British Trains: Did Privatisation Cause the Current Chaos?

British trains are terrible at the moment... I mean they've always had issues, but it's especially bad right now. So in this video we unpack the British railway system, explain the flaws and discuss why it is that Britain's trains just suck.

TLDR is all about getting you up to date with the news of today, without bias and without filter. We aim to give you the information you need, quickly and simply so that you can make your own decision.

TLDR is a completely independent & privately owned media company that's not afraid to tackle the issues we think are most important. The channel is run by just a small group of young people, with us hoping to pass on our enthusiasm for politics to other young people. We are primarily fan sourced with most of our funding coming from donations and ad revenue. No shady corporations, no one telling us what to say. We can't wait to grow further and help more people get informed. Help support us by subscribing, following, and backing us on Patreon. Thanks!

[crookedpaths]

Next up: British roads, schools, crime, health, town centres, weather and food.

[Jonathan-ioqk]

I live in LDN and need to get to Leicester often - it's a 50 minute fast train, or a 1.30hour slow train. It's often quoted as the single highest rail fare in Europe, and if you buy it on the day, it could cost you up to £130. Absolute madness.

[MaxiTB]

As an Austrian I always thought we have the best rail company with ÖBB in the world when it comes to passenger transport, but then I finally went to Japan and oh boy, they are on another level. And years later (about 5 years ago) I went to the UK and oh boy, they are on another level - just in the opposite direction.

[g]

It’s a classic case of privatizing the profit and socializing the loss.

[swadow]

Now I ain't British. But as someone who visited England last year it was a fascinating experience seeing the massive difference in price that existed in England and Scandinavia Germany. I think it was during 22 summer that Germany had a pass that cost 20 euros or something and could give you free transport anywhere in Germany for entire summer. Meanwhile a 4 hour train ride from a large English city to a mid sized English city would have cost me 100 pounds.

The price difference is ridiculous

[quenchize]

The main problem with the privatisation is that there is no competition. If I want to go from A to B at a particular time there is only one company I can use. So it is effectively a monopoly.

[JagoHazzard]

Spending and saving don't have to be incompatible - you just have to think in the long term. Invest money in new technology to save on the costs of running a line. But what also needs to be remembered is that investment in lines leads to a better, more attractive service, which leads to increased passenger numbers. That's exactly what happened with the Overground, but that's only one of many examples one could cite.

[stevedavy]

The UK Govt since the 50s ( both Parties) have been about short term profit, minimal investment. We used to have a network of railway lines running to virtually ever village and large industrial complex in the UK. How easy it would have been to go carbon neutral if still the case. Electric or hydrogen driven trains not only doing away with cars and truck convoys, but people and freight literally being delivered door to door. I remember Nationalised Red Star Parcels back in the 50s and 70s. You could deliver large loads to you nearest station and guaranteed it would be available for collection from another station withing 48 hours. Interesting that Auty Maggie smashed the Unions and broke up Nationalised Services to end constant strikes. Remind me again how Privatisation has brought reliability and affordability to our travelling experience ?

[DubzXD]

Can we pause for a second...did privatisation CAUSE rail passenger numbers to go up, or is it merely a correlation? Was there always going to be an increase regardless of the privatisation?

[blazzz]

I lived in Spain for a few years, their transport is publicly owned. Strange then that their trains were always on time and some of the cheapest in Europe. The fact of the matter is that Britain is a mismanaged country- not just in terms of rail but most things. Why is fuel more expensive here than on the continent? Alcohol? Housing? That's what Tory rule for 40 of the last 53 years have done to this country.

[cuddliestbear]

Missing a big important point here! While yes the railways were privatised, the UK government actually ended up spending way more money and investing a whole lot more into them than they ever did under British Rail and nationalisation, which is likely the reason why ridership has increased so much - not much to do with privatisation at all.

[thegearknob]

This misses the real reason why UK trains are terrible. The service is non existent outside of major cities. Arguing over public/private is moot when there is no track in the first place.

My town of about 13, 000 people used to have a train station. That closed under Beeching and the track was built over so now it can't be replaced. The nearest station is an hour by bus away. Once you get there, you can go east to London, or west to Weymouth. However at Weymouth the line ends for absolutely no reason. If you wanted to go further west to Exeter, you would have to head east and go around, adding like an extra hour or so onto the journey again. So of the three directions it's possible to go (south is the sea), they covered one of them! Well done!

So if I wanted to use public transport to get to Exeter, it would take me over 4 hours. I can get a boat to France in that time.

It saddens me to think that 100 years ago, the public transport was actually faster than it is today, and probably quicker than driving too because our traffic and road infrastructure is so poor too.

I went on holiday to Germany recently. I used the train there more in that week than I have done in the UK in my whole lifetime. That's how little use they are.

[kienhwengtai]

Trouble is, if you allowed private companies to choose what routes to keep ... pretty much the ones which don't make money which means more rural and remote ones. The higher volume ones would only be left and these probably the most profitable. So to make any money, private operators cut costs which means no upgrades and running everything until it breaks.

[merseyviking]

I never understood the competition thing - when I am waiting for a train, my first thought isn't "I'll wait for a TransPennine instead of this Avanti that's waiting right here." I want to get on a train and get to my destination. This leads on to route weirdness - travelling from Liverpool to Wilmslow I can get a ticket that's valid either via Manchester or Crewe, but not both. They take broadly the same amount of time, and are broadly similar in price. Or travelling from Northampton to Liverpool I found it was significantly cheaper to get off the train that was going to Manchester, buy a new ticket, wait 20 minutes and get the next train via a slightly different route. You couldn't buy that ticket combo online (as one ticket), I had to go to the ticket office in my 20 minute stopover.
Maybe, just maybe, this new plan will simplify things for passengers. But I'm not holding my breath.

[zaksharman]

Short answer yes
Long answer YYYYEEEESSSS

[caseysmith]

It would be interesting to evaluate how the renationalisation of the railways in Scotland and Wales has impacted performance/operations compared against the quasi-private system in England. Also, how this relates to Network Rail (which is UK wide and operates the signalling and maintains the rails) e.g. Scotrail currently aren’t on strike but when Network Rail decides to go on strike, services are disrupted/limited.

[Homer-OJ-Simpson]

It sounds a lot like the US Amtrak train. It’s partially public and partially private. They are forced to have certain routes but also are trying to make a profit as a for profit organization.

[adamsmithfrsa]

Don't think that nationalising the railways will make them any better. If you think that, please read this message, it may change your mind about it.

I am from Italy, a country where the railways are mostly nationalised, and our train system is absolutely screwed. Most regional routes are served by old, dirty trains, without air conditioning, smelly and overcrowded. Some trains in the south truly resemble the scenery of a post-apocalyptic film. Most of them are always late, of hours, not minutes. Sit in a major Italian train station for a couple of hours, and you will always hear every few seconds the phrase "the train from X to X is delayed of X amount of hours because of {stupid nonsense excuse}. We are sorry for the inconvenience".

But how about train prices? are they cheap? I always hear British people complain about their train prices. Well, I'm sorry to inform you that nationalising won't help that either. Our greedy Italian nationalised system is as expensive as the British one, I've tested a few routes in the UK compared to Italian similar ones (in terms of population of the two cities and km of the route) and the prices are nearly the same. The only difference is that the Italian ones are slightly more predictable, while the British ones fluctuate a lot depending on demand. This however can be a good thing, if you buy British train tickets well in advance, you will save money. Italian fares are just always expensive...

"But that's not true! I've been to Italy and the trains were so amazing! So clean! So beautiful!" I hear you say. Ah, let me guess: did you take one of those fast red trains from one major city or a tourist destination to another, like from Milan to Rome or from Rome to Florence? That, my friend, is either a Frecciarossa or an Italo, which are the only two privatised routes, which compete against each other and therefore are the only ones in the country that provide a good service.

So, in a nutshell, the only decent services we have are the ones that are privatised. Competition makes companies improve their services. Nationalised services solely rely on the goodwill of the managers to improve, because they have no economical drive, as everyone will use their services no matter if they are good or not. You don't like an Italian regional train? Well, walk then...

[soleenzo]

Britain si slowly coming to terms with the idea that some services, like transport, energy, health, education, are things that improve quality of life, economic potential and cannot be run profitably if they are to be run well. And that's totally fine, they're an INVESTMENT in the country, in the future. A Private company, however benevolent it says it is, always tries to make the most money and will cut corners to get there. It's either low fares, or high quality of service, you can't have both, it never happens, except in the dreams of ultra liberals who think they'll solve a country's economy by selling off it's infrastructure. Short-mindedness at it's best.

[maginotu]

As an American who visited the UK in May 2022, I used the train system to visit all the places on my list. My experiences were not bad at all. My first trip from Southampton to York required only one change and the connecting train was on time with a wait time of about 10 minutes. I subsequently travelled on to Scotland and then back down to Chester, Exeter, Penzance, Winchester and London. Only once was there delay of more than 15 minutes. The trains were clean enough and comfortable. The ticket price seemed a bit steep but you can save if you book ahead of time online. In the USA, no one travels by train except for people who live in the NYC area. So I am not an expert in train amenities and performance. I suppose being a tourist is one thing, and a regular commuter another, but I found the train personnel very helpful and the service not bad. Overall, I would give the British trains a mark of at least B.