Sir, I am surprised at the lack of comment from government ministers over the recent fiascos at Rugby and Liverpool Street (report, Jan 3). This is in contrast to the manner in which the Government spoke out whenever Railtrack failed in its duty.

Perhaps there is some embarrassment that the Government’s own creation is proving to be so incompetent and a dawning realisation that if you create a “not for profit” company there is no way that you can punish it by hitting shareholders through a financial penalty — any penalty will only reduce the funds available for improvements and repairs.

Come on, ministers, face up to your responsibilities and integrate track and operations through the private company structure, which can then be held financially accountable for any failures and rewarded for success.

Brian Noton
Cowbridge, Glamorgan

Sir, On Wednesday I returned to work to find Liverpool Street station closed and all trains terminating at Stratford, where our train arrived 50 minutes late because of the difficulty of turning trains around there. Our driver informed us that the police were limiting the number of trains at Stratford because of overcrowding, and when we finally got there we concluded that the police were not wrong.

This is the station that in four years’ time will have to cope with crowds exceeding even the weekly rush hour. It is surely not a moment too soon for those responsible to set about enabling Stratford station to do just that, to prevent the London Olympics from turning into a travellers’ nightmare.

Hazel R. Morgan
Witham, Essex

Sir, In the internet age, the concept of shuttling workers hundreds of miles back and forth every day is ludicrous. No one “forces” commuters to commute, and train operators are entitled to charge the best market rate they can get.

Let’s phase out subsidies and let prices rip: employers can then decide whether they want to provide workspaces where people live, or pay their employees enough to live where the work is.

Ian Morrison
Wareham, Dorset

Sir, The railways need to be on a level playing field with other forms of transport.

A coach pays £165 a year in road fund licence for which it has access to a maintained, improved and policed infrastructure. If a single passenger rail carriage of similar size paid the same sum for access to the rail infrastructure would any further subsidy be required?

Better still, the electric car pays no road licence or tax on the fuel it uses but still has access to the whole of the road infrastructure on environmental grounds, so presumably an electric train should make no contribution at all.

David Crick
Barnstaple, Devon

Sir, Roger Lewis attributes the success of Chiltern Railways to the former “investment by BR in the early 1990s” (Jan 3). He is mistaken. Chiltern’s performance is the consequence of its own massive investment in redoubling track (reduced to single by BR), rebuilt and new stations, and good management that cares for trains and motivates its staff, communicates with customers and negotiates with skill the minefield of Network Rail and the DfT.

Geoffrey Holroyde
Warwick

Sir, How nice to read the words “railways” and “renationalisation” on your front page (Jan 4). The idiocy of having one company manage the trains and another manage the tracks was obvious to the layman from the word go. I never thought I would say it, but come back British Rail, all is forgiven.

Jo Rees
Cheltenham

Explore Letters

• Feedback