Impact of the privatisation of British Rail

=== Safety ===

=== Safety ===

[[File:Rail fatalities of European countries.png|thumb|Rail fatalities per billion passenger-km in European countries in 2013]]

[[File:Rail fatalities of European countries.png|thumb|Rail fatalities per billion passenger-km in European countries in 2013]]

The railways can point to continued improvements in safety under privatisation; in fact the rate of improvement increased compared to that experienced in the last years of BR, according to research by Imperial College London. The researcher said their findings showed that 150 people had probably lived who might have been expected to die in crashes had pre-privatisation trends continued.{{cite news | url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/more_or_less/6607991.stm | work=BBC News | title=Rail 'safer' after privatisation | date=30 April 2007 | access-date=20 November 2015 | archive-date=21 November 2015 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151121064837/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/more_or_less/6607991.stm | url-status=live }}

The railways can point to continued improvements in safety under privatisation; in fact the rate of improvement increased compared to that experienced in the last years of BR, according to research by [[Imperial College London]]. The researcher said their findings showed that 150 people had probably lived who might have been expected to die in crashes had pre-privatisation trends continued.{{cite news | url=https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/more_or_less/6607991.stm | work=BBC News | title=Rail 'safer' after privatisation | date=30 April 2007 | access-date=20 November 2015 | archive-date=21 November 2015 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151121064837/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/more_or_less/6607991.stm | url-status=live }}

In 2013, according to a [[European Railway Agency]]'s report, Britain has the safest railways in Europe based on the number of train safety incidents.[https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jul/25/how-safe-are-europe-railways How safe are Europe's railways?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160517035019/http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jul/25/how-safe-are-europe-railways |date=17 May 2016 }}, [[The Guardian]]. Several major rail crashes occurred in the early years of privatisation including the [[Southall rail crash]] (1997), [[Ladbroke Grove rail crash]] (1999), [[Hatfield rail crash]] (2000) and the [[Potters Bar rail crash]] (2002).

In 2013, according to a [[European Railway Agency]]'s report, Britain has the safest railways in Europe based on the number of train safety incidents.[https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jul/25/how-safe-are-europe-railways How safe are Europe's railways?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160517035019/http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/jul/25/how-safe-are-europe-railways |date=17 May 2016 }}, [[The Guardian]]. Several major rail crashes occurred in the early years of privatisation including the [[Southall rail crash]] (1997), [[Ladbroke Grove rail crash]] (1999), [[Hatfield rail crash]] (2000) and the [[Potters Bar rail crash]] (2002).

=== Investment ===

=== Investment ===

[[File:UK rail private investment.jpg|thumb|Real private rail investment between 2006/07 and 2017/18 per passenger-km traveled with rail{{Cite web |url=http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/39381/rail-finance-statistical-release-2017-18.pdf |title=Rail Finance 2017–18 annual statistical release | Office of Rail and Road |date=9 October 2018 |access-date=11 October 2018 |archive-date=11 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181011133533/http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/39381/rail-finance-statistical-release-2017-18.pdf |url-status=live }}]]

[[File:UK rail private investment.jpg|thumb|Real private rail investment between 2006/07 and 2017/18 per passenger-km traveled with rail{{Cite web |url=http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/39381/rail-finance-statistical-release-2017-18.pdf |title=Rail Finance 2017–18 annual statistical release | Office of Rail and Road |date=9 October 2018 |access-date=11 October 2018 |archive-date=11 October 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181011133533/http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/39381/rail-finance-statistical-release-2017-18.pdf |url-status=live }}]]

Since privatisation, the amount of investment has gone up nine-fold, from £698m in 1994–95 to £6.84bn in 2013–14.{{citation|url=http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/files/Publications/2014-06_KPMG_rail_industry_dataset.pdf|title=GB rail: dataset on financial and operational performance}}{{Dead link|date=November 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} There has also Government investment across the network in speed improvements, [[proposed railway electrification in Great Britain|electrification]], [[European Rail Traffic Management System in Great Britain|in-cab signalling]] on the East Coast Main Line and [[High Speed 2]]. Due to the [[Hatfield rail crash|Hatfield accident]] in 2000, [[Railtrack]] undertook large-scale track relaying without sufficient planning, and much of the work was substandard and subsequently had to be re-done.{{citation|url = https://books.google.com/books?id=vCJniku2eJMC| title = Off the rails: Britain's great rail crisis: cause, consequences and cure| author = Andrew Murray| publisher = Verso|year = 2001 | at = "Companies in trouble", pp. 124–129| isbn = 978-1-85984-640-7}} Railtrack's poor project management abilities were exemplified with the [[West Coast Main Line|West Coast Route]] Modernisation project, which was intended to deliver a 140 mph route in 2005 at a cost of £2 bn, but which finally delivered a 125 mph route in December 2008 at a cost of £9 bn,{{cite news

Since privatisation, the amount of investment has gone up nine-fold, from £698m in 1994–95 to £6.84bn in 2013–14.{{citation|url=http://www.raildeliverygroup.com/files/Publications/2014-06_KPMG_rail_industry_dataset.pdf|title=GB rail: dataset on financial and operational performance}}{{Dead link|date=November 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} There has also Government investment across the network in speed improvements, [[proposed railway electrification in Great Britain|electrification]], [[European Rail Traffic Management System in Great Britain|in-cab signalling]] on the [[East Coast Main Line]] and [[High Speed 2]]. Due to the [[Hatfield rail crash|Hatfield accident]] in 2000, [[Railtrack]] undertook large-scale track relaying without sufficient planning, and much of the work was substandard and subsequently had to be re-done.{{citation|url = https://books.google.com/books?id=vCJniku2eJMC| title = Off the rails: Britain's great rail crisis: cause, consequences and cure| author = Andrew Murray| publisher = Verso|year = 2001 | at = "Companies in trouble", pp. 124–129| isbn = 978-1-85984-640-7}} Railtrack's poor project management abilities were exemplified with the [[West Coast Main Line|West Coast Route]] Modernisation project, which was intended to deliver a 140 mph route in 2005 at a cost of £2 bn, but which finally delivered a 125 mph route in December 2008 at a cost of £9 bn,{{cite news

| last = Johnston

| last = Johnston

| first = Ian

| first = Ian

In theory, privatisation was meant to open up railway operations to the [[free market]] and encourage competition between multiple private companies. Critics have pointed to the fact that many of the franchises have ended up in the common ownership of the few dominant transport groups such as [[Abellio (transport company)|Abellio]], [[Arriva]], [[FirstGroup]], [[Go-Ahead Group]], [[Keolis]], [[National Express]] and [[Stagecoach Group]], either as wholly owned subsidiaries, or as part owners of franchisees or other holding groups. Since these groups all had their origins in the earlier deregulation and consolidation of bus services, it also meant that in some cases there was now a common private owner of both the bus and train operator on some routes.

In theory, privatisation was meant to open up railway operations to the [[free market]] and encourage competition between multiple private companies. Critics have pointed to the fact that many of the franchises have ended up in the common ownership of the few dominant transport groups such as [[Abellio (transport company)|Abellio]], [[Arriva]], [[FirstGroup]], [[Go-Ahead Group]], [[Keolis]], [[National Express]] and [[Stagecoach Group]], either as wholly owned subsidiaries, or as part owners of franchisees or other holding groups. Since these groups all had their origins in the earlier deregulation and consolidation of bus services, it also meant that in some cases there was now a common private owner of both the bus and train operator on some routes.

Criticism has also arisen due to the fact many of the private companies are themselves owned by the state-owned transport concerns of other nations, including the largest freight operator. Several passenger franchises are owned either in part or in full by subsidiaries or joint ventures of foreign governments; Abellio being owned by the Dutch government's [[Nederlandse Spoorwegen]], Arriva by the German government's [[Deutsche Bahn]], the French government's [[SNCF]] holding a 25% in Keolis and the Hong Kong government owning 75% of [[MTR Corporation]].{{cite book|last=Haywood|first=Russell|title=Railways, urban development and town planning in Britain: 1948–2008|year=2009|publisher=Ashgate|location=Farnham, England|isbn=978-0-7546-7392-7|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vWhpkyrFvjAC&q=foreign-owned+train+operating+companies+london&pg=PA266|edition=Online-Ausg.|access-date=10 December 2012|page=266|archive-date=21 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210221032912/https://books.google.com/books?id=vWhpkyrFvjAC&q=foreign-owned+train+operating+companies+london&pg=PA266|url-status=live}} Critics have also pointed out that the franchise system does not encourage true competition, although supporters point out that privatisation has enabled any private company to compete, as an [[open access operator]]. In July 2015, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) introduced plans to increase competition for inter-city routes, laying out four possible options for reform:{{cite web |url=http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/scrap-inter-city-franchising-and-let-tocs-bid-for-train-paths-stagecoach-and-virgin |title='Scrap inter-city franchising and let us bid for train paths', say TOCs |access-date=20 November 2015 |archive-date=21 November 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151121025310/http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/scrap-inter-city-franchising-and-let-tocs-bid-for-train-paths-stagecoach-and-virgin |url-status=live }}

Criticism has also arisen due to the fact many of the private companies are themselves owned by the state-owned transport concerns of other nations, including the largest freight operator. Several passenger franchises are owned either in part or in full by subsidiaries or joint ventures of foreign governments; Abellio being owned by the Dutch government's [[Nederlandse Spoorwegen]], Arriva by the German government's [[Deutsche Bahn]], the French government's [[SNCF]] holding a 25% in Keolis and the Hong Kong government owning 75% of [[MTR Corporation]].{{cite book|last=Haywood|first=Russell|title=Railways, urban development and town planning in Britain: 1948–2008|year=2009|publisher=Ashgate|location=Farnham, England|isbn=978-0-7546-7392-7|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=vWhpkyrFvjAC&q=foreign-owned+train+operating+companies+london&pg=PA266|edition=Online-Ausg.|access-date=10 December 2012|page=266|archive-date=21 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210221032912/https://books.google.com/books?id=vWhpkyrFvjAC&q=foreign-owned+train+operating+companies+london&pg=PA266|url-status=live}} Critics have also pointed out that the franchise system does not encourage true competition, although supporters point out that privatisation has enabled any private company to compete, as an [[open access operator]]. In July 2015, the [[Competition and Markets Authority]] (CMA) introduced plans to increase competition for inter-city routes, laying out four possible options for reform:{{cite web |url=http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/scrap-inter-city-franchising-and-let-tocs-bid-for-train-paths-stagecoach-and-virgin |title='Scrap inter-city franchising and let us bid for train paths', say TOCs |access-date=20 November 2015 |archive-date=21 November 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151121025310/http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/scrap-inter-city-franchising-and-let-tocs-bid-for-train-paths-stagecoach-and-virgin |url-status=live }}

# retaining the existing market structure, but with significantly increased open access operations

# retaining the existing market structure, but with significantly increased open access operations