Last December, in the middle of a bout of extreme weather that ironically saw the suspension of all rail services in Scotland, a dedicated group of Co-operative party members and transport experts met in a room in the Holyrood Hotel in Edinburgh for the launch of ‘ScotRail – a people’s railway for Scotland’. The pamphlet was written by Paul Salveson from the University of Huddersfield on behalf of the Co-operative party, Sera and Aslef.
In it, we argued that the current system was no way to run a railway, making the case for a new kind of train operator whose primary commitment would be to the people of Scotland.
The proposals set out how a not-for-profit enterprise with co-operative principles at its heart could work. Working closely with Transport Scotland, Network Rail, local authorities and other transport providers, it could deliver better value for money, improved accountability and a first-class passenger experience. It would do this by ensuring that passengers, staff, local communities and the taxpayer all have a formal voice in decision-making, drawing on their specific insights, interests and expertise.
On Monday, shadow secretary of state for transport Mary Creagh and Scottish shadow infrastructure secretary James Kelly brought that vision for a ‘People’s ScotRail’ one step closer, by announcing that under a future Labour government in Westminster, Holyrood would have new powers when tendering Scottish rail services. This decision means that in future ScotRail could be delivered by a public sector or arms-length not-for-profit organisation.
Ever since the collapse of the West Coast Mainline bidding process, the future of the rail network has become a hot political topic. In the Labour party there have been strong voices on both sides of the argument, an indication of how deeply members and activists care about this issue.
But beyond the fine detail of rail policy, it is also clear that this debate has a much wider significance. It is about how the next Labour government will work on behalf of hard-pressed consumers, reforming dysfunctional markets and breaking up unaccountable oligopolies. It is about how we create a more accountable state, in which citizens and frontline staff have a real voice in how services are designed and delivered. About how we will promote a different kind of economy where power and ownership are more widely spread.
By making co-operative and mutual solutions a central part of our plan for the railways, Creagh and Kelly have highlighted the fresh thinking that is shaping Labour’s wider policy offer. There is an understanding that in the push to raise standards and improve passenger accountability, it is not simply a question of trying to turn the clocks back to British Rail versus a continuation of the status quo. In rail as on a whole range of issues, our choice is larger than simply public and private, between – as Ed Miliband put it – the ‘unresponsive state’ and the ‘untamed market’.
Ultimately, a key way we improve vital services such as railways is through greater accountability to the people that use, pay for and work in them. Too often people feel as distant from decision makers, whether they sit in Whitehall or in a boardroom. A 2009 YouGov survey showed that 81 per cent of regular rail users felt that they should have more say in the way the way the railways are run.
There is a recognition within the Labour party that co-operative and mutual models based on shared ownership and accountability, are a key part of the solution. As well as endorsing mutual and co-operative transport solutions, delegates at last weekend’s National Policy Forum adopted Co-operative party amendments in support of co-operative schools, co-operative housing, community energy generation, the expansion of credit unions, a strengthened voice for patients in NHS foundation trusts, and new support for employee ownership and co-operative startups.
For the best part of a century the Co-operative party and the Labour party have worked together to make the case and win the argument for radical social change in Britain. Today it is clear that those shared values are as strong and important as they have ever been.
The announcement of a ‘people-powered’ railway with a strong voice for staff and passengers at its heart is a real statement of intent. Together, we can put these values at the heart of our offer to the British public, and at the heart of our plans for a Labour and Co-operative government.
———————————————-
Karin Christiansen is general secretary of the Co-operative party
———————————————-
Photo: Ryan Woolies
Only problems are that no-one wants this (4 out of 5 of the public want nationalisation) and that co-ops and mutuals can’t compete effectively with the big boys unless they become open to private investors and just another route in for private capital. Same situation in NHS, where Maude is forever trying to mutualise the NHS (see https://www.opendemocracy.net/ournhs/caroline-molloy/we-all-already-own-nhs-latest-mutual-spin-is-about-taking-it-out-of-our-hands). Whatever happened to the co-op movement?
Have you read the pamphlet?
Remember that Train Operating Companies aren’t capital intensive. They don’t own the trains or the tracks they run on. Their biggest spend under the current franchising scheme seems to be on new liveries and uniforms.
Advocates of “nationalisation” can’t honestly believe that having local services dictated by civil servants in the Department against Transport is a good thing, can they? And, of course, everyone believes that the Treasury has the best understanding of the needs of the travelling public.
I am co-creator of a railway cooperative here in Argentina. Our goal is to reactivate an abandoned line. I am going to read the pamphlet,congratulation for this new perspective.