Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
> Opinion Polls
Party Ratings
Test: 50%
Current Government: National Party
National Issues
Health: 50% Education: 50% Economy: 50% Law & Order: 50%
Transport: 50% Social Affairs: 50% Environment: 50% Foreign Affairs: 50%
Government Reputation
Strength: 50%
Popularity: 50%
Trust: 50%

Welcome to Mock Parliament. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Repeal of the National Rail Act Act
Topic Started: Aug 17 2009, 01:59 AM (307 Views)
Lord Wallace Buttersworth
Member Avatar
Right Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
PREAMBLE:
This Act repeals the National Rail Act

DEFINITION
This bill will repeal the National Rail Act, and a free and just auction will be held to sell stakeholds in the National Rail system.

---

There is no need for a rail system to be under Government control, it's a burden on the Government and a more effiecient rail service could be had using free market principles.

This bill may not go to debate, but it is to foster conversation about what people think of the state of the rail network.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DynamoJax
Member Avatar
17th and 20th PM of Ostentia.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I am glad that we are willing to pre-debate this. I'm still studying the rail network, even after I rode extensively on my July 2009 election tour.

My gut instinct is to potentially support potential privatised facilities and perhaps the vehicles that run on the tracks, but we maintain the physical rails to travel on.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lord Wallace Buttersworth
Member Avatar
Right Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
This is to mainly stir conversation more then anything else.

I think a concept where the Government maintains majority ownership, but privatises 49% of it would be good. That way the free market gets a say in what happens, but we retain ulimate control. Over time, we can reduce the percentage of Government ownership to 0 but the infrastructure will be there to support a efficient rail network.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Inevitable
Member Avatar
WOBBUFFET!
Moderator
I think not.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HRH King Zog II
Member Avatar
Waffler of the House of Boreds
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Free market principles fail to apply correctly on the railway network due to its inherant monopoly on high speed internal travel, high barriers to entry and little room for expansion. Thus I oppose your claim that a non-government run system would be more efficient and your effort to create one.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Commoncold0
Member Avatar
Elder Statesman
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
The National Rail Bill was superceded by the Comprehensive Railways Act anyway, repealing this would do nothing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lord Wallace Buttersworth
Member Avatar
Right Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Commoncold0
Aug 17 2009, 08:52 PM
The National Rail Bill was superceded by the Comprehensive Railways Act anyway, repealing this would do nothing.

Regardless, the point of this conversation is to discuss privatising the rail network.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DMHowe
Member Avatar
Under Investigation
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Pretty much what HRH King Zog said. The railway industry is not one that applies to free market principles.

That, and if you look at the rail industry in Britain compared to that of most Western European countries, the private rail industry there is not uhm... Brilliant... Whereas the Western European countries have excellent rail systems as an offset of government investment.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
plqx
Member Avatar
overlord of the Solafian universe
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
How is a privately owned state-enforced monopoly any better than a publically owned state-enforced monopoly?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Commoncold0
Member Avatar
Elder Statesman
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
plqx
Aug 18 2009, 11:11 PM
How is a privately owned state-enforced monopoly any better than a publically owned state-enforced monopoly?

Exactly. I know I may have come to this conclusion a little late, but the rail industry is not one in which competition can be effectively introduced. I see no reason for privatisation.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cieran
Member Avatar
Should-like-totally-be-the Prime Minister
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Commoncold0
Aug 18 2009, 11:48 PM
plqx
Aug 18 2009, 11:11 PM
How is a privately owned state-enforced monopoly any better than a publically owned state-enforced monopoly?

Exactly. I know I may have come to this conclusion a little late, but the rail industry is not one in which competition can be effectively introduced. I see no reason for privatisation.

*Jumps into air in celebration before rushing to Commons bar and buying everyone a drink :D *...
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Commoncold0
Member Avatar
Elder Statesman
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Cieran
Aug 18 2009, 11:59 PM
Commoncold0
Aug 18 2009, 11:48 PM
plqx
Aug 18 2009, 11:11 PM
How is a privately owned state-enforced monopoly any better than a publically owned state-enforced monopoly?

Exactly. I know I may have come to this conclusion a little late, but the rail industry is not one in which competition can be effectively introduced. I see no reason for privatisation.

*Jumps into air in celebration before rushing to Commons bar and buying everyone a drink :D *...

^_^

I can say more left wing things if you buy me more drinks. Alcohol seems to turn me left wing. Seriously, I have been known to make passionate speeches in support of Gordon Brown and socialism while pissed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lord Wallace Buttersworth
Member Avatar
Right Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
That's okay. I just wanted to have a discussion about it, and I've succeeded in that objective. Case closed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carl Miller
Member Avatar
Chancellor
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Commoncold0
Aug 18 2009, 06:48 PM
plqx
Aug 18 2009, 11:11 PM
How is a privately owned state-enforced monopoly any better than a publically owned state-enforced monopoly?

Exactly. I know I may have come to this conclusion a little late, but the rail industry is not one in which competition can be effectively introduced. I see no reason for privatisation.

You're both right and wrong. Nationalization of passenger transport can be a good thing, but it is better on the freight side to have competition.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
plqx
Member Avatar
overlord of the Solafian universe
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
(note: post contains ooc references)
Depends what you mean. After all, how would it operate?

A completely competitive rail network is disasterous for freight - which is one of the main reasons why Britain's rail network mainly consolidated into the big four (LMS, LNER, GWR and Southern) during the late 19th and early 20th century - in order to end the extortionate prices that each company was charging the others to run trains on their lines. This in turn was the main thing that effectively turned Britain's rail network from competitive to four local monopolies.

Those companies that refused to sell off to the big companies were easy prey to the growing road hauliage industry and the larger railways, both of which could easily transport the freight over longer distances and to more destinations. Many of those ended up selling to the larger companies or going out of business. The handful that were clinging on when the rail network was nationalised were in desperate decline and all that lasted that long - without exception - fell to the Beeching Axe.

However, if you mean a situation whereby all the infrastructure is publicly financed and owned and just the operation (with permission and at a suitable fee) on the lines being done by competitive and prviate firms then yes I agree.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
« Previous Topic · Legislation · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Mock Parliament Wiki

Looking for the posts about Democratia, Ostentia or Brian Blessed? Click here.