4 ms·
I don't think SNCF have any choice about separating train operations from rail track network maintenance and opening the network up to competition. It's an EU r
by makomk 8y ago
I don't think SNCF have any choice about separating train operations from rail track network maintenance and opening the network up to competition. It's an EU requirement, part of the fourth railway package. That's part of the reason there was talk of the UK not being able to renationalise their railways if we didn't leave the EU - it's increasingly requiring all states to structure their railways more like the UK system (because that worked so great for us!)
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago>That's part of the reason there was talk of the UK not being able to renationalise their railways // I thought we did effectively renationalise a portion of the network on the East Coast, and it was better [for users] and profitable in some sense [for the exchequer]? https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/26/east-coast-mainline-why-privatise https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/oct/26/east-coast-m... We have a lose-lose system in the UK AFAICT, we have a private system, and we subsidise it from taxation. So private companies get paid dividends, that they didn't earn, from tax money and we still get a fragmented and under-invested system.
- isostatic 8y ago> profitable in some sense East coast made £100m a year for the exchequer Stagecoach promised £400m for the exchequer Clearly the latter is better for the exchequer, it means more subsidy can be spent on other areas of the network. The problem is that Grayling let stagecoach off their promises, undermining the whole point of privatization.