Passengers on a British Rail intercity train in 1985. Photo: Brian Harris/Alamy Stock Photo
When Eric was looking for a punchline, Eric Morecambe liked to attack the state operator of British railways.
“My father was an engineer for British Rail,” the comedian said. “He welded the crusts to meat pies.”
Morecambe & Wise could always guarantee a laugh: in the 70s and 80s, British Rail was seen as the epitome of everything that was wrong with Britain. Terrible food on trains isn't the whole story.
British Rail finally came to an end in 1994 when John Major began privatizing it.
Now Labor wants to revive the public system.
Sir Keir Starmer's party has achieved this. has pledged to take back control of the railways, one of the party's leading policies ahead of an election year.
Even though shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves said nationalization «would not be contrary to our budget rules», other Labor figures are fanatical.
Shadow Transport Secretary Louise Hay said: “We have a plan to rebuild the railway as a whole, which would involve putting operators into public ownership, but in reality it would bring significant savings.”< /p>
More detailed plans will follow. will be unveiled within the next month, she said.
The revival of what appears to be the British railway system is likely to prompt renewed scrutiny of what was once considered a relic of history.
Privatization of British Rail began in 1994. Photo: Barry Lewis/Alamy Stock Photo
Most people born after 1980 are unlikely to remember this brand. This includes Hay, who was born in 1987.
The rose-colored glasses of state ownership mask the decline of the railways under the yoke of British Rail.
“British railways have been a disaster for passengers,” says Sir John Redwood, who helped pioneer the privatization of the railways in the 1990s. e years.
“The number of passengers has decreased over the years of nationalization. They have not made rail transport a sufficiently popular or attractive way of travel. There were too many delays, too many cancellations, poor service and poor food, so it was not attractive to passengers.»
Travel fell in half, from 1.2 billion a year to just 630 million after that. how the state took control measures is shown by the figures.
British Rail intercities later became associated with football hooliganism and widespread decline, which made the situation even worse.
“Nationalization has had a disastrous effect on the railways,” said Alexander Paterson, long-time transport analyst at Peel Hunt.
“Nationalization made the railways even more employee-focused and even less customer-focused, and volumes fell. It took privatization the best part of 20-odd years to get it back to its peak.”
Passenger numbers reached a new peak of 1.7 billion in the year before Covid, matching figures last seen in the inter-war period. boom in the 1920s, when railroads were also in private hands.
Sir John says: “Privatization has changed things. The company created better services that people wanted to use, increased ridership and reduced taxpayer bills.»
British Rail's roots go back to the plucky Victorian era of railway barons, when individual entrepreneurs paved the way to create their own private train systems.
In 1921, the government merged around 120 smaller operators to create the Big Four: Great Western Railways (GWR), London North Eastern, London, Midland and Scottish and Southern Railways.
Passenger services. their numbers increased sharply during the interwar period, dubbed the Golden Age of Railways, but the Second World War destroyed much of the system and forced Clement Attlee's government to nationalize the Big Four in 1948.
The Labor Party has not yet decided. It's unclear exactly how this would replicate Attlee's scheme, but the cheapest and easiest way would be to simply take over the train contracts when they run out.
The government still owns the tracks through the independent body Network Rail. The government is currently awarding fixed-term contracts to operate trains on British railways to operating companies that trade under well-known brands such as Avanti West Coast and Southeastern.
When these contracts expire, the government can simply begin instead runs its own services.
The creeping nationalization of the railways is already underway. Plans have been put forward to create Great British Railways (GBR), combining Network Rail with the government's rail functions. The plans have been shelved and have not yet become law, but in theory GBR could become a model for a national government operator.
The Government already runs four franchises — LNER, Transpennine, Northern Trains and Southeastern — as operator of last resort after private companies have lost their contracts. Including additional franchises in the model would increase this benefit.
Assuming Labor comes to power this year, its first task will be to decide what to do with a number of contracts that are up for renewal.
< p>Avanti, Chiltern Railway, Thameslink, Essex Thameside, East Anglia, East Midlands, Southwestern and Great Western are all up for renewal between 2025 and 2026.
This avalanche of contracts could spell trouble for the Labor Party.
“Taking over all these franchises, regardless of performance indicators, would be a very ambitious target for a centrist would-be Labor government and the Department for Transport,” says RBC Capital analyst Ruairi Cullinan.
“Such an approach would also carry increased political risks, as the government would increasingly be blamed for any failures and delays.”
British Railways locomotive, 1960s. Photo: SSPL/Getty Images
Despite the private model's praise, anyone who's been stuck in a train station or stuck in a concourse for hours will attest that the train can be a nuisance. way to travel.
Although privatization has increased the use of railways, the quality of customer service has often changed.
The massive increase in railway use brought about by privatization was not accompanied by investment.
“Politics aside, the biggest problem facing railroads is that they have become a victim of their own success,” says Gerald Hu, an analyst at Liberum.
p>“More people are using the railroads than they have been in generations. If more people use this service, you need to invest more money. Most fares are regulated and we have outdated infrastructure in very densely populated parts of the country.”
According to the Office of Rail and Road Transport, the most common passenger complaints relate to punctuality and overcrowding.
Ironically, the government, rather than the railroad companies, is largely responsible for many of these problems.
Most of the reasons for cancellations are due to infrastructure problems such as signaling failures or problems with the tracks, one of the few parts of the system that is actively owned by the government.
The government also regulates the fares that train companies can charge, raising prices for passengers who have to travel during peak hours.
One of the ways to improve the situation on the railways may be, oddly enough, to liberalize them more and reduce government participation in the system.
An open access system where private sector railway companies provide competing services on the same line. This is one of the highly praised solutions.
Under this system, multiple train operators apply to run trains on the same section of track, giving customers the choice of which train company to use.
For operators, this will replace the current political risk of losing their monopoly privileges with the commercial risk of failing to attract enough passengers. Essentially, they will have an incentive to do their best for passengers.
“Train operators are currently paid a fixed and variable fee depending on how they perform their job under the National Rail contract, but they're not directly at risk to passenger revenues because that's the responsibility of the government,” says Cullinane.
“With open access, you're exposed to that. Operators are exposed to greater business risk.»
Lumo is one of the first private operators currently operating on open access trails. Photo: Dave Porter/Alamy Stock Photo
Lumo, Hull Trains and Grand Central are three of the first private operators currently operating on open access tracks in the north and Scotland.
They compete with incumbent LNER, and the model is notable for winning the support of some members of the Labor Party. A recent parliamentary reception celebrating the success of Lumo and Hull Trains attracted more than a dozen Labor MPs.
Open access is currently popular in Germany, where state operator Deutsche Bahn has to compete with private sector operators on the same ground. the same sections of track.
Spain is also exploring similar ways to liberalize its own railway system, including open access. .
The government could also liberalize the railways by giving up tariff controls. There are currently 55 million fares available on British railways — an astonishing figure that highlights the staggering structure of the railway system.
Train operators have the power to set peak hour prices, but peak hour fares are set by the government and are tied to inflation.
Post-pandemic operating practices mean fewer people use trains at peak times than before. many years ago. This means it could be possible to give rail companies full power over setting tariffs to better respond to supply and demand.
The Tony Blair Institute, the powerful think tank behind some Labor Party policies, has backed more detailed politics. .
A research review published during the previous general election in 2019 said small changes such as tariff simplification may be the best option.
“Nationalization will not fix the problems with the UK. railways, not least because decisions… are already under government control,” the report says.
Sir John believes more privatization is needed, not less. He proposes handing over tracks owned by Network Rail to private operators.
“I would now like a fully integrated privatized modelling. Divide the tracks into regional or line blocks and people can bid on them and you won't prevent one of the leading train providers from owning them.»
Peel Hunt's Paterson added: «There are no magic levers, but simplification is important.
“Railroads should work for the benefit of customers, not the employees who work there. It must be customer-centric and responsive to changing customer requirements. It needs to become more accessible.”
To paraphrase Morecambe & Wise one, give us sunshine.
Свежие комментарии