Recent fare integration trials between Northern, TransPennine Express, and LNER have been hailed as evidence that public operation can simplify pricing and deliver savings. The Department for Transport claims journeys like Harrogate to Manchester have seen prices fall from £33.90 to just £14.10.
Rail Minister, Peter, Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill, said:
“This is exactly the type of collaborative work public ownership enables, allowing us to put passengers first by making train travel simpler and more affordable.
“Through these cheaper fares we’re opening up more options to people travelling across the North, putting more money in working people’s pockets and boosting connectivity and growth as part of our Plan for Change.”
The railways: on examination …
But look more closely, and a more cautious truth emerges. If this is nationalisation, it’s a very partial version. LNER’s experience shows the limits of a system where the state runs services but doesn’t control them. As a supporter of public ownership, I believe it’s time we were honest about what we’ve got – and what we should be demanding instead.
The 2023 “Simpler Fares” pilot introduced single-leg pricing to replace complex off-peak returns. While this made the system less confusing in theory, it didn’t lower prices in practice. In fact, some passengers found they were paying more.
Yes, the cross-operator trials in the North are encouraging. But they are limited pilots, not a national strategy. Most LNER fares, especially walk-up or flexible tickets, remain among the most expensive in Europe. And that’s the key issue: despite being publicly operated, LNER is still pricing journeys like a private operator. The logic of revenue maximisation is still at work.
Public ownership has helped LNER stabilise staffing and resolve industrial disputes – most notably, the 2024 agreement with drivers that eliminated cancellations due to shortages. That’s a real win.
But on-time performance is still poor, with only 64–67% of LNER services arriving punctually in early 2025. Why? Because LNER doesn’t control the track, the signals, or the congestion; all that sits with Network Rail.
Without a fully integrated system, public operators like LNER are left to take the blame for problems they can’t fix.
As Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander recently acknowledged:
“I would love to be able to bring down fares… but we are subsidising the day-to-day running of the trains to the tune of about £2 billion a year… I can’t promise that we’re not going to be putting up fares next year.”
Her candour is important, but it also highlights the limitations of public ownership when it’s built on the same financial logic that shaped privatisation.
Even as Great British Railways (GBR) begins to take shape, Alexander has stressed that it won’t be a return to the British Rail bureaucracy:
“GBR is going to be run as a business. It’s not going to be run by civil servants; it will be run by industry professionals.”
A rail service for the public good
If public ownership still replicates market behaviours; revenue targets, performance penalties, fare rises, then we’re only halfway to real reform.
Staff at LNER are regularly praised for their professionalism and helpfulness. The company provides digital tools and has shown willingness to communicate transparently with passengers. But core concerns persist: cleanliness, overcrowding, onboard food, and – again – delays. Customer satisfaction data shows growing frustration with reliability and value for money.
Public ownership has brought some accountability. But passengers are still waiting for service quality that reflects the high price of tickets.
Look across the Channel and you’ll see state-run rail systems that offer lower fares, more reliable services, and clearer public accountability:
- France’s SNCF runs everything – trains, stations, infrastructure – as a single national entity, with capped fares and extensive regional subsidies.
- Germany’s Deutsche Bahn, though not without its problems, still offers better fare integration and unified public control over rail policy and infrastructure.
- Italy’s Trenitalia delivers high-speed services at half the price of UK equivalents, despite competing with a private operator.
- And Switzerland’s famously punctual trains are the result of heavy public investment, integration, and planning -not market fragmentation.
In contrast, Britain’s rail system still clings to the broken logic of the franchise era: fragmented control, private leasing of trains, fare structures built on competition instead of coordination.
North East Mayor Kim McGuinness has been amongst the critics of this fragmented system.
“We know the needs of our communities and we are best placed to get it right. Through the Rail Bill, we need mayors to be given new devolved powers for rail to truly transform travel for local passengers,” she said at the launch of the North East Rail Partnership Board in May 2025.
Her calls include local station ownership, better fare integration, and reopening routes like the Leamside Line; all impossible under the current model.
McGuinness put it more bluntly earlier this year:
“Transport is not just about getting from A to B – it is the infrastructure of opportunity.”
That vision goes far beyond who operates the trains; it’s about who decides how they’re run, funded, and prioritised.
The North East Rail Partnership Board
The creation of the North East Rail Partnership Board marks a welcome shift. For the first time, regional leaders sit formally alongside Network Rail, Great British Railways, operators, and government in shaping the North East’s rail future. The board’s stated purpose is to “jointly develop plans for improvements to rail infrastructure and services” – from ticketing integration to long-term upgrades like reopening the Leamside Line.
The Board is a positive step toward regional coordination, but it is not yet a vehicle for real public power. It can advise, advocate, and convene – but it cannot set fares, own or manage stations, direct service levels, or control infrastructure investment. All those powers still sit in Westminster, with the Department for Transport and industry bodies.
For passengers, that distinction matters. A body that can’t cap fares, fix timetables, or enforce reliability risks becoming another talking shop; well-meaning, but ineffective. If we want real accountability, the Board must evolve into something more: a regional public transport authority with statutory power to shape rail services, award contracts, and reinvest revenue locally. That means not just being in the room, but being in charge.
In this sense, the Board represents both what’s promising about Labour’s rail approach, and what’s still missing. It shows a growing appetite for joined-up, locally informed decision-making. But without deeper devolution and structural reform of how services are governed, its potential will remain unrealised.
A publicly owned rail network
Public ownership should mean more than just the state running trains. It should mean a coherent, integrated railway system that:
- Offers affordable fares for all – not just for those who book in advance or find a pricing loophole.
- Is accessible to everyone – urban, rural, young, old, working, and disabled passengers alike.
- Runs on time, reliably – because it is managed as a whole, not a patchwork.
- Is accountable – not just to civil servants, but to passengers, communities, and the public interest.
We need to stop pretending that moving franchises to public hands is the same as building a public railway. Ownership is only the start; the structure, purpose, and priorities must follow.
LNER has shown what is possible: better industrial relations, more responsive management, and limited policy innovation. But it has also shown the limits of a system that still works on privatised principles.
If Labour is serious about rail reform, it needs to go further. Not just a patchwork of public operators, but a truly national, publicly accountable railway – one that serves people, not profit.
We deserve a railway that belongs to us – and works for all of us.
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
