Cameron on roads

Cycloslalomeur

So your dear leader wants to move passengers and heavy goods on to the railways AND build more motorways and lanes on A roads. Eh? What's the point in the latter if road congestion is eased by the former? Unless of course he has no intention of investing in the railways.

CiB

You're right. Cameron must be a complete numpty for not spotting the obvious flaw in his plan that leapt right out at you straight away. Sack him now. It's the only way.

Can we have a Bottom Bracket sub forum - Lefty Spouting - where everyone can flag up government failings to their hearts' content without troubling the rest of us. And when Milliband takes over we can set up another one on similar lines where we can rip the pee out of his half-witted poorly thought out idealistic and unworkable schemes.

Fair?

MattC59

CiB wrote:

You're right. Cameron must be a complete numpty for not spotting the obvious flaw in his plan that leapt right out at you straight away. Sack him now. It's the only way.

Can we have a Bottom Bracket sub forum - Lefty Spouting - where everyone can flag up government failings to their hearts' content without troubling the rest of us. And when Milliband takes over we can set up another one on similar lines where we can rip the pee out of his half-witted poorly thought out idealistic and unworkable schemes.

Fair?

Cycloslalomeur

CiB wrote:

You're right. Cameron must be a complete numpty for not spotting the obvious flaw in his plan that leapt right out at you straight away. Sack him now. It's the only way.

Can we have a Bottom Bracket sub forum - Lefty Spouting - where everyone can flag up government failings to their hearts' content without troubling the rest of us. And when Milliband takes over we can set up another one on similar lines where we can rip the pee out of his half-witted poorly thought out idealistic and unworkable schemes.

Fair?

What a brilliant idea.

sfichele

Well I think privatising the roads is a fantastic idea - no really I do.
Because in France the toll roads are so amazing - OMG.
and if we had them it'd be awesome
because by French standards it would only cost a measly, pittance, say £60+ one-way to go from London to Scotland
bargain!
and naturally the government - nice people that they are would naturally decrease fuel tax - no honest they would

sfichele

of course the sharper people here will realise that the road nonsense is a massive deflection from the emergency debate on the NHS - another cluster-f@ck of privatisation stupidity

CambsNewbie

sfichele wrote:

Well I think privatising the roads is a fantastic idea - no really I do.
Because in France the toll roads are so amazing - OMG.
and if we had them it'd be awesome
because by French standards it would only cost a measly, pittance, say £60+ one-way to go from London to Scotland
bargain!
and naturally the government - nice people that they are would naturally decrease fuel tax - no honest they would

Agree with you apart from one point. Why would anyone want to go from London to Scotland?

plowmar

Toll roads, hmmm don't we have one on the M6 ?, that is hardly used to any where near capacity - 33% I heard. Also heard on 'the news' that new roads are / should be built by private companies - who else usually builds them? councils don't they are forced to contract them out.

ddraver

Man, what is it with you and cluster f@ck?!?!

sfichele

ddraver wrote:

Man, what is it with you and cluster f@ck?!?!

A word picked up from work when things go badly wrong :oops:

rick_chasey

Forgive my ignorance, but without tolls, how would privitising existing roads work?

sfichele

Rick Chasey wrote:

Forgive my ignorance, but without tolls, how would privitising existing roads work?

I think at the moment private companies are commissioned to build them after tender.

However, one could get a company to take on a road for (say) twenty years. The company would be in charge of up keep and initial investment etc. In return the government would pay them (over the odds*) through some PFI scheme/loan/lease. And we would "save" money because we could get rid of that pesky^ inconvenient tender/commission stage, and in effect the company gets a nice and convenient monopoly and source of revenue. The government in return for screwing over the tax-payer, gets to keep this disaster off the books.

*if history from all other PFI is anything to go by
^pesky for the companies that have to bid for contracts - would be easier for them if they didn't have to /sarcasm

daviesee

CambsNewbie wrote:

Agree with you apart from one point. Why would anyone want to go from London to Scotland?

In my experience, to get out ASAP.
You could equally reverse the question. Why would anyone want to go from Scotland to London?
I've been in some amazing cities and London has some sights but I am in no rush to go back thank you very much.

Jez mon

As far as I can see, it's going to be a difficult debate for them to win:
a) It wasn't mentioned at election time
b) Previous attempts at introducing more tolls have been very unpopular
c) The p word, not much good has come out of privatisation

Of course, there are sound arguments for it, and some roads are very busy and there is no money for investment, but the British public just doesn't seem to like the idea of toll roads.

Pross

Rick Chasey wrote:

Forgive my ignorance, but without tolls, how would privitising existing roads work?

Shadow tolling.

Tolls work OK if there is a suitable alternative route. The M6 toll is pretty good as people can decide whether it is worth paying a few quid to avoid sitting in a jam but having tolls on the only 2 decent roads into South Wales (whilst undoubtably good for the toll operator who has a captive audience) can't be good for growth in the area!

beverick

Rick Chasey wrote:

Forgive my ignorance, but without tolls, how would privitising existing roads work?

It's not privatising per se but involving the private sector in providing the road network. It's about being able to provide a sustainable road network and getting more for less over an extended period.

The road network would as now, in general, be funded out of the public purse but government agencies (such as the Highways Authority) would not be responsible for maintaining them. It takes place now in several areas such as the A1-M1 link in West Yorkshire. nb, the M6 link (and toll roads) work on a fundamentally different model.

Under the proposed model the cost of running a road is 'smoothed' over the life of the contract rather than being subject to variances such as unplanned maintenance and 'routine' upgrades. Government budgeting becomes easier, private sector is 'guaranteed' income over a set period and they have access to investment (ie loans) at lower rates of interest. On top of that the "service" to the customer improves.

Or that's the idea.

Bob

sfichele

beverick wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Forgive my ignorance, but without tolls, how would privitising existing roads work?

It's not privatising per se but involving the private sector in providing the road network. It's about being able to provide a sustainable road network and getting more for less over an extended period.

The road network would as now, in general, be funded out of the public purse but government agencies (such as the Highways Authority) would not be responsible for maintaining them. It takes place now in several areas such as the A1-M1 link in West Yorkshire. nb, the M6 link (and toll roads) work on a fundamentally different model.

Under the proposed model the cost of running a road is 'smoothed' over the life of the contract rather than being subject to variances such as unplanned maintenance and 'routine' upgrades. Government budgeting becomes easier, private sector is 'guaranteed' income over a set period and they have access to investment (ie loans) at lower rates of interest. On top of that the "service" to the customer improves.

Or that's the idea.

Bob

The guarantee of income is what confuses me about the models of privatisation that are pursued.

The theory is that private companies are supposedly lean, efficient, innovative, and productive due to commercial pressures, and competition. Companies need to continually strive for good performance etc to stay afloat. Therefore getting private companies to do public-sector work sounds like a good idea, and in some cases is.

However, when companies are installed to take on large public infrastructure, the commercial pressure and competitive environment that once made then "good" is no longer there. Instead it's replaced with the guaranteed income and subsidy, making it a one-way bet, and they no longer require innovation or efficiency to keep them in business.

Rigged

Well privatisation worked so brilliantly for our water, gas, electricity, rail, bus, aerospace and telecoms industries why not extend it to the NHS, Education and now the roads?

MaxwellBygraves

Never mind road privatisation - Boris Johnson has just 'privatised' the official Twitter account of the Mayor of London :roll:

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-s ... ndon-mayor

verylonglegs

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Never mind road privatisation - Boris Johnson has just 'privatised' the official Twitter account of the Mayor of London :roll:

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-s ... ndon-mayor

That matters not one jot where as the transport system is fundemental to an economy.

MaxwellBygraves

verylonglegs wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Never mind road privatisation - Boris Johnson has just 'privatised' the official Twitter account of the Mayor of London :roll:

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-s ... ndon-mayor

That matters not one jot where as the transport system is fundemental to an economy.

The 'Never mind' was in jest. Prob should have put a better smiley

verylonglegs

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

verylonglegs wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

Never mind road privatisation - Boris Johnson has just 'privatised' the official Twitter account of the Mayor of London :roll:

http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-s ... ndon-mayor

That matters not one jot where as the transport system is fundemental to an economy.

The 'Never mind' was in jest. Prob should have put a better smiley

Understood, I did have you down as more thoughtful than that

Mr_Cellophane

Work was also needed to relieve gridlock by widening "pinch points" and allowing traffic to use motorway hard shoulders, the prime minister said.

That's going to make cycling saver. :roll:

Frank the tank

Rigged wrote:

Well privatisation worked so brilliantly for our water, gas, electricity, rail, bus, aerospace and telecoms industries why not extend it to the NHS, Education and now the roads?

My thoughts exactly.

verylonglegs

Frank the tank wrote:

Rigged wrote:

Well privatisation worked so brilliantly for our water, gas, electricity, rail, bus, aerospace and telecoms industries why not extend it to the NHS, Education and now the roads?

My thoughts exactly.

I wouldn't put telecoms in that list as it is actually a fairly open and competitive market now.

RideOnTime

CiB wrote:

You're right. Cameron :roll: must be a complete numpty for not spotting the obvious flaw in his plan that leapt right out at you straight away. Sack him now. It's the only way.

Can we have a Bottom Bracket sub forum - Lefty Spouting - where everyone can flag up government failings to their hearts' content without troubling the rest of us. And when Milliband :oops: takes over we can set up another one on similar lines where we can rip the pee out of his half-witted poorly thought out idealistic and unworkable schemes.

Fair?

Frank the tank

RideOnTime wrote:

CiB wrote:

You're right. Cameron :roll: must be a complete numpty for not spotting the obvious flaw in his plan that leapt right out at you straight away. Sack him now. It's the only way.

Can we have a Bottom Bracket sub forum - Lefty Spouting - where everyone can flag up government failings to their hearts' content without troubling the rest of us. And when Milliband :oops: takes over we can set up another one on similar lines where we can rip the pee out of his half-witted poorly thought out idealistic and unworkable schemes.

Fair?

People will ALWAYS MOAN ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT I just enjoy it more when it's a tory one. Moaning that is.

Ben6899

plowmar wrote:

Toll roads, hmmm don't we have one on the M6 ?, that is hardly used to any where near capacity - 33% I heard. Also heard on 'the news' that new roads are / should be built by private companies - who else usually builds them? councils don't they are forced to contract them out.

When 'they' say the roads should be built by private companies, 'they' mean that the private companies should also finance the road; rather than the Government. Those private companies then maintain the road for a concession period and recoup the construction and maintenance costs through Shadow Tolls.

So a payment is paid to the private company - by the Government - for each vehicle which uses the road. Also opportunity for additional payments for delivering safety schemes or penalties for road works creating lack of capacity at peak times. These are just examples - it depends what is written into the contract.

random man

[quote="Frank the tank
People will ALWAYS MOAN ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT I just enjoy Moaning.[/quote]

FTFY

RideOnTime

Ben6899 wrote:

plowmar wrote:

Toll roads, hmmm don't we have one on the M6 ?, that is hardly used to any where near capacity - 33% I heard. Also heard on 'the news' that new roads are / should be built by private companies - who else usually builds them? councils don't they are forced to contract them out.

and trucks won't go anywhere near it... it's been a complete white elephant... destroying acres of countryside and putting yet another 'barrier' between communities to the north and south...