為什么英國政府選擇將英國鐵路私有化而不像其他國家那樣將其國有化？
Why did the UK government choose to privatise British railways rather than nationalise them like other countries have done?
譯文簡介
歷屆英國政府在不同時間采取了國有化和私有化的方式對英國的鐵路進行管理。
正文翻譯
Why did the UK government choose to privatise British railways rather than nationalise them like other countries have done?
為什么英國政府選擇將英國鐵路私有化而不像其他國家那樣將其國有化？
評論翻譯
很贊 ( 3 )
收藏
A succession of UK governments have variously nationalised and privatised British railways.
歷屆英國政府在不同時間采取了國有化和私有化的方式對英國的鐵路進行管理。
1914年，英國政府接管了鐵路。在1921年的政府改革后，于1947年進行了一次國有化。2014年，英國政府開始了一項以網(wǎng)絡(luò)鐵路為核心的國企國有化計劃，并于2020年完成，取消了所有剩余的私營客運特許經(jīng)營權(quán)。
英國政府選擇在1923年進行鐵路私有化，這一決定由1921年的鐵路法案實施。政府傾向于通過四家地區(qū)運營商進行私有化，原因是擔(dān)心現(xiàn)有的國有化形式導(dǎo)致管理不善。英國政府在1994年進行了第二次私有化，因為政府認為商業(yè)參與可以降低成本并更好地利用資產(chǎn)。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
四大鐵路公司是英國政府在經(jīng)歷了9年的國有化后，于1923年創(chuàng)建的私有化鐵路公司。這些公司一直存在到1947年，當(dāng)時鐵路再次國有化。
1994年至2014年之間的第二階段英國鐵路私有化失敗了。私人公司搞砸了它們的財務(wù)狀況，最終被國有化。新冠疫情使整個私有化模式不可行。2000年，Railtrack鐵路的成本超支導(dǎo)致該公司破產(chǎn)。
被忽視的是政府在1985年啟動的平行且失敗的公交車放權(quán)。這也是一個徹底失利，票價上漲、重復(fù)運營、乘客導(dǎo)向不佳、關(guān)注利潤豐厚的干線路線、復(fù)雜的票價、無條理的服務(wù)提供和倫敦以外的乘客數(shù)量下降。這個失敗的公交車放權(quán)計劃被取消，正在用英格蘭全國范圍內(nèi)的票價上限、更多地方政府控制、統(tǒng)一時刻表和改善乘客導(dǎo)向來替代。在這方面，康沃爾、大曼徹斯特和大倫敦正在帶頭。
The UK railway companies weren’t nationalised in 1914. Using powers granted to the government by the Regulation of the Forces Act 1871, the Railway Executive Committee took control of the national rail network on 4 August 1914, the day that war was declared and mobilisation began. The Railway Executive Committee (REC) had been formed in 1912 to act as an intermediary between the War Office and the various British railway companies.
英國鐵路公司并沒有在1914年進行國有化。根據(jù)《1871年軍隊管理法》所授予的權(quán)力，鐵路執(zhí)行委員會于1914年8月4日，即宣布戰(zhàn)爭并開始動員的那一天，接管了國家鐵路網(wǎng)絡(luò)。鐵路執(zhí)行委員會（REC）成立于1912年，旨在充當(dāng)英國戰(zhàn)爭部和各大鐵路公司之間的中間人。
REC的控制持續(xù)了從1914年到1921年，當(dāng)時控制權(quán)被歸還給1914年存在的私營公司。1921年的鐵路法案導(dǎo)致這些公司合并成為“四大公司”，自1923年1月1日起生效。
They said that competition would put prices down, but they had closed lines that duplicated routes in the 1950 and 1960 so there was no real scope for competiton. That meant THAT didn’t work either.
他們曾經(jīng)說過競爭會降低價格，但他們在20世紀50年代和60年代關(guān)閉了重復(fù)路線的鐵路，因此并沒有真正的競爭空間。這意味著這種做法也沒有奏效。
What I often wonder is when British railways were being rebuilt after WW2 why were some mainlines such as the London - Glasgow and Crewe - Holyhead lines not rebuilt to the Berne loading gauge? This could have been accomplished with electrification of the former.
Otherwise there is much to be appreciated with British Railways such the development of mark 2 and mark 3 carriages. It was a pity that BR could not order Electro Motive diesels which would have revolutionised operations.
我常常想知道的是，二戰(zhàn)后重建英國鐵路時，為什么一些主干線如倫敦-格拉斯哥和克魯-霍利黑德線沒有按照伯爾尼限界進行重建呢？這可以通過對前者進行電氣化來實現(xiàn)。 除此之外，英國鐵路還有很多值得贊賞的地方，比如開發(fā)了二型和三型客車?？上У氖?，英國鐵路無法訂購革命性的電力柴油機車。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
Colin Riegels
You have to cast your mind back to the 1980s. Back then the UK government had enjoyed a lot of success with privatisation - it enabled them to sell off underperforming state assets to the private sector, who could run them better and more cheaply, and pay the Treasury for the privilege which funded tax cuts. The first few privatisations went very well indeed. The excerpt below is from the Harvard Business Review in 1992.[1]
你需要回到20世紀80年代。當(dāng)時英國政府通過私有化取得了很多成功，這使他們能夠?qū)⒈憩F(xiàn)不佳的國有資產(chǎn)出售給私人部門，私人部門能夠更好地運營這些資產(chǎn)，并支付給財政部門以獲得特權(quán)，從而支持減稅政策。前幾次私有化非常成功。下面這段摘自1992年的哈佛商業(yè)評論。
所以，毫不意外地，政府決定要“更多”。唯一的問題是，它已經(jīng)把最好的東西賣掉了——英國煤氣公司、英國電信、英國航空、英國宇航、勞斯萊斯、捷豹、英國石油（還記得他們嗎？）等等。最終，政府只剩下了垃圾。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
然而，由于私有化取得了如此成功，他們還是決定冒險賭一把。于是，他們出售了其他相當(dāng)邊緣的資產(chǎn)，包括鐵路公司，然后又單獨出售了鐵路軌道，他們希望一切順利。但最好的并沒有真正發(fā)生。
公平地說，在私有化之前，鐵路就很糟糕。但國有化并沒有讓它們變得更好。同樣，我相當(dāng)確定將它們重新納入公有制也不會解決問題。
This is one of the untold miserable consequences of the 1992 General Election, which Labour was expected to win. We were left with the fag end of a Tory administration out of (good) ideas. Water and electricity were privatized too. My own local privatized water provider monopoly, Thames Water, is now owned by an Australian venture capital company, Macquarrie, which offloaded ￡12 billion of debt onto its books and let the system rot. We now have 1,000 discharges of raw sewage into the local rivers every day (2.75 million hours in 2021). Nothing can be done because it’s too expensive now to renationalize them. Longstanding Iron Man contests have been cancelled after the swimmers got ill. It’s a national scandal.
這是1992年大選一個未被預(yù)料到的悲慘后果之一，當(dāng)時工黨被認為會贏得選舉。水和電也被私有化了。我自己當(dāng)?shù)氐乃接谢畡?wù)服務(wù)提供商壟斷者——泰晤士水公司，現(xiàn)在由澳大利亞風(fēng)險投資公司 Macquarrie 所擁有，將 120 億英鎊的債務(wù)轉(zhuǎn)嫁到它的賬簿上，并讓系統(tǒng)腐爛。我們現(xiàn)在每天有 1,000 次原汁原味的污水排放到當(dāng)?shù)睾恿髦校?021 年共計 2,750 萬小時）?，F(xiàn)在國有化太昂貴了，無法再做任何事情。長期的鋼鐵俠比賽因游泳者感到不適而被取消。這是全國性的丑聞。
The sewage discharges issue that has garnered so much media coverage is, as with most issues, more complex than the headlines suggest.
For a start, we have only been widely monitoring them for about three years since, guess what, the volume of events (a discharge) appear unacceptable.
Yes, there's is underinvestment in the water systems, no the EA doesn't have sufficient powers and no, it's not all poo that causes the overflows.
像大多數(shù)問題一樣，得到了很多媒體關(guān)注的污水排放問題比標題所示更加復(fù)雜。 首先，我們只是在過去三年中廣泛監(jiān)測它們，因為事件（即排放）的數(shù)量被認為是不可接受的。 是的，供水系統(tǒng)存在投資不足的問題，環(huán)保局沒有足夠的電力，而且也不是所有的排放都是因為糞便引起的。
Of course the Thatcher minister who penned that piece was as naive and boosterish about human nature as the centralized economy socialists he thought he was vanquishing.
The way he keeps asserting that democratic governments will provide wise oversight is as daft as both Marx and Jefferson: history tells otherwise…
當(dāng)然，寫這篇文章的撒切爾大臣對人性的看法，和他自以為要征服的中央集權(quán)經(jīng)濟社會主義者一樣天真和樂觀。
他一直聲稱民主政府將提供明智的監(jiān)督，這與馬克思和杰斐遜一樣愚蠢:歷史告訴我們的并非如此……
It will not fix them, but it will certainly fix the prices and the fact that you have to show the ticket 3 times whilst traveling. It will probably remove the dangerous turnstiles at the entry that clog whenever more than 2 trains arrive at the same time. Compare that to EU where you just hop on and off.
這可能不能解決問題，但肯定能解決價格問題，以及你在旅行時必須出示車票3次的事實。它可能會移除入口處的危險閘門，當(dāng)超過2列火車同時到達時會造成堵塞。相比之下，在歐盟，你可以隨意上下車。
Sheer doctrinaire capitalism and the weakness of the only opposition party. Privatisation of the railways, and every other privatisation, was a disaster just as everybody in the railway industry said it would be. John Major said that fares would fall after privatisation. In reality fares have roughly quadrupled and subsidies to the operating companies are six times what the subsidy to British Rail used to be. Stations and services have closed, though some have opened. As in 1964 when there was a massive closure programme under way, the Labour Party is too timid to denounce the T*ry vandalism for what it is and re-nationalise the railways without compensation.
純粹的教條資本主義和唯一反對黨的軟弱是1992年大選的災(zāi)難。鐵路私有化以及其他所有私有化都是災(zāi)難，正如鐵路業(yè)內(nèi)的每個人所說的那樣。約翰·梅杰曾表示，私有化后車費將會下降。實際上，票價已經(jīng)猛增了大約四倍，對運營公司的補貼是英國鐵路時代的六倍。車站和服務(wù)已經(jīng)關(guān)閉，盡管有些已經(jīng)重新開放。就像1964年正在進行大規(guī)模關(guān)閉計劃一樣，工黨太膽小了，不敢公開譴責(zé)托利黨的破壞行為，也沒有不賠償?shù)刂匦聡谢F路。
They were nationalised by the post war, Labour Government. Then they were privatised by the Tory Government of John Major, who claimed “It was to save the burden on the British tax payer”. Which is Ironic, as it now costs the British tax payer, many times more than it did when they owned it! HS2 alone, if it’s built or not, is costing the tax payer billions, for a very debateable benefit!
他們被戰(zhàn)后的工黨政府收歸國有。隨后，約翰·梅杰(John Major)的保守黨政府將它們私有化，他聲稱“這是為了減輕英國納稅人的負擔(dān)”。具有諷刺意味的是，英國納稅人現(xiàn)在花費的錢比他們擁有它的時候要多很多倍!單單是HS2項目，無論建設(shè)與否，都將為納稅人帶來數(shù)十億的花費，這是一個非常有爭議的利益!
他承諾提供更好的服務(wù)、更少的延誤和更便宜的票價。但這些都沒有實現(xiàn)。在這個國家，鐵路車輛的制造和維修等已經(jīng)減少到以前的一小部分，所以我們主要依賴其他國家，比如日本和德國，來滿足我們的需求。這里僅存的幾家公司大多是外資企業(yè)，它們必須爭奪訂單。
我住在的德比是一個鐵路城鎮(zhèn)，在中央鐵路公司的總部所在地?，F(xiàn)在，只有一家小的外國公司在這里制造火車。曾經(jīng)有“鐵路技術(shù)中心”，那里開發(fā)了新的列車和想法，包括HS125和磁懸浮列車?，F(xiàn)在它已經(jīng)變成了商務(wù)中心。
可悲的事實是，許多特許經(jīng)營權(quán)都由外國公司擁有，包括至少三個國有鐵路，因此我們實際上正在資助其他國家的股東和鐵路乘客！這對我們有什么好處呢？
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://mintwatchbillionaireclub.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處
It’s a shame I can only give it a single upvote, but the list of companies that were founded and funded by the taxpayer, then sold off at bargain basement prices, is much more extensive and, I believe, criminal. We already owned them.
可惜我只能給這篇文章一個贊，但是那些由納稅人創(chuàng)立和資助，然后以白菜價出售的公司名單更加廣泛，我認為這是犯罪行為。我們本來就擁有它們。
They were nationalised earlier. Strikes were frequent.
Privatisation has lead to the highest travel costs in Europe - and now strikes are back on the frequent agenda.
Tory governments are unlikely to nationalise.
這些公司在更早的時候已經(jīng)被國有化。罷工頻繁發(fā)生。私有化導(dǎo)致了歐洲最高的旅行成本，現(xiàn)在罷工再次成為頻繁議題。托利黨政府不太可能國有化。