• Ramifications of "Brexit" for railways

  • Discussion about railroad topics everywhere outside of North America.
Discussion about railroad topics everywhere outside of North America.

Moderators: Komachi, David Benton

  • 202 posts
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14
  by philipmartin
 
I wrote that our ALP45dps are made in Chermany, but Wiki says that they are made in Poland. They are made by Bombardier, a Canadian company. The diesel engines are manufactured by Caterpillar in Indiana, USA.
Here's a link to a puff piece from Bombardier's website. http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NJT's multilevel coaches are built by Bombardier in North America.
  by george matthews
 
johnthefireman wrote:Of course. But it's interesting that I have not yet seen any speculative article headlined "Railways will thrive and expand due to Brexit". It seems at best it will be business as usual, at worst there will be new challenges due to Brexit.
Today's news says the French are delaying passengers crossing the channel. Their excuse of course is the various terrorist events that have occurred recently but they may be hinting at the results of exit from the EU.

Obviously leaving the EU will not benefit railways but may not hinder them much either.
  by NH2060
 
So far -as of right now- HS2 is not going to be cancelled and it appears the new gov't in London does not intend on scrapping it. It's biggest threat to becoming a reality is probably not going to be Brexit related.


Two areas that are of particular interest in the post-Brexit world are:

1) Iarnrod Eireann/NI Railways. Theresa May has said that she does not want a return to the dreaded "hard border" between the Republic and the North and would like to see at worst a "soft border" where business can continue as usual with some form of electronic tracking.

OTOH I don't see how the Dublin-Belfast trains won't need to be stopped at the border for some kind of customs check. Even during the Troubles (when at one time in the late 1980s the main line was considered one of the most dangerous stretches of railway in the world) AFAIK there was no customs inspection akin to what takes place on Amtrak's Adirondack since both the Republic and the UK were both members of the European Economic Community. This time around things will be different and may make passenger rail travel a tad more complicated.

In addition EU funds have contributed quite a bit to overall funding of various rail projects on the island. You can see big blue signs with the yellow circle of stars detailing "what's happ'nin'" with each project. In fact the recent overhaul of the viaduct @ Drogheda was a project that received EU funding.

And then of course there's the possibility of a United Ireland- and it's not as far fetched as it was just a month and a half ago- in which case both Iarnrod Eireann and Translink would presumably merge and rebrand (perhaps retaining the Iarnrod Eireann name) and their respective fleets would/could get pooled together.

2) ScotRail

Scotrail plans to increase the number of services by or on 2018 to around 2500 trains per day across the country. Once the UK leaves the EU (or Scotland leaves the UK and re-joins the EU) where does that leave for the investment made in those extra trains. Do they stay? Are trains dropped? Do other ail infrastructure/capacity improvements suffer? Scores of folks have been saying that no longer having direct ties to the UK will put an independent Scotland in a real bind vs. others who claim that Scotland should go their own way and make their own choices without any "intrusion" from London.
  by David Benton
 
I don't recall a border stop between Belfast and Dublin, when I rode in the early 1990's. I remember armed ( machine guns)soldiers on the train , but I can't remember if they checked my passport.
I think Ireland is still quite politically complicated, and a united Ireland still some way off. I can't see whatever happens there affecting the railways too much.
An independent Scotland, staying in the EU, is less complicated. I imagine England would still be its biggest trading partner , and its border would be open. Rail traffic should be similar to now, albeit with Scotland possibly receiving EU grants for rail projects , and England paying for its own Projects.
  by george matthews
 
I crossed that border in 1964, travelling from Belfast on a journey that started in Edinburgh and the ferry to Belfast. I remember a check of some kind, probably amounted to a customs check but I don't remember having to open any bags. I was going to Dublin to pick up a boat on the Shannon. The modern train is a lot more "modern" than the train then.
  by george matthews
 
Anyway it is by no means certain that Britain will leave the EU. The future is very uncertain. The whole concept of "Referendum" is doubtful. The actual consequences of leaving the EU would prove very damaging indeed, and it is clear that the establishment is fully aware of this. Cameron's reputation is rapidly going down hill now that he has left. Apparently he hoped for a "remain" vote. In that case his duty was to make sure it happened. He was very careless at allowing it to go the way he didn't intend. The noisy tories who advocated "leave" are I think losing influence.
  by BandA
 
Obviously, if there are border controls and visa requirements, cross-border passenger traffic will go down. The impact of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt is still uncertain, I am afraid. One of the most interesting articles pointed out that new trade treaties will have to be negotiated (such as rail equipment, to bring it back on topic). EU apparently has hundreds of bureaucrats that work on this while UK has none since they haven't had to negotiate their own trade treaties since 1974, so they would have to repatriate some Brits who work for the EU or start from scratch.

Nobody has mentioned freight yet. How will freight trains in UK be impacted?

[OT] why would Scotland be required to adopt the Euro if it rejoined the EU separately? [OT] why does Greece have to drop the Euro if they default on their loans (apparently they don't?)

Are railroads in UK nationally regulated, or is there an EU agency in charge?
  by David Benton
 
I think any new member of the EU has to adopt the Euro.
Possibly Scotland could be considered an existing member.
I think the individual countries still have their own trade departments, but use EU rules and guidelines. Countries such As the UK have their former colonies to consider. For example, New Zealand gets better access to the UK market for our Lamb and butter, than it does for the rest of the EU. (Before the UK joined the EEC, it took around 60 % of our exports, now its about 15%).
I don't think England was a gateway for Europe, as far as freight goes, so port to Europe traffic should not change. Rail has struggled to gain the market share you would think it would since the opening of the channel tunnel, so probably not alot of change there either.
One change for freight , England would presumably not have to offer access to European operators such as DB, after Brexit. However it would be poor form to suddenly kick them out , I would expect any existing contracts to run their course.
I think railways in Britain are nationally regulated , within EU guidelines, or requirements.
  by kato
 
The port gateway for Europe, especially regarding ship-to-rail transshipment is Benelux and the German north sea coast. The ports along that area - from Antwerp to Hamburg - together handle around 40% (!) of all international freight moved by ship in the entire European Union. British ports account for 14% altogether (the southeastern ports towards the EU for around 10% by themselves), Spanish for 13%, Italian ports for 11%, French ports for 9% and everyone else together for the remaining 13%.
There's an interesting official study on modal shares for European freight ports here.

As for the Euro, Scotland would currently (by a pretty large margin) not fulfill the economic preconditions for being allowed into the Euro zone and would hence get a "derogation" until it meets the requirements - just like Sweden still has and all Eastern European countries did upon entry. As for Railway Regulations in Britain, they're authentically British, and in their privatization drive - since the mid-90s - go well beyond EU guidelines.
  by philipmartin
 
Just for clarification, I have inserted my own remarks in George's quote.

Moderator note: lets stick to the EU and the effects on the Railways, and NEVER modify somebodies post in a quote. You can add your own comment after the quote, and you can shorten a quote to the part you are responding too , but you can't change the context of their post.
  by george matthews
 
Actual negotiations won't begin until next year - 2017 - and may go on for years.
  by philipmartin
 
george matthews wrote:Anyway it is by no means certain that Britain will leave the EU. The future is very uncertain. The whole concept of "Referendum" is doubtful. The actual consequences of leaving the EU would prove very damaging indeed, and it is clear that the establishment is fully aware of this. Cameron's reputation is rapidly going down hill now that he has left. Apparently he hoped for a "remain" vote. In that case his duty was to make sure it happened. He was very careless at allowing it to go the way he didn't intend. The noisy tories who advocated "leave" are I think losing influence.
"leaving the EU would prove very damaging indeed," and "his duty was to make sure it happened."
These two statements of dubious veracity are allowed to stand, but my questioning them is deleted. Why?
  by David Benton
 
Your post is been deleted because of reference to a new world order.
You are misreading what George said. George said , "Apparently he hoped for a "remain" vote. In that case his duty was to make sure it happened".
That is the way a parliament works. If the PM wants something to happen, he needs to make sure he has the backing of enough MPs to make it happen. I think what George is saying is , if Cameron wanted to remain in the EU, he should have put more effort into presuading the electorate to vote remain. He is not implying that Cameron should sabotage the referundum after the fact.
Perhaps the use of the word "duty" is confusing you .
  by philipmartin
 
Thank you, David, for the explanation. Obviously I understand George differently than you do.
Cheers.
  by JayBee
 
Abellio has won the East Anglia contract and will order 169 new trainsets to operate the franchise. Bombardier(Derby) will build 22 10-car EMUs and 89 5-car EMUs. Stadler will build 10 12-car EMUs for Norwich - London stopping services, 10 12-car EMUs for Stansted Express services, 24 Bi-mode EMU/DMU 4-car units and 14 Bi-mode 3-car units for Regional services.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 14