Damien

A lot of countries around Europe have nationalised rail companies and pretty good railways. I don't think nationalisation is the answer to everything, not even most things, but privatisation isn't always the answer either.

In the UK we do have a tendency to religiously assume that going private is always better no matter what. Even if it means coming up with really convoluted schemes to try and implement it in industries which are not a natural fit for it. The rail network in Britain is a mess. We have the network itself owned by the state after the privatised firm collapsed, we have had a number of cases where the state has had to take over failing franchises, we had that scenario with the West Coast Mainline being won with an absurdly optimistic bid from First Group which was only overturned on the eve of a court case brought by Virgin Trains.

Competition should be the main driver of effectively, investment and better services but the tender process means that doesn't really happen. People can't elect to use a rival service so it's only the Government who judges the competition and they tend to pick the biggest bidder irrespective of the qualities of the bid. So now the franchise has a set amount of time to turn a profit on the line whilst providing the service and returning money to shareholders before they have to hand it back! This is hardly a good approach for long-term investment by the operators is it?

It seems to me that it has become a mantra that privatisation is good and nationalism is bad that allows this to continue. I wonder if other countries are as obsessed with this fight between the two or if they have gotten over it and just decide what to do on a case-by-case basis.