Seamus Milne writes:
Barely a month since the private security firm G4S crashed and burned in the runup to the
London Olympics, we're back in outsourcing la-la land again. This time the
battle is over the monopoly franchise to run passenger trains on Britain's most
lucrative rail route, the west coast mainline. Ministers have given the 15-year contract to the privatised bus operator
FirstGroup, with a licence to increase fares by up to 11% a year, reduce
services, downgrade catering and close ticket offices. Richard Branson, whose
Virgin Trains has had the franchise since the 90s, is crying foul, and on
Tuesday launched a legal action to halt the handover.
Labour wants MPs to be able to scrutinise the deal. But the transport
secretary, Justine Greening, is determined to plough ahead regardless,
potentially tying the hands of government for the next three parliaments. And
the controversy follows uproar over plans for an average 6.2% rise in rail
fares from January. Commuters now routinely spend 15% of their income travelling to work on what
is now the most expensive rail network in Europe. No wonder coalition MPs are
lobbying for some relief from the drive to load more of the costs on to
passengers: it is now cheaper to fly on half the popular routes around Britain than travel
by more environmentally friendly rail.
The heavily subsidised rail privateers, whose top five executives paid
themselves an average of £1m last year, are also supposed to cough up a bigger
share. But there's little sign of that happening – and the west coast mainline
deal helps explain why. Forget the special pleading by Branson, who's made over £200m from rail
privatisation. Virgin's own record is poor. But his accusation that FirstGroup
is gaming the system is widely shared by industry analysts and insiders.
Greening claims FirstGroup offers the best deal for taxpayers. In reality
it's based on heroic growth expectations of 10.6% a year and payments to
government that are heavily loaded on to the contract's last few years. The
company in fact has an incentive to dump the franchise as those payments come
due, because they dwarf the cost of the bond penalty. If FirstGroup – which is walking away from the Great Western franchise –
defaults, it wouldn't be the first time. That's what happened with
Bermuda-based Sea Containers and National Express, who had the contract for the
east coast mainline before the last government was forced to take it over. But
by then, both ministers and corporate executives would likely be long gone.
Nearly 20 years after John Major's disastrous privatisation, this is the
reality of Britain's railway: a byword for bewildering fragmentation,
unreliability and exorbitant cost – and a gigantic scam for siphoning off
public money into the pockets of monopoly contractors. Branson has raged at the government's "insanity" in
awarding the west coast mainline franchise to FirstGroup. But it is the system
itself that is irrational. Privatisation was supposed to cut public subsidy by
boosting competition, investment and innovation. In fact, it has done the opposite. Government funding has at least doubled
in real terms, while fares have also increased, largely because of
privatisation – including the costs of fragmentation and duplication; dividend
payments to investors; contractors' profit margins; debt write-offs; and higher
interest payments to keep Network Rail's debts off the government's balance
sheet.
Taken together, those privatisation costs amount to around £1.2bn a year,
according to a new thinktank report (Transport for Quality of Life's Rebuilding Rail), while genuine
private investment is estimated at barely 1% of the total funding of the
railway. It's hardly surprising that the mainly publicly owned rail systems in
the rest of Europe – several of which now run bits of Britain's privatised rail
– are cheaper. The solution could not be more obvious. It's to rebuild a publicly owned and
integrated railway. That can be done at zero or minimal cost, by bringing back
each franchise into public ownership as the contracts expire. Freight apart, it
can also be done under EU law, and with built-in local control. And saving the
£1.2bn-a-year costs of privatisation over time would be the equivalent of an
across-the-board cut in fares of 18%.
Rail renationalisation has long commanded large majorities in opinion polls.
So you might imagine politicians would fall over themselves to sign up to a
policy that's popular and saves money. The fact that they don't says something
about the continuing grip of discredited ideology and corporate interests on
Britain's political culture. Even a respected public transport pressure group
like the Campaign for Better Transport, which now relies on funding from
privatised transport companies, shies away from campaigning on the issue.
Labour is at last inching in the right direction. Its transport spokesperson
Maria Eagle has floated the possibility of extending public ownership
to rail services, and this week called for the east coast mainline to be kept in public hands. But with Tory
defence secretary Phillip Hammond declaring the Olympics has changed his mind about
privatisation and Liberal Democrat Vince Cable pressing the case for the
outright nationalisation of banks, Ed Miliband can afford to be a bit braver. Last
year he called for a break with the neoliberal model. Rail could be the place
to start.
No comments:
Post a Comment