"Matthew Malthouse" wrote in message
.. .
: On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 20:29:36 +0100 Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
: } In article , Matthew
: } Malthouse writes
: } } British Rail, very seriously underinvesting,
: } } Nowhere near true.
: } } Read Roger Ford's column in the current (August) Modern Railways.
: } The gist?
: }
: } A detailed analysis of this canard. Basically, BR invested lots.
: }
: } The perception as long as I can remember has been that railways have
: } suffered from lack of funds.
: }
: } Yes, as in there's a lot of improvements that could have been done with
: } more money. But, unlike Railtrack, BR at least invested enough to keep
: } the network stable.
:
: Fine, I'll go with that. ;-)
:
: Come back BR! All is forgiven!
:
: Matthew

I agree. On many fronts, the Sectorised approach worked, except for marginal
infrastructure. The accountants weren't smart enough to give a value to
operational flexibility, and to do risk assessments and adjust cost
allocations accordingly. But certainly, Network South-East seemed to me to
be making headway in turning a system with many pre-Grouping overtones into
a coherant service-based business. They made mistakes, but the break-up by
Major and his loser-mates was a MAJOR punishable sin. The price YOU pay is
BLAIR. - Can't win whichever way you toss the die!

Likewise, I thought InterCity was re-inventing that business in a manner
which was properly cognisant of rail and motorway competition.

The weak link was Regional, and the plurality of PTEs about the place all
doing their own thing. Should have warned us about a bunch of TOCs also all
doing theior own thing.

Anyway, the pre-Major BR was certainly a service based business moving in
the right direction about as fast as it could carry its staff, stakeholders
and customers, with a limited srip feed of Exchequer funds.

I was a paying customer in those years, annual season tickets Zone 1
variously from Stevenage, Hitchin and Leagrave.

David Winter
Armadale,
Western Australia