Re: If rail privatisation hadn't happened
- From: john.porter1960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 22:28:19 -0700 (PDT)
On 28 May, 23:45, Colin Reeves <colinree...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The message <gg3u15h27hhmd7sb5ccl3vo2qk1ehm0...@xxxxxxx>
from Charles Ellson <char...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> contains these words:
On Thu, 28 May 2009 22:18:42 +0100, Arthur Figgis
<afig...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Colin Reeves wrote:
The message <scCdnX4Z_54kNoDXnZ2dnUVZ8oOdn...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
from Arthur Figgis <afig...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> contains these words:
So which private companies provide domestic open-access (not
contracted)
passenger operations on the nationalised - but EU - rail networks in
Ireland, France and Bulgaria?
When has France ever complied with an EU Directive unless it is clearly
in their favour?
They've separated infrastructure and operations. ish.
In that case they have gone beyond the EU directive which IMU requires
separate accounting but not separate entities.
Article 4
Member States shall take the measures necessary to ensure that as
regards management, administration and internal control over
administrative, economic and accounting matters railway undertakings
have independent status in accordance with which they will hold, in
particular, assets, budgets and accounts which are separate from those
of the State.
Charles - seems you are correct. I wish they used normal people to word
Directives rather than lawyers though!!
--
Colin
Nice discussion but in the end academic. None of the political parties
likely to form even a part of the next Govt. want to run railways, the
likely winner of the general election wants to allow private companies
to have more freedom and longer franchises. Public ownership isn't
going to happen.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: By Train to the Seaside
- Next by Date: Re: Argentine railways
- Previous by thread: Re: If rail privatisation hadn't happened
- Next by thread: Re: Gates again (this time in Cambridge)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
