NEW: Got questions about energy? Put them to Gary and Andrew from MSE's Utilities team during our energy-themed 'Ask An Expert' event. Check back here from Tuesday 9 August, 12pm
MoneySaving Poll: Do you support renationalisation of rail, energy, water and more?

105 Posts



Poll started 30 August 2016
Do you support renationalisation of rail, energy, water and more?
Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn has argued the railways should be taken back into public ownership. It was one of a raft of state owned essential services that was privatised since the 1980s – usually by floating them on the stockmarket.
Those arguing for privatisation often focus on increased efficiency due to competition. Those against that say firms do what’s best for their shareholders and not for consumers. It’s a complex argument, but we’re really most interested in testing public sentiment so are keeping it simple.
Please vote for the choice closest to your view for each of the following services:
Did you vote? Are you surprised at the results so far? Have your say below. To see the results from last time, click here.
If you haven’t already, join the forum to reply. If you aren’t sure how it all works, read our New to Forum? Intro Guide.
Thanks!

[purplesignup][/purplesignup]
Follow MSE on other Social Media:
MSE Facebook, MSE Twitter, MSE Deals Facebook, MSE Deals Twitter, Forum Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest
Join the MSE Forum
Get the Free MoneySavingExpert Money Tips E-mail
Report inappropriate posts: click the report button
Flag a news story: [email protected]
0
This discussion has been closed.
Latest MSE News and Guides
Replies
Words, words, they're all we have to go by!.
(Pity they are mangled by this autocorrect!)
What innovation has ever come from a public service? Where are the highest salaries and lowest productivity? Where does performance management vaguely exist - so coasters and average employees become the norm? Where is over zealous unionisation? Where is the slowest response to changing markets/trends?
I can only think that people voting here expect "someone else" to do the management.
People complain about the railways but forget the huge investment brought in by privatisation that the state could/would never have afforded. They also forget the massive increase in passenger numbers since privatisation - BR would never have coped!
In the majority of cases the efficiencies made by private companies is much greater than the profit they take out. I can talk at length about the Electricity/Gas industry and the bad PR that is written - yet companies here are making about £25 per year per customer per fuel annually. There is no excessive profits here despite misguided public opinion.
Prices are high, and rising but this is due to global demand and government taxes - electricity and raw materials are expensive, but operating margins are paper thin due to competition. The "bit" that is truly open to competition the billings and service is very efficient.
The reason competition cannot go further, is the infrastructure was built based on a nationalised model - in which the inefficiencies are obvious.
As for rail - the right thing to do is remove the rails and tarmac the tracks, and run automated road-trains at greater frequency/capacity for the same cost. This would be a policy based on outcomes (moving people in comfort from A to
Why would tarmac be any more efficient at moving people than rails? Or do you mean turn the railway lines into extra roads and run more buses :eek: ?
If I want to go from A to B I have no choice but to use the company that runs trains between A and B or take a bus. The bus makes me travel sick, so not much of a choice. The train company has no real competition, so all they have to do is be a "better" alternative than the bus for the price, and so can charge highly for not much except being a train. A national railway would at least be influenced by elections and it would be more consistent across the country.
In reality, where does Corbyn think the money is going to come from to re-nationalize anything? A great idea in principle, but ill-thought through.