Network Rail runs the infrastructure and private companies
compete for franchise contracts to run trains – is failing taxpayers
and passengers while benefiting private train operators and their
shareholders, who are guaranteed taxpayer funds if profits fall below
a certain level.

The authors estimate that £1.2bn of public money has been lost each
year as a direct result of privatisation and fragmentation, money that
could have allowed fares to be 18% lower than at present. UK rail
passengers, who already pay the highest fares in Europe, face further
increases of at least 6% from next January.

Making it clear that Labour agreed with many ideas in the report,
which was funded by the main rail unions, Eagle said: "Under the
current system we have unaccountable train companies given a licence
to print money to operate a monopoly service at high cost to
passengers in an industry that still relies on £4bn from taxpayers
every year.

"Increasingly franchises are run by subsidiaries of the German, French
and Dutch state railways with profits helping deliver ticket prices in
those countries that are a third of ours. Labour's policy review is
therefore looking at all options to make our railways work better for
passengers with nothing ruled out, including whether the
not-for-dividend model that works for rail infrastructure should be
extended to rail services."

END QUOTE

For the rest of the article, go to:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

I'll believe it when I see it. Maybe they've conveniently forgotten to
mention how they will achieve it without tripping over EU rules which
will come as an "unexpected surprise" when they try it ?


Cannot the operating company and the infrastructure nonetheless be
state-owned?

On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 00:29:35 +0100, "
wrote:

On 01/07/2012 00:15, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 00:05:25 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

Labour backs plans to return railway network to public control

Sweeping reform would begin with renationalisation of key routes and
end franchising of services

Plans to bring the national rail network back under public ownership
in order to halt big fare increases and prevent private companies
siphoning off huge profits will be considered by Labour as part of its
policy review, the Observer can reveal.

An independent thinktank report out on Monday, which puts forward a
detailed plan for effective renationalisation, was warmly welcomed by
the party's transport spokeswoman, Maria Eagle, who said the study was
timely and put forward a "coherent case for reform".

The changes would amount to the biggest overhaul of the train system
since British Rail was broken up in the mid-1990s and be seen as a
deliberate pitch by Ed Miliband's party for millions of "commuter
votes" in key marginal seats ahead of the next election.

If adopted by Labour it would mean ending franchises as they come up
for renewal on the east coast, west coast and midland mainlines –
ousting the likes of Sir Richard Branson from one of the country's
most profitable routes – and bringing the running of trains and
infrastructure under one publicly owned and accountable company.

Entitled Rebuilding Rail, the report by Transport for Quality of Life
argues that rail operations and infrastructure should be reintegrated,
franchising phased out and a democratic role given to passengers, the
workforce and elected local and regional authorities.

It says that the current fragmented system – under which the publicly
owned Network Rail runs the infrastructure and private companies
compete for franchise contracts to run trains – is failing taxpayers
and passengers while benefiting private train operators and their
shareholders, who are guaranteed taxpayer funds if profits fall below
a certain level.

The authors estimate that £1.2bn of public money has been lost each
year as a direct result of privatisation and fragmentation, money that
could have allowed fares to be 18% lower than at present. UK rail
passengers, who already pay the highest fares in Europe, face further
increases of at least 6% from next January.

Making it clear that Labour agreed with many ideas in the report,
which was funded by the main rail unions, Eagle said: "Under the
current system we have unaccountable train companies given a licence
to print money to operate a monopoly service at high cost to
passengers in an industry that still relies on £4bn from taxpayers
every year.

"Increasingly franchises are run by subsidiaries of the German, French
and Dutch state railways with profits helping deliver ticket prices in
those countries that are a third of ours. Labour's policy review is
therefore looking at all options to make our railways work better for
passengers with nothing ruled out, including whether the
not-for-dividend model that works for rail infrastructure should be
extended to rail services."

END QUOTE

For the rest of the article, go to:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

I'll believe it when I see it. Maybe they've conveniently forgotten to
mention how they will achieve it without tripping over EU rules which
will come as an "unexpected surprise" when they try it ?


Cannot the operating company and the infrastructure nonetheless be
state-owned?

Indeed but IMU the work performed on it has to be publicly advertised
to the rest of the EU and then awarded to the most suitable (not
necessarily the cheapest) candidate not just to e.g. Mr Millipede's
chosen recipient. Renationalising the infrastructure is probably the
easy part but not the trains using it.

On Jul 1, 12:29*am, "
wrote:
On 01/07/2012 00:15, Charles Ellson wrote:





On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 00:05:25 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state....

Labour backs plans to return railway network to public control

Sweeping reform would begin with renationalisation of key routes and
end franchising of services

Plans to bring the national rail network back under public ownership
in order to halt big fare increases and prevent private companies
siphoning off huge profits will be considered by Labour as part of its
policy review, the Observer can reveal.

An independent thinktank report out on Monday, which puts forward a
detailed plan for effective renationalisation, was warmly welcomed by
the party's transport spokeswoman, Maria Eagle, who said the study was
timely and put forward a "coherent case for reform".

The changes would amount to the biggest overhaul of the train system
since British Rail was broken up in the mid-1990s and be seen as a
deliberate pitch by Ed Miliband's party for millions of "commuter
votes" in key marginal seats ahead of the next election.

If adopted by Labour it would mean ending franchises as they come up
for renewal on the east coast, west coast and midland mainlines –
ousting the likes of Sir Richard Branson from one of the country's
most profitable routes – and bringing the running of trains and
infrastructure under one publicly owned and accountable company.

Entitled Rebuilding Rail, the report by Transport for Quality of Life
argues that rail operations and infrastructure should be reintegrated,
franchising phased out and a democratic role given to passengers, the
workforce and elected local and regional authorities.

It says that the current fragmented system – under which the publicly
owned Network Rail runs the infrastructure and private companies
compete for franchise contracts to run trains – is failing taxpayers
and passengers while benefiting private train operators and their
shareholders, who are guaranteed taxpayer funds if profits fall below
a certain level.

The authors estimate that £1.2bn of public money has been lost each
year as a direct result of privatisation and fragmentation, money that
could have allowed fares to be 18% lower than at present. UK rail
passengers, who already pay the highest fares in Europe, face further
increases of at least 6% from next January.

Making it clear that Labour agreed with many ideas in the report,
which was funded by the main rail unions, Eagle said: "Under the
current system we have unaccountable train companies given a licence
to print money to operate a monopoly service at high cost to
passengers in an industry that still relies on £4bn from taxpayers
every year.

"Increasingly franchises are run by subsidiaries of the German, French
and Dutch state railways with profits helping deliver ticket prices in
those countries that are a third of ours. Labour's policy review is
therefore looking at all options to make our railways work better for
passengers with nothing ruled out, including whether the
not-for-dividend model that works for rail infrastructure should be
extended to rail services."

END QUOTE

For the rest of the article, go to:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state....

I'll believe it when I see it. Maybe they've conveniently forgotten to
mention how they will achieve it without tripping over EU rules which
will come as an "unexpected surprise" when they try it ?

Cannot the operating company and the infrastructure nonetheless be
state-owned?

Network Rail is a State Monopoly in everything but name. The Railways
are as Government Controlled as they have ever been. Why would the UK
go back to the dark days of British Railways? Better IMO to allow
operating companies to buy the infrastructure. Then drop franchising,
allow history to take its course (given neccessary regulation and
grants for desirable, but loss-making services).

In message , at 00:05:25 on
Sun, 1 Jul 2012, Bruce remarked:

Labour backs plans to return railway network to public control

Sweeping reform would begin with renationalisation of key routes and
end franchising of services

Blair and Prescott promised lots of things last time around, and failed
to deliver. Why would Labour act differently next time (assuming they
ever get a next time).
--
Roland Perry

On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 09:44:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

Blair and Prescott promised lots of things last time around, and failed
to deliver. Why would Labour act differently next time (assuming they
ever get a next time).

Given that it's impossible to discern any difference between the parties,
I doubt that they would.

The article described something less than complete re-nationalisation
anyway, so there'd still be plenty trough available for their mates.

--
Alex

On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 09:11:06 +0000 (UTC), Alex Potter
wrote:

On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 09:44:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

Blair and Prescott promised lots of things last time around, and failed
to deliver. Why would Labour act differently next time (assuming they
ever get a next time).

Given that it's impossible to discern any difference between the parties,
I doubt that they would.

The article described something less than complete re-nationalisation
anyway, so there'd still be plenty trough available for their mates.

Yes, the subject heading is rather misleading. The railway network is
already subject to public control, in the sense that it is heavily
regulated. Ther article seems to be referring to ownership. The
suggestion that labour has 'backed' the plans is misleading also as it
seems to be a consultation document rather than a policy that has been
adopted.

On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 10:23:21 +0100, Scott
wrote:

On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 09:11:06 +0000 (UTC), Alex Potter
wrote:

On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 09:44:19 +0100, Roland Perry wrote:

Blair and Prescott promised lots of things last time around, and failed
to deliver. Why would Labour act differently next time (assuming they
ever get a next time).

Given that it's impossible to discern any difference between the parties,
I doubt that they would.

The article described something less than complete re-nationalisation
anyway, so there'd still be plenty trough available for their mates.

Yes, the subject heading is rather misleading. The railway network is
already subject to public control, in the sense that it is heavily
regulated. Ther article seems to be referring to ownership. The
suggestion that labour has 'backed' the plans is misleading also as it
seems to be a consultation document rather than a policy that has been
adopted.

It's a document that was funded by the main rail unions, so the Labour
party has to show obedience to its paymasters in the short-term, but
can duly ignore it when push comes to shove.

On 01/07/2012 00:15, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2012 00:05:25 +0100, Bruce
wrote:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/30/labour-railway-network-state-control

Labour backs plans to return railway network to public control

Sweeping reform would begin with renationalisation of key routes and
end franchising of services

Plans to bring the national rail network back under public ownership
in order to halt big fare increases and prevent private companies
siphoning off huge profits will be considered by Labour as part of its
policy review, the Observer can reveal.



I'll believe it when I see it. Maybe they've conveniently forgotten to
mention how they will achieve it without tripping over EU rules which
will come as an "unexpected surprise" when they try it ?



Yes, it is just as believable as Harold Wilson & co. saying they will
halt the Beeching closures. But as for the EU - sooner or later, we will
get a UK government that will tell EU precisely what to do with their
policies. A lot of people are getting fed up with EU meddling in what
they consider to be matters for our own government.

Bevan