Brexit - What Impact (Negative or Positive) Will It Have On Our Heritage Railways?

How about post-brexit that if property prices were to fall, in turn knocking the stuffing out of the land banking business, there could be the opportunity to acquire track bed (or other property) at a more reasonable rate?

 

Thus giving opportunities to invent yet more heritage railways to share, in all probability, a diminishing leisure spend thereby risking the viability of established railways? - no thanks!!

 

Well it needn't be, many existing heritage railways need land for other purposes, e.g. under-cover storage, and quite a few have the ambition to extend to provide a reasonable length ride.

 

Or indeed to buy the trackbed they currently rent...

 

It seems to me that there are a huge number of unknowns at the moment & - for example a crash in land prices would be a symptom of other issues in the economy.

If for a moment we ignore Brexit there are a number of issues that I am sure must concern many in the sector eg the rise in the retirement age, skills shortages, fewer early retirees etc

 

Did he make any comment re the cost of coal - much of which is imported on some railways ? Some railways import coal from Russia through Ireland but is that a routeing that might also be subject to change ?

 

Andy Forster (CME) spoke about coal, noting that WSR coal comes from a Welsh open cast site that is likely to remain in production for 10 years or more.

Robin

 

Absolutely correct. I did also see a news article recently where an open cast mine (in Northumbria ?) is set to open.

For land prices, I don't see the cost of land without planning permission for housing changing significantly any time soon. Markets are driven by demand and supply with neither factor altering to any great degree post Brexit.

Now that a few days have passed, it seems to me that a significant Brexit vote was based on two factors. "Project Fear" was seen for what it was, a shallow set of scare tactics that would not convince your average child. Secondly, business leaders telling their staff how to vote. Those are the same leaders who appear to be immune from the factors that limit bonuses and pay rises e.g. "we live in a period of difficult trading conditions so you are only getting a 1.5% rise". In the meantime, they get a 20% hike "to reward and retain talent". The work force always love being told what to do so they voted with two fingers.

 

I think there are three big issues to consider.

Firstly, the effects on tourism. We initially saw a drop in the pound which was widely predicted by both sides of the campaign. This makes it relatively more expensive for UK residents to go abroad and cheaper for overseas tourists to come here. This may favour our heritage railways, although given the dismal summer we have had so far, I would think that plenty of UK residents will still want a dose of summer sunshine even if it's going to cost a bit more!

The pound has now stablised against both the dollar and the Euro, but has not so far regained much ground. However, while the pound may stay lower against the US dollar for a while, in the medium/longer term, the Euro may end up falling further from pre-June 23rd levels than Sterling if other countries in the EU decide they want a referendum. This would be seen as an indication that the whole European project may be about to unravel and this would inevitably put the single currency under pressure. This would have the opposite effect - foreign holidays cheaper and the "staycation" - including visting heritage railways - less good value relatively speaking.

Although there is much demand to see tighter controls on our borders and on immigration, tourism was and will be an important source of revenue to the UK. People from the EU will still want to visit our country. Hopefully, they will still want to travel on our heritage railways. There is no reason for them not to

Secondly, EU funding. The exit process is going to be a slow, protracted affair. At the moment, we have not even triggered Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, the EU's prescribed exit mechanism. However, in spite of some of the headlines, it's a case of "when" not "if". Some knowledgeable people are saying that an extension to the prescribed two- year exit window may have to be agreed at the very start of negotiations. We will be liable for our contribution to the EU budget up to the end of the current seven-year cycle which ends in 2020. Technically this means that as we are paying in and will still be an EU member until the Article 50 negotiations are complete, we can still apply for money from the regional funding programmes. In practise, as a country that is on the way out of the EU, it's hard to imagine that such applications are going to be taken seriously - or indeed, submitted. I guess that the Welsh Highland Railway must be very pleased that it has completed its rebulding through to Porthmadog before Brexit!

Of course, once we do leave, we will not be paying our membership fee to the EU. We have alway been a net contributor to the EU budget, so there will be extra money available. Personally, although involved with the "leave" campaign, as I mentioned earlier, I was not happy about the headline campaign about the £350 million per week beig allegedly available for the NHS if we left. My organisation did not endorse it. However, there will be a net saving from not paying dirct contributions. The Norwegian model, which I think is the most likely immediate post-brexit scenario, has been badly misrepresented. They actually pay very little to access the Single Market, but do make voluntary contributions to certain EU projects. We may well do the same, but there will still be a saving. The government could put it all into the NHS, but I think this is unlikely and the prospect of new grants being available to fund worthwhile projects (effectively replacing the EU regional funding) remains a possibility. It's going to be up to whichever government we elect at the next General Election.

We could, of course, scrap VAT once we leave. It is an EU-inspired tax. This could reduce costs of buying certain commondities essential to running and maintaining heritage railways. Again, however, it's up to the first post-Brexit government. No guarantee this will happen.

Thirdly, Legislation. The EU's Interoperability Directive contains some derogations (Exemptions) for the requirement to go through the complicated registration process allowing new rolling stock to run in other EU member states. It is likely to be repealed once we leave, but given that heritage railways rarely build new rolling stock (apart from some narrow gauge lines which are exempted), I see little effect here. I think that, say, a Mk1 carriage bought from a heritage railway for main line use likewise would probably already fall under some existing derogation.

There is also the question of EU environmental legislation, particularly regarding the effects of burning coal. Since UK governments of whatever shade have been quite active in pushing green legislation in the EU, I don't see a lot of change when we leave, but lobbying our own Parliament for exemptions from unhelpful legislation is a lot easier than lobbying the powers-that-be in Brussels. Big multinationals have plenty of lobbuying clout, but small groups like heritage railways less so. Brian Simpson, the former Labour MEP, used to be the person who would seek to put the Heritage Railways' position across when legislation affecting them was being discussed. I think he was able to secure a few derogations but don't know all the details off the top of my head.

In summary, I don't see a lot of changes to our heritage railways beause of Brexit except that there won't be any more EU largesse such as the WHR enjoyed, but this could be replaced by something similar once we're out. I hope this helps.

 

Thank you for this level headed assessment!

On a personal note, a big part of my future pension is in EUR :-( so I hope the pound drops ! But it could go in any direction. I once asked a dealer in the bank where I used to work if the pound was going to rise (buy now for me) or fall (wait a bit). He said it would go up, so I bought.
The next day it had gone down (should have waited therefore) and I challenged the dealer.
Ah, he said, but that was yesterday !

 

A senior politician travelled on the WSR not so long ago with his wife and family. He appeared to be having a fine day out judging from the smiles and waves to the loco crew.

 

Senior politicians quite often appear on heritage railways...... I don't think being a politician necessarily means you're not also an ordinary person with the same interests, joys and sorrows as the rest of us and over time Parliament has been pretty supportive of the needs of heritage railways.

 

Not heritage railways, but .... if we leave the EU, we are no longer "bound" to ERTMS or the need to have a separate infrastructure company

 

Not so fast - the EU rules were heavily influenced by Britain, and designed to stop the old state monopolies stymieing change.

 

Leaving the EU will still leave us as part of the European rail network so interoperability will still apply to some degree. It's not as if the country's going to be physically towed over towards Rockall.

I read recently, in any case, that the New Zealand rail network has installed ERTMS L1 in one area - and they're about as distant from the European rail network as it gets! So some, at least, clearly think it has advantages in its own right.

 

Interoperability has never been a real issue...our loading gauge is the biggest issue, and basically prevents through working (unlike on the continent). If it works ERTMS does have some advantages. The point I was making is that like NZ we can decide for ourselves the balance.

 

I also think that Saudi Arabian railways have installed ERTMS and I don't think there would be too many takers for that country joining the EU somehow!

Whether or not we proceed with ERTMS here will not be affected by the Brexit vote. I do not think there is any legislation requiring EU member states to install it.

 

Abolish VAT? Seriously? take a look at how much money it raises and look athow many countries outside the eu operate similar taxes. Yes we could but even to state it is a possibility is to really taking things too far.

 

Yes there is

 

Before we had VAT we had purchase tax. A return to that really would be a winding back of the clock as apparently craved by some Brexiteers. Either way the revenue from VAT has to be raised. Maybe go back to the Window Tax? - the ultimate in Brexiteering?