Steamdemon
Pizza Delivery Train
Ok, i've just seen what First Group's Bid is, and I am extremely annoyed. That is blatant anti-competetiveness.
Virgin to Lose West Coast?
- Thread starter iain2006
- Start date
That is true, though the BBC did mention it tonight along with some weird stuff about how Mr Branson is taking the government to court
.I still sadly think that the Government will continue with their ludicrous decision
.Regards
Johan
That is true, though the BBC did mention it tonight along with some weird stuff about how Mr Branson is taking the government to court
I still sadly think that the Government will continue with their ludicrous decision
Regards
Johan
I would be inclined to think that unless Virgin have got hold of some sensitive information from some leaked source, the court action may be more of a delaying tactic, perhaps in hope that if the petition keeps growing at it's current rate it might get so big that it can't be shoved to one side and at least get debated properly. Still don't hold out much hope of anything changing though.
That is true, though the BBC did mention it tonight along with some weird stuff about how Mr Branson is taking the government to court
I still sadly think that the Government will continue with their ludicrous decision
Regards
Johan
Yes, looks like the deal will go ahead and signed up tomorrow, according to Transport Secretary Justine Greening: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19395621
Hi Everybody
I would not put too much faith in the E petition as I cannot think of a single petition that having raised sufficient numbers for it to be debated in Parliament making any difference whatsoever. What we will probably get is the speaker will allocate the debate time to be something like 3 PM on a Friday when all the MPs have left for home. We will then have one or two speakers against first group taking over the franchise and then the transport secretary surrounded by a group of cronies (all hoping to get a place in the Cabinet) re-stating that first group are a wonderful company who will somehow magically put more trains on the WCML than there is scheduled room for, with everyone getting a first class seat at half the present price of a standard seat.
I would go along with the statement made by paulsw in an earlier posting that we should look at bringing the whole railway system back into public ownership. After all the track is already under public control with the East Coast mainline train operation also that at present. I believe that private ownership is not always better than public ownership as successive governments would wish us to believe, therefore let's give the railways and their workers the chance to see what they can do when employed by us.
I don't know about nationalisation without compensation as Paul suggested, as owners of the railways in that situation we will probably up to our necks in legal challenges and also we will have all the bleating from the pension fund managers regarding their losses etc. perhaps the best way would be to wait until first group goes under with this franchise or as in the case of National Express just walks away. Perhaps then we could as the general public takeover of the running of the whole operation of the WCLM without any cost and then just wait for the other franchises to go the same way.
Bill
I would not put too much faith in the E petition as I cannot think of a single petition that having raised sufficient numbers for it to be debated in Parliament making any difference whatsoever. What we will probably get is the speaker will allocate the debate time to be something like 3 PM on a Friday when all the MPs have left for home. We will then have one or two speakers against first group taking over the franchise and then the transport secretary surrounded by a group of cronies (all hoping to get a place in the Cabinet) re-stating that first group are a wonderful company who will somehow magically put more trains on the WCML than there is scheduled room for, with everyone getting a first class seat at half the present price of a standard seat.
I would go along with the statement made by paulsw in an earlier posting that we should look at bringing the whole railway system back into public ownership. After all the track is already under public control with the East Coast mainline train operation also that at present. I believe that private ownership is not always better than public ownership as successive governments would wish us to believe, therefore let's give the railways and their workers the chance to see what they can do when employed by us.
I don't know about nationalisation without compensation as Paul suggested, as owners of the railways in that situation we will probably up to our necks in legal challenges and also we will have all the bleating from the pension fund managers regarding their losses etc. perhaps the best way would be to wait until first group goes under with this franchise or as in the case of National Express just walks away. Perhaps then we could as the general public takeover of the running of the whole operation of the WCLM without any cost and then just wait for the other franchises to go the same way.
Bill
Last edited:
For anyone without knowledge of the public procurement process, it is irrelevant how many signatures are placed on a petition. Further, Virgin have 10 days from notification of the decision, in which to approach the DfT to dispute it. If this should end up going to court, it would need to be proved that the competition was run unfairly and was biased towards First. There are two outcomes to this, firstly that Virgin is told that the decision stands or secondly, that the competition was indeed unfair in which case Virgin will not be handed the franchise but will have to re-tender as the process will be run again to avoid the perceived bias. Branson has already indicated that he is unlikely to tender again, given the £14 million cost (though this may be reduced for a re-tender, the majority of work having been done).
I'm not pro one or the other so I would be quite happy to see what transpires rather than succumb to wild speculation.
As for the public ownership issue, it is unwise to think back to the halcyon days of BR. The current public set up that is Translink (which includes NI Railways) posted a reasonable profit last year but expects to run at a £10 million loss over the next 3 years and that's taking into account the massive subsidy they receive from the NI Executive. Despite this, the chief executive remains the highest paid public servant here with a £200,000 paypacket and drivers have just been awarded an eye-watering, inflation busting pay rise of 24% (that's without Bob Crowe!). Something doesn't add up.
I'm not pro one or the other so I would be quite happy to see what transpires rather than succumb to wild speculation.
As for the public ownership issue, it is unwise to think back to the halcyon days of BR. The current public set up that is Translink (which includes NI Railways) posted a reasonable profit last year but expects to run at a £10 million loss over the next 3 years and that's taking into account the massive subsidy they receive from the NI Executive. Despite this, the chief executive remains the highest paid public servant here with a £200,000 paypacket and drivers have just been awarded an eye-watering, inflation busting pay rise of 24% (that's without Bob Crowe!). Something doesn't add up.
The government have made the decision purely on the basis of financial considerations. I doubt the Transport Secretary travels by train (and if she does its likely in First Class at public expense) and it makes little difference to her what conditions us human cattle are transported in. As for the e-petition it has probably been printed out for use as toilet paper at the DfT offices - such is the government's regard for public opinion (but hey at least they help us maintain the pretence of being a democracy). With the issue of whether or not Heathrow is getting another runway on top of this, perhaps it's time the Transport Secretary considered whether her own position is still tenable.
I don't actually have any faith in the current bunch of politicians of any persuasion taking notice of any petition online or otherwise other than maybe as a possible means of point scoring at PM's questions.
Thoroughly agree about privatisation not always working having been privatised in the past by Mrs T's lot, however this is probably not the place to discuss that fiasco.
Thoroughly agree about privatisation not always working having been privatised in the past by Mrs T's lot, however this is probably not the place to discuss that fiasco.
I think there is a bit of wishful thinking there from Paulsw2 on a return to public ownership. It is just not going to happen and none of the main political parties are in favour of it so he is living in a corner. As for not giving compensation if such a thing was possible. Seems a bit ridiculous to me to ignore such as even in 1948 it was part of things. Anyway, public ownership on the maniland is not on. Too many look back with dark glasses on as if somehow BR was so inherently brilliant that nothing could compare with it. This is more conspicuous when passenger numbers have increased tremendously since de-nationalisation and the highest since the 1948 date.
That comment from pfx was of special interest as I am bulding NIRailways from a distant Glasgow and how a salary of £200,000 can be justified would be an interesting answer especially over what is left of railways in the Province. Rail in the past there has never been well treated and when the UTA set up the powers that be were bus people and promptly started shuting t down around 75% of services.
We won't know what the situation will be as of yet with First. After all when Virgin took the franchise for tghe first few years there were nothing but complaints about the service although in latter years that has changed. Personally, i am open minded aboit First. In my part of the country we had a buy out by the former BR Scotrail then they lost that in time to First Scotrail. I have to admit that locally, I did see an obvious improvement in speed and service and wil wait to se if they manage a good service on the West Coast Line.
That comment from pfx was of special interest as I am bulding NIRailways from a distant Glasgow and how a salary of £200,000 can be justified would be an interesting answer especially over what is left of railways in the Province. Rail in the past there has never been well treated and when the UTA set up the powers that be were bus people and promptly started shuting t down around 75% of services.
We won't know what the situation will be as of yet with First. After all when Virgin took the franchise for tghe first few years there were nothing but complaints about the service although in latter years that has changed. Personally, i am open minded aboit First. In my part of the country we had a buy out by the former BR Scotrail then they lost that in time to First Scotrail. I have to admit that locally, I did see an obvious improvement in speed and service and wil wait to se if they manage a good service on the West Coast Line.
Interesting article here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...blic-ownership - that demonstrates that renationalisation is a very practical proposition. After all, the track and signalling and the ECML have already been renationalised. It would be a small matter to simply let the franchises run out and not renew them. The article also makes an interesting point about how the costs of a private railway are draining £1.2 billion out of the industry every year (dividend payments, profit margins etc.) equivalent to an 18% cut in fares.
People are understandably fed up with how we've ended up with the world's most inefficient and expensive railway industry and one that only seems to serve the interests of bus industry fat cats. Nationalisation is the way of the future!
Paul (corporate blue through and through!)
People are understandably fed up with how we've ended up with the world's most inefficient and expensive railway industry and one that only seems to serve the interests of bus industry fat cats. Nationalisation is the way of the future!
Paul (corporate blue through and through!)
Last edited:
Ah the rapidly declining and ignored by most, Guardian! Certainly Nationalisation is a political discussion pieve and that one can accept but it is still an utterly pointles direction Paul. My reason for saying that is that the 3 main parties, Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat (the smaller ones can't decide) don't have that in their sights at all. Bob Crowe and associates are in that corner somewhat naturally re their political stance but then we vote for MPs to represent the nation.
One can undersatand that people coming from a particular political utlook will argue for State control and have no issue with that but as I have now pointed out twice, there is nothing on the cards from parties to give any indepth to the view. The Guardian can freely advocate that as is it's entitlement but it is hardly representative judging by it's falling and limited circulation!
One can undersatand that people coming from a particular political utlook will argue for State control and have no issue with that but as I have now pointed out twice, there is nothing on the cards from parties to give any indepth to the view. The Guardian can freely advocate that as is it's entitlement but it is hardly representative judging by it's falling and limited circulation!
As the report points out, renationalisation is repeatedly supported by large majorities of the public in opinion polls. It's the politicians who are out of touch because their parties have been captured by corporate vested interests through donations and patronage. The Labour Party is going to shift its position on this and I suspect the LibDems too. There is a growing consensus that the current position for our railways is just not sustainable for the future and if First Group really do screw up WCML, as many expect they will, that will probably spell the end for the franchise system.
There is a reason why Britain's railways were nationalised in the first place, because private enterprise could not deliver a sustainable, economic railway. We're simply re-learning that lesson all over again (and at vast expense).
Paul
There is a reason why Britain's railways were nationalised in the first place, because private enterprise could not deliver a sustainable, economic railway. We're simply re-learning that lesson all over again (and at vast expense).
Paul
Paul,
In my experience people still refer to anything railway related as "BR" - it's quite possible that many of those polled did not really know what privatisation of the network meant at the time and have no idea of the implications, especially to the pubic purse.
I seem to recall something posted along the lines of "Who will be the winnner First or Virgin", well now that it seems to be all over, at least on the legal front, I can deliver the verdict (at least my personal one) - the Winner is ........... Virgin, at least they did not put in a silly bid which would have been doomed to failure.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with you there Paul and I'm coming from a historical rather than political perspective. Private industry and enterprise, with political backing, built the railway system we had into the 1920's. The "Big Four" were formed because there were too many small, uneconomic, railway companies and the benefits of scale of combining them into large enterprises were obvious, many regard this period as the heyday of Britains railways.
Without the railways in WWII we would have had no transport system and they did a fine job, but during the war years the railways were not maintained (in every sense). By the end of the war they were so run down that they needed massive investment and with the increasing road competition (cheap army surplus lorries being one of many factors) no private company would, or could, contemplate that type of investment. If the railways had not been nationalised then the country would have faced cuts to the system that would make Beeching pale into insignificance.
All that said, I thought at the time of privatisation that the government of the day were the ones who had not learned the lessons of history and that they were splitting a perfectly viable large enterprise into smaller, less economic, units simply for the sake of political doctrine and a few quick bucks.
I'm going to stop now because my soap box is beginning to creak under they strain !
Cheers
Chris
In my experience people still refer to anything railway related as "BR" - it's quite possible that many of those polled did not really know what privatisation of the network meant at the time and have no idea of the implications, especially to the pubic purse.
I seem to recall something posted along the lines of "Who will be the winnner First or Virgin", well now that it seems to be all over, at least on the legal front, I can deliver the verdict (at least my personal one) - the Winner is ........... Virgin, at least they did not put in a silly bid which would have been doomed to failure.
I'm not sure I entirely agree with you there Paul and I'm coming from a historical rather than political perspective. Private industry and enterprise, with political backing, built the railway system we had into the 1920's. The "Big Four" were formed because there were too many small, uneconomic, railway companies and the benefits of scale of combining them into large enterprises were obvious, many regard this period as the heyday of Britains railways.
Without the railways in WWII we would have had no transport system and they did a fine job, but during the war years the railways were not maintained (in every sense). By the end of the war they were so run down that they needed massive investment and with the increasing road competition (cheap army surplus lorries being one of many factors) no private company would, or could, contemplate that type of investment. If the railways had not been nationalised then the country would have faced cuts to the system that would make Beeching pale into insignificance.
All that said, I thought at the time of privatisation that the government of the day were the ones who had not learned the lessons of history and that they were splitting a perfectly viable large enterprise into smaller, less economic, units simply for the sake of political doctrine and a few quick bucks.
I'm going to stop now because my soap box is beginning to creak under they strain !
Cheers
Chris
I think you have skimmed history without being indepth there Paulsw2. My reason for saying this is the simplistic view that the big four were more or less hopeless. There was progress in the 1930's. Certainly bus travel had made inroads but what you forget is that in 1948 we were still dealing with post World War 2. This country had been badly damaged by air raids. Cities, factories damaged and worse. Much of the infrastructure was effected and financially we had been strained during the events of the war.Iin additionyou have to realise in case you didn't know that for the narly 5 years the railways were so heavily used by the military, goods and war effort they were run into the ground and left in a tenuous way.
Certainly politicians and the public can sometimes be distant but the public can be just as fickle as MP's. Our official oppostion were not so much against back to private but more in the way it was done. The same public moaned for years about BR. From everything from tea rooms, stale food to the state of carriages, etc. Add to that more people are using rail since the day of 1948 plus. So much so that trains need more carriages more trains longer platforms and the rest. So the fickle will still moan whether private or public!
Certainly politicians and the public can sometimes be distant but the public can be just as fickle as MP's. Our official oppostion were not so much against back to private but more in the way it was done. The same public moaned for years about BR. From everything from tea rooms, stale food to the state of carriages, etc. Add to that more people are using rail since the day of 1948 plus. So much so that trains need more carriages more trains longer platforms and the rest. So the fickle will still moan whether private or public!