Rail Network Review

[removeduser_487563287433]

Sir Roy McNulty, late of the Civil Aviation Authority, has published his Government-backed review on the state of the UK rail industry. British passengers already pay the highest fares in Europe for an ageing, cramped and unreliable service.

Sir Roy has concluded that the cost of running the network should be 30% lower, which would bring it into line with other European railways. He has listed 10 main barriers to efficiency and makes recommendations to deliver the cut in running costs. The Transport Secretary is due to make a statement in the Commons in less than an hour's time - ultimately the recommendations will feed into a Government White Paper expected in the Autumn.

Among the recommendations are;

A full review to make fares more "equitable" and less complex
Reforming the role of the Government in the railways
The franchise system
Altering company operation methods
Combating "excessive wage drift" and inefficient working practices

The Unions have predictably already assaulted the report, which is unsurprising as it writes in black and write what is common knowledge: rail workers are overpaid and receive huge, disproportionate benefits such as holiday times, and consumers are paying the cost.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13446824

[Plan C]

You're on fire today, F.

As a long-term victim of the southeastern railways I can only welcome the review.

Privatization of the railways is fundamentaly flawed - despite service operators being entirely private, they are not subject to market competition because they hold virtual monopoly on their sections of the railways. This is manifested in the situation where I have no choice of service providers ergo I am forced to put up wit price increases and poor service come hell or high water.

[removeduser_487563287433]

But for obvious reasons we cannot really have true competition, anyway. So failing that, there needs to be something more akin to market control. I do not feel that nationalisation would be the answer, although it is obvious privatisation has not been as it should have been - and there's been unnecessary crashes, let alone outrageous price rises as a result.

[Plan C]

But for obvious reasons we cannot really have true competition, anyway.

Not sure I follow. I think we would have to define "true competition" to find some common ground and also establish the variable "obvious reasons".

So failing that, there needs to be something more akin to market control. I do not feel that nationalisation would be the answer, although it is obvious privatisation has not been as it should have been - and there's been unnecessary crashes, let alone outrageous price rises as a result.

I think it would be advisable to have several operators providing service on the same section of the railway. This way we could perhaps verify if market laws actually apply to this sort of enterprise. Could well be that all we would witness would be price rigging and cartel-like behaviour but things can hardly be worse for commuters than they are now.

When I get trains I usually avoid paying the ticket for as long as possible, or just avoid it completely.

This compounds existing problem. As much as I despise usual excuses on behalf of railways operators, fare evasion is a persistent issue and does contribute to high fare prices. It may well be, also, that your posts merely illustrates the law of diminishing returns in action. Would you pay consistently if fares were smaller?

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

This compounds existing problem. As much as I despise usual excuses on behalf of railways operators, fare evasion is a persistent issue and does contribute to high fare prices. It may well be, also, that your posts merely illustrates the law of diminishing returns in action. Would you pay consistently if fares were smaller?

Yes I would, but considering it costs in the region of around £35 to get from Birmigham to Sheffield, a journey of around 70-80 miles, I'm not gonna pay, avoid paying to Derby (halfway between the two) wherin the fair magically reduces not to £17, as you would expect, but £7.50. The inconsitent pricing is another concern, considering that some Train companies have monopolies over some lines, leading them to charge whatever they'd like, and others where they have to compete.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Not sure I follow. I think we would have to define "true competition" to find some common ground and also establish the variable "obvious reasons".

If you want to get the train from Ashford to London you will never be able to pick what company to travel with.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

If you want to get the train from Ashford to London you will never be able to pick what company to travel with.

Across huge sections of the nation, the privatization of public services has resulted in little to know competion, there was a BBC documentary several years ago, regarding the buses in manchester, where two companies First, and Stagecoach basically agreed to divide the city in half to avoid any competion with each other, and if you look at a transport map of Greater Manchester, this is the case.

Actually it is cheaper depending on how much you value your time.

Edinburgh to London is a 2 hours flight about £50 (+-20), by train it is 8 to 12 hours and starting from £80.

In fact if you are willing to spend 8 or 12h hours travelling the bus cost about £30.

I value my time at £55.432 per second, you shall be reciving an invoice for this time wasting post, which proves my point that it's cheaper to fly than to go by train, but then you claim it's not.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Across huge sections of the nation, the privatization of public services has resulted in little to know competion, there was a BBC documentary several years ago, regarding the buses in manchester, where two companies First, and Stagecoach basically agreed to divide the city in half to avoid any competion with each other, and if you look at a transport map of Greater Manchester, this is the case.

The rails is a different matter, because prior to nationalisation many towns had multiple lines and stations. These were mostly lost in the sixties when about a third of the railways were destroyed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_Axe

[Menelik_I]

I value my time at £55.432 per second, you shall be reciving an invoice for this time wasting post, which proves my point that it's cheaper to fly than to go by train, but then you claim it's not.

I was actually agreeing with you ... oops a stupid typo at beginning

I actually agree with you, sorry for not having correctly written it.

[Menelik_I]

A cheaper London-Scotland line would be great indeed

Chances of this being implemented ?

[removeduser_487563287433]

A cheaper London-Scotland line would be great indeed

Chances of this being implemented ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_2 - will possibly influence this

Although it is already possible to get very cheap fares to Scotland for the distance. The highest rail fares occur over short distances in the South East commuter belt, where the train companies may exploit high traffic and captive markets of commuters with no other way to reach work.

[Menelik_I]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Speed_2 - will possibly influence this

Interesting.

Although it is already possible to get very cheap fares to Scotland for the distance.

Well overnight they once charged me £120, another day in a rush they blew me £200 and in advance it is something like around £90 way in advance ...

Now I get the bus for £30 after these royal screw ups

ETA:

it's got to the point where I think it works out cheaper to fly from several places in the UK rather than catch a train to London

Well that is right, especially if you reserve well in advance.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

Well that is right, especially if you reserve well in advance.

Yeah, but I just can't imagine it being actually cheaper to fly from say, Edinburgh to London..?

When I get trains I usually avoid paying the ticket for as long as possible, or just avoid it completely.

[Menelik_I]

Yeah, but I just can't imagine it being actually cheaper to fly from say, Edinburgh to London..?

Actually it is cheaper depending on how much you value your time.

Edinburgh to London is a 2 hours flight about £50 (+-20), by train it is 8 to 12 hours and starting from £80.

In fact if you are willing to spend 8 or 12h hours travelling the bus cost about £30.

[Hookah Smoking Caterpiller]

I'll hold comment until we see some improvement, fairly sure Labour promised similar things in there first term, and all that led to was Rail Track being renaimed Network Rail, and prices still went up. The trains are insanely expensive, it's got to the point where I think it works out cheaper to fly from several places in the UK rather than catch a train to London

[Babur]

Will this mean cheaper rail fares?