Re: Passenger Rail Privatisation

["dirtcircuitvideos" <dirtcircuitvideos@bigpond.com>]

Privatisation is ok so long as Railway Stations
and other Railway buildings are included in the
deal and not left to the Vandals.
As in Peterborough South Australia.
Thats my bit,
Robin.
-- 
Dirtcircuit Videos
 Email:  dirtcircuitvideos@bigpond.com
Webpage:  http://www.users.bigpond.com/dirtcircuitvideos.htm

Edward Slee <ews3@ozemail.com.au> wrote in article
<77e7bc$93p$1@reader1.reader.news.ozemail.net>...
> There have been a few threads recently regarding passenger rail
> privatisation, generally suggesting that privatisation is not possible
> because the fares would go up dramatically etc. when the government
subsidy
> is removed.  This is not generally the case in rail privatisations.
> Instead, the government pays a rail subsidy to the private operator to a
> schedule agreed prior to the privatisation.  Usually the subsidy
diminishes
> over time.
> 
> This has the following advantages:
> 1) Government can budget accurately for future years
> 2) The value of the Community Service provided by the government is
clearly
> defined and accounted
> 3) Certainty of subsidy income for the private rail operator
> 
> Privatisation creates an environment in which the rail operator can focus
> more effectively on increasing patronage and revenue by meeting customer
> needs.  Political interference is presumably reduced.  I have travelled
the
> length and breadth of the privatised NZ Rail system (Tranz Rail) over the
> last two years and it was a great experience - they are customer
focussed,
> rather than operationally focussed.
> 
> As a taxpayer and rail user, I would like to see ALL of Australia's rail
> systems privatised under this model. I'm probably putting the cat among
the
> pigeons with this post, but I strongly believe that privatisation is in
the
> best interests of the broader community.
> 
> Regards
> Ed
> 
> 
>