IF WE think back to the early 1980s, the railways in Scotland were indeed in a sorry state. Much of the rolling-stock was old and unattractive, widely believed to be hand-me-downs from English regions.

Apart from the Strathclyde PTE, there was a feeling that closures loomed, fuelled by the infamous Serpell report, so there was little point in any upgrades, let alone any re-openings.

Fast-forward to the present day and the railways are a victim of their own success.

Unrecognisable from the 1980s, networks have newer trains, increased frequencies and even re-opened lines and stations, with more in the pipeline.

READ MORE: Abellio to be stripped of ScotRail franchise early  

More people than ever want to travel by train, even eschewing their cars to do so, due to longer commuting distances, and a growing awareness of the environmental benefits of rail over road.

Unfortunately, all too often the system fails to cope. Stories abound of overcrowding, stop-skipping, (where hapless passengers are left on the platform), cancellations and breakdowns, with the added insult of annual increases announced just in time to spoil the festive season.

It’s difficult to say whether or not the increase is fair – nobody likes paying increased prices – but because government has decided that more of the cost of the rail network should be borne by the passengers, rather than all taxpayers, increases are inevitable.

It is perhaps deemed too difficult to convince those who never use trains that they benefit from the railways because of the cars they remove from the road, leaving more space for those who need to drive and cutting emissions.

It should also be observed that the cost of motoring over the past decade or so has plummeted, compared to using public transport.

Of course cancelled or late trains are a serious problem, but compensation is available, and of course “delay-repay” did not exist in the days of BR.

There can be no doubt that the way the railways were privatised was problematic.

The track, now back in public ownership, is used by private train operating companies running trains they do not own but lease, so are unlikely to hold expensive reserve rolling-stock “just in case”.

Repairs carried out by Network Rail over-run, leading to delays and cancellations, with the operating companies such as Scotrail taking the flak.

Nationalisation is not necessarily the answer. From 1948 the railways were starved of investment by governments of both hues and used as a political football, often under the auspices of transport ministers who knew little about the railways and cared less.

READ MORE: Disastrous ferry contract costs Scottish taxpayers extra £100m

Branches and stations were closed and lines were singled, reducing resilience. Now, with the great upsurge in rail passengers, it’s no wonder the system cannot always cope.

Any nationalisation would have to be properly funded – in this country we don’t confiscate private assets without compensation – and the industry protected against future political interference.

There are also still some archaic practices which need to be renegotiated with the workforce; for example, how on earth can a 21st century railway function seven days a week if Sunday working is optional? I would hazard a guess that the main bus companies are not so easy-going.

Staff shortages are further exacerbated by the train operating companies competing for drivers, with some companies able to pay more to poach this limited resource. As the saying is, this is no way to run a railway.

The Opinion survey of 1,000 passengers carried out for the RMT in June includes responses from all over the country, but it is not clear whether the 50 Scotrail passenger responses expressed the same concerns to the same degree as the overall result. Scottish annual rail fare increases tend to be less than those down south, for a start. And while there will always be some rail passengers who threaten to switch back to cars, it may be that when they take into account the high parking charges in places like Edinburgh and Glasgow, they might realise they would not actually be saving much money.

Scottish rail journeys too, with the exception of the Strathclyde PTE, tend to be longer than English ones, because the country’s population is more spread out.

Scotrail-bashing has become a national sport but it is noticeable that some of Abellio’s sternest critics also regularly found fault with their predecessors, First. Could it be that both companies encountered similar difficulties in running services on inadequate infrastructure? And who is waiting in the wings to take it on when Abellio’s contract ends?

Thanks to the policy of shifting the financial burden of funding the railways from the taxpayer to the passenger, fare increases would seem inevitable. It is, though, hardly likely to encourage the desperately-needed modal shift from the private car.

What is needed is for public money to be invested in making up for the decades of neglect the railways have suffered so that the services can run where they are supposed to and when, including all scheduled stops, and even to some places which currently the network cannot reach. St Andrews, anybody?

Jane Ann Liston is secretary of Railfuture Scotland