Deutche Bahn in the UK

The "railroad police" in the UK is the British Transport Police, who are a regular police service, not a private force belonging to the railways. UK railway companies do not have their own private police forces.

I've just been in UK for three weeks, staying with family in Brighton but making several trips to London, and I experienced some of the problems with Southern. Not good. I can see why regular commuters are upset. I agree with George completely that we need re-nationalisation of the railways.

johnthefireman wrote:The "railroad police" in the UK is the British Transport Police, who are a regular police service, not a private force belonging to the railways. UK railway companies do not have their own private police forces.

Thank you, John. The NJ Transit police have full police powers.

philipmartin wrote:

george matthews wrote: Really, you should not interpret situations here in terms of US practice.

I suppose that you are referring to railroad police. I don't know if they exist in Europe, and was suggesting that, if they do, it might be an answer to John's question about the female officer.
Railroading is basically the same the world over, and I thought that North American railroad police might have counterparts in Europe. It may not be pertinent here but as we all know, the GWR used policemen as signalmen early in its history.
Thank you for pointing out the correct spelling of "Deutsche."

It may be that throughout the world railways consist of steel rails supporting steel wheels. But in ownership and supervision there are many varieties. The American system of ownership and state supervision is far from universal. Indeed it may be unique and to many observers from outside appears very strange. The abandonment of most passenger services seems to me a disaster. Even within Europe there are many varieties of ownership, and the laws change from time to time. In Britain the so-called "privatisation" enacted by the John Major government is not proving a great success, especially in the Southern franchise. The privatisation of the track ownership actually contributed to some very serious train crashes with loss of life, mainly due to poor organisation of track maintenance by poorly qualified companies. The government found no alternative to taking it back into national ownership as Network Rail. As time passes the days of British Rail seem more and more attractive.

johnthefireman wrote:I may have misunderstood the OP, but I'm wondering what authority an Eastern European police officer would have at Acton yard. As far as I know Acton would come under the jurisdiction of the Met and the British Transport Police. While there are Polish police officers patrolling in one or two parts of the UK where Poles have been subject to xenophobic attacks, particularly since the Brexit vote, they patrol only with their British counterparts and have no police powers in the UK.

Is Acton still a base for Eurostar? That would give it an international role.

That "treatise" that I posted about the class 66 locomotives says that in 1996 "They [the Wisconsin Central] decided to order new locomotives to reinvigorate rail freight (at that time it made up a measly 6% of the UK freight market).
About two years later, (I guess from reading the article,) "the UK railfreight market was steadily growing as more and more operators entered the market."

It sounds like a free enterprise success.

It sounds like a free enterprise success story.

But it's not. Government rules and supervision control what lines are retained and whether new ones are built.

And with the passenger train operating companies, government also has a great deal of control over what types of trains they can design, order and build, over service frequencies and routes, and all sorts of other things.

UK style "privatization" sounds designed to fail. It gives the impression that the government is in favor of free enterprise when in fact it isn't. I've mentioned before, the demoralizing effect of working for a temporary enterprise instead of a permanent one.
George mentions "train crashes with loss of life, mainly due to poor organisation of track maintenance by poorly qualified companies." I think this is an example of privatization designed to fail.

But how is rail freight in the UK doing these days? Is it making the private companies money or not?

Personally I believe that essential social services like the railways are too important to be left to the vagaries of the free market and profit motives. Railways are necessary for society (at least in Europe) even if they make a financial loss, and certain routes and services are necessary whether free marketeers see a market or not.

johnthefireman wrote:Personally I believe that essential social services like the railways are too important to be left to the vagaries of the free market and profit motives.

Are the vagaries of public servants more conducive to excellence? Ask your typical Zimbabwean about the excellent rail service his government provides

philipmartin wrote:UK style "privatization" sounds designed to fail. It gives the impression that the government is in favor of free enterprise when in fact it isn't. I've mentioned before, the demoralizing effect of working for a temporary enterprise instead of a permanent one.
George mentions "train crashes with loss of life, mainly due to poor organisation of track maintenance by poorly qualified companies." I think this is an example of privatization designed to fail.

But how is rail freight in the UK doing these days? Is it making the private companies money or not?

Privatisation was urged on by the sort of Tories who were enthused with the theory but ignorant of the practical consequences. Thatcher for example did not propose it as she was aware of the kind of problems that have in fact occurred. Why Major supported it is a mystery to me. Why Blair did not repair the damage is also a mystery.

philipmartin wrote:Are the vagaries of public servants more conducive to excellence? Ask your typical Zimbabwean about the excellent rail service his government provides

I hardly think that comparing Zimbabwe and the UK is very helpful.

A better comparison closer to home was a few years ago when the company running the East Coast main line passenger services collapsed financially (if I recall correctly it was the second company to do so). The franchise was taken over by civil servants for a couple of years while a new franchise was sorted out, and they ran it far better and more profitably than the private company had done. They were so good that many people suggested that the civil service should be allowed to put in a bid to run it as a franchise, but that goes against the free market ideology, so they had to hand over to another private company. Of course foreign governments are allowed to bid for UK private franchises, but our own government isn't. Strange.

Sorry about the comparison of Zimbabwe with the UK, John. As we know, Zimbabwe has a much better run government. It is helpful in that it shows that government run enterprises are not necessarily better than private ones.
I've never heard the appreciation of free enterprise referred to as an ideology before. It's a part of being free, a natural desire of all men.
To quote John: "They were so good that many people suggested that the civil service should be allowed to put in a bid to run it as a franchise." It may not be the case here, but there are people who make a lot of noise to further their objectives.

I have visited and travelled through and round Zimbabwe, though not for some time. Experience there has nothing to say about railways in countries like Britain. I don't think anyone, however deluded, would describe the government there as competent. It reflects the crazy notions of its president, still alive, worse luck.

philipmartin wrote:It's [free enterprise] a part of being free, a natural desire of all men.

Well we're going off railways here, but that statement is an opinion, not a fact. It can be (and is) also argued that humans (not just men) have a "natural desire" to cooperate and work communally for the common good rather than for profit, if not universally, at least within certain communal units - family, clan, tribe, nation, society, religious body, trade union.