UK railways were nationalised as British Rail in 1948 and were privatised in 1995. Labour renationalised track, signals and stations in 2003, and in the 2020 s the train companies have been nationalised as their franchises expire. It means we have plenty of experience of what works less badly.
The period of full nationalisation saw a big fall in passenger numbers and usage. Rail locked into a vicious spiral of rising fares, fewer journeys, job losses, reduced timetables and general contraction. In the middle of the nationalised period top management decided on a big reduction in unprofitable lesser lines, closing them completely.
The early years of full privatisation were very successful. Passenger use surged. The businesses were more responsive to passenger needs and demand. The railway set about remedying obvious errors of the nationalised business. For example it put in a branch line to Heathrow to pick up many air passengers and get them into London on the Great western which the nationalised industry never bothered to do.
The hybrid and over regulated industry of recent years is returning to poor nationalised performance and mistakes. The fully nationalised HS 2 is a complete disaster. Massive cost overruns led both Conservative and Labour to drop the crucial northern legs of the original idea. Endless delays means a plan first agreed in 2009 will not see any trains running before 2035, a 26 year catalogue of incompetence.
June 24, 2025
Sir John
With over 50% of the UK’s Legislators (HoC & HoL) supporting a Socialist if not Marxist State and the ruling Politburo, surely their aim, their single desire is that everyone should work for the State. It is never about the railways or any other industry for that matter it is about personal ego
It is not even about cost, efficiency or effectiveness its about the personal esteem of a handful of individuals that want society to be in their image and nothing else
June 24, 2025
Ian B
Much truth in what you say, redistribution of wealth by stealth is the game, problem is the wealthy now are regarded as ordinary taxpayers who have been prudent with their own money, hence the evacuation of many self made millionaires in the last 6 months, which appears to be on going.
Afraid the workers strivers, investors, and savers are in for more financial pain in coming years as the State takes more and more control of our lives.
June 24, 2025
@Berkshire Alan. – the mistake or maybe the plan was that those with money would leave, after all they would never vote for the Socialist Uniparty.
June 24, 2025
Ian they really need people with some money and ambition to stay in order to pay for all of their promises, unless they intend to tax the people on Benefits.
June 25, 2025
@Berkshire Alan – yes but that wouldn’t be Socialism. Socialism has the fall back position of those they say wont pay will be the only ones that do pay
June 24, 2025
Well privatisation brought us better rolling stock than the slam door trains, even if our host does not like the seats.
Apart from that, my personal experience was fewer trains per hour on my service, an earlier last train from Waterloo, the disappearance of waiting rooms, toilets and staff at my station. Plus much more expensive fares.
We also got routine line closures due to maintenance (now done at weekends instead of overnight), Replacement buses as a cost saving wheeze.
Less obvious is the decline in long term employment in the rail industry as franchises change. I believe this leads to less competence within the railway. You had the famous rail crashes that led to renationalisation of track maintenance. Yesterday we had signal failures paralysing SW rail service. Poor service is now a built in feature of the railways. Change in ownership will not rapidly address the problem.
June 24, 2025
One thing you fail to mention john is the unions
They have been instrumental in blocking progress with their archaic working practices and vetoed on manning rates.
Now they are renationalised we can expect more disruption from walkouts and unreasonable pay demands.
The other problem is ticket prices
A party of us wanted to go down to London for a theatre break. The plethora of ticket prices was baffling especially during the week. To get to Heathrow for the 2 of us was going to cost £120 return plus getting a taxi with luggage down to Derby station another £25.
Eventually we settled on driving down, probably £30 in petrol and with an off site parking deal of £70 we considered it a bargain
The sheer convenience of travelling door to door witbout a list of preconditions on travelling times etc made it a no brainier.
Trains rarely get you to where you want to go and station parking is generally extortionate.
The freedom afforded by the car is why governments dislike them and do everything possible to frustrate them. Of course I should have mentioned that 5 of us could have travelled but car at no extra cost.
June 24, 2025
Indeed and of the car costs much of it will be tax – 50% of the fuel, VAT and Council tax on the car park… The train is subsidised for about 50% of the fare and pays no VAT and v. little in fuel taxes.
June 24, 2025
Roughly train fares are 50% subsidised and cars 50% of the cost is tax. Despite this vast (4 times) market rigging a car can still be far cheaper perhaps 20% of the cost (even with single occupancy). A full car is vastly cheaper still. Self driving cars and taxis will make the economics and convenience even more in favour of roads.
June 24, 2025
But commuters have to take the train!
They don’t want to drive. They want to relax and work – or sleep after long day!
That is one reason you need trains.
At least into London and the big cities.
And we need trains into London that are more like Switzerland than India. Train into Waterloo more like India than Switzerland!
June 24, 2025
“We” don’t need trains – I do not use trains so why should I subsidise the train users or their mobile wifi or tunnel signal boosters simply because they are more comfortable for a select few.
People commute because they don’t like living in London, it is a lifestyle choice that the rest of us should not be forced to subsidise.
June 25, 2025
Life’s too short.
The stress of worrying about commuters being subsidised is bad for your mental and physical health. You’d be better off drinking a cool beer in the pub.
June 24, 2025
I’d settle for a train at rush hour were I could get a seat
June 25, 2025
Also, UK best country on earth. Not being patriotic. It’s true. For all problems here let’s not forget how great it is to live here. London. Countryside. Cornwall. Surfing. Cream teas. Pubs. Bitter. Ancient villages and cathedrals. Football. Oxford. Humour. Dad’s Army.
And, the people. If you’re friendly enough there are loads of people around to have a laugh and good time with. And the doctors and nurses looking after my mum recently just great. Seriously. No place as great to live as England. Let’s remember that more and be grateful!
June 24, 2025
Indeed. But the whole train system is vastly subsidised and car, vans, trucks are vastly over taxed and the roads deliberately blocked too.
Despite this rigging London or Manchester single circa £150 for 1 by car about £30 for up to 7 people. The latter goes door to door can take more luggage and you have a car to use when you get there. Standard fares by train are circa £1 a mile. Not even low energy or low CO2 when properly accounted for with the end connections considered and for average occupancy and track considered. If the market were not this rigged and fares were perhaps £2 at mile what would the real unrigged demand for trains be? Perhaps 50% of current demand?
June 24, 2025
According to their website LNER impose a luggage limit of one suitcase of a maximum size plus 1 medium bag and a small handbag. They’re not much different to the airlines.
June 24, 2025
Indeed and the seats get more like economy airline seats and often very hard and upright too. At least we do not have 30 mins + to get through airport security and car 2 min drop off parking charges (as yet) anyway!
June 24, 2025
@Lifelogic – your observation this morning reminds me of the bizarre thinking from what they now call ‘Transport for London’. They felt the need to build the Silvertown Tunnel to take some of the pressure off the Blackwell tunnel. Then it dawned, they wanted to charge for its use, to drag money in, the driver is a sitting target for wealth creation, but if they charged for the Silvertown route people wouldn’t use it. So, they elected to also charge for use of the free tunnel, built in 1897, ‘Blackwell’ that is part of the national road network joining the North & South circulars.
The 2 tunnels are now down to 80% of the flow of the single old route. However, the flows and queues at the ‘free’ Woolwich ferry are up. So, they should be next to be hit.
As an aside Angela Rayner thinks Surrey is too big to run itself, population around 700,000, so it needs to be split into 3. Yet London 9.8 million needs to grab more from the adjoining Counties to give the Mayor more headroom
June 24, 2025
Indeed it is almost invariably follow the money. But then many of these tax grabs backfire as Vat on school frees and the NonDom abolition will do. Costing more than they raise and damaging education and the economy! The latter started by PPE tax to death and failed health Sec. dope Hunt!
June 25, 2025
@Lifelogic ‘Costing more than they raise’ that is the equation never factored in. An easy target is seen pursued then hundreds of caveats, get out of jail free cards and kick backs are needed to lessen the blow to those that weren’t thought about causing excessive administration costs.
We used to have a Conservative controlled council here in Wokingham, at one council meeting it was suggested the town needed parking wardens. It was agued and won that the cost of the staff was not warranted for the minor infringements they would solve. We lost our Conservatives in line with the conservatives deserting its voters, now the new regime like other regimes attack the motorist, discourage people from entering the town and everything declines. Did the make any real money when everything is factored in?
June 25, 2025
This is abstract political thinking – not practical.
June 24, 2025
As everybody on here knows, HS2 is a pointless white elephant – there are already routes to Birmingham from 3 London termini.
However the fact is that prenationalised railways ran far far better than the opportunistic outfits of today. I have followed the rail industry all my life and it is at an utter all time low – and where we are today is the end result of the rushed privatisation of Major’s government.
Privatisation for the sake of it was a flawed concept.
June 24, 2025
The Major privatisation was damaged hugely by EU rules on splitting track and train ownerships. Plus Major was not the brightest of PMs to put it mildly. Privatisation also damaged by the threat of new governments moving the goal posts and confiscating assets at will. Plus the mad restrictive employment laws.
June 24, 2025
@Andrew Jones, to get into Birmingham City from the HS2 station requires another train journey
June 25, 2025
Attacking HS2 is fair game. That’s a clear waste of billions.
June 24, 2025
Sir John, The reflections of rail management are indicative of a greater malaise impacting British commence.
When managers are allowed to manage unrestricted by endless restrictions imposed by people not directly involved in the business, businesses thrive. Sadly in our overregulated western world things are not like that any longer. Bureaucrats in the main state employees are in place to ‘protect’ customers from unregulated business activities. The effect of this lofty open ended virtuous brief, to safeguard the public, results in state overreach and businesses become constrained and burdened by endless regulations. The reduced profits mean the businesses can no longer invest in new technology or worse restrictions imposed make the business no longer viable. The Net Zero policies now in place have all but doomed manufacturing activities in the UK. That is yet another example of state actions to supposedly protect the public from energy emissions when no such protection is necessary. The only thing that happens is the state ends up carrying the cost of the legislation as private businesses close or have to be nationalised due to their strategic importance think rail or water and ultimately energy via grants becoming ever greater in scale to keep the unprofitable producers mostly renewable in operation.
The road to totalitarianism in paved with misplaced virtue masquerading as good intentions….
June 25, 2025
People in this country are too polite to be ‘totalitarian’. I think you’re over-egging it somewhat.
June 24, 2025
Good morning.
You have to look at the industry to see if it is one of those that are too vital lose and too costly to hold on to. Much like coal, steel and the utilities industries. Yes they cost money to maintain but, at what cost to us, and not just in financial terms, would it be for us to lose both the industry and its skills ?
We need rail, but to get people to use it we need to price it better. I suggest a ‘cap and collar’ price approach, especially for weekends. Say, a price of a return ticket to anywhere in the UK for no more than £50. It may encourage people to use the service and, with refreshment and other platform services and greater footfall could result in more income. It would also benefit the economy of other parts of the country as people may be encouraged to leave the car and travel to more remote areas increasing wealth distribution through trade.
The railways began because people with imagination saw a need. A need to travel and move goods to other parts of the country in relative safety, speed and comfort compared to horse drawn carriages. The motor car has replaced the horse drawn carriage but the need to do the aforementioned has remained the same. It just requires the same imagination that created the railways in the first place.
June 24, 2025
Is it vital?
Keep the commuter routes and ditch the rest. I resent having to pay £100 tax contribution every year for their subsidy when I don’t even get free tickets.
June 24, 2025
For me it is not solely about effective use of our travel systems.We are in a time where we need to show national cohesion.Nationalisation at least attempts to do that.You know private systems are there to make a profit and Will sell to the best bidder when it suits them.This could be anybody.Look at the control of soccer clubs by the rich ,look at those selling out to go abroad,look at the NHS and especially general practice where very few English staff work and are regularly belittled.If only the public had enough insight into a growing problem.It is only yesterday someone pulled a derogatory face at England at the same time as saying we just come over for free treatment and then go back to Saudi. Can’t you understand John that continual privatisation splits a country and puts us at the mercy of the rich.
Reply Nationalisation chokes innovation, drives away private capital and puts our taxes up to lay for the losses. Everyone has to put up with poor monopoly supply and rationing
June 24, 2025
No it doesn’t need to.If there’s a problem fix it don’t sell out.
June 24, 2025
To reply: Indeed and the market rigging with subsidies and unfair taxation in Schools, Healthcare, Transport, Universities, Housing, Energy… is creating even more unfair markets and monopolies or near monopolies.
June 24, 2025
Well government are not good at fixing problems, good at creating them though. They are not good at regulating private owners either – as we see with the Water Companies, Trains, Vaccine Regulation, Energy, Buses, Building Regulations and so many other areas.
June 24, 2025
MBJ
The problem is politicians themselves because too many of them are idealists, few now have any commercial, business, management, or financial skills, and new laws and regulations just complicate matters further due to micro clauses that defeat the very object of simplicity and efficiency.
June 24, 2025
They can’t fix it once civil Serpents and th unions are involved.
June 24, 2025
So our government & ministers do not know if they support the action by the USA against Iran’s nuclear refining activities or not. So whose side are you on Sir Keir? Asks the Mail today.
Asked this question “for or against” the Armed Forces Minister answers “the American Activity has now happened”!
What an appalling government we have have. But they do seem to have finally realised their energy policy is insane. Offering 25% “discounts” for high energy industrial users but in the US prices are 1/4 of ours at 75% discount is needed and for all users. The mad deluded PPE graduate Ed tomb stone Miliband must go but also the deluded “Conservative” like Countinho and Kemi need to ditch net zero too.
So should I renew my Spectator subscription now that the daft, Greta disciple and fan of VAT on private school fees – the deluded socialist English graduate Gove is the editor? Perhaps not.
June 24, 2025
Lammy’s “answer” to the “for or against the US action question” was “we were not involved”! What a pathetic man he is.
June 24, 2025
Lammy gives the Blob its bad image….he is built for the job.
June 24, 2025
On the basis that there are very important to us, players in the Middle East, who themselves are looking both ways, one to please their local populations, the other (quietly) welcome potential long term peace, I see no reason to anger them with public statements.
Diplomacy not your strongest asset.
June 24, 2025
I remember listening to him on LBC some years back. He was very good at demonstrating his ignorance, rudeness, race baiting and stupidity when dealing with callers most usually rather more brighter than him. He strangely seems to thing he was bright as he went on to Harvard but no sign of it at all.
June 24, 2025
i sometimes wonder whether politicians such as Miliband or Alok Sharma ever have what i would call an “Alec Guinness” moment as near the end of Bridge on the River Kwai he suddenly realises that he has helped the enemy and more or less betrayed his own men… “What have I done?”.
June 24, 2025
Indeed Sharma went to a posh school but only went to Salford Uni. to read Practical Physics and Electronics so duff A levels I assume. Miliband read PPE at Oxford.
June 24, 2025
Time and again, the UK have proved incapable of managing large projects involving taxpayer’s funds. £billions were wasted by the last administration attempting to upgrade government computer systems. Similarly, the NHS lost more £billions trying to upgrade their computer systems. Numbers of defence contracts have gone wrong, coming in late and over budget – Ajax being a recent example. Experience shows that if a QUANGO is involved, costs multiply astronomically
With the benefit of hindsight, we should have appointed the American firm Bechtel to build HS2 on a fixed price contract. Had we done so, it would be running now and we would not have blown £100 million on a bat tunnel. Bechtel can build large projects on time and budget. The only construction firm that we have that comes near is Sir Robert McAlpine, who have successfully done many large projects for the government. The Olympic stadium comes to mind. As does their new Bloomberg European HQ in Cannon Street
June 24, 2025
Anyone involved in public sector projects/bids etc will know of the value for money requirement (cheapest?) so companies cut corners to get the gig and then have no expansion factors for delays/overruns et.y
Factor in vast environmental surveys, diversity promises and then dealing with umpteen public enquiries, political changes and often demands from politicians to change the spec and you have a recipe for the nightmares we see.
June 24, 2025
“The fully nationalised HS 2 is a complete disaster.”
The costs and uselessness of HS2 will pale into insignificance compared to those of Net Zero.
June 24, 2025
Indeed Net Zero of the costs of the net harm lockdowns and net harm Covid Vaccines. HS2 will surely be less than 1/10000 of the costs of these two dangerous, costly, evil and insane policies!
June 24, 2025
Bringing all facilities, services and organisations in-house is the only way HMG sees it as being able to keep anything running, by throwing our money at their created problems, because it has no competence in hands-free government, no ability to incentivize, and certainly no ability to innovate.
Big government is all about taking control without responsibility, but that’s only part of the dogma. We know socialists don’t promote by ability but by favour or some perverted creed. Lacking honest application of survival techniques whatever socialism touches will eventually end up in a ball of confusion, debt and frustration.
The railways will all become nationalised, simply because nationalisation is a major God of the labour party – they worship the idea of it without noting how it fails to deliver – but THAT is the ignorant socialist mind-set for you!
June 24, 2025
I can’t see the problem of the Taxpayer or Consumer being the ultimate owner of strategic nation infrastructure, in fact I would see that as a safety net. I see the problem with that of Empire Building by those that have no experience of running things, Governments, Quangos.
As with all these things the only one paying is the taxpayer. What is wrong is if anyone in Government or their authorities have any day-to-day involvement. Beyond being responsible for a return on Taxpayer money, ensuring proper accounts. Whether building onto the infrastructure or the actual running it should be handed over to competitive fixed length price tender, it’s the only form of competition available.
With the railways as there is no actual real completion for service, the only competition can come from time limited contracts to run the day-to day elements. If contracts are not kept, they are lost, but the taxpayer/consumer doesn’t pay twice. After-all, under all the structures played with today the railways always finish up with massive taxpayer handouts and subsidies. So the contract is to spend other people’s money
June 24, 2025
A case in point would be Thames Water, the company and its assets were bought by the incoming purchaser by selling what the company had previously owned. The purchaser got to sell or lease back what the taxpayer and consumer funded assets creating a debt mountain that still has to be paid. They didn’t put any of their own or their shareholders money in, but the did ensure the shareholder and themselves were paid well for their involvement. Now we have the situation that unless the taxpayer and their consumers bail them out the company goes bust. If the Government nationalises them, the failed entity will then be expecting compensation from the Taxpayer. The point being if the ownership had stayed with those that created its structures, the taxpayer/consumer and then those that were contracted to run it failed it wouldn’t be the taxpayer/consumer ‘paying twice over’ for the same thing. It would just be a new contract
June 25, 2025
Indeed v. poor government regulation they should never have been allowed to borrow so extensively against the companies assets to extract these funds.
June 25, 2025
In reality it is a failure of regulation. Water companies were encouraged to leverage up debt mountains by the regulator, because that nominally lowered their financing costs under ZIRP, allowing the regulator to set a lower controlled return on assets and lower bills. When the debt came to be rolled over post ZIRP the financing cost went off the scale, particularly in view if the leverage. Meanwhile the regulator was too concerned with limiting bills to ensure a proper balanced investment programme was pursued. Costly, gold plated projects were given the go ahead in place of basic maintenance.
June 24, 2025
Of course, the downer to my theory is HS2, that was a contract. A failed contract. A contract that is costing the taxpayer billions they haven’t got.
Clearly those that were awarded the contract appear to be in breach, so they should lose it. If it was the contract that was at fault those that created the contract which is in this case both parties need to lose their jobs. Clearly it is not the taxpayer that is at fault, it is the custodians of their money.
June 24, 2025
Whatever Labour do will make things worse, but the Conservatives were not much better. Perhaps the only way to make the railways work is to pass ownership to the employees, including the tracks. An ownership model will always work better than a nationalised one. But it would take vision and courage to do that, which our PM, Cabinet Ministers and MPs sadly lack.
The idea of a fixed price for any distance is also attractive, as mentioned in an earlier comment.
But a Government in thrall to the Net Zero religion is going to take the UK into bankruptcy; it is just a question of when.
June 24, 2025
Keith from Leeds – the employees yes, maybe even the consumer. It has to be like all these things someone actually doing the job, the work and with a vested interest. An entity seeing the chance of fleecing the Taxpayer is not wanted
June 24, 2025
HS2 and the railways are another perfect vehicle for socialists as it enables them to spend vast amounts of money in seemingly virtuous pet projects but in essence is making the country poorer whilst pretending otherwise. If this were not the case we would be seeing for instance the introduction of driverless trains to improve productivity and reliability.
June 24, 2025
PS : It would be intresting to ask the Permanent Secretary of the DfT and the Chief Scientific Adviser where they are with the implementation of driverless trains.
June 24, 2025
I think rail privatization, if adjusted for inflation, has been a success for both passengers and the government. I am sure there must be some figures available.
June 24, 2025
Sir JR, you constantly berate nationalisation for the poor performance of the railways and you may be correct, but you can hardly claim privatisation has improved anything.
Over-complicated ticketing at extortionate prices. Over-paid rail-staff bleeding the companies and the public dry. Fare dodgers running wild. The whole thing is a shambles and needs a complete rethink.
A third way is required.
Reply The railway has been mainly nationalised with prices and timetables set by government for the last 20 years.