4 ms·

Tldr for the lazy?

GW150914 8y ago
From Wikipedia The process was very controversial at the time, and still is, and its success is hotly debated – with the claimed benefits including a reduced cost to the taxpayer, lower fares, improved customer service, and more investment. Despite opposition from the Labour Party, who gained power in 1997 under Tony Blair, the process has never been reversed wholesale by any later government, and the system remains largely unaltered. A significant change came in 2001 with the collapse of Railtrack, which saw its assets passed to the state-owned Network Rail (NR), with track maintenance also brought in-house under NR in 2004. The regulatory structures have also subsequently changed. The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/07/britains-railways-is-this-the-best-we-can-do-renationalisation-strikes-fare-rises https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/07/britains-rai... Citylab https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/09/why-britains-railway-privatization-failed/3378/ https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/09/why-britains-... Science Direct https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0155998214000416 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S015599821...
- anon1385 8y ago
  Even the Financial Times, notoriously partisan backers of privatisation and markets, struggles to make the case for rail privatisation these days (although they do try, bless them). https://www.ft.com/content/d82848ca-f7ba-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1a00 https://www.ft.com/content/d82848ca-f7ba-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1... >There is a growing consensus among both executives and industry experts as well as the public that Britain’s unique attempt to create competition on Britain’s rail network has not delivered. >While it has led to more services, and encouraged more users to pay higher prices, it has not unleashed the productivity improvement necessary both to upgrade the network and stabilise the network’s finances. >Over the same period, for instance, London’s state-owned metro network, Transport for London, has grown just as quickly and delivered much more state-of-the-art investment.

Tldr for the lazy?

From Wikipedia The process was very controversial at the time, and still is, and its success is hotly debated – with the claimed benefits including a reduced cost to the taxpayer, lower fares, improved customer service, and more investment. Despite opposition from the Labour Party, who gained power in 1997 under Tony Blair, the process has never been reversed wholesale by any later government, and the system remains largely unaltered. A significant change came in 2001 with the collapse of Railtrack, which saw its assets passed to the state-owned Network Rail (NR), with track maintenance also brought in-house under NR in 2004. The regulatory structures have also subsequently changed. The Guardian https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/07/britains-railways-is-this-the-best-we-can-do-renationalisation-strikes-fare-rises https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/07/britains-rai... Citylab https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/09/why-britains-railway-privatization-failed/3378/ https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2012/09/why-britains-... Science Direct https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0155998214000416 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S015599821...

anon1385 8y ago
Even the Financial Times, notoriously partisan backers of privatisation and markets, struggles to make the case for rail privatisation these days (although they do try, bless them). https://www.ft.com/content/d82848ca-f7ba-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1a00 https://www.ft.com/content/d82848ca-f7ba-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1... >There is a growing consensus among both executives and industry experts as well as the public that Britain’s unique attempt to create competition on Britain’s rail network has not delivered. >While it has led to more services, and encouraged more users to pay higher prices, it has not unleashed the productivity improvement necessary both to upgrade the network and stabilise the network’s finances. >Over the same period, for instance, London’s state-owned metro network, Transport for London, has grown just as quickly and delivered much more state-of-the-art investment.