Should the national railway be privatised?

It should be privatised but the operating companies need to be held to account on prices and service

Allow a French style system where the Government holder 51% share majority, and the private sector 49%

If you want people out of cars the rail has to be an affordable effective option for travel, so the government must take view on what that means. It cannot abdicate responsibility to the private sector who are driven to pay dividends to shareholders

The trains are utterly ridiculous costs. You want us to use less cars and more public travel, and yet the costs are outrageous. In other countries I can go to the other end if the country for less

No, eliminate any privatisation and allow local workers to opperate the transport and make the stations publicly owned

Partial Nationalization to ensure ethical prices for those commuting and to make more effective train schedules

No,. But stricter regulation required to stop operators stripping cash out annd not re-investment and Inflated price setting.

lower the cost of train rides compared to europe

Don't use the train

have the trains and tracks owned by either the government or private companies not both

Yes but increase regulation and provide subsidies

Yes, as I think things will be done much more efficiently and will therefore help the economy but the government should put price caps on tickets

Yes privatise everything it always becomes better. Capitalism & privatisation = competition & innovation.

Yes but have more scrutiny/ powers to change contracts from the government if the operators are failing to run effectively

It should be a public service with control, the control factor should be that the prices do not increase unreasonably.

Have a government owned operator as well as private competitors, the role of the government owned operator is to keep the expectations and quality of the service high enough that private companies can't afford to cheap out and make their service worse

If we had a functional governance system, and a complete overhaul of the tax system (globally!), then we could abandon privatisation of the national railway. For now, it's probably the least of the many evils.

No it should not be privatised however it needs to be far more reliable and consistent as trains are always either delayed or late and prices very far too much. It’s cheaper to fly to another country than it is to catch up one hour train journey which is absolutely ridiculous. If we were to privatise it would be cheaper and better at first but in the long run it would become far more expensive and would lose any control

Only if it was affordable to people and more beneficial. It's an essential service so it shouldn't be treated like a profiting business.

I think privatisation should be allowed if it can improve the quality of service but the UK government should be allowed to implement fair price caps that can be accessible everybody in the country.

Either is fine, so long as each party is held accountable to keep the costs low. Current costs for fares are ridiculous.

Yes, keep trains privatised, but increase government regulations to ensure quality of service is at a good standard

No- tickets are already expensive and enough strikes happen, preventing people from getting to work etc.

Whatever is cheaper for the people but also if that is private make sure the goverment can make sure that private corporation can take advantage of the people

The railway needs major improvements as well as ticket price reduction but I am unsure if the government should be in control of this.

They already are effectively. Very basic and simple question. This is why people expect simple answers

The operating companies need to be held to account on prices and service and penalised if they don't meet standards

Companies operating rail franchises should be held accountable for failures to deliver services. Travel fares should be capped and profit maximisation should be obtained by the franchises becoming more efficient and eliminating waste. Failure to deliver set targets agreed with government when setting up the franchise should result in big fines.

Private, but with much greater control and regulation over the profit, reliability of service and importantly the cost of tickets, which are far too expensive

Yes but companues should be required to use funds from profitable lines to keep non profitable but essential lines open before paying dividends to share holders

Providing regulation/legislation is used to ensure the fair and competitive operating of rail lines is used. And private companies are not empowered to overcharge commuters for using the service.

Yes, as long as privatisation doesn’t increase the price of travel at an extortionate price. Keep it fair for regular commuters.

The railways should be publicly owned and operated. The whole of the uk should be linked via a network. More people would use the trains cutting carbon and making the train the quickest cheapest option for travel. European trains are incredible. Why don’t we have this in the Uk?

Absolutely NOT! National services HAVE to be maintained by the Govt and not private companies to make a profit.

More government control would be better, however I believe the issue is the cost and the foreign investors using our railway system to subsidise other countries public transportation systems rather than putting the money back into the national railway or into commuters

The trains should be run on a cooperative and profit should be funnelled into staff with personal invested interest in the service.Maintenance and money should be dependent on each bough and need of local demographic

It’s already private being paid for with public funds; full privatise it and force heavy fines for noncompliance

No ! But the trains need to become more affordable! It’s way too expensive and we should be encouraging people to travel by train as it’s more environmentally friendly too

No, but investment in the railway needs to be looked into and overall fares decreased (as well as closing any loopholes that allow profits to subsidise rail fairs in other countries)

The question is not to privatise or be public. It is as most organisations a hybrid anyhow. The question is to put limits and criteria around senior exec pay and bonuses, dividend payouts

Both tracks and trains should be privatised, however, prices on tickets should be tightly controlled by a governing body.

Having or keeping some degree of privatisation may be appropriate, so long as the contacts and enforcement are rigorous and give benefit to the populace.

Whatever makes rail travel cheapest. It is a joke how much it costs from Preston to London compared to similar distances across europe

Privatised but if work needs to be done to improve it they can only take a small amount of the profit for shareholders 5/10% max

Allow for tendering of government contracts to sub contractors but don't completely privatise the railway.

No, but the rail service needs more support and new services like ones adopted in other countries. That would make it more affordable quicker and reliable.

Public transport in the main should not be considered as a profit driven industry. Transport is an important link that let people to move and this overall impact the productive and the economy. More movement = more creativity = better economy

Partial nationalisation to ensure ethical prices for those commuting, and to make more effective train schedules.

Yes, but the operation of rail lines should be more competitively tendered and contracts shorter term to encourage better management and funding

Privatisation of railway is essential to reduce all costs to the public purse but the government should impose stricter controls to remove the possibility of strikes

Yes, but ticket fares should be adjusted to the needs of the local people to allow fair use and reduce congestion/emissions from road users. Make trains cheaper to reduce carbon emissions from vehicles.

It should definitely only owned by UK companies and managed at a national level. Sovereign security

If we are going to have a national transportation plan then I'd support a nationalised approach for the whole network

Some level of privatisation can be accepted, provided that private companies invest in the development of the railway and service and that there are set conditions with the public entities. Public transport mist be preserved, especially in areas that are not commercially viable for private companies

It’s more important that they are run efficiently, safely and provide a high level of service than who owns them

It should be nationalised but be run by people who know what their roles include. People who have worked in the roles they would be in charge of

Privatise if increases the quality The government do not efficiently operate the trains but retains local control so strict criteria would be required to privatise fairly and not increase cost for consumer

Have railways owned by a single company in a constituency, that must co-operate with the local governments.

Whichever option reduces the cost of travelling sustainably, improves the efficiency and timely-ness of services and prevents disruption

Create a partnership to ensure the best people run and operate the service with stiff penalties for failire

Yes but govornment to set terms of service for private companies to tender to operate with fines which get invested in infrastructure managd by govornment to tender but not allowed same companies to operate and do infrastructure

I'd prefer publicly owned rail networks and stations, with both private and public train operators competing across the country

Definitely, corporations have tried and failed to make the rail network work but buy taking huge profits to the detriment of the users. It should never be less expensive to use your own car versus public transport.

Private is fine but it should be owned by British firms as it stands we're mostly owned by the German railway and where do you think our moneys going it's ridiculous

There’s no need for the government to run the trains. The problem has been that they implemented privatisation badly.

every time they do it nothing really changes so probably not there's so many jokes about this problem so probably leave it to the government to look after it

but unless you can find some individuals that will treat the railway light and proper business and not an easy way to get money off of your customers then yes

The tracks are already nationalised (Network Rail). Many of the train companies are also already nationalised. But yes, the remaining train companies should be nationalised.

On a case by case basis. But neither privatisation or nationalisation are necessarily best for public services

No, but allow some privatisation with the goal of reducing costs for the government and keeping them to a minimum for customers

Yes, but it needs to have punishable contracts that mean if passengers suffer, they are compensated without having to appeal, where appropriate. Only allow them to make a certain amount of profit and the remaing profit invested back into the infrastructure. Some money can be put aside to help deal with compensation but if not used anually, is split between profit and infrastructure

Contracted systems haven’t worked. I believe in privatisation but regulation needs to be stricter on service industry’s to prevent corporate greed

The government should own and operate its own train company that provides a skeleton service to the country

No, but the nationalised railways should be able to generate revenue from other sources. E.g. property development nearby stations and selling rights to run cabling along rail routes

Depends who will do the better job at maintaining them and keep cost to an affordable price for everyone.

It doesn't matter, just make sure there are enough workers and that trains actually turn up on time. The current rail network is a shambles.

I think the government should start there own company to increase competition and allow for a cheaper alternative

Yes, but add a watchdog and set a maximum profit limit to encourage reinvestment into clean energy developments of public transport and reinvestment into infrastructure

Yes, but only if enough competition is created to force the organisations to innovate and provide the best service at the cheapest cost

Privatization only works if the people in charge know what they're doing. Selling for the sake of selling is a waste of time.

The ownership is less important than the structure. It should be either a nationally owned monopoly or a privately owned monopoly with government oversight and subsidy.

Critical services should be nationalised. The rest of the privatised services need a new model of competition.

Rail tracks should be maintained and regulated by the government, but trains could be privatised. Local stations should be regulated by the national government so that there are standards for safety and accessibility, but more control given to local councils to make their stations excel beyond the basic requirements. -Similar to airports and private airlines.

Government should be a majority shareholder and dictate some of the running, profit caps and reinvestment should be governed

Yes, but with multiple operators allowed on the same lines to allow for competition rather than hidden monopolisation encouraging better service and lower fares

No. Public transport should be improved and more incentivised to increase use. Rail travel is currently too expensive and when more than one person is traveling it is more economical to drive. This should not be the case

Resolve ticketing issues and provide a better service for passengers. Doesn’t matter who runs the service as long as this is resolved.

No, national infrastructure should be owned by the nation and operated for the benefit of the population.

Fines on rail services companies that don't achieve sufficient performance criteria. Fines given back to service users

I'm divided on the topic, as a big trainspotter there are benefits and downsides to both privatisation and nationalisation.

Yes, the current privately owned sections run better than they did, the issue is the infrastructure that is still owned by the government

A balance to ensure that the most utilised regions are accommodated for and works take place, rather than going to the highest bidder who strips them for profit.

It just needs to be improved and priced to encourage the mobility of people - levelling up more areas.

Complex, get top business people to consult on whether it would be more cost effective. Tap the profits they are allowed to make???

UK trains are an embarrassment. Can anything change that? Where's HS2? After all that time and money!

Either privatise it or nationalise it but make one company responsible for the rails & the trins & simplify fares

Should never have been Privatised. I worked for British Rail for close on 14 years, but had a feeling that it was never going to be the same when it was Privatised, and accepted voluntary redundancy

No, but harsh penalties must be in place and higher compenation paid to consumers when trains are cancelled due to failed service, repairs and/or strikes

Yes, but on the model of European countries where the parent holding company is owned by the national government.

Maybe It should be privatized but the operating companies need to be held to account on prices and service.