It is a very difficult matter we have regarding our railways. Certainly heavy use and constantly growing and although there are problems thee same thing happened under state control. People tend to have short memories when a challenge comes up I think and what the eventual solving will be is wide open. Interestingly more is being spent on rail.
The loss of thousands of miles in the controversial Beeching time is a reminder that no matter which government was in power there was a problem under them. No-one really looked at the possibility of population growth or movement did they? There were lines that just had to go and no longer justifiable as some basic right when hardly anyone used them. In places where a few lines have been brought back they are fortunate in places where there has been over the decades house growth and so on. All those years ago the Argyle Line (named after the street it ran under centrally) in my city here in Glasgow ran through Glasgow Central low Level and like lines that came off it done away with. Then years later brought back and electrified and heavily used so there have been good progressions. Apart from the Borders Line partly back - well about 33 miles (!), Stirling-Alloa and the Larkhall Lines came back and doing well.
There are other places in Gt Britain for rail coming back in England as well as other parts of Scotland (maybe St Andrews and the Peterhead routes?). In N. Ireland a 10,000 petition on getting the Armahg link back showed general interest but the money is tight. Maybe the only city without rail?? Perhaps the structure has to be looked at and the association of Network Rail and the individual companies and one can but hope something positive will be the eventual answer.
