I found myself nodding along to all of this. I live in Cornwall and recently I've found myself flying to London when I need to travel there for work because it is literally half the price. And because all of my recent journeys on trains have been delayed/cancelled/extremely squished/or I've had to stand for hours because seat reservations have gone wrong. I love travelling my train too, and think flying is awful for the environment but as well as costing less, it's quicker and more reliable.
This is so true - and really timely. It also ought to be possible to just turn up and buy a ticket, without swingeing penalties - life doesn't always book x weeks in advance: and, anyway, what about spontaneity? (And catching that train to Paria ri meet a friend for lunch and catch an exhibition...ha!)
I totally agree with everything you state here. I come from a third world country and we get better public transport services over there. It's deplorable the state that the railway system is at the moment.
I've lived in London for 15 years and went to Brighton for the first time last week to attend funeral. I travelled off peak and return ticket was about £50ish. When I head back to Brighton station, most of the trains from Brighton to London were delayed or cancelled so I added an extra hour to a journey that takes 50 minutes. People were surprised I hadn't been to Brighton before or haven't explored more of the UK in all these years, but used to the prices and trains in France, Italy and Spain (now getting worse with privatisation) it was often cheaper and faster getting on a plane back home in Spain than trying to get anywhere here on train. And as a resident of London I also have the privilege to suffer the same issues in the tube.
That Manchester to London bargain return was incredible. I'm now still living on that line but a bit further south, and I just can't afford to visit London. Cultural things like exhibitions etc, become only for the folk who can afford them... It's SO FRUSTRATING.
The situation in the United States is equally deplorable. While the rail system for passenger trains has never been any good, all the other choices for public transport in most cities (forget about rural areas) are complete garbage. The other choices being...buses. They are normally anywhere between 15 to 20 minutes behind schedule (sometimes they simply do not arrive at all), and the bus stop where they drop you off is nowhere near your actual destination. Instead, they put bus stops next to abandoned lots, factories, or just simply out in the middle of nowhere with no sidewalks in sight and eight lanes of traffic roaring by at 55 mph+ as you attempt to Frogger your way to safety.
Oh, and prices? I flew 1600 miles for $300 last summer. The same destination for a railway ticket (cheapest seats) was $840, and would have taken about 3-4 times as long to get there. The bus was going to be about the same price. I guess they want us all on airplanes?
Indeed, I have been to so-called 3rd world countries where public transport was way more efficient, timely, cleaner, and cheaper. I think maybe our 1st world status ended sometime back in the 1970s or 80s, but since it wasn't announced in the newspaper or on the television I guess everything's fine.
Preach! I recently took a train from Birmingham to London and had to stand up during the entire journey. My back was screwed as a result.The trip back was appalling: a cancelled train, followed by a delayed train I declined to get in, as it was so full I would have had to stand again until the number passengers had reduced, usually, around an hour in. I was ready to elbow, push and kick every able-bodied person out of the way to get on the third suitable train, 90 minutes later than my scheduled departure. I’ve never needed train gins more, such was my fury.
The trains need to be returned to public ownership as a matter of priority.
had three hour train delay friday on random bit of track- train company blamed the slowness on red tape. when i was staying in the borders getting to edinburgh it took 3-4 hours by bus and train whereas driving takes an hour. used to be train stations all over borders now only a few. communities completely isolated without cars, the buses are few and far between and expensive(5.70-7 pounds for a bus ride!)
Recommended! Currently writing this from Norwich railway station where my train has just been cancelled (albeit after a week of trouble-free daytrips).
I guess I, like, half-agree with this. I mean I agree that our trains are shit, and that privatisation hasn't helped. I guess I'm not qualified to talk about the Beeching cuts, but it seems pointless getting mad at something you can't undo.
While nationalisation would probably be good in the long term, it's hardly a panacea; it's not like the publicly-owned services in this country are doing any better than the privately-owned ones.
I'm not sure where the RMT are getting their figure of an 18% saving from. The info I can find from FullFact suggests that the profit margin in the rail sector is about 4% (though this is old data). Still worth saving, of course, but it doesn't feel transformative.
In addition, you talk about your train trips back in the mid-noughties - that was *after* Beeching and privatisation and everything. So something else must have happened since then to make things drastically worse. No idea what it is.
The climate argument feels weak to me. Yes, rail is much cleaner than petrol cars, but electrics are much closer to rail on CO2 per mile. Still a bit higher, but electric cars are an immature technology with the potential to improve their efficiency, and close the gap completely or even reverse it, over the timescales we have to solve the climate crisis. I think congestion, accessibility and safety are stronger arguments for preferencing rail over road.
Finally, the last section "I'm not an economist, but..." Well, yeah. I can't believe anyone still believes in MMT after the inflationary spike we've had. You're essentially like a left-wing version of Liz Truss - she borrowed her money for tax cuts rather than public spending, but the outcome is the same. No problem spending more on services, but would like to see it done through taxes rather than borrowing. (Some sort of land tax would fit the bill nicely.)
Curious as to what you think the ‘timescales we have to solve the climate crisis’ actually are? (Given the world’s 1st year-long breach of the 1.5C warming limit were reported in February this year - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68110310 - and the window to limit warming to ‘only’ 1.5C is expected to close by 2030.) So, 6 years to transition completely to electric cars and other vehicles? You’re having a laugh, ain’tcha . . .
1) why can't we undo them? We can absolutely rebuild the train network. 2) you literally cannot compare a railway network to the massive extraction and emissions that would be caused by all drivers changing to electric cars c) you're blaming an inflationary spike on MMT when MMT was in no way utilised? How is that in any way comparable?
Trains are busier because more people are using them (passenger numbers doubled after privatisation). Which is good, but our planning system makes it impossible to build the capacity needed to accommodate that growth, which might in turn set off a virtuous circle of increasing growth and capacity.
And UK rail is very heavily regulated, with a lot of public sector involvement. There's no clear cut publicly owned - privately owned divide. National Rail really was terrible - grimy, shabby, falling apart. People want nationalisation, but a nationalised railway will be fighting for investment against health, education and social care spending, which is not a fight it will win. It's complicated.
Maybe I’m missing something, but how can it be “…siphoning off of profits to line the pockets of the rich” if the companies are state-owned rail companies?
They aren't *all* state-owned. Arriva is a private company registered in the Cayman Islands. First Group is listed on the stock exchange. Etc, etc. https://weownit.org.uk/who-owns-our/railways
Interesting! I just researched further and it turns out Arriva was, until this month, owned by the German state-owned rail company Deutsche Bahn.
Is there any evidence that state-owned rail companies provide a better service than privatised ones? When I lived in Poland the trains were cheap and good and they are mostly run by a state-owned holding company as independent entities on a commercial basis. The Polish version of Railtrack is only about 17% state-owned. This hybrid system seems to be a good solution.
I found myself nodding along to all of this. I live in Cornwall and recently I've found myself flying to London when I need to travel there for work because it is literally half the price. And because all of my recent journeys on trains have been delayed/cancelled/extremely squished/or I've had to stand for hours because seat reservations have gone wrong. I love travelling my train too, and think flying is awful for the environment but as well as costing less, it's quicker and more reliable.
This is so true - and really timely. It also ought to be possible to just turn up and buy a ticket, without swingeing penalties - life doesn't always book x weeks in advance: and, anyway, what about spontaneity? (And catching that train to Paria ri meet a friend for lunch and catch an exhibition...ha!)
I totally agree with everything you state here. I come from a third world country and we get better public transport services over there. It's deplorable the state that the railway system is at the moment.
I've lived in London for 15 years and went to Brighton for the first time last week to attend funeral. I travelled off peak and return ticket was about £50ish. When I head back to Brighton station, most of the trains from Brighton to London were delayed or cancelled so I added an extra hour to a journey that takes 50 minutes. People were surprised I hadn't been to Brighton before or haven't explored more of the UK in all these years, but used to the prices and trains in France, Italy and Spain (now getting worse with privatisation) it was often cheaper and faster getting on a plane back home in Spain than trying to get anywhere here on train. And as a resident of London I also have the privilege to suffer the same issues in the tube.
That Manchester to London bargain return was incredible. I'm now still living on that line but a bit further south, and I just can't afford to visit London. Cultural things like exhibitions etc, become only for the folk who can afford them... It's SO FRUSTRATING.
Great piece.
The situation in the United States is equally deplorable. While the rail system for passenger trains has never been any good, all the other choices for public transport in most cities (forget about rural areas) are complete garbage. The other choices being...buses. They are normally anywhere between 15 to 20 minutes behind schedule (sometimes they simply do not arrive at all), and the bus stop where they drop you off is nowhere near your actual destination. Instead, they put bus stops next to abandoned lots, factories, or just simply out in the middle of nowhere with no sidewalks in sight and eight lanes of traffic roaring by at 55 mph+ as you attempt to Frogger your way to safety.
Oh, and prices? I flew 1600 miles for $300 last summer. The same destination for a railway ticket (cheapest seats) was $840, and would have taken about 3-4 times as long to get there. The bus was going to be about the same price. I guess they want us all on airplanes?
Indeed, I have been to so-called 3rd world countries where public transport was way more efficient, timely, cleaner, and cheaper. I think maybe our 1st world status ended sometime back in the 1970s or 80s, but since it wasn't announced in the newspaper or on the television I guess everything's fine.
Preach! I recently took a train from Birmingham to London and had to stand up during the entire journey. My back was screwed as a result.The trip back was appalling: a cancelled train, followed by a delayed train I declined to get in, as it was so full I would have had to stand again until the number passengers had reduced, usually, around an hour in. I was ready to elbow, push and kick every able-bodied person out of the way to get on the third suitable train, 90 minutes later than my scheduled departure. I’ve never needed train gins more, such was my fury.
The trains need to be returned to public ownership as a matter of priority.
And the gins are also too expensive!!
M&S gin in a tin!
had three hour train delay friday on random bit of track- train company blamed the slowness on red tape. when i was staying in the borders getting to edinburgh it took 3-4 hours by bus and train whereas driving takes an hour. used to be train stations all over borders now only a few. communities completely isolated without cars, the buses are few and far between and expensive(5.70-7 pounds for a bus ride!)
Agree with all this (although I am a fan of voluntarily stopping in Preston!)
I should have clarified: no beef with Preston! I would have enjoyed it more had I ventured off the platform, no doubt
Recommended! Currently writing this from Norwich railway station where my train has just been cancelled (albeit after a week of trouble-free daytrips).
I guess I, like, half-agree with this. I mean I agree that our trains are shit, and that privatisation hasn't helped. I guess I'm not qualified to talk about the Beeching cuts, but it seems pointless getting mad at something you can't undo.
While nationalisation would probably be good in the long term, it's hardly a panacea; it's not like the publicly-owned services in this country are doing any better than the privately-owned ones.
I'm not sure where the RMT are getting their figure of an 18% saving from. The info I can find from FullFact suggests that the profit margin in the rail sector is about 4% (though this is old data). Still worth saving, of course, but it doesn't feel transformative.
In addition, you talk about your train trips back in the mid-noughties - that was *after* Beeching and privatisation and everything. So something else must have happened since then to make things drastically worse. No idea what it is.
The climate argument feels weak to me. Yes, rail is much cleaner than petrol cars, but electrics are much closer to rail on CO2 per mile. Still a bit higher, but electric cars are an immature technology with the potential to improve their efficiency, and close the gap completely or even reverse it, over the timescales we have to solve the climate crisis. I think congestion, accessibility and safety are stronger arguments for preferencing rail over road.
Finally, the last section "I'm not an economist, but..." Well, yeah. I can't believe anyone still believes in MMT after the inflationary spike we've had. You're essentially like a left-wing version of Liz Truss - she borrowed her money for tax cuts rather than public spending, but the outcome is the same. No problem spending more on services, but would like to see it done through taxes rather than borrowing. (Some sort of land tax would fit the bill nicely.)
Curious as to what you think the ‘timescales we have to solve the climate crisis’ actually are? (Given the world’s 1st year-long breach of the 1.5C warming limit were reported in February this year - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-68110310 - and the window to limit warming to ‘only’ 1.5C is expected to close by 2030.) So, 6 years to transition completely to electric cars and other vehicles? You’re having a laugh, ain’tcha . . .
1) why can't we undo them? We can absolutely rebuild the train network. 2) you literally cannot compare a railway network to the massive extraction and emissions that would be caused by all drivers changing to electric cars c) you're blaming an inflationary spike on MMT when MMT was in no way utilised? How is that in any way comparable?
Trains are busier because more people are using them (passenger numbers doubled after privatisation). Which is good, but our planning system makes it impossible to build the capacity needed to accommodate that growth, which might in turn set off a virtuous circle of increasing growth and capacity.
And UK rail is very heavily regulated, with a lot of public sector involvement. There's no clear cut publicly owned - privately owned divide. National Rail really was terrible - grimy, shabby, falling apart. People want nationalisation, but a nationalised railway will be fighting for investment against health, education and social care spending, which is not a fight it will win. It's complicated.
Maybe I’m missing something, but how can it be “…siphoning off of profits to line the pockets of the rich” if the companies are state-owned rail companies?
They aren't *all* state-owned. Arriva is a private company registered in the Cayman Islands. First Group is listed on the stock exchange. Etc, etc. https://weownit.org.uk/who-owns-our/railways
Interesting! I just researched further and it turns out Arriva was, until this month, owned by the German state-owned rail company Deutsche Bahn.
Is there any evidence that state-owned rail companies provide a better service than privatised ones? When I lived in Poland the trains were cheap and good and they are mostly run by a state-owned holding company as independent entities on a commercial basis. The Polish version of Railtrack is only about 17% state-owned. This hybrid system seems to be a good solution.