I was.

What? You never ran on time?

Always, pity my colleagues didn't have the same attitude.

You never get that sort of thing in the world of private business etc, do you?

Just coke sniffing in the City, say ...

You read it exactly right, that is what I meant.
Cheaper results actually, as BR wouldn't have had to pay dividends.

Don't know where I said that privatisation "worked".
I said that the same investment could have been got without privatisation.

I deal with DB Schenker Rail on a daily basis ... not a clue how they run a railway and nor it would appear have they.

Call me old fashioned but it's a shame to see EWS trains rebranded as BD Schenker Rail, it's like something else has died

Public transport should never have been privatised. It should be run by the state on a not for profit basis in order to provide the infrastucture for business (private and public sector) to operate smoothly for the benefit of the country as a whole. How on earth can you expect the government to provide an integrated green transport and energy policy if the transport system is run to provide dividends for the shares holder rather than to meet the country's needs. As stated previously, how can a company that needs to pay a dividend to shareholders run a comparable service that is cheaper to operate than a business that runs on a not for profit basis where all excess funds are reinvested in the system ?

Because the state has a bloody terrible history of running services, the railways will never make a profit in government hands, all we can expect is a better service without paying more to subsidise it.