Finally, we need to call in the troops for a spot of cloud dispersal Right That’s that sorted. Each time there seems to be a clear road for the reform of the railway, we find ourselves shunted back into the sidings. The minister has been thrown off, there is a bright new head of the Strategic Rail Authority at the controls, and Railtrack is no more. No one has died, but the cock-up over the upgrade of the West Coast Main Line, which will cause chaos for hundreds of thousands of passengers and cost hundreds of millions of taxpayers’ money, has the same cause – the fragmentation of responsibilities which runs like a faultline through the privatised railway.It should have been a relatively simple matter to improve the line from Euston to the north for faster running. Victorian civil engineers didn’t have too much trouble building it more than 150 years ago with little more than horses and muscle power. Yet our effort to bring the line into the 21st century is already running two years late and five times over budget at more than £10bn – a staggering 20 times the price for which Railtrack has been sold to Network Rail.Former British Rail engineers say they could have done the job under the old regime in less time and for less money Maybe.

But it’s certainly true that a lack of central responsibility and the myriad private interests involved in this, the UK’s biggest civil engineering project, have been the major factor in its going awry.With the creation of Network Rail we have nationalised the railway in all but name. But if we don’t jettison the bad old ways of the privatised railway, we could end up with a cash-eating monster even worse than Railtrack.. This week A-level results are due to be posted on school noticeboards across Britain They will determine who does what at Britain’s universities. The choices are extraordinary – there are nearly 40,000 different degree courses in Britain today, offered by 254 institutions. In 1960, 4 per cent of young people went to university, while today more than 30 per cent study for a degree. Universities, once the domain of the few, have been expanded to provide places for the many. There has been reluctance to provide adequate funds for further expansion.

Tuition fees have been introduced, maintenance grants abolished, and many universities are strapped for cash. There has been academic drift in certain colleges.The dream of greater access to higher education for greater numbers of students is tarnished. Today we report that the Government is prepared to close further education colleges and universities that fail to attract enough students. Under the current system, colleges that do not succeed in filling their places are given year-on-year funding to stop them sinking Now this safety net will be removed. It is no wonder that some institutions will close.The old university system worked well.

It controlled quality at the point of entry and educated students to a high standard with few drop-outs. Since then, some colleges have created courses that are pseudo-vocational, offering degrees that do not lead to jobs, or they have been driven to accept students with A-level failures to fill places. Employers have caught on to the reality: some colleges are second-rate.It is the very students whom successive governments have claimed to want to introduce to higher education who have been least well served by it. Too few children from lower-income families are taking up places; even fewer finish their degrees. Moves should be made to improve on this: more summer schools, for instance, and more links between universities and local schools.Higher education should stop being used as a cheap quick-fix for youth unemployment. Access should be improved for those with the ability and commitment to obtain a degree. We applaud the eagerness of the Education Secretary, Estelle Morris, to see maintenance grants restored to ease the financial difficulties that deter many from going to college, and force others to drop out.