Keir Starmer is making a huge mistake at cost to the taxpayer (Image: PA)
Less than five months in and Labour are breaking manifesto pledges by raising taxes on working people. To make things worse, they are planning to sign the taxpayer up to funding all new investments in railways for years to come through their ideological obsession with nationalisation.
The current franchising system is flawed and our railways need reform. Our rail network isn’t delivering for passengers because services are so often late, cancelled, or overcrowded.
This isn’t because of privatisation – it’s because being an operator is unattractive, uncompetitive, and too few companies want to do it, meaning we can’t easily get rid of poor performers. Operators are actually limited in the ways they can improve services and passengers lose out as a result.
With little to no competition for franchising contracts, passenger priorities go unaddressed all while paying higher fares. But nationalisation isn’t the answer – it won’t improve services or ease the burden on the Treasury.
What we need is a greater role for the private sector, not the current franchising model. That is the path to boosting economic growth, reducing the burden on the Treasury, and – as we sometimes forget – improving our environment and levels of air pollution.
I’m old enough to remember the grim days of the nationalised British Rail where trains were old, dirty, and sluggish. Taking us back thirty years will not only be a complete waste of taxpayers’ money and government capacity but will also do nothing at all to improve the experience of passengers. And we cannot reasonably expect more journeys to be taken by train while the fundamental problems of reliability, inconvenience, and expense remain.
Thanks to greater – but still restricted – privatisation and market control, our railways have improved in some key respects. One billion pounds of private investment has flowed into the rail network each year, creating 7,000 more daily services, ending the sense of inevitable decline in our train stock, resulting in passenger numbers doubling between 1995 to just before the pandemic.
Arguing that public money won’t be used to take over operations is one thing. But ministers are failing to mention the eye watering costs later down the track. The taxpayer will have to fund all investment, upgrades, and pay deals struck with belligerent unions. This is all before the necessary expansion of the existing network.
Not to mention, railways will be competing with everything from the NHS to education for funding. The government and – most importantly – the taxpayer cannot and should not be expected to pay for all of the capital investment that our railways desperately need.
Privatisation has brought in the capital needed for new trains and improved stations. Why are the government now cutting off this vital source of investment?
But Labour are being blind to both the economic benefits of private sector involvement and the potential environmental benefits. Given that transport remains the largest source of pollution and emissions, any feasible plan to reach net zero or improve air quality must include an affordable, convenient and reliable railway network.
We all care about the world we leave for the next generation. We should strive for a less polluted, more sustainable one. But the government doesn’t see the practical necessity of private finance for the Treasury, our services and our environment.
Instead of pouring billions into the white elephant of nationalisation, we must allow the market to effectively weasel out ineffective operators and leave passengers to choose the service that best matches their preferences on price and service.
We should forge a system where private operators compete in a market that incentivises upgrades, investment, and improvements to services leading to new lines and stations, electrification, and lower fares.
Securing private investment is the only way to create reliable alternative ways to travel, without creating a nasty surprise every time we get our payslip, and a dirtier and decaying environment.
Most Popular Comments