Currently UK trains are operated by private franchises and the tracks are operated by the government. Proponents argue that the system would run more efficiently if the tracks and trains were operated by private entities. Opponents of privatization claim that a single government train system would end the disruptions caused by the fractured franchise system.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
Political party:
Political party:
@9QBXBCF9mos9MO
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
@9Q5ZPSD9mos9MO
Both tracks and trains should be privatised, however, prices on tickets should be tightly controlled by a governing body.
@9PTPVM79mos9MO
Create a partnership to ensure the best people run and operate the service with stiff penalties for failire
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
@9L2BRYB1yr1Y
Infrastructure should be owned by the state. There could be a national train operator but it must compete with private operators
@9QKY5NV9mos9MO
Yes, keep trains privatised, but increase government regulations to ensure quality of service is at a good standard
@9PKDH599mos9MO
Yes but there should be more control over feeding profits to shareholders and management pay increases, especially when performance and customer satisfaction is low. The current gaming of the system should be stamped out.
@93PZNQJ3yrs3Y
yes but keep costs the same
Either all private or all public
@8S77NHLLiberal Democrat4yrs4Y
Privatisation jeans profit which is counter intuitive to inexpensive green travel ... however without investment from fares needed upgrades cannot be achieved. Privatisation happened because the government did not up grade do there has to be a balance between government and the franchise holders ... what we have now nay be he fear if both worlds even if not perfect
@8R2CRTX4yrs4Y
I really don’t care, whatever would make it overall better do it
@8QC445Z4yrs4Y
I don't have any opinion
@8QB9H5TLiberal Democrat4yrs4Y
No, privatisation has failed.
No, nationalise with local control over the area’s
@9D3C7MFConservative2yrs2Y
Increased privatisation and increased subsidies
@99GNPLG2yrs2Y
A healthy railway policy would combine private and public ownership, with the larger state-owned lines subsidising smaller, less frequented local or rural services
@98QSVDH2yrs2Y
We already have privatisation but it doesn’t work because it’s a monopoly. You need investment but also reduce cost to incentive people to use train travel
@98LQCD8Conservative2yrs2Y
Privatised, but very well regulated to increase competition and higher quality services.
@96VB8Z92yrs2Y
Indifferent - will be bad either way
@922PW283yrs3Y
Only nationalise those lines which are not profitable
@8ZVV4QH3yrs3Y
Should not be entirely government control, ultimate veto and oversight but a consortium of companies, railway passenger representation bodies, public, experts and govt
@8VZC5FF4yrs4Y
Co-operation of govt and private sector
@8VC4GRZ4yrs4Y
No, for if we were to remove all privatisation the government may see to maintain it to good enough standard or it could be dropped and discontinued
@8V95DN44yrs4Y
Privatise the operation of trains, but have the government operate the tracks.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
