Labour’s expanding programme of rail nationalisation has yet to deliver a clear verdict on one of its central promises: better-performing trains.
Passenger services are being transferred to public ownership as private contracts expire, while the government prepares legislation for Great British Railways (GBR), a body intended to bring train operations and infrastructure under a single strategic structure.
However, recent disruption and incomplete performance data mean it remains difficult to establish whether public ownership is improving punctuality or cancellations.
Performance remains difficult to assess
South Western Railway (SWR) became the first operator transferred to public ownership by Labour in May 2025. Its cancellations increased during its first year in public hands, although the government says performance was affected by high temperatures, signalling failures and trespass incidents.
Rail minister Lord Hendy said measures including the introduction of delayed new suburban trains and the recruitment of additional drivers had reduced cancellations linked to staff shortages.
At Woking station, commuter Leo told the BBC that he had initially been optimistic about public ownership but had seen little improvement. “I think the phrase ‘emperor’s new clothes’ comes to mind… it’s still unreliable,” he said.
TransPennine Express, which was nationalised in May 2023 under the previous Conservative government, has recorded a noticeable fall in cancellations after a reliability plan reduced some services, removed one type of train and secured a new agreement with drivers. Its cancellation rate, however, remained above the Great Britain average in the year to August.
Only SWR and c2c, among the operators nationalised since Labour came to power, had completed a full year under public ownership at the time of the assessment. Comparisons are also complicated by infrastructure failures, extreme weather, the condition of each operator before transfer and the effects of the pandemic on passenger numbers.
Stephen Glaister, a former chair of the Office of Rail and Road and emeritus professor of transport and infrastructure at Imperial College London, said it was “completely hopeless” to assess the policy over such a short period. He believes a decade may be needed to judge its impact.
A fragmented system
The government argues that official figures show publicly owned operators are performing better overall on punctuality and cancellations than services still run under Department for Transport contracts. But many delays originate with infrastructure, including signalling, while limited network capacity and shortages of trains or staff cannot be resolved quickly by changing ownership.
DfT Operator Limited chief executive Alex Hynes said short-term improvements had been possible, including making one team jointly responsible for infrastructure and passenger services in parts of south-west England.
“The railway is a system: track, train, people,” he said. “So by putting one person in charge, they can fix all elements of the system to deliver a better service to customers.”
Hynes also pointed to work on the recently nationalised Thameslink, including improved cleaning, better toilets and the replacement of unpopular upright seats.
The changes do not amount to a return to the former British Rail model. Network Rail has been publicly controlled for more than 20 years, while LNER and Northern were already in public ownership before Labour’s programme. ScotRail, Transport for Wales and Caledonian Sleeper are controlled by devolved administrations.
Private rolling-stock companies still own most of the trains, freight operators remain private and open-access passenger services such as Lumo, Hull Trains and Grand Central continue to operate commercially.
GBR could reshape the railway
The government’s wider reform depends on GBR, which is intended to act as a “single guiding mind” for the network. Its creation follows the disruption caused by the 2018 timetable failure and is being pursued through legislation that is still making its way through Parliament.
Transport expert Professor Jon Shaw of the University of Plymouth said a unified structure could support better long-term planning for rolling stock and timetables, while ending disputes between train operators and Network Rail over responsibility for delays.
He also warned that limited funding and political intervention could undermine the model. Professor Glaister said ministers would need to give rail management sufficient independence, particularly on politically sensitive issues such as fares and service levels.
Lord Hendy said GBR would operate at arm’s length from government, despite the Transport Secretary retaining final approval of its strategy.
Funding remains the central constraint
The railway receives around £12bn a year in subsidy, excluding major projects such as HS2. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander wants that figure to fall, while Network Rail has said constrained budgets will force difficult choices as it also prepares for more extreme weather.
Professor Glaister said passengers seeking greater reliability, fewer breakdowns and lower fares were effectively asking for more investment. He warned that expectations could rise while government funding falls.
Hynes said better services and lower subsidy were compatible because improved performance should attract more passengers and revenue. “My two north stars are performance up and subsidy down,” he said.
For now, the evidence points to a railway in transition rather than a settled result. The public ownership programme may change accountability and coordination, but its effect on everyday reliability will depend on funding, infrastructure, industrial relations and the eventual powers given to GBR.