QR Privatisation

[#Metro]

... from the Timetables> interruptions and delays thread. http://backontrack.org/mbs/index.php?topic=1862.280
Just for QR; rather than all the assets for sale...

Who is "they"?

QR Passenger is not for sale, and neither is QR Network. It is QR Coal and Freight that will be put up by Ms Bligh and I don't think delays or problems on the passenger network impact too much on that- since there are dedicated lines for freight and IIRC much of it travels around at night. IMHO selling QR Network (which owns the tracks) is a no-no. Rail network infrastructure (track,stations,rollingstock) are costly to buy and maintain. I think a lot of people (myself included) think selling the track assets to a for-profit entity is bad idea.

Problems on the passenger network affect frustrated commuters and are not good for staff, who cop abuse, have to rush out and fix the (many) problems under pressure, and figure out horrifically complicated things (like rebooting SCADA during peak hour) and have politicians, newspapers and TransLink make their discomforts known. All of this couldn't be good for staff morale, and would be counterproductive, so I don't think it is them- i think the network has some kind of (systemic) problem.

[ozbob]

This is just  a personal opinion.

I am of the view that a franchise operation of the Citytrain operation will occur down the track.  The government is getting caned by the constant disruptions and will be seen as a 'cure-all', government can stand off and say 'not our problem' and such nonsensical responses.

The CEO of TransLink Mr Peter Strachan was involved in Melbourne franchises at one point,  and the new Director rail at Translink has similar experience  I understand.

http://www.translink.com.au/aboutus.php#publications

Steve Banaghan, Director, Rail
When Steve joins TransLink in September 2009, he will be
responsible for managing the contract between QR and
TransLink, monitoring performance and special events.
Steve brings extensive rail management skills and will be
joining TransLink from the UK.

Some people have asked why a Director of Rail is needed at TransLink but that is another debate.  The franchise operation at Melbourne has not been an overwhelming success, principally because the Government has not kept pace with proper maintenance of track etc. (sound familiar?) but also the fact that franchise operators are driven by profit, pure and simple.  Since the VLine (government) has taken back the long haul stuff in Victoria it has boomed and is an outstanding success.

QR is the master of its own fate.  

A franchise outcome is not an absolute certainty if the present system gets it act together but unless there is a turn around it is highly probable IMHO.  Particularly viewed in the political context, a stumbling Labor Government, opposition just marking time ...

The Opposition needs to get its act together as well.  It must come up with a coherent transport policy that is achievable and sensible.

Political commitments to the effect that QR Passenger is not for sale are worthless IMHO.  They will simply say we are not selling but putting a franchise in place, or other political spin that matches the circumstance.

 

[#Metro]

The government is getting caned by the constant disruptions and will be seen as a 'cure-all', government can stand off and say 'not our problem' and such nonsensical responses.

Yes it is true, and this is a risk worth discussing:

There are 'good' public operators, and there are 'bad' public operators.
The above is true for private operators or hybrid operators (such as Keolis which appears to be a public/private alliance).
Neither public operation nor private operation is "magical";
Both have their own unique risks and problems that need avoiding. Because of this 'failure' is possible (and avoidable) under both public and private operation.

The profit motive can bring innovation and efficiency:

• Attracting more passengers means more money, and this pressures operators to do well
• Bad performance can be punished, bad operators get the boot
• Incentive to cut waste, streamline operation
• Introduce innovation (SMRT's early bird saver, cheap coffee, GoCard for taxi; Connex's installation of crossbars in
  trains to get passengers to stand away from the doors and thus fit more people in the train, MTR's TOD developments)

But if and only if the proper controls are in place because:

• They can pressure the government for more funding
  or concessions without net service increase. (also applies to public operators, presumably why TL contracts with QR).
• Undetected overoptimistic forecasts can lead to unplanned subsidy increase
• Inadequate funding for maintainence or rollingstock by the gov could lead to higher
  contract bid prices
• Inadequate funding for maintainence or rollingstock by the gov could lead to the operator
  going bankrupt (PR disaster for the gov, chaos for workers; NB: also applies somewhat to public operators)