A news item in the Telegraph gives some examples of schemes that Network Rail would prefer to be financed in whole or in part by companies or by councils:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/09/call-private-rail-funding-keep-upgrades-track/
I incline towards the pragmatic. If, by almost any means, new and effective rail infrastructure can be built bring it on. There are obvious concerns about what happens should private finance run out during the construction of a scheme and about ongoing operating subsidy requirements. Less obviously, private investors will seek guarantees that reduce their risk, which then give rise to potential or actual cost to public finances. These are questions for risk assessment and management, in which there is much existing experience. For the little that it is worth, I would wish that to come under the auspices of Network Rail.
As to concerns about greater risks of questionable design and construction or later operating practice: Network Rail and/or the Office of Road and Rail will necessarily be involved in the integration of new infrastructure into the existing railway system. I think we can trust them to be careful.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/09/09/call-private-rail-funding-keep-upgrades-track/
Not included in that list, but apparently already well advanced along similar lines, are the proposals to fund the East West rail scheme.Network Rail is poised to demand help to pay for an initial dozen schemes. The taxpayer-owned company said earlier this year that it wanted to invite more private sector involvement. It has identified projects it believes should be part or wholly funded by private companies or councils, which would benefit from the works.
Examples on a list seen by The Sunday Telegraph include the potential upgrade to the Cumbrian line to help with the building of the NuGen Sellafield power station. Network Rail believes the companies linked to the power station should back the project given the support it will provide the construction effort.
Also on the list are projects that Network Rail believes could be built, financed and operated without it being involved in any way. These *include the proposed western rail link to Heathrow Airport and an upgrade to the Brighton main line in the Selhurst/East Croydon area. Funding from Coventry City Council is also suggested *towards station improvements there.
I incline towards the pragmatic. If, by almost any means, new and effective rail infrastructure can be built bring it on. There are obvious concerns about what happens should private finance run out during the construction of a scheme and about ongoing operating subsidy requirements. Less obviously, private investors will seek guarantees that reduce their risk, which then give rise to potential or actual cost to public finances. These are questions for risk assessment and management, in which there is much existing experience. For the little that it is worth, I would wish that to come under the auspices of Network Rail.
As to concerns about greater risks of questionable design and construction or later operating practice: Network Rail and/or the Office of Road and Rail will necessarily be involved in the integration of new infrastructure into the existing railway system. I think we can trust them to be careful.