« The Ulster Covenant march and sectarian tensions |
| "The Nobel Peace for 2012 is to be awarded to the European Union..." »
Posted at 07:04 PM in Transport | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c61a053ef017d3c7b689f970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Richard Branson says that, after the Department for Transport climb-down, Virgin stands a good chance of winning the West Coast Main Line contract :
I though having a "privatised" railway was all about market forces, competition, passenger choice and getting the politicians out of the way?
Now we've got the Secretary of State deciding who gets the custom, we've ended up with monopoly provision, no competition and record taxpayer subsidies. Imagine if the government said "Right then, for the next 15 years, Heathrow to JFK is going to be run by Air France." We have the worst of all worlds; a nationalised, corporatised railway.
We have to make a decision. Either we deregulate and let train companies go head to head for passengers' business so the customer can decide, or we admit that railway journeys are nigh on impossible to commoditise as a fungible product and are just fundamentally unsuited to the market place. Either way, we can't continue with this once every 15 years shambles of politicians deciding who the rest of us have to travel with.
Matt Woods |
October 03, 2012 at 07:51 PM
Richard, Richard, I don't understand it, I don't know how Justine got it so wrong, listen I'll fix it ok, we'll push her off somewhere where she can't do any harm, overseas development, lots of trips too Bongo-Bongo land that sort of thing, find some clod to take her place, wait a few weeks, then say there's been a cock-up, blame it on some civil servants, roll the whole thing again and Bob's yer uncle: errr that place you've got on Lake Como wouldn't be free the first two weeks of June would it?
October 03, 2012 at 10:24 PM
How do 4 companies spend £40M on a bidding process? That alone says that there is something deeply suspicious about the way these things are run. In Virgin's case, they apparently spent £14M on the bid. They've been running the railway for years. What research / preparation did they have to spend that much on that they didn't know already?
Finally, even accepting that Virgin might have spent £14M on preparing the original bid, is it going to cost that much to prepare a new bid? It is still the West coast mainline they are bidding for after all - surely more than 80% of the parameters will be the same even if the bidding process is rationalised? At the very most, the tax payer should pay for the cost of rebidding which should be minimal and not the ludicrous cost of the whole process. The idea that we weren't going to be paying these costs anyway is hopelessly naive. OK it would have been commuters paying rather than general tax payers and amortized over a 15-year contract rather than in one lump sum, but the public was always going to pay one way or the other.
Alistair Thomas |
October 03, 2012 at 11:16 PM
Write nice.Oh continue to work hard. Refueling.
Mulberry Outlet |
October 09, 2012 at 08:17 AM
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
(URLs automatically linked.)
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Name is required to post a comment
Please enter a valid email address