I don't know many details about the structure of the current private ownership, but my understanding is that the number of different private companies involved means that it is very difficult to assess responsibility for a particular problem, such as underinvestment, and thus to exert pressure for change. The tories did a terrible job too - but at least we knew who to blame.
David (erstwhile lurker, inspired by all the other lurkers who've stepped into the light recently and survived).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Carl Remick [mailto:carlremick at hotmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 08, 1999 10:26 AM
> To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
> Subject: Re: More on the UK rail crash
>
>
> Carl Remick wrote:
> [snip]
>
> I hate to say it, but in light of additional information, the
> problem would
> seem not to be private vs. public ownership but simply that
> the UK - with
> all due respect to Baroness T. - is unusually backward. This week's
> Economist (another British beacon unto the world) notes that capital
> investment in the UK's rail system has been anemic under both
> public and
> private ownership. It states:
>
> " ...the safety technology to make crashes less likely and
> congestion less
> dangerous has been around for a long time. It is called an
> automatic train
> protection (ATP) system. If a careless driver jumps a red
> light, the brakes
> come on and the train halts. It is in use in many American
> trains; Sweden
> converted its network in the 1980s; the French and German high-speed
> networks are being converted to it. Britain has been toying
> with this for
> years, ever since the inquiry into the Clapham rail crash in 1988
> recommended it. British Rail wanted it in 1994, but the
> government said no.
>
> "Inevitably, many people will be tempted to blame the crash
> on the transfer
> of Britain's railways into private hands, which began in
> 1995. Yet though
> there is much to criticise about the way in which that
> privatisation was
> carried out, and much now to be reformed in the way the
> railways are run and
> regulated, to draw a connection between privatisation and the
> crash would be
> wrong. In public ownership, under successive governments,
> investment in the
> railway infrastructure was meagre. There is no reason to
> think that had it
> remained in government hands, spending on safety measures
> would have been
> markedly higher."
>
> Carl
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>