Failing train services in Britain have often been the butt of jokes, but the chaos is not funny to those who rely on them. For many in the north of England in particular, frustration has given way to despair. Railways are a public good that the public are turning away from.
The pandemic’s long-term impact on working patterns may be the chief culprit for slashed traveller numbers. But it is unsurprising that former passengers are declining to come back. Many are concluding that late and cancelled trains, dirty and overcrowded carriages, and broken toilets make journeys too unpredictable or unpleasant, and are driving, flying or staying put instead. In the last quarter of 2024, a record 4.87% of trains were cancelled. Fares have risen almost twice as fast as wages since 2010.
Labour’s plans to renationalise the rail industry in its first term, laid out by the shadow transport secretary, Louise Haigh, on Thursday, are sensible and welcome. It is something of a stretch to present them as evidence that the party is willing to make “bold” policy changes, as Labour officials have done. Rather, they are a pragmatic solution to the glaring failure of the Tory ideological fixation on the private sector, regardless of its suitability for the task in hand.
The appetite is obvious: seven in 10 people back nationalisation. In fact, many parts of the system have already been taken back by the state due to private failure. Network Rail returned to the public sector in 2014, and almost one in four passenger journeys, including in Wales and Scotland, are on trains run by the Department for Transport’s own operator of last resort. Business leaders and politicians in the north recently told the government to take over from Avanti West Coast too. The remaining contracts are expected to expire within the next parliamentary term, though rolling stock will remain in private hands.
Beyond ownership, the proposals for structural reform essentially adopt the plans drawn up for Boris Johnson by a rail review chaired by Keith Williams, the former chief executive of British Airways. But the Conservatives can take no credit when they have blown hot and cold. They said the streamlined new system would save £1.5bn a year; Ms Haigh suggests removing the “friction costs” of private sector involvement – such as legal bickering – could save another £700m.
She was wise to warn that there will be no overnight fixes. The problems are entrenched – as Aslef’s announcement of further strikes highlighted earlier this week. Given just how bad industrial relations have become, a fresh start may help. From then on, however, consistency will be key. The country has had seven transport secretaries since 2010. A committed team will be essential to success.
The public still value and rely on train services. But the more they deteriorate, the greater the danger that disenchanted passengers turn away for good. That would be bad for air quality and climate policy, the British economy and society more broadly, exacerbating the UK’s London-centrism and weakening the nations and regions. While some may cringe at the Great British Railways branding, a system needed to knit together different parts of the country should be a source of pride. Ms Haigh observed that the railways have become a symbol of national decline. A serious attempt to fix them also reinvigorates hope that Labour is willing and able to tackle the impoverished public sector and halt the broader slide.
