Religion and Ethics Forum
General Category => Politics & Current Affairs => Topic started by: Gonnagle on April 13, 2017, 02:35:32 PM
-
Dear Forum,
School buildings are falling down due to private firms trying to cut corners, some kind of scheme called PFI ( private funded initiative ) Jeremy Vine on Radio 2 has just been chuntering on about it but I found this from the Guardian.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/12/edinburgh-schools-pfi-racket-crumbling-scotland-tax-avoiding-governing-class
But one of the things that really struck me, private firms have a stake in our schools,
This week is reminiscent of the end days of Major’s sleaze meltdown, and it’s no coincidence that PFI is at the heart of the crumbing ideological shambles. Yesterday it emerged that a fund registered in a tax haven owns a 20% stake in the schools. Something called the John Laing Infrastructure Fund has its registered office in Guernsey, though a spokesman has said that the company pays tax in the UK.
And although Scotland was used as a test case for this scheme it may go further afield, is your kid attending a school that may come crumbling down around their ears.
The bottom line ( aye I am a bottom line man ) time for this country to stops selling off its assets, we all should by now be thoroughly fed up with shoddy infrastructure, time to reclaim our Buses and trains, or are we all waiting for someone to be injured, and lets not stop at the buses and trains, lets buy back our post office, a great British institution that was actually making a profit when we sold it off.
And to end, here's a thought, what about those other great institutions, The Church of Scotland, The Church of England or OR!! what about the Monarchy, lets sell off Our Madge to the Americans, they love the Monarchy, yes!! I am guessing that there are quite a few on this forum that would love to sell off Her Majesty >:(
To end end, I suppose the question is, what kind of future do you want your kids to have, well assuming that they are not injured by their school falling down on them.
Gonnagle.
-
I am guessing that there are quite a few on this forum that would love to sell off Her Majesty >:(
You post that as if it's a bad idea :P
-
So find an example of something that isn't good then dismiss all examples.
Would kind of suck for religion if we followed that method.
I'm not hopeful of getting anything other than a 'ya boo sucks' reply but lets try.
What is your position, nationalise everything? If not what criteria should we use to establish if a service should be in the private or public sector?
-
Dear Jakswan,
How are you old son :P
Criteria, you want criteria, sure me old friend, lets see, building that won't fall down around our children, no cost cutting at all, the best of the best for our future, not some children, all children, oh and fuck the cost, we are talking about our children.
Is that enough criteria for you, I have lots of criteria for you, what about the NHS being bleed dry by private firms who see the NHS as some kind of cash cow.
What about buses to rural spots, does the wee granny not have the right to shop at Tesco like the rest of us, no who cares about the wee granny, the criteria should be, access to public transport for all, not just the route which make a profit.
What about the millions who use the train ( I nearly said our trains haha haha ) the millions who keep our country running, the criteria should be, they should be able to travel to work in a safe and comfortable condition, oh and that the train is on time everytime, and be affordable.
And to end, no not nationalise everything, I am all for private enterprise but not at the expense of the ordinary working man.
Now your turn, give me an example of privatisation that works, and you can't use the mob who run Londons water, they have just been fined big time ( not big enough in my opinion ) for polluting the Thames.
Gonnagle.
PS: Sorry I forgot, ya boo sucks!
-
PFI might have been introduced by Major but Blair/Brown loved it - how else do you think they got all those shiny new hospitals built?
http://www.newstatesman.com/staggers/2014/07/save-nhs-labour-must-face-ugly-truth-pfi
Those two profligate wankers sowed the seeds for the problems in today's NHS.The level of debt is staggering and it was all because they wanted good soundbites today regardless of the shit that someone else would have to clear up later.
-
Dear Rhiannon,
Correct, but as I have said, I am a bottom line man, privitisation of our infrastructure does not and has not worked, we can portion blame later, we need to rethink and put money into our infrastructure, not give it to private firms whose only master is profit, this is why school walls are falling down.
Gonnagle
-
Dear Jakswan,
How are you old son :P
Criteria, you want criteria, sure me old friend, lets see, building that won't fall down around our children, no cost cutting at all, the best of the best for our future, not some children, all children, oh and fuck the cost, we are talking about our children.
Is that enough criteria for you, I have lots of criteria for you, what about the NHS being bleed dry by private firms who see the NHS as some kind of cash cow.
What about buses to rural spots, does the wee granny not have the right to shop at Tesco like the rest of us, no who cares about the wee granny, the criteria should be, access to public transport for all, not just the route which make a profit.
What about the millions who use the train ( I nearly said our trains haha haha ) the millions who keep our country running, the criteria should be, they should be able to travel to work in a safe and comfortable condition, oh and that the train is on time everytime, and be affordable.
And to end, no not nationalise everything, I am all for private enterprise but not at the expense of the ordinary working man.
Now your turn, give me an example of privatisation that works, and you can't use the mob who run Londons water, they have just been fined big time ( not big enough in my opinion ) for polluting the Thames.
Gonnagle.
PS: Sorry I forgot, ya boo sucks!
Fine words, Gonny, but how would you go about getting these things done from where we are now? What I mean how would you go about getting power to change these things because our present lot aren't going to do anything.
-
time to reclaim our Buses and trains, or are we all waiting for someone to be injured, and lets not stop at the buses and trains
Yes, people keep saying that but I remember British Rail as being shite. Not only that, but being entirely owned by the government, any investment was added to the National debt which meant there was no investment. Parts of it are shite now, but parts of it are pretty OK. On Great Western Railways, even the food is edible.
-
Yes, people keep saying that but I remember British Rail as being shite. Not only that, but being entirely owned by the government, any investment was added to the National debt which meant there was no investment. Parts of it are shite now, but parts of it are pretty OK. On Great Western Railways, even the food is edible.
Yep. There never was a 'golden age'.
-
Dear Rhiannon,
Correct, but as I have said, I am a bottom line man, privitisation of our infrastructure does not and has not worked, we can portion blame later, we need to rethink and put money into our infrastructure, not give it to private firms whose only master is profit, this is why school walls are falling down.
Gonnagle
It's important to know who to blame. It's not so long ago that it is lost in the mists of time.
-
Dear Rhiannon,
Correct, but as I have said, I am a bottom line man, privitisation of our infrastructure does not and has not worked,
This is manifestly false. I get electricity, water and gas. I have a phone line that probably works (I use my mobile almost exclusively). The roads are usable for the most part and the trains in my part of the world are quite reliable.
I remember once walking through a shop as a child where there were all sorts of wonderful designs of telephone on display, but all were illegal to hook up to your telephone line because the dead hand of the government owned General Post Office allowed you to buyrent only one of the standard model or the new fangled but already dated in the mid 70's trim phone.
I think your view of our nationalised institutions is very much rose tinted.
-
Dear Jack,
Raise taxes but make it fair right across the board, this is where I do not agree with Corbyn, we don't mug the rich ( well right after we have received all back taxes from all their off shore accounts >:( ) everybody pays the exact same tax.
Car owners like myself, raise fuel tax and road tax, you want that nice wee luxury of driving to your work in your heap of metal, fine!! but you are going to pay heavy for that luxury.
If you want a country to run properly then you have to pay for it, if we want our kids to have a brighter future we pay for it.
Oh and scrap Trident, put that money into a armed force that is emergency ready to the hilt, if it kicks off in a foreign country we are there, with every tool imaginable at our disposal, that includes a armed force trained in all types of medical emergencies.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
Yes, people keep saying that but I remember British Rail as being shite. Not only that, but being entirely owned by the government, any investment was added to the National debt which meant there was no investment. Parts of it are shite now, but parts of it are pretty OK. On Great Western Railways, even the food is edible.
Living in the past!! Have we not grown, have we not learned, we can do better and at the same time create jobs, not try by the back door to get rid of staff.
Gonnagle.
-
we can do better
Can we? I've yet to see any evidence of that.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
This is manifestly false. I get electricity, water and gas. I have a phone line that probably works (I use my mobile almost exclusively). The roads are usable for the most part and the trains in my part of the world are quite reliable.
Electricity, water, gas, yes and you pay through the nose for it, but I suspect you have a moderate income, try telling the single mum who has to choose between food or heating for her kids, these utilities are basic, we all need them to survive and be happy.
I remember once walking through a shop as a child where there were all sorts of wonderful designs of telephone on display, but all were illegal to hook up to your telephone line because the dead hand of the government owned General Post Office allowed you to buyrent only one of the standard model or the new fangled but already dated in the mid 70's trim phone.
Once again, living in the past, but it won't be long before yer wee granny in the utter Hebrides is paying through the nose for her wee letter to her Grandson living it large in London, oh wait a minute, by that time she will be internet friendly, sorry can you wait another minute ( boy I sound like one of those machines you talk to when you want to complain about your water, gas and electricity )
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/oct/21/carbon-footprint-email
How much water did I just use telling you you are wrong, again.
I think your view of our nationalised institutions is very much rose tinted.
Sorry mate but I don't want to go back to old, I want to go forward for a brighter future for our kids.
Gonnagle.
-
Bit of a tangent but:
On the subject of single mums, I would like to hear more reference made to the obligation of their children's fathers to help support the children but this is seldom mentioned on programmes I hear on radio.
-
Well we could sell off Scotland to Donald Trump, I hear he's bought some of it already.
;)
-
Dear Jeremyp,
Electricity, water, gas, yes and you pay through the nose for it, but I suspect you have a moderate income, try telling the single mum who has to choose between food or heating for her kids, these utilities are basic, we all need them to survive and be happy.
I don't think I pay through the nose for my utilities. There are other ways to ensure poor people have the essentials they need. For instance, the benefits system could do better. Three the cheap energy would be targeted at the people who can't afford it.
Once again, living in the past, but it won't be long before yer wee granny in the utter Hebrides is paying through the nose for her wee letter to her Grandson living it large in London, oh wait a minute, by that time she will be internet friendly, sorry can you wait another minute ( boy I sound like one of those machines you talk to when you want to complain about your water, gas and electricity )
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/green-living-blog/2010/oct/21/carbon-footprint-email
How much water did I just use telling you you are wrong, again.
I have absolutely no idea what point you are trying to make here.
Sorry mate but I don't want to go back to old, I want to go forward for a brighter future for our kids.
Going back to a failed model will not make our kids' future brighter.
-
Yep. There never was a 'golden age'.
No one is looking for a golden age just a time when our money isn't going to foreign governments to build up their pension pots, make the rich elite shareholders richer and top up their massive offshore accounts.
-
This is manifestly false. I get electricity, water and gas. I have a phone line that probably works (I use my mobile almost exclusively). The roads are usable for the most part and the trains in my part of the world are quite reliable.
I remember once walking through a shop as a child where there were all sorts of wonderful designs of telephone on display, but all were illegal to hook up to your telephone line because the dead hand of the government owned General Post Office allowed you to buyrent only one of the standard model or the new fangled but already dated in the mid 70's trim phone.
I think your view of our nationalised institutions is very much rose tinted.
All you need is a phone that works not some fancy shit.
Anyway, those days are gone when there was a limited choice in colours! ;D
-
Dear Jack,
Raise taxes but make it fair right across the board, this is where I do not agree with Corbyn, we don't mug the rich ( well right after we have received all back taxes from all their off shore accounts >:( ) everybody pays the exact same tax.
Car owners like myself, raise fuel tax and road tax, you want that nice wee luxury of driving to your work in your heap of metal, fine!! but you are going to pay heavy for that luxury.
If you want a country to run properly then you have to pay for it, if we want our kids to have a brighter future we pay for it.
Oh and scrap Trident, put that money into a armed force that is emergency ready to the hilt, if it kicks off in a foreign country we are there, with every tool imaginable at our disposal, that includes a armed force trained in all types of medical emergencies.
Gonnagle.
Fine, but my point is is that you are not in power and those who are aren't going to do the things you wish. So my original question was how would you change things, how would you get power to do those changes, what are you prepared to do to achieve your goals?
-
Can we? I've yet to see any evidence of that.
-
Scottish Water?
It remains a nationalised company, after a consultative referendum by the then Strathclyde region during the Tory dictatorship up here showed that we didn't want it sold off.
-
Dear Jeremyp,
I don't think I pay through the nose for my utilities.
Course you don't, why? You have fallen for the big con trick, hook line and sinker, and as I have already stated you probably have a moderate income, you actually think you are in charge, if I don't like Macgas I will switch to Smithgas, Smithgas up their price you can switch to Borisgas, Borisgas up their price you can switch to Pigsflygas, all a huge con.
But I will reiterate, these are basics, they are not luxuries to be toyed with, private companies should not be in charge of the basics of life.
There are other ways to ensure poor people have the essentials they need. For instance, the benefits system could do better.
Have you not noticed, do you not read the papers, the benefit system is in tatters, Tory tatters, people with jobs are queuing at foodbanks, forget the channel four documentaries about benefit street, this is a small minority, there is a majority of people who do want to work but not on zero hour contracts, they also want access to higher education so they can go on and improve their lot, the Tories have all but destroyed this.
It's all very simple, give a man a fish and he will feed himself for a day, give him the means to better himself and he will tell you to stick yer fish wear the sun don't shine, they don't want handouts they want a hand up.
Going back to a failed model will not make our kids' future brighter.
Not going back, going forward, it was not a failed model but a model run very badly, Corbyn may not be the great hope, but he is a thousand time better than the shit we have now or any of the Torylite wankers he has in his cabinet just now.
Gonnagle.
-
Sorry Gonnagle, but even if everyone agreed what was wanted, it is not going happen as no one knows how to put it together.
You need people who know how to provide working services, education, health, utilities etc with the ability to lead and motivate those that will work in the system without cheating, conning, waste and profiteering. These leaders are not sitting around on the shelf or hanging around on street corners!
You can complain as much as you like, but the hard bit is coming up with detailed constructive workable solutions that people can build. Corbyn is certainly not going to enable that.
-
Dear Udayana,
Sounds like a very defeatist attitude, where is your British Bulldog spirit ::)
I tell you what! Lets take Mr Corbyn out of the picture ( oh! there are some who would love that, the media led some ) lets concentrate on the problem, and let me ask you a simple yes or no question.
Do you think it is okay for a select few to say, we need to up the price of your gas and electricity? ( and please remember, you, we the British public have no say in this matter ).
A simple yes or no.
Gonnagle.
-
Have you not noticed, do you not read the papers, the benefit system is in tatters, Tory tatters, people with jobs are queuing at foodbanks, forget the channel four documentaries about benefit street, this is a small minority, there is a majority of people who do want to work but not on zero hour contracts, they also want access to higher education so they can go on and improve their lot, the Tories have all but destroyed this.
Are you claiming that things that currently do not work cannot be fixed? Because, if you are, you might as well give up on the utilities and railways too.
it was not a failed model but a model run very badly, Corbyn may not be the great hope, but he is a thousand time better than the shit we have now or any of the Torylite wankers he has in his cabinet just now.
Gonnagle.
You seem to be very selective about what you consider failed and what you consider merely being "run badly". In fact, it seems to me that, if it is a private contractor screwing up, it is failed but if it is the government screwing up, it is merely being run badly. I sense confirmation bias.
-
It is time to reclaim the Electric and the Gas too.
That is the National Grid needs to be reclaimed instead of being owned by several companies who are foreign ones at best.
Our Government have closed down hospitals and schools. Our Government are not bothered they all have private health care.
Private schools for their children. Do you ever wonder what would happen if they made it law that all serving Members of Parliament and Councils had to use NHS medical care and State Schools?
Do you think so many hospitals would have been closed or so many schools?
-
Dear Jeremyp,
Are you claiming that things that currently do not work cannot be fixed? Because, if you are, you might as well give up on the utilities and railways too.
And are you now admitting that thing need to be fixed. ::)
Funny thing is I have following the story in the news about Thames water now building a new sewer system, very timely considering they had just been hit with a heavy fine for polluting the old Thames and they are now admitting that this happens on a regular basis.
Now as far as I can see, Thames water have been going for decades ( privately ) so if I lived in London I would be asking, Where the hell has all the profits gone.
Further ( I like a little bit of further ) Scottish water, who oor Jim has pointed out is publicly owned have been a little more proactive than Thames water and been actively trying to not pollute but bring back life to our national waterways.
http://www.engineerlive.com/content/23652
Improving the water quality in the Clyde is not solely Scottish Water’s responsibility, but they are taking a lead in tackling the issue because of the potential benefits to the environment and customers.
They are accountable to us, not to shareholders.
You seem to be very selective about what you consider failed and what you consider merely being "run badly". In fact, it seems to me that, if it is a private contractor screwing up, it is failed but if it is the government screwing up, it is merely being run badly. I sense confirmation bias.
We all suffer from confirmation bias, and I see you did not answer my little simple question, who should be in charge of the very basics of life.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Udayana,
Sounds like a very defeatist attitude, where is your British Bulldog spirit ::)
I tell you what! Lets take Mr Corbyn out of the picture ( oh! there are some who would love that, the media led some ) lets concentrate on the problem, and let me ask you a simple yes or no question.
Do you think it is okay for a select few to say, we need to up the price of your gas and electricity? ( and please remember, you, we the British public have no say in this matter ).
A simple yes or no.
Gonnagle.
Whether private or nationalised prices will be set by some small group. The issue is about the factors that are taken into account or influence the price. On what basis are you deciding how much is too much or too little? How would you set the price? Is it to be set by country or worldwide? The current system is crap, but you need to be able to propose a workable alternative - that should also account, imo, for the costs of cleaning up the pollution it generates.
You could have the government set the price and the providers compete for profit at providing it at the set price through efficiency savings of their own making. But the economy doesn't really work that way, and I expect you would just end up with shortages and power cuts, with subsequent damage in other sectors.
Probably the best approach is to make the Of-what quangos more accountable democratically, with more teeth.
-
Dear Jakswan,
How are you old son :P
Good trust you are well I do not frequent these parts that much these days, a quick preview of your reply makes me think this isn't going to change.
Criteria, you want criteria, sure me old friend, lets see, building that won't fall down around our children, no cost cutting at all, the best of the best for our future, not some children, all children, oh and fuck the cost, we are talking about our children.
So all business should be nationalised subject to 'someone think of the children', its not exactly got much substance to it really, want to have another go?
Is that enough criteria for you, I have lots of criteria for you, what about the NHS being bleed dry by private firms who see the NHS as some kind of cash cow.
Oh there is more how refreshing, I'm confused though I asked for criteria and you've not given me any, another try perhaps?
What about buses to rural spots, does the wee granny not have the right to shop at Tesco like the rest of us, no who cares about the wee granny, the criteria should be, access to public transport for all, not just the route which make a profit.
So public transport that being nationalised because wee granny. So does that apply to everything that wee granny wants, my mum, a granny wants to go on a cruise every year is the Gonzo Raving Party going to spend our tax money on that as well?
What about the millions who use the train ( I nearly said our trains haha haha ) the millions who keep our country running, the criteria should be, they should be able to travel to work in a safe and comfortable condition, oh and that the train is on time everytime, and be affordable.
I'm on a train, its safe, quite comfy and my ticket from Swansea to Norwich cost me £32.50.
And to end, no not nationalise everything, I am all for private enterprise but not at the expense of the ordinary working man.
Again what does that mean, I'm a working man, Gopogle charge my company to advertise, at my expense in effect, will the Ministry of Search Engines be taken over when you get your hands on power.
Now your turn, give me an example of privatisation that works, and you can't use the mob who run Londons water, they have just been fined big time ( not big enough in my opinion ) for polluting the Thames.
My GP, Dentist and local chemist all provide their services as a private sector businesses, I have no complaints. My sister who works for NHS in Wales (very little privatisation) has a few horror stories about terrific waste at the hands of a bureaucracy that simply will never compete with private enterprise.
-
My GP, Dentist and local chemist all provide their services as a private sector businesses, I have no complaints. My sister who works for NHS in Wales (very little privatisation) has a few horror stories about terrific waste at the hands of a bureaucracy that simply will never compete with private enterprise.
I don't want to get into the broader argument about the balance of private and public sector provision, but I do want to take issue with your motion that the public sector can never compete with the private on efficiency. I think that is simply non-sense and there have been many studies that demonstrate that the NHS is one of the most efficient health services in the world, providing treatments at a cost that the private sector cannot compete with. The issue is, of course, overall resource provision rather than efficiency.
In my experience I think most public sector organisations are very efficient, simply because money is always so tight and because money isn't diverted to profit. I also speak as a small business owner - I think we run a tight ship but undoubtedly were we a 'not for profit' we'd be able to deliver services more efficiently.
Actually I think the biggest wasters in terms of efficiency are the big private sector organisations - I'm constantly astonished at the profligacy that seems to be the accepted norm in such organisations that would be completely unimaginably in the public sector, from company funded jollies for not just the employees, but often partners as well (in the public sector it is common that you pay for your own Christmas do, perhaps with some subsidised drink) through to unking perfectly good equipment etc.
On the latter I have a friend who used to work for a multi-national construction company and they were moving their company HQ from one side of a car park to the other side - literally 100M. They made the decision to buy entirely new office furniture and give away all their existing furniture to anyone who wanted it. We benefited to the tune of a few office chairs and filing cabinets. And no, these weren't old and tired pieces coming towards the end of their usable life - they were simply throwing away (or rather giving away to anyone who wanted) brand new furniture still in its wrapping - never used. Astonishing.
-
Whilst waiting to be seen in A&E yesterday, after falling and damaging my right arm, I noted the number of people who were called but had gone home, fed up with the wait. Obviously they didn't need emergency treatment, which is what A&E is set for. ::)
-
I don't want to get into the broader argument about the balance of private and public sector provision, but I do want to take issue with your motion that the public sector can never compete with the private on efficiency. I think that is simply non-sense and there have been many studies that demonstrate that the NHS is one of the most efficient health services in the world, providing treatments at a cost that the private sector cannot compete with. The issue is, of course, overall resource provision rather than efficiency.
In my experience I think most public sector organisations are very efficient, simply because money is always so tight and because money isn't diverted to profit. I also speak as a small business owner - I think we run a tight ship but undoubtedly were we a 'not for profit' we'd be able to deliver services more efficiently.
Actually I think the biggest wasters in terms of efficiency are the big private sector organisations - I'm constantly astonished at the profligacy that seems to be the accepted norm in such organisations that would be completely unimaginably in the public sector, from company funded jollies for not just the employees, but often partners as well (in the public sector it is common that you pay for your own Christmas do, perhaps with some subsidised drink) through to unking perfectly good equipment etc.
On the latter I have a friend who used to work for a multi-national construction company and they were moving their company HQ from one side of a car park to the other side - literally 100M. They made the decision to buy entirely new office furniture and give away all their existing furniture to anyone who wanted it. We benefited to the tune of a few office chairs and filing cabinets. And no, these weren't old and tired pieces coming towards the end of their usable life - they were simply throwing away (or rather giving away to anyone who wanted) brand new furniture still in its wrapping - never used. Astonishing.
I'll accept that it was too sweeping a statement on my part, blimey I think I've agreed with you twice in the last six monthes now.
-
I'll accept that it was too sweeping a statement on my part, blimey I think I've agreed with you twice in the last six monthes now.
It gets to be a habit ;)
-
Dear Jeremyp,
And are you now admitting that thing need to be fixed.
Of course there are issues. There always are with large complex organisations. Nobody could look at Southern Railways and argue that the rail privatisation was an unqualified success, but bits of it are. We need to fix the bits that are broken, not go back to the years of bad management and underinvestment that characterised the nationalised era.
Funny thing is I have following the story in the news about Thames water now building a new sewer system, very timely considering they had just been hit with a heavy fine for polluting the old Thames and they are now admitting that this happens on a regular basis.
So regulation of privatised industry is a model that works.
They are accountable to us, not to shareholders.
No they aren't. They are accountable to government ministers, who are theoretically accountable to us - or rather you as a Scottish voter - but how well they've managed a utility company tends to come very low down the list. Nobody's going to vote against the SNP just because one of the companies under their control bodged things up.
A government owned company not operating as efficiently as possible within a framework of regulation and incentives is pissing taxpayers' money up the wall.
We all suffer from confirmation bias, and I see you did not answer my little simple question, who should be in charge of the very basics of life.
The people who should be in charge are the people who would do the best job. Ultimately the government should set objectives and regulations but the government generally has a bad record of overseeing operations that should be run commercially.
In some cases the government has to run services. Fore example, I cannot see any way to allow our health or education services to be turned over to the commercial sector without healthcare and education suffering, but I see no reason not to let commercial organisations run utilities within a proper regulatory framework. You, however, seem to think the answer to everything is nationalise. It's not.
-
One of the effects of privatisation on public transport was to trim unprofitable routes, which meant people in the countryside found it harder to get about when they wanted to. When they were nationalised they were supported by the more profitable routes.
With nationalisation you tended to get a better service in how things were co ordinated , which made it better for longer journeys.
i'd prefer nationalised trains and buses.
Also makes it easier to get on every bus with a season ticket.
-
You're right there Rose. I would prefer nationalised public transport for same reasons.
-
You're right there Rose. I would prefer nationalised public transport for same reasons.
And we currently have the bizarre situation that the government pumps high amounts of money into subsidising a notionally privatised rail system which includes train operating companies owned by the state nationalised rail operators in other European companies. So our government cannot run its own railways, but the governments of Germany, France and the Netherland can run ours via their nationalised rail operators.
-
Dear Jakswan,
So all business should be nationalised subject to 'someone think of the children', its not exactly got much substance to it really, want to have another go?
Once again, no not all business, just the basics of life and yes, could someone please think of the children.
So public transport that being nationalised because wee granny. So does that apply to everything that wee granny wants, my mum, a granny wants to go on a cruise every year is the Gonzo Raving Party going to spend our tax money on that as well?
Gonzo Raving Party has a nice ring to it, which I am sure you would vote for considering you think yer wee Ma going on a cruise is a basic of life.
I'm on a train, its safe, quite comfy and my ticket from Swansea to Norwich cost me £32.50.
That is very, very cheap, could you pass on to the rest of the forum where we find this marvelous bargain.
Dear Jeremyp,
No they aren't. They are accountable to government ministers, who are theoretically accountable to us - or rather you as a Scottish voter - but how well they've managed a utility company tends to come very low down the list. Nobody's going to vote against the SNP just because one of the companies under their control bodged things up.
Theoretically!! Well yes that is the theory, but at least they theoretically are accountable to us not shareholders.
In some cases the government has to run services. Fore example, I cannot see any way to allow our health or education services to be turned over to the commercial sector without healthcare and education suffering, but I see no reason not to let commercial organisations run utilities within a proper regulatory framework. You, however, seem to think the answer to everything is nationalise. It's not.
No Not the answer to everything, just the very basics and nice to see you do not want our health and education in private hands, parents who have a new child in neonatal can have a nice room in the Ronald McDonald so they can be near their child.
Gonnagle.
-
That is very, very cheap, could you pass on to the rest of the forum where we find this marvelous bargain.
Plan your journeys well in advance and use websites like RedSpottedHanky to buy your tickets.
-
Plan your journeys well in advance and use websites like RedSpottedHanky to buy your tickets.
And you'll still end up paying a fortune unless you are able to travel during off-peak times. So if you rely on the train to commute to work, as millions of us do, expect to pay through the nose. Just to note, my season ticket for a journey of less than 20 miles costs over £3000 per year. Ouch. For that money, you'd expect a comfortable and reliable service - but what do you get. Trains where you never get a seat and are usually so ram packed that you can hardly move. A service that regularly falls apart, with even minor problems meaning you end up having to take a completely different line to a station miles from your home (as happened to me, yet again, last week).
By contrast, in most European countries (recently involving France, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland) you can buy a just before boarding at a fraction of the per mile cost you'd pay in the UK and get a much more reliable service.
-
Dear Prof,
Three grand a year :o :o forgive my french but F*** me, something is way out of order here, I just had a quick calculation, and even factoring in my tax, insurance and money spent keeping my car in reasonable shape I am a fraction of your cost.
Excrement :P :P Given that our kids can expect to have a working life ( on average ) of 40 years, that is £120,000 >:( and that is if prices remain at that level.
No wonder this country is suffering, all that wasted income going to private investors.
Gonnagle.
-
Dear Prof,
Three grand a year :o :o forgive my french but F*** me, something is way out of order here, I just had a quick calculation, and even factoring in my tax, insurance and money spent keeping my car in reasonable shape I am a fraction of your cost.
Excrement :P :P Given that our kids can expect to have a working life ( on average ) of 40 years, that is £120,000 >:( and that is if prices remain at that level.
No wonder this country is suffering, all that wasted income going to private investors.
Gonnagle.
£3288 to be precise - standard class. And that doesn't include the tube, which would be necessary if I took public transport all the way to my work. Instead I have a folding bike, so I cycle across London for the last part of my journey.
-
Dear Prof,
Using your good self as an example, I have given up on calculating the profit made by these private companies ( I was using a piece in the Mirror which quoted 1.3 billion train journeys in just one year ).
The investment they are putting into up dating our trains is a drop in the ocean compared to the profit.
Gonnagle.
-
Using your good self as an example, I have given up on calculating the profit made by these private companies
In many cases these aren't really private companies at all, but the state owned train companies in other european countries.
-
Dear Prof,
Which only heaps insult upon insult, but thank you, I am now fully convinced that we should reclaim our transport, run properly and reinvesting all profit, you at least can look forward to a comfortable and reliable train service, plus, government run would think twice about increasing prices.
Now you have sorted that out, how do we get rid of a Tory government, just been listening to a Labour supporter on the Jeremy Vine show, he is going to vote Tory this time, why? Brexit.
Gonnagle.
-
Great. We could reclaim government in the same way: have a proper government that runs the country nicely and makes sure everyone is comfortable, works to the best of their ability and has fun.
Everything sorted now!
-
One of the effects of privatisation on public transport was to trim unprofitable routes
Public ownership is no guarantee of protection of unprofitable routes.
-
And you'll still end up paying a fortune unless you are able to travel during off-peak times. So if you rely on the train to commute to work, as millions of us do, expect to pay through the nose. Just to note, my season ticket for a journey of less than 20 miles costs over £3000 per year. Ouch. For that money, you'd expect a comfortable and reliable service - but what do you get. Trains where you never get a seat and are usually so ram packed that you can hardly move.
On the assumption that you travel to work 200 days in the year, that's 37p per mile to travel into and out of London at the busiest times. Seems like a bargain to me, unless you have the misfortune to be in Southern Rail's area, in which case you are probably being robbed.
By contrast, in most European countries (recently involving France, Netherlands, Denmark, Germany and Switzerland) you can buy a just before boarding at a fraction of the per mile cost you'd pay in the UK and get a much more reliable service.
But their rail services are all subsidised by tax payers to a much greater extent than ours.
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_subsidies#Europe
-
Dear Taxpayer,
A few thoughts.
Using the good Prof's scandalous cost for travelling to and from work and rounding it down to £3000, if we times that by, lets say a million passengers a year, well that is easy, 3 billion pounds going to private investors.
Now if we use Wiki as a reference,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Central_station
With over 30 million passengers in 2015-16, Glasgow Central is the twelfth-busiest railway station in Britain, and the busiest in Scotland.[5] According to Network Rail, over 38 million people use it annually, 80% of whom are passengers.[6] The station is protected as a category A listed building.[7]
30 million passengers a year, but then, Glasgow Central is only the twelfth busiest station in Britain.
But lets be conservative here, lets half that amount, Wiki can sometimes not be the most reliable source of info.
15 million x 3000, anyone!! You young Smithers, you have your hand up, oh you just want to go to the toilet, well off you go young man, hurry back I am sure you must be fascinated to know how the ordinary citizen is being ripped off.
45 billion pounds a year :o
Now Dear Taxpayer, I have only used my wonderful Glasgow Central ( yes it is mine ) as a test case, here is Wiki again and you can choose your own station and do your own sums.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_busiest_railway_stations_in_Great_Britain
Now you can for reference go and check Udayanas link on subsidies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_subsidies#Europe
A paltry 4.4 billion pounds per year, but then I ask myself, why are we even subsidising such a wonderful Golden egg.
Now granted, the above calculations are a bit simplistic, but if we delve deeper.
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3241294/Virgin-Rail-lines-27m-dividend-sales-hit-1bn.html
Mr Branson, sorry my apologies, some numpty gave him a Knighthood, Sir Richard is coining it in thank you very much, but then it starts to become a little more complicated.
Sir Richards company gives hundreds of millions back to us in taxes but then gets a nice wee bung back from state owned Network rail for failure to maintain lines, so maybe that is something else we can sell off.
And if we go a little deeper ( my apologies for using Sir Richard as a example, other scroungers are available )
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/truth-richard-branson-virgin-rail-profits
These sums are what got Virgin interested in rail in the first place. In his biography of Branson, Tom Bower records a phrase used by the billionaire's lieutenants while weighing up the west coast deal: "It's a licence to print money. Can't go wrong."
A licence to print money >:( >:( But wait, in the above article there is mention of off shore accounts, surely not, not Dear sweet Sir Richard.
To end Dear Taxpayer, I will allow you to draw your own concussions and please remember it could only be my confirmation bias working overtime, I have made no mention of cramped conditions or reliability, I have made no mention of what the first line in Udayanas link states,
Many countries offer subsidies to their railways because of the social and economic benefits that it brings.
Social and economic benefit, our transport is a basic, something we need to keep the country moving, so once again I ask, who should be in charge of the very basics of life, some foreign power, a private investor, or the Great British public.
Gonnagle.
-
On the assumption that you travel to work 200 days in the year, that's 37p per mile to travel into and out of London at the busiest times. Seems like a bargain to me, unless you have the misfortune to be in Southern Rail's area, in which case you are probably being robbed.
Check out the comparison for comparable commutes in the UK and other European countries.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-rail-passengers-rpice-hike-train-fares-europe-income-southern-virgin-gwr-a7506711.html
Price per mile in the UK (using my line as the comparison) is over 3 times more than the next highest (Germany) and over 6 times more than France.
But their rail services are all subsidised by tax payers to a much greater extent than ours.
But differences in subsidies doesn't come close to explaining the difference in cost.
So subsidies in Germany and France are less than double those in the UK, yet our fares are more than 3 times and 6 times greater respectively.
One of the reasons, of course, is that a load of the UK subsidy actually ends up subsidising the French and German railways as their state owned companies run a significant number of our train operating companies, including mine (part owned by the French state railways. S my exorbitant fare allows commuter fares around Paris to be just 16% of the cost of mine, on a per mile basis.
-
Social and economic benefit, our transport is a basic, something we need to keep the country moving, so once again I ask, who should be in charge of the very basics of life, some foreign power, a private investor, or the Great British public.
I'm a pragmatist, and not someone with a ideological view on what should be in the private sector or public sector as many on both the hard left and hard right are.
However what I see in our privatised railways is a system that is eye waveringly expensive both the the customer and overall to UK PLC (cost to tax payer through subsidy and direct to customer), with overall costs clearly significantly greater than in other countries. Yet by comparison our service is very poor - unreliable and overcrowded.
So as a pragmatist I look at other ways to run railways, notably those in comparable European countries and I see services that are mech better and much cheaper, and that is even when you add in the greater state subsidy. And the unifying feature - they are state owned.
One further point on economics - you need to factor in the cost to the economy of unreliable services. As someone working in London regularly either 1 or colleagues are simply unable to get into work because of poor service. Sure home working is possible for some, but overall there is a hit on productivity - how much I don't know, but it must be very considerable for a economy the size of London's.
-
Dear Taxpayer,
A few thoughts.
Using the good Prof's scandalous cost for travelling to and from work and rounding it down to £3000, if we times that by, lets say a million passengers a year, well that is easy, 3 billion pounds going to private investors.
Now if we use Wiki as a reference,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glasgow_Central_station
30 million passengers a year, but then, Glasgow Central is only the twelfth busiest station in Britain.
...
hmm, whatever is meant by "30 million passengers" it does not mean 30 or even 15 or even 1 million individuals paying £3000 each. Probably they are counting numbers of journeys, with further complications wrt interchanges, non-ticketed journeys .. ad infinitum.
Your fag packet would run out of space just trying to understand that one statistic.
-
hmm, whatever is meant by "30 million passengers" it does not mean 30 or even 15 or even 1 million individuals paying £3000 each. Probably they are counting numbers of journeys, with further complications wrt interchanges, non-ticketed journeys .. ad infinitum.
Your fag packet would run out of space just trying to understand that one statistic.
Indeed - my £3200 equates to about 400 journeys, on the basis that my normal daily commute results in 2 journeys, one there in the morning and one back in the evening.
-
Dear Prof,
One further point on economics - you need to factor in the cost to the economy of unreliable services. As someone working in London regularly either 1 or colleagues are simply unable to get into work because of poor service. Sure home working is possible for some, but overall there is a hit on productivity - how much I don't know, but it must be very considerable for a economy the size of London's.
Well in my own way I was when I mention basics, if a commuter can not make it to his work on time on a regular basis the economy suffers.
For me, the job of keeping the country moving should be one of government, maybe it could be selling point on your favourite subject Brexit, we could tell foreign investment, look we will ensure your workers are there on time every time.
Gonnagle.
-
...
So as a pragmatist I look at other ways to run railways, notably those in comparable European countries and I see services that are mech better and much cheaper, and that is even when you add in the greater state subsidy. And the unifying feature - they are state owned.
One further point on economics - you need to factor in the cost to the economy of unreliable services. As someone working in London regularly either 1 or colleagues are simply unable to get into work because of poor service. Sure home working is possible for some, but overall there is a hit on productivity - how much I don't know, but it must be very considerable for a economy the size of London's.
Indeed. However it is wrong to conclude that just a re-nationalisation of the railway is bound to improve the service and economics of our own system. We need to understand the details of exactly why these continental systems work better than ours and then work out the best way of implementing improvements here.
If those same companies are doing fine in Germany (say) but just screwing up our system - again, you need to understand the details even if only to ensure our state system (if reinstated) doesn't continue doing the same.
-
Dear Udayana,
Rounding off, that's all I was doing, I could have rounded up, I was just showing how rotten the system is, and it is, Jeremyp can quote figure of 37p per mile but that is still to high for low earners, but if you use the good Profs cost it becomes staggering.
But then that is only one problem of this whole mess, what about routes that are being cancelled because they are not profitable, or as the Prof says, overcrowding, if I was an employer in London I would want my staff to be well rested when they come to work.
Gonnagle.
-
Indeed. However it is wrong to conclude that just a re-nationalisation of the railway is bound to improve the service and economics of our own system. We need to understand the details of exactly why these continental systems work better than ours and then work out the best way of implementing improvements here.
If those same companies are doing fine in Germany (say) but just screwing up our system - again, you need to understand the details even if only to ensure our state system (if reinstated) doesn't continue doing the same.
I think there are a range of reasons.
But fundamentally you need to understand the different drivers for the French state owner railway company operating in France and in the UK. In France they are acting effectively as a nationalised public service, with necessarily emphasis on service and efficiency of operation. In the UK they are simply acting as another commercial organisation and their key driver will be profit, which can be piled back into the French system (the French government isn't a charity).
Add to that the lack of any meaningful competition, which is of course a necessary component for a free market private system to operate effectively.
Further, that in many cases there is no incentive in some of the deals struck for the service to be run effectively - I gather that Southern earned exactly the same from government subsidies throughout the period where their industrial dispute meant that they were barely operating a viable service.
Finally the fragmentation and short-termism embedded in the system. That the train operating companies aren't responsible for the rails on which they run and the signals that allow them to proceed or otherwise. Secondly that there is no real incentive to invest by train operating companies as the timeline of the return one investment is way beyond the length of their franchises.
The problem for me is that I cannot see how you can rectify all these issues and also create a proper free market that might drive down cost and drive up service quality in the private market. It simply doesn't work as far as I can see and I'm struggling to see any example across the globe of an effective privatised railway system, while I can see loads of effective ones that are state owned.
-
Dear Prof,
Well in my own way I was when I mention basics, if a commuter can not make it to his work on time on a regular basis the economy suffers.
For me, the job of keeping the country moving should be one of government, maybe it could be selling point on your favourite subject Brexit, we could tell foreign investment, look we will ensure your workers are there on time every time.
Gonnagle.
Agreed. The government has set up the Office of Road and Rail to monitor and regulate transport issues. One could feel that it has been set up to be inadequate and toothless.
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/office-of-rail-and-road
-
...
The problem for me is that I cannot see how you can rectify all these issues and also create a proper free market that might drive down cost and drive up service quality in the private market. It simply doesn't work as far as I can see and I'm struggling to see any example across the globe of an effective privatised railway system, while I can see loads of effective ones that are state owned.
Yes, I agree with this. All I am saying is that Corbyn (or whoever) can't demand re-nationalisation and expect everything to magically work. He needs detailed plans, or people with them, on how the economics and management is going to be arranged.
The same applies to the NHS, social care, energy etc. If he did get in and even started work on these immediately, in 2022 we would just be 5 years down the road with little or no improvement.
-
Dear Prof,
Great post, I wish I could be as erudite as your good self.
Dear Udayana,
Agreed. The government has set up the Office of Road and Rail to monitor and regulate transport issues. One could feel that it has been set up to be inadequate and toothless.
Well sorry, but for cynical old me, it is another case of the Tories walking away from their responsibilities, I have read they are wedded to a thing called little government, but I could be wrong.
Gonnagle.
-
Yes, I agree with this. All I am saying is that Corbyn (or whoever) can't demand re-nationalisation and expect everything to magically work. He needs detailed plans, or people with them, on how the economics and management is going to be arranged.
Of course, and I'd have no confidence in Corbyn achieving it, as he is an ideological nationaliser, and just as bad as the ideologue privatisers who got us into the problem in the first place.
However I don't think the challenges are as great as some suggest. In order to achieve nationalisation you simply need to wait a few years until franchises lapse and simply revert them into public control. In fact this has happened in the past - with the East coast route, which reverted to public control for a period of about 6 years, and ran very successfully during that period after the debacle of National Express.
-
Dear Prof,
However I don't think the challenges are as great as some suggest. In order to achieve nationalisation you simply need to wait a few years until franchises lapse and simply revert them into public control. In fact this has happened in the past - with the East coast route, which reverted to public control for a period of about 6 years, and ran very successfully during that period after the debacle of National Express.
Problem solved, Mr Corbyn just needs to ensure that we are all aware it is ours to use or abuse, it is far to precious to be abused, we need it to keep the country moving.
Gonnagle.