Based on the sources, the main arguments against railway liberalisation can be summarised as follows:

Financial impact and costs for taxpayers

No cost reduction: Contrary to expectations, liberalisation often does not lead to lower costs for the government.

Higher subsidies: In countries such as the United Kingdom, Sweden and Germany, government contributions have risen significantly since liberalisation, often to catch up on overdue maintenance or to support new private players.

Privatisation of profits, socialisation of losses: Private operators are often reluctant to invest in infrastructure, which means that the government (the taxpayer) must continue to bear the costs of maintenance and loss-making lines, while private companies skim off the profitable lines.

Impact on passengers and service

Higher ticket prices: Fares often rise faster than the cost of living. In addition, liberalisation leads to ‘yield management’, whereby train tickets become significantly more expensive during rush hour.

Threat to network coverage: Private operators focus only on profitable lines (‘cherry-picking’), which undermines the principle of cross-subsidisation (péréquation). As a result, less profitable but socially important lines come under pressure or are closed.

Quality and safety: In Great Britain, a lack of investment by private operators led to a temporary decline in punctuality and even to serious fatal accidents.

Impact on staff

Deterioration of working conditions: Liberalisation is often accompanied by a significant reduction in the number of employees, higher work pressure, greater flexibility and less favourable secondary employment conditions for new staff.

Loss of status: There is a tendency to abolish the protected status of railway staff for new recruits, leading to social decline.

Operational and strategic disadvantages

High coordination costs: The separation between infrastructure manager and different operators creates complex and costly coordination problems.

Loss of public control: The NMBS is seen as one of the last major public bastions. Opponents fear that liberalisation is a means of weakening trade union power and the right to strike.

Need for complex regulation: Governments now have to hire expensive expertise to monitor private operators and manage contracts, which was previously part of the internal operations of the state-owned company.