Re: National Rail Corp

[ahonan@zipworld.com.au]

On Sun, 14 Nov 1999 21:59:23 GMT, mauried@commslab.gov.au (Maurie
Daly) wrote:

>In article <382e88ab@nap-ns1> "Grahame Ferguson" <grahamef@users.mcmedia.com.au> writes:
>>From: "Grahame Ferguson" <grahamef@users.mcmedia.com.au>
>>Subject: Re: National Rail Corp
>>Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 20:18:47 +1100
>
>
>>Grahame Ferguson wrote in message ...
>>>
>>>The point that we are all missing is that the creation of the NRC was
>>>supposed to be the start of seamless, one stop shop for rail freight to
>>>effectively and collectively to compete with road transport.  Instead we
>>now
>>>have a mongrel hybrid of a national rail system.
>>>
>>>The NRC are in competition with other rail operators.   They do not own any
>>>rail lines.  For them to operate a train from Sydney to Perth, they have to
>>>negotiate with 3 Rail Access Authorities, and has to comply to 3 different
>>>Accreditation authorities.  Hardly an integrated system designed to beat
>>>road transport.
>>>
>>>In Victoria we have the Department of Infrastructure, responsible for rail
>>>safety accreditation.  Victrack the owners and operators of the track.
>>>Freight Victoria who have a lease on their rail infrastructure, and are
>>>resposible to maintain it.  National Express who run the country passenger
>>>trains, half the suburban trains, and half the Trams.  Hillside Trains who
>>>run the other half of the suburban rail network.   Confused??    Victoria
>>is
>>>home to the mongrel hybrid.
>>>
>>>Governments are trying to promote competition.  But the bottom line is that
>>>Rail is competing against itself.  The Road Transport Lobby must have been
>>>the policy makers for the Federal and Victorian Governments.  The Road's
>>>competition (the Railways) has been reduced to an unco-ordinated
>>>self-destructing industry.
>>>
>>>If Rail Freight is to survive it must be run by one or two major players.
>>>If Queensland Railways bought the NRC, well at last they will be backed by
>>>pro-railway management who run an integrated railway. If FreightCorp bought
>>>it, then it would have a railway with assets and experience, and then it
>>>would have reduced competition by buying it , not by eliminating each other
>>>through bunkruptcy.
>>>
>>>Its true that all Governments stand accussed, and the slack stagnant
>>>attitude of past State Railway Bureaucracies, dug railways into a very deep
>>>pit.  But the new counter measures are counter productive and destructive.
>>>
>>>We have taken an unprooved model from the British at our peril.   In the
>>US,
>>>Freight Railroads own the tracks that they run on.  Mega - Mergers are the
>>>trend in the US, not downsizing, and they are doing this to increase their
>>>profits, and fight the common enemy - The Truck.
>>>
>>>Passenger Railroads are Government subsidised, as they provide a low
>>>pollution efficient mode of transporting the masses.  US cities are now
>>>rebuilding their urban railroads, reversing a 40 year trend.  As we are 20
>>>years behind in the trend.  We still build Freeways as the answer to our
>>>transport problems.  Who would want to be an asthmatic in Los Angeles
>>today,
>>>or Melbourne in 20 years.
>>>
>>>For National Rail to be a force in transport, it has to own and control the
>>>tracks over which it does its business.
>>>
>>>Imagine what would have happened if the NRC had of been given ownership and
>>>control of its tracks.  Imagine further if the NRC board had head hunted
>>>overseas for someone like Ed Burkhart as its first CEO.  But I don't want
>>to
>>>think of, is its probable politically expedient sell off, left to uneven
>>>market forces.  Would any of the NRC sale money be directed to new
>>>interstate trackwork?- Fat chance!!
>>>
>>>In the end, the question we must all ask, is possibly how, can the array of
>>>non-integrated large and small Rail operators, who face a wall of access
>>and
>>>accreditation bureaucracies ever survive in a limited market, especially
>>>when road has had all the advantages.
>>>
>>>
>>>Regards, GF.
>>>
>>>
>
>
>Absolutely spot on Graham, you have summarised the problem perfectly.
>Too many Rail Administrations administering what by world standards is a very 
>small Rail system,and its getting worse not better.
>In NSW where we used to have the NSWGR (New South Wales Govt Railways) we now 
>have SRA,Cityrail,Countrylink,Freightcorp,RAC and RSA , all to do the same 
>thing.
>Whilst I have problems with privatization , I now firmly beleive that this is 
>the only hope for rail in Australia , as we have to get Govt out of the Rail 
>business.
>One of the current problems with the sale of NRC at the moment is argument 
>about whether it can be sold to a Govt operator , (ie QR).
>The VIc govt arnt keen on this (dunno why).
>
>cheers
>MD
>
 I think that the rail transport sector needs to integrate more into
the supply chain in order to regain its competitive edge. It must be
run as a compelete transport logisitc operation with  integration to
road terminals and wharves. I would like to see someone like aTOLL and
Patricks as transport operators
There needs to be more investment in the infrastructure by the Govt.
and pricing neutrality between road and rail but after that have rail
as an arm of an enterprises' transport needs.

Regards
Andrew Honan