This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Trains: in UK Mid‑importance Trains Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated projects or task forces: /  This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as High-importance). United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contents of the International Rail Regulator page were merged into Rail Regulator on 3 May 2020. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

I am puzzled by this sentence:

Critics regarded this as an unjustified interference in an inter-dependent contractual matrix, contrary to the legitimate expectations of private investors in the railway.

What was an unjustified interference? The Railways Act or the proposed amendment? Should we reword this to make it clearer? -- Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) ( Talk) 08:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC) reply

Although the offices of "Rail Regulator" and "International Rail Regulator" were strictly speaking legally distinct, in practice the same individuals always occupied both offices. There is very little coverage of the "International Rail Regulator" in reliable sources, beyond just acknowledging its existence. Given this situation, I don't think there is much sense in having a separate article for "International Rail Regulator", I think the best solution is just to make it a small section in the "Rail Regulator" article. SJK ( talk) 12:18, 4 June 2019 (UTC) reply

  Y  Merger complete. Klbrain ( talk) 07:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC) reply