Great British Railways to Derby

[Wheatley]

Whilst looking for any kind of official anything about the alleged GBR Doncaster Freight Hub (there's another thread somewhere) I came across this gem from that obvious hotbed of rail expertise, Nuneaton (full disclosure - I was born there but I left very quickly) -  https://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/NuneatonGBRHQPlus

 

Their bid seems to be based on the premise that it's quite handy for Birmingham and has a tower which says "OLEO" on the top. You have to admire the optimism. 

[30368]

6 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Indeed - but that sort of expertise is a long way from what GBR is proposed to be (particularly since the current Government is heavily back-pedalling on what GBRs remit and various back-benchers are pushing for the private sector to be given far more freedom (aka a return to 'proper' franchising) to 'innovate' and lower taxpayers bills.

 

Hi Phil,

 

Yes I get that but the suggestion that the private sector running of the railway has and will produce a reduction in taxpayer bills is a bit of a myth. Per capita or per taxpayer if you wish, has resulted in a massive increase in both the tax burden and ticket prices. In the case of the latter, commuter season tickets are usually paid by employers with a further impact on inflation.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

[woodenhead]

I like the quote from the Nuneaton website above

 

"Britain’s railways are embarking on a major, once in a generation reform that will transform the way in which the sector works, bringing together track and train to deliver a customer-focused railway. Great British Railways will be the railway’s new guiding mind, serving  as a single, accountable public body responsible for running Britain’s railways. As a new organisation, with a new culture, focused on serving the interests of everyone in Britain, Great British Railways will need a new national headquarters."

 

So the last once in a generaton reform was the splitting the responsibility of the track and trains, creating franchising and selling off the track which went oh so well especially the track bit!  It's not a reform, it's a return to BR but with private companies running the service on behalf of GBR.

 

[Mallard60022]

13 minutes ago, Wheatley said:

Whilst looking for any kind of official anything about the alleged GBR Doncaster Freight Hub (there's another thread somewhere) I came across this gem from that obvious hotbed of rail expertise, Nuneaton (full disclosure - I was born there but I left very quickly) -  https://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/NuneatonGBRHQPlus

 

Their bid seems to be based on the premise that it's quite handy for Birmingham and has a tower which says "OLEO" on the top. You have to admire the optimism. 

That was MY post AND I read about the Donny Council and local MPS proposed meeting with the GBR mob. There was NO suggestion it was something agreed and I just asked if anyone had any information about that idea.

Thanks

Phil 

[phil-b259]

22 minutes ago, 30368 said:

 

Hi Phil,

 

Yes I get that but the suggestion that the private sector running of the railway has and will produce a reduction in taxpayer bills is a bit of a myth. Per capita or per taxpayer if you wish, has resulted in a massive increase in both the tax burden and ticket prices. In the case of the latter, commuter season tickets are usually paid by employers with a further impact on inflation.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

You misunderstand me.

 

I am fully aware of the myths of the private sector magically making things cheaper and more innovative just because.. well.. they are the 'private sector' but then again I am not a Conservative Party back bencher who has an alarming tendency to think that such statements are true.

 

It is a fact however that various groups of MPs (and right wing think tanks) have been pushing back against GBR right from the moment it was announced - such bodies see GBR being an over representation of the state and not befitting of a party which champions low taxes plus free enterprise.

 

With Boris gone and Grant Shaps sidelined plus the party judging there are far more pressing issues in need of parliamentary time said MPs and lobby groups have waisted no time in pushing hard for a return to the sort of privatisation which existed in the late 1990s...

Edited April 24, 2023 by phil-b259

[roythebus1]

19 minutes ago, Wheatley said:

Whilst looking for any kind of official anything about the alleged GBR Doncaster Freight Hub (there's another thread somewhere) I came across this gem from that obvious hotbed of rail expertise, Nuneaton (full disclosure - I was born there but I left very quickly) -  https://www.warwickshire.gov.uk/NuneatonGBRHQPlus

 

Their bid seems to be based on the premise that it's quite handy for Birmingham and has a tower which says "OLEO" on the top. You have to admire the optimism. 

Maybe using it as a buffer zone? :)

 

[phil-b259]

10 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

it's a return to BR but with private companies running the service on behalf of GBR.

 

 

Except it isn't - because if various Tory MPs / right wing lobby groups get their way the contracts will in fact be arranged very much along the same lines of the franchises of old (thus allowing the dynamic private sector to 'innovate' and reduce costs so as to lower the burden on taxpayers).

 

Hence my reference to GBR simply being a very expensive talking shop producing no real value for the public wherever it happens to be HQed

[roythebus1]

12 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

I like the quote from the Nuneaton website above

 

"Britain’s railways are embarking on a major, once in a generation reform that will transform the way in which the sector works, bringing together track and train to deliver a customer-focused railway. Great British Railways will be the railway’s new guiding mind, serving  as a single, accountable public body responsible for running Britain’s railways. As a new organisation, with a new culture, focused on serving the interests of everyone in Britain, Great British Railways will need a new national headquarters."

 

So the last once in a generaton reform was the splitting the responsibility of the track and trains, creating franchising and selling off the track which went oh so well especially the track bit!  It's not a reform, it's a return to BR but with private companies running the service on behalf of GBR.

 

In my generation (early 1950s) we've had British Railways, British Rail, Network South East (maybe the most successful at getting people back on trains) and the privatised debacles of which I've lost count. It seems a wonderful idea bringing track and train together. On the infrastructure side we've had British Railways, Railtrack plc which was a disaster in terms of lives lost, train crashes and financially, then Network Rail. But does this statement mean that trains have not run on track for the last 200 years? What absolute rubbish these publicists push out.

[woodenhead]

7 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Except it isn't - because if various Tory MPs / right wing lobby groups get their way the contracts will in fact be arranged very much along the same lines of the franchises of old (thus allowing the dynamic private sector to 'innovate' and reduce costs so as to lower the burden on taxpayers).

 

Hence my reference to GBR simply being a very expensive talking shop producing no real value for the public wherever it happens to be HQed

So just like last time - gotta be careful now as I might make a politically biased point that nothing ever changes with the Tories, it just more of the same wrapped up in 'it's everyone else's fault but ours'

Edited April 24, 2023 by woodenhead

[30368]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

You misunderstand me.

 

Sorry Phil.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

[Wheatley]

2 hours ago, Mallard60022 said:

That was MY post AND I read about the Donny Council and local MPS proposed meeting with the GBR mob. There was NO suggestion it was something agreed and I just asked if anyone had any information about that idea.

I didn't say 'agreed'. 

 

[The Stationmaster]

Let's face it - the whole GBR idea was invented by somebody who hadn't got the first idea about running a wailway at teh behest of a politician who doesn't seem to have the first idea about anything except a few (possibly dubious according to some) bsiness deals prior to becoming an MP.  And I have yet to find any senior retired railway manager who thinks it's good idea and plenty who are sure it will be a disaster.

 

The franchising system has actually been fairly food - notwithstanding its holes and the big failing of it has been mismanagement of the letting of franchises by those responsible for such th wrk in DafT and the treasury.  Properly managed franchises have been very successful but even properly managed contracted operations cannot do as much for the passenger as some franchises did.

 

Buildinga national rail timetable has always beena sort of dynamic process involving umpteen different stakeholders (y to use the modern word.  writinga timetable for one of the hardest examples - Cross Country - actually involv es fewer people in teh decision making process today that it did when it was part of BR.  access contracts were somethng the industry had long needed to protect the rights of smaller and secnary operators on many routes and to kept the route owner in check - the biggest failing of the final BR fully sectorised management structure.  In fact having an Access Contract in black & white did a n awful lot more than relying on what could ultimately be teh decision making whim of a couple of people.

 

The infrsastruture owner's timetabling process started with some pretty big holes and sme of these got deeper because of Govt interference and NR doing what Govt told it to do about staff numbers.  That latter point has hopefully been recognised but there are still some holes where production and publication timescales that should be applied are just not being applied (that could readily be rectified but at a cost).

 

the big danger of GBR will be just how prone it is likely to be to political and (un)Civil Service interference and the change certainly won't put it right and will probably make it worse because there won't be a weight of experience - Andrew Haines apart - to tell the meddlers to keep their noses out as the BRB often managed to do (although it wasn't always entirely successful - such as failing to prevent The Treasury driven rundown of freight services in the 1980s).

 

The contract instead of franchise idea probably won't deliver much for the simple reason that it will hardly incentivise successful bidders in the way the franchise system could.

 

Now back in the early 1990s like many railway people I was very firmly against prvatisation and thought the franchise idea was rather daft - but better than all the alternatives dredged up back then.  we could foresee, and then saw, some barn my effects but there seem to be even more barmy things happening now - due in many cases I would reckon to political interference.   But the numbers made a lot of sense - until a political idiot flogged off Railtrack which was an unmitigated disaster in more ways than one.  Fortunately the NR idea has put the worst  of that right, albeit in some cases at unnecessary cost.  But properly let - which DafT seem incapable of doing - the franchise system isn't bad thing but it does mean that an eye has to be kept on every franchisee (which should be no different from keeping an eye on every contracted operator and no more expensive).

 

And GBR?   No more than a rather lame joke a but laughable in its basic idea.   And now being joined by GBN - Great British Nuclear - anotherexample where when some politico adds the word 'great' you know that in Britain today that is the last thing it will turn out to be.

[woodenhead]

The whole 'Great British' labelling of everything is a moribund attempt to put life into the idea of post Brexit Britain being better than it was back in 2016 when the whole shambles began to take root, I think the more usual British term for this is polishing a t$rd.

 

The problem is that all we have had since is a steadily declining national confidence to do anything, and whilst we can blame Covid for some of the problems, actually the fact that the UK population weathered the storm and came out singing from a people perspective displays it did not need to be like this.  For a time we all pulled together, everyone celebrated the welfare state, the emergency services and all those helping us to get through a pandemic, then as soon as it was all over, the nasty side of politics was unleashed and with a new fury.

 

What we have now is a political system being infiltrated with the rubbish spewed out in the US - wokism, make X great again and a general resistance to any form of partisanship, of building bridges and notably apologising for mistakes or corruption.

[30368]

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

he whole 'Great British' labelling of everything is a moribund attempt to put life into the idea of post Brexit Britain being better than it was back in 2016 when the whole shambles began to take root, I think the more usual British term for this is polishing a t$rd.

 

The problem is that all we have had since is a steadily declining national confidence to do anything, and whilst we can blame Covid for some of the problems, actually the fact that the UK population weathered the storm and came out singing from a people perspective displays it did not need to be like this.  For a time we all pulled together, everyone celebrated the welfare state, the emergency services and all those helping us to get through a pandemic, then as soon as it was all over, the nasty side of politics was unleashed and with a new fury.

 

What we have now is a political system being infiltrated with the rubbish spewed out in the US - wokism, make X great again and a general resistance to any form of partisanship, of building bridges and notably apologising for mistakes or corruption.

 

I couldn't agree more.

 

Our decline into an offshore theme park for the US is accelerating.

 

Kind regards,

 

Richard B

 

[John-Miles]

On 23/04/2023 at 10:41, melmerby said:

What's this Aston bit?

It ends close to Aston University

[phil-b259]

Roger  Ford of Modern Railways seems pretty unimpressed with GBR in his latest blog (take note of the bits I've highlighted in bold)

 

Talking of GBR, the latest news is that DfT has asked consultants to advise on how much of the Williams-Shapps Plan can be implemented without legislation.  For a Department to need help understanding its own Railways Act shows just how far civil service competence has fallen. 

Even worse, tucked away in the SBP is the news that the Network Rail Human Resources Transformation Team is ‘supporting GBR Transition Team’s work to define the role of the rail industry’s ‘guiding mind’ set out in the Plan for Rail’.

Words rarely fail me, but if two years to the month after the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail was published we are still trying to work out how its central concept is to be managed, then GBR really is in deep trouble.

 

 

live.ezezine.com/ezine/archives/759/759-2023.06.16.02.40.archive.txt

 

Edited June 20, 2023 by phil-b259

[woodenhead]

GBR - Great British Robbery

 

Design a means of funnelling tax payer money to the private sector and therefore shareholders by creating a government owned company to run the railways that relies on private sector consultants.

 

Same faces different name.

[ess1uk]

So apart from a billboard at Derby station what has happened?

[phil-b259]

On 26/07/2023 at 17:40, ess1uk said:

So apart from a billboard at Derby station what has happened?

 

Lots of money has been spent forming a Shadow* "GBR transition team" in Network Rail and no doubt lost of money has been wasted (sorry 'invested') by Whitehall on keeping the idea alive (when in reality its about as alive as the Parrot in a certain Monty Python sketch).

 

* Shadow because to actually give GBR any powers there is a need to get legislation passed in the Houses of Parliament (just like the Strategic Rail authority was forced to operate in 'shadow mode with no powers to actually do anything for its first 18 months of existence.

 

Given there is a general election due next year and precious little parliamentary time (not to mention more 'important' bills the Government want to get into law before they face the voters its entirely possible we will be in the same situation in 2 years time!

Edited July 27, 2023 by phil-b259

[The Stationmaster]

15 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Lots of money has been spent forming a Shadow* "GBR transition team" in Network Rail and no doubt lost of money has been wasted (sorry 'invested' by Whitehall on keeping the idea alive (when in reality its about as alive as the Parrot in a certain Monty Python sketch.

 

* Shadow because to actually give GBR any powers there is a need to get legislation passed in the Houses of Parliament (just like the Strategic Rail authority was forced to operate in 'shadow mode with no powers to actually do anything for its first 18 months of existence.

 

Given there is a general election due next year and precious little parliamentary time (not to mention more 'important' bills the Government want to get into law before they face the voters its entirely possible we will be in the same situation in 2 years time!

With any luck it will kill the stupid. idea once and for all.  

 

Only problem then is that it needs competent Civil Servants in DafT to make franchising work properly (plus one or two other things such as a proper safety audit regime restored) and the Timetable Conference system to be properly re-established (is it still gong on at all I wonder?)

[ess1uk]

With still no idea where in Derby

[31A]

5 minutes ago, ess1uk said:

With still no idea where in Derby

Midland House, I heard ....