John Harris writes:
By the time you read this article, the UK will
probably be in the grip of that recurrent national malady known as travel
chaos. At the time of writing, in addition to warnings about the perils of
driving, trains were being cancelled en masse, while would-be travellers were
instructed to follow news from that array of corporate names which still feels
like some alien imposition on national life: First TransPennine, CrossCountry,
First Capital Connect, c2c. There will, it seems, be leaves on the line, and
then some.
Even the most efficient set-up can probably not
do much about what one firm was predicting to be "localised flooding, fallen
trees and debris on the tracks". But still: as rail travel is disrupted,
thousands of people will once again seethe with fury at the operating
companies' shortcomings, whether unfairly or not. Public anger, moreover, will
also reflect a firmly embedded belief: that the approach of politicians to the
railways is lily-livered at best; and at worst, completely barmy.
If you want a good example of the latter, consider the fate of the east coast mainline, which runs between
London, the north-east and Scotland. In 2006 GNER lost its contract to run trains along the route when its
Bermuda-registered parent company filed for bankruptcy. The franchise then went
to National Express, which soon defaulted on its payments. So the then-Labour government
created a not-for-profit public operator called Directly Operated Railways,
which has run the service for the last four years with much success.
Since 2009, DOR has paid
£602m into public funds: over £200m more than National Express did, and
£209m more than Virgin Rail – the franchise-holder for the west coast mainline
– has managed during the same period. Its public subsidy is comparatively minimal – seven times less than that paid last year
to Virgin. Its record on safety improvements is jaw-dropping: "major
customer accidents" are down 81% since 2009. And customer satisfaction and
punctuality are at unprecedented highs.
Now, of course, the government wants to re-privatise it – which is where things
get truly absurd. Among the top bidders for the franchise is a consortium split
between Eurostar and Keolis, both majority-owned by the French state firm SNCF.
As well as Virgin, another probable contender will be Arriva, the British train
company wholly owned by Deutsche Bahn, which is in turn wholly owned by the
German government. As is increasingly the case across a whole range of national
infrastructure – from power stations to water suppliers, via airports and
bus companies – supposed free-marketeers are gleefully happy about state
ownership of British assets, as long as it's somebody else's state that's doing
it. In the case of the railways, moreover, you end up with the inevitable consequence
of profits being skimmed off and invested in trains and tracks overseas.
This is another of the insanities at the core of
an economic model that George Osborne in particular wants to develop. Labour argues that the east coast mainline should stay in public hands
and that DOR should be allowed to bid for other train franchises, following the
same revenue-generating model as publicly owned firms from Germany, France
and the Netherlands.
But is that really enough? The Greens' Caroline
Lucas, a rare voice of sanity, recently tabled a private member's bill outlining a simple
alternative: that over time, as rail franchises expire, they should be restored
to public ownership – which would cost peanuts, repatriate a fair bit of money,
and commence the abolition of all the complex and costly stupidities that
privatisation produced (topical note: before the rehabilitation of John Major
goes too far, let's remember that it was his government that did it). This
would at least slow those outrageous ticket price rises. And just imagine: we
would also get the kind of integrated railway system to which politicians could
finally apply some joined-up thinking.
This Thursday, after the publication of a new
business case, there will be a Commons vote on the so-called paving bill for HS2,
which will enable the government to release funding for the
"preparation" of the project before later legislation grants full
planning permission. The HS2 project is the grimmest embodiment yet of how
awful railways policy has become, whereby tens of billions will be frittered on
services for which there is no obvious demand – while existing
routes will suffer, links between cities outside London will be as poor as
ever, and commuter and branch lines will remain under-resourced and
overcrowded.
For the moment, Labour is sticking to a
depressingly familiar approach: why have a clear policy when nods, winks and
mischievous opacity will suffice? With David Cameron now insisting that HS2 depends on all-party support, shadow ministers
still claim to back it, though Labour MPs will be under no obligation to
actually turn up and vote, and Ed Balls may yet decide to turn tail and offer to spend the money on
other things. There will certainly be Conservative dissent this week, though Tory rebels
are likely to come out in their largest numbers a little later. Whatever,
support for HS2 is palpably weakening.
Who will eventually supply the trains and
actually run HS2 remains unclear. But as well as the prospect of state-owned
European firms getting involved, the China Railway Group and China South
Locomotive and Rolling Stock Corporation – again, government-owned enterprises
– have registered
an interest in bidding for contracts. So, off we may well go again, handing
yet more chunks of infrastructure to interests whose chief responsibilities lie
far away from the UK, swaths of whose profits will be invested at home.
Storms permitting, I will be among the stressed-out
crowds this morning, trying to get from the West Country to Stockport on a
family ticket that – even with a railcard, booked several weeks in advance –
cost me a wallet-threatening £125, a good deal of which will be going straight
into the coffers of Deutsche Bahn, and will presumably contribute to such
projects as the redevelopment of the central station in Stuttgart and the improvement of services from Mainz.
How remarkable that
railways which once embodied the British genius should have become not just
overpriced and lamentably run, but mere outposts of other countries'
economic empires.
"HS2 project is the grimmest embodiment yet of how awful railways policy has become, whereby tens of billions will be frittered on services for which there is no obvious demand – while existing routes will suffer"
ReplyDeleteAll true-but it serves the EU's requirement for a transcontinental network, like all those shiny new HS2-style railways in the Netherlands and elsewhere.
Never mind that such dazzling high-speed lines suit the Continent, with its vast open spaces, but do not suit our cramped island.
Never mind that the HS2 money would pay for the ships, aircraft and Army regiments we're currently getting rid of.
Like mass immigration-the EU wants it, so the people's voices don't count.
Mad, and would do both causes - opposition to the EU, and opposition to HS2 - immense harm if anyone paid any attention to you.
ReplyDeleteThe North East regional assembly was never going to go through, but it would have been a much closer-run thing if the "Brussels plot" nutters had been allowed on the telly. This is the same thing.
I once worked for the bit of Government dealing with the regions. One of the Brussels plot nutters threatened me with the death penalty in response to an innocuous consultation on very small scale funding for the unelected regional assemblies that existed in the early 2000s. Along the lines of 'One day a Government will get in that will recognise the treasonous nature of you and your EU loving ilk, and you sir, will pay for your sins with the ultimate penalty via the noose'. I responded by thanking him for his reply, comments noted etc.
ReplyDeleteEvery single EU plot person I have come across has been a nutjob. Without exception.
You should do the comment moderation on here. You'd feel right at home.
ReplyDelete