The UK's Failed Experiment in Rail Privatization
Vložit
- čas přidán 8. 03. 2021
- Buy your custom domain or email for 10% off at Hover.com/HAI
Buy a Wendover Productions t-shirt: standard.tv/collections/wendo...
Subscribe to Half as Interesting (The other channel from Wendover Productions): / halfasinteresting
CZcams: / wendoverproductions
Instagram: / sam.from.wendover
Twitter: / wendoverpro
Sponsorship Enquiries: wendover@standard.tv
Other emails: sam@wendover.productions
Reddit: / wendoverproductions
Writing by Sam Denby
Research by Sam Denby and Tristan Purdy
Editing by Alexander Williard
Animation by Josh Sherrington
Sound by Graham Haerther
Thumbnail by Simon Buckmaster
Select footage courtesy the AP Archive
References
[1] www.conservativemanifesto.com/...
[2] eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conte...
[3] assets.publishing.service.gov...
[4] dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statist...
[5] assets.publishing.service.gov...
[6] bettertransport.org.uk/sites/...
[7] news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/6...
[8] news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8...
[9] www.bbc.com/news/business-441...
[10] www.transportfocus.org.uk/pub...
[11] www.gov.uk/government/speeche...
[12] www.gov.uk/government/news/ra...
[13] www.bbc.com/news/uk-49346642
[14] ec.europa.eu/commfrontoffice/... dataportal.orr.gov.uk/media/1...
[15] fullfact.org/economy/do-publi...
Musicbed SyncID:
MB01WK2XIJ6Z6KV
The big irony about British Railways privatisation was that the majority of railways ended up being owned and operated by foreign state-owned rail companies.
Same with some of the utilities too
Yeah dutch owned Abellio basically owns East Anglia, most of the Midlands and Liverpool’s passenger rail now 🤷♂️
Not really a complaint though since the new trains they got for East Anglia is actually pretty good imo 😊
Yh I was thinking this as I watched the video
Always feelt dumb that our rails where nationalised by other countries but subsidised by our taxpayer
Yeah I'm sure Duetsch Bahn and Trentalia own some of the franchises, or should I say have some of the concessions now.
Sounds like the folks painting trains were the real winners.
Just wanna let you know that I chuckled :D
Just like Mormons did in Gold rush
Ain't that the truth. Our trains must have gained half an inch in paint over their service lives. Trains change operators quicker than they can paint them.
@@HMSDaring1 and even some trains came later after the company dissolved (Virgin trains Azure class)
@@DangItshere I think you mean Azuma, but yes
One important note forgotten here: many of the 'private' operators were actually state-owned companies in various parts of Europe and China. We were still subsidising them, but the profit was funding other countries' budgets, not ours.
Like what is happening with the water companies now
@@alkaholic4848every part of our national infrastructure
Hence Scottish Government sacked Abellio
@@alkaholic4848 Water, electrics, royal mail, BP...
Soon the NHS
They even tried to sell off motorways (which could lead to poorly managed roads & toll gates)
Sweden is founding china and norway. Feels good to help the rich get richer...while trains are so expensive and bad you need a car.
Update: As of now, a new Nationalized train company called,"Great British Railways(GBR)" is currently a planned state owned company that is expected to start operations in 2023. It is expected to run passenger services, take over rail infrastructure in the entire country, and even carry the famous double arrow logo from British Rail.
That sounds eerily like a name for such a company if the Little Britain gang decided to do another set of mockumentaries
But all the same old private companies are running the services behind the GB Rail logo, it’s not nationalisation at all.
It’s not nationalized ,it’s a public body to better regulate and oversee the still privatized railway service,but it’s not a nationalization as in 1945.
In my area, most transit service, rail and bus alike, except Amtrak is provided by a concessionaire. The key is that a government agency decides what services will be provided and what equipment will be used.
@@HSMiyamoto you must be in America then right?
"some of the highest fares in Europe" - literally *the* highest fares, the second-highest average rail fares are in Denmark, and those are 50% of the average UK price.
In Norway i can pay $40 for 30 days of unlimited travel with train (and bus) within 100-150km radius.
I dont know if this could be profitable in other countries, as electricity prices are much higher outside norway.
The British prices sounds horrendous though.
Yeah, because train tickets in other countries are subsidized, usually around 50%, but sometimes higher, by the taxpayer. Meaning people who don't use trains indirectly pay for them.
I'm not taking a stand on wether British railways should be privatized or not, the government there can do whatever they think will work best. But don't bitch about high cost train tickets, it's irrelevant
@@georgekosko5124 The UK has rail subsidies, too, though.
@@georgekosko5124 It's not irrelevant. Loads of things that are a net benefit to the country are subbed by individual taxpayers, even though they don't benefit directly, e.g. education helps the economy overall even if you don't have kids. More people taking the train also benefits the economy and the environment.
That's because Britain left it so late that we had to replace our ENTIRE railway stock of trains and carriages....over a very short period of time. Everything was falling apart. It costs a lot for a reason. Train stations had to be ripped down and rebuilt....whole sections of line had to be rebuilt. I remember that trains had to go slow on the old system, because the tracks were all buckled and worn down to their nubs. PS: I also worked on the railways during the last years of Nationalisation. It was in an abysmal state before Privatisation.
“Its time to get Britain back on track”. Some speechwriter must have felt terribly clever about that one.
The Tories love starting or ending their speeches with very lame puns xD
I hate that line, but I am glad that the UK has moved away from this model of private rail.
But Jesus Christ, why that fucking pun?
@@KasabianFan44 Politicians in general, not specifically one or the other.
@@Ass_Burgers_Syndrome
British politicians are by far the worst offenders though.
Maybe it’s not just the Tories - to be fair I’ve only lived here since 2011 so I never had the chance to see any other party in power (except the Lib Dems, but only kinda)
@@KasabianFan44 I dunno mate, I think politicians are alike all over. Always some agenda being pushed, and they don't give a shit about any of us.
As someone who moved to the UK in 2017, it was massively confusing being at Euston station seeing like 5 different ticket machines for the same thing.
You can get tickets from any of the machines
(That's more of a heads up so you know for next time. I agree it's confusing.)
i moved to the uk in 2017 too for uni, i was at victoria station buying a ticket to the town i was moving to (about an hour and a half away from london) and i was shocked to see the ticket was 30 pounds one way. where i was from i took the train regularly, from my town to the capital, and paid about 3 euros each way (give or take) which was for a 50 minute train ride. so in my head i assumed it wouldve been maybe a 10 quid ticket
@@goncaloalves8035On my local train line I can do a 37 minute return journey for £1.30 (with a railcard) so it depends on the route
I think it’s based more on distance than time
Edit: Also booking in advance is usually cheaper and the busier ones that go to London are way more expensive
I truly hate the mess that England is in. Our government has this obsession with privatising systems for no reason and leading to worse service. Every single process, company, and system in the country relies on a bidding scheme just like the railways which *always*, *ALWAYS* leads to a company overbidding and failing miserably. Some services shouldn’t be nationalised, I admit it, but there are many more services that REALLY shouldn’t be privatised. I’m glad some parts of the railway are properly being renationalised now however as I’m so sick of our government making these mistakes repeatedly.
The conventional approach has always been that the government exists only to provide those services which the private sector cannot. Your approach is something I'm seeing much more often these days, which is to say that the government should attempt to provide all services it can
Just take that problem, make it even worse, and now you have America lol.
It‘s not directly just privatisation versus public ownership, there can also be mixed models of half owned by the state and half owned privately. Like in Switzerland and the transport is decent, great compared to places like the UK.
Fepends a lot how you do it.
The bidding process is so obviously flawed as every company will propose their offer in the most optimistic light, which is highly unlikely to be the reality.
I can't think of a single service that shouldn't be nationalised. If we make compromises with our government (both parties btw), they will continue to exploit any loopholes they can to privatise everything
I live in the UK and had completely missed the news that the government have effectively taken over the trains. I read the news daily, how did this get buried? Husband had no idea either and he gets his news from a different site!
I remember hearing about it, but it was along the lines of "rail franchising has been suspended" which may not have caught that much attention. Especially as it happened during and as a result of "the virus" so it's easy for that news to have been overshadowed...
The Tories didn't want to shout about fulfiling Corbyns manifesto pledge, because it makes them look at best incompetent, and at worst totally malicious.
Nothing has really changed on the surface anyway. What will be interesting is what happens after COVID. Will trains keep their liveries or will there be a unified design?
@@Croz89: To be honest, I don't really see much of a need for a unified design, they can just keep a lot of the ones that exist (and most of the modern liveries were supposed to be operator neutral, weren't they? To save on the need to repaint during franchise changes and so on) It can still be useful to keep the separate identities, almost how in sectorisation you had NetworkSouthEast/Intercity/Regional Railways so people have more of an idea of what train they should get?
@@fetchstixRHD Not in my experience, the WCML services between Euston and the North West got painted from red to green (Virgin to Avanti) about 2 years ago.
I think a unified livery would look better. In my experience the colour of the train doesn't really factor in for deciding what train to get for most journeys, and the trains need to be repainted every few years anyway, just move to the unified livery gradually. Or maybe if they're owned by local government, we might get different liveries for different regions, plus an intercity livery.
Much as I wish the Minister for Transport was named Grant Schnapps, it's actually Grant Shapps.
Funnily enough, Grant Shapps used fake names for “business ventures” so who the hell knows what his right name is
Still better than "Failing Grayling" I guess 🤣
Or Michael Green, Sebastian Fox or Corrinne Stockheath
@从 Deadpoppin 从 what
Shapps is just another Tory parrot, acting as if growth in passenger numbers is because of privatisation and not from population growth and the decline of small towns and employment they offer 🤣
"No country has fully cracked the nut of fully-privatized rail."
No shit. Because it _cannot be done_ to the same levels of service ubiquity as a single entity which is charged with discharging duties, and does not have to care about turning a buck for the shareholders.
If at the end of the day, a government-run rail service breaks even - after tallying up all its revenues, after paying all its bills, if it's made a big fat goose-egg, _it has done its job,_ because its job is not to be a money-spinner, its job is to mobilize your got-damned nation. That oftentimes means the fantastically huge trains from BigCity1 to BigCity2, but it _also_ means that the people living in BFE get their two trains a day.
Mail service is the same way. You cannot privatize mail service, because people in remote areas that are in no way, shape, or form profitable to, still need to get mail - and (thankfully often) by law the mail is obliged to deliver to them, whether that is as easily accomplished as throwing a letter into a carrier's sack, or if it means you need to have a man throw a couple of bins over the back of a donkey and guide it down a tiny path into the grandest canyon of them all once a day.
People who see everything in terms of profit and loss can never see the bigger picture. It’s why people’s businesses go bust when they start doing what their accountant wants instead of what they want.
I'm so confused, hasn't Japan cracked that nut? I feel like I'm missing something.
@@FRETW1ZARD Japan has a modal share of 37% for rail transport compared to 8.5% for the U.K. It has almost 4x as many rail kilometres per capita as the U.K. There’s many reasons for this including population density/distribution and culture.
Allied to this is the other means of revenue that Japanese rail operators generate from valuable land they took possession of at the time of privatisation. They own shopping malls, office blocks and hotels. For some companies, it generates nearly 2/3 of their profits.
And it was only able to happen because the Japanese taxpayer took over €100 billion in long term debt. Basically it’s the ideal country to turn a profit from railways but it still cost the taxpayer a bomb and even at that isn’t perfect with JR Hokkaido making a loss.
Britain was never as suited to privatisation and is currently the most expensive rail service in Europe, is still being subsidised by the taxpayer and is a crappy service to boot. Worst of every world.
@@FRETW1ZARD Yes and no. Out of the seven JR companies, four can make a profit and the other three are still nationally owned in order to maintain their services.
@@Dreyno you know what the bigger picture really is? Let's suppose everything was privatized, this would mean some people simply wouldn't get services if they lived in remote zones. This can mean two things: they either stay there and pay more, or they move to urbanized zones and enjoy cheap services. There's no reason why the taxpayers should pay to keep people remote, some places simply shouldn't be inhabited
"It brought the highest number of passengers onto the rails in the country's history"
Sorry but that had sweet FA to do with rail privatization. The reason this happened was due to the breakdown of local communities having places of work literally a 5-15 minute walk away. So-called 'company towns', particularly in the north of england, had industries like mining, steel, ship building/dockyards and textiles in which entire villages were built around. During the thatcher years (and admittedly a short while before), this began to break down and more and more people were starting to commute to places of work in town/city centers.
I recall in the 1980s and 90s how commuters were paying thousands of pounds annually for their rail season tickets.
Complete nonsense and does little to explain the boom in leisure travel.
And then she shot them with an anti aircraft canon
@@Bungle-UK well that's very simple: the oil crisis.
@@truedarklander which oil crisis has there been for the past 20 years to drive up rail travel?
Also, Railtrack the infrastructure owner was renationalised in 2002 after a series of fatal crashes and since 2002 a state owned company Network Rail is the owner of the infrastructure
The status of network rail was obscured for a good decade to cover over the theft
When an industry is privatised. The new owners fire all the staff and hire contractors.
They run the infrastructure into ground, and cut maintenance.
The customers get a poorer service. Because private owners must make profits. Thus, risking the lives of rail-users.
@Rob it was bad because they were forced to fix the rails that they had neglected for most of the late 90s. When they actually had to spend money and pay dividends to their shareholders shit went bad quickly.
The biggest problem with their shitty idea of "privatization" was that the operators were forced to be separate companies from the infrastructure. That's retarded.
@@MilwaukeeF40C it's a little bit different than the United States. Many different operators use the same tracks. You have long distance and local services run by different operators. Having one of those companies own the infrastructure wouldn't be good for the other operators. Plus if that one operator wasn't making money then they wouldn't invest in the infrastructure that needed repairing. Putting the lives of people using different operators at risk.
The US rail system is very different than any other system throughout the world.
When an American train de rails the only casualty is a few sea cans.
When a European train de-rails people die.
It was when I flew from Marseille to London and then got a train to Oxford for double the price of my flight I realised how broken the UK rail network is. You are basically incentivised to own a car
Railways are taxed, planes are practically subsidised. And our wonderful PM wants to further cut what little tax domestic flights incur to prop up the industry. I thought capitalism was all about survival of the fittest...
However, Ned - did you book your flight in advance and your train just on the day? If you'd done it the other way round you'd have found something very different (especially Ryanair - lol!).
But if you'd booked both flight and train ticket in advance you might have a more equal proposition. The problem is people expect to book flights in advance and buy train ticket on the spot - you just need to align the method.....
@@danguee1 This is only true in certain situations for early bookings though. UK rail fares are absurdly expensive compared to European ones and it seems like none of these 'rebuttals' actually address that.
@@armadillito It's expensive to build a railway. The sky has always been there, and the use of it is free (in most cases).
@@gravityskeptic8697 the energy to fly isn't free though
I have never in my life heard of anybody talking positively about the privatization of the UK rail system, all it led to was higher fares and a lack of incentives to actually improve services since franchises basically weren't competing with anybody else. More so the underlying lines themselves were maintained by a state-owned agency which was great for maintaining the lines but not good for improving them, since that company had no reason too make the lines better than they were before.
The increase in commuters had nothing to do with the privatization of the railway operators, people became more expected to travel into towns/cities and in the case of a couple cities (esp. London), they started to operate congestion charges, basically charging you for driving a car around significant parts of the city and getting to the point where taking the train and tube can be cheaper than driving yourself.
Publicise the debts (infrastructure) privatise the profits (trains)
Japan though did manage to privitize it's rail quite successfully so that makes me think it's also about the poor execution.
@@MrMarinus18 Japan tossed a stupid amount of money into trains, far more than anybody else, so there was enough for private companies to profit while still upgrading infrastructure but that isn't a good solution. Japan still needs to spend more than most of Europe to build similar lengths of rail...
@@DoomsdayR3sistance Indeed but with rail I'm not always sure profit is everything. It also has social and enviromental benefits as well as indirect economic benefits.
@@MrMarinus18 Rail has many benefits and is socially important, which is why it NEEDS to be nationalized, not privatized. Saying that we can make it viable with private ownership by tossing more money than needed at it, begs the question of why it should even be privatized at all.
Here in Northern Ireland we are the only part of the UK that never privatised our rail network, so rail fares here are subsidised and cheap as hell in comparison lmao
And Iarnrod Eireann have a common ticketing system with NI Railways..
It’s not cheaper, your taxes go to it. Thats that’s the lie or nationalization
@@chrispopovich700 No shit, because we kept the railway public.
Plus the bus serves are under the same company so they have a lot of synergy especially around the bigger stations like great Victoria street or Bangor station
@@chrispopovich700 wow you’re so smart
You forgot to mention the ultimate irony. Many of the 'private' train operating companies in the UK were subsidiaries of state-owned railways from other European companies
So it still isn't a private system. We have AmTrak in the USA and it is a disaster. Aside from the Acela line on the east coast, it has never supported itself.
@@Anon54387 cuz private rail doesnt work
@@shayan_idkamtrak is government owned but their problem is that yanks don’t care about rail transport like we do and also the tracks are mostly owned privately unlike most of Europe, including the UK, where the state owns the railway.
@@tobeytransport2802 yes i did mean the rail tracks, but also amtrak is legally required by the government to turn a profit (even though it still has never been able to) leading to a situation with the worst of all worlds
@@shayan_idk ah ok- I think Deutsche Bahn is asked to turn a profit too and as much as Germans complain it is certainly better than British trains and like 1000x better than American ones.
The only winners were train logo designers and painters, with all that re-branding
Don't know much, but many of them looked great in this video
Believe it or not they aren't painted. Most uk trains are vinyl wrapped. One big sticker
@@jjskn93 Need to be, keep changing ownership.
@@flybobbie1449 sortof, it's easier to wrap a unit than paint it. Deffo not cheap. Most of the uk contracts take kickbacks of eachother. It's like leaches with ticks feeding off other leaches.
@@flybobbie1449 The actual trains themselves are owned by one of the 3 rolling stock companies. It's just the branding that gets changed
So basically, they tried to keep the good parts of a nationalized rail system and add in the positives of a free market system.
Instead they ended up with the negatives of both.
Surely it should be a matter of Social benefit and to encouraging growth in the the economy as a whole. Even a century ago the private companies were finding it hard to make profits, they could no longer be cash cows. They should be used to encourage free movement, tourism and make life better. Right now people think. Would be nice to take the train to see this person, take a day trip or just leave the stress of driving behind and relax with a drink, then see the prices. Pricing is used to discourage use to manage the lack of capacity. Make the system encourage use not force people away an have a service of last resort.
@@pauledwards2817 Thing is, you can only do this if the profit motive is weakened - which it could be, if the rail is public. A company HAS to earn money; a government, well, we can accept that their services aren't there to make money but to serve us taxpayers.
But of course the real reason here is that Thatcher's friends, and the friends of those friends down to today, are the rich people who can buy shares in these companies, suck them dry of value, and then renationalise, leaving the public to foot the bill. The Conservative party is nothing but corruption, and has never been otherwise.
Plus they exastervsted certain aspects like maintainable times and regulation due to how uncooperative the companies are where as a state own monopoly can just instigate them quickly
Lol, there is no benefit for privatization. It just adds cost to the general public, as the rich elite need to make more money of the general public.
Yes, one company operating through your station = them having a complete monopoly on fares. The tories were so adamant to tear down this when Labour suggested it, but like all their stolen ideas, implement it in the background.
Having lived in the UK, can confirm. My train ticket cost the equivalent of 2 hours of my earnings per day worked. This was a 45-minute trip which took me 2/3 of the way between two smallish cities.
"We got there first, and now we're the worst." Jay Foreman
One of his greatest quotes haha. Love Jay so much
this is from the Northern Line episode, if im not wrong..
No its actually the Heathrow one
@@kumbaya69421 yeah it’s the airport one
China should privatize their state-owned enterprises, espcially China Railways.
Wendover Productions: "If it ain't about planes, it'll be about trains"
Remember people in past used trains to travel and now planes ,planes ,planes
2020- I will make it imaginary if you don’t like it
Wendover- let’s make these people jealous
Haha yes
Nyeeuuuuuum
As it should be
@1:49 found your airplane
The fundamental misunderstanding here is assuming that public transit infrastructure needs to be profitable in the first place.
Imagine if roads were treated this way: "Sorry, your little rural towns doesn't have enough people travelling to and from it, so we're just not gonna run a road there. Good luck!"
The rail operators should all be 'not for profit'. So that the money generated mostly goes back into investing in the network, and upgrading it. No e of these companies should be listed on the stock exchange. And shareholders should either be kept to a bare minimum.....or removed out of the equation altogether. That's the future of rail in the UK imo.
The taxes motorists pay like VED and fuel tax MORE than pays for roads… several time over in fact.
Whereas rail gets 100’s of millions in subsidies and only accounts for 2% of trips.
@@StarMan_2018 ....I can assure you, rail travel in the UK accounts for more than 2% of trips made each year - London alone, ensures this. Where did you get that figure from?
@@robtyman4281 you also might be interested to know that two thirds of the Department for Transports budget is spent on rail… which again only accounts for 2% of trips as you will see from the government’s own official statistics.
@@StarMan_2018 ....again, this tells you how 'car dependent' our cities (other than London) have become. It shouldn't be a 'mission' to get from one side of Birmingham to the other, using public transport. Or between two cities close to each other, on decent modern trains (Sheffield to Manchester).
Then take Hull - a city with really poor public transport...and no rail bridge over the Humber. In 2023, that's ridiculous.
If the Tories invested more in our Railways, by improving existing infrastructure, and building new stations, then people outside London (in other cities) would use it more often.
Denton in Greater Manchester is a case in point. It's hardly in the middle of nowhere - yet remains one of the least used rail stations in the whole of the UK - why? If people live in the area, then why aren't they using the train station. Could it be because no investment in the station has been made for years, and the other public transport options which would link up with it, are negligible to non existent. That's appalling, given how near Denton is to Central Manchester.
So you can argue that too much money is spent on the railways until you are blue in the face (yep, bet you vote Tory), but in actual fact, too much money goes to road building. Far too much.
We need to get more people out of their cars (in our other cities), not make them dependent on them to get them around their city.
It's all about having good public transport connections. Most British cities don't have this, especially when compared to similar sized cities in countries like France and Germany.
These are the countries we should be measuring ourselves against (for good, joined up public transport) - not America!
You briefly mentioned Railtrack but one thing you didn't mention was that their establishment brought along a noticeable drop in safety standards. A few major (and fatal) accidents in the late 90s and early 2000s resulted in them going bust and the infrastructure was re-nationalised as Network Rail in 2002.
Wendover: _Makes a 20-min UK train video_
Geoff Marshall and Jago Hazzard: _Sweats profusely_
Seriously I saw this and thought wow that's a long Jago video
Petition to get Wendover and Geoff to make a video at a certain Chiltern station between Amersham and Aylesbury, anyone?
I think Geoff Marshall would be quite happy with the video.
Wendover will soon announce his new series, All the Airports.
Waiting for them three make a crossover project, where Jeoff travels, Wendover researches and provides all info about the former's ride and Jago tells the history of the line and its historic possibilities. Nerd-storm of the rail
Its a shame Wendover didn't mention the station of Wendover within the town of Wendover in Buckinghamshire, UK :(
Wendover is a village, but yes. The first time I saw Wendover Productions I got excited thinking someone from the village I grew up in got super successful on CZcams. Closest I got is the Slow-Mo Guys from Tring.
And they have their own station on the Chiltern Main Line.
@@geollizzie2459 technically it’s a market town 😜 but yeah it would be great for it to get some recognition
@@denelson83
It’s on the London-Aylesbury line, not the Chiltern main line.
@@KasabianFan44 Sorry. My mistake.
I get UK trains all the time and the service is ok and generally on time. The prices are insane though, each rail line is its own private monopoly so the companies charge outrageous fees as they know people have no other option
Due to delayed luggage, I had to get a last minute train from London to Norwich at night in 2018. I was an exchange student at UEA from Australia and it floored me the price I paid. For a last minute train, it cost me £54. In AUD that was roughly $104. I live in Victoria, Australia and the equivalent trip would’ve have cost me no more than $30 AUD or roughly £15. Thankfully I had just finished a holiday and had plenty of money to cover the journey.
get an off-peak next time
@@PikaPluff It was off-peak. I was taking the train around 9.30pm. Thankfully the train got back to Norwich before the taxis stopped for the night.
Everyone in the UK knew this was going to be a giant mess with insane fares. It still is.
Privatization always fails, it's just a way for political cronies to milk money from public systems
tories gonna tory though.
They're still doing this kind of shit today
I use East Midland Railways from Norwich, sometimes to Ely, Sometimes to Peterborough, and sometimes further North. I always book my tickets in advanced on National Rail Enquires at least a week before I plan to travel. The cost of a train ticket is less than it costs me to drive my vehicle, they are a reliable (no thrills) service, and most of the time I reach my destination on time or slightly early. In fact when returning to Norwich, sometimes we are 20 mins early. I wouldn't use Great Anglia (when it was its name) simply because it was more costly than to drive there, so it really does depend on the company.
@@RustyDroid it's a little bold to say "privatization always fails"
The national post office was failing until alternative shipping companies started to out do them in-services. It depends on what is being privatized. That matters.
The reason the fares are high is because of lack of capacity and inefficient mixed use mainlines. Fares are set by thr government. Thankfully, although late, we are learning our lessons and building at least some dedicated high speed rail.
Coming from the Netherlands and living in the UK for cose to 10 years, I can say the fares in the UK were absolutely insane.
Still are!
Yeah, you could see it most starkly on Eurostar. If you bought the ticket in the UK, it would be about double what you'd pay in Belgium or France.
It’s cheaper to fly to Scotland from the south of England then get a train. It’s also cheaper to drive to Liverpool by car than get a train from where I live. It doesn’t make sense
Going to the Netherlands and a train from Sittard to Amsterdam for €19?? On the day??? An absolute dream
Yeah, I worked in the Netherlands for a while and commuted from Zandvoort to Amsterdam. It was almost the same distance of my then commute from Hertfordshire into London, but about half the price. Nice double-decker trains and people could often get a seat during rush hour too.
The UK has the highest rail prices I've ever paid, and the most devastating delays as well. I've never had a satisfactory journey. "Tresspassers on the line" has been uttered over the speakers more than anything else, in my experience.
I’m a big fan of British comedy (particularly the panel shows.) I’ve learned a surprising amount about the horrors of UK rail privatization watching shows like Mock the Week, Eight out of Ten Cats & Have I Got News For You.
What’s truly worrying is that no British Media Outlet has ever made such a candid, well researched and thought out documentary. BBC/ITV/Sky? Where have you been for the last twenty five years. Why am I only just seeing such candid journalism and proper scrutiny now???
Not a single lesson was learned at any phase.
Well, this is the British Government we are talking about. They are not exactly known for learning lessons.
Except that maybe Margaret Thatcher wasn't entirely bad if she saw all this was a bad idea.
@@SaltpeterTaffy she was good for the middle class and rich people but bad for working class and outright poor people. whether she was good or bad overall is subject to debate
@@SaltpeterTaffy yeah, she wasn’t that great, but then again, there is always a balance between whether crucial aspect of our daily lives should be run for profit or for need.
@@Eltener123 Over here in the US I mostly hear the "She was bad" argument. I remember the news showing people in the streets chanting "Ding dong the witch is dead!" when she died.
And this video doesn't even mention that six years after Railtrack's formation, the government re-nationalised the railway infrastructure because Railtrack had been horribly mismanaging it, leading to disasters like the Hatfield rail crash.
I came here to mention this. Railtrack was plagued with corruption, cornor-cutting and incompetence and people lost their lives for it.
And forget Potters barn.
@@PoisonedAl See it this that makes me really question why people believe that Private corporations can ALWAYS run things better than the government? From where I'm sitting most of the time were looking at a 45% that whatever services the government was providing will actually be better privatized. Most of the time it's about the same or more corrupt then before.
@@eldermoose7938 privatize the profits and socialise the loses. Some industries should never be for profit.
@@eldermoose7938 It seems like most of the time what privatization really ends up meaning is that the profits are taken by private investors while the government still pays all of the costs to run and upkeep the system and then at the same time the service becomes worse basically everywhere. Rail is one example but also look at internet, the US has that fully privatized with basically no government intervention and it has resulted in the slowest, most expensive and least reliable service in the western world and the US is still giving ISPs billions of dollars so they can upgrade the system but those upgrades never come. Many parts of rural America still use microwave or dialup internet.
Even air travel which is generally seen as a good example is only profitable because the companies don't have to pay to maintain and build the infrastructure. If they did have to do that I guarantee that profits would fall through the floor and even without that every time there is some sort of economic crisis they have to be bailed out, especially during covid-19. And at the same time everyone universally agrees that flying is one of the most uncomfortable ways to travel and the conditions for the employees are generally terrible.
And tbh this is how it is with all companies the only reason they ever make any profits is because they don't have to foot the entire bill for what they're doing, car companies only make money because the government builds the roads, shipping companies only make money because the government builds the ports, tech companies only make money because the government pays for the science that make their products possible and so on and so on. Everywhere there is some sort of hidden bill that the companies aren't paying which is ultimately being payed by the government and in turn the taxpayer who said company then demand money from in order to let them use the services and products they already payed to bring into this world.
All rolling stock in this video I can recognise:
2:20 Class 421 and other stuff way before my time
2:42 Intercity APT (never received a TOPS number)
3:31 Class 41 "HST", class 108, class 142 "Pacer", class 158 "Express Sprinter"
3:35 Class 48
3:39 Another class 41 HST
3:58 More class 41 HSTs
4:38 Another class 48
7:10 Class 91 "Electra"
7:17 Class 390 "Pendolino"
7:40 Class 222 "Meridian"
9:40 Class 455 "PEP", class 159 "South West Turbo", class 444 "Desiro", class 450 "Desiro"
9:58 Another class 91 Electra
10:04 Another class 41 HST
10:28 Probably a 195 "Civity"
10:37 Another HST
11:03 Another HST (class 150 "Sprinter" with class 142 "Pacer" in background)
11:43 Another 91 Electra
12:06 Another HST
12:12 Another HST
12:18 Another Electra
12:53 Another Electra
13:12 Class 158 "Express Sprinter"
13:18 Class 387 "Electrostar"
13:23 B2K stock (DLR)
13:30 Class 507 "PEP"
13:45 M5000 (Tram)
13:53 Class 375 "Electrostar"
14:07 NS VIRM
14:09 NS Sprinter
14:20 Class 465 "Networker"
14:34 Class 755 FLIRT
15:39 Another class 387 "Electrostar"
16:34 Class 376 "Electrostar"
17:09 Class 220 (Maybe 221) "Voyager"
17:12 Class 185 "Desiro"
17:23 Class 700 "Desiro City" (Both of them)
18:44 Class 397 "Nova"
18:52 Another Electra
I think 10:28 is a german train. See on the upper left corner: "Sprechstelle".
@@frantastic4047 You're probably right, I was mainly going off the seating moquette looking like Northern, but now I see it again, it doesn't look quite the same
Wasn't the HST Class 43?
@@carlisroy6666 Yes, Class 41 was the prototype HST.
When you learn an idea was too extreme for Thatcher... probably not a good idea to try it. Especially not for quarter of a century.
And then her successor decides to try it anyways…
I didn't even know that Thatcher believed that railways shouldn't be nationalized.
@@ilikedota5 it's about the only thing she didn't ruin
If you read the EU directive, it was basically a requirement of membership, and as Major was so hell bent on taking us into the EU after it replaced the EEC.
@@James_Rivett Yet UK was the only country in the EU that did that.
Clearly the directive doesn't mean what you think it means.
A thing often overlooked in railway "privatization": The railway system does not get privatized, but instead owned by other public entities.
I looked up the companies from the table in 12:29 and 1 out of the first 7 is really a privately owned company:
East Midland Trains. Abellio is a daughter of the Dutch state owned railway company. Arriva is a daughter of the German state owned railway company. c2c is a daughter of the Italian state owned railway company. Chiltern Railways and CrossCountry are daughters of Arriva, so once again German....
And East Midlands Trains was then replaced by East Midlands Railway (7:40), which is owned by ... Abellio.
They really want to privatize? Go back to the Big Four!
Yes all that profit, going abroad. How does the UK actually make money?
Foreign public entities usually act like private entities, they're not under democratic control of the people in that country and they seek to maximize profits for their shareholders, the governments of other countries in this case. The british public company profits went back to the british government, which is obviously preferable.
Would love to see the bidding process and how many private companies actually were involved in the process
@@eddeduck
The entire EU, and the UK, have about 511 million people. America has 330 million.
America makes about 1.5 trillion more.
No country in Europe makes any money. 😁
It amazes me that the London Underground can be so good, then you go literally anywhere outside of it and it becomes an expensive shit-show
Innit
It's basically like the NYC subway and the rest of the US.
The London Underground isn't privatised, that's why.
@@rubberduck3y6 TFL are a private company aren't they?
@@AlexanderBrassington No, TfL is an arm of the Greater London Authority. Some of the buses, trams and non-Underground tain services are operated by private companies on behalf of TfL, but TfL itself is a government body.
I once heard a phone-in with a man who said he used to be a Conservative Party member in the 1980s, and he went to a reception with all these top Conservative politicians. They were saying "we can't compete with the Japanese or Germans for manufacturing, so we'll just stop manufacturing and the stock market and the banks will ensure the future prosperity of the nation." The man asked them "But what if the banks fail?" and they all laughed at him like it was the dumbest thing they'd ever heard. Britain is the sad story of an experiment in a country getting rid of all its manufacturing base and engineering expertise in favour of service industries. It is, quite frankly, a race to the bottom.
Very true. It's important to make stuff and not just sell stuff. Always more butter than guns if you can help it 😉
The day boat are gonna blockade anything on your island, you are gonna starve hard
""But what if the banks fail?" and they all laughed at him like it was the dumbest thing they'd ever heard." As 2008 has shown, banks only fail if the government allows them to fail
calling the British railways railroads just sounds so wrong.
Yesss
Yeah, saying "railroad" just sounds wrong.
British "Railways"
it is
@@TheMessiahOfPoo: Nah, from now on, we're calling it "British Railroads™️" , matter of fact, I mandate all train operating companies to replace "railway" with "railroad" effective immediately 😂
"We got there first, and now we're the worst"- Jay Foreman
Well for once they also were the only ones to get there.
Motto of the Anglosphere
Haha...you should travel to your former dominions for a change. That's how you make British Rail look perfect (coming from a jealous Canadian)
@@ramzanninety-five3639 As an American, I agree with this statement.
@Lambo you lot have everything compared to the United States and Canada… you can complain, just not to us.
"Why doesn't Britain own anything any more?"
Well, Thatcher, really.
We have the same issues here in Norway too. The EU law from 1991 is the thing making it all happen. The routes are now being out on tender, but the tender specifies what rolling stock you must lease from the national rolling stock provider, the exact time table and the pricing. So all the tender can compete on is how low the wages of their employees will be.
At the same time the infrastructure has been separated into its own company. And most people doesn't understand that all the delays and problems on the rail is not the train companies fault, but an infrastructure problem. It's like blaming Volvo for the highway being closed.
I feel this video missed a very important aspect to this fiasco, the years where railtrack (who ran the network infrastructure) massively cutback maintenance of the infrastructure and from 1997 to 2000 led to a series of deadly rail crashes.
Maybe if they would go back to the "Big Four" style privatization...
@@jayo1212 wasn't it untill 2002 the private company,
But what about the STONKS GAINS
I don't know what you mean... They really need to go back to the "Big Four", where the railways own, operate, and maintain their own track, trains, and infrastructure.
@@jayo1212 It was the U.K Treasury, under the influence of the free-market Adam Smith Institute, that went for the fragmented privatization model, in the name of maximising revenue, rather than the Big Four or British Rail plc models.
I am currently using the train system every single day. I can honestly say the trains have never run better. Lots of seats, trains always on time, rarely cancelled, staff to change over are waiting on the platform. Trains are very clean, toilets work. The reason? No fucking passengers :D
You probably haven't experienced Norther Rail 😂
I used to work on the Underground, and we would always joke, the system would run great without passengers.
As David Frankal said, "The only thing keeping the railways from being reliable is all the damn trains and all the damn passengers
The more people take the bus the better the trains are.
They ruin the whole thing for the rest of us
Along the years, three strategic mistakes:
1. On the basis that coal is an indigenous and inexhaustible fuel - while oil had to be imported - they kept steam trains running until the '60s.
2. The Beeching cuts of 1963. They lost wide areas where tracks were laid, and later it wasn't always possible to re-acquire. These cuts changed the nature and purpose of railways in the UK thereafter.
3. The privatisation of '94 - '97 - as referenced in this video.
Compliments for the very well researched video, it is a wonderful cross-over of a documentary with great journalism.
A very interesting take on our rail system here in the UK that only scratched the surface of what actually went on/still goes on in the industry.
Privitsing the tracks was even more of a debacle than the TOCs themselves, with Railtrack being rolled up and renationalised after just 8 years (and several fatal accidents). Our tracks are now run by Network Rail which is owned directly by the Department for Transport.
The ROSCOs (Rolling Stock Operating Companies) are also a very interesting group to look into, with some very questionable practices and benefits there.
My favourite thing about this whole national joke is how anyone who remotely understood free market economics would think this was a good idea. It's the only way I can see them giving these companies monopolies on each line.
Love the train apart from the pricing
Yeah it's great commuting on a train built in the 70s
Regarding your "Love the train" comment: Obviously you only use the train for pleasure rides, as a London commuter i can assure you being stuck in London due to almost daily rail delays, cancellations is not fun. But i do agree the pricing is a total ripoff.
@@SecretOfMonkeyIsland784 are you talking about current time or in past
@@ShubhamMishrabro Referring to the 'Love the train' bit ... not the pricing comment
Or the delays, the cancelations or the lack of seats when you PAID for a seat.
"When it annouched that the franchise was to be re-privatised, many asked why? Why should the government hand over a well-run, well-liked, well-profitable company to private hands..."
Because they, their family or mates have shares in the companies. Understand this and much of british politics makes scene.
What I’ve never understood is why does the House of Commons need 650 mp’s to represent a country of less than 70 million people when in America they have 435 people in the House and 100 in the Senate to represent 340 million people. It seems to me that Parliament might just run a bit smoother if they trimmed the fat from their House. If you do the math The house of commons only needs about 90 mp’s
105 mp’s at the most. Imagine what that would look like and how much money would be saved immediately. They could take what they save from losing 550 mp’s and their staff and use it over at the NHS. Think of all the much needed medical staff in the Breast cancer and Prostate cancer screenings departments that could be hired. At least 1,000 more medical staff. Think of all the good they would do simply by not being overworked to the point of exhaustion. While they’re at it take any profit from the nationalised railroads and send it to the NHS as well. More doctors, more nurses, better pay for the orderlies and staff.
It would have a huge impact on the level of care being provided by the currently overwhelmed staff and help make their lives a bit less stressful and more enjoyable.
@@prepperjonpnw6482 The number could definitely be cut but 90/105 seems very low. Remember in the US the states also have significant powers far above councils, or even city mayors that we have in England (Scotland, NI, Wales obviously have the devolved admins). MPs, when they do their job, act very well as a voice for their community. Removing the number will mean they need more caseworkers, so not massively reduce the costs involved.
Also unless, and its still an issue if you do, you massively reform the way we vote for the House of Commons with 100 MPs its going to be even harder for other voices, Green/Lib Dem/Ukip and the parties of the nations to get a voice in Parliament.
Also the savings wouldnt be that significant MPs salary of 82k+ the average expense of 191 is 273K per MP culled. That times by 550MPs gives you a figure of 150M saved a year or 0.018% of the UKs annual Budget of 842Bn. Or in other terms 3 days of funded promised to us by the magic red Brexit bus
@@prepperjonpnw6482 if only it was simple to make such changes...
@@prepperjonpnw6482 what you are forgetting is the Congress and the Senate are only the Federal government, the US also has state governments each with their own assemblies and House Reps.
There are over 5000 state reps and nearly 2000 state senators in the US in addition to the federal politicians.
@@prepperjonpnw6482 so you think politics in the us are something to look at to for good government? Lol
Shoutout to Shaun for cuing me in on the absolute cluster that was British rail privatization, leading me through a series of interesting and informative videos on related topics--and finally introducing me to this channel!
Caught the urban planning big eh
BIG UP SHAUN!!!
Japan and the UK is very fun to compare, but also depressing.
Britain taught Japan how to make rail, they both developed and went through a lot, and both privatised their railways, and yet they didn’t end up on the same stage of public transport.
I feel like Grant Schnapps is only there for the next "Every Mistake We've Ever Made" video
Also 12:20ish had a mistake too. Punctuality is spelled wrong
^
Also Kingussie is pronounced "King-oosie" not "Kin-Gussie"
@@THEGREATAPPLEFIRE always love seeing another Scot correcting pronunciation for me
Wrong channel bro
18:43 Congratulations on using clips that show a train leaving Leeds to the East, towards York, then actually arriving at York. Good continuity editing.
Although a different actual train.
@@ccityplanner1217 Shhh!
YORKSHIRE YORKSHIRE YORKSHIRE
Perhaps there was a points failure.
@@paulsutton5896 Real continuity would have been footage of a rail replacement bus
I have to commend you on your coverage of this subject, you’ve put this across in a very clear way in which many large UK media agencies and the government have failed to do for 25 years.
from what I can tell, the whole benefit from a fully nationalized railway system is that, while it may be a loss to run certain trains at certain times, the people using all these lines stimulate the economy enough that it's worth it (assuming that tons of people are using the service as a whole)
Do “the economics of a frequent flyer program”
Yes
Yeah this would actually be pretty interesting.
And credit card rewards.
Yea that’s a great idea
This needs more likes
Informative! One aspect that wasn’t covered in the video (probably for time reasons) was how Railtrack ended up nationalised after less than 10 years of operation.
The Hatfield Rail disaster in 2000, where a train crashed because of a overly-fatigued rail sent the whole rail system into meltdown for almost a year. Railtrack (who at the time ran the infrastructure) realised that they did not know the condition of the rail network. So to prevent another crash, they imposed speed restrictions on the whole network whilst they worked out the condition of the neglected infrastructure and fixed it.
This sent Railtrack into bankruptcy, and Network Rail was formed from it as a public ally funded company.
When I read the title I thought for sure the video would be about RailTrack's disastrous tenure 'maintaining' the railway infrastructure
It's interesting reading into Railtrak, iirc, they were kinda nationalised but not really as a way for the UK governement to keep the debt of the national books (similar to the current system of student "loans"). This was a problem as Railtrak could no longer raise outside capital which lead to a steady decline of maintenance. Basically the only reason that National Rail was formed was the ONS turned around to the government and said this is really your debt and we're going to start counting it as government debt.
Yes, the railway expertise had been sold off and Railtrack had no idea when another Hatfield would occur, hence the nationwide speed restrictions & new rails installed virtually countrywide. Looking up the Potters Bar accident also makes interesting reading.
Rail tracks final demise came when the government gave them a big lump of cash to sort themselves out and they went a paid it out as a dividend. Mind, Network rail were forced to reduce its debt by selling off all the properties under the rail arches. What was a nice little earner became a lump sum buried in accounts, and added to issues where they don't now own the property under the track, making it harder for repairs etc.
There were actually three major rail accidents in five years under Railtrack: Southall (1997), Ladbroke Grove (1999) and Potters Bar (2002).
Biggest joke of all is that 70% of the franchised rail services arent operated by private businesses, but private wings of other countries publicly owned rail services, meaning any profit made was subsidising other countries at major expense of British commuters.
Thats right, they couldnt even be internally consistent with their ideology.
Would you denationalize public roads?
The same is with railway. It does not have to earn profit. It has to serve the public, the same as roads.
“Air transport industry, rail’s most direct competitor” - absolutely not. Excluding long-distance, high-speed services, which are a tiny minority of the timetable in pretty much any country (and even more so in the UK), rail is mostly competing against *roads* and *cars* .
Failure to understand this undermines the point of the video, as most HSR services are highly profitable either way.
Not always
so Johnson put prices up for railway tickets and cut tax for internal flights....go green up my ars
“Air transport industry, rail’s most direct competitor” - absolutely not.
Agreed. Furthermore you can't compare Rail with Air, since they are run on entirely different models.
Nor can you compare it with road transport.
Air transport has enjoyed fuel subsidies and a bunch of other perks.
Road infrastructure in the UK has been almost exclusively in public ownership for a very long time, and taxation has therefore subsidised road transport.
The problem really comes down to the fact that one way or another, we pay taxes for rail transport.
The issue is how much do we wish to pay in terms of subsidy, and by extension how much of what we pay do we effectively wish to gift to private companies.
I don't say this as some kind of wish washy lefty. It is a fact that the system works arguably as well if not better in public ownership, and therefore the argument for paying shareholders from the public purse is somewhat difficult to sustain.
Who would have thought it, greed 'aint necessarily good, and the "free market" for all its conceptual attractiveness doesn't actually seem to exist.
What people need is a system to get them to and from their destination comfortably and affordably. Whether that is a rail system, cars, buses, flights, or a teleporter doesn't really matter. Nor does notional "competition".
For the future, we would be better concentrating on what the users of these systems want, namely getting to and from their destination comfortably and affordably , and how best to achieve their needs at the least environmental cost.
@@AndyHullMcPenguin it's funny how widely understood the daftness of "competition" in train services seems to be. Yet in so many other areas anything but the free market is "socialism". Fundamentally the world needs various services and has the resources to make them work. The economics we devise to achieve that are often artificial and, given they can hugely affect the services delivered, need designing thoughtfully.
For the last ten years or so, I've found Britain's trains to be overpriced, overcrowded and ALWAYS late. I have hope it will get better in the future, though...it couldn't get much worse!
Ah a child makes a comment, before privatisation trains were routinely up to 30+ minutes late on even the busiest routes if not out right just cancelled they were so unreliable rush hour morning trains that were on time were empty as no one could rely on them to get to work.
As to prices in my area the government take over came with an immediate 80% price increase on ticket prices with an immediate gutting of service great for everybody /s
@@Ushio01 I've been travelling by train for around forty years. I still think the price and overcrowding have gotten progressively worse over time. The delays have been pretty consistent IMO
@@aitchpea6011 Not in my area while cost has gone up minimum wage has gone up faster in my first job it was 3 hours wage (before minimum wage) to get to London now it's 1 hour of minimum wage. Delays at least have been vastly better since privatisation than in the 70's and 80's.
Its cheaper for me to get a megabus into London than a train. (150+ miles). That will never make sense to me..
@@Ushio01 the government take over immediately made south eastern better at least. we finally caught up with the rest of country and got wifi on trains and i haven't seen a single delay since nationalisation
We need a collab between Sam and Geoff Marshall. He would teach Sam about the railways and how to say Grant Shapps’ name correctly.
Which of Grant Shapps’ 3 aliases are we talking about here?
@@J-wm4go The ultimate in aliases was Tony Blair as Charles Linton, his middle names...
this alias used in 1983 at Bow Street Magistrate Court where he was convicted for cottaging.
East Coast is an interesting example of government doing a better job than the private sector. Usually the argument goes the other way. I mean: same trains, same track, same passengers, probably same ticket processes, same employees, same everything except for who manages the damn thing, right? “Sorry, we can’t pay the franchise costs” sounds fishy.
Privatization is bad, that's clear. But liberalization, on the other hand, can work really well.
In Italy, back in 2013, they liberalized their high speed network and a brand new private company entered service. The difference was that the public company still had all the previous services, and in many cases they even increased them. The private company came to complement the public service, not to replace it, by adding their private services to the already running public ones, increasing the number of trains/services. And that's the key point.
Ever since the liberalization came into effect, ticket prices have dropped an average of 40% and passenger numbers have doubled.
Government-run operation: *Does well*
Everyone: Impossible, perhaps the archives are incomplete
I hate the guys who say that.
They can run well if you have good management.
Worse, it isnt a coincidence, they are parroting propoganda
We can’t escape the prequel memes
They do well most of the time, as long as they were created to solve a problem rather than an excuse to not have to. Like it would be a lot better for everyone if we could de-privatise all our services in the UK.
During the early months of 2021 I had to get a train from where i live to Nottingham for work and one thing that I hadn't a clue when starting and was fortunate for staff to tell me was that If I had purchased a rail ticket that ran all day, as long as it wasnt though a specific rail company, I could use any train I liked to get to my destination and back home again.
I can see for anyone else who does not use the train frequently how confusing that would be. I thought I could only catch EMR trains at the time but it turns out I could also get Cross Country as long as I didnt get an EMR or Cross country ticket.
My father and grandfather both worked on the railway throughout this. One of the truly huge problems was the selling off of the railway properties not directly related to running the trains such as the hotels. BR used to own a lot of hotels pubs and other miscellaneous enterprises, uf you were in a rail journy you used them which helped bring funding back in, if you bought a bacon roll the 50p profit could be used to help componsate for your subsadized fare and so on. Beaching is also cursed left right and center by rail workers as the selling off of the feed lines helped to cripple the railways as mentioned in the vidio. Kingussie moved 108 pepile, now add ten to rwenty of those stations snd over 1-2 thousand more pepole per day buy the more expensive tickets from say birmingham to london, but since they now cant reach Birmingham they cant reach london. The railways were dilliberatly missmanaged by both labour and the conservatives to try snd make road the big thing, and now that rail needs to become the primary again to meet the green targets and just for general economic benefit... They cant agree how to renationalis it
And now, Norway is basically following the British franchising model introduced in the nineties... God help us.
They never learn. Or they learn too well. It's a very convenient way of dispersing responsibility between many different actors so the public never knows who to blame for problems.
@@dijikstra8 True that. Also, whoever initiated it, gets a pat on the back, in the short term and a golden parachute for exit before the consequences catch up, leaving the next people to take the fall.
Britain should follow the American model, i.e., go back to the Big Four railway structure!
@@jayo1212 and let private railways run the show and control the tracks? That would be disastrous!
@@jayo1212 Noone should follow the American model when it comes to trains, are you insane?
I remember paying $200 to go from London to Plymouth in 2006. A few weeks later I flew down to Morocco from Gatwick and paid around $100.
You mean £, right?
I'm sorry I came to this a year late. I started on the railway in 79 after 6 years in the navy. I became a driver in 91. In my opinion, privatisation was a disaster in all but one areas. None of the new companies wanted to spend money training new drivers. Privatisation coincided with a period when due to lack of recruitment in the past, there was a shortage of drivers. So, the new companies started poaching. I stayed where I was and my pay went up exponentially.
Which meant that when I retired, my contributory pension meant I could retire to France. Every cloud as they say.
And, I was at Reading for 19 years.
Perfectly researched and explained, as always, Sam!
You know 2021 will be crazy when someone calls thatcher cautious
*in the context of privatising the national rail system.
it's not crazy because it is a fact.
but that goes against the muh thatcher bad narrative.
@@spartand001 she was bad though.
@@jameslebron2403 Why? Was it because she didn't allow a foreign country (Argentina) to steal the United Kingdoms territory and the homes and properties of British citizens? I am just guessing but that is what she is mostly criticized for as if she was such a war monger that her war mongering caused the junta to invade UK territory first. I think British liberals were feeling left out and started to bitch just for the sake of it.
@@kingjoe3rd honey, no one hates her for the Falklands, more her attitude towards the working class and her treatment of the miners, steel workers, union members and anyone who got royally fucked over by her ‘reforms’
Thatcher is a British hero, next to Churchill.
There's this clip of an older Scottish lady who was filmed by a news station saying she would dig up thatcher and throttle her and bury her again and I-😭😭😭
She'd be happy with the recent announcement that ScotRail is being renationalised. Great news.
😂😂😂
In fairness it was not Thatcher (who thought that to Privatise BR would be unworkable) but Sir John Major (who had this rose tinted idea of the Private railways of old) who decided to go ahead with the breakup of cashstrapped BR (who had given us such successful designs as the IC125 & IC225, not to mention such workhorses as Class 319 etc etc.).
To attempt to make the Privatisation work they doubled taxpayer subsidy virtually overnight.
The Conservatives have now done the same over simplification of a very complicated subject in offering a vote on Brexit imo and they refused us another casting vote once it was becoming clear the problems that were piling up.
twitter.com/janeygodley/status/1180909924341211136?lang=en this one?
@@dodsg What they're 'renationalising' are the losses: the farepayer and the taxpayer will continue to be bled dry.
As someone who, until just before covid struck, had been using the UK train service a lot for over 40 years, from a passengers point of view the prvatisation of the railway was (and to the best of my knowledge still is) an utter disaster. Ever more expensive tickets, often overcrowded trains increased cancellations, and heaven help you if you wanted to make a complaint about anything; I well recall one autumn where I complained to station staff about lack of information on the platforms as to what was happening with regard to delayed trains. They said I needed to contact the train companies, as they hadn't been properly informed by them. Contacting the rail company I used most often, they blamed the company that owned the tracks. Contacting them, they wondered why on earth I was asking them about lack of notification of changes in train schedules on platforms, as they operated neither trains nor stations!
When it was all British Rail, you knew exactly who to contact about any problems (or with any praise!), and could expect a sensible answer (even if it was one you didn't like). British Rail was, in effect, owned by all of us as a service to benefit all of us, whereas private companies exist only to make their owners and shareholders richer - actually providing a decent reliable service is only secondary to profit. A particular irritation was that shortly after it all went privatised, at every stop the tannoyon the train would say "thank you for travelling with.. (rail company" irrespective of the fact that there was no competing company operating on that line. It was just noise pollution that reminded us who to blame for the ever worsening and more expensive service we were now getting. Like the privatisation of the power and phone industries, and the creeping assault of privatisation on the NHS, it was and is a completely stupid mess done for nothing more than political dogmatism rather than to provide an improved service. There is no "one method best fits all" system when it comes to provision of services - some are best served by the private sector, others by nationalised industries.
There is a big difference between airline deregulation and railway deregulation. Airlines were not required to serve certain markets. They could pick and choose which markets they wished to serve. The railways on the other hand were required to continue service to specific locations regardless of the traffic or passenger demand for that location.
I think what should have been done is that the railway operating companies should have been charged a fee to run on any rail line to offer service between any city pair or any route. The locations which were not profitable or desirable could have been subsidized under a concept similar to the US for air service called essential air service. In the US there were many smaller cities that completely lost commercial air transportation.
What also needs to be emphasized is that British Rail used to design and build its own trains within the funds provided for its overall subsidy. These designs were usually successful. Now we pay higher fares and vastly more in subsidies and have to use overseas designs that are not that good.
The only positive is that the customer experience at a superficial level is a lot better. Most BR staff were real railwaymen, loved their jobs and were pleasant but there was a noticeable awkward squad element protected by their unions who were just vile to the public. Everyone had tales.
British trains: *Are always late*
Japanese trains: "Pathetic"
Colombia: wait... you have trains?
Hungarian train: What do you mean you have a reserved seat in carriage number 12? We only have a carriages 1-6, then 47,18,15 and 7.
(True story, sitting in a corridor from Budapest to Vienna, with not a single ticket inspector to be seen to sort it out).
Well just remember what that Intercity add said.
"Intercity, Were getting there"
Atleast comapred to american services.
@@davidty2006 @Evan Wilson The US has the largest rail network in the world, the largest road network in the world, and the most airports of any country on Earth. There is a whole lot of infrastructure in the US.
@@aryanbhuta3382 thats because US is a large country, not because US has the best infastructure. Per capita and square miles most developed countries have way better infrastructure than US, even when compared to places like Chicago and San Francisco.
It would be interesting to see a follow-up video on the privatization of the Japanese National Railway (now JR), since Japan had more success after the privatization than Britain did.
Yes
That’s what I was thinking as well. JR and private railways work really well, there are exceptions IGR(Iwate Galaxy Railway) with incredibly high fares. It may be a difficult topic to research though without Japanese.
I think the difference is that demand for rail travel in Japan is much higher than in any European country, so the popular routes are more financially lucrative and can offset the losses made on the niche routes that the companies are legally required to continue operating.
@@mattdeeeezy this is precisely the sort of thing that would be interesting in a follow-up documentary, wouldn't you agree?
@@mattdeeeezy You got the point. Japanese private rail companies operate all sorts of side businesses to feed passengers to their trains. They also manage their own infrastructure and equipment, which is different from the UK/EU model, giving them more control on service planning. As rail operation itself is seldom lucrative, some minor companies only have one short operational line and focus on buses, real estate, etc.
Take a look on CZcams at the rail services in the rest of Europe(yes we are part of Europe) and you'll see just how much better rail travel is in Europe than here in the UK. Their trains are more modern, longer, faster and very importantly more affordable.Because our rail companies are mainly foreign owned they have no incentives to improve the service here.They just take the profits and run.
I honestly don't know how I only found this channel today.
CZcams sucks.
Anyway, amazing video and especially amazing to hear a North American pronounce nearly everything right, in such a Britcentric video.
Incredible levels of research.
Thanks
I had no idea that BP, Leyland, & Rolls Royce were Government owned.
Yes, prior to the 80's. British Airways as well. The original Rolls-Royce company actually went bankrupt and the govt purchased the assets to keep it going. It was split up and eventually privatised again.
@@MrDragon1968 I knew about BA,. QANTAS was government owned from 1947-1993.
If i remember correctly RR got into financial difficulty due to the huge developement cost of the RB211 turbofan engine and Ted Heath's Conservative Government nationalised the company to save it. I'm very grateful that he did.
Ahhh I get it now, I only thought of their cars
@@Martindyna Yeah it was for the TriStar. Lovely plane, big nightmare for RR and Lockheed though.
10:50 - minor correction: GNER as an entity remained profitable, but its _parent company_ Sea Containers was making a bigger loss in its other businesses than GNER was making profit and so it couldn't plug the holes. With the parent company being at risk of collapse, GNER had to hand the keys back.
That was a tragedy; GNER had the nicest trains
@@stevecarter8810 The trains that GNER used were the same trains that Intercity had used before them, NXEC, East Coast, VTEC & LNER used after them. It's only in the last couple of years that they have been replaced. There are even a few still running. GNER oversaw the 'Mallard' refurbishment programme in the mid-2000s, but the trains have remained pretty much the same since then, bar some new seat covers and a bit of a refresh under VTEC.
Problem with the whole thing is that everyone associates a company with the trains they run, like when it was announced First had been selected over Virgin to run the West Coast franchise, everyone was up in arms that they were going to use old trains that other Frist franchises use. The reality was that they would use exactly what they were told to use, the ones Virgin had used previously.
@@stevecarter8810 And GNER actually had a good customer reputation, especially compared to National Express.
She was absolutely right, some things are run for the secondary economic benefits rather than direct profits and they can’t be privatised
Hearing a reasonable argument saying thatcher was right is quite shoving to be honest
@@jmurray1110Thatcher being right about something is always impressive!
@@grahamstrouse1165 yeah I’m saying the only justification usually are fallacies and lies
Things like electricity, tap water, infrastructure and education
Thanks for this as a transport professional I have been thinking a lot of this for the past 10 years. I think one of the fundmental consideration to make is that where rail sit in the mobility mix, in which case you got to consider the car as the primary compeitior. Which most people own, is more convient and reliable. I don't think the question is just why Rail is so expensive, I think is more why the "car" is so cheap in comparision, rather then make rail cheaper how do we drive the cost of other modes up to discourage this behaviour? I think with the rise of the climate emergency, the life style changes (decline in commute for work) we are in for a big change in what the future of rail looks like in the UK. I would love to hear people view on this, is it the economic that we need to focus to make rail work or is it elimating the compeition to drive up adoption? How do we balance the income for the goverment like road tax etc.
I remember the first months of rail privatisation: after decades of neglect we suddenly had clean, efficient new trains that ran on time, and it seemed good. But that was just an illusion: the railways had deliberately been underfunded and neglected, to make privatisation look better. It was a bad deal for the government and people, but it made lots of money for the rich mates of those awarding the franchises.
It's the same trick they're gonna try to pull with the NHS
This is what they've been doing with council estates. They neglect them until they're practically in ruins (along with demeaning them culturally), to justify selling the land off to property developers.
@@withoutwithin That's happened near me, on the watch of local 'Labour' politicians.
Same thing they're doing to the NHS right now
“The railways had deliberately been underfunded to make privatisation look better”
I disagree. British Rail had been severely underfunded for *decades* prior to the ’90s - long before privatisation was even conceived as an idea. No way was it a deliberate attempt.
I live by the ECML so was apprehensive watching this that there were going to be a multitude of error. Instead I got an insightful video where I learned even more about the railway I walk past every day. Solid job, well researched!
I live next to the Penistone line which before lockdown was operated by pacers.
Not really. The example of unprofitable routes being a problem for privatisation is complete bs
@@fgsaramago look into the history of private Victorian railways and the railway boom, many many companies died from running lines that weren’t highly trafficked enough and went bust. The people living there lost service if they weren’t lucky enough to have the railroad company bought out by a competitor.
@@kaitlyn__L since the inception of the EUs idea of liberalised markets that there are provisions for the government to pay private companies to provide non profitable but essential services. It happens with different things all over Europe, thats why thats a false problem
@@Olivers-trains It used to extend much further, and formed part of the Woodhead line if you didn't know.
So the government partially privatized the trains but still forced them to service unprofitable areas this means that the companies would operate at a loss and would have to raise their prices to stay afloat.
The government also had numerous regulations that the contracting companies had to follow which further drove down productivity instead of letting the market decide what services were worth it.
If the government had allowed the rail companies to be fully independent of the government (other than having to win the bid and if the companies were not allowed to inflate their bids with unrealistic numbers) then maybe things might have been different.
This video was really well done.
It teaches an important season (at least to me.)
Either you let the companies who win the government contract regulate themselves so they can operate profitably OR you keep your nationalized system as is.
But trying to do half measures will fail.
Yeah, you're either doing free Market, serving profit and screw the people who live at quiet stations, or you declare that the population needs mobility and figure out what it's worth budgeting to provide that.
6:40 inverness mentioned!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
"Our bidding system picks the bidder with the worst forecast"
"The bidders we select keep missing their forecast!"
**surprise pikachu**
I literally said "WTF" out loud when I saw the profit at 12:38. People always complain about when government fails but don't roll back deregulation if it is shown to be a failure...
They're paranoid about the *s* word
In Australia a Government-owned company built our national broadband network. It's responsible for its maintenance and continuous improvement. They provide this infrastructure in a wholesale manner.
Private companies (dozens thereof) use the network and pay a monthly price to the wholesaler per customer and speed tier. They charge the customer whatever the market forces allow and pocket the difference.
Surely a wholesale model similar to this could be introduced on rail services, not just in Britain. Operators would compete for passengers and pay the wholesaler a rate per carriage-mile.
I'm certainly no rail expert, but I have worked with them.
It was an absolute shambles. Soon after privatization, money was being poured into increasing retail space at stations, but on track and equipment maintenance, not so much. At least 41 deaths under Railtrack's watch, and then their farcical admission that the track was in such an unsafe state that trains would have to travel at 15 mph over the majority of the network.
I have personal experience of Connex South Central on a busy commuter line. On good days, the train was just 8 carriages and almost full by the time it got to my station. Soon, all available space between seats would be packed with commuters standing very uncomfortably. Just the kind of situation you don't want in a potential accident. The rolling stock was the old slam-door rolling stock from the 1970s, officially designated as "death traps," yet the operators were given years to phase them out. Often, the train would be shortened to 4 carriages, meaning it would be packed like sardines well before it got to my station.
6:23 is where everyone Scottish watching this immediately shouted "ITS PRONOUNCED KING-YOOSEE, PAL" at their phones
Or, Kingyousee. I lived there for years.
@@nkt1 Corrected. Schoolboy error!
@@the1gip Either or, both are fine :-)
The number of seats in the House of Commons has actually varied over time. There are 650 seats now, but there were 635 seats in 1979.
What an outstanding video. As someone who has grown up on the East Coast mainline around Newcastle you better explained the whole GNER, Stagecoach, East Coast, Virgin East Coast, LNER thing better than any news outlet ever did in the UK. It’s been odd seeing the same physical train pass over the bridges on the Tyne painted in so many different liveries. As someone who uses these trains semi regularly I must say the quality of the actual trains (all now Hitachi Azumas made in 2019/2020) and their interiors is a huge improvement. This actually had little to do with the renationalisation as these trains were ordered by Virgin Trains and even have their red and white livery which LNER mostly just took over. Fares are still high but hopefully Covid reduces these. An amazing fact is that a trip from Newcastle to London on the East Coast mainline could actually be more expensive than someone flying a budget airline to a random European city, then to a UK destination. Railways like health are a public necessity and need to have the flexibility and efficiency of the private sector but actually owned and ran by the government. Just my 2 cents on the issue. Thanks again for this video
My local station was peterborough in the 90s/00s. The GNER livery was the best
For the cost of a one-way fare from Birmingham to London, you can fly to Asia. Crazy!
Rest of the world: “I guess privatizing railroads isn’t a great idea”
American Railroads: “Hippity Hoppity get your Amtrak trains off my property.”
Japan is one of the few places where it does work. They don't seem to be regulated anywhere near the same as the UK.
To be fair the US thinks anything remotely state-run as bad thanks to having an enemy that just so happened to have state-run everything. I'm not saying socialism *or* communism are good, what I'm saying is *certain* socialist policies (like a state operated and funded healthcare system and publicly run transit and rail systems) are.
Certain people use the fact that an enemy practices it therefore we should not because they are bad and therefore everything they do is bad.
@@cco53587 JR has a virtual monopoly on most of the major lines though. Most other private operators (apart from the odd charter train) seem to be on isolated routes that don't connect to the rest of the network. The UK doesn't have many of these disconnected local lines like Japan does.
@@Croz89 Most of the modern-day JRs are private companies, and there are plenty of private passenger-carrying lines across the country, including the Tokyo Metro and a lot of nearby commuter rails. A lot of their income comes from rail + property.
@@cco53587 yeah, but the thing with most of those private non-jr railways is the fact that they run on their own infrastructure disconnected from the jr network. hell not even the different jr's share their tracks.
If you take away the tracks and add some wings, trains are basically airplanes.
*On tracks
If that was the case then the first train wouldn’t have been invented in 1804 compared to commercial jet planes in 1949
Idea: The railplane. Like an airplane, except it uses train tracks instead of runways.
Yeah... there's a reason people don't fly to and from work and school every day.
Like SkyTrain from the 1980's?
I lived through this, commuting to London daily on the East Coast Line from Grant Shapps' own constancy, and seeing all of the branding you mentioned.
I went to the uk in 2019. before I left, I planned out a train ride from london, where my family and I lived, to york, where a friend of mine had recently moved to, using google maps. i determined what was the best date to leave and downloaded the virgin trains app so that i could plan my journey closer to the date. I arrived in london, and searched the same journey with actual addresses and found that in the time between planning the trip and arriving in the uk, the trains had been renamed to LNER. I was very confused but I accepted it. seeing why that happened is fairly shocking but it makes me very appreciative of the british government taking over when these companies dont live up to their expectations. the LNER trip was quite nice and I kinda doubt the virgin trip would have been from their reviews and their other companies.