Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Labour pledges to re-nationalise railways - Is it time for utilities too?

115 replies

Startingagainandagain · 25/04/2024 12:50

I am glad to see that Starmer is finally announcing some more radical policies and this is a positive step as far as I am concerned.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/renationalise-railways-labour-election-starmer-b2534505.html

I would like to see water, gas and electricity to be brought back into public ownership too, considering the profiteering, lack of investment and the sewage scandals that privatisation gave use.

I am old enough to remember the times before privatisation and I think that a big part of the cost of living crisis comes from private companies trying to squeeze as much profit out of us.

Also with climate change I think we also need to bring natural resources into public ownership.

Labour pledge to renationalise railways within five years

A Labour government would expect to transfer rail networks to public ownership within its first term, the party will say.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/renationalise-railways-labour-election-starmer-b2534505.html

OP posts:
TonTonMacoute · 25/04/2024 19:22

GiantHornets · 25/04/2024 13:04

It’ll never happen; the cost would be phenomenal!

This. It seems that many people here have no idea what nationalisation actually involves.

Look at how bad many of our public services are run, HMRC, the justice system. Folk are living in cloud cuckoo land if they think nationalisation is the answer

taxguru · 25/04/2024 19:16

Chersfrozenface · 25/04/2024 15:35

Labour would still have to "contract out" the operation of the railways to operating companies, just like today, they're hardly likely to suddenly directly employ a few thousand drivers, guards, station staff, maintenance workers, cleaners, etc., are they?

Labour's intention is for a new arm's length body, Great British Railways (GBR), to take over service contracts as they expire.

GBR would operate services and set timetables. The only way to do that would be for GBR to directly employ those doing the work of operating services.

That's what Transport for Wales Rail does - it's a subsidiary of Transport for Wales, a company owned by the Welsh Government.

They've already taken over Northern Trains. No improvements at all, in fact it just gets worse.

"Northern Trains, trading as Northern, is a British train operating company owned by DfT OLR Holdings for the Department for Transport (DfT), after the previous operator Arriva Rail North had its franchise terminated at the end of February 2020."

Network Rail is another Govt owned company that controls and maintains the infrastructure. As is LNER, Transpennine, Southeastern, and ScotRail.

So basically, probably over half of the railway companies are already owned by the government.

Not sure what Starmer thinks he's going to achieve? Presumably just trying to win votes by assuming enough voters don't know that the government already control/own the railways!!

TheBanffie · 25/04/2024 19:08

Scotrail was renationalised already- doesn't seem to have made any difference to services, but very hard to find any data on this which is odd given that the government took over in 2022. Drivers striking over pay has been an issue and some services have been cut.

TTPD · 25/04/2024 19:00

They should start with water. Even the US has publicly owned water.

IvorTheEngineDriver · 25/04/2024 18:59

Thames Water first, please!

Startingagainandagain · 25/04/2024 18:30

''@LittleLegsKeepGoing
Re-nationalising energy would be a financial cluster fuck of epic proportions because only a small amount of the assets/companies are actually British owned (from memory only British Gas, OVO and Octopus). These are the only ones that the government can literally seize with minor implications. ''

Then I assume that if the government at least nationalised these British companies and then offered customers decent prices then it would be a case of customers voting with their feet and the remaining privately owned company would either go bust or have to offer more competitive tariffs too..

The issue at the moment is that there is little competition/choice and that they all charge ridiculous prices and work together as a cartel to squeeze as much money as they can out of us.

OP posts:
Maninthemoonsmiles · 25/04/2024 18:19

I think it’s immoral for something vital for life like water to be owned privately for profit and also a security risk if anyone eg unfriendly country can control it. I would like to see our rivers seas and lakes be clean and fit for humans and wildlife.

Also with rail surely we cant keep expanding the number of cars, building more roads. We should have a subsidised public transport that is fast clean safe and efficient - other countries seem to manage it so it is possible.

Tigersonvaseline · 25/04/2024 17:31

I'm fed up of our absolutely shit and yet breathtakingly expensive railways but unfortunately people who remember nationalised rail didn't think they were any good either

0sm0nthus · 25/04/2024 17:27

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn due to privacy concerns.

So we have the devil or the deep blue sea, private sector corruption or gvt run corruption.
Surely there are ways to mitigate the down sides of these options?

Chersfrozenface · 25/04/2024 16:30

frankentall · 25/04/2024 16:24

Back to East Germany/North Korea

Or Roosevelt's New Deal.

The Works Progress Administration employed 8.5 million people, mainly men, between 1935 and 1943.

frankentall · 25/04/2024 16:24

Dotjones · 25/04/2024 16:07

There are more important things to be nationalised first like employment. The state should provide suitable employment for anyone who is unable to find it themselves.

Back to East Germany/North Korea

Meadowfinch · 25/04/2024 16:17

I'd far rather they started with water. The way Thames Water is going, it's only a matter of time before we have a typhoid outbreak in London.

Safety of the general population must come first, and Thames Water are a dangerous disgrace. Their board should be in jail, or at the very least banned from holding directorships.

JanefromLondon1 · 25/04/2024 16:14

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn due to privacy concerns.

Trolleytoken · 25/04/2024 16:13

Dotjones · 25/04/2024 16:07

There are more important things to be nationalised first like employment. The state should provide suitable employment for anyone who is unable to find it themselves.

Yup, the morning shift can dig the hole and the afternoon shift can fill it in.

Dotjones · 25/04/2024 16:07

There are more important things to be nationalised first like employment. The state should provide suitable employment for anyone who is unable to find it themselves.

ap1999 · 25/04/2024 16:07

Of course they should be.

What a corrupt moral compass a country must have to run ESSENTIAL services for profit !

I want water, electricity, gas, heating oil all forms of public transport and communications owned by the state FOR the people , not for the pockets of shareholders. Instead of paying out millions in dividends- it can be reinvested.

Not everything needs to be run for ever increasing profits. Sometimes they just need to be run for the public good.

LittleLegsKeepGoing · 25/04/2024 16:01

Re-nationalising energy would be a financial cluster fuck of epic proportions because only a small amount of the assets/companies are actually British owned (from memory only British Gas, OVO and Octopus). These are the only ones that the government can literally seize with minor implications. The rest are owned by a variety of international companies, some actually state owned by foreign governments either in part or wholly. Seizing those would cause massive international relations issues and I wouldn't be surprised if trade embargoes were placed on the UK in retaliation.

Then there's the question of how far to go...do you just target the suppliers, or do you include upstream activity and assets (generating electricity, providing gas), do you also include the national grid infrastructure and gas network infrastructure?

That's four entirely different industries, all with their own specific regulatory obligations and costs. The upstream businesses are the most profitable - but would also be the most expensive to buy out. We're talking absolute billions - no one is going to just hand over power stations, wind farms and nuclear power stations.

The government showed it's competence in the energy field with Bulb when they were forced to run that for a while, it cost us £3billion as tax payers. That's just one, medium sized company.

The energy industry has moved on too far since the 90s to be able to roll back ownership to the state. It should never have been broken up in the first place. Too late to bolt the barn door now the horse has firmly bolted to another country

peakygold · 25/04/2024 15:56

The unions run the railways, or hadn't you heard?

LlynTegid · 25/04/2024 15:41

Some of the railways (or provision of them) will revert to public ownership. Won't solve all the issues but may stop things getting worse.

As for utilities, start with larger water companies. Not fussed so much about the others.

Chersfrozenface · 25/04/2024 15:35

Labour would still have to "contract out" the operation of the railways to operating companies, just like today, they're hardly likely to suddenly directly employ a few thousand drivers, guards, station staff, maintenance workers, cleaners, etc., are they?

Labour's intention is for a new arm's length body, Great British Railways (GBR), to take over service contracts as they expire.

GBR would operate services and set timetables. The only way to do that would be for GBR to directly employ those doing the work of operating services.

That's what Transport for Wales Rail does - it's a subsidiary of Transport for Wales, a company owned by the Welsh Government.

taxguru · 25/04/2024 15:24

Not sure what difference it would make. The government control the trains now anyway and most trains are run by the private operating firms under contract/licence these days. Govt quangos control timetables, routes, pricing, maintenance, new building projects etc.

Labour would still have to "contract out" the operation of the railways to operating companies, just like today, they're hardly likely to suddenly directly employ a few thousand drivers, guards, station staff, maintenance workers, cleaners, etc., are they?

The illusion of privatisation was all about getting finance for all the new trains that were needed due to health & safety, disability discrimination, emissions, etc., that would have probably bankrupted the country had the taxpayer had to pay or had they been bought directly under something similar to PFI! In the 90s, virtually every coach needed replacement and modern ones cost millions per coach.

User135644 · 25/04/2024 15:20

Sarahconnor1 · 25/04/2024 13:58

I honestly find it hard to believe that British Rail was worse than the train services now. In what way?

My recollection. Very old rolling stock, dirty trains, cancellations were frequent, as was strike action.

Labour are not committing to reducing prices either just simplifying. So I expect we will see very little difference

British Rail was run down because governments didn't invest in them (mostly Tory but some Labour as well). Problem is from the 60s the motorcar was kind and rail travel was viewed as obsolete. We had the Beeching cuts in the 60s - to help accelerate motorways - and Thatcher didn't care for trains either and then Major privatised them.

Difference was though it was far more affordable and you were more likely to get a seat. It's a bit like going to watch football in the 70s and 80s - the grounds were run down and needed investment, but at least it was cheap to get in and you could walk up on the day and get a ticket.

Privatised companies don't invest either - it's all about profit and dividends. The train companies make money off high fares but it's the taxpayer who has to pay for the big projects like HS2.

OnlyTheBravest · 25/04/2024 15:16

I do not understand how it was possible for the basic utilities (gas/electricity/water) to be sold off to private companies that were not British or at least to maintain a majority stake in these industries. It saddens me that the basic rights were sold out for profit.
I would like to see state control of social housing, gas, electricity, water, NHS, nurseries and schools at a minimum. These things are not for profit. It is half the reason why so many people are finding it so hard to live on the NMW. The people we put our trust in to run the country on our behalf have completely failed but are reaping none of the consequences.

User135644 · 25/04/2024 15:16

Sarahconnor1 · 25/04/2024 12:56

I would prefer them to start with utilities to be honest

Anyone who remembers British rail won't be over excited about nationalised rail

It's no use having nationalised industry if we're always electing Tory governments. They don't look after them and hate spending on public services.

But privatised industry is a disaster because prices skyrocket energy bills, train fares) but the customer is no better off.

Gingerkittykat · 25/04/2024 15:12

Water is not privatised in Scotland and I pay £168 for water and £195 for wastewater a year as an added charge to my council tax bill.