The TFL (Transport For London) is used by people every day to transport around London and includes the London Underground, the London Overground, the bus system, London’s tram network, and much more. However, while London certainly has one of the best public transport systems in the entire world, it would be far more efficient and cheaper if it were privatised.

The main issue with publicly run services is that the incentives for the government are very different from the incentives for a private business. The incentives for a government run organisation are to maintain votes while the incentives for a private business are to make money. These incentives lead to private businesses being far more efficient than a government run organisation. One of the reasons for this is because government wastage will just be paid for by taxpayer money – or by selling government bonds which will eventually need to be paid out by taxpayer money in the future. For a government to maintain votes with the public, the organisation doesn’t actually have to provide a particularly brilliant service – it just has to avoid the service going tremendously downhill. However, a business will always want to make more money – and the only way it will make more money is by providing a better service.

There are many issues with the TFL that would be resolved by privatisation, including frequent strikes, overcrowded rush-hour services, and littering that occurs on trains, buses, and trams.  No private company would allow its service to go on strike as much as the TFL has – because it would lose so much money. Millions of people use the TFL daily and these strikes can severely disrupt their day. Privatising the TFL would also reduce overcrowded services during rush hour. As a private company would want to make as much money as possible, it would ensure that the service during rush hour would be less crowded, so more people are likely to use it. It would do this either by price gouging or by providing more carriages. Price gouging will cause train prices during rush hour to be more expensive so people will be less likely to use the service during that period of time, so the service would be less crowded. Littering on public services is also a huge issue. An unclean service would mean that less people are likely to use it. This would obviously lose a private business a lot of money, so a private business is likely to ensure that the service is kept clean. However, a public service would not have this incentive.

There is also a large number of homeless people that end up on London Underground’s tubes, asking passengers for money – which is something a private company would put a stop to. These homeless people can access the trains because the barriers to enter the station can easily be opened by pushing them open. This also leads to many people using the service without paying as they can just push the barriers open and walk through.

Another issue with the TFL is the number of suicides that occur on the London Underground. Every year, on average, there are about 40 suicide attempts that occur on the London Underground by individuals jumping on the tracks. There is no reliable date as to how many of these suicide attempts lead to an actual death but that is an incredibly high amount of attempted suicides. The disruption and negative publicity that a private company would face if 40 individuals attempted suicide on their service would incentivise a private company to put a stop to it. Some tube stations have barriers that prevent individuals from jumping onto the tracks. However, these barriers are not all tube stations because it would cost too much. However, for a private company, barriers would definitely be worth it as the cost of the barriers are much smaller than the cost of someone dying on their service.

Even though the TFL broke even this year, it never has before – meaning it usually loses more money than it makes. Because of this, UK taxpayers are essentially forced to pay to maintain the service, even if they don’t use the service. This is inherently unfair as people should not be forced to pay for services that they don’t use. A person should only pay for a service used by someone else if the other person’s livelihood is at risk, as humans have an obligation to help those in urgent need. Another reason why the TFL doesn’t make as much money as it should is because individuals over the age of 60 get free travel, which means that the tax money of working people is being used to pay for the travel of people over 60. This is quite absurd as individuals over 60 years old are the richest age group. If the TFL were privatised, taxpayer money would not have to go towards maintaining it anymore. While it is overall a small sum of taxpayer money that goes towards the TFL – it is still money that should be kept by the taxpayer. If privatised, children would most likely no longer get free transport, which some people may object to as it could hinder their ability to travel to school. However, even if the TFL is privatised, the government could just subsidize it so that children still get free travel.

By using taxpayer money to fund the TFL, the upfront price of travel decreases. While this obviously has problems which were previously discussed, such as overcrowded trains and people having to pay more tax money. A potential benefit is that people are more likely to use trains rather than using a car. This could be beneficial as using a train would be better for the environment. However, this argument isn’t nearly sufficient enough to argue against privatisation. If the environmental damage caused by other vehicles was that big of an issue, the government could just subsidize the tube system rather than own it outright. Besides, road tax is already in place to reduce car usage.

Another argument that arises when it comes to TFL privatisation is that because some services have a monopoly, such as the London Underground, they would be able to exploit this and charge customers extremely high prices. However, the issue with this argument is that the only reason the London Underground has a monopoly on the tube system is that private companies are currently not permitted to start an underground tube service. If the TFL was privatised and private companies were able to start competing tube services, the competition between the tube services would lead to lower prices and a better quality product. There will obviously not be many competing tube services as the infrastructure costs would be extremely high and would need a high upfront investment, but even having 3 tube services competing would be enough to bring down prices and improve quality. Another factor that is not taken into account is that even though the TFL may not be competing with any other tube services, it still competes with many other modes of transport, such as the bus, the car, walking, etc. Due to this, even if the TFL is privatised and there are still restrictions preventing other private companies from starting their own tube services, the TFL will still not be able to drastically raise their prices.

While London definitely has one of the best transport systems in the world, it would greatly improve if it were to be privatised. Japan’s subway system is completely privatised and is considered to be the best in the world. Private corporations will always provide a better and more efficient service than a nationalised organisation due to the difference in incentives. Allowing the TFL to be privatised will decrease strikes, improve quality, and most likely lower travel prices.