The six-month trial removing peak time fares on Scotland’s railways was much in last week’s news. Very welcome for regular commuters I’m sure, but was it worthy of the coverage and hype? At the end of the day, will it improve services for the rest of us? Will it contribute to a system matching those in other countries?
A country’s transport infrastructure and operation, particularly its railways, tell us much about its economic, social, educational, engineering and construction capacity. Given our diminished circumstances, last week’s decision to scrap HS2 north of Birmingham was sensible. It was also a sad reflection on our current and future ability to deliver major engineering and construction projects.
Although not a regular user, I had cause to travel by rail last week. It was okay; just. Probably not all that different from similar journeys of 20 years ago. By coincidence, a relative has had recent experience of train travel in China. We compared experiences. She described, for example, being marshalled on a numbered section of the platform. A bit authoritarian perhaps, but effective. When her train pulled in, on time to the second, the number on both her ticket and the carriage door directly in front of her, corresponded to that on the platform.
Boarding was quiet and orderly, and the train departed on time. The carriage and seats were immaculate. Without exception, passengers respected the space and sensitivities of fellow travellers. Rather different from my recent journey from Glasgow Queen Street, where raucous laughter and loud telephone conversations, even in the quiet coach, were de rigueur.
I’ve also been interested in Jane McDonald’s recent series, Lost in Japan. In particular, her experiences on Japanese state-of-the-art railways. A world away from the UK’s miserable InterCity experience.
The Japanese have no intention of resting on their laurels. Plans are well advanced for the introduction of driverless Shinkansen trains travelling at around 300kmh. All, by 2028! 200million yen has been earmarked for the project. Will they make the ambitious deadline? Would they have successfully completed HS2? Of course they would. Though it’s probably a tad early for ASLEF to be losing sleep over driver job losses on ScotRail.
The unsatisfactory state of our railways is due to many factors. Principally, a chronic shortage of design, technological and construction capacity. Like so many other things, those failings can be traced directly back to 1980s government policies and actions. Present-day technological and construction enfeeblement arose from past and present failures of vision, planning and funding.
From the 80s onwards, we were no longer to make and build things. The future was spivs in sharp suits bawling down phones. In that brave new world, scientists, engineers, and builders were far less worthy than bankers and hedge fund managers, their relative value measured in much poorer remuneration. Economic sclerosis was inevitable. The old saying “use them or lose them” is demonstrably true when it comes to manufacturing and construction skills. How did one of the world’s great shipbuilding nations lose the will and skills to build two small ferries?
Can those skills possibly be recaptured and relearned? I scanned the Prime Minister’s speech for any recognition that lost skills were even a factor in the failure to deliver HS2 in full. There was no reference to a national strategy to redress the balance. I haven’t analysed the professional experience of cabinet members, but I would bet the house on very few having a background in engineering and construction. They’re not big on those things at Eton and Oxbridge.
Without being disrespectful of the service sector’s contribution to the economy, it can never drive what is required. For the UK to regain international credibility, it must demonstrate it can deliver major projects such as HS2. That requires major re-prioritisation and mobilisation of education, training, and the wider economy. If we are serious about the nuts and bolts of the economy and making things better, we need to re-learn how to make things.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here