YouGov poll says majority of British voters favour re-nationalisation of railways

MGWR

Very oddly, it shows more UKIP voters favouring nationalisation than Tory voters. Wonder exactly whom they polled? UKIP, apart from what else they may be, claim to be libertarian, who favour en-masse privatisation, but the poll results run completely counter to such an assertion.

YouGov web site

Supporters of nationalising the energy companies include 52% of Conservative voters, and 74% of UKIP voters. And again, 52% of Conservatives are pro-nationalisation of the rail companies, as are 72% of UKIP supporters. ...

corktina

simply proves that most people are so stupid they will vote for anything depending on how it is worded.

GBOA

Given local experience of UKIP representatives, I wouldn't call them libertarian in the slightest.

Frank Lee Midere

corktina wrote: »

simply proves that most people are so stupid they will vote for anything depending on how it is worded.

Or it proves that British people are in favour of renationalising the railways and can understand simple questions.

A lot of UKIPs support is ex labour.

corktina

52% of Conservative voters in favour of re-Nationalisation? I should Cocoa, Maggie will spin in her grave.

It's like a poll of residents of the West being asked "would you like your line re-opened?" . It's too simple a question to get an informed answer.

GBOA

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

A lot of UKIPs support is ex labour.

I'd expect more of their support to be ex Tory.

You would have to assume that those who responded to the poll were able to discern between the "railway companies" as asked, and Network Rail. Most probably see them as one unfathomable entity.

Perhaps given the number of foreign TOCs though, it's easy to see why UKIP followers would want vote to privatise. UKIP makes no secret of its xenophobia.

MGWR

corktina wrote: »

simply proves that most people are so stupid they will vote for anything depending on how it is worded.

Trickery, then? Not unheard of in polls. Although I wouldn't look at it through a misanthropic eyeglass myself, or at least I try not to.

corktina

well. yougov polls are fundamentally flawed in that they aren't made from representative selection of persons, merely from people with an axe to grind. Thus all those people who are quite happy with the status quo don't vote...why would they even look at a poll?

GBOA

I actually take part in YouGov polls but never seem to be invited to take part in polls that are quoted in various media outlets, mostly mundane nonsense about banking and television! I am inclined to think that the polls are targeted at a certain demographic rather than completely random.

Also bear in mind that by taking part in YouGov polls, you get points which can be redeemed for money so it is in effect, incentivised. I'd take any YouGov poll with a pinch of salt.

Banjoxed

God the shock of it! This chap disagrees with Corktina:

http://thenextrecession.wordpress.com/2013/11/05/oh-dear-what-are-the-british-people-thinking-of/

Just goes to show there is more than one way of running public utilities and that most responders didn't care to be screwed on pricing the way the companies who benefitted from the windfall from the taxpayer handing over their businesses to them. Funny that.

corktina

but the question is flawed as it should go on to say "and are you willing to pay "X" amount more in subsidies out of your taxes which will have to be raised" AND " are you happy to give back the profit you made buying (for example) Royal Mail shares

Loaded questions....

Banjoxed

corktina wrote: »

but the question is flawed as it should go on to say "and are you willing to pay "X" amount more in subsidies out of your taxes which will have to be raised" AND " are you happy to give back the profit you made buying (for example) Royal Mail shares

Loaded questions....

Well that's a valid way of looking at it. In reality, what should have happened when Labour were in power during 1997-2010 was to say to the electorate "We will renationalise the privatised utilities OR guarantee price/service levels to your satisfaction, but this will cost you x pence on your income tax." Instead, Blair and Brown both squandered their governments on sucking up to the domestic Right in the press and to Bush internationally.

Then the Lib Dems got a record vote as a result of dissatisfied centre-left voters moving to them, and they put the Tories in. Nice one. :rolleyes: Truly Ken Livingstone was right when he said that if voting changed anything "they" would abolish it, or at least make choice meaningless.

Banjoxed

Here's an even more trenchant critique from the Grauniad: yes, what you'd expect but the article persuasively puts numbers behind its viewpoint:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/rail-privatisation-train-operators-profit

GBOA

And another opinion piece

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22700805

Surely the best option would be a not for profit company such as the model used for Network Rail?

Frank Lee Midere

corktina wrote: »

but the question is flawed as it should go on to say "and are you willing to pay "X" amount more in subsidies out of your taxes which will have to be raised" AND " are you happy to give back the profit you made buying (for example) Royal Mail shares

Loaded questions....

Whats Royal Mail got to do with this? The railways were privatised by selling the rights to the lines to mostly existing companies, like Virgin etc. So maybe their shareholders would be upset. The effect that would have on the poll is minimal.

The funny thing about this nonsense is that there is no free market - and therefore no competition - in railway privatisation. If First piss you off on the Bristol line there is little you can do about it, you cant hope to take the next virgin train to Bristol because they don't run trains to Bristol. Every decade or more there is another auction, which is mostly about the best deal promised to the Government, and you have little input. If you don't like First, they will get it if they offer the best deal which generally means a greater cost to the consumer. This is effectively a private monopoly when the rights are granted. The price the company can charge is the same as a State Monopoly, plus it makes provision for CEO salaries, stock options and profit for shareholders. It can never be more efficient. If there are to be monopolies then make them public monolpiles. The only people who fetishise private railways never ride private railways.