Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[News] Southeastern train services taken over by government



TomandJerry

Well-known member
Oct 1, 2013
11,365
Franchise holder Govia was informed of the decision last month after failing to declare more than £25m of taxpayer funding.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said the Operator of Last Resort would take over the running to protect taxpayers' interests.

Passengers are unlikely to see any immediate changes as trains, timetables and fares will stay the same.

Southeastern's vast network includes London, Kent, East Sussex and the High Speed 1 line."

Were loose?

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk
 




AmexRuislip

Trainee Spy 🕵️‍♂️
Feb 2, 2014
33,727
Ruislip
Franchise holder Govia was informed of the decision last month after failing to declare more than £25m of taxpayer funding.

Transport Secretary Grant Shapps said the Operator of Last Resort would take over the running to protect taxpayers' interests.

Passengers are unlikely to see any immediate changes as trains, timetables and fares will stay the same.

Southeastern's vast network includes London, Kent, East Sussex and the High Speed 1 line."

Were loose?

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

Anyone wanting clarification can email as per below:

crazyclownrailways.gov.uk
 


1066familyman

Radio User
Jan 15, 2008
15,185
What does that mean for Southern? They're an absolute shambles. Both run by Govia, in a roundabout way.
 






Lower West Stander

Well-known member
Mar 25, 2012
4,753
Back in Sussex
Been wondering how the rail companies are surviving given commuting revenue must be 80/90% down.

They weren’t surviving before.

The whole privatisation of British Rail was an utter mess. The TOCs were never ever able to survive on passenger revenue alone and there was never any incentive for them to invest given how short the franchises were. In reality, they have all been heavily subsidised for years. Of course they don’t own trains either - these are leased from the ROSCOs. So it’s a bit like an elaborate sale and leaseback scheme where fixed costs are way too high.

So you now have a situation where the ROSCOs are doing fine - they own the trains and get the lease payments. Railtrack went years ago to be replaced by Network Rail - effectively taxpayer risk. The TOCs are the squeezed middle with a totally unsuitable business model.

It’s about time we stopped pretending that the TOCs are anything other than UK taxpayer risk. Even Maggie didn’t privatise British Rail….


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 


Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Aug 25, 2011
63,388
Withdean area
Whether it's state owned or quasi-private, it should just be a single entity including the infrastructure. The whole lot.

It's a false marketplace.

A disjointed nonsense - in Sussex you can catch trains by Gatwick Express, Southern, SE Trains (now HMG) and Thameslink.

Why? There are zero advantages and several disavantages eg flexibility of travel, ticketing, duplicated management.
 


Swansman

Pro-peace
May 13, 2019
22,320
Sweden
They weren’t surviving before.

The whole privatisation of British Rail was an utter mess. The TOCs were never ever able to survive on passenger revenue alone and there was never any incentive for them to invest given how short the franchises were. In reality, they have all been heavily subsidised for years. Of course they don’t own trains either - these are leased from the ROSCOs. So it’s a bit like an elaborate sale and leaseback scheme where fixed costs are way too high.

So you now have a situation where the ROSCOs are doing fine - they own the trains and get the lease payments. Railtrack went years ago to be replaced by Network Rail - effectively taxpayer risk. The TOCs are the squeezed middle with a totally unsuitable business model.

It’s about time we stopped pretending that the TOCs are anything other than UK taxpayer risk. Even Maggie didn’t privatise British Rail….


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah thanks for that, we copied your privatisation over here and its also a mess.

Also British Rail should have been holy. They invented time, ffs.
 




Motogull

Todd Warrior
Sep 16, 2005
9,796
Whether it's state owned or quasi-private, it should just be a single entity including the infrastructure. The whole lot.

It's a false marketplace.

A disjointed nonsense - in Sussex you can catch trains by Gatwick Express, Southern, SE Trains (now HMG) and Thameslink.

Why? There are zero advantages and several disavantages eg flexibility of travel, ticketing, duplicated management.

Agreed. Free market economy and all that but there are some things that don't make sense not to have one 'owner'.
 


Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patreon
Oct 8, 2003
49,331
Faversham
They weren’t surviving before.

The whole privatisation of British Rail was an utter mess. The TOCs were never ever able to survive on passenger revenue alone and there was never any incentive for them to invest given how short the franchises were. In reality, they have all been heavily subsidised for years. Of course they don’t own trains either - these are leased from the ROSCOs. So it’s a bit like an elaborate sale and leaseback scheme where fixed costs are way too high.

So you now have a situation where the ROSCOs are doing fine - they own the trains and get the lease payments. Railtrack went years ago to be replaced by Network Rail - effectively taxpayer risk. The TOCs are the squeezed middle with a totally unsuitable business model.

It’s about time we stopped pretending that the TOCs are anything other than UK taxpayer risk. Even Maggie didn’t privatise British Rail….


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Indeed. It was John Major's parting gift to the nation. The modern trains were not brought into service till after privatisation so Major could say 'da da! Look what we/privatisation did for you!'. Except (and I'm a Connex south east/southeaster rail victim, I mean customer) the toilets didn't work properly, the doors kept jamming, and the service got slower and shitter. Then they banned bikes (apart from fold ups - and initially made us carry them on the platforms, in the crowds). Wankers.

rowson3.jpg__345x300_q85.jpg
 


Eeyore

Lord Donkey of Queen's Park
NSC Patreon
Apr 5, 2014
23,379
As a Go Ahead shareholder, I can say that this doesn't bother me that much. The railways have been a poison chalice. There is an impression that they are lucrative, this is far from the case. The railways brought in the bulk of the revenue and only a small fraction of overall profits.

All the bravado from Shapps is hiding a wider problem of a system that is struggling financially.

They can have Thameslink back as well if they want it.
 




Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Aug 25, 2011
63,388
Withdean area
As a Go Ahead shareholder, I can say that this doesn't bother me that much. The railways have been a poison chalice. There is an impression that they are lucrative, this is far from the case. The railways brought in the bulk of the revenue and only a small fraction of overall profits.

All the bravado from Shapps is hiding a wider problem of a system that is struggling financially.

They can have Thameslink back as well if they want it.

Even before the Pandemic, HS2 and Crossrail, annual government expenditure in subsidising the operators and bankrolling infrastructure, was colossal at circa £8b (now £27b). Dwarfing dividends of £181m.

Fare income in 2019/20 was £11.6b, the removal of dividends would give a one-off 1.6% reduction on the UK's incredibly expensive trains fares. A drop in the ocean.

It's silly really, other than possibly better management at some operators and fewer industrial disputes than with British Rail, it's not true private enterprise.
 


Eeyore

Lord Donkey of Queen's Park
NSC Patreon
Apr 5, 2014
23,379
Even before the Pandemic, HS2 and Crossrail, annual government expenditure in subsidising the operators and bankrolling infrastructure, was colossal at circa £8b (now £27b). Dwarfing dividends of £181m.

Fare income in 2019/20 was £11.6b, the removal of dividends would give a one-off 1.6% reduction on the UK's incredibly expensive trains fares. A drop in the ocean.

It's silly really, other than possibly better management at some operators and fewer industrial disputes than with British Rail, it's not true private enterprise.

For me, there has been a lot of myths about rail privatisation. Folk seem to think that bringing it back under public ownership would reduce prices. As you point out, If it did (loss of dividends etc) it would barely make a dent and the government has been looking to reduce its subsidy forever. I think, when I checked, the railways were only 15%ish of Go Ahead's profits yet the vast majority of revenue.

By all means nationalise it again. But as someone who is very keen on public utilities staying in government hands generally, I don't feel the same about the railways. Most of the subsidies are for season ticket holders anyway who are generally amongst the higher earners. If folk take a closer look they will see the trains are just a public money guzzler. I think the system is more efficient than it was, just confused and polarised.

I think a properly co-ordinated public transport initiative is needed. That's why I've not stomached the loss on Go Ahead and Stagecoach. I'm a massive fan of a fully integrated system. But the railways need an overhaul.
 






Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patreon
Aug 25, 2011
63,388
Withdean area
For me, there has been a lot of myths about rail privatisation. Folk seem to think that bringing it back under public ownership would reduce prices. As you point out, If it did (loss of dividends etc) it would barely make a dent and the government has been looking to reduce its subsidy forever. I think, when I checked, the railways were only 15%ish of Go Ahead's profits yet the vast majority of revenue.

By all means nationalise it again. But as someone who is very keen on public utilities staying in government hands generally, I don't feel the same about the railways. Most of the subsidies are for season ticket holders anyway who are generally amongst the higher earners. If folk take a closer look they will see the trains are just a public money guzzler. I think the system is more efficient than it was, just confused and polarised.

I think a properly co-ordinated public transport initiative is needed. That's why I've not stomached the loss on Go Ahead and Stagecoach. I'm a massive fan of a fully integrated system. But the railways need an overhaul.

Excellent post, echoing my thoughts.

I do realise it’s incredibly difficult to modernise the world’s first railway system, lines hemmed in by 180 years worth of homes and often following illogical routes created by 100’s of Victorian operators. Germany had a clean slate after being flattened and French railway experts have explained how their governments build where they like in the countryside, sweeping environment concerns aside.
 


Eeyore

Lord Donkey of Queen's Park
NSC Patreon
Apr 5, 2014
23,379
Excellent post, echoing my thoughts.

I do realise it’s incredibly difficult to modernise the world’s first railway system, lines hemmed in by 180 years worth of homes and often following illogical routes created by 100’s of Victorian operators. Germany had a clean slate after being flattened and French railway experts have explained how their governments build where they like in the countryside, sweeping environment concerns aside.

I'm not sure that the railway lines in the UK were first built for passengers anyway. I think initially it was for cargo. That may explain some of the strange routes that linger.
 


D

Deleted member 22389

Guest
Excellent post, echoing my thoughts.

I do realise it’s incredibly difficult to modernise the world’s first railway system, lines hemmed in by 180 years worth of homes and often following illogical routes created by 100’s of Victorian operators. Germany had a clean slate after being flattened and French railway experts have explained how their governments build where they like in the countryside, sweeping environment concerns aside.

Your right about it being difficult to modernise our system. Biggest advantages for France and Germany is also the extra space they have. Saying that last time I visited Italy they had managed to build a high speed line from Naples to Rome for the Frecciarossa.
 


KeegansHairPiece

New member
Jan 28, 2016
1,829
I thought most franchises were defacto renationalised in all but name anyway. Southern is basically managed by central government as I understood it. Obviously it's not being advertised in these terms as that would be admitting failure of the privatisation.
 



Paying the bills

Latest Discussions

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Paying the bills

Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here