Re: Send for the Cavalry

Labour increased taxes and it was still crap. The railway in that is in the Hull region (I forget the name,) has a 95% satisfaction rating. We never had that under Labour and the high taxes.

The lowering of corporation tax has increased tax revenues

Re: Send for the Cavalry

Very probably, because the scumbag 'nasty party' were forced to renationalise it again, after Virgin & Govia went 'bust' and were forced to hand back the franchise, which is why it now works that much better, - I should add that this is the second time the scumbag 'nasty p[arty' have attempted to flog off this particular franchise and each time the franchise company have 'lost' money, however when it was previously 'nationalised' it was making a profit too - funny that!!!

Re: Send for the Cavalry

Good to hear the Conservative government is making such a good job of running it.

Re: Send for the Cavalry

The railways were nationalised because if EU directive 91/440.

British Rail was a joke... the reason it's still crap is because it's not all privatised.

Re: Send for the Cavalry

Then explain why the PRIVATISED East Coast franchise owned by Virgin & Govia went bust, whereas, when the NATIONALISED LNER were running the trains - it was making a profit!!!

Re: Send for the Cavalry

Did you mean de-nationalised?

Directive 91/440 1991 did not require denationalisation.

Whereas Member States should ensure in particular that existing publically owned or controlled railway transport undertakings are given a sound financial structure, whilst taking care that any financial rearrangement as may be necessary shall be made in accordance with the relevant rules laid down in the Treaty;

Reference; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-cont...X%3A31991L0440

Re: Send for the Cavalry

You're quoting the wrong part. It was part of the trans European network.


Whereas, in order to render railway transport efficient and
competitive as compared with other modes of transport,
Member States must guarantee that railway undertakings
are afforded a status of independent operators behaving in
a commercial manner and adapting to market needs;
Whereas the future development and efficient operation of
the railway system may be made easier if a distinction is
made between the provision of transport services and the
operation of infrastructure; whereas given this situation, it
is necessary for these two activities to be separately
managed and have separate accounts;
Whereas, in order to boost competition in railway service
management in terms of improved comfort and the services
provided to users, it is appropriate for Member States to
retain general responsibility for the development of the
appropriate railway infrastructure ;


Try that.. that was 1991 and major privatised in 92.

Re: Send for the Cavalry

While I'm in favour of nationalizing almost anything including the railways, I was just wondering can we insist our utilities are owned only by UK rather than us paying a fortune for our fuel etc to other countries ? I can't see we have gained anything by allowing that to happen over the years !

Re: Send for the Cavalry

This is Corbyns big problem. He cannot implement his manifesto(the book of stupid ideas) on nationalisation whilst being in the EU. This is partly because of EU 91/400 (see above) and partly due to all government contracts (over a certain vakue) having to be submitted to the EU for competitive bids.

Once we leave the EU and if (god forbid) he gets elected he can then nationalise everything but.... then his last problem will be ... who will actually operate support and maintain it ... oh yes, the private sector who have already been doing most of this since 1992.

So we end up with yet another waste of money under Labour.

Re: Send for the Cavalry

Thanks for explaining, I don't agree obviously in them not being the most sensible and needed reforms in history but we can agree to differ on that one