Transport expert Prof Mark Barry on plans to create Great British Railways a single public body running the network, time tabling and ticketing following the White Paper from Transport Secretary Grant Shapps and head of the review into the rail industry Keith Williams.
________________________________________________________
To start with it has to be recognised that most of the rail industry in the 海角视频 is already nationalised.
Network Rail has been in public hands since the demise of Railtrack and has been an expense entry for the Department for Transport (DfT) since 2015. Fares, timetables and service specification have and are also for the vast majority of services, are also set by by the DfT.
The recent Covid impact has turned most of the train operating company franchises into temporary management contracts with DfT, the Welsh Government’s transport body, Transport for Wales (TfW) in Wales and Transport Scotland in Scotland taking the revenue risk.
To that extent the ideological call for nationalisation is really a little off the mark given the scale of such already in place. I would add that I have no issue with private companies bidding for and operating concessions or management contracts under the proposed new arrangements, called passenger service contracts. This relationship with the private sector is how most of the 海角视频’s light rail systems operate.
In Wales, TfW specified and let the Wales and Borders franchise (with DfT looking over its shoulder); the same applied in Scotland.
Whilst rail infrastructure decisions and funding are devolved to Scotland, they are not in Wales. This situation has led to decades of underfunding of Wales rail network versus the 海角视频. Of the £150bn referenced in the White Paper across the 海角视频 since the mid 1990s, Wales share of the enhancements is perhaps 2%, despite having around 11% of the network.
Most Read
On organisation, yes, it makes sense to formally bring together track and train to remove all those costly bureaucratic interfaces – and to have a more unified thinking mind. This is not rocket science and most in the industry have been calling for this since privatisation.
In doing so, bringing revenue risk back onto the governments books and replacing franchises with in effect concessions or management contracts also makes sense.
What is proposed actually formalises what in effect has already happened as a result of Covid, and as stated NR was already nationalised.
However, this thinking and associated funding and control needs to be devolved in Wales with necessary cross border arrangements and protocols (as is the case in many countries with cross border rail services, which is normal).
What is proposed for Wales will not address the inequity in rail investment nor will it help the development and thinking re rail strategy and priorities in Wales (which is already quite well developed) by having another London based organisation trying to pull the steering wheel.
There are clear needs for common standards and operational alignment in many areas, especially cross border (which is common between many countries around the world). However, strategic rail planning in Wales needs to be led in and by Wales and integrated with other modes and local planning within its Metro programmes.
More generally, transport planning needs to be localised and better integrated with local land use planning and especially bus services (as TfW are beginning to do).
Don’t miss
Apart from intercity routes therefore, rail planning needs to be more locally integrated. For example the rail industry makes a great play of the ability to buy a ticket between any two points on the network as if that was of primary importance. In reality it will be far more effective to better integrate local rail and bus services (more like Transport for London where buses were never de-regulated as they were in the rest of the 海角视频 in the 1980s).
For example, how many people want to travel between say Aberdare and Frodsham by train versus say Aberdare and Talbot Green (which requires both rail and bus). The former ticket exists, but not the latter. This is the primary issue TfW is dealing with, to the extent the White Paper acknowledges this challenge, that is welcome.
There are also some questions. For example, TfW are working hard on long term plans to integrate bus services, fares and ticketing as part of the South Wales Metro which will come with new branding, apps, website, etc. How does the Great British Railways proposal sit alongside the current WG commitments?
A more general challenge which I am not yet convinced the current 海角视频 Government will properly address is the need for major mode shift to help deliver our decarbonisation targets. More bluntly, the climate emergency requires a significant mode shift from car to public transport and active travel. This will mean more rail capacity (not just electrification) and ultimately road pricing, or, as I prefer to call it, the reduction in the “road use discount”.
This is just a White Paper, so much still to play out. On a general look, there is much to welcome. However, it still does not address the primary issues from a Welsh perspective and that is a systemic long term lack of enhancement investment.
The fact that Welsh Government only gets one mention in the entire 100 plus page document is telling. The use of the expression “devolved authorities” rather than “devolved governments” is also indicative of current Westminster attitudes. The 15% efficiency saving targets also sets some expectations.
In Wales, WG and TfW are trying to do much of what is set out in the 海角视频 Rail White Paper. However, having rail non-devolved (apart now from the Core Valley Lines) with all major decisions and the purse strings re rail infrastructure made/held in Westminster, is a huge impediment.
Wales barely gets half way up page 2 on a list of priorities at Whitehall. So with the all deck chairs being moved around and big new hats to dish out for Great British Railways how will Wales’s issues get traction?
So, can we now just devolve rail powers to Wales.