Will Labour's rail replacement service leave travellers stranded?
By spooky coincidence, on Saturday night I watched an old episode of Slow Horses in which a passenger died mysteriously on a replacement bus between High Wycombe and Oxford Parkway – and on Sunday I woke to reports that the first service of the new era of rail renationalisation, the 5.36 from Woking to Waterloo, had also featured a replacement bus. Nobody died, but it wasn't a good omen.
Nor was it quite the 'turning point for the future of our railways' that Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander declared. South Western Railway's return to state hands this week was in fact the fifth major passenger franchise to go that way – four having already failed under the previous government. Nine more will transition as their contracts expire between now and 2028, by which time Labour's Great British Railways (GBR) will have seized control of the whole contraption, including tracks and stations.
So this is a work in progress – which in theory should lead to economies of scale, co-ordinated timetables and simpler ticketing. In practice, it's also likely to be hobbled by incompatible IT, endless track and signal troubles, and workforce intransigence. But in fairness, all this reflects the fact that the Major government's 1996 blueprint for privatisation, which broke British Rail into 70 companies, was a Treasury-driven dog's breakfast that enriched undeserving players, bankrupted worthy ones and left commuters deeply disgruntled.
On the other hand, GBR is also a nakedly leftist move to return to state ownership the only privatised industry in which (as its time-limited franchises expire) the transfer can happen without confiscation or compensation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
15 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Mixed reaction from politicians to news Galloway will not become national park
The decision was slammed by Labour's Colin Smyth, while Tories Finlay Carson and John Cooper criticised the NatureScot consultation. There has been a mixed reaction from politicians to the news that Galloway will not become Scotland's third national park. The decision was slammed by Labour's Colin Smyth, while Tories Finlay Carson and John Cooper criticised the NatureScot consultation. The SNP's Emma Harper believed the decision showed the Scottish Government had listened to local people. Reacting to Thursday's announcement from Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon at Holyrood, South Scotland MSP Mr Smyth said: 'For too long, Galloway has been Scotland's forgotten corner – and the government made it clear it wants to tear down the 'Welcome to Dumfries and Galloway' signs and put up 'No Entry' instead. 'The Cabinet Secretary knows she could've brought forward plans for Galloway that supported farming and forestry and helped them thrive. She could have built something special. Made a change for the better. Instead, she has taken the easy way out and walked away. 'The government has failed to set out an alternative to its inaction. No plan B to fix a local economy built on low pay. No action to stop the fastest depopulation in mainland Scotland'. 'This isn't just about ditching a national park – this is about ditching Galloway's future.' The Tories were critical of the consultation process. Dumfries and Galloway MP, Mr Cooper, said: 'The consultation on a Galloway National Park was deeply flawed – it was always far too vague. 'And while I raised right at the start questions about what weighting would be given to the opinions of those living in Dumfries and Galloway compared to those outwith, I never got a satisfactory answer. 'There were attempts to portray the 'blank sheet of paper' approach of the consultation as a good thing, but it was nebulous, and led to claim and counterclaim about what a Galloway National Park might be like. 'Galloway is not like the other two parks – our hills have hill farms, not just hillwalkers – and no way should remote and distant national park bureaucrats be anywhere near decisions on some of the most productive grassland in the UK. 'Agriculture is the backbone of the economy in Dumfries and Galloway, and it's not just about farmers and stockmen – it's about the hundreds of jobs in associated businesses, from seed merchants to machinery firms, to accountants who do the books.' Galloway and West Dumfries MSP Mr Carson added: 'The government's handling of the national park selection process has been opaque, inconsistent, and dismissive of genuine local engagement. 'Communities across Galloway invested time, energy, and hope into a process which could and should have united communities, but that process was poorly communicated and ultimately felt predetermined. 'Rather than fostering trust and collaboration, the Government's approach has sown division and confusion. It has left many wondering whether rural voices are truly being heard in this parliament. 'We could have avoided months of uncertainty and frustration. We should have had an independent review of the existing parks so that lessons could be learned.' Naturecot's consultation revealed the majority of people who responded were from the area that would be covered by the national park, with 54 per cent of respondents against the idea. South Scotland MSP Emma Harper said: 'Too often the Scottish Government and its agencies are accused of not listening to the voices of the people, so I hope those accusations can be brought to a peep now that the consultation process has been shown to be open, transparent and fair, and was one of the major factors determining the Government's decision. 'Going forward we need to strike the right balance between biodiversity, the natural environment, tourism and the economic development all of our communities are striving for regardless of their views on the park itself. 'I firmly believe that whatever views each of us held on the proposals that were on the table and expressed through the consultation process, we all collectively need to work together on how we develop Galloway economically, socially, and culturally over the years and decades ahead. 'That work would require to be done regardless of whether national park status was a reality, but now the decision has been made it's more relevant and urgent than ever.'
Glasgow Times
31 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
UK must change approach to defence in an insecure world, Starmer warns
But the Prime Minister could not say when his aim of raising defence spending to 3% of the UK's economic output would be realised, amid questions about whether the Treasury had guaranteed to fund it. Britain will build up to 12 new nuclear-powered attack submarines and invest £15 billion in its warhead programme, the Prime Minister is expected to announce on Monday, as the Government unveils its strategic defence review. Significant investment in the UK nuclear warhead programme this Parliament and maintaining the existing stockpile are among the 62 recommendations that the Government is expected to accept in full. Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme ahead of the announcement, Sir Keir warned of a 'new era' of instability on defence and security which the review would respond to. He added: 'I think that's a common feeling across Europe and more broadly there is greater instability on defence and security than there has been for many, many years, and greater threats, and that's obviously having a direct impact back into the United Kingdom. Hence the review.' Principles of 'war-fighting readiness' and integrating the UK's forces are at the heart of the review, Sir Keir said. He added: 'We have to recognise the world has changed, and if the world has changed we need to be ready.' Sir Keir also refused to guarantee that defence spending would reach 3% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2034, saying it was an 'ambition'. The Government has pledged to raise the UK's defence spending to 2.5% of GDP – a measure of the country's economic output – by 2027. But on Sunday, Defence Secretary John Healey sidestepped questions about whether he had any guarantee from the Treasury to provide the funding for the 3% target by the end of the next Parliament, when asked on the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme. Defence Secretary John Healey outside BBC Broadcasting House, after appearing on the BBC One current affairs programme, Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg (Yui Mok/PA) Asked about the commitment, Sir Keir told the BBC he was 'not going down that road' of a precise funding commitment until he had a plan behind it. He added: 'We had a commitment for 2.5% by the end of this Parliament. We pulled that right forward to 2027. 'We showed that when we say there's a new era of the defence and security of our country, is our first priority – as it is – that we meant it. We take the same approach to 3%. 'But I'm not going to indulge in the fantasy politics of simply plucking dates from the air until I'm absolutely clear that I can sit here in an interview with you and tell you exactly how that's going to work, because I take the defence and security of our country extremely seriously.' Ministers have been keen to point out that the strategic defence review will support regions across the UK, as 70% of defence jobs are outside of London and the South East. Building the new submarines, which is part of the Aukus partnership with the US and Australia, will support 30,000 highly skilled jobs into the 2030s as well as 30,000 apprenticeships and 14,000 graduate roles across the next 10 years, the Ministry of Defence said. The £15 billion investment into the warhead programme will back the Government's commitments to maintain the continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrent, build a new fleet of Dreadnought submarines and deliver all future upgrades. From the late 2030s, the fleet of up to 12 SSN-Aukus conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines will replace seven astute class attack submarines the UK is due to start operating. In response to the strategic defence review, the Government will also commit to: – Getting the armed forces to a stage where it would be ready to fight a war – Boosting weapons and equipment stockpiles and making sure there is capacity to scale up production if needed in a crisis or war – Buying up to 7,000 UK-built long-range weapons in a move due to support 800 defence jobs – Setting up a new cyber command and investing £1 billion in digital capabilities – More than £1.5 billion of additional funding to repair and renew armed forces housing. Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge outside BBC Broadcasting House in London (Jonathan Brady/PA) The Conservatives and Lib Dems have questioned Labour's commitment to funding the promises it was making. Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge suggested his counterpart Mr Healey had been 'hung out to dry by Rachel Reeves' over the 3% target. 'All of Labour's strategic defence review promises will be taken with a pinch of salt unless they can show there will actually be enough money to pay for them,' he added. Lib Dem defence spokesperson Helen Maguire said the 2034 timeline for the commitment 'suggests a worrying lack of urgency from the Government'. She also said: 'Unless Labour commits to holding cross-party talks on how to reach 3% much more rapidly than the mid-2030s, this announcement risks becoming a damp squib.'
Western Telegraph
an hour ago
- Western Telegraph
UK must change approach to defence in an insecure world, Starmer warns
But the Prime Minister could not say when his aim of raising defence spending to 3% of the UK's economic output would be realised, amid questions about whether the Treasury had guaranteed to fund it. Britain will build up to 12 new nuclear-powered attack submarines and invest £15 billion in its warhead programme, the Prime Minister is expected to announce on Monday, as the Government unveils its strategic defence review. Significant investment in the UK nuclear warhead programme this Parliament and maintaining the existing stockpile are among the 62 recommendations that the Government is expected to accept in full. Speaking to BBC Radio 4's Today programme ahead of the announcement, Sir Keir warned of a 'new era' of instability on defence and security which the review would respond to. He added: 'I think that's a common feeling across Europe and more broadly there is greater instability on defence and security than there has been for many, many years, and greater threats, and that's obviously having a direct impact back into the United Kingdom. Hence the review.' Principles of 'war-fighting readiness' and integrating the UK's forces are at the heart of the review, Sir Keir said. He added: 'We have to recognise the world has changed, and if the world has changed we need to be ready.' Sir Keir also refused to guarantee that defence spending would reach 3% of gross domestic product (GDP) by 2034, saying it was an 'ambition'. The Government has pledged to raise the UK's defence spending to 2.5% of GDP – a measure of the country's economic output – by 2027. But on Sunday, Defence Secretary John Healey sidestepped questions about whether he had any guarantee from the Treasury to provide the funding for the 3% target by the end of the next Parliament, when asked on the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme. Defence Secretary John Healey outside BBC Broadcasting House, after appearing on the BBC One current affairs programme, Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg (Yui Mok/PA) Asked about the commitment, Sir Keir told the BBC he was 'not going down that road' of a precise funding commitment until he had a plan behind it. He added: 'We had a commitment for 2.5% by the end of this Parliament. We pulled that right forward to 2027. 'We showed that when we say there's a new era of the defence and security of our country, is our first priority – as it is – that we meant it. We take the same approach to 3%. 'But I'm not going to indulge in the fantasy politics of simply plucking dates from the air until I'm absolutely clear that I can sit here in an interview with you and tell you exactly how that's going to work, because I take the defence and security of our country extremely seriously.' Ministers have been keen to point out that the strategic defence review will support regions across the UK, as 70% of defence jobs are outside of London and the South East. Building the new submarines, which is part of the Aukus partnership with the US and Australia, will support 30,000 highly skilled jobs into the 2030s as well as 30,000 apprenticeships and 14,000 graduate roles across the next 10 years, the Ministry of Defence said. The £15 billion investment into the warhead programme will back the Government's commitments to maintain the continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrent, build a new fleet of Dreadnought submarines and deliver all future upgrades. From the late 2030s, the fleet of up to 12 SSN-Aukus conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarines will replace seven astute class attack submarines the UK is due to start operating. In response to the strategic defence review, the Government will also commit to: – Getting the armed forces to a stage where it would be ready to fight a war – Boosting weapons and equipment stockpiles and making sure there is capacity to scale up production if needed in a crisis or war – Buying up to 7,000 UK-built long-range weapons in a move due to support 800 defence jobs – Setting up a new cyber command and investing £1 billion in digital capabilities – More than £1.5 billion of additional funding to repair and renew armed forces housing. Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge outside BBC Broadcasting House in London (Jonathan Brady/PA) The Conservatives and Lib Dems have questioned Labour's commitment to funding the promises it was making. Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge suggested his counterpart Mr Healey had been 'hung out to dry by Rachel Reeves' over the 3% target. 'All of Labour's strategic defence review promises will be taken with a pinch of salt unless they can show there will actually be enough money to pay for them,' he added. Lib Dem defence spokesperson Helen Maguire said the 2034 timeline for the commitment 'suggests a worrying lack of urgency from the Government'. She also said: 'Unless Labour commits to holding cross-party talks on how to reach 3% much more rapidly than the mid-2030s, this announcement risks becoming a damp squib.'
