For all the complaints about high ticket prices and overcrowded trains, our readers still felt the rail network was performing better now than it did in BR days. Several readers said it was easy to view the past with rose-tinted glasses. But they remembered the railways from those days as being under-funded, shabby and unreliable. Progress has been made since then, they said.
Yes: 60%
No: 13%
Don't know: 27%
There didn’t appear to be much love for Network Rail among our panel. That said, PE readers felt the current infrastructure owner and operator had performed much better than its predecessor Railtrack, a much-derided organisation that was at the heart of several safety-related incidents and high-profile scandals over directors’ pay throughout the late 1990s and early noughties.
3. Does it matter that parts of the rail network are run by foreign operators?
Yes: 38%
No: 57%
Don't know: 5%
One of the consequences of rail privatisation is that many of the firms now running train services are owned by foreign companies. Most of our readers didn’t get too worked up about this – it wasn’t relevant in a globalised world, they said. But a significant minority did take issue with it, saying vital national infrastructure and services should be delivered by home-grown firms.
4. Do you think that Labour’s plan for part-nationalisation is a good idea?
Yes: 44%
No: 39%
Don't know: 17%
The underlying grievance here was that privatisation had enabled train operators to line their pockets while not materially improving the service. Many readers felt that some sort of change to the current set-up was needed, to rein in what they saw as profiteering on a grand scale. The Yes voters assumed that additional state competition might achieve that.
5. Would you welcome full nationalisation of rail services?
Yes: 33%
No: 56%
Don't know: 11%
Readers didn’t think full nationalisation was likely. But many said they supported the case for the government taking a more substantial stake in railway services through, perhaps, stronger regulation to ensure public services were not degraded by the private profits of a very few.
6. Would you like to see greater investment in rail at the expense of other modes of transport?
Yes: 63%
No: 31%
Don't know: 7%
Amid complaints about high prices and reliability, engineers did seem to feel a fondness towards the railways, perhaps due to the high levels of mechanisation. So almost-two thirds wanted greater investment.
7. Do you support the plan for HS2 in its current guise?
Yes: 54%
No: 37%
Don't know: 7%
Support for the high-speed network among engineers has softened, with a well-organised and well-funded anti lobby getting its message across. But the majority of readers said they still supported the project, citing the need for greater capacity and a desire to leave a legacy to future generations.
8. Would you like to see first-class travel eradicated to free up space in second-class carriages?
Yes: 37%
No: 55%
Don't know: 8%
Who doesn’t get frustrated when they try in vain to board a packed train in second class, while noticing the first-class carriages are empty? Is that enough justification to do away with the posh seats to free up space for everyone else? Well, no, said most readers. More expensive first-class tickets subsidised cheaper second-class seats, said many.