The Rail Reform Bill Explained
Vložit
- čas přidán 12. 11. 2023
- Get Nebula for just $2.50 a month: go.nebula.tv/tldrnewsuk
Watch the Daily Discussions on Nebula: nebula.tv/thedailybriefing
British trains face issues of lateness, overcrowding, and cancellations, prompting government action. The Rail Reform Bill aims to simplify responsibilities and improve the railway system for customers.
🎞 TikTok: / tldrnews
💡 Got a Topic Suggestion? - forms.gle/mahEFmsW1yGTNEYXA
Support TLDR on Patreon: / tldrnews
Donate by PayPal: tldrnews.co.uk/funding
Our mission is to explain news and politics in an impartial, efficient, and accessible way, balancing import and interest while fostering independent thought.
TLDR is a completely independent & privately owned media company that's not afraid to tackle the issues we think are most important. The channel is run by a small group of young people, with us hoping to pass on our enthusiasm for politics to other young people. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, engaging and sharing. Thanks!
It's a shame how downhill the railways in this country have gone.
Downfall stemming from WW1.
It's called Privatisation
@@andycooper6085 it was not very good before privatisation
that's what you get when your country is run by Indians
Britain: Our trains suck
America: Hold my beer
I have a local 5.30am train that every single day gets cancelled due to not enough staff. Legally they have to run it so they just don't hire anyone to be on it forcing cancellations for safety reasons cause it's gonna lose them money. Train operators do this nation wide, finding any excuse possible. It's even easier to find an excuse during strikes cause they can cancel a whole days worth of trains and everyone will just unfairly blame the strikers even during non-strike days
Where abouts is this train?
Cancelling HS2 was a pretty big step in the direction of NOT fixing the railways. Sunak’s not going to accomplish much without it
It's a step on fixing it. That money can be used on existing train lines. But will the government do that probably not
@@beanhole123 Spending more money on existing lines won't do anything - the main benefits of a full HS2 is that it would have massively improved network capacity. Given that high speed trains would have been moved to the new high speed lines, it'd have allowed for more slow commuter services and freight trains to be run - something that can't be done by just upgrading the existing lines. In addition to that, it'd have decreased North to South journey times.
The real issue is poor management - they really should have started building HS2 from the North ends first, which were the parts of HS2 that'd be the most important, rather than start with the Birmingham - London section, which is by far the least.
@@beanhole123
That money won't be though. And HS2 would have been a permanent improvement to the infrastructure.
You know why?
Boomers got mad the rails were going to make their houses prices drops, environmental idiots were worried about a few daisies being destroyed and a few rabbits losing their homes and going somewhere else.
Government caved because boomers are their main voter base and wanted to use tunnels, then the price sky rocketed because tunnel digging is expensive.
So once again we can blame the boomers for screwing the future generations and the environmental idiots for crying about a few trees being cut down
HS2 is spending money on existing lines by freeing up their capacity. You can't throw money at a line to make it magically better. There is a physical limit to how many trains can go on it just like with a road. @@beanhole123
we're paying ridiculous amounts per ticket compared to other countries in Europe if i'm not mistaken. I feel like someone is getting monstrously rich from this and they will probably block any practical attempt to make things cheaper and better for everyone, as is the case already with energy bills etc. This government is an Oligarch's wet dream....
Oh, there are several benefactors from the rail industry's current set up. But I'd say by far the worst are the ROSCOs, the companies that own all the trains, and then lease them to the companies that actually run the services. The Government puts in roughly £9bn per year (if I've remembered the figures correctly, which I may not have done), and £1bn of that leaves the industry as ROSCO dividends.
The individual franchisees also continue paying out dividends to their shareholders even while their services are collapsing, and at the same time insist they don’t have enough money to maintain safe staffing levels
@@mastertrams someone's done their research!
The cost of UK rail doesn't run much higher than their European alternatives. Same with HS2's construction, middle of the road expenses.
The reason for euro prices being cheaper comes down to government subsidy. European rail prices are hidden by redistributing the cost of your rail ticket over all of the citizens in your country. Your neighbor is forced to help pay for your ticket.
@@mastertrams Perhaps the government ought to stop giving them that money.
They should never have been allowed to Privatise the railways, or the buses, Royal Mail, British Gas, BT, Water...they sold off our assets with no Referendum and squandered the money. They even sold off the vast majority of our gold reserves for pennies. It's absolutely disgraceful.
Public ownership of the railways now.
Yes it's what we need but they won't do it
But to add on to my post this bill is a step in the right direct fixing our railways
@star-lord5356 it's happening but slowly. I think the government own LNER and TPE now but its stupid First Group have gotten a 9 year contract for Avanti the worst
Close to half of services are currently publicly run
@brandenburgquentinthe3rd532 Ironically, the government already owns the vast majority of the railways. It's called Network Rail.
It's because of the state owning the rails that our infrastructure is so poor. Why would a private company invest in infrastructure it's not permitted to own?
You know privitisation is a _reallly_ bad idea, if Margaret Thatcher of all people is against it.
Margaret Thatcher was against privatisation? I was not expecting that.
Its litteraly idiotic beyond compare. even ignoring the problem of unprofitable routes, its litteraly impossible to have actual competition in railbased transport. You can't pick between multiple trains, you're forced to pick the train that can get you at your destination at the earliest possible, you can't have multiple trains going to and from the same locations at the same time. So by its own nature it becomes a bloody monopoly. And the twits than tried to jury-rig competition onto the system by having them compete in bloody PROMISES, so ofcourse it would fail. Goddammit, this is what you get when you let ideology (free-market/thatcherism in this case) blind you to reality
@gertjanvandamme2068 you are wrong. Firstly you are not forced to take train that arrives first. I can pick the one that arrives 10 minutes later if I want to. Secondly you can have and indeed there are trains fron same point to the same point that leave at the same time. Some take same route some take different route some share part route.
@@Speedkam it's still massively inefficient to have 2 trains to go from the same place to the same place at the same time (which requires 2 tracks in one direction, which doesn't exist in most of the places) just to have competition. At that point you're doubling the cost just to have competition on rail. It's just way cheaper and more efficient to just have 1 organised by the government. Maybe this could work on the busiest of tracks, but outside of that it doesn't work anywhere. So there is fundamentally no competition on rail. And while you theoretically can wait for another train because you like the company better (if there are actually several companies on the same track, which almost never is the case), that's of course not really practical and nobody is willing to wait 30 min just to get a slightly less shitty company to ride with. And you take the 1 route that makes sense, you don't choose the railway company and then based on that where you want to go, you have to go somewhere and then decide whether to use the train or not. There's not really any competition on rail, only between rail and other modes of travel, which is barely competition at all.
@@Speedkam 10 minutes later?
Lol try 30 minutes. Plus most train passengers are commuters who need to arrive at an exact time. These aren't just tourists who can afford to arrive later
Absolutely not! He cancelled HS2, Northern Powerhouse Rail, Transpennine Upgrade and there is no way forward for Crossrail 2. If the Tories had one saving grace, it's that they were at least [theoretically] committed to investing in infrastructure - and now they've completely u-turned on that.
TPU hasn't been cancelled, where is your source?
hs2 isnt cancelled. Phase 1 is still being built. However as we have seen its currently a economic black hole. How many tens of BILLIONS are we going to spend untill we realise we are being scammed? Yes we need the infrastructure, yet the only people benefiting from it are the ones building it. How is it that we struggle to build 140 miles for a pretty mediocre high speed rail line for £50 billion yet the japanese can build a bullet train line that spans 160 miles for £5 billion? If you look at the current cost of their maglev line its roughly £52 billion. for a 177 mile line. A fucking maglev track... its a disgrace
I think the answer to any question starting with “Has Sunak …” is usually “No”.
Key exceptions apply for any question relating to negative things: "Has he messed everything up more?"
Ah the Windsor Framework was good and they have undone a decent amount of the mess truss made but yeah a mediocre enough PM by U.K. Standards.
not going to lie its about time we got British Railways back
It’s easy to privatise. Much more difficult to nationalise.
@cameronleach5902 that’s the problem. They always bring up the failed “privatised” system. It was basically owned by the government, not the company. You cannot get it in their heads. BTW, I'm left-wing guys. I can just see beneath the surface.
Nationalise the trains indeed. And gradually start to improve the infrastructure.
They can be profitable for the government, and then they can reinvest it back into the infrastructure and technology instead of private owners' pockets.
@@cameronleach5902no it isn't. There are several nationalised train operating companies. You just need to take back the franchise. You don't need to buy back a company like a government would normally do to nationalise an industry.
@@user-ds8rj2vc4v I think you are right up to a point,
Nationalise, but compensate the failed franchises,
pay into the system from taxes/borrowing,
get to a working system,
reprivaties, to allow our mates to make a profit for a while,
take-on over paid executive positions for a while,
pay-out shareholders using loans, until we have crippled it again,
renationalise
Seems like a plan.
Bit of a correction. Train Operating Companies (TOCs) don't run franchises any more they have management contracts. While it may sounds like a technical difference it actually a very different structure financially.
Under the franchising system TOCs would bid to run a service and in return for running that service they would receive all the proceeds of ticket sales, the idea being they would be incentivised to run on-time, clean, regular trains to make as much money from tickets as possible. Unfortunately the bottom fell out of the commuter market as people moved to WFH meaning that several franchisees "handed back the keys" leaving the government to run things.
With COVID the franchises were making zero money from tickets and many wanted to "hand back the keys" but the government (which is committed to privatisation) changed things to management contracts where the companies hand all ticket revenue to the treasury and in return they get a flat profit margin (usually 3%) with the chance to get more for hitting certain goals r.e. service and punctuality. This means that there's basically zero risk to the TOCs as they have a guaranteed profit just for turning up.
Railway should be a public service.
Go and visit your BFF country Argentina and experience their trains to see what your proposal would bring to Britain: Peronism.
I don't think we can afford any more "public services". Deficit is far too high. If anything we need to start massive cuts, double digit percentages minimum.
@@joeblogs6598and why is that?
@@joeblogs6598we've already tried austerity for 13 years. It doesn't work
The last time Britain had public railways it was terrible, it was in the 1970s where trains were always late and inefficient.
“Quick to adopt rail systems” is a very bold understatement of birthing railways
I took offence to that also considering that We Created them
@@mightymizzar9672 Oh dear. I suggest you write an angry letter to your MP. This cannot stand.
@@FantasticOtto why they are just as useless as this commentator if they can not distinguish between inventor and early adoptor....
Note that many of the problems with the UK rail system stem from being the inventors. In particular the loading gauge is a huge hindrance.
@@jonathanbuzzard1376 it does prevent the importing of alot of foreign stock.. meaning anything that has to run in britain needs to be custom built to fit on britain's rails...
On plus side everything built for britain's rails can easily fit everywhere else..
All the problems that we've had from the Privatisation of British Rail and this was supposed to make our railways cheaper and better for the customer and the Finances, we pay more than before Privatisation, this is a total mess that the Government won't admit to it, they keep practicing Tory Ideology that Private is best! Germany, France , Netherlands bought into this mess, and they all have state run railways
Dutch railways is so incredibly expensive and NS keeps getting sweetheart deals from the government. I won't be surprised if something shady is going on there. Public transport should be free.
@@lo-filogicso you want slave labour for the workers?
Because it’s not actually private, it’s a complete govt-private interlocked mixed market, so it just cronyism, nothing about it is an open private market in the same way food or clothes are hence why those are cheaper than they ever have been and more available
@@jacobmacdonagh4070 Yes, it's not fully open, because you can't have a fully open railway market. You can't just build a 1000km rail net with a bit of crowdfunding or a loan from your local bank.
So with that stupid privatization is't now worst of both worlds.
@@steemlenn8797 I mean you can, that’s exactly how the railways started and it’s completely possible today if the government got out of the way. There are many companies who have enough money to build railways haha
I think it needs underlining that Thatcher of all people stopped short of privatising the railways. I always wonder if they couldn't be bothered/didn't get around to it, or if the government at the time had guessed that it would be a mess
Everyone with a brain could figure out the current privatisation of railways doesn't work.
Just think about what makes capitalism work? -> competition.
Is there competition between rail companies in the current privatised system? -> NO
Result => bad service for high prices
Watching this on a lovely, frequent, punctual train in the Netherlands. 😂 I’m sure it’s not as bad as the absolute embarrassment that is the Irish public transport system back home
That's true, the irish republic inherited an impressive rail network from its time as part of the UK but it just couldn't afford to keep it and had its own version of Beeching cuts, which of course impacted on the Northern Irish routes.
I'm told German trains don't run on time also
@@JohnRowsellDepends where you are. If you are in the densly populated west/rhein ruhr or around big cities, for example Hamburg, then they are often late.
If you're in the sparsly populated eastern half of Germany (bar the western part of Bavaria) the trains run mostly on time due to not as many trains running.
@@StopTheThirdWorldEnterin-qu1bq I agree. Most trains are mostly punctual most days, the main problem is the price, but I am seeing things from a Southern perspective...
I'm not that well versed on just how punctual dutch trains are, but as a belgian and the second country to adopt railways its kinda embarrassing how much of a running joke our trains being late has become. Maybe we're overreacting, but i'm kinda jealous
Whenever a headline has a question, the answer is 'No'
Stop showing photos of politicians wearing hard hats and high vis vests - Sunak is as much of a labourer as I am Spiderman.
We didn't 'adopt it' we invented it !
it litterally began in this country.
Then spread like wildfire because "Hey look how much coal we can move so easily for money!"
@@davidty2006use coal to carry more coal, see how genius the 19th century engineers were?
@@bepisguy6963lol
Guess who's reaping the profits.
my god just renationalize the rails
From the speech: "prioritising the journeys that people take most often" - so, the good lines that people already use a lot because they are good will get better, the bad/expensive/slow/unreliable lines will get put to the back of the queue of improvement. Great.
Yep, just the urban rail lines. F*ck the rest of us.
Not necessarily.
I'm in the South East. Our routes are heavily used because of the connections to London and France, yet our trains are just terrible in every way.
-Expensive
-Gross
-Late (or don't turn up)
-Outdated
In the same way that a private company gets more money from popular routes, government gets more votes from popular routes.
This is how reality works, socializing things cannot change reality.
@@joeblogs6598 The private company can get multiple fares per person from the popular routes; the government is limited to one vote per person, so the incentives are different - improving a popular, but already adequate, route is less likely to get votes than turning a bad route into a tolerable one.
From what I've heared there are almost no good rail connections anywhere outside of London really. For context: in the Netherlands in most places in the country there is a train every 10 or 15 min, and every 30 min is the absolute minimum, from the early morning till past midnight to everywhere in the country. It makes somewhat sense to at least make the trains that are actually somewhat used a more viable mode of transport first and give them regular service hours.
They’ll do anything but renationalise. It’s really pathetic
Scottish Trains are under Scottish Government control via ScotRail. Tracks remain under Network Rail, franchises have been got rid off.
Regarding the astronomical costs involved in running the Railways, look at how the Rolling stock is managed! It's the gravy trains (not intended! but hey) of all gravy trains!
Correct also the Cross Border Caledonian Sleeper.
The tracks are no longer under the control of RailTrack. That company went bust in 2002 after incidents like Potters Bar, Ladbroke Grove, etc. to be replaced by the publicly-owned Network Rail.
Correct, my mistake repeating the historic context in the video above@@mastertrams
you realise that railtrack was such a failiure it had to be renationalised?
£18.20 Northern Open Return Liverpool Queen St to Manchester Piccadilly
£14.90 ScotRail Open Return Glasgow Queen St to Edinburgh Waverly
= 18,1% lower fare
Distance
31 miles Liverpool Lime St to Manchester Piccadilly
42 miles Glasgow Queen St to Edinburgh Waverley
NorthernTrains is owned by the English Government
ScotRail is owned by the Scottish Government
Why does England's Government charge 18% more to go from Liverpool to Manchester
than Scotland's charges to go from Glasgow to Edinburgh?
Saw a great Twitter post before, someone asking instead of giving out subsidies, we should instead be getting equity stakes (why give out the money for free when we can buy part ownership)
Seems reasonable and would be a fair way to slowly bring back into public hands. Didn't they do that with NatWest as well in 2008?
subsidies for ownership?
Or just allow a publicly owned coop to take over the franchise when they come up for renew.
We didn't 'adopt it' we invented the rallway system
Rail will always be economic drains. but you have to take into account all the industry that it enables
That drain used to be cancelled by private businesses owning the network. A steel mill would have it's own tracks that passenger trains could use too.
@@joeblogs6598 lmfao
@@gonzoengineering4894"Yeah, let me just make some random bullshit up that adds nothing sensible to the conversation
No.@@joeblogs6598
I've seen pics of your overcrowded trains. As a Filipino, I tell you that it's a far cry than ours.
'For a country that was quick to adopt a rail system and then expand it, it's not exactly a great *indictment* that this is the current state of rail travel in the country.'
I think *endorsement* is what you meant.
If Rishi does pass this bill. It will help his polling. And he needs to implement quickly. Starmer should want to pass this bill through quickly as well to support the middle income.
A socialist suporting the middle income? Which sick breaksfeastdid you have?
Labour are working towards renationalising the trains.
@@2dradon2 this is in effect nationalism of the rail systems. They are giving contractors les control
Yet another rail reform, I have lost count of how many reforms there have been since I started on the Railways. The reality is that over involvement (interference) by Politicians and civil servants have created a mess. The Railways have historically supported other industries, helped to create jobs and moved the bulk of munitions and equipment for D Day.
the king just looks so tired and disinterested reading his little printout that someone gave him
It's contempt. He hates having to deign to talk about anything to do with his subjects. We should replace him with a directly-elected President, like Ireland.
Sunak couldn't control a Hornby train set.
Politicans are either too corrupt or too incompetent to actually do what's needed to be done.
The first step to fixing the rail network is to bring it back to public ownership.
Not whatever BS the Tories are trying (and failing) to do.
nope, it's the unions that need breaking up
ail workers and train drivers in UK are best paid in Europe while not the best in service quality
Estimated average gross monthly earnings (in euros) of train drivers in 2021 :
5542 (UK),
4763 (Denmark),
3173 (Ireland)
3030 (Luxembourg)
3030 (Germany)
3010 (France)
2947(Netherlands)
- according to Eurostat, the statistical office of the EU
Rail network is already owned by the state. "Network Rail"...
"Public ownership" means run by politicians mate
@@zurielsss Lmao I guess people being paid is bad.
They're well paid because they strike, that's the point of a union@@zurielsss
It is hard to imagine the level of resistance this bill will receive from the private sector. I don't think they will limit themselves only to lobbying and propaganda.
To be honest, that’s likely the answer to why this is only a draft bill as noted in the video. They have no intention of bringing it in because of the private sector resistance.
It's a step in the right direction but stops short of public ownership. It's also unclear on what this means for devolved lines, such as Merseyrail and rail in TfGM, which may seek to have local franchising of routes in the future.
Basic mobility and transportation creates economic benefits well beyond just ticket sales for everyone regardless of if they use it or not. It gets people to their jobs where they can produce for the economy and to commerce where they can spend money. This is why profitability can't be a determining factor in whether or not to run a specific route and why private rail just ends up with worse, more expensive service. When routes are cut, people either have to simply not get to work or have to purchse and maintain a car to continue going to their jobs, which is more expensive for both the people who have to pay for a car and its maintenance and the state that has to maintain the roads.
wtf is the point of the companies running it then if the govt has all control? is this a way to make it harder for labour to nationalise?
Probably some "Yes, Minister" type reason.
I doubt Labour has the balls to Nationalise the Rail Service unfortunately.
@@Priception Why would they get rid of a useful vote extracting tool? "Vote for us and we swear we'll nationalize the rails!"
@@Priception Official policy is to simply not renew the franchises.
So will proberbly take time but it's cheapest way of doing so.
At least you guys have a ton of trains for local public transit! - signed, an American
We lost most of them to the Tory Beeching
America is a very low bar to compare with
@@ttbrown9700 TBH they dredged up all the tracks and trams for the shiny interstate... and then expanded the city like America's ever expanding waistline... outwards.
if you want change, vote for it. if not, stand for it. seating on your arse ain't gonna make transit comeback to your towns...
In London, yes. In the rest of country, not so much. Regional commuter rail isn't bad, but urban transport lags way behind most european cities.
I hope this helps make some trains stuff in the UK easier and maybe after that they expand the routes to many new cities.
... what is the point in that? Just renationalise the effing thing, like the vast majority of British citizens want.
With markets tumbling, inflation soaring, the Fed imposing large interest-rate hike, while treasury yields are rising rapidly-which means more red ink for portfolios this quarter. How can I profit from the current volatile market, I'm still at a crossroads deciding if to liquidate my $125k bond/stock portfolio
The market is volatile at this time, hence i will suggest you get yourself a financial-advisor that can provide you with entry and exit points on the shares/ ETF you focus on.
very true, I started investing before the pandemic and that same year I pulled a profit of about $600k with no prior investing experience, basically all I was doing was seeking guidance to make a from a financial-advisorr, you can be passively involved with the aid of a professional.
wow that's stirring! Do you mind connecting me to your advisor please. I desperately need one to diversified my portfolio.
Mayra Femia Hetrick
That's my licensed Financial advisor you can easily look her up, Thank me later!
UK POV 💀
Short answer no
Long answer is only fix is put back into public ownership
Or completely privatize the entire system.
British rail got circa £2bn in funding in 1992. Adjusted for inflation that’s about £4bn now. We spend £16bn now on a far inferior service. Privatisation is just such an epic failure, a complete piece of shit. No public utility should ever be for profit, especially natural monopolies. It’s pure insanity
Whilst your point is still valid. It’s worth considering that between 1992 and 2020 (pre Covid) rail passenger numbers increase by approximately 120% (double and a bit more). So naturally we would expect subsidy to go to £8 billion.
That’s a very good point. I guess you could also argue that since privatisation there’s been almost no infrastructure investment (or relatively none to help with capacity or modernisation which would bring down costs in the long run) just profit taking. So long term costs could still be lower. Or even at £8bn we’d have a far superior rail service and be spending half of what we are now. Privatisation just cannot work on natural monopolies.
It's a good plan, but it'll probably come far too late to save the Tories. Also, in my experience reliability and quality of service has significantly improved compared to about 10 years ago (strike days notwithstanding), my train is rarely ever late by more than a couple of minutes.
The only problem now is the high cost of tickets - my 30 mile return commute to London now costs £28, a sum that can buy me enough diesel to drive 180 miles. Taking the train simply doesn't make any sense otherwise unless work is paying for it. Make the tickets cheaper and I'll take the train instead of driving, and I suspect many others will too.
Yes, he fixed it. Fixed it in place so they may never move that is.
2:40 they can just start running smaller and cheaper trains to the less populated areas and can still make profits.
I really enjoyed this kind of video.
The fact we still have an old dude dressed in jewels reading out the new reforms, as if he has absolutely any responsibility towards them, makes me think we are still living in the medieval era
No mention of the ROSCOs? That's where the money goes.
What are ROSCOs ?
@@bertieclayton4865 Rolling Stock Companies. They are the companies that own the trains, and lease them to the operating companies. Often very old stock that has paid for itself several times over.
@@bertieclayton4865leasing companies who own the trains. We have massive amounts of perfectly good modern trains sat around doing nothing because either the owners want too much money (like the 10 year old former Stansted express trains), or the government don't want to pay for them (crosscountry trains are constantly overcrowded and there are empty spares sitting around). So now we have to pay more for the things we originally owned, and then sold off for cheap.
No discussion of rail privatisation is complete without mentioning the ROSCOs. The companies that lease rolling stock to the franchises. This is where most of the profit is extracted from the system and they get their money regardless. They were also all initially owned by private equity companies whose shareholders featured many of the government ministers who oversaw the privatisation. No reform is going to make a difference unless it first and foremost tackles the rolling stock issue.
You might consider telling us whom William Schapps is and why this bill is named for him?
The sheer amount of tax payer money being gifted to the rail companies to pass to their foreign shareholders is mind blowing.
Those foreign shareholders being other counries governments! Basically subsidise their railways. No wonder their tickets are so cheap over on the continent.
@@hawk_ness this is how it feels to be American quite often. Taxes get spent on stuff with revenue going to foreign governments while the domestic product suffers.
@@hawk_ness And yet over on the continent our railways are getting ever worse because the governments seem happy to buy fancy new trains to replace rolling stock that's just fine, but can't be bothered to keep the regionals running and are perfectly happy to let the private companies in the middle profit.
I think people are a bit harsh on british railways. They are far from perfect but they are still very safe, frequent, and fairly extensive.
Just too expensive
Do you perchance live in the South?
a 35 minutes ride costs £24 from the airport to London with the Stansted Express. In Germany for the same price you can go from Frankfurt to Cologne and that's a 3 hours journey.
@@nailil5722is that just a slower train?😊
On a train rn and they couldn't find a member of staff they needed for half an hour
The new system sounds like it could work, interested to see how it pans out
The "king" couldn't give a shiii about public transportation services.
He's got his own train.
He used trains MORE than the current prime minister.
that says something...
Public transport is pretty easy to organise and run as we found out from 1880 to 1980 in the UK. To make a complete horlicks of it takes some doing ie a government that has been in power for the past 14 years has managed just that.
That 'Return of David Cameron' video is taking longer than I thought.
There are services that should be public and public only:
Healthcare / Transports / energy / communications, ) etc.
Honestly the real problem is choosing the cheapest and not who's the most likely to deliver.
We have the same problem in construction: thanks to competition, we only choose the cheapest builders. If builders want a chance to get a contract, they need to lie and say they'll get it done below the real price tag or someone else will. So, this system reinforces lying to get the contract and try to keep it, instead of delivering a real quality service.
Because I could eventually come and say "I can run those routes for £0.1 a year !" and get the contract even if it's ridiculous. Of course nobody can run a train line with that budget. But they'll still choose me somehow and act surprised when shit hits the fan.
You can't be cheap and expect 5* services.
Also it's quite funny to see a right-wing government do what leftists have been asking for : MORE REGULATION, LESS PRIVATISATION
You know, certain people say that the rail system has "fallen" a long way from where it used to be. Yet if you go back and look through newspapers and media broadcasts, people in general have been complaining about the trains ever since they've existed.
I needed to know why they don’t dig a tunnel and do an extension for the main line Train so that they can extend the unused abandoned underground train stations. Why couldn’t they use the part D78 Stock train doors on the sides and also restructure the front face of the A60 and A62 stock that includes the class 313, class 314 and class 315 remix and make them all together and also redesign them an overhead line and also make them into Five cars per units and also having three Disabled Toilets on those Five cars per units A60 and A62 stock trains and also convert the A60 and A62 stock trains into a Scania N112, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Engines and also put the Loud 7-Speed Voith Gearboxes even Loud 8-Speed Leyland Hydra cyclic Gearboxes in the A60 and A62 stock, class 313, class 314, and class 315 and also modernise the A60 and A62 stock and make it into an 11 car per unit so it could have fewer doors, more tables, computers and mobile phone chargers. A Stock Trains and also having 8 Disabled Toilets on those A stock trains. why couldn’t we refurbish and modernise the Waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel and make it larger and extend it to the bank station, making it into a Triple-Track Railway Line so those Five countries such as Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden to convert the waterloo and city line Triple-Track Railway tunnel into a High-Speed Railway lines? The Third Euro tunnel Triple-Track Railway line to make it 11 times better for passengers so they could go from A to B. Then put the modernised 11 car per unit A Stock and put them on a bigger modernised Waterloo and city line Triple-Track train tunnel so it could go to bank station to those Five countries such as Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden. The modernised refurbished 11 cars per unit A stock could be a High Speed The Third Triple-Track Euro Tunnel Train So it is promising and 47 times a lot more possible to do this kind of project if that will be OK for London Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden. oh by the way, could they also tunnel the Triple-Track Railway Line so it will stop from Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex so that the Passengers will go to Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland and Sweden and also extend the Triple-Track Railway Line from the Bank to Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and Essex Stations so that more people from there could go to Australia, Germany, Italy, Poland And Sweden more Easily. Why couldn't they extend the Piccadilly Line and also build brand-new underground train stations so it could go even further right up to Clapton, Wood Street can they also make another brand new underground train station in Chingford and could they extend the Piccadilly Line and the DLR right up to Chingford? All of the classes 150, 155, 154, 117, 114, 105, and 106, will be replaced by all of the Scania N112, Volvo B10M, Gardner 6LXB, Gardner 6LXC and Gardner 8LXB Diesel Five carriages three disabled toilets are air conditioning trains including Highams Park for extended roots which is the Piccadilly line and the DLR trains. Could you also convert all of the 1973 stock trains into an air-conditioned maximum speed 78 km/hours (48 MPH) re-refurbished and make it into a 8 cars per unit if that will be alright, and also extend all of the Piccadilly train stations to make more space for all of the extended 8 car per unit 1973 stock air condition trains and can you also build another Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive Companies and can they order Every 67 Octagon and Every 37 Hexagon shape LNER diagram unique small no.13 and unique small no.11 Boilers from those Countries such as Greece, Italy, Poland, and Sweden, can they make Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive speeds by up to 147MPH so you can try and test it on the Original Mainline so it will be much more safer for the Passengers to enjoy the 147MPH speed Limit only for HS2 and Channel Tunnel mainline services, if they needed 16 Carriages Per units, can they use those class 55’s, class 44’s, class 40’s and class 43HST Diesel Locomotive’s right at the Back of those 18 Carriages Per Units so they can take over at the Back to let those Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s have a rest for those interesting Journeys Please!!!!!!, oh can you make all of those Coal Boxes’s 18 Tonnes for all of those 147MPH Mayflower and Tornado Steam Locomotive’s so the Companies will Understand us PASSENGER’S!! so please make sure that the Builders can do as they are told!!!!!!!!!!!! And Please do something about these Very Very Very Very Very Very important Professional ideas Please? Prime Minister of England, Prime Minister of Australia, Prime Minister of Sweden, Prime Minister of Germany, Prime Minister of Italy, Prime Minister of Poland and that Includes the Mayor of London.
You know the world is tired when the monarch of the UK looks like he's about to drift off while reading.
Trains are way too expensive now, even with a railcard.
Wrong
@@widodoakrom3938 How is it wrong?
@@WildShakz seems u don't know anything about science and engineering
@@widodoakrom3938 All I did is state a fact about train ticket prices. What has that got to do with science or engineering?
I'm talking about how in the past few years, prices have skyrocketed.
This is why I love TLDR News, never really understood how the railways got privatised and what the reason or 'incentive' was. Really fascinating to see the original reasons for it as always thought it was a stupid idea but at least now I could see why they thought it could work.
Did they explain it?
No they just said John Major did it.
They completely skipped over that British rail was a complete shit show, trains we smelly, dirty and regularly 4 hours late.
Meanwhile after privatisation Virgin trains introduced tilting trains which increased reliability and reduced journey time.
@@SaintGerbilUK British Rail was bad because of a bill the Tories made which is that it has to be self sufficent. So the reason why the trains sucked is because British Rail was forced to cheap out. Virgin trains was good because back them they picked bids based on how good they were. Now its about how cheap they are.
@@Mgameing123 it should be self-sufficient we have enough things adding to the debt an inflation the currency.
The money pit isn't endless what do you think caused the cost of living crisis?
I can't argue with you about Virgin trains being good, and not cheap.
@@SaintGerbilUK Self-sufficient railways would be more expensive since the government will need to pay for the additional road repairs that will come with more vehicles on the roads.
@@Mgameing123 roads pay for themselves and are self sufficient, they actually provide more money which is used for other programs.
They are also quite cheap by comparison unless you start to put something like ULEZ on top, it could be cheaper still since the majority of car fuel costs are taxes and levies including vat, green levy, NetZero charges and so on.
I know I'm a radical for thinking that people who use the railways should pay for using the railways.
Much like people who drive should cover the cost of maintaining the roads and road infrastructure.
Hopefully, Sir Starmer's Labour Government will expand on GB Rail
Nice picture of a retired type of train in the thumbnail...
The Israeli bus system works in a similar fashion: the govt sets the routes, schedules and prices, then companies bid on regional blocks. The main difference, I think is that the franchisee is selected according to financial criteria and past performance with the aim of optimizing for the ability of the operator to deliver a good service. Then there are continuous checks and if the govt decides that the operator is not performing well - they can cancel the contract with a short notice - this happened recently where I live, and the new operator is very good.
that's the same for singapore too... many presumed it was based on the TfL version.
Your whole intro to this video doesn't make sense. Most rail connections were opened under the pre-war private companies, and most were closed under BR, and some have been reopened under franchise. So to say private companies would axe the routes is simply not supported by the evidence. You have it exactly bass ackwards.
companies nowadays will always cut that one single track branchline.
Also remember the pre grouping and big 4 railways had a bigger monopoly on freight that paid for everything.
trucks didn't pull much till BR era.
Well, ain't this a mixture of truths and lies, and a sore lack of context. Yes, it's true that pretty much the entire rail network in this country (and more) were built by private companies, mostly during something called Railway Mania. This was a time when there was no decent competition to the railways, cars hadn't been invented, planes didn't exist, and canal boats were quite a bit slower. Therefore, it was predicted that railways would be very profitable, so the stock market backed them immensely. When they proved they weren't guaranteed to make money, private companies lost interest VERY quickly. In fact, this was the same time that railways became designated Common Carriers, which meant they legally couldn't turn down jobs, no matter how unprofitable they'd be, because there was no alternative.
It's also true that BR did close a lot of railways during the Beeching Axe, justified by the railways being deeply unprofitable, caused in large part by the Common Carrier status they still had. It's also important to understand the people involved in the Beeching Axe. Dr Richard Beeching was a physicist and engineer, who was selected by what is now the DfT to be BR's chairman, precisely with the goal of producing this report and closing down railways. That was the entire reason he was hired, and he had no previous railway expertise. The Minister for Transport at the time, the guy who hired Beeching, is a different kettle of fish. Ernest Marples was someone who owned a tarmac company. Quite the conflict of interest, and explains why he ordered the Beeching Axe, because his tarmac company couldn't make money if everyone was on the trains. Marples is also the primary reason why London no longer has trams in it's city centre.
As for some routes re-opening under franchises, yes, they have, but it's been very reluctant. Especially when we have such meaningless programs such as Restoring Your Railway from the Government, which has always felt like more of a PR grab than anything actually meant to re-open railways.
@@mastertrams You've just confirmed everything I said
Hey guys anything on Cameron coming up?
Someone need to account for rail delay, which is a national shame when compare to Japanese or even Chinese.
It was stupid to privatise them in the first place but it should be noted how much of an obstruction to re-nationalisation the EU is. Thankfully that should no longer be a problem.
They were originally privatized.
@@joeblogs6598 Everything was originally privatised.
@@aituk And as we can see, things tend to get worse when the government takes them over.
This very video shows that our current rail system isn't privatized much at all. The rails are state owned, the trains are mandated to run in lockdowns when noone was using them. Not a free market.
@@joeblogs6598 It's not state owned at all, it's a hybrid system which was introduced following 4 major rail disasters in the late 90's all in which privatization was in some part to blame.
The current TOC system is utterly terrible and makes no sense. The government constantly have to make up the shortfall in money by subsidising them and yet profits are always taken out each year.
State ownership isn't perfect but its unquestionably better than what we have now
The EU directive requires opening to competition but is not an obstacle to nationalized operators. A good example is Spain where 3 nationalized operators (RENFE, SNCF, Trenitalia) compete on the high speed lines.
Just learn from Japan and do the right thing for everyone. No shame in learning
It says a lot that legislation that is clearly direly needed and is well supported in parliament (even across parties) and a manifesto promise may not even happen even with a huge government majority and having had five years to enact it.
When on holiday to spain, 12 euro to Barcelona and back which was around an 80mile round trip. UK easily tripple that
He couldn't sharpen his own pencil, latest face it, fix rail 🤔🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I’m just glad I live in a town just 4 stops away from London where a train to and from won’t cost more than a fiver
I'm surprised the fact that ScotRail is back in the public ownership, did not get mentioned.
2;40 I feel as though there is an element of if the trains were just better more people would use them? So many times I’ve known people say, basically, “we could get the train, but they’re shit and there’s only 50% chance we will actually get there on time, if at all”
We weren’t quick to adopt a rail system... We invented the rail system!
Working in the office - on it’s way out, town centre shopping - on it’s way out and replaced by online home delivered. The country and its use of rail would have benefitted more from an investment in hub to hub parcels than high speed passenger.
I live not too far from Denton. the train comes literally once a week. at about 9am. It doesn't even go to central Manchester and instead goes to a neighbouring town. This route has connections that allow it to reach the centre. Despite the positives it can bring to the all the areas, it has instead had to be fought hard by the local community. Running once a week, it is now ran like cute little bit of local history instead of a functional route which could help reduce congestion around the East Manchester ring-road. There could easily be a route to Stockport, and then into Manchester, in around 20-25 minutes. This would 100% be a busy train as it's connecting stations do not have great transport links but are quite well populated.
It just seems like another case of private companies not wanting to improve the routes and it's communities, and instead, try to make as much money as possible whilst using as little as possible.
I love how the train in the thumbnail is an Adelante train, one of the most unreliable trains in the UK - pretty much sums up the current railways in general haha
"you'll be going nowhere"
Whilst I agree our railways are expensive, are they often Late, Overcrowded or Cancelled? Agreed there is an issue of government preventing negotiation between Employers and Unions causing strikes, other than strike actions (generally caused by the Government) are the service bad?
at the time of writing this a train from Birmingham to Edinburgh is £146, to do the same by plane is £22, the system is very broken!!
@@TW19567 Also don't forget the tram fare in Edinburgh.
@@TW19567 well that the numbers I got when i looked, but yout forgetting it takes over 5 hours to get there by train........ so I will fly, will be there Sunday
@@TW19567 PS i am doubtfull you found a train ticket for £45 I have looked again, so have gone with the flight £22 outgoing, £35 return and saved myself 4 hours
@@TW19567 again your wrong, from my house it takes 15 minutes to get to the airport, an hour to get to the train station, I only ever allow an hour for domestic flight check ins and have never had a problem and it certainly doesnt take an hour to off board the plane
I work in the rail industry and let me tell you.. privatisation has savaged our rail industry! It’s all about maximising profit. The changes that are being pushed through the maintenance side of things will make it worse not better. It needs to be bought back into public ownership and run for the public NOT for profit!
😂 I don’t think TLDR have noticed what they did with their thumbnail. As a rail enthusiast, the train you have put next to Sunak is probably one of the most unreliable and biggest failures of modern DMUs also known as the class 180 Adelante. Of course a perfect reflection of the chap next to him. 😂
Just like with Sunak and HS2, you'll be going nowhere
We need better alternative transport options other than just cars.
So what would the private companies being doing then, why even include them?
Should have upgraded (electrified and rolling stock) the whole country instead of HS2
Wow a video that starts at the 6 minute mark :D
Sneaky cover picture - a class 180 which has the famous slogan "you'll be going nowhere" - was this intentional?
Are these stations that received 40 entries in a full year? Did I read that well? 😮
I didn't hear anything about reducing the dangerously high rail tickets....
Except for being able to say we didn't nationalise the rail, what is the benefit of leaving private companies running the actual trains as a service?
I would expect every private company involved to just reduce costs as much as possible in accordance to what their contract allow. Since they basically have no say on their revenue.
If they can clean the trains once a week only and get away with it, they will. And that is just one example.
Could you do other videos than "did Sunak fix ….?"
Without having watched the video yet, I'm going to assume the answer to the question is: No
The disastrous consequences of privatisation. There are currently THREE levels of profit bring siphoned off, Network Rail, the train leasing companies and then the operators.
Some people are extremely ignorant, Network Rail is owned by the Westminster government after Railtrack went bust following a series of fatal railway crashes caused by inadequate maintenance.
@jonathanbuzzard1376 OK, I got that particular fact wrong , was it necessary of you to reply " some people are extremely ignorant " ?
A train should never be more expensive that the amount it would cost you to fuel a car for only you