Andy Burnham’s right:railway unity would get Britain back on track Andrew Martin

[zenitzz]

The Labour leadership contender’s commitment to renationalising our railways is welcome, but hardly radical
andy Burnham, whose politics seem not so much a movable feast as a packed lunch, seeks to appear leftwing. But bringing the railways under state control is not a radical policy. It would bring us into line with the European norm, and it is consistently supported by majorities in opinion polls.

Ellie Harrison, an artist and teacher, runs the Bring Back British Rail campaign from her flat in Glasgow. Its Facebook page has more than 100,000 likes. “We have support from across the spectrum,” she says. “One of the administrators of the page was a Conservative candidate in the general election. He didn’t win because the seat was in Scotland.” She identifies many motives among the likers. “For some it’s the ridiculous cost of season tickets. For some it’s the environmental thing. And then there’s a nostalgia for British Rail.”

I suppose British Rail might seem to embody conventional railway romance. In the early days, it was keen on retaining steam, and it continued the charming tradition of naming trains (eg The Elizabethan, 1953). But then, the hard-headed Dr Beeching became chairman of BR, which entered a period of mortification as competition from other modes of transport increased. It built stations resembling airports, and introduced the dour new livery of blue and off-white (“blue and dirt”). The umber-and-cream Brighton Belle was subjected to this colour scheme before being killed off in 1972. “We can’t live on nostalgia,” ran the BR press release.

Read more: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/07/andy-burnham-railway-unity-renationalising

[alva5763]

Andy Burnham is a champagne socialist. Educated at Britain's finest university. Nationalising the railways would push up prices even more than when privatised and unions would be in control of the whole system. Private,not public, ownership is the best way forward.

[Lethn]

This is the guardian, commenting on the labour party, nothing left to see here really guys, for those outside of the UK the guardian is a very left leaning newspaper they'll side with labour almost always.

[newflesh]

Andy Burnham is a champagne socialist. Educated at Britain's finest university. Nationalising the railways would push up prices even more than when privatised and unions would be in control of the whole system. Private,not public, ownership is the best way forward.

Since privatisation, the railways actually cost the UK taxpayer more (in government subsidies) than when it was state owned so I can't see how it could push up the ticket prices any more than they are now.

A study in 2009 even showed that 70% of British people support re-nationalisation of the railways so it's obviously a popular choice, hence Burnham's support for it. 

[Lethn]

Andy Burnham is a champagne socialist. Educated at Britain's finest university. Nationalising the railways would push up prices even more than when privatised and unions would be in control of the whole system. Private,not public, ownership is the best way forward.

Since privatisation, the railways actually cost the UK taxpayer more (in government subsidies) than when it was state owned so I can't see how it could push up the ticket prices any more than they are now.

A study in 2009 even showed that 70% of British people support re-nationalisation of the railways so it's obviously a popular choice, hence Burnham's support for it. 

Think about it though, how are they going to pay for the lower prices? Simple answer is that they can't. I think in the UK at least transporation is being bid up to artificial highs just like the housing market because of how much these monopolies are being helped by the government through various programs.

[newflesh]

Think about it though, how are they going to pay for the lower prices? Simple answer is that they can't.

They could nationalise the railways and run them as a non-profit organisation. The profits could then be re-invested back into improving services/reducing ticket prices instead of  lining the pockets of shareholders.

Check out the East Coast Main Line (state owned train company), they managed to pull in £220 million for the UK taxpayer. Granted we probably never saw a penny of that but it goes to show that in certain conditions state-owned services/utilities can be as efficient, if not more than the private sector.

Britain's only state-owned railway, which runs the East Coast artery between London and Scotland, made payments of almost £220m to the taxpayer last year

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/11085643/State-owned-train-company-returns-217m-to-taxpayers.html

[bryant.coleman]

Just because the East Coast Main Line can be profitable, you can't say that the railways all across the UK can be run in a similar fashion. Some of the railway routes will be more profitable than the others. But the government will be forced to operate the non-profitable routes, as the general population will face inconveniences otherwise.

[newflesh]

Just because the East Coast Main Line can be profitable, you can't say that the railways all across the UK can be run in a similar fashion. Some of the railway routes will be more profitable than the others. But the government will be forced to operate the non-profitable routes, as the general population will face inconveniences otherwise.

Agreed, it wouldn't work with all railways in the UK. Ideally the more profitable companies would offset the less profitable and still leave money over for re-investment. Not sure of the exact figures so I can't say for sure if it's 100% feasible.