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
- 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.

- Type
- News
New mental health in construction code of practice launched
Published by the Construction Leadership Council (CLC), the code focuses on prevention so that people can get help before they reach a crisis point.