Is the UK government right to leave train stations crumbling?

Question

10 of the "worst" stations in England had been identified for £50m of improvements, including Manchester Victoria, Wigan North Western, Crewe, and Liverpool Central.

The historic Crewe station, a vital hub in the UK national rail network, is falling apart and is a disgrace. It gets considerable traffic and should have far better facilities. This is possibly the most important station outside London and needs to be improved.

The major NS/EW junction of Warrington Bank Quay is also a disappointment, considering it is a major town on the West Coast mainline, and a junction connecting a North Wales service (which ought to go to Holyhead rather than terminating at Llandudno), the station has nothing and is too bleak.

The underground Liverpool Central is like a dungeon, its overcrowded island platforms an accident waiting to happen, and again a lack of proper facilities.

Wigan North Western, another identified for cash for regeneration, is a disgrace for the town, with a small part time café seating perhaps 4 or 5 people, a wooden shed on one of the platform islands serving as a waiting room, and one on the opposite island resembling a dungeon.

Clapham Junction, with trains coming in at a rate of more than 1 every 30 seconds in peak times, one of the world's busiest stations, has absolutely nothing.

Why are these stations which were identified for funding being ignored?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/10154987.stm

Answer 1

Maybe there's only so much you can do in the middle of a recession. The vulnerable in society are still going to want their benefits.

Answer 2

You highlight a few stations that are in a poorish state, thought not nearly as bad as you state. On the network as a whole most stations are cleaner, have had more re-furbishment and have been made more user friendly than at any time since the second world war. Huge progress has been made in providing not only clean and re-furbished stations but beter places to eat and drink, clean toilets and better facilities for the disabled as well as high tech train running information. The responsibility for stations rests with Network Rail and the train operating companies, not the U.K. government. You talk about money fleeced from passengers by Branson. Virgin Trains must make a profit to stay in business; they provide new Pendolino trains, shortly to be extended in length,

running every 20 minutes from London Euston to Manchester in 2 hours 8 minutes and 83 minutes

from London Euston to Birmingham. British Rail's services were hourly and slower. You are looking backwards to a past era with a false positivity.

(There is c urrently a massive building project at Clapham Junction constructing lifts from the overbridge to all platforms)

Answer 3

Announcements have been made about station improvements - including all those that you mention. The new Government has not stated that these works have been cancelled in the spending cuts announced earlier this week. Remember, that there is no magic wand to be waved which will mean the work will be miraculously done overnight. It all takes time, and has to be programmed and done around the continued use of busy stations.



The train operating companies, whether they make a profit or not, have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with station improvement, although they may act as managers. The repair and improvement of infrastructure falls entirely within the remit of Network Rail which is, effectively, a nationalised organisation in all but name and funded from taxation.

Answer 4

There are only 66 stations in Category B.

Branson is the head of Virgin trains. Train operating companies are not responsible for stations. Stations are owned and operated by Network Rail. Train operating companies have no control whatsoever over what Network Rail do with the money to them by train operating companies for the right to operate the franchise. That is between Network Rail and the government.

If you are somehow anti-Branson, you seem to have picked the wrong topic. He runs trains and passengers are satisfied with their punctuality and reliability. Even if a station at which his trains call, collapsed during the night, it is still not his problem. He only operates trains

Answer 5

It's a disgrace. The government wants more people to use the trains, but doesn't seem prepared to make the railways attractive to travel on. Many stations have been reduced to unstaffed halts, with bus type shelters and little else - no toilets, no refreshments, nothing.



All these train companies are making massive profits, and in any other country they would be obliged to use that money to improve facilities for their passengers.

Answer 6

Good point, before tens of millions are spent on a new 'hi-speed' rail lines, the existing rail network needs to be brought up to standard. When the railways were privatised we were told we wouldn't have to pay a subsidy to maintain the railways. We're still paying a subsidy and train company directors are collecting millions in profits from exorbitant fares.

Answer 7

No British government has been prepared to spend as much on the infrastructure as most other countries. I have a friend who travels extensively in all european countries and even Romania has better roads and railways. And I was shocked to learn that our personal tax burden is one of the lowest in the EEC. Is that why we spend so much more on big TV's, mobile phones, fast food and booze, while things that really matter go hang? I don't know. Perhaps you do.

Answer 8

British Rail was privatised years ago. Some stations are owned by rail companies and some are owned by Network Rail (ex-Railtrack).