|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: allan tracyallan tracy Date: Jun 22, 2008 09:31
Quote from Tom Harris (Labour) - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
State for Transport interviewed for 'Week In Week Out'.
"If Labour had come to power in 1997 and the railways had still been
nationalised then I think we would have privatised them.
To say that (cost) is the only hurdle to re-nationalise is simply not
true.
The private railway has provided a level of investment, innovation,
imagination that wouldn’t have happened if British Rail had stayed as
it was.
If you speak to suppliers they are displaying a level of commitment
and enthusiasm that you just wouldn’t have got under a nationalised
industry.
I don’t think that if BR had stayed as it was up until 1994/95 we
would have as good a service as we do have today."
|
| |
|
| | 112 Comments |
|
|
Author: JNugentJNugent Date: Jun 22, 2008 09:34
allan tracy wrote:
> Quote from Tom Harris (Labour) - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
> State for Transport interviewed for 'Week In Week Out'.
> "If Labour had come to power in 1997 and the railways had still been
> nationalised then I think we would have privatised them.
> To say that (cost) is the only hurdle to re-nationalise is simply not
> true.
> The private railway has provided a level of investment, innovation,
> imagination that wouldn’t have happened if British Rail had stayed as
> it was.
> If you speak to suppliers they are displaying a level of commitment
> and enthusiasm that you just wouldn’t have got under a nationalised
> industry.
> I don’t think that if BR had stayed as it was up until 1994/95 we
> would have as good a service as we do have today."
Is he getting ready to cross the floor of the House, d'you think?
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: True BlueTrue Blue Date: Jun 22, 2008 10:08
"allan tracy" hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:ebaafdb9-f7e4-4b14-9a40-50c8c512b304@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Quote from Tom Harris (Labour) - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
State for Transport interviewed for 'Week In Week Out'.
>"If Labour had come to power in 1997 and the railways had still been
>nationalised then I think we would have privatised them.
.To say that (cost) is the only hurdle to re-nationalise is simply not
.true.
.The private railway has provided a level of investment, innovation,
>imagination that wouldn’t have happened if British Rail had stayed as
>it was.
>If you speak to suppliers they are displaying a level of commitment
>and enthusiasm that you just wouldn’t have got under a nationalised
>industry.
>I don’t think that if BR had stayed as it was up until 1994/95 we
>would have as good a service as we do have today."
|
| Show full article (1.29Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: David HansenDavid Hansen Date: Jun 22, 2008 10:38
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 09:31:30 -0700 (PDT) someone who may be allan
tracy hotmail.com> wrote this:-
Irrelevant newsgroups snipped.
>Quote from Tom Harris (Labour) - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
>State for Transport interviewed for 'Week In Week Out'.
>
>
>"If Labour had come to power in 1997 and the railways had still been
>nationalised then I think we would have privatised them.
>
>To say that (cost) is the only hurdle to re-nationalise is simply not
>true.
>
>The private railway has provided a level of investment, innovation,
>imagination that wouldnÂ’t have happened if British Rail had stayed as
>it was.
|
| Show full article (2.15Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Neil WilliamsNeil Williams Date: Jun 22, 2008 10:50
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:38:26 +0100, David Hansen
spidacom.co.uk> wrote:
>BR was busy investing in suburban trains when it was abolished.
>There was then a gap of something like a decade before the programme
>continued. During that gap old Mark I trains continued to run, which
>exposed passengers to extra danger.
An absolutely miniscule extra danger. Passenger comfort was a far
better reason for getting rid of them (well, the VEPs, anyhow).
Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: PaulPaul Date: Jun 22, 2008 12:48
"Neil Williams" pacersplace.org.uk> wrote in message
news:485e90a9.20778849@news.individual.net...> On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 18:38:26 +0100, David Hansen
> spidacom.co.uk> wrote:
>>>BR was busy investing in suburban trains when it was abolished.
>>There was then a gap of something like a decade before the programme
>>continued. During that gap old Mark I trains continued to run, which
>>exposed passengers to extra danger.
>
> An absolutely miniscule extra danger. Passenger comfort was a far
> better reason for getting rid of them (well, the VEPs, anyhow).
>
> Neil
>
> --
> Neil Williams
> Put my first name before the at to reply.
>
|
| Show full article (0.74Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: GazGaz Date: Jun 22, 2008 13:45
allan tracy wrote:
> Quote from Tom Harris (Labour) - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
> State for Transport interviewed for 'Week In Week Out'.
>
>
> "If Labour had come to power in 1997 and the railways had still been
> nationalised then I think we would have privatised them.
>
> To say that (cost) is the only hurdle to re-nationalise is simply not
> true.
>
> The private railway has provided a level of investment, innovation,
> imagination that wouldn
|
| |
| 3 Comments |
|
|
Author: Tim RogersTim Rogers Date: Jun 22, 2008 14:26
> allan tracy wrote:
>> Quote from Tom Harris (Labour) - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
>> State for Transport interviewed for 'Week In Week Out'.
>>
>>
>> "If Labour had come to power in 1997 and the railways had still been
>> nationalised then I think we would have privatised them.
>>
>> To say that (cost) is the only hurdle to re-nationalise is simply not
>> true.
>>
>> The private railway has provided a level of investment, innovation,
>> imagination that wouldn
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Neil WilliamsNeil Williams Date: Jun 22, 2008 14:43
On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 22:26:18 +0100, "Tim Rogers" sapm.net>
wrote:
>If the same amount of money that is now put into the privatised rail
>industry was put into BR we really would have a world class railway as
>opposed to the shambles we have.
The problem is that, other than the NHS which most regard as a good
thing, there is not the political will to treat a public organisation
as a bottomless money pit, even if the private organisation would cost
more.
Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: GazGaz Date: Jun 22, 2008 14:47
Tim Rogers wrote:
>> allan tracy wrote:
>>> Quote from Tom Harris (Labour) - Parliamentary Under-Secretary of
>>> State for Transport interviewed for 'Week In Week Out'.
>>>
>>>
>>> "If Labour had come to power in 1997 and the railways had still been
>>> nationalised then I think we would have privatised them.
>>>
>>> To say that (cost) is the only hurdle to re-nationalise is simply
>>> not true.
>>>
>>> The private railway has provided a level of investment, innovation,
>>> imagination that wouldn't have happened if British Rail had stayed
>>> as it was.
>>>
>>> If you speak to suppliers they are displaying a level of commitment
>>> and enthusiasm that you just wouldn't have got under a nationalised ...
|
| Show full article (1.46Kb) |
| no comments |
|
RELATED THREADS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
