article-0-057D5A9D0000044D-699_634x423

Can we please just renationalise the railways already


Edgar Sait-Jones
Edgar Sait-Jones  /  4 Comments

Back in the early nineties, a stagnating Conservative government, under the infamously dreary leadership of John Major (even his name makes you want a nap), pulled out their favourite old trick that had kept them oh-so-busy under Thatcher: privatisation. The country had been ravaged in the previous decade, with nearly every industry sold off and hundreds of thousands of jobs lost, but this was, apparently, not quite enough. The well-used rhetoric was once again rolled out. An entire industry is being hindered by such a wasteful, slow and bureaucratic government organisation. Wouldn’t it go so much smoother with the injection of some juicy competition?

Unfortunately for us, their target was the railways. Thatcher herself had deemed it a ‘privatisation too far’, but nevertheless the Tories chucked it in their 1992 manifesto, and when they got in again, perhaps without expecting to, they found themselves in the uncomfortable position of having to go through with it.

Had I been born a couple of years earlier I would had stood up (knee high to a grasshopper) and defended public railways with all my might, but I doubt even my loudest tantrum would have made a difference.

hgfgf

Is Thomas going to be privatised as well, mummy?

The truth is, nobody really knew what an utter disaster awaited them down the line. Our railways today are the worst in Europe, and we should be ashamed of them. Privatisation is the sole reason travelling by train has become so expensive, with no improvements in comfort or efficiency.

To see how much of a mess we’ve made of things you only need to catch the Eurostar to the continent. It’s like visiting the future. On mainland Europe the trains are shiny, clean, fast and unfathomably cheap. All are run by centralised organisations; owned, and to a variable degree controlled, by their respective governments. Travelling Europe by train is such a joy it has become the basis for many a young intrepid backpacker’s holiday, with the growth of InterRailing. Try to imagine a young, foreign tourist travelling the UK by train. You don’t hold out much hope for them, do you?

Our railways suffer from overcrowding, underinvestment and aging rolling stock, and yet the fares continue to rise. Tickets are already twice the cost of equivalents in France or Germany.

The explanation is simple. A national system of railways is not suited to privatisation because of the lack of competition. You may well choose your supermarket based on your preferences for the various chains, preferences which are free to change. But you don’t choose your destination based on the train operating company. If you want to go to Bristol you use First, and no matter what offers or perks the other companies offer, they won’t be able to get you to go to Durham instead, because that’s not where you’re going. Each company operates a monopoly on its routes and so is therefore able to charge extortionately.

You always win if you can get all the stations…

You always win if you can get all the stations…

The one element of competition is the refranchising process, which only takes place every several years, and has been proved dodgy by the West Coast Mainline scandal of 2012. Large transport companies put in bids to run whole swathes of the network, the infrastructure for which is still paid for by the taxpayer through Network Rail. And on top of that, the Government has to further subsidise the operators.

So we pay thrice for transport by rail: Network Rail, Government subsidies, and tickets. And what stings the most is that the state operators of the Netherlands, France and Germany own in part or in full some of the biggest train operating companies here. So next time you pay extortionately for an outdated, slow and overcrowded train to or from Cambridge, you can at least take solace in the fact that the price of your ticket is being reinvested into the railways, albeit those in Holland.

How this sham has been allowed to continue for 20-odd years is beyond me, especially given that the Labour opposition to John Major promised to scrap privatisation, before 1997. There is of course, an alternative. It’s not something radical, wild or untested. It’s how we ran railways for the best part of a century. Not a pipe dream, but a real part of our history: British Rail.

Beyond the leaves-on-the-line and soggy-sandwiches clichés, rooted in the economic turmoil of the seventies, British Rail was a streamlined, efficient and modern organisation by the nineties. Throughout the previous decades the network had been improved, most notably with the introduction of InterCity, which still forms the backbone of today’s services. However, since then, innovation has ground to a halt; in the majority of cases rail travel hasn’t changed in 20 years.

There were problems of course, as there are with any public sector service. But the principal motivation, passengers not profit, pushed the railways into the modern age. A unified network created to help win a war went on to serve the country, drive the economy and transform technology.

In this election, the Greens are the only party committed to full renationalisation, despite the opinion polls suggesting that public support for the move is up around 70%. The shadow transport secretary has made some monumentally vague remarks about changing the current system. It is certainly frustrating that Labour, or any other parties for that matter, have yet to grasp at this common sense and popular policy, which would make a rather nice addition to their frankly sparse collection. Renationalisation would fix the broken system, save both passengers and the government money, reintroduce innovation, and save a huge amount of emissions as people would tend to use the train more often instead of cars. It’s time we stopped putting up with the absolute nightmare and brought back British Rail.

  • Jugurtha

    Not knocking the sentiment Edgar, but if you were a toddler in 1992 you’ll be unaware of the state of the railways pre-privatisation. There was nothing shiny or space age about them and, as for customer service, I’ll give you a clue. There was a popular myth that the NUR was an acronym for ‘no use running’.
    Enquiries about the non-materialisation of a scheduled train were generally met with: “what are you asking me for, I just work here”.
    As I say, I’d love to see a cheap, efficient modern railway system but it’s absence can’t be wholly blamed on privatisation. Such a thing has never been a reality in this country. However, there was one big plus point. Nobody ever gave a fuck whether you had a ticket or not. True story. I moved to London in 1987 and it was 3 months before I found out it wasn’t free to travel on the tube. A guy asked for my ticket one day and I was genuinely surprised. Prior to that (this was before barriers) I just walked on and off with everyone else.

    • Edgar

      Hi. I’m aware that unfortunately I wasn’t alive to see British Rail in the flesh. I do know that the latter days weren’t the best. But public transport in general wasn’t doing so well in the last part of the 20th century. Systems around the world were suffering from under investment. It was the rise of the automobile that spelt the end for the dominance of the railways.

      Other countries dealt with these issues by keeping the railways in public hands, increasing investment. But we decided to privatise, and it’s meant that we’ve been overtaken by everyone else by a long way.

      British Rail had problems, but was also underfunded. But it did show promise. That’s why the majority of trains you ride on today were built by BR. The intercity routes are still served by the 125s and 225s. These are old trains, but they’re still the best we’ve got. Privatisation hasn’t provided any improvements in that area.

      Things have changed in 20 years, and whilst I think most changes have been negative (expense mainly), some have been positive. My friend pointed out that our safety record is very good, although I think this is down to government changes after the Paddington and Hatfield crashes. But railway travel is once again becoming popular, and we need railways that keep up with that. Privatisation just isn’t.

      I don’t want to portray BR as perfect, but we tried to fix BR’s problems by privatising, and it’s just made everything worse. In order to get the railways we deserve, like the rest of the developed world, we need to push back towards public ownership and increase investment.

    • Edgar

      Hi. I’m aware that unfortunately I wasn’t alive to see British Rail in the flesh. I do know that the latter days weren’t the best. But public transport in general wasn’t doing so well in the last part of the 20th century. Systems around the world were suffering from under investment. It was the rise of the automobile that spelt the end for the dominance of the railways.

      Other countries dealt with these issues by keeping the railways in public hands, increasing investment. But we decided to privatise, and it’s meant that we’ve been overtaken by everyone else by a long way.

      British Rail had problems, but was also underfunded. I think it did show promise in certain areas though. That’s why the majority of trains you ride on today were built by BR. The intercity routes are still served by the 125s and 225s. These are old trains, but they’re still the best we’ve got. Privatisation hasn’t provided any improvements in that area.

      Things have changed in 20 years, and whilst I think most changes have been negative (expense mainly), some have been positive. My friend pointed out that our safety record is very good, although I think this is down to government changes after the Paddington and Hatfield crashes. But railway travel is once again becoming popular, and we need railways that keep up with that. Privatisation just isn’t.

      I don’t want to portray BR as perfect, but we tried to fix BR’s problems by privatising, and it’s just made everything worse. In order to get the railways we deserve, like the rest of the developed world, we need to push back towards public ownership and increase investment.

  • Chris P

    Which is the magic bit of the equation that you think the government could do cheaper? Or do you think that instead of charging passengers the funding would come from further taxpayer subsidies creating an illusion of being cheap at point of service but in reality exposing the taxpayer to bottomless costs?
    So is the problem that wages are too high and need cutting? Are they spending too much on rolling stock? Too much on maintainance? Paying too much in dividends? Paying too high bonuses to management? I suspect the latter is an issue but I also bet its a drop in the ocean in the grand scheme of the total cost of running the operation.
    If the current rail operators are charging unreasonable amounts of profit they should be investigated. But so far I am left unconvinced that a nationalised rail company would operate at a lower cost than currently and the money (as always) would come from our pockets one way or the other. Are you sure that the magically cheap European railways are just not funded by the taxpayer? You haven’t given any depth to your costings here