Quote:
|
Originally Posted by scastle
While I agree that this government has done f*** all to improve hospitals and transport, they are not the only government that can be blamed for this.
I don't agree with socialism (or nationalisation for the sake of it) but transport should be run by the government, not private companies. However, it should be run efficiently.
Traditionally, when properly invested in, the railways (both in this country and others) have never made a large enough profit to warrant privatisation. Hell, British Rail was created because smaller rail companies were going bankrupt.
When privatising the Rail network was being talked about, I remember seeing (I think) the Swedish transport minister on TV, warning us not to privatise as they had tried it and it failed. That seems to be happening here too. First Railtrack went, now the South Eastern lines are run by "south eastern" trains, pending the award of a new contract after connex were sacked.
As to the state of Transport. Somebody (and I don't know whether it should be the government or a private company) needs to invest a lot of money to
1) Reverse the damage done by the current train companies through lack of maintenance (according to Private Eye, Railtrack cut imaintenance to below safe minimum levels years ago) and
2) Improve the system.
Edit: Didn't make sense the first time.
|
ok i see your point, but who allowed the rail service to become privatised?
privatisation can be a good idea in theory, if a company proves they are willing to actually repair the damage already there, otherwise it is simply a waste of time imo