Pennine MC Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 There are undoubtedly some things wrong with the present set-up but there is also a lot of good in it and I would hate to see the good points lost by what would fairly surely be a botched recreation of the nationalised railway. That is a critical point because there is no way that 'BR' can be recreated - a lot of the BR network and structural management skills have been lost because they just haven't been needed for a decade or more and many senior managers in the industry simply haven't got the skills or independence to be able to tell DafT where to stick its 'clever' ideas. This is it, isnt it Mike. The petition is predicated on the shallow, black and white assumption that 'nationalised = good, privatised = bad', without considering the myriad shades of grey within the issue. Much as I was against privatisation at the time (along with most of the country, I think), there's no guarantee that a renationalised system would right what we generally see as wrongs. And it probably wouldnt sit very easily in the changed and much more overtly commercial world that we have even since the mid 90s I don't think this e-petition will go very far - renationalising the spaghetti bowl mix of gvt and corporate contracts would be costly and time-consuming. I'm reminded of the change back from Humberside here - again I wasnt particularly in favour of its being set up, but changing things back was in some ways chucking good money after bad. Though again it's a complex issue. The only real separation which did lead to a bit of duplication (in BR times that is) was RfD and in any case in business terms it wasn't really competing with any of the divisions of Trainload Freight nor were they competing with each other because each was specialised in traffic terms. The only odd ball back then was Freightliner which in some respects was competing with other parts of the freight business but it was in reality a very minor overlap. But of course once they were privatised they began, a year or two down the road, to seriously compete with each other as they do to this day. Do you think even that (Sectors and Subsectors) was possibly a prelude to privatisation Mike? It's probably forgotten now after so many years of EWS dominance, but the idea behind the setting up of Loadhaul, Transrail and Mainline Freight was as 'pseudo-companies' which each might find separate buyers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Classsix T Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 The fattest chestnut in the hobby appears again, a petition started by someone who no doubt feels recently aggrieved at the levels of service they have received, more than likely, a matter of days ago. The railways were nationalised for a reason. The Big Four were skint. It only lasted 46 years, a mere chapter in the history of rail. Petition for less Govt. intrusion, more re-openings, fairer leasing, more seats.... Anything but an ill informed ideology of past glory which would cost the taxpayer billions to buy shareholder stock. C6T. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Thumper Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 for the record, I did not create the petition, I found it whilst looking for one, thing was i could start one with more detail to it but the blighters would decline it on the grounds that another petition had been started...... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Thumper Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 also it was a mistake here for me to put it up, so sorry about that.. mods can you lock or nuke this thread please cause its heading 'off the rails' Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trisonic Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 But in reality I don't think there were Pete. The only real separation which did lead to a bit of duplication (in BR times that is) was RfD and in any case in business terms it wasn't really competing with any of the divisions of Trainload Freight nor were they competing with each other because each was specialised in traffic terms. The only odd ball back then was Freightliner which in some respects was competing with other parts of the freight business but it was in reality a very minor overlap. But of course once they were privatised they began, a year or two down the road, to seriously compete with each other as they do to this day. Maybe, Mike - I still think BR were fascinated by the idea of nice neat trains with all the same products on board preferably all the same freight cars! Whereas with the benefit of hindsight we know it should should be General Freight plus Containers/Piggybacks.......... All the best, Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Classsix T Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 No need to feel like that Thump. Noone is putting the blame on you, and as far as I can tell everyone is behaving themselves, putting their own point of view across, just don't mention paint and Flying Scotsman in the same post... C6T. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pointstaken Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Should we nationalise all the preserved railways ? Dennis Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium Ian J. Posted August 23, 2011 RMweb Premium Share Posted August 23, 2011 Should we nationalise all the preserved railways ? Dennis Aren't they already our 'Strategic Steam Reserve'? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Oldddudders Posted August 23, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 23, 2011 just don't mention paint and Flying Scotsman in the same post... Or Blue Pullmans (Pullmen?) 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted August 23, 2011 RMweb Gold Share Posted August 23, 2011 Do you think even that (Sectors and Subsectors) was possibly a prelude to privatisation Mike? It's probably forgotten now after so many years of EWS dominance, but the idea behind the setting up of Loadhaul, Transrail and Mainline Freight was as 'pseudo-companies' which each might find separate buyers. Many folk 'inside' reckoned sectorisation was the prelude to privatisation but in many respects it wasn't as it introduced some complexities all its own (plus some excellent internal opportunities for dumping costs onto the unwary - it was fascinating to see how much InterCity picked up on infrastructure as everyone else busily said they didn't need it, and if necessary re-wrote timetables to make sure they didn't). The split of Trainload Freight into 3 'companies' was however very much a prelude to privatisation, a fact that I was all too well aware of as I was on the working party which was busily building the organisation to create one of those companies as a free standing concern which would ultimately be ready for sale into private hands. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Classsix T Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Recent times has seen a "sectorisation" of (what was previously) EWS, plus diversification of other companies into other markets. History alone will tell if these: 1. Make money, and then are ripe to: 2. Be sold off. Such is competition, the driving factor in the success of capatalism. Ergo we need another round of "railway mania" so we can have duplicate lines to encourage lower price...or summit...who do you think I am, Adam Smith? C6T. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscale Posted August 23, 2011 Share Posted August 23, 2011 Should we nationalise all the preserved railways ? To return them to their former status? No. If you want to return most of them to their former status that would involve closing them to all traffic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicester Thumper Posted August 23, 2011 Author Share Posted August 23, 2011 No need to feel like that Thump. Noone is putting the blame on you, and as far as I can tell everyone is behaving themselves, putting their own point of view across, just don't mention paint and Flying Scotsman in the same post... C6T. ok mate so basically I think it is wrong that they repainted the Flying scotsman, because It would be nice to build a new Blue Pullman 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod6 Posted August 24, 2011 Share Posted August 24, 2011 OK I think we're all done here now. 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts