Competition is one of my four horsemen of the rail privatisation apocalypse. Competition is generally a good thing. Rivalry with other magazines certainly keeps me on my toes.
However, trying to force competition in situations where the practical realities prevent it can only make things worse. Take passenger rail services as a proven example.
In the beginning, it was envisaged that competing franchise operators would bid for timetable paths on an eight-weekly cycle. This was shortlived when it was patiently explained that this a) wasn’t feasible and b) wouldn’t work into Waterloo, say.
Faced with this removal of one of the fundamental ‘benefits’ of privatisation, the government fell back to the argument that passenger train operators would still have to compete, but through the franchise bidding process. How well that turned out can be seen in the history of the Inter-city East Coast franchise.
SIGNALLING
For economic regulators, such as the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), competition is one of the essential tools of the profession, along with benchmarking, in the perpetual struggle to ensure their charges provide value for the state’s money they receive. If firms don’t fight to the death for a contra…
