Key points include:
- Ultimately, whether services are in public or private ownership, a long-term approach to asset management and investment is needed, supported by sensible regulation, good governance and accountability in order to ensure best value for consumers.
- Public support for nationalisation as a binary concept is high, but more needs to be done to close the information deficit about the tangible benefits private investment delivers.
- Nationalisation of rail would have marginal short-term impacts, but in the longer-term an integrated network could improve decision-making and efficiency.
- At present, the water and energy sectors are funded almost wholly by private investment. There is a real risk that outright nationalisation would see investors move their capital elsewhere, with the public sector then needing to meet the investment requirements for much-needed infrastructure improvements.
ICE Discussion Paper: Potential implications of the nationalisation of infrastructure
Content type: Policy
Last updated: 2018
You may also be interested in@headerSize>

- Type
- Awards and competitions
‘Invest as much in understanding people as you do in technical expertise,’ says award-winning engineer
ICE members who made this year’s WES Top 50 Women in Engineering list share what ‘engineering intelligence’ means to them.

- Type
- Infrastructure blog
Can the UK’s infrastructure strategy survive political upheaval?
A year on from the UK’s 10 Year Infrastructure Strategy, ICE policy director Sam Gould reflects on its future.

- Type
- Awards and competitions
Vote to decide South West’s best as transport and flood schemes make shortlist
Twelve projects, totalling more than £230m of infrastructure investment, are in the running for the ICE South West People’s Choice Award 2026.