Rail Privatisation Failure - Why we pay more for Trains
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 05. 2024
- A look at rail privatisation. Why it was left to last. What happened to ticket prices? Are there any benefits? Lots of nice footage of trains too
00:00 Intro
00:49 Passenger Numbers
2:00 Rail Fares
2:29 Problems of Privatisation
3:38 Failed Franchises
5:22 Rising Costs
6:30 Profit in Rail
7:47 Is UK really more expensive?
9:07 Post Privatisation
9:39 Benefits of Privatisation
10:34 HS2
Sources:
• Why did we sell off th...
gbrtt.co.uk/keep-informed/blo...
www.ft.com/content/d6683d7c-7...
www.seat61.com/uk-europe-trai...
www.euronews.com/travel/2023/...
www.christianwolmar.co.uk/202...
Thumbnail photo of Intercity 125 - Phil Sangwell - originally posted to Flickr as Chesterfield
► Please SUBSCRIBE!
► UK Economy - czcams.com/users/economicshe...
ABOUT
-----------
► www.economicshelp.org was founded in 2006 by Tejvan Pettinger, who studied PPE at Oxford University and teaches economics. He has published several economics books, including:
► Economic Short Cuts amzn.to/3IgxupC
► 50 Essential Economic Ideas amzn.to/3IgxndG
► Cracking Economics. www.economicshelp.org/shop/cr...
► What Would Keynes Do? Amazon amzn.to/2xShqq4
► Economics Without the Boring Bits amzn.to/48T1hA9
UK trains are rubbish compared to Europe. Facts.
so are UK people.
WHERE'S THE LIE
Man. Being in Belgium or the Netherlands or even France, you see what real trains should be liken
@@kokojambo4944 I was at Waterloo Station on the 15th May. I was stuck on the train for over 2 hours before all the passengers were kicked off and told to find an alternative route.
I had to go all the way to Heathrow and then get picked up by car to continue my journey.
Literally thousands of people were stuck at Waterloo.
Some kind of major incident at Raynes Park hence the total melt down.
In this day and age it's disgraceful. No contingency plans.
I'd just finished a 4 hour CFA exam session as well. I was absolutely shattered.
"But the markets will fix the problems"!! Was the annoying mantra I've heard all my life! We just need to accept it's better to own it as a nation, for our own peace of mind! Oh and the increase of usage is mostly due to the open borders of Europe making the population of every western capital city increase massively. More people, more riders, nothing to do with the private companies.
Neoliberalism is nothing more than a looting exercise
Great video. I have never heard anyone, Labour, Conservative or otherwise, say that privatising UK rail worked. And the cost of using the trains is sickening.
I mean it didn't. If it had we would have good train services. And we have terrible expensive train services
Old dog here. I remember as a child growing up in NE England taking trains to visit my aunt in London (steam trains) and some years before the Beeching cuts. There was a lack of forethought at that time which probably contributed to the problems in later decades. Rail needs to be a complete network and a public service to work efficiently and not some quick money grab by private investors who bale out when the profits dry up. With the size and population of the UK it should not be impossible to operate an effective affordable rail service. Hey but what do I know!. For years now I have lived in both Canada and the USA where passenger rail service is a disaster, especially in the west due to lower population density, longer distances and the love of the automobile. Great channel , have been following for a while now though it is sad to see what a mess the UK has become.
The reduction of the infrastructure of British railways I have always likened to the Architects of such a decision surprise that a river dried up when they cut off all its tributaries.
Ironically the private companies running the rail franchises in the UK are mainly owned by nationalised European national rail companies. So, the UK dividends subsidise European rail travellers. Having just travelled in Germany I paid less for services that were more frequent, had much more carriages and I always had a seat. Then on my return to the UK I had to stand on a Crossrail service along with a bunch of foreign students; it made me so proud that in the country that invented railways our public services are just so bad ☹
I maintain that the Scottish government should buy up English railstock since the english government is consistently silly enough to keep flogging off.
also, after the potters barr crash we discovered the train company valued life at 38k per passenger, if the cost of the repair was more than paying out for the death of the passengers, the repairs wasn't done!
A flight across the UK is cheaper than a train. The pricing and various tickets are confusing. Local station is miles away, to use it I have to pay £9 a day to park the car at the station and over one hundred pound to travel 4 hours. I can do the same journey in 2.5 hours by car and take 4 others with me.
Trains should be cheaper than car to make them attractive to use.
24 years ago I took the train from Dortmund to Milano Italy and back paid 80Euro ...😂😂 today same route £127 ...not to bad 😂😂😂 london to Aberdeen and back 227£
This video only scratches the surface of the topic. The examples given are more nuanced than discussed, and recent failures that have resulted from privatisation have been missed.
ECML franchise failures are due to overoptimistic bids leading to larger premium payments, much more complicated than just failing.
Tunneling costs and HS2 are capital costs for new railways, unrelated to the operating costs of running the existing railways.
The cost of train tickets for the consumer has been compared to answer 'Is the UK is really more expensive?', but this misses the vastly different levels of state subsidy - costs that are borne by the taxpayer.
Recent failures include:
- Significant driver shorage when franchise transfered from FCC to GTR
- DfT prioritising bids with new trains, leading to more trainbuilding capacity, then not ordering any new trains leading to train building sites at risk of closure.
Fun fact - the Beeching cuts were massive closing down of many rural train lines that serviced poorer communities.
In the 50s the tories closed down many train lines that today, would have helped the local economies and in turn the national economy.
im still travelling in 1980's trains which are a recent replacement for 1960 trains. i wrote to northern rail to complain, who wrote back saying the contract they have doesn't include improving the rolling stock. privatisation was like crack for capitalist, a quick hit then its down hill from there! anyone with half of a brain knows you cant have competition on 1 waterline, 1 train line 1 post box, 1 cable?
the UK needs to spend £4 Trillion - with a T - over the next 10 years to undo the damage of 45 years of Tory policies, which is of course impossible.
£550 billon needed for new schools. £700 billion for road repairs. £280 billion for sewers.
*I CAN GET A TRAIN FROM BURGAS TO ISTANBUL* for the same price it costs my Nephew to go to college and back each day in the UK
Something equivalent to london to manchester, distance wise
@@Hession0Drasha - AH no cos I have to go to Sofia the capital and then to Istanbul cos there are mountains in the way - so its 600 miles.
@@piccalillipit9211 seems like the EU needs to fund a istanbul-edirne-burgas-varna-constanta-odessa railway
But at least the British has rainbows and gay people
Awesome. Brilliant content. Spot on.
Thank You!
Natural monopolies and why privatisation doesn't always work: you really need to do a video on Georgism.
as usual (the same for gas, water and electricity) it led to the buyers claiming the need for capital and increasing debt to the point where tickets are too expensive. In the meantime they trousered the money. What percentage of a ticket cost is now servicing debt compared to pre-privatisation?
Apart from maintaining the dead routes, the problem of the rail system is the choking of investment in infrastructure.
it's very disingenous to call UK model privatised. e.g. the eletrification example from India - this is what Network Rail are in charge of, which is all state, and no private companies. UK model is picking the worst parts of free market, and combining them with the worst parts of public ownership.
What would you do about trade unions in natural monopolies?
0:09 Tell me... how did it get to that point?
Why were cars so cheap? Just naturally, was it?
Privatised rail gives same choices as privatised water. Take it or leave it are the only choices. More gov money goes in to "privatised" rail than it used to when nationalised.
Railways should be like roads - a public service which benefits everyone. The roads are bursting with traffic, surely not sustainable to build more and more roads with the pollution, noise, dangers and land use.
I mean only at certain peak times do you only see trains full at a certain peak times - in most instances no-body is on the trains they are empty. Advanced tickets only really work on certain routes. Scotland I can spend from my parents closest station to stirling for 15 pounds for a similar train time from Witham to London it going to cost me 26.
when I was living in Gillingham the prices would be different going in from London. I don't think a train ticket should be more than a tenner. These trains are dead most of the time. They can't really be making a profit.
*Thatcher DID lay the groundwork for railway privatisation - her government created sub-brands (Network SouthEast and Intercity) that had to act like self-funding businesses within British Rail and eventually wouldn't receive government funding.
It was initially successful (because it shook up the creaking British Rail system a bit and made them lean and efficient)... Maybe also because they didn't have the whole shareholder thing that later privatisation would bring.
Privatize more, that'll fix it! 😂
British Rail needed an improvement in presentation and service not Privatisation.
As always look at Europe, ticket prices are going down and service has always been better.UK Privatisation has not improved service,like other Privatisation’s the Rich has asset stripped and sent the system broke needing Public Subsidy.I would like to use the Rail System but have not for 25yrs because it’s way too expensive and as a disabled person can’t stand when I have paid for a seat.
If any government wants to restore confidence in UK Institutions then Utility’s have to be Re-Nationalised.
UK Railways are the most expensive in the World with ticket prices going up not down.Like anything the Tory’s have initiated or managed,it’s been a failure.
Time for a change….
Privatised rail was never efficient of poifitable even before WWII. No competition - just like water so take it or leave it are the only choices. Driving more and more journeys onto the existing congested road network is not a happy prospect either for drivers or bus passengers.
Here's my thinking, you _cannot_ effectively privatise mass transport.
Mass transport is vital to infrastructure. It means that you have about as big a market share as you'll ever get (maybe a bit more here, a bit less there).
So, year one: you get everyone on your mass transport system. You make as much money as possible.
Year two, you need to make a 5% increase on that. How can you when everyone has already paid? Raise prices. Great.
But what about year 3? 4? 5?
Sooner or later, you are scrambling to make profits by any means necessary, including cutting the services down to the bare bones, stifling any kind of improvements or extention. Your system becoming stagnant, aging, under invested, charging ridiculous prices for worse and worse service.
Oh, wait. That happened.
Regarding railways, the public private partnership as implemented in Japan has a pretty good track record (no pun intended). Would be interesting to compare the Japanese model with that of the UK and see what Britain can learn from its success.
Japan's railways aren't really in the railway business they're real estate developers. Also to consider is the great population density around stations in a lot of Japan, so rail is very useful to a lot of customers there. The JR Hokkaido network more accurately represents a system comarable to the UK's where lower population density around railway stations as well as other factors make at least half of the lines uneconomic by themselves so subsidies and or service reductions are still required.
@@BO-he6yy Yes, so it appears the emphasis still remains on *public private* then.
Unlike in the UK, there was no separation of track ownership and rail operations in Japan. The regional JR own their tracks and invest for the long term.
Japan National Railways was a low productivity operator largely run by the unions. The privatized JR selectively hired 210 000 of the 277 000 former JNR employees. Once rid of the bad apples, they could run more trains, transport more passengers, reduce delays, improve service, and maintain fares at the same level for 8 years when the bloated JNR had to raise them every year. Labor costs went from 73.6% of fare income pre-privatization in 1985 to 35.1% in 1994.
I like your videos a lot but I sometimes feel they struggle to draw together into a clear conclusion. I really noticed that with this video and the one on New Labour.
Maybe you can draw your own conclusions..just sayin..
I’m going to start a CZcams channel showcasing all the things that work well in the UK and offer good value. My channel will have no videos.
It's a political dogma attached to privatisation which causes the most issues here, particularly in those essential services, Rail being just one of them. With the vast sums of money spent on the HS2 had that money been spent on the existing infrastructure the improvements that could have been made are beyond compare to the Vanity Project of HS2.
The whole point of HS2 was to increase capacity on the WCML. The WCML is overcrowded and saturated and cannot cope with any further increase in demand, fiddling with signalling or similar to squeeze more efficiency out has been done and we are now out of options. HS2 takes the high speed services off the WCML and as a result allows an increased number of local services to be made available for servicing places that tend to be bypassed. People go on about the cost which is not all coming from taxpayers money, but is borrowed on the future economic benefit of having an improved rail network capable of keeping up with demand.
Why 100% private?. In some countries, public services are owned by the state +50% and the rest by private investors. It should be a non-profit company. The best of both worlds.
Why would someone invest in a non-profit company?
I suggest you actually look at the joint ventures between the French State and the Private Sector. These are 51% owned by the French State, and they make so much money that they actually own some British companies outright. You really need to brush up on how other EU countries didn't swallow the Neoliberal koolaid as the UK did regarding privatisation. And the profits they make and the quality of the infrastructure and service quality exceeds that of the UK. Pragmatism there, rather than 'free market' ideology, has prevented far less erosion of infrastructure and service quality than in the UK.
I’m a regular user of the TGV and last week we hit 298 km/h.
I was on a Thameslink train travelling from Farringdon to East Croydon which got diverted down a different line through the south London suburbs because of a broken down train at London Bridge. Took over 50 minutes to get to East Croydon which is about the time it would have taken to go by bicycle. Welcome to the flaky UK, on the plus side I will get delay repay.
@@adamlea6339 The SNCF has ordered 120 new TGV.s with double decker cabins. Train capacity is up from 550 to 720. More space too for passengers. Top speed up to 315 km/h and 30% less energy needed. Not bad for a state company. It’s all about choices and very long term investment. Short term shareholder returns can’t work for public transport. Big decisions soon regarding subsidies to airlines like Ryan Air in France right now. Should our local taxpayers money subsidize plane tickets for holiday makers? Let’s see.
Privatization itself doesn't necessarily need to be negative. Market competition could provide for higher and better service.
What lacks with every single project in the UK, be it water, train or other public utility, is proper rules, regulations, oversight and sanctions.
Communism supposedly isn’t half bad, when implemented properly…
It drives profit focus, ultimately over all else including concern for life.
Is profit all there is to life?
@@debbiegilmour6171 and how do businesses make a profit when they are not a monopolist? By being the best in the branch, so providing the best service for their customers.
@@ab-ym3bf In an ideal world, maybe. Unfortunately, pride, greed, arrogance and ignorance get it the way especially as time goes on and the original idealists are retired and gone.
So I ask again, what is so important about monetary profit that it would override concerns for human safety? Especially when human safety is not profitable.
Government control over transport infrastructure is important because governments can transcend simple considerations like short term profit without fear of going bust.
@@ab-ym3bf Supermarkets consist of different companies, none of which are monopolies, yet they manage to make a profit.
Great video. Got me thinking about water especially with themes water falling apart, would you do a video about that??
Record narrow Britiish loading gauge means bespoke narrow non-standard train sets means expensive train rides.
Extend loading gauge everywhere, buy standard series train sets from the producers, enjoy cheaper rides.
But Brits will never do that.
you know they'd find the extremely rare columbian 3 taled blue Newt along the line and have to build a 200 mile detour around it's habitat involving tunnelling through a 1000 year old cathedral that would add 50 Billion to the initial budget of 100 million and delaying the project 31 years
You mentioned that when railways fail, the roads get congested. Sorry. that's not right. I work for a highways operator. When the railways have problems, we don't even notice. We really don't.
I tell you why...trucks are obsolete..too many stations and curvy lines..so they are so slow.
A trip of 10 miles..1.30 hours.
Few trains..per route..abd the most important..electric line on the floor..in a rainy abd floodibg country...unvelieveble!
Never understood why companies don't cut fares to get more customers in, the higher numbers would probably compensate for the lower prices. Either way why should a public service be run for profit, money should all go back into the network not to shareholders
I recall decades ago here in the south the railways had a £1 journey from Tunbridge Wells to Hastings...the trains were packed
4:25 Can you please elaborate on the supposed failure of "Scottish Rail"? Scottish Rail Holdings is the name of the *publicly* owned company that was constituted to take over the trains in Scotland in 2022 as operator of last resort. Maybe you meant to say "ScotRail", but even that wouldn't be correct, as that's just the brand name that is taken over by whoever is operating the service on the current contract. ScotRail can't really "fail" as such, it's just reincarnated under a new operator. So far, the ScotRail brand has been used by three private companies: National Express, First Group and Abellio; and two public companies: British Rail and (currently) Scottish Rail Holdings.
I think he was referring to the failure that required the 2022 takeover.
Im really not sure you told us anything there....
If you get a "buy me a coffee" page we could send a coffee once in a while. We have been watching these videos for a while and we have learnt a lot. Would be great to say thanks!
Water gas electricity back door n h s probation all failed models of attempted privatisation.
I have yet to see any good evidence that services can ever be better provided by the private sector rather than the public sector.
The privatized Japanese Railway companies were able to run better and more frequent services than their nationalized JNR predecessors without raising fares for 8 straight years. They could do so because they were allowed to pick and choose which former JNR employees they would hire.
Both systems create the moral hazard of non rail users subsidising rail users as neither private or public ownership can break even. Beeching was ahead of his time really.
Good public transport systems benefit the people that don't use them. Imagine all the extra commuters being on the roads at peak times @@lawLess-fs1qx
There are cast iron common sense reasons why complex vital and expensive national infrastructure should ALWAYS remain in state hands.
One only has to look at the 'sewage' going down at Thames water to currently see it at its worst.
Their mounting £15bn debt looks like, surprise surprise, is going to be assumed by the UK Government.
The UK water 'industry' was originally privatised with zero debt for its new owners courtesy of the UK taxpayer taking on its obligations and yet today it's in debt to the tune of over £60bn in total over a period of 30 years.
Like the railways this was pure expedient greed and a blatant wealth transfer at the expense of UK taxpayers cynically dressed up by the Tories as a political ideology.
'Private in the good times. Public in the bad'.
THAT was the ideology.
Nuff said.
Let's not forget that the global population was 6 billion in 2000 and is now 8 billion.
And yet the Tories and the Right says privatisation brings efficiency, profitability, competition to the Railways. 🤔
Having an iron track maintained for just one type of vehicle is going to be expensive. Trains are a 19th century idea that should have died some time in the 20th century. Without subsidy and the heavy taxes on road users they would already be history as an economical choice of transport.
LOL motoring is cheap and the taxes don't cover the externalised costs.
@@adamlea6339 Motoring is only "cheap" because it is so efficient. It still manages to give the government two out of every three pounds spent on motoring which is unlike trains which spends taxpayers money subsidising the commute of the well off. How would you make up for that money if motoring stopped or provide employment for the one in seven people that work in motoring related services
I love how literally, everything in this country at any given time never has worked, like ever.. lol no matter what we do, it will never ever work.
We have to keep our competitive position in the crapness league table.
Why not allow them to actually complete, allow companies to build railways where they want, and run the routes they would like.
Local govts don’t allow rails coming in
2:05 this plot shows that prices should be halved.
Just as aside, but is it me or does capitalism actually seem awfully adept at creating large monopolies and oligopolies rather than destroying them nowadays?
The fact of the matter is is that true capitalism would entail 0 govt intervention, subsidies and regulation. The railways in this country don’t operate in a truly free market fashion and the fact that it doesn’t exacerbates the situation with prices.
The problem was mentioned in the first minute of the video. Rail can not compete against automobile. Privatization does not magically create markets where they don't exist.
I think that good public transport HELPS car drivers. Imagine no buses or trains and the roads would be horrendous. View public transport as cooperative not competitive
@@keithparker1346 The keyword being "good". If it's not "good" it *will* actively make everything worse.
@@uncaboat2399 read my second sentence
In some cases yes it can. What do you think would happen if all the London commuters abandoned the train tomorrow and decided to drive into the city?
@@adamlea6339 London and many other older cities have an advantage. The train system was constructed a long time ago with cheap labor over cheap real estate. Other places, such as Los Angeles, have neither.
Chicago, New York, have a "subway" system that was built long ago with cheap labor over cheap real estate. Like London, if everybody abandoned the trains to drive in to work, the entire city would shut down.
Places like Los Angeles, most of the time you can't even *find* a bus. My wife used to drive in to work because the only available bus would take 3 hours to complete a 20 minute commute.
The _Cross City Line_ , introduced to the Birmingham area by the public sector _West Midlands Passenger Transport Executive_ in 1978, was a roaring success. No privatisation was required.
Petition to name the first train to travel under nationalisation, Thomas, and bring back the role of Fat Controller.
Hmmm... a bit late. As mentioned in the video, operations on the East Coast Main Line were renationalised a few years ago. ScotRail also. I have no info on the waistlines of their respective controllers.
Edit: ...but I imagine they are probably fairly chunky.
Surely you don't mean Alex Salmond.
Because we have 10 layers of "managers" until the work gets done
The Nazis did a poor job of bombing our railways, so they never got the upgrade they needed unlike in Europe.
Unfortunately we won the Battle of Britain 😮
Yes that is true, European railways were so badly damaged it was easier to start again from scratch, which provides trhe opportunity to rebuild with the most uptodate technology. Britain repaired its old Victorian network and was slow to modernise.
So my diesel does around 5l/100km so from Brighton to Stansted airport it costs me around 17£ with the train 47.
Cartoon Failed England's BBC telling.
I wish the government would just let this Victorian idea just die. The costs are unjustified . Dr Beeching was right but didn't go far enough.
Uk has an Indian PM. Nuff said.
Just ban all rail
A minority of people use the Railways and it should not be subsidised by everyone else, if you want it pay for it.
No. Decent public transport benefits road users. If railways failed you'd see more road users and road travel is a nightmare at peak times so that would be even worse
Grossly short sighted. Decent public transport benefits EVERYBODY through taking pressure off heavily used road networks and reducing the externalised costs of motoring. If you really want people to pay for what they use, go further and make them pay a price for the costs externalised on society and the environment. That won't happen because the cost of motoring would skyrocket, when externalised costs are taken into account motorists are being subsidised.
And yet the Tories and the Right says privatisation brings efficiency, profitability, competition to the Railways. 🤔
you would be surprised to find out the Labour Party isn't going to privatise them either. People argue about parties or other nonsense but the establishment is one.