Privatise rail yes or no?

nowayout1

I know it probably has been asked before just wanted to see how people would feel if our rail service was privatised but properly that rail users would get a quality service that others in Europe have.

Reason why I ask was after a recent trip to the UK and seeing how it’s run is great. I looked into it more & seen that it seems to have very little hiccups. That Network Rail own the tracks & certain train stations & they receive funding from the UK government as well as fees from the company’s for using the train lines & that goes back into upgrade works on the lines maintenance & platform works. Was in Liverpool & after 8 weeks closed where they replaced signals as well as realigning platforms etc.

If Ireland copied this model where by Irish Rail would still own the stations & train track lines as well as opening up lines that where closed & upgrade works & adding new lines like from Dunboyne to Cavan or to Letterkenny etc adding a second line beside current tracks so that passenger numbers could increase as well as employment, decreasing journey times. Theyd receive money from government funding as well as fees from private companies & have legislation that funding & fees collected have to be used within a certain time frame or gov funding would decrease so they’d have to invest into the rail service, would this be a positive thing or would it make it worse?

end of the road

looks can be deceiving. quite a lot of the privatized rail in the uk isn't that good at all. in fact, most of it is over-rated and on top of that a lot of the fares are ridiculous.
plenty of hiccups, including from network rail (mind you they are way better then the privatized rail-track that came before it)
how the uk operates in terms of it's funding from the outside at least looks like good accountantsy tricking because operators in a number of cases are receiving subsidies yet are able to pay back money to the government. they are then able to pay fees to track operator and rolling stock owner.

ireland copying the uk model would be a massively expencive disaster. it would not open more lines or build new lines nor would it double track lines. it would also not be viable to have multiple companies and it would not generate the money to allow the good accountantsy that has lead to the money-go-round of the uk railway. the government would not pay for this model and i'd agree with them for once.
in short, it's not viable

Isambard

I agree, the net result would be subsidies to pay the shareholders.

L1011

The UK system is not well run. Southern, Virgin East Coast etc as well as the current Northern debacle; decades of poor provision of stock for certain contracts etc.

The UK system is a mess and should not even be considered here. The ROSCO structure is insane and is effectively little more than a continual transfer of state assets to a pointless middleman - the Tories love that, of course.

Actually doing the split in Irish Rail - it already operates internally as a track operator and a train operator - even if they were both still owned by the CIE Group Holding Company and making it significantly easier for third party operators should be done. But due to our almost unique track gauge it isn't really practical for a third party operator to come in without leasing stock off Irish Rail anyway.

If the NTA controls the purchasing and allocation of new stock as they do for PSO bus contracts, routes could be tendered using the London Transport model that we are now using for buses here; which is entirely benign privatisation. All infrastructure and equipment remains owned by the state; if a private sector firm can deliver the service to an SLA cheaper than a state owned firm, in a very competitive staffing market that makes any 'race to the bottom' impossible; by all means let them.

Ireland trains

They could have the dart and dublin commuter service as one franchise, cork commuter+WRC+ limerick regional as another franchise.
The last one could be all intercity routes or all except cork, limerick and tralee

end of the road

Ireland trains wrote: »

They could have the dart and dublin commuter service as one franchise, cork commuter+WRC+ limerick regional as another franchise.
The last one could be all intercity routes or all except cork, limerick and tralee

they could, but it would be even more ridiculous then the uk situation given ireland's network is a tiny network. fragmentation of the railway fails, always.

Isambard

Ireland trains wrote: »

They could have the dart and dublin commuter service as one franchise, cork commuter+WRC+ limerick regional as another franchise.
The last one could be all intercity routes or all except cork, limerick and tralee

84% of heavy rail travel is in the Dublin area, no one will want most of the rest of it (16%), so not only will the increased costs mean higher fares, but also probably line closures/ service reductions.

Losty Dublin

By Law our railway networks are open to any licensed operator/s to run train services if they so wish. Irish Rail are obliged to grant track access without prejudice, subject to certain reasonable limits of space and limitations.

With all the know it all's and numerous international operators that are out there you'd wonder why they haven't hopped onto our network to rake it in and show Irish Rail how it's done.

Jamie2k9

UK system is very flawed however there are some positives but they have the volume to support it which is lacking here to a degree.

I would never support 100% private operations. IE are fine but could be much better however they have no interest in improving nor do the NTA who set contracts and essentially let Irish Rail away with what they like. There should be incentives if the operator exceeds there performance obligation across a range of KPI.

Irish Rail are obliged to grant track access without prejudice, subject to certain reasonable limits of space and limitations.

They would be as disruptive as they could, now if the NTA opened tenders like they are doing with Dublin Bus it might be a different story.

Isambard

indeed that would probably be the case. Unless the infrastructure was owned and managed by a separate Company, I can't see any operator wanting to work over track owned and manged by a main competitor and a probable hostile one at that.

Losty Dublin

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

They would be as disruptive as they could, now if the NTA opened tenders like they are doing with Dublin Bus it might be a different story.

They can't object or disrupt. Once an operator has a licence it it entitled to run as many trains as it wishes, subject to physical constraints such as speed, axle weight, platform lengths, loading gauge clearance. CIÉ must oblige them in their requirements as far as possible.

n97 mini

If franchises were given to private companies the connections might be better. Was looking at Hazelhatch-Galway (return) this weekend gone. Connections don't exist. Ended up driving instead.

Wanderer78

Neoliberalism is a busted flush, it's time for us to move on from it, even though the private sector has an important role in creating and maintaining a healthy society, privatising critical infrastructure generally isn't a good idea

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

If franchises were given to private companies the connections might be better. Was looking at Hazelhatch-Galway (return) this weekend gone. Connections don't exist. Ended up driving instead.

franchising to private companies wouldn't make any difference in terms of connections unfortunately. as we can see from the uk, a lot of connections went or were disimproved since franchising/privatization.
the only way we will get improvements in connections is if the NTA start dictating or writing the timetable, or at least sending them back for a re-write where they believe connections should exist.

Jamie2k9

Losty Dublin wrote: »

They can't object or disrupt. Once an operator has a licence it it entitled to run as many trains as it wishes, subject to physical constraints such as speed, axle weight, platform lengths, loading gauge clearance. CIÉ must oblige them in their requirements as far as possible.

If I came to Irish Rail tomorrow and said I want to run an hourly non stop Heuston-Cork they would do whatever possible to disrupt within the rule book.

They are not exactly overly accommodating towards NIR specials at times. Belmond schedule isn't exactly prefect either.

No operator will come unless they can get a PSO contract for a route or Irish Rail infrastructure is removed from CIE and an independent body put in charge.

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

franchising to private companies wouldn't make any difference in terms of connections unfortunately. as we can see from the uk, a lot of connections went or were disimproved since franchising/privatization.
the only way we will get improvements in connections is if the NTA start dictating or writing the timetable, or at least sending them back for a re-write where they believe connections should exist.

IE write the timetable. In many cases it couldn't be worse.

If the NTA were to rewrite the timetable, it wouldn't really matter who operated the trains.

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

IE write the timetable. In many cases it couldn't be worse.

the timetable possibly not being worse is definitely no reason to go to the expence of franchizing, especially setting up minny franchizes and the fragmentation it would bring. ireland's network is a tiny network.

n97 mini wrote: »

If the NTA were to rewrite the timetable, it wouldn't really matter who operated the trains.

hence you wouldn't need franchizing because the NTA would be doing the work, and i'd bet they could start writing the timetable tomorrow if they wished.

Annasopra

If you google "uk rail privatisation" - you find media story after story about how it is a bad thing that never worked.

Wanderer78

Joeytheparrot wrote:

If you google "uk rail privatisation" - you find media story after story about how it is a bad thing that never worked.

My suspicions are, the failures of the privatisation of the UK system are more complex than just that, but have played a significant role in this occuring, their system does seem to be very complex, and the failures of such systems can be difficult to pin point exactly why.

Privitisation of critical infrastructures should never be turned into 'rent extractive' processes, as all citizens benefit from such systems, but we must figure out ways of funding such activities, continual taxation of labour to do so is unsustainable.

Wanderer78

could or should private, not for profit organisations be integrated into our public transport system in order to aid funding and operations?

devnull

The UK system is ideal for the Department of Transport there. They have more control now than they did under British Rail.

It allows them to make almost all the unpopular decisions and get almost none of the blame.

Bit like how the UK is able to scapegoat the EU for all the problems caused by domestic policy.

Jamie2k9

Nothing wrong with making a profit if private or public ownership. The focus should be Irish Rail improving the service offered and would be good to see the NTA start next year.

One example been they have been able to arrange extra services for the 25th of August 2 months in advance yet are incapable of putting other specials such as concert ones on sale more than a week in advance. Then again the good catholic drivers might be doing it in the name of God rather than Irish Rail

Isambard

nothing wrong with making a profit it's true, but if that profit is paid for from subsidies and fare increases, who wins?

judeboy101

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/teenager-flies-from-sheffield-to-essex-via-berlin-because-it-is-cheaper-than-getting-the-train-a6837836.html

Working class heroes

Unions.
If jam was unionized you wouldn’t see a wasp near it. Too much trouble.

Wanderer78

Jamie2k9 wrote:

Nothing wrong with making a profit if private or public ownership. The focus should be Irish Rail improving the service offered and would be good to see the NTA start next year.

At what point do the accumulation of profits become potentially unsafe for a functioning society, and how do we redistribute these profits to reduce inequality?

Working class heroes wrote:

Unions. If jam was unionized you wouldn’t see a wasp near it. Too much trouble.

Understandable comment, but has the destruction and possible self destruction of the union movement truly benefitted society?

devnull

judeboy101 wrote: »

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/teenager-flies-from-sheffield-to-essex-via-berlin-because-it-is-cheaper-than-getting-the-train-a6837836.html

The unfortunate thing is such comparisons are often flawed and not objective as they often compare a walk up fully flexible train ticket with an extremely limited advance booked flight tickets that are only avaliable to a few people on a few planes that are also mandatory bookings.

Also it doesn't take into equation time. You can get anywhere cheaper than by train by buses for instance but few will because of the slowness.

I don't agree the UK system is perfect but the common beliefs in UK society about the cause of the problems are generally inaccurate and that suits the government fine since if they are blaming someone else they are not blaming them.

The other irony is the DFT have masterminded it so much that the public are calling for more involvement of them in rail services by nationalisation whilst not realising that it would simply put more power in the hands of those who are actually behind most of the things they don't like.

Working class heroes

Wanderer78 wrote: »

At what point do the accumulation of profits become potentially unsafe for a functioning society, and how do we redistribute these profits to reduce inequality?



Understandable comment, but has the destruction and possible self destruction of the union movement truly benefitted society?

Well it would benefit public transport so yes, it would therefore benefit society.

Wanderer78

Working class heroes wrote:

Well it would benefit public transport so yes, it would therefore benefit society.

The destruction of the union movement would benefit society? If so, how? It's clearly obvious that since this has occurred, worker insecurities have in fact increased due to the reduction in collective bargaining power, it's actually one of the main reasons for the current situation in Ryanair.

Working class heroes

Wanderer78 wrote: »

The destruction of the union movement would benefit society? If so, how? It's clearly obvious that since this has occurred, worker insecurities have in fact increased due to the reduction in collective bargaining power, it's actually one of the main reasons for the current situation in Ryanair.

It benefits the people using these services if the union stranglehold was broke. This is “obvious”.
And as you mentioned Ryanair, watch those air fares rise into the sky, thanks to unions. What society would that benefit, eh?

Wanderer78

Working class heroes wrote:

It benefits the people using these services if the union stranglehold was broke. This is “obviousâ€. And as you mentioned Ryanair, watch those air fares rise into the sky, thanks to unions. What society would that benefit, eh?

the Ryanair situation is an age old battle underneath it all, it's ultimately the battle of capital v's labour. In the age of financialization, we have been lead to believe if we effectively unhinge capital and squeeze labour, the wealth created will 'trickle down', this in fact is only partial true, but largely untrue. What is becoming apparent, over the last few decades, what is in fact trickling down are the debts that have been created by this process. How does this truly benefit society as a whole? My suspicions is the Ryanair situation will eventually be solved, and the company will be as successful as ever, with very little change to fairs, if any at all.

end of the road

Working class heroes wrote: »

Unions.
If jam was unionized you wouldn’t see a wasp near it. Too much trouble.

unions benefit the workers. that's their job, nothing more nothing less.

Working class heroes wrote: »

Well it would benefit public transport so yes, it would therefore benefit society.

it would actually be a huge disbenefit to public transport, as a lack of a counter-ballance can (and in 1 well known case did) lead to staff being treated badly. that in turn is a disbenefit to society, as it causes and increases industrial unrest.

Working class heroes wrote: »

It benefits the people using these services if the union stranglehold was broke. This is “obvious”.
And as you mentioned Ryanair, watch those air fares rise into the sky, thanks to unions. What society would that benefit, eh?

unions don't have a stranglehold on anything. collective bargaining power has nothing to do with the issues at ryanair, which were coming long before the union came in . in fact, it's highly likely staff would have downed tools whether the union came in or not. the issues at ryanair were a long time in the making. ultimately, the union not being in ryanair was a disbenefit to the users as the issues could likely have been solved ages ago had they been so. there is no evidence that fares will rise at all, never mind into the sky.

whisky_galore

Working class heroes wrote: »

Unions.
If jam was unionized you wouldn’t see a wasp near it. Too much trouble.

Ironic username is ironic.

Jamie2k9

Wanderer78 wrote: »

At what point do the accumulation of profits become potentially unsafe for a functioning society, and how do we redistribute these profits to reduce inequality?

Profits should be used to reinvest in a company and infrastructure and reduce dependence on public funding, or reduce fares and future proof in case of financial problems. A small reward for staff but such rewards would require consistent profitability.

Irish Rail cannot make a profit and if they do it needs to be kept at a minimum. A sniff of a profit and a big fat pay claim would be lodged before the ink has dried on the accounts.

Not sure where inequality comes into this public v private discussion as vast majority of IE fall on the right side of the equality divide.

Unions represent the few not the many!

Working class heroes

end of the road wrote: »

unions benefit the workers. that's their job, nothing more nothing less.



it would actually be a huge disbenefit to public transport, as a lack of a counter-ballance can (and in 1 well known case did) lead to staff being treated badly. that in turn is a disbenefit to society, as it causes and increases industrial unrest.



unions don't have a stranglehold on anything. collective bargaining power has nothing to do with the issues at ryanair, which were coming long before the union came in . in fact, it's highly likely staff would have downed tools whether the union came in or not. the issues at ryanair were a long time in the making. ultimately, the union not being in ryanair was a disbenefit to the users as the issues could likely have been solved ages ago had they been so. there is no evidence that fares will rise at all, never mind into the sky.

As much as a troll as you are you are actually agreeing with me. Unions have no benefit to society as a whole. Their incompetence has ruined many a company.
All your ridiculous “computer says no” responses won’t change that”

Working class heroes

whisky_galore wrote: »

Ironic username is ironic.

Good input, well done.

Working class heroes

Wanderer78 wrote: »

the Ryanair situation is an age old battle underneath it all, it's ultimately the battle of capital v's labour. In the age of financialization, we have been lead to believe if we effectively unhinge capital and squeeze labour, the wealth created will 'trickle down', this in fact is only partial true, but largely untrue. What is becoming apparent, over the last few decades, what is in fact trickling down are the debts that have been created by this process. How does this truly benefit society as a whole? My suspicions is the Ryanair situation will eventually be solved, and the company will be as successful as ever, with very little change to fairs, if any at all.

I’m sorry but’s all of that is just your opinion.
I’d be of the opposite opinion.

Rigor Mortis

Yep, i would consider myself to be in favour of most privatisations and even I dont think it works with rail. In particular, I dont believe that it would work in Ireland. The market is too small. Growing the market will depend on massive state investment in new infrastructure, which is really hard to see happening.

tabbey

Rigor Mortis wrote: »

Yep, i would consider myself to be in favour of most privatisations and even I dont think it works with rail. In particular, I dont believe that it would work in Ireland. The market is too small. Growing the market will depend on massive state investment in new infrastructure, which is really hard to see happening.

New Zealand isa country close to Ireland in terms of size /population.

In the 1990s, due to financial considerations, the NZ government sold the rail network to private investors.
The company operated the system with minimal maintenance, and ran it into the ground.
The government was then in a dilemma, do we abandon rail or invest in it. The government bought back the rail system and paid for overdue maintenance/renewal, but only part of the network.

For NZ, rail privatisation was a disaster.

In the UK, what we now have is not really privatisation. It is more like the incoming Dublin bus regime, where private enterprise competes to operate a service micro-managed by a QUANGO, NTA in Ireland, ORR in UK.

tabbey

end of the road wrote: »

unions benefit the workers. that's their job, nothing more nothing less.

Some unions do.

Regrettably unions are like any other business, they compete for members/customers.

They compete for members by wielding their industrial muscle, saying you would be better off with us.
These unions members are merely used as pawns by despotic union officials, to pay the salaries of the union bosses.

Thankfully they are not all like this.

Arthur Daley

It is laughable. Northern, who have a load of services down today are owned by Arriva. Arriva are huge in the UK public transport sector, and in turn are owned by Deutshe Bahn. DB's shareholding is owned by the Federal Republic of Germany. Yes the German state owns many of the 'privatised' rail and bus companies in the UK. (Another example is Scot rail - owned by the Dutch government)

What is wrong with having DB or the Dutch run these services? Nothing as such, I'm sure DB are very efficient indeed. But it is a total joke to call this 'privatisation' and start blaming the local unionised labour, trying to dig up tired old arguements and failed ideology that now looks decidedly dodgy as the whole policy unwinds at tremendous cost to the taxpayer. It smacks of crony capitalism all over the shop.

Working class heroes

Arthur Daley wrote: »

It is laughable. Northern, who have a load of services down today are owned by Arriva. Arriva are huge in the UK public transport sector, and in turn are owned by Deutshe Bahn. DB's shareholding is owned by the Federal Republic of Germany. Yes the German state owns many of the 'privatised' rail and bus companies in the UK. (Another example is Scot rail - owned by the Dutch government)

What is wrong with having DB or the Dutch run these services? Nothing as such, I'm sure DB are very efficient indeed. But it is a total joke to call this 'privatisation' and start blaming the local unionised labour, trying to dig up tired old arguements and failed ideology that now looks decidedly dodgy as the whole policy unwinds at tremendous cost to the taxpayer. It smacks of crony capitalism all over the shop.

Are you saying that the unions don’t have a negative impact on the way IE, BE and DB are run?

Wanderer78

Working class heroes wrote:

I’m sorry but’s all of that is just your opinion. I’d be of the opposite opinion.

Not just my opinion, but the opinions of many well respected social, political and economic commentators, some of which hold positions of professorship, with data and research to boot.

Arthur Daley

Working class heroes wrote: »

Are you saying that the unions don’t have a negative impact on the way IE, BE and DB are run?

Maybe they do in some cases. They are not the best operations for the consumer, well DB in particular, don't know much about BE and seldom use rail.

But how does so called 'privatisation' where you sell your state owned asset to another state make the service any better. I'm sure Deutsche Bahn have all sorts of union representation, German companies often try to get the unions/workers involved at every level, all the way up to the top. It is part of the social partnership model.

Ireland now needs to look at how these things work across the EU and not get hung up on just AngloAmerican cliches like private good/public bad, or union bashing as the first port of call. Sometimes we have been very unpleasantly surprised at how 'private' these operations really are.

Working class heroes

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Not just my opinion, but the opinions of many well respected social, political and economic commentators, some of which hold positions of professorship, with data and research to boot.

Like who?

Working class heroes

Arthur Daley wrote: »

Maybe they do in some cases. They are not the best operations for the consumer, well DB in particular, don't know much about BE and seldom use rail.

But how does so called 'privatisation' where you sell your state owned asset to another state make the service any better. I'm sure Deutsche Bahn have all sorts of union representation, German companies often try to get the unions/workers involved at every level, all the way up to the top. It is part of the social partnership model.

Ireland now needs to look at how these things work across the EU and not get hung up on just AngloAmerican cliches like private good/public bad, or union bashing as the first port of call. Sometimes we have been very unpleasantly surprised at how 'private' these operations really are.

So going by your first paragraph you reluctantly agree with me.
The rest is just rambling.

Wanderer78

Working class heroes wrote:

Like who?

Where would you like to start, and what aspect of this subject matter would you like to tackle first, because this does tend to become very complicated quickly?

Working class heroes

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Where would you like to start, and what aspect of this subject matter would you like to tackle first, because this does tend to become very complicated quickly?

Right, I see. Deflecting.
I’ll leave it with you so.

Wanderer78

Working class heroes wrote:

Right, I see. Deflecting. I’ll leave it with you so.

Not at all, just trying to create a more concise answer, as this truly does become complicated, it also requires a large amount of research on your side to see the bigger picture, i.e. I cannot help you unless you have some interaction in the debate

Was only listening to a podcast over the weekend with ul economist Stephen kinsella, he believes that the rapid growth in productivity over the last couple of decades has not been reflected in income levels, he ultimately believes this is directly related to the demise of the union movement, I suspect he's right.

Arthur Daley

Working class heroes wrote: »

So going by your first paragraph you reluctantly agree with me.
The rest is just rambling.

Oh I see it's like that is it. Well do you want to set out your points/issues and contribute something to the topic in hand? Or maybe you are just not here for that.

Working class heroes

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Not at all, just trying to create a more concise answer, as this truly does become complicated, it also requires a large amount of research on your side to see the bigger picture, i.e. I cannot help you unless you have some interaction in the debate

Was only listening to a podcast over the weekend with ul economist Stephen kinsella, he believes that the rapid growth in productivity over the last couple of decades has not been reflected in income levels, he ultimately believes this is directly related to the demise of the union movement, I suspect he's right.

Your patronizing is almost as impressive as your deflecting.
It’s a lot more simple than you are trying to make it. As long as unions exist there will be no improvement in public transport. They are only there to enable inefficient work practices. No private operators will enter the market as long as these goons continue their stranglehold.
And this is why we will never know, public or private, which way to go, eh?

Edit:I’m specifically talking about rail