30 year rail plan

Government 30-year plan for Rail – White Paper

In August the government issued a White Paper called 'Delivering a Sustainable Railway'. A White Paper sets out the government position, but it is part of the consultative process. Depending on the feedback on the White Paper, ministers may make changes before the proposals become law in the form of an Act of Parliament.

'Delivering a Sustainable Railway' details what the Department for Transport (DfT) is committed to doing in our industry over the next three decades. Rail minister Ruth Kelly claims it is ‘the most positive statement about the growth and development of Britain’s Railways in 50 years’.

‘It is easy to be critical – and it is the duty of a union to be so,’ declares Keith Norman. ‘We always want more – for the good reason that there is always more to ask for!

‘But it would be churlish not to welcome some of the statements and visions contained in this White Paper. If all the proposals in it were implemented there is no doubt that it would be a great boost for our industry.

Main Features of the Government Plans;

• Over 1,300 new carriages -nearly 100,000 new seats.
• £10bn will be invested in capacity enhancement between 2009-14 to accommodate 22.5% growth in passenger demand
• £5.5bn to be spent on Thameslink.
• £600m new money to improve stations and tackle bottlenecks at Birmingham New Street and Reading.
• A third of a billion to prepare for the introduction of the Intercity Express trains and next generation signalling.
• £150m for the refurbishment of 150 stations.
• Simplified fares and a fairer balance of investment from taxpayers and farepayers.
• Modernised tickets – smartcards and tickets to mobile.
• £200m for a new Strategic Freight Network.
• Provision of a small ‘pool’ of new trains to improve rural and regional services, backing Community Rail, and – for the first time – a commitment to not close any rural lines.

Safety and Reliability:

• The government claims railway is safer than ever before and reliability is back to where it was before the appalling accident at Hatfield in 2000 – despite the railway carrying many more people and being used much more intensively.
• By 2014 reliability will allegedly be over 92% - among the best in Europe.

Quality of service for passengers – tickets and stations:

• Simplification of fares structure, to three simple categories across the whole network: “Anytime”, “Off peak” “Super Off peak”, which can be bought on the day or in advance.
• Modernisation of tickets and ticket retailing – with smartcards being rolled out on the railways in London and our other major cities. Long distance tickets will be able to be sent to mobile phones.
• 150 mid-sized stations – the backbone of the national network – will be refurbished and modernised with investment of £150m from the government. This is on top of £370m of accessibility funding already announced.
• any increases in regulated tickets will remain capped at RPI+1%. These account for over half the use of the railway and include season tickets and saver fares.

Environment:

• The industry will be publishing its carbon reduction targets next year and taking action with initiatives like regenerative braking, on-train energy metering and driver-training.

Positives

1. It was encouraging to hear Ruth Kelly say, ‘Those who work on our railways deserve credit.’ This is a useful ministerial statement for ASLEF pay negotiators this year!
2. There was some encouragement for freight. The £200m that the White Paper commits to freight must be seen as a positive inititative. £18.5m was recently put into the Gospel Oak to Barking Line and 4 other proposals for rail freight expansion are being considered for funding from the Transport Innovation Fund (TIF).
3. The minister gave a commitment not close any rural networks – although perhaps it’s time to start thinking about opening some more.

Negatives

1. The union was rather concerned that Ruth Kelly seems to be looking at rail with remarkable optimism. ASLEF is pleased at our successes, but also aware of rail’s failings. It was therefore slightly disconcerting to see her speak of the ‘remarkable success of our railway network’ and to describe it as ‘a modern success story’. It can be, and we want it to be – but the last thing we need is complacency at government level. No one can be content when last year we saw commuters go on ‘fare’ strike, one in ten trains arriving late, toilets being ripped out of carriages to provide extra standing room and fares hiked by up to 20 %!
2. While we welcome the positives in the 30-year strategy, we have to be aware that some future government of a different political hue could simply rip it up.
3. The government has shied away from definite commitments to big infrastructure projects and offered only lukewarm support for the London Crossrail project. The minister went no further than saying, ‘The Crossrail Bill is being debated in Parliament and we are considering whether Government funding can be matched with private sector funding.’ Any decision is therefore effectively put off for the next year.
4. A high-speed north-south rail line was ruled out on the grounds of ‘unclear benefits’ and ‘considerable costs’. The government also believes that the environmental benefits of high-speed trains are ‘over-stated’. ASLEF doesn’t agree and we will be seeking evidence to challenge this.
5. A new freight line has been ruled out.
6. While the White Paper did not say no to electrification, the government believes that there are ‘other priorities’ at present.
7. John McDonnell MP raised ASLEF’s proposal to retain at least one Train Operating Company in public hands to set standards and provide comparisons. He pointed out that the Labour party in Scotland had made proposals for operating train passenger services on a not-for-profit basis and asked if the government would consider such a measure.

The transport minister replied, ‘When the railway is entering an unprecedented era of growth, it would not be right for the Government to suggest that the answer to any concerns about railways is to restructure them. Network Rail has never advanced a proposition for running not-for-profit railway services, but if at any time it did so, the Government would consider the proposal.’

Writing to thank John for raising the issue, Keith Norman pointed out, ‘It is very strange that in her reply to you, the minister undertook to consider running a not-for-profit franchise if Network Rail suggested it – but apparently she won’t consider it if the proposal is made by a Member of Parliament, a Labour-affiliated trade union or the Labour Party of Scotland!’

ends