[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Tomkat

Because overall, while the ticket prices are probably higher, the service and number of trains running has vastly improved.

The number of rail services, in real terms, as decreased. The less popular routes are being cut out of the services, while the numbers are boosted by an excessive number of trains between the most common destinations, even if they're not being used.

Originally Posted by Tomkat

Of course there's the dubious area of privatised companies scrimping on safety to get a higher profit, as we saw in 2001 with that big crash. Since then, I haven't heard of any major train crashes.

I don't think the lack of "big crashes" subsequently supports your argument, as Railtrack has been replaced by Network Rail, which is owned by the government.

In any case, "big crashes" aren't exactly the only ways in which rail companies have failed - the performance figures remain pisspoor, while walk on ticket prices have skyrocketed. The average ticket price is about the same, allowing for inflation, as it was under british rail, but this is due to the networks slashing the prices on season tickets and tickets bought in advance, rather than any actual reflection on how ticket prices have changed.

Originally Posted by Tomkat

So it seems that the current system, where it is (supposedly) privatised, but controlled rigidly and thoroughly by the government, seems to be the best.

Controlled rigidly? The government is controlling this about as rigidly as they do IT suppliers, with non-competitive shortlists, rewards for failure and the like.

Originally Posted by Tomkat

I do think it's one of those industries that works better under privatisation than nationalisation. Simply due to more companies = more trains and more competition = better service.

Neither of these things are entirely true. There are indeed more services running in total, but this is done by sending out many, short, trains, which creates problems for, say, people trying to get to work in Newcastle from Durham as there being three times as many trains between ten and eleven won't help that much.

As to the "competition" aspect - why is there competition? A franchise is won by a single operator, there's noone for them to be competing with.

Transport isn't something that works with competition, as many bus services have shown. Standard business tactics of undercutting the opposition until they go out of business, at which point you hike fairs to higher levels than they ever would have been, and the like, are not uncommon. This is not exactly what you want from a transport system.