To think our public transport system needs a complete overhaul?

Totally agree. Transport in London and other big cities is obviously better than it in rural areas, but better than nothing or very poor doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement.

I paid 40 euros for 2 x first class seats in the extra quiet carriage of an intercity train in a European country. I regularly travel by train there. Trains are clean, announcements are clear and easily understood (in several languages) and, most importantly, trains leave and arrive on time. Track work is done every summer, to ensure smooth running for the rest of the year. It's not impossible, they provide plenty of advance notice and arrange alternative forms of transport.

Trains also run all year round (excluding lines where tracks are being improved/maintained) - there's none of the "leaves on the line", "too wet", "too dry" that you get in the UK.

Northern trains need to be longer, it’s crazy how packed the two carriage ones get in rush hour.

It costs me £40 to get to work on the train every day. I can’t do anything to reduce the price as I’m only eligible for (and have) the friends and family railcard to use with DC but can’t use when alone. This is transpennine and is an hour journey. Absolutely abominable. The only city where PT is reliably on time and reasonably priced is London, the rest of the UK is shocking.

The West Coast mainline does need more capacity though (as do other lines). That’s a key problem with the network that we have & it makes it expensive to run. It also means a lack of resilience in areas that don’t have alternative routes.

Longer trains have been done on a number of lines- though you could argue not long enough. Eleven car trains to Liverpool and Manchester, 12 car Thameslink trains.

It is the 2 car local trains that probably need longer ones more.

Driving is subsidised though - very few tolls, roads have been expanded repeatedly over previous decades, free car parks amongst other things.

It’s a political choice - we could pay for more rail if we diverted money from new road projects. Personally, I’d be happy with that as new rail (such as the Elizabeth & Northumberland Lines) have been really successful, whereas bigger roads just lead to more people driving (so will never reduce road pollution) and more air pollution & CO2. Collisions on roads are far higher than on rail too.

One thing that people can do if they want better public transport is to join / support their local rail / public transport user group.

I don't want more trains. There is no point having more of something I already can't afford to use. I want reasonably priced trains and until the trains are in hands of private companies, this is never going to be a possibility (with or without HS2).
I am not saying your points aren't valid. I just disagree with your original statement that the mysterious taxpayer can't subsidise me. Which is something we are hearing a lot of when it comes to any financing of public services. As if the taxpayer is some entity completely separate from the rest of British public.

@LlynTegidThey could have extended platforms to run longer trains on busy lines. But no. All the northern cities like Manchester were gagging for HS2. Burnham wanted HS2 and had said as PM he wants it to go to Manchester! Of course Manchester. Nowhere else counts does it? Look at the destruction where hs2 is going and you would not wish it on your worst enemy. The destruction is immense but we have monumentally foolish politicians who never looked at the alternatives. Burnham is going to spend money like water on his pet project! Manchester! Could he maybe go back there?

The whole bloody country needs an overhaul!!!!

This is what reason growth has been shit since the 0& crash, no investment in infrastructure.

We have not invested enough in railways since the mid 1950s. The corrupt decisions of the Beeching Report was the first of many that has led to where we are now with rail. There is a lot that could be done, Scotland has shown some success and there are a few other examples.

HS2 was a bad decision, should have been up the east coast then Leeds to Manchester, which would have achieved far more and cost a lot less I expect.

@CatzaYes, I know there is government money but it’s enough and guess what, we are paying for HS2. The stupid voters wanted it so other services are not improved. The North wanted easy access to London and look how well that went.

I do not believe we need to spend more on this. My DD travels all over the country at peak times. Yes, it costs but she’s got court deadlines and gets there! Plus striking is the bigger issue.

Of course season tickets cost more - peak time travel. If you all wanted more trains you should have lobbied for no HS2 and improvements to the existing network but no one did. It’s just another addition to the long list of things we want improved but in many cases, aren’t that bad. It’s not obligatory to live where the rail service is not the best. Most of us take a view in that before buying. Services to Cornwall have always been crap but it’s not obligatory to live there!

Agree with this. Rural public transport in particular is basically in a death spiral. Hardly anyone uses it because the services are sparse and unreliable. But there are no funds to improve the frequency or reliability because no one is using it.

I don't know what "not unreasonably priced" means to you but I used to pay 6k for a season ticket in 2015.
Some things are essential infrastructure - health, transport, utilities. And it is perfectly reasonable for "the taxpayer" to subsidise it. And who is this mysterious "tax payer"? Newsflash, I am one. So is the OP, I am sure. Why can't we expect better and more affordable services for our own money? What should our tax money be used for if not improve the very services we use? Is financing wars a better use of "the tax payer's" money?
And, I tell you a secret - "the tax payer" already subsidises rail network.

I 100% agree with you. Our public transport is a shambles. I am also concerned at the number of trains derailing lately, everything is so poorly maintained. It's ridiculous that the get a train from the South West to London is more expensive than flying....not that I would fly but just to demonstrate the ludicrous cost. Plus the trains and rail network stink of sewage. Has anyone been to Bristol Temple Meads recently, the smell turns my stomach.

They will all be publicly owned by next year.

But it costs billions to improve the infrastructure and takes years, even for relatively modest improvements. Whilst being improved, the rail services are seriously hindered and curtailed or even cancelled, which again can take months for simple junction improvements. Even re-opening an existing freight line to carry passenger trains again can take years and millions of pounds to upgrade the tracks, signalling, stations, etc. I think it's why HS2 was thought of as such a good idea as it was a brand new line so disruption to existing lines/trains would be minimised. Obviously HS2 had turned into a hugely expensive white elephant. We really don't want any repeats of that!

How would you do it though?

Unfortunately, taking some of the rail operators back into company ownership/control hasn't improved things in the North - Northern Rail and Transpennine Express were taken back into public/govt control a few years ago and things are worse now rather than better.