Amsterdam the preferred city for staff - can see why, the Netherlands basically works as a country and it is only a very short hop to the UK. I think I'd prefer Amsterdam over Milan at this point if I was working for the EMA.
Completely ignoring my point that cars have become much more safe and much more reliable, without spiralling upwards in cost. Train fares have increased in real terms year on year while the cost of car transport has fallen.
The last two times I had to be out of London (Newcastle and Manchester respectively) the cost of the train ticket was far, far, far in excess of the petrol cost, about x3 the cost in fact. I am aware there are other costs to car ownership but the difference in price was very clear.
I didn't ignore your point: I pointed out it was bogus, as other countries have not had the stellar safety record our railways have had. Unless you're saying that Germany and France's railways (amongst others) are not as technically advanced?
There is a financial incentive, both in terms of rewards for successful completion, and in penalties for failure. I'm not sure what the situation on mainland Europe is in comparision. In other words, we throw a lot more money at it than we used to.
I am fairly certain advances in technology have made both car and train travel safer, would you compare road deaths in 1990 to road deaths in 2017 and expect them to be like-for-like?
One thing I can say with absolute certainty, though, is that since privatisation train fares have increased way above inflation.
e.g. "A London to Leeds return is now £154, up from £55 in 1995."
The train is an OK way to travel when a) work is paying for it or b) you book months in advance to get the best fare, but if you have to travel on the day (or quite often within a week or so) you have to pay full fare, which is prohibitively expensive compared to jumping in the car, assuming you have one, or catching the bus (if you don't). Car costs also fall dramatically when you are travelling as a group, as OldKingCole points out.
Politics is funny. What odds would you have got on June 9th that Theresa May would outlast Angela Merkel and Robert Mugabe?
Perhaps similar to the situation in the winter of 1981. At that time most pundits thought Mrs Thatcher wouldn't last long and of course she ended up staying in power longer than almost everyone else in office at that time.
Just announced she will stand if new elections are needed
Chaos in Europe
The next election will be all about her, and if she stays or goes.
She's fundamentally weakened. Who know's what will happen.
Letting her run would be the same as the Tories letting Theresa run in a snap election during the aftermath of the one she lost.
It seems completely mad for the CDU to let her run. Have they got no teeth?! At least the Tories are using May as a lightning rod for Brexit, there's no way she's leader at the next election.
their problem is they have no successor
their one chance was Schauble but he's 76 and was booted into the long grass in September
Merkel's paying the price for shafting the FDP in the previous GE
The dementia tax was absolutely toxic on the doorstep. No, it wasn't the only thing. Hiding in a cupboard for half the election and hiding the rest of the cabinet in a box in a cupboard, while proclaiming to be strong and stable was laughable; there was some proposal to scrap a benefit (Winter Fuel allowance?) for the well-off which was so badly announced that people on council estates thought it'd apply to them; there was the U-turn on the policy, which made it sound like the party didn't know what it was doing and didn't have the strength of its convictions; there was the uncosted manifesto. There was also the contrast of Corbyn surfing his surging popularity.
All of that made a difference but it was the dementia tax cock-up in the first place will both set it off and which was the biggest single error.
Yes, that is right, although it seems to have varied by area. Someone here (perhaps @Topping?) reported that in west London the 'dementia tax' wasn't a big issue, but Brexit was. My wife and I helped the (unsuccessful) Tory campaign in Eastbourne, and there the dementia tax was the most common reason given by former Conservative voters who were either going to switch to the LibDems or stay at home.
Counter-intuitively, the Dementia Tax didn't have any measurable impact in Torbay - where with the average age of voters being 97, you'd think it might have played badly....
It was a weird election for sure!
Yeh, ditto in Dorset. Our local Tories increased their majorities.
I, foolishly with hindsight, didn't think the policy was gaining traction nationally because locally it wasn't having any impact.
Well, given the absolutely massive surge of tax payer money that went into the freshly privatised railways that's a bit of a non-sequiter.
BR for a good couple of decades was directed under a managed-decline model. Successive governments, but especially the last Conservative one, slowly starved it as they assumed that rail was a dead end travel solution.
Privatisation, including the criminal low balling of the values of the rolling stock, came with a massive increase in tax payer subsidy to the new private firms.
It's not a non-sequitur at all. Under British Rail, any increased subsidy would have gone (as it always had previously) into increased inefficiencies rather than improved services for passengers.
Just announced she will stand if new elections are needed
Chaos in Europe
The next election will be all about her, and if she stays or goes.
She's fundamentally weakened. Who know's what will happen.
Letting her run would be the same as the Tories letting Theresa run in a snap election during the aftermath of the one she lost.
It seems completely mad for the CDU to let her run. Have they got no teeth?! At least the Tories are using May as a lightning rod for Brexit, there's no way she's leader at the next election.
their problem is they have no successor
their one chance was Schauble but he's 76 and was booted into the long grass in September
Merkel's paying the price for shafting the FDP in the previous GE
Indeed, she's been very good at knee capping any internal successors.
Politics is funny. What odds would you have got on June 9th that Theresa May would outlast Angela Merkel and Robert Mugabe?
Perhaps similar to the situation in the winter of 1981. At that time most pundits thought Mrs Thatcher wouldn't last long and of course she ended up staying in power longer than almost everyone else in office at that time.
Mrs May last one standing as all her challengers suffer bizarre gardening accidents?
The IRA attacks didn’t just fail because they didn’t attack Corbyn economically. They failed because the Conservative Party and the right wing press generally has very little hearing among those who voted for Corbyn. This idea that dozens will become Conservatives upon hearing the ‘truth’ about Corbyn is delusional when you realise that among his voters, the Conservative party and its allies in the press are not a credible voice to begin with.
Exactly the same applies to Trump supporters. We are in an age where people will happily stick fingers in their ear if they don't like the message and assume it's biased.
How many problems will a new german election cause to brexit negotiations. I guess a new election cant be before late January at the earliest
None at all, I'd have thought. I think there was a 70 minute TV debate between Merkel and Schulz on foreign policy before the last election, and Brexit wasn't mentioned. It just isn't a live issue there the way we wish it was. And with the EU having adopted its negotiating position and sticking to it (much to the gnashing of teeth for David Davis & co) there's little impact a new German government would have even if in place.
We've all heard the idea that a good Brexit deal is about squaring the key players who will then force the rest into line. Little evidence so far; indeed it's been impressive / frustrating (delete to taste) quite how united the EU27 have been to date.
The Tories need to be mindful of continuing to brand Corbynism "hard left". A lot of our policies are so mainstream that they are the policies of the Conservative government in Germany and have been very mainstream Tory as recently as the same 1970s that the Tories think will do the job in warning people away.
As I keep stressing to my happy clappy Momentum friends who have Seen The Light about His ascendance - most voters are NOT political, do not identify with Tory or Labour, do not care about ideology or what is "left" or "right". At a fundamental level "mainstream" politics have failed millions and millions of people, and even the supposedly affluent are worried about the cost of housing and education. Offering a solution to these problems is not "hard left" to most punters, its just different to whats already failing them.
As I said to HYUFD on the other thread, there is a fundamental misconception amongst many Tories that people are happy and can be scared into sticking with nanny with tales of the Commie monster. They aren't happy, and the status quo holds no grip on them.
It is an indication of the state of play that the Cons are going to have to articulate quite carefully the difference in spending plans between the two parties. I'm sure that if I went through the Lab manifesto the costs would pretty soon skyrocket but I know that very few Lab voters will be doing that either and the appeal must be far simpler to grasp and delivered in an attention-grabbing way.
How much for example would renationalising the railways cost? £350m per week?
The age old problem with nationalisation is that it promises to reinvest profits, but in fact squanders them (generally on producer interests) and has to rely on taxpayer's money or taxpayer's guarantees of loans to do any 'investment'.
Anyone who remembers BR knows that that privatised railways offer a far better service.
Well, given the absolutely massive surge of tax payer money that went into the freshly privatised railways that's a bit of a non-sequiter.
BR for a good couple of decades was directed under a managed-decline model. Successive governments, but especially the last Conservative one, slowly starved it as they assumed that rail was a dead end travel solution.
Privatisation, including the criminal low balling of the values of the rolling stock, came with a massive increase in tax payer subsidy to the new private firms.
"Successive governments, but especially the last Conservative one, slowly starved it as they assumed that rail was a dead end travel solution."
Well, given the absolutely massive surge of tax payer money that went into the freshly privatised railways that's a bit of a non-sequiter.
BR for a good couple of decades was directed under a managed-decline model. Successive governments, but especially the last Conservative one, slowly starved it as they assumed that rail was a dead end travel solution.
Privatisation, including the criminal low balling of the values of the rolling stock, came with a massive increase in tax payer subsidy to the new private firms.
It's not a non-sequitur at all. Under British Rail, any increased subsidy would have gone (as it always had previously) into increased inefficiencies rather than improved services for passengers.
ISTR BR in the 1980s was the most efficient major railway in Europe. Efficient and shrinking, but efficient.
BR deserves much criticism, but also a fair amount of praise.
Merkel's paying the price for shafting the FDP in the previous GE
This time round she's going to get it over with early.
as TSE said re Mrs May - in what Universe do you think this result has strengthened her position ?
we are entering the post Merkel era, she may be in office but she is increasingly no longer in power
It's weakened all her opponents except the Greens and that amounts to the same thing. There's no sign of an internal putsch, and the course of the coalition negotiations so far has brought the CSU back into line.
P.S. My last betting tip was to bet against a Jamaica coalition in Germany - because with so many parties fighting to get over the 5% threshold I figured that one would miss out, and distort the seats for the others.
Totally wrong on that - but looks like the tip was good, by a fluke,
Well, given the absolutely massive surge of tax payer money that went into the freshly privatised railways that's a bit of a non-sequiter.
BR for a good couple of decades was directed under a managed-decline model. Successive governments, but especially the last Conservative one, slowly starved it as they assumed that rail was a dead end travel solution.
Privatisation, including the criminal low balling of the values of the rolling stock, came with a massive increase in tax payer subsidy to the new private firms.
It's not a non-sequitur at all. Under British Rail, any increased subsidy would have gone (as it always had previously) into increased inefficiencies rather than improved services for passengers.
How is it then that over the last 20 years when the government has taken over rail franchises in Britain due to private sector failure they invariably have better punctuality, fewer customer complaints and higher revenue?
There was no better train service in the UK than the government run East Coast main line. First Class on that was like being treated as royalty.
Well, given the absolutely massive surge of tax payer money that went into the freshly privatised railways that's a bit of a non-sequiter.
BR for a good couple of decades was directed under a managed-decline model. Successive governments, but especially the last Conservative one, slowly starved it as they assumed that rail was a dead end travel solution.
Privatisation, including the criminal low balling of the values of the rolling stock, came with a massive increase in tax payer subsidy to the new private firms.
It's not a non-sequitur at all. Under British Rail, any increased subsidy would have gone (as it always had previously) into increased inefficiencies rather than improved services for passengers.
How is it then that over the last 20 years when the government has taken over rail franchises in Britain due to private sector failure they invariably have better punctuality, fewer customer complaints and higher revenue?
There was no better train service in the UK than the government run East Coast main line. First Class on that was like being treated as royalty.
Well, given the absolutely massive surge of tax payer money that went into the freshly privatised railways that's a bit of a non-sequiter.
BR for a good couple of decades was directed under a managed-decline model. Successive governments, but especially the last Conservative one, slowly starved it as they assumed that rail was a dead end travel solution.
Privatisation, including the criminal low balling of the values of the rolling stock, came with a massive increase in tax payer subsidy to the new private firms.
It's not a non-sequitur at all. Under British Rail, any increased subsidy would have gone (as it always had previously) into increased inefficiencies rather than improved services for passengers.
How is it then that over the last 20 years when the government has taken over rail franchises in Britain due to private sector failure they invariably have better punctuality, fewer customer complaints and higher revenue?
There was no better train service in the UK than the government run East Coast main line. First Class on that was like being treated as royalty.
My friend used in from Edinburgh to Nottingham and really liked it.
How is it then that over the last 20 years when the government has taken over rail franchises in Britain due to private sector failure they invariably have better punctuality, fewer customer complaints and higher revenue?
There was no better train service in the UK than the government run East Coast main line. First Class on that was like being treated as royalty.
Good. That shows how competitive pressure and intelligent regulation improves services. It doesn't show that ideologically-driven nationalisation, under pressure from producer interests, and without the threat of the franchise being removed, would do the same. Quite the opposite, of course, as we know well from experience in this country.
ISTR BR in the 1980s was the most efficient major railway in Europe. Efficient and shrinking, but efficient.
BR deserves much criticism, but also a fair amount of praise.
Indeed. The three passenger sectors of British Rail in the 1980s each managed their own remarkable success.
InterCity was profitable in itself after sectorisation. Network SouthEast under Chris Green transformed a run-down series of commuter railways into a tightly focused, convincingly marketed unit which was very successfully improving services line-by-line via the Networkers, the Chiltern route modernisation, and many other initiatives. (The 442s, InterCity-style rolling stock made from the remains of old commuter units, are perhaps the best example of NSE's ability to do much with little - and now, in 2017, they're being brought back into service!)
Regional Railways had in some ways the toughest job of all, but absolutely transformed the fortunes of many lines through Sprinterisation, which set the tone for much of today's railway and achieved a service level which many European railways' regional operations are only now catching up with. They were, however, hamstrung by the Treasury-imposed "managed decline" model which cut the three-carriage Express Sprinters (158s) down to two - something that has hampered ridership ever since, and is still felt on many lines.
...Network SouthEast under Chris Green transformed a run-down series of commuter railways into a tightly focused, convincingly marketed unit which was very successfully improving services line-by-line via the Networkers, the Chiltern route modernisation, and many other initiatives....
LOL! I was a commuter on Network SouthEast in that period, and the suggestion that it was 'very successfully improving services' is hilarious.
Merkel's paying the price for shafting the FDP in the previous GE
This time round she's going to get it over with early.
as TSE said re Mrs May - in what Universe do you think this result has strengthened her position ?
we are entering the post Merkel era, she may be in office but she is increasingly no longer in power
It's weakened all her opponents except the Greens and that amounts to the same thing. There's no sign of an internal putsch, and the course of the coalition negotiations so far has brought the CSU back into line.
Merkel's paying the price for shafting the FDP in the previous GE
This time round she's going to get it over with early.
as TSE said re Mrs May - in what Universe do you think this result has strengthened her position ?
we are entering the post Merkel era, she may be in office but she is increasingly no longer in power
It's weakened all her opponents except the Greens and that amounts to the same thing. There's no sign of an internal putsch, and the course of the coalition negotiations so far has brought the CSU back into line.
so basically youre not in this Universe ?
the CSU has knives out for Seehofer, he's not so much dead meat as roadkill, Merkel is losing authority in her party the country and Europe
you forget of course the AfD breakthough in to the Bundestag and that they are now here to stay. Job cuts in Saxony will only strengthen them in the East as Angie becomes unpopular
if there is a new election then a punt on Merkel losing her seat looks a decent outside bet
Completely ignoring my point that cars have become much more safe and much more reliable, without spiralling upwards in cost. Train fares have increased in real terms year on year while the cost of car transport has fallen.
The last two times I had to be out of London (Newcastle and Manchester respectively) the cost of the train ticket was far, far, far in excess of the petrol cost, about x3 the cost in fact. I am aware there are other costs to car ownership but the difference in price was very clear.
I didn't ignore your point: I pointed out it was bogus, as other countries have not had the stellar safety record our railways have had. Unless you're saying that Germany and France's railways (amongst others) are not as technically advanced?
There is a financial incentive, both in terms of rewards for successful completion, and in penalties for failure. I'm not sure what the situation on mainland Europe is in comparision. In other words, we throw a lot more money at it than we used to.
I am fairly certain advances in technology have made both car and train travel safer, would you compare road deaths in 1990 to road deaths in 2017 and expect them to be like-for-like?
One thing I can say with absolute certainty, though, is that since privatisation train fares have increased way above inflation.
e.g. "A London to Leeds return is now £154, up from £55 in 1995."
The train is an OK way to travel when a) work is paying for it or b) you book months in advance to get the best fare, but if you have to travel on the day (or quite often within a week or so) you have to pay full fare, which is prohibitively expensive compared to jumping in the car, assuming you have one, or catching the bus (if you don't). Car costs also fall dramatically when you are travelling as a group, as OldKingCole points out.
That is a result of:
1 - A policy slightly more directed towards "those who use the trains should pay for the trains". I can't see why that is controversial.
and 2 - Setting fares reasonably to reflect demand. Half of the increase you quote is inflation, and by travelling at sensible times just before or after rush hour you can at this moment book a London Leeds First Class return for tomorrow for some way below £100 - less than it was in 1995.
I would certainly agree with those who think investment needs to be delivered more evenly. On our local direct-to-London main line station it takes abut 90 minutes for people in wheelchairs to cross the platform, because they have to travel 30 minutes to a station where a lift exists, and then back again. This has been the position for around 25 years.
PS I note that that BBC article is nearly 5 years old, and somewhat cherry-picked.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
LOL! I was a commuter on Network SouthEast in that period, and the suggestion that it was 'very successfully improving services' is hilarious.
So the Networkers weren't an improvement on what went before, or the 442s? Or the Chiltern modernisation, Cambridge and Peterborough electrification, or Thameslink? The redeveloped Liverpool Street, Fenchurch Street, Oxford, or many other stations? You don't fix a system that large overnight, but I think you'd be hard-pushed to find a railway historian who didn't consider NSE a success.
Merkel's paying the price for shafting the FDP in the previous GE
This time round she's going to get it over with early.
as TSE said re Mrs May - in what Universe do you think this result has strengthened her position ?
we are entering the post Merkel era, she may be in office but she is increasingly no longer in power
It's weakened all her opponents except the Greens and that amounts to the same thing. There's no sign of an internal putsch, and the course of the coalition negotiations so far has brought the CSU back into line.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Anyone who has done anything good about immigration is instinctively disliked by PB Tories. Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser. Others won't be. The only non-CDU alternative is Martin Schulz.
I do hope the FDP get smashed in the next election.
As I thought, that is your hope but probably not going to happen
It is highly unlikely, voters deserted the Union because of immigration, at least those who left for the FDP and AfD, nothing has changed since then if anything the FDP and AfD will have a stronger message because Merkel wasn't willing to compromise on immigration forcing the FDP to walk away.
So the Networkers weren't an improvement on what went before, or the 442s? Or the Chiltern modernisation, Cambridge and Peterborough electrification, or Thameslink? The redeveloped Liverpool Street, Fenchurch Street, Oxford, or many other stations? You don't fix a system that large overnight, but I think you'd be hard-pushed to find a railway historian who didn't consider NSE a success.
Obviously if you buy new trains or invest in electrification, things should (all else being equal) improve. On our line (the Hastings line), service from 1987 when I started using it just got steadily worse for the next decade. It is miles better now, improved out of all recognition.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Anyone who has done anything good about immigration is instinctively disliked by PB Tories. Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser. Others won't be. The only non-CDU alternative is Martin Schulz.
This may go on for months and longer and in that time Europe will be in chaos.
Brexit may be delayed, it may not, but the federalists in Europe have reason to be very worried tonight
ISTR BR in the 1980s was the most efficient major railway in Europe. Efficient and shrinking, but efficient.
BR deserves much criticism, but also a fair amount of praise.
Indeed. The three passenger sectors of British Rail in the 1980s each managed their own remarkable success.
InterCity was profitable in itself after sectorisation. Network SouthEast under Chris Green transformed a run-down series of commuter railways into a tightly focused, convincingly marketed unit which was very successfully improving services line-by-line via the Networkers, the Chiltern route modernisation, and many other initiatives. (The 442s, InterCity-style rolling stock made from the remains of old commuter units, are perhaps the best example of NSE's ability to do much with little - and now, in 2017, they're being brought back into service!)
Regional Railways had in some ways the toughest job of all, but absolutely transformed the fortunes of many lines through Sprinterisation, which set the tone for much of today's railway and achieved a service level which many European railways' regional operations are only now catching up with. They were, however, hamstrung by the Treasury-imposed "managed decline" model which cut the three-carriage Express Sprinters (158s) down to two - something that has hampered ridership ever since, and is still felt on many lines.
Generally agree, but I doubt the Chiltern route modernisation is anything for BR to be proud of, especially as the modernisation comprised of rationaisation,, many of whose 'improvements' are being undone! But at least they saved the line.
ISTR one railwayman of the time saying something like: "whatever we ask for, the Treasury will give us half of, if we're lucky."
IMV the increase in passenger numbers and the success of the railways is not solely down to privatisation, and not by a long chalk. It's down to a change in attitude within the railways and the government. That may have been possible within the old BR structure, but I doubt it; for these reasons amongst others:
1) The railways needed to get rid of the deadwood management; the ones who thought the same way as their predecessors had for a hundred years, and who promoted those of similar mindsets. This was changing at the end of BR times with excellent people like Chris Green and others, but they were a few shining stars.
2) The railways needed a voice to government. BR did not have that voice; the lobbying capabilities of the privatised companies are much louder and strident.
3) The privatised companies were hungrier for passengers. For some in BR, passengers (and freight) were just an inconvenience, preventing them from doing things the way they'd always be done.
It may therefore be said that privatisation did not 'save' the railways, but the change of attitude caused by privatisation did.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Anyone who has done anything good about immigration is instinctively disliked by PB Tories. Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser. Others won't be. The only non-CDU alternative is Martin Schulz.
It won't be non-CDU though, it will be someone new from the CDU, Merkel will get deposed by her party if she leads them to the same or worse result.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Anyone who has done anything good about immigration is instinctively disliked by PB Tories. Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser. Others won't be. The only non-CDU alternative is Martin Schulz.
I do hope the FDP get smashed in the next election.
Yes, that's what they deserve. It's interesting that the CSU and Greens seemed to be working towards compromise, with Green leader Özdemir expressly thanking the CSU's Seehofer for his efforts in the coalition talks.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Anyone who has done anything good about immigration is instinctively disliked by PB Tories. Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser. Others won't be. The only non-CDU alternative is Martin Schulz.
I do hope the FDP get smashed in the next election.
Yes, that's what they deserve. It's interesting that the CSU and Greens seemed to be working towards compromise, with Green leader Özdemir expressly thanking the CSU's Seehofer for his efforts in the coalition talks.
some use that will be
Seehofer is due to make a statement on his political future on Thursday
People in London could easily commute to Amsterdam and Paris, certainly on a weekly basis. But I wonder whether it will be made a condition of their employment that they (and their families?) need to live in those countries.
Interesting that Frankfurt did not get the EBA. The French will be pleased though. They have rather lost out in terms of bank moves.
People in London could easily commute to Amsterdam and Paris, certainly on a weekly basis. But I wonder whether it will be made a condition of their employment that they (and their families?) need to live in those countries.
Interesting that Frankfurt did not get the EBA. The French will be pleased though. They have rather lost out in terms of bank moves.
My understanding was that the rest of the EU 27 didn't want to hand another financial institution to Germany and make it the even more powerful financial centre of the EU after our departure.
How is it then that over the last 20 years when the government has taken over rail franchises in Britain due to private sector failure they invariably have better punctuality, fewer customer complaints and higher revenue?
There was no better train service in the UK than the government run East Coast main line. First Class on that was like being treated as royalty.
Good. That shows how competitive pressure and intelligent regulation improves services. It doesn't show that ideologically-driven nationalisation, under pressure from producer interests, and without the threat of the franchise being removed, would do the same. Quite the opposite, of course, as we know well from experience in this country.
That would be fine if it weren't for the fact that ideologically-driven privatisation forced the more successful publicly East Coast main line run service to be given back to the private sector to screw up again!
On topic, Labour has no need to be purposeful, coherent, generous or trustful. It only needs to sit back and watch the Conservative party disintegrate into Brexit factions, then stroll across and pick up the reins of power.
How is it then that over the last 20 years when the government has taken over rail franchises in Britain due to private sector failure they invariably have better punctuality, fewer customer complaints and higher revenue?
There was no better train service in the UK than the government run East Coast main line. First Class on that was like being treated as royalty.
Good. That shows how competitive pressure and intelligent regulation improves services. It doesn't show that ideologically-driven nationalisation, under pressure from producer interests, and without the threat of the franchise being removed, would do the same. Quite the opposite, of course, as we know well from experience in this country.
That would be fine if it weren't for the fact that ideologically-driven privatisation forced the more successful publicly East Coast main line run service to be given back to the private sector to screw up again!
On topic, Labour has no need to be purposeful, coherent, generous or trustful. It only needs to sit back and watch the Conservative party disintegrate into Brexit factions, then stroll across and pick up the reins of power.
On present polling even despite the Tories problems the best Corbyn can get is a minority government not the clear overall majority your comments suggest he should get.
On topic, Labour has no need to be purposeful, coherent, generous or trustful. It only needs to sit back and watch the Conservative party disintegrate into Brexit factions, then stroll across and pick up the reins of power.
On present polling even despite the Tories problems the best Corbyn can get is a minority government not the clear overall majority your comments suggest he should get.
If we had seen the nadir of the Conservative party's problems now, I would understand your point. But things, as D:Ream didn't quite sing, can only get worse.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Anyone who has done anything good about immigration is instinctively disliked by PB Tories. Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser. Others won't be. The only non-CDU alternative is Martin Schulz.
What, exactly, is "good" about Merkel's approach?
She has:-
1. Breached all the rules/laws on asylum seekers. 2. Allowed a huge number of mostly young men without any vetting at all from countries with a long history of terrorism at a time of increased terrorist threat to Europe. 3. As a consequence of 1 and 2 allowed the conditions to arise in which there has been a considerable increase in crime (both knife-related and sexual) by many of those she has let in. 4. Then changed tack and has said that relatives may not come thus separating families and creating an injustice towards women and children, who are likely to be more vulnerable than fit young men. 5. Created the conditions in which a quasi-fascist party has significantly increased its vote. 6. Annoyed the countries around Germany which are now being expected to bear the costs of a German policy entered into without any regard to the interests or wishes of those other countries.
This is quite the opposite of a sensible immigration policy or indeed a sensible and compassionate policy towards genuine asylum seekers. It is all over the place, alternately too strict or too soft and animated by emotion and lack of thought.
Too many people think that the only fair immigration policy is one which allows in anyone who wants to come regardless of the wishes of those already in the country or the desirability of the person seeking to enter it. That's a stupidly soft-headed approach - and a dangerous one.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Anyone who has done anything good about immigration is instinctively disliked by PB Tories. Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser. Others won't be. The only non-CDU alternative is Martin Schulz.
Merkel is an EU Federalist and has shown zero interest in compromise with the UK, at least a more conservative CDU/CSU leader ideally from the CSU would be a tad more sympathetic to UK immigration concerns especially given the rise of the AfD. Schulz would be even worse than Merkel for the UK but with the SPD still trailing badly in the polls has next to no chance.
Curious perhaps that the Conservative German chancellor is so disliked by the pb.com conservative community. I suppose it’s because of refugees and immigration.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further. A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser.
Funny, I recall being told several times whoever won the german elections was irrelevant to Brexit because the approach was so logical and everyone was broadly in line with each other.
On topic, Labour has no need to be purposeful, coherent, generous or trustful. It only needs to sit back and watch the Conservative party disintegrate into Brexit factions, then stroll across and pick up the reins of power.
Probably true. But their problems then start once they are in government. Their own lack of coherence could then cause them similar problems to those currently afflicting the Tories.
Nobody learns. We have precisely zero idea about the next election. None.
Last time the Tories were miles ahead - outcome minority. Before that neck and neck - outcome majority. Between now and the election we have Brexit, new leaders and who knows what else. Labour's current position could signal anything.
Everyone needs to chill out and watch events unfold.
Comments
a month ago you were telling me Merkel was Queen and laughing at me saying she was in trouble
it's too early to call the election until the dust settles
I think I'd prefer Amsterdam over Milan at this point if I was working for the EMA.
I am fairly certain advances in technology have made both car and train travel safer, would you compare road deaths in 1990 to road deaths in 2017 and expect them to be like-for-like?
One thing I can say with absolute certainty, though, is that since privatisation train fares have increased way above inflation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21056703
e.g. "A London to Leeds return is now £154, up from £55 in 1995."
The train is an OK way to travel when a) work is paying for it or b) you book months in advance to get the best fare, but if you have to travel on the day (or quite often within a week or so) you have to pay full fare, which is prohibitively expensive compared to jumping in the car, assuming you have one, or catching the bus (if you don't). Car costs also fall dramatically when you are travelling as a group, as OldKingCole points out.
EMA results in next couple of mins apparently...
their one chance was Schauble but he's 76 and was booted into the long grass in September
Merkel's paying the price for shafting the FDP in the previous GE
Whats German for 'Doesn't she look tired'?'
I, foolishly with hindsight, didn't think the policy was gaining traction nationally because locally it wasn't having any impact.
Huzzah for the Dutch.
We've all heard the idea that a good Brexit deal is about squaring the key players who will then force the rest into line. Little evidence so far; indeed it's been impressive / frustrating (delete to taste) quite how united the EU27 have been to date.
What's your evidence for that?
we are entering the post Merkel era, she may be in office but she is increasingly no longer in power
BR deserves much criticism, but also a fair amount of praise.
This is a real crisis for the ever closer union and indeed Europe itself, especially if Germany swings harder right
Totally wrong on that - but looks like the tip was good, by a fluke,
There was no better train service in the UK than the government run East Coast main line. First Class on that was like being treated as royalty.
I had a quid on Amsterdam
A good city for English speakers, I am sure that staff will be happy there. Plenty of drugs too.
InterCity was profitable in itself after sectorisation. Network SouthEast under Chris Green transformed a run-down series of commuter railways into a tightly focused, convincingly marketed unit which was very successfully improving services line-by-line via the Networkers, the Chiltern route modernisation, and many other initiatives. (The 442s, InterCity-style rolling stock made from the remains of old commuter units, are perhaps the best example of NSE's ability to do much with little - and now, in 2017, they're being brought back into service!)
Regional Railways had in some ways the toughest job of all, but absolutely transformed the fortunes of many lines through Sprinterisation, which set the tone for much of today's railway and achieved a service level which many European railways' regional operations are only now catching up with. They were, however, hamstrung by the Treasury-imposed "managed decline" model which cut the three-carriage Express Sprinters (158s) down to two - something that has hampered ridership ever since, and is still felt on many lines.
I do hope the FDP get smashed in the next election.
the CSU has knives out for Seehofer, he's not so much dead meat as roadkill, Merkel is losing authority in her party the country and Europe
you forget of course the AfD breakthough in to the Bundestag and that they are now here to stay. Job cuts in Saxony will only strengthen them in the East as Angie becomes unpopular
if there is a new election then a punt on Merkel losing her seat looks a decent outside bet
Let's face it she has paid the price for her stupid decision on letting all to come in and it looks as if she is on the way out sooner or later
1 - A policy slightly more directed towards "those who use the trains should pay for the trains". I can't see why that is controversial.
and 2 - Setting fares reasonably to reflect demand. Half of the increase you quote is inflation, and by travelling at sensible times just before or after rush hour you can at this moment book a London Leeds First Class return for tomorrow for some way below £100 - less than it was in 1995.
I would certainly agree with those who think investment needs to be delivered more evenly. On our local direct-to-London main line station it takes abut 90 minutes for people in wheelchairs to cross the platform, because they have to travel 30 minutes to a station where a lift exists, and then back again. This has been the position for around 25 years.
PS I note that that BBC article is nearly 5 years old, and somewhat cherry-picked.
Another election will presumably delay our Brexit negotiations further.
A new leader of Germany would presumably be either Schulz or Merkel... not sure there is much between them from a Brexit perspective...
Ironically, if Merkel is gone it will be worse for UK and Brexit because she is by instinct a compromiser. Others won't be. The only non-CDU alternative is Martin Schulz.
Brexit may be delayed, it may not, but the federalists in Europe have reason to be very worried tonight
ISTR one railwayman of the time saying something like: "whatever we ask for, the Treasury will give us half of, if we're lucky."
IMV the increase in passenger numbers and the success of the railways is not solely down to privatisation, and not by a long chalk. It's down to a change in attitude within the railways and the government. That may have been possible within the old BR structure, but I doubt it; for these reasons amongst others:
1) The railways needed to get rid of the deadwood management; the ones who thought the same way as their predecessors had for a hundred years, and who promoted those of similar mindsets. This was changing at the end of BR times with excellent people like Chris Green and others, but they were a few shining stars.
2) The railways needed a voice to government. BR did not have that voice; the lobbying capabilities of the privatised companies are much louder and strident.
3) The privatised companies were hungrier for passengers. For some in BR, passengers (and freight) were just an inconvenience, preventing them from doing things the way they'd always be done.
It may therefore be said that privatisation did not 'save' the railways, but the change of attitude caused by privatisation did.
Vienna or Frankfurt.
Paris is no longer an option for work.
#Paris leads voting to win the European Banking Authority. It won round one on the #EBA with 34 points, against 32 for #Frankfurt and 28 for #Dublin
Seehofer is due to make a statement on his political future on Thursday
Interesting that Frankfurt did not get the EBA. The French will be pleased though. They have rather lost out in terms of bank moves.
She has:-
1. Breached all the rules/laws on asylum seekers.
2. Allowed a huge number of mostly young men without any vetting at all from countries with a long history of terrorism at a time of increased terrorist threat to Europe.
3. As a consequence of 1 and 2 allowed the conditions to arise in which there has been a considerable increase in crime (both knife-related and sexual) by many of those she has let in.
4. Then changed tack and has said that relatives may not come thus separating families and creating an injustice towards women and children, who are likely to be more vulnerable than fit young men.
5. Created the conditions in which a quasi-fascist party has significantly increased its vote.
6. Annoyed the countries around Germany which are now being expected to bear the costs of a German policy entered into without any regard to the interests or wishes of those other countries.
This is quite the opposite of a sensible immigration policy or indeed a sensible and compassionate policy towards genuine asylum seekers. It is all over the place, alternately too strict or too soft and animated by emotion and lack of thought.
Too many people think that the only fair immigration policy is one which allows in anyone who wants to come regardless of the wishes of those already in the country or the desirability of the person seeking to enter it. That's a stupidly soft-headed approach - and a dangerous one.
Nobody learns. We have precisely zero idea about the next election. None.
Last time the Tories were miles ahead - outcome minority. Before that neck and neck - outcome majority. Between now and the election we have Brexit, new leaders and who knows what else. Labour's current position could signal anything.
Everyone needs to chill out and watch events unfold.