A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:

https://www.londonreconnections.com/2018/holy-grails-and-thameslink-fails-part-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:24:01 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:

https://www.londonreconnections.com/...ink-fails-part
-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

The real mystery is why the government persists with rail privitisation when
its just one disaster after another. You'd think eventually reality would
creep in to their collective conciousness but it would been not. I'm a long
way from being a socialist but this is one of the areas privitisation just
has not worked and it would be better run as a single not for profit
organisation.

wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:24:01 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:

https://www.londonreconnections.com/...ink-fails-part
-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

The real mystery is why the government persists with rail privitisation when
its just one disaster after another. You'd think eventually reality would
creep in to their collective conciousness but it would been not. I'm a long
way from being a socialist but this is one of the areas privitisation just
has not worked and it would be better run as a single not for profit
organisation.

You mean like BR, with steadily declining patronage, line closures, poor
standards of customer service on old trains and lower safety standards?

On 22/06/2018 11:01, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:24:01 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:

https://www.londonreconnections.com/...ink-fails-part
-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

The real mystery is why the government persists with rail privitisation when
its just one disaster after another. You'd think eventually reality would
creep in to their collective conciousness but it would been not. I'm a long
way from being a socialist but this is one of the areas privitisation just
has not worked and it would be better run as a single not for profit
organisation.


Odd then that competition for operating rail services has been spreading
across the EU.



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

In uk.railway Recliner wrote:
You mean like BR, with steadily declining patronage, line closures, poor
standards of customer service on old trains and lower safety standards?

That's something of a tired refrain, when here one of the issues is lack of
a 'controlling mind' and issues falling between the cracks (of GTR, NR, SE,
GBRf, DfT, SoS)

I'm sure BR wouldn't have been perfect in this instance, but in BR days
there were many fewer cracks to fall down. Once the Treasury had signed the
cheque, BR could just get on with it (at least 1980s BR, maybe less so
1950s).

That the only person who could stop things was the Secretary of
State, who seems not the sharpest tool in the box, does rather suggest that
the controlling mind needs to be elsewhere.

Theo

On 22/06/18 11:01, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:24:01 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:

https://www.londonreconnections.com/...ink-fails-part
-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

The real mystery is why the government persists with rail privitisation when
its just one disaster after another. You'd think eventually reality would
creep in to their collective conciousness but it would been not. I'm a long
way from being a socialist but this is one of the areas privitisation just
has not worked and it would be better run as a single not for profit
organisation.

If London Reconnections is to be believed, the former franchisee stopped
hiring drivers when they discovered that they would be recruiting and
training them for the benefit of a rival company. That's certainly due
to privatisation. How well BR would have managed, we'll never know.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 10:24:21 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:24:01 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:


https://www.londonreconnections.com/...ink-fails-part

-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

The real mystery is why the government persists with rail privitisation when
its just one disaster after another. You'd think eventually reality would
creep in to their collective conciousness but it would been not. I'm a long
way from being a socialist but this is one of the areas privitisation just
has not worked and it would be better run as a single not for profit
organisation.

You mean like BR, with steadily declining patronage, line closures, poor
standards of customer service on old trains and lower safety standards?

Lower safety standards? Yes, hardly surprising given privatisaion happened 20
years ago when standards were lower anyway. You think the TOCs would have
raised them on their own? Pull the other one.

As for the rest of it, that was all down to the governments of the day not
wishing to invest plus the economic situation. Well the government is
certainly having to invest now! Keeping it off the treasury books doesn't
stop some taxpayers money going straight into shareholder dividends for these
companies.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 11:58:46 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 22/06/2018 11:01, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:24:01 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:


https://www.londonreconnections.com/...ink-fails-part

-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

The real mystery is why the government persists with rail privitisation when
its just one disaster after another. You'd think eventually reality would
creep in to their collective conciousness but it would been not. I'm a long
way from being a socialist but this is one of the areas privitisation just
has not worked and it would be better run as a single not for profit
organisation.


Odd then that competition for operating rail services has been spreading
across the EU.

Nothing odd about it , its an EU requirement for open access to private
operators. Directive 91/440 you'll find.

On 22/06/2018 15:32, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 11:58:46 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 22/06/2018 11:01, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:24:01 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:


https://www.londonreconnections.com/...ink-fails-part

-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

The real mystery is why the government persists with rail privitisation when
its just one disaster after another. You'd think eventually reality would
creep in to their collective conciousness but it would been not. I'm a long
way from being a socialist but this is one of the areas privitisation just
has not worked and it would be better run as a single not for profit
organisation.


Odd then that competition for operating rail services has been spreading
across the EU.

Nothing odd about it , its an EU requirement for open access to private
operators. Directive 91/440 you'll find.



Indeed. But that's not what I found odd.

What I did find odd was your view that it is self-evident railways are
"better run as a single not for profit organisation" when yet just about
every EU State[1] no longer does so.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Railway_Package

[2]
https://www.lvm.fi/en/-/factsheet-74...untries-949736

"With the exception of Finland, Ireland and Luxembourg, all other Member
States of the European Union have already more than one operator
providing passenger rail transport services."

https://www.citymetric.com/transport...s-britain-3727

"But please let us not labour anymore under romanticised ideas of
‘nationalised’ European rail based on experience from the odd long
weekend away. The debate over the future of Britain’s railways deserves
a better level of understanding – and there is much to learn from the
European experience. "

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

On 22/06/2018 15:32, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 11:58:46 +0100
Robin wrote:
On 22/06/2018 11:01, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 09:24:01 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
A sorry tale with many deserving of blame, and no heroes:


https://www.londonreconnections.com/...ink-fails-part

-2-the-plan-that-went-wrong/

One thing I hadn't appreciated was how much of the plan depended on GBRf
drivers, because GTR didn't have enough.

The real mystery is why the government persists with rail privitisation when
its just one disaster after another. You'd think eventually reality would
creep in to their collective conciousness but it would been not. I'm a long
way from being a socialist but this is one of the areas privitisation just
has not worked and it would be better run as a single not for profit
organisation.


Odd then that competition for operating rail services has been spreading
across the EU.

Nothing odd about it , its an EU requirement for open access to private
operators. Directive 91/440 you'll find.


Yes - just one example of EU and its commissioners meddling in things
that ought to be none of its concern - examples which probably persuaded
some people to vote "Exit".