MR R G Spencer, of Court Road (Malvern Gazette, December 15), concludes that the present chaos on our railways is due to recent EU legislation. In particular, he cites the directive which required state-run railway systems to be split into separate infrastructure and operating companies. Well, if this is so, how is it that most of our continental neighbours have rail systems that are vastly superior to ours? In Holland for instance, they have now split their state owned rail company into three companies: Railnet, which owns the infrastructure, Nederland Spoorwagen (NS), which operates the passenger trains, and NS Cargo, which operates freight services. But, despite being split up, the Dutch Rail system still runs like clockwork, and has the highest level of punctuality in Europe!

I think the problem with the privatisation of British Rail was that not only did the Tories rush it through without proper consideration, but they also split it into too many companies. This was a botched attempt to turn the clock back to before the First World War, when there over 20 major rail companies.

The Tories would have us believe that things were better in those days, but if you look at old newspapers and magazines from those days you'll find that people certainly did not think the system was wonderful. Indeed, in the Edwardian era, reckless competition between train companies led to a number of disastrous accident, notably that at Salisbury in 1906, where 20 people lost their lives. Had the Tories not won the election after the First World War nationalisation would have happened a lot sooner.

On a more positive note, the new 20- year franchises being introduced by the Strategic Rail Authority should encourage train companies to make

improvements. For instance, Chiltern Trains, who have revitalised the London Marylebone-Banbury-Birmingham Snow Hill "Chiltern Line", have been rewarded for their efforts by having their franchise extended for 20 years in return for promising further improvements. Not only have they already redoubled parts of their line which were singled in the 1970s, but they now plan to reopen a couple of closed lines.

It is to be hoped that their bid to take on the Worcester-Oxford-London Paddington "Thames" franchise succeeds, since this will hopefully lead to the Oxford-Worcester "Cotswold" line getting redoubled and an hourly service between Worcester and London Paddington. This would also fit in with the SRA's aim of reducing the number of Train Operating Franchises by merging several of the existing franchises into fewer, larger ones.

Finally, on the subject of reopening rail lines, EU money has helped projects such as the highly successfully "Robin Hood", which involved reopening the disused line linking Nottingham with Mansfield (a town of 200,000 population - the largest in Britain without a rail service prior to the Robin Hood line opening!) and Worksop, to get off the ground.

So, in conclusion, the blame for the state of our railways lies not with Brussels but with the ham-fisted way privatisation was done. At the same time, up until now, successive governments have failed to exploit the opportunities that EU funds can provide for investment in infrastructure.

Richard Putley, Foxglove Close

Malvern. (via e-mail)