|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 1, 2022 13:29:01 GMT
It was a Dutch rail company, Abellio, running Scotrail up to yesterday. So, I’m wondering how what is happening in Scotland (and the UK generally) differs from the Netherlands. It seems to me that Scotland is moving to an entirely public system where everything related to trains is public owned. Is that the case in the Netherlands or is there some form of public / private arrangement? In the UK the infrastructure ie rails, bridges, viaducts, signalling (some stations) maintenance and repair is all state owned (Network Rail) and assuming it's all fit for purpose which unfortunately a lot isn't there's no reason a system shouldn't run smoothly. But with every piece of rail traffic using the system at the same time it can get jammed. Admittedly some of the operating companies are more professional than others. There's a lot of single track working in this country which slows everything down massively. That's all true although while maintenance and repair is state owned as you say its funded in large amounts by charging the operating companies track access fees which is obviously then one of the reasons fares are perceived to be high, mostly the push for state ownership seems to be on the belief it will bring lower fares if it did that would mean the shortfall coming from other taxation. Virtually none of the rolling stock is owned by operating companies nationalising the roscos would cost 100s of billions and you then have the problem of governments only elected for 5 years having to take long term strategic decisions that provide them with no electoral upsides so just like other big decisions on pensions, uni fees it gets kicked into the grass until its too late.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Apr 1, 2022 13:51:03 GMT
In the UK the infrastructure ie rails, bridges, viaducts, signalling (some stations) maintenance and repair is all state owned (Network Rail) and assuming it's all fit for purpose which unfortunately a lot isn't there's no reason a system shouldn't run smoothly. But with every piece of rail traffic using the system at the same time it can get jammed. Admittedly some of the operating companies are more professional than others. There's a lot of single track working in this country which slows everything down massively. That's all true although while maintenance and repair is state owned as you say its funded in large amounts by charging the operating companies track access fees which is obviously then one of the reasons fares are perceived to be high, mostly the push for state ownership seems to be on the belief it will bring lower fares if it did that would mean the shortfall coming from other taxation. Virtually none of the rolling stock is owned by operating companies nationalising the roscos would cost 100s of billions and you then have the problem of governments only elected for 5 years having to take long term strategic decisions that provide them with no electoral upsides so just like other big decisions on pensions, uni fees it gets kicked into the grass until its too late. Why would nationalising the railway operators cost 100s of billions? Is that what you meant?
|
|
|
Post by Eggybread on Apr 1, 2022 14:53:50 GMT
Wasn't nationalising one of the reasons people didn't vote for Corbyn? Maybe I've got it wrong but I'm pretty sure it was and now everyone is saying ,"it should be nationalised"..
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Apr 1, 2022 15:21:06 GMT
Wasn't nationalising one of the reasons people didn't vote for Corbyn? Maybe I've got it wrong but I'm pretty sure it was and now everyone is saying ,"it should be nationalised".. Folk didn’t vote for Corbyn because he is a cunt. On the other hand, we ended up with Boris. Funny old world isn’t it!
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Apr 1, 2022 16:40:59 GMT
I don't know, maybe you're right, maybe his Labour Party will turn out to be a carbon copy of the current Conservative government. That would be a big disappointment. On the other hand, given the performance and ability of the Conservatives over the last twelve years, I'm prepared to see if the only alternative to the current government can make life better for ordinary people in ways that the Conservatives so obviously will never do. And to do so, they need to be electable to right-wing England first. Your campaign against Starmer and the direction he's taking his party, because it's not the Labour Party you want to see, is only going to help elect another Conservative government. I'm not sure why you'd prefer that? It's basically People's Front of Judea stuff... My campaign? I'm literally commenting as I see on a message board........... And no-one is saying you aren't perfectly entitled to do so. But what else would you call a constant stream of criticism with little or nothing the other way! How else would you describe, for example, your silence during months of favourable polling for Starmer's Labour, instant comment the moment the polls turned the other way, silence resuming once more now that the latest poll shows a 7% Labour lead. (Personally, I think that's bollocks, but that's beside the point!). It's as one-eyed as FYD in its own way I get that you hate him, and the fact that Corbyn's Labour got such a walloping, but if you want to see the outcome of that hatred, you only have to look at some of the more right-wing characters on here who like your posts criticising Starmer and his Labour. They know that the more "non-Tories" like yourself who turn on their own apparent "non-Tory" alternatives, the more likely it is that the Tory Party forms the next government! Seems the worst possible outcome to me, if you'd rather not have to endure another five years of corruption, incompetence and little or no shits given to the ordinary man or woman. Just to reiterate, I very much doubt whether Starmer's Labour will be anywhere near perfect, what government is? But at least they'd be in government and therefore able to at least try to make things better for ordinary people.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Apr 1, 2022 16:42:48 GMT
That's all true although while maintenance and repair is state owned as you say its funded in large amounts by charging the operating companies track access fees which is obviously then one of the reasons fares are perceived to be high, mostly the push for state ownership seems to be on the belief it will bring lower fares if it did that would mean the shortfall coming from other taxation. Virtually none of the rolling stock is owned by operating companies nationalising the roscos would cost 100s of billions and you then have the problem of governments only elected for 5 years having to take long term strategic decisions that provide them with no electoral upsides so just like other big decisions on pensions, uni fees it gets kicked into the grass until its too late. Why would nationalising the railway operators cost 100s of billions? Is that what you meant? The CBI said in 2019 it'd cost about £196 million. Or slightly less than what HS2 is probably going to end up costing us.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Apr 1, 2022 16:53:38 GMT
My campaign? I'm literally commenting as I see on a message board........... And no-one is saying you aren't perfectly entitled to do so. But what else would you call a constant stream of criticism with little or nothing the other way! How else would you describe, for example, your silence during months of favourable polling for Starmer's Labour, instant comment the moment the polls turned the other way, silence resuming once more now that the latest poll shows a 7% Labour lead. (Personally, I think that's bollocks, but that's beside the point!). It's as one-eyed as FYD in its own way I get that you hate him, and the fact that Corbyn's Labour got such a walloping, but if you want to see the outcome of that hatred, you only have to look at some of the more right-wing characters on here who like your posts criticising Starmer and his Labour. They know that the more "non-Tories" like yourself who turn on their own apparent "non-Tory" alternatives, the more likely it is that the Tory Party forms the next government! Seems the worst possible outcome to me, if you'd rather not have to endure another five years of corruption, incompetence and little or no shits given to the ordinary man or woman. Just to reiterate, I very much doubt whether Starmer's Labour will be anywhere near perfect, what government is? But at least they'd be in government and therefore able to at least try to make things better for ordinary people. Can you not see the irony in you suggesting that FYD and Prestwich are "One-eyed"
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Apr 1, 2022 16:58:39 GMT
And no-one is saying you aren't perfectly entitled to do so. But what else would you call a constant stream of criticism with little or nothing the other way! How else would you describe, for example, your silence during months of favourable polling for Starmer's Labour, instant comment the moment the polls turned the other way, silence resuming once more now that the latest poll shows a 7% Labour lead. (Personally, I think that's bollocks, but that's beside the point!). It's as one-eyed as FYD in its own way I get that you hate him, and the fact that Corbyn's Labour got such a walloping, but if you want to see the outcome of that hatred, you only have to look at some of the more right-wing characters on here who like your posts criticising Starmer and his Labour. They know that the more "non-Tories" like yourself who turn on their own apparent "non-Tory" alternatives, the more likely it is that the Tory Party forms the next government! Seems the worst possible outcome to me, if you'd rather not have to endure another five years of corruption, incompetence and little or no shits given to the ordinary man or woman. Just to reiterate, I very much doubt whether Starmer's Labour will be anywhere near perfect, what government is? But at least they'd be in government and therefore able to at least try to make things better for ordinary people. Can you not see the irony in you suggesting that FYD and Prestwich are "One-eyed" Left eyed and right eyed presumably?
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Apr 1, 2022 17:22:40 GMT
My campaign? I'm literally commenting as I see on a message board........... And no-one is saying you aren't perfectly entitled to do so. But what else would you call a constant stream of criticism with little or nothing the other way! How else would you describe, for example, your silence during months of favourable polling for Starmer's Labour, instant comment the moment the polls turned the other way, silence resuming once more now that the latest poll shows a 7% Labour lead. (Personally, I think that's bollocks, but that's beside the point!). It's as one-eyed as FYD in its own way I get that you hate him, and the fact that Corbyn's Labour got such a walloping, but if you want to see the outcome of that hatred, you only have to look at some of the more right-wing characters on here who like your posts criticising Starmer and his Labour. They know that the more "non-Tories" like yourself who turn on their own apparent "non-Tory" alternatives, the more likely it is that the Tory Party forms the next government! Seems the worst possible outcome to me, if you'd rather not have to endure another five years of corruption, incompetence and little or no shits given to the ordinary man or woman. Just to reiterate, I very much doubt whether Starmer's Labour will be anywhere near perfect, what government is? But at least they'd be in government and therefore able to at least try to make things better for ordinary people. I don't hate Starmer, I just think he has zero personality, zero principles and offers zero hope for those who desperately need it (which isn't most of us on here). I couldn't give a fuck which "right winger" posters (or whatever label you want to give individual posters) criticise Starmer. There are many many reason why Corbyn as an individual and the party under his leadership received a "walloping", you can reduce it to a binary thing but it's not there were and still are many factors. But again I'm just going round in circles with you, you're like the bayernoatcake of the EE board, just repeating the same phrase ad nauseam. People who regard themselves as Labour through and through have been demonised as "hard left", "Marxists" "Trots" "antisemites" "extremists" for wanting a government not too dissimilar to most Scandinavian democracies, then the same people throwing those accusations around are appealing for unity and telling them "be careful what they wish for" Well guess what don't be surprised if the "red wall" remains Tory, and the aforementioned draw a giant cock and balls on their ballot paper, turn their attention to the Green Party or just stay in the pub..........
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Apr 1, 2022 17:23:52 GMT
And no-one is saying you aren't perfectly entitled to do so. But what else would you call a constant stream of criticism with little or nothing the other way! How else would you describe, for example, your silence during months of favourable polling for Starmer's Labour, instant comment the moment the polls turned the other way, silence resuming once more now that the latest poll shows a 7% Labour lead. (Personally, I think that's bollocks, but that's beside the point!). It's as one-eyed as FYD in its own way I get that you hate him, and the fact that Corbyn's Labour got such a walloping, but if you want to see the outcome of that hatred, you only have to look at some of the more right-wing characters on here who like your posts criticising Starmer and his Labour. They know that the more "non-Tories" like yourself who turn on their own apparent "non-Tory" alternatives, the more likely it is that the Tory Party forms the next government! Seems the worst possible outcome to me, if you'd rather not have to endure another five years of corruption, incompetence and little or no shits given to the ordinary man or woman. Just to reiterate, I very much doubt whether Starmer's Labour will be anywhere near perfect, what government is? But at least they'd be in government and therefore able to at least try to make things better for ordinary people. Can you not see the irony in you suggesting that FYD and Prestwich are "One-eyed" It's like debating with bayern on the other board, slowly being worn down by sheer repetitiveness........
|
|
|
Post by cerebralstokie on Apr 1, 2022 19:34:50 GMT
I think the railways should be in public ownership. Railtrack was the company which looked after infrastructure in privatisation. There were a number of safety issues, including fatal crashes and the company was brought back under public ownership as Network Rail. Most of the privatised rail companies are owned by foreign companies, including Nationally owned entities. True, they have improved trains and carriages in many cases and they pay for the privilege - but the passenger also pays some of the highest fares in Europe. Different companies charge different prices on the same route, and tickets bought from one provider are not valid on their rivals' trains. Try going from Manchester to Leeds for example - slow journey and crowded trains with, often, poor punctuality. The same arguments apply to energy providers, most of which are owned by foreign nationally owned energy providers such as E.D.F. The problems with British Rail were often due to lack of investment, a climate where passengers were deserting trains in droves in favour of using cars and the decision to continue with steam haulage when most of the rest of Europe was electrifying their networks.
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 1, 2022 21:26:38 GMT
That's all true although while maintenance and repair is state owned as you say its funded in large amounts by charging the operating companies track access fees which is obviously then one of the reasons fares are perceived to be high, mostly the push for state ownership seems to be on the belief it will bring lower fares if it did that would mean the shortfall coming from other taxation. Virtually none of the rolling stock is owned by operating companies nationalising the roscos would cost 100s of billions and you then have the problem of governments only elected for 5 years having to take long term strategic decisions that provide them with no electoral upsides so just like other big decisions on pensions, uni fees it gets kicked into the grass until its too late. Why would nationalising the railway operators cost 100s of billions? Is that what you meant? No I meant the rosco's (rolling stock companies) who own the locomotives, carriages etc, thats without nationalising the likes of bombardier who maintain the rolling stock.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Apr 1, 2022 21:36:53 GMT
I won’t pretend to know anything about it. All I know is that in the last 9 months I’ve made over 300 train journeys to work and back and had a total of 2 cancellations (during the storms the other week) and 4 lates (a few minutes). I’m surprised by the reliability after hearing all the comments about our shite train system.
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Apr 1, 2022 21:56:00 GMT
I won’t pretend to know anything about it. All I know is that in the last 9 months I’ve made over 300 train journeys to work and back and had a total of 2 cancellations (during the storms the other week) and 4 lates (a few minutes). I’m surprised by the reliability after hearing all the comments about our shite train system. I've clocked a few miles up on the network as well and the only real problematic journey was getting back to Stoke from Milton Keynes when some poor soul lost his life under the wheels of a pendolino outside Newport Pagnall and the West Coast mainline was chaos. V sad 😔.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Apr 1, 2022 22:40:45 GMT
Why would nationalising the railway operators cost 100s of billions? Is that what you meant? The CBI said in 2019 it'd cost about £196 million.Or slightly less than what HS2 is probably going to end up costing us. I think it was £196 billion: www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/17/cbi-tells-labour-to-publish-details-of-plans-for-rail-and-utilitiesHS2 will probably cost more than the current top estimate of £100billion but not double. The question surely is what are the benefits? In my experience nationalised industries are inefficient and eat tax payers money. The reasons are numerous: lack of competition being the main reason. Rail companies know if they mess up can lose their franchise. When governments/politicians/civil servants start running businesses it is a recipe for disaster in the UK; just look at how well this government has managed the pandemic. What will be the benefit of a publicly owned rail system? What will you get for your £196billion? I can guess the first thing that will happen that the Chair of the new British Rail will be asking for £100s billions to rebuild/replace everything. What do you get for your £100 billion HS2? See link attached. What value do you put on moving people off roads and aircraft, moving goods by rail, discovering our heritage through archaeology? The problem with the present London to Manchester route is you have slow trains and fast trains trying to run on the same route, by moving fast trains onto a new line, you can load up the old line with more commuters, goods trains, etc. www.economicshelp.org/blog/3088/economics/pros-and-cons-of-high-speed-rail-hs2/#:~:text=Pros%20of%20High%2DSpeed%20Rail&text=HS2%20will%20free%20up%20capacity,road%20and%20provide%20environmental%20benefits.
|
|
|
Post by rivival on Apr 2, 2022 2:36:51 GMT
Stoke-on-Trent to Liverpool Lime Street by train. As my daughter lives there along with my wheel trims. It takes an average of 2h 52m to travel from Stoke-on-Trent to Liverpool Lime Street by train, over a distance of around 43 miles and you have to change trains ffs its 43 miles not bloody Siberia.
I could go by bicycle faster.
Last time I went by train it was a Virgin one to Manchester I had to stand all the way as did many others. I had just come out of hospital and was still recovering. That will be the last time I ever go by train.
The whole network is Unfit for purpose so no matter who runs it the cost of upgrading it to something useful would be astronomical.
For me every major train station should be next to a bus station and run as ONE company. Taxi rank available also obviously. There should be NO standing on trains. If the government is serious about getting people out of cars onto public transport then they need to be run as a non profit making company. I would allow a fixed percentage profit for investment.
"In my experience nationalised industries are inefficient and eat tax payers money. The reasons are numerous: lack of competition being the main reason. Rail companies know if they mess up can lose their franchise."
Performance related pay is the answer to this. It's funny how things run well when there is an incentive.
This levelling up "pie in the sky" scheme has to include public transport in Cities like ours. We have simply been left in the dark ages with no trams , no local rail links and a bus service that does little but cause traffic jams and pollution.
So nothing will change , trains will service London and no where else and fat cats will make big money from a captive public.
Now if I can just persuade the cyclists to get off the road and move on to the canals with a canoe, just think how much hassle that would stop.=)
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Apr 2, 2022 3:34:16 GMT
Why would nationalising the railway operators cost 100s of billions? Is that what you meant? No I meant the rosco's (rolling stock companies) who own the locomotives, carriages etc, thats without nationalising the likes of bombardier who maintain the rolling stock. Got you. They don’t feature in what happened in Scotland to date which has just been about operation. But, I guess, they could feature as part of a full blown nationalisation of the railways. It would certainly add a substantial capital element to the bill.
|
|
|
Post by felonious on Apr 2, 2022 10:26:47 GMT
I won’t pretend to know anything about it. All I know is that in the last 9 months I’ve made over 300 train journeys to work and back and had a total of 2 cancellations (during the storms the other week) and 4 lates (a few minutes). I’m surprised by the reliability after hearing all the comments about our shite train system. Don't spoil the illusion Pre Covid my daughter was travelling here, there and everywhere by train with few problems. The only problems I remember her talking about were as Chuffed referred to when some poor soul decided to use the rail network.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Apr 2, 2022 10:27:28 GMT
Stoke-on-Trent to Liverpool Lime Street by train. As my daughter lives there along with my wheel trims. It takes an average of 2h 52m to travel from Stoke-on-Trent to Liverpool Lime Street by train, over a distance of around 43 miles and you have to change trains ffs its 43 miles not bloody Siberia. I could go by bicycle faster. Last time I went by train it was a Virgin one to Manchester I had to stand all the way as did many others. I had just come out of hospital and was still recovering. That will be the last time I ever go by train. The whole network is Unfit for purpose so no matter who runs it the cost of upgrading it to something useful would be astronomical. For me every major train station should be next to a bus station and run as ONE company. Taxi rank available also obviously. There should be NO standing on trains. If the government is serious about getting people out of cars onto public transport then they need to be run as a non profit making company. I would allow a fixed percentage profit for investment. "In my experience nationalised industries are inefficient and eat tax payers money. The reasons are numerous: lack of competition being the main reason. Rail companies know if they mess up can lose their franchise." Performance related pay is the answer to this. It's funny how things run well when there is an incentive. This levelling up "pie in the sky" scheme has to include public transport in Cities like ours. We have simply been left in the dark ages with no trams , no local rail links and a bus service that does little but cause traffic jams and pollution. So nothing will change , trains will service London and no where else and fat cats will make big money from a captive public. Now if I can just persuade the cyclists to get off the road and move on to the canals with a canoe, just think how much hassle that would stop.=) I did a quick Google and found Network Rail have performance related pay. It's possible to download a file. Virgin don't appear to, but claim to pay more than anyone else, presumably to attract the best employees. When you look a GWR it seems they are dominated by paying compensation to customers! I have stood on a train all the way from King's Cross to Northallerton! There should be a national rule that customers who have to stand are compensated to motivate rail companies to increase the size/length of trains. The most incentivised business I have seen is Nissan. If employees don't put in loads of improvement suggestions they don't get a pay rise. Three years poor performance and you are sacked. I've been round the works twice and it is easy to see why it is always in the top ten most efficient car assembly plants in the world. Usually 8 out of 10 are in Japan and South Korea. Rewards are very high but so is employer's expectations of the management and workforce performance level. Second best is not acceptable. Wish we had a football club like that!
|
|
|
Post by foghornsgleghorn on Apr 2, 2022 10:27:41 GMT
One of the issues with the privatised rail network is apportioning blame in the event of delays etc.
Take for example the derailment of a passenger train at Great Yarmouth back in 2001 (no injuries), but impacting all except one platform. On the nationalised railway there would be an immediate response to rerail the locomotive repair the track and clear the incident.
Not in 2001. The track was rotten, but the contractor responsible for maintaining it refused to accept the blame, as did Railtrack, so the arbitrator (AEA Technology) had to be called in . Unfortunately their staff were all in Glasgow dealing with another incident. They arrived 9 hours after the incident and confirmed the track was defective.
There have been changes to reduce/ control the involvement of contractors in maintaining the track since then, but the fact remains that the fragmentation of rail adds to its complexity and cost.
The pandemic has had a massive impact but even before then the DFT was paying private Train Operating Companies for any shortfalls in predicted revenue.
When the British Railways starts (the 'Great' prefix being applied is just typical Johnsonian bullshit) the arrangements with the operating companies will change again.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Apr 3, 2022 17:55:52 GMT
The CBI said in 2019 it'd cost about £196 million.Or slightly less than what HS2 is probably going to end up costing us. I think it was £196 billion: www.theguardian.com/business/2019/oct/17/cbi-tells-labour-to-publish-details-of-plans-for-rail-and-utilitiesHS2 will probably cost more than the current top estimate of £100billion but not double. The question surely is what are the benefits? In my experience nationalised industries are inefficient and eat tax payers money. The reasons are numerous: lack of competition being the main reason. Rail companies know if they mess up can lose their franchise. When governments/politicians/civil servants start running businesses it is a recipe for disaster in the UK; just look at how well this government has managed the pandemic. What will be the benefit of a publicly owned rail system? What will you get for your £196billion? I can guess the first thing that will happen that the Chair of the new British Rail will be asking for £100s billions to rebuild/replace everything. What do you get for your £100 billion HS2? See link attached. What value do you put on moving people off roads and aircraft, moving goods by rail, discovering our heritage through archaeology? The problem with the present London to Manchester route is you have slow trains and fast trains trying to run on the same route, by moving fast trains onto a new line, you can load up the old line with more commuters, goods trains, etc. www.economicshelp.org/blog/3088/economics/pros-and-cons-of-high-speed-rail-hs2/#:~:text=Pros%20of%20High%2DSpeed%20Rail&text=HS2%20will%20free%20up%20capacity,road%20and%20provide%20environmental%20benefits. Apologies, yes, it'd be great if the HS2 white elephant was "only" costing £196 million!
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Apr 3, 2022 18:02:25 GMT
Stoke-on-Trent to Liverpool Lime Street by train. As my daughter lives there along with my wheel trims. It takes an average of 2h 52m to travel from Stoke-on-Trent to Liverpool Lime Street by train, over a distance of around 43 miles and you have to change trains ffs its 43 miles not bloody Siberia. I could go by bicycle faster. Last time I went by train it was a Virgin one to Manchester I had to stand all the way as did many others. I had just come out of hospital and was still recovering. That will be the last time I ever go by train. The whole network is Unfit for purpose so no matter who runs it the cost of upgrading it to something useful would be astronomical. For me every major train station should be next to a bus station and run as ONE company. Taxi rank available also obviously. There should be NO standing on trains. If the government is serious about getting people out of cars onto public transport then they need to be run as a non profit making company. I would allow a fixed percentage profit for investment. "In my experience nationalised industries are inefficient and eat tax payers money. The reasons are numerous: lack of competition being the main reason. Rail companies know if they mess up can lose their franchise." Performance related pay is the answer to this. It's funny how things run well when there is an incentive. This levelling up "pie in the sky" scheme has to include public transport in Cities like ours. We have simply been left in the dark ages with no trams , no local rail links and a bus service that does little but cause traffic jams and pollution. So nothing will change , trains will service London and no where else and fat cats will make big money from a captive public. Now if I can just persuade the cyclists to get off the road and move on to the canals with a canoe, just think how much hassle that would stop.=) I’d be quite happy if cyclists got off the pavements.
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on Apr 3, 2022 18:15:35 GMT
And no-one is saying you aren't perfectly entitled to do so. But what else would you call a constant stream of criticism with little or nothing the other way! How else would you describe, for example, your silence during months of favourable polling for Starmer's Labour, instant comment the moment the polls turned the other way, silence resuming once more now that the latest poll shows a 7% Labour lead. (Personally, I think that's bollocks, but that's beside the point!). It's as one-eyed as FYD in its own way I get that you hate him, and the fact that Corbyn's Labour got such a walloping, but if you want to see the outcome of that hatred, you only have to look at some of the more right-wing characters on here who like your posts criticising Starmer and his Labour. They know that the more "non-Tories" like yourself who turn on their own apparent "non-Tory" alternatives, the more likely it is that the Tory Party forms the next government! Seems the worst possible outcome to me, if you'd rather not have to endure another five years of corruption, incompetence and little or no shits given to the ordinary man or woman. Just to reiterate, I very much doubt whether Starmer's Labour will be anywhere near perfect, what government is? But at least they'd be in government and therefore able to at least try to make things better for ordinary people. I don't hate Starmer, I just think he has zero personality, zero principles and offers zero hope for those who desperately need it (which isn't most of us on here). I couldn't give a fuck which "right winger" posters (or whatever label you want to give individual posters) criticise Starmer. There are many many reason why Corbyn as an individual and the party under his leadership received a "walloping", you can reduce it to a binary thing but it's not there were and still are many factors. But again I'm just going round in circles with you, you're like the bayernoatcake of the EE board, just repeating the same phrase ad nauseam. People who regard themselves as Labour through and through have been demonised as "hard left", "Marxists" "Trots" "antisemites" "extremists" for wanting a government not too dissimilar to most Scandinavian democracies, then the same people throwing those accusations around are appealing for unity and telling them "be careful what they wish for" Well guess what don't be surprised if the "red wall" remains Tory, and the aforementioned draw a giant cock and balls on their ballot paper, turn their attention to the Green Party or just stay in the pub.......... Peoples Front of Judea stuff. The Tories must piss themselves laughing at the naivety of non-Tory voters tearing themselves apart time and time again. In a sense, you have to admire the Tories over Brexit. They could see that the issue of Europe was threatening to do to the political right precisely what the non-right has suffered from for years, a fragmented vote. Obviously, the ongoing negative effect that will plague the country as a whole for years didn't matter compared to preserving the unanimity of choice for the right-wing inclined voter. That was the whole point. Cynically party political and nothing really to do with Europe and making the country a better place as is readily obvious, but it's been admirably effective party politically. I'd love a Scandinavian style government. Gosh, perhaps we might even get services and utilities run to benefit people rather than shareholders? First step towards that, I'd suggest, is making yourself electable under our archaic FPTP system designed when we had two parties only, then you can start, hopefully, implementing policies that take you there. No guarantees that they'll do that, of course, but much more chance of it happening than never getting into power!
|
|
|
Post by rivival on Apr 3, 2022 20:12:48 GMT
Stoke-on-Trent to Liverpool Lime Street by train. As my daughter lives there along with my wheel trims. It takes an average of 2h 52m to travel from Stoke-on-Trent to Liverpool Lime Street by train, over a distance of around 43 miles and you have to change trains ffs its 43 miles not bloody Siberia. I could go by bicycle faster. Last time I went by train it was a Virgin one to Manchester I had to stand all the way as did many others. I had just come out of hospital and was still recovering. That will be the last time I ever go by train. The whole network is Unfit for purpose so no matter who runs it the cost of upgrading it to something useful would be astronomical. For me every major train station should be next to a bus station and run as ONE company. Taxi rank available also obviously. There should be NO standing on trains. If the government is serious about getting people out of cars onto public transport then they need to be run as a non profit making company. I would allow a fixed percentage profit for investment. "In my experience nationalised industries are inefficient and eat tax payers money. The reasons are numerous: lack of competition being the main reason. Rail companies know if they mess up can lose their franchise." Performance related pay is the answer to this. It's funny how things run well when there is an incentive. This levelling up "pie in the sky" scheme has to include public transport in Cities like ours. We have simply been left in the dark ages with no trams , no local rail links and a bus service that does little but cause traffic jams and pollution. So nothing will change , trains will service London and no where else and fat cats will make big money from a captive public. Now if I can just persuade the cyclists to get off the road and move on to the canals with a canoe, just think how much hassle that would stop.=) I’d be quite happy if cyclists got off the pavements. I was a pretty savvy young man at 15, however that didn't stop me being knocked off my bike and having my dreams of being a pilot destroyed. That was a long time ago and life goes on, but when I see some of the people riding bicycles on our roads it makes me cringe. It's clear they have ZERO knowledge of the highway code or indeed little ability in riding their bike. I know we took cycling Proficiency test in the 1960's to at least learn a little. I would prefer if they were kept completely separate from motor traffic, trust me a Cortina mk 4 estate running over your leg is NOT what you want at any time. Time cyclists were licenced especially with the rise of electric bikes. BTW will that young man achieve powered flight if he keeps flapping his arm^
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Apr 3, 2022 20:45:01 GMT
I’d be quite happy if cyclists got off the pavements. I was a pretty savvy young man at 15, however that didn't stop me being knocked off my bike and having my dreams of being a pilot destroyed. That was a long time ago and life goes on, but when I see some of the people riding bicycles on our roads it makes me cringe. It's clear they have ZERO knowledge of the highway code or indeed little ability in riding their bike. I know we took cycling Proficiency test in the 1960's to at least learn a little. I would prefer if they were kept completely separate from motor traffic, trust me a Cortina mk 4 estate running over your leg is NOT what you want at any time. Time cyclists were licenced especially with the rise of electric bikes. BTW will that young man achieve powered flight if he keeps flapping his arm^ I cycle to work and back, I find your tone disagreeable 😉 Never liked cyclists on the road myself then found myself doing it as was the quickest and cheapest way of getting to work. I really am a very good boy on it😉
|
|
|
Post by maninasuitcase on Apr 3, 2022 23:16:14 GMT
If we didn't have such antiquated infrastructure we could have double decker carriages similar to several countries. It would ensure more seats are available and move more passengers around. Sadly the cost to change stations, bridges, catenary lines, tunnels, etc makes it impossible. Maybe HS2 should be set up for double decker trains?
The loss of lines over the decades and the cost to put most of them back shows the short sighted view all those years ago.
Imagine if stoke on trent had kept the loop line and all those mineral lines, we would have an astonishing city wide light rail/tram network and could effectively ditch the bus.
|
|
|
Post by chuffedstokie on Apr 4, 2022 6:49:23 GMT
If we didn't have such antiquated infrastructure we could have double decker carriages similar to several countries. It would ensure more seats are available and move more passengers around. Sadly the cost to change stations, bridges, catenary lines, tunnels, etc makes it impossible. Maybe HS2 should be set up for double decker trains? The loss of lines over the decades and the cost to put most of them back shows the short sighted view all those years ago. Imagine if stoke on trent had kept the loop line and all those mineral lines, we would have an astonishing city wide light rail/tram network and could effectively ditch the bus. Well put. S-O-T probably had one of the most comprehensive linked rail network in the UK at one time just using a small percentage of the old trackbeds at the time for say a tram system would have transformed the area. 20/20 hindsight.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Apr 4, 2022 7:12:17 GMT
If we didn't have such antiquated infrastructure we could have double decker carriages similar to several countries. It would ensure more seats are available and move more passengers around. Sadly the cost to change stations, bridges, catenary lines, tunnels, etc makes it impossible. Maybe HS2 should be set up for double decker trains? The loss of lines over the decades and the cost to put most of them back shows the short sighted view all those years ago. Imagine if stoke on trent had kept the loop line and all those mineral lines, we would have an astonishing city wide light rail/tram network and could effectively ditch the bus. Well put. S-O-T probably had one of the most comprehensive linked rail network in the UK at one time just using a small percentage of the old trackbeds at the time for say a tram system would have transformed the area. 20/20 hindsight. We've been talking about this for decades 😞
|
|
|
Post by followyoudown on Apr 4, 2022 7:29:42 GMT
One of the issues with the privatised rail network is apportioning blame in the event of delays etc. Take for example the derailment of a passenger train at Great Yarmouth back in 2001 (no injuries), but impacting all except one platform. On the nationalised railway there would be an immediate response to rerail the locomotive repair the track and clear the incident. Not in 2001. The track was rotten, but the contractor responsible for maintaining it refused to accept the blame, as did Railtrack, so the arbitrator (AEA Technology) had to be called in . Unfortunately their staff were all in Glasgow dealing with another incident. They arrived 9 hours after the incident and confirmed the track was defective. There have been changes to reduce/ control the involvement of contractors in maintaining the track since then, but the fact remains that the fragmentation of rail adds to its complexity and cost. The pandemic has had a massive impact but even before then the DFT was paying private Train Operating Companies for any shortfalls in predicted revenue. When the British Railways starts (the 'Great' prefix being applied is just typical Johnsonian bullshit) the arrangements with the operating companies will change again. Not sure that is right about the DFT it might apply to some non commercial routes or after a number of years if they are significantly below predicted revenue but generally the operating companies make a net contribution to government last figure I remember was around 2 billion per year.
|
|
|
Post by Huddysleftfoot on Apr 4, 2022 7:33:57 GMT
I don't hate Starmer, I just think he has zero personality, zero principles and offers zero hope for those who desperately need it (which isn't most of us on here). I couldn't give a fuck which "right winger" posters (or whatever label you want to give individual posters) criticise Starmer. There are many many reason why Corbyn as an individual and the party under his leadership received a "walloping", you can reduce it to a binary thing but it's not there were and still are many factors. But again I'm just going round in circles with you, you're like the bayernoatcake of the EE board, just repeating the same phrase ad nauseam. People who regard themselves as Labour through and through have been demonised as "hard left", "Marxists" "Trots" "antisemites" "extremists" for wanting a government not too dissimilar to most Scandinavian democracies, then the same people throwing those accusations around are appealing for unity and telling them "be careful what they wish for" Well guess what don't be surprised if the "red wall" remains Tory, and the aforementioned draw a giant cock and balls on their ballot paper, turn their attention to the Green Party or just stay in the pub.......... Peoples Front of Judea stuff. The Tories must piss themselves laughing at the naivety of non-Tory voters tearing themselves apart time and time again. In a sense, you have to admire the Tories over Brexit. They could see that the issue of Europe was threatening to do to the political right precisely what the non-right has suffered from for years, a fragmented vote. Obviously, the ongoing negative effect that will plague the country as a whole for years didn't matter compared to preserving the unanimity of choice for the right-wing inclined voter. That was the whole point. Cynically party political and nothing really to do with Europe and making the country a better place as is readily obvious, but it's been admirably effective party politically. I'd love a Scandinavian style government. Gosh, perhaps we might even get services and utilities run to benefit people rather than shareholders? First step towards that, I'd suggest, is making yourself electable under our archaic FPTP system designed when we had two parties only, then you can start, hopefully, implementing policies that take you there. No guarantees that they'll do that, of course, but much more chance of it happening than never getting into power! Scandinavian style government? Jesus wept....
|
|