Government considering splitting Northern into North West and North East franchises from March 31

[Robertj21a]

For medium/short journeys and street running yes, great.

For longer journeys they ride terribly, have a maximum of 4 small cars, are slow and have no bogs... Ask the users of Thameslink if they’d like their heavy rail replaced by trams... Anyway, I don’t see how the suggested huge expansion of Metrolink will be paid for if central government doesn’t cough up. I think Burnham has said this.

Thameslink runs frequent trains with 12, usually packed, carriages - what has that massive volume got to do with what we are discussing here for the Manchester/NW area ?

 

[ScottGallagher]

I desperately hope that the Cumbria-Manchester services can go back to TPE if the east/west split goes ahead. If they go to a Manchester and Liverpool mayor dominated North West franchise the improvements we’ve just gained are near certain to be the first to be sacrificed. And I doubt either of them have heard of the Cumbrian Coast.

This

With all the talk of politics here regading appeasing the North East, Barrow and Workington have just gone Tory as well. Copeland's MP Trudy Harrison (which went Tory under Theresa May in 2017 in a by election) has just been appointed Boris Johnsons PPS which makes you think he would at least listen to her opinion!!

 

[Purple Orange]

As i commented months ago when the TfGM prospectus for rail was published, this is already in the bag for someone. Rightly or wrongly, certain people in Manchester get to find out everything that is happening long before anyone else.

I also said, though, that it would be completely inappropriate for rail services to be run from/for Manchester, or control even shared equally with them.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cb60dBQXIAAZUkk?format=jpg&name=small

For decades, the Liverpool region has produced the lion's share of passengers and revenue.

If control of this goes to ill-qualified Manchester, fares will rise in Liverpool and profits from Liverpool will be used to pay for train service improvements in Manchester. Probably while services in Liverpool themselves become less focused.

Immediately this forum jumped on the notion of this north western set up being run from Manchester, as if that's just natural.

Yet it is Merseytravel that have the experience of rail concession letting, govern the area with by far the highest level of train use in the north, and have the track record of working with neighbours to mutual interest (as opposed to own).

If nothing else, the Merseyrail City Lines should be ripped out of Northern and devolved to Liverpool. Although I would argue they should be entrusted to run it all.

Do the Manchester stats in the link include Metrolink numbers or do the Liverpool stats include Merseyrail? Or are those numbers just Northern rail passengers?

I find it important to compare like-for-like correctly and that is not clear in the link. In this era of needing to fact check, it irks me somewhat, to the extent that I have joined the forum!

Anyway, from a non-enthusiast or railway employee perspective, the forum is an interesting source of information, despite the somewhat odd attitudes towards passengers/customers in some instances.

 

[js1000]

Still can't see any good reason to split the franchise. However could it be to potentially re-open the DOO proposal? Splitting it would stop sympathy strikes on the other side so to speak. As others have mentioned, would this affect the east-west split of the 195/331s?

 

[Starmill]

Do the Manchester stats in the link include Metrolink numbers or do the Liverpool stats include Merseyrail? Or are those numbers just Northern rail passengers?

I find it important to compare like-for-like correctly and that is not clear in the link. In this era of needing to fact check, it irks me somewhat, to the extent that I have joined the forum!

Anyway, from a non-enthusiast or railway employee perspective, the forum is an interesting source of information, despite the somewhat odd attitudes towards passengers/customers in some instances.

I think I remember that graph. I think it was comparing national rail passenger numbers (on all of the relevant providers).

A very long way from like for like in other words.

 

[Camden]

Do the Manchester stats in the link include Metrolink numbers or do the Liverpool stats include Merseyrail? Or are those numbers just Northern rail passengers?

I find it important to compare like-for-like correctly and that is not clear in the link.

Its ORR stats and completely like for like.

No, of course it doesn't contain your tram figures. It doesn't contain your bus or bike figures either.

FYI, if you were to lump on top tram passenger numbers, Manchester would still come up short on both counts, including per person by half across an area twice the size of Liverpool.

It irks you that control of something important should be carried out by an organisation or area that does it well, vs one which has no track record of successful rail concession running and which has low rail passenger numbers?

It irks me that it seems impossible to make sensible decisions wherever Manchester is concerned, nor even discuss facts without being the recipient of paranoid chest beating.

 

[Edders23]

I think this smacks of the government looking for a sticking plaster to cover the gaping wounds

I cannot see what if anything can be achieved really the business as a whole needs rebuilding with the right finance behind it oh and a few more trains might help as shortage of stock is a major factor in the public disatisfaction

 

[Glenn1969]

Does the article actually have any substance or is it just lazy journalistic speculation by the Telegraph online looking for something to print on a slow news day

 

[J.C.]

I really hope they don't split.
I remember a few times when Northern Spirit Calder Valley services were disrupted on the Lancashire side of The Pennines that requests for assistance at Manchester Victoria were met with comments along the lines of 'nothing to do with us, and NS don't have any representatives over here to help you' from FNW staff.
No passengers want that again surely?

 

[Bertie the bus]

Its ORR stats and completely like for like.

No, of course it doesn't contain your tram figures. It doesn't contain your bus or bike figures either.

FYI, if you were to lump on top tram passenger numbers, Manchester would still come up short on both counts, including per person by half across an area twice the size of Liverpool.

It irks you that control of something important should be carried out by an organisation or area that does it well, vs one which has no track record of successful rail concession running and which has low rail passenger numbers?

It irks me that it seems impossible to make sensible decisions wherever Manchester is concerned, nor even discuss facts without being the recipient of paranoid chest beating.

What a fantastic reply to somebody who asked a perfectly reasonable question in a calm, polite manner.

Of course it isn't like for like. The Metrolink is Manchester's equivalent of the Merseyrail network so if it was like for like it would include tram passengers.

 

[158756]

Oh, I agree with you, I'm just comparing the Metrolink model (run good balanced frequencies from each branch into the city centre) with the Northern Rail model (run unbalanced services from each branch which cause congestion in central Manchester because we think that an hourly cross-Manchester link - e.g. Rochdale to Wigan or Stockport to Bolton or whatever is more important than a good simple frequency into central Manchester).

So if you are on the tram from Rochdale, you have five departures per hour, a nice simple twelve minute frequency (every six minutes from Shaw etc) into central Manchester.

If you are on the *train* from Rochdale you've got five departures per hour, but look at the westbound timings:

• xx:09 - Wigan
• xx:18 - Clitheroe
• xx:25 Victoria
• xx:39 - Wigan
• xx:50 Chester

...so gaps of nine/ seven/ fourteen/ eleven/ nineteen minutes (three services within thirty one minutes and then big gaps) - that's not much use for typical passengers just wanting a train to Victoria (and therefore the first train after a long gap - like the xx:09 - will get a disproportionate amount of passengers and therefore be busier than the others) - most passengers will just want a train into the nearest big city (the numbers wanting to go from Rochdale to Chester, Clitheroe and Wigan will be in a minority) but we are lumbered with it because of the obsession with running through trains to a variety of destinations.

It'd be better to have four well spaced trains per hour from Rochdale that all run through to one destination (e.g. Wigan/ Southport) but The Powers That Be like the vanity of being able to show a range of through services, it makes them feel important if they can have many destinations (because only the everyday passengers are going to be bothered about practical things like an unbalanced timetable or unreliable trains caused by the fact that you're importing delays from several different other corridors)

There's also an xx34 to Blackburn in there as well. The Blackburn and Clitheroe trains run to Rochdale because there's no space at Victoria and get the small stops between Rochdale and Manchester off the trains going further. So the gaps in non-stop trains from Rochdale to Manchester are 16,13,11 and 19 minutes. Regardless of where they go West of Manchester you're probably not going to get much better than that given that those trains have to have at least three different routes on the Calder Valley side. The Calder Valley isn't an example where a consistent all stations service to one destination is ever going to happen (or ever should happen at least - if we're back to the days of managing terminal decline you could of course close some bits)

 

[Edders23]

Does the article actually have any substance or is it just lazy journalistic speculation by the Telegraph online looking for something to print on a slow news day

there must be some sort of source for the story

 

[Clarence Yard]

There may be a grain of truth in the article as splitting the Northern franchise has been discussed in the context of eventually matching up the franchises to the new NR regions.

If that was done, then the option of creating vertically integrated railway organisations becomes possible.

 

[Purple Orange]

Its ORR stats and completely like for like.

No, of course it doesn't contain your tram figures. It doesn't contain your bus or bike figures either.

FYI, if you were to lump on top tram passenger numbers, Manchester would still come up short on both counts, including per person by half across an area twice the size of Liverpool.

It irks you that control of something important should be carried out by an organisation or area that does it well, vs one which has no track record of successful rail concession running and which has low rail passenger numbers?

It irks me that it seems impossible to make sensible decisions wherever Manchester is concerned, nor even discuss facts without being the recipient of paranoid chest beating.

No, it just irks me that these days facts and figures presented in the public domain need to be taken with a pinch of salt and fact checked, when those who publish these stats should be open and honest about the figures. Sorry if my question upset you. I assume that you are from and/or live in north London, so does it really matter to you that much?

Concerning Northern rail or whatever it becomes, I’m not fussed either way where it is run from, as long as decision making is made in the region the service is provided, as opposed to London.

 

[modernrail]

I fear the cycnical political understory here may be correct, a great way to push things onto the Labour mayors. If the Gov has refused to commit to infrastructure improvements this would seem to add to that fear and Arriva will be doing to right thing in walking away.

I am not sure I see the merit in a split. If taken from Arriva there is no reason the same affect cannot be achieved by having an operational split as happens to some extent now anyway. If Manchester/NW is the real problem then why not add resource into fixing - setting up some specialist problem solving teams etc. Manchester is not a mess because it is being operated alongside a better functioning east side.

I am actually quite attracted to the idea of Merseyrail taking over an element of services to allow it to develop the City Line properly, ideally completing the link into the underground.

Merseyrail seems to be run pretty well. There is clearly lots that a west side operating company could learn from it and it would be good to see Liverpool become a recognised centre of excellence for regional railway management.

 

[Djgr]

That graph is totally meaningless in the context of this discussion. It includes Merseyrail ridership Whether you like it or not and whether you live in Manchester or not, Manchester is the centre of regional services in the North West. Then you have places like Preston and Liverpool which are the centres of a much smaller network.

Preston and Liverpool are in no way comparable.

Liverpool City Region's population is around ten times that of City of Preston

 

[modernrail]

Preston and Liverpool are in no way comparable.

Liverpool City Region's population is around ten times that of City of Preston

You do both realise you are both falling for a classic Tory divide and conquer in real time don't you! Show some northern solidarity!!

 

[sw1ller]

Who gets the new trains then?

 

[Djgr]

You do both realise you are both falling for a classic Tory divide and conquer in real time don't you! Show some northern solidarity!!

Just staring a fact.

But it's true that a Liverpudlian never thinks of Manchester one month to the next!

 

[Bertie the bus]

Preston and Liverpool are in no way comparable.

Liverpool City Region's population is around ten times that of City of Preston

What on earth has population got to do with what I wrote? It's a fact - the North West's regional services are mainly centred on Manchester. Other places, such as Liverpool and Preston, have some services radiating from them. Fact. Not up for debate and nothing to do with my town is bigger than yours.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What on earth has population got to do with what I wrote? It's a fact - the North West's regional services are mainly centred on Manchester. Other places, such as Liverpool and Preston, have some services radiating from them. Fact. Not up for debate and nothing to do with my town is bigger than yours.

This is not overly surprising because (a) Preston is quite small compared with the others, and (b) because it's tucked in a coastal corner, Liverpool only has about 90 degrees for services to radiate, whereas Manchester has 360!

 

[Djgr]

What on earth has population got to do with what I wrote? It's a fact - the North West's regional services are mainly centred on Manchester. Other places, such as Liverpool and Preston, have some services radiating from them. Fact. Not up for debate and nothing to do with my town is bigger than yours.

And so does Oxenholme.

It is ludicrous to dump Liverpool and Preston together in any consideration of rail services past, present or future.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And so does Oxenholme.

It is ludicrous to dump Liverpool and Preston together in any consideration of rail services past, present or future.

Merseyside (or the Liverpool City Region as you might now call it) has a history of high investment in rail.

Lancashire County Council has a history of not giving a stuff about rail.

Which would you prefer to be associated with?

 

[modernrail]

Just staring a fact.

But it's true that a Liverpudlian never thinks of Manchester one month to the next!

Seriously, don't fall for it. The north is a great region as are its people, all of them other than the usual minority. Its cities are doing quite well, its towns could be doing much better with more effort and imagination. The problem here is not scousers, Mancs, Yorkshire folk, geordies or anybody else.

The problems are a franchise insanley let on a no growth presumption by Labour, zero effective devolution (except to Merseyrail), zero proper spatial planning, very poor planning of movements around Manchester, chronic underfunding and spend per head compared to other regions, the piecemeal and badly thought through incorporation of Airport services, problems with industrial relations, poor introduction of new stock and new timetables and, because parts of the region are doing quite well in one way or another too many passengers!

What is needed here is a for northern leaders to spot the traps before falling into them, get good railway organisers (such as those working in Merseyrail and bring some in from devolved authorities in other countries) into the mix and negotiate with the Goverment, properly and in a business like fashion.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wouldn't let Merseyrail management anywhere near it. They have a small, simple network that would be hard to get wrong, yet they do get some things spectacularly wrong, most notably ticketing (no ToD nor e-tickets, nor effective Railcard acceptance - they basically do not want to be part of the national network - not to mention a significant number of incompetent ticket office staff who are barely fit to sell anything more than tickets to Liverpool) and maintenance of stations and rolling stock interiors (typically falling to bits and dirty in many places).

I wouldn't hold them up as some kind of specially skilled group of people - they just have a really easy job to do, and the job they do of it is basically very average. Which I'll give you is better than Northern (which I would rate very poor) but it is hardly something to aspire to.

Actually, talking of Merseyrail management, isn't LNR (one of the worst TOCs on the present system, though possibly not *quite* as bad as Northern) run by a certain Jan Chaudry van der Velde, who was, er, a former Merseyrail manager, and seems to be presiding over the biggest stuff-up we have seen on the rails in recent years, having turned a competent and reasonably well-regarded TOC (something Northern never really was) into a laughing stock in the space of only a few months?

 

[Djgr]

Let me guess - you wouldn't be a Scouser who thinks Liverpool is still the 2nd city of the empire by any chance?

No but I do object to Liverpool rail infrastructure being understated.

I calculate that there are 14 passenger railway lines that radiate out from Liverpool as follows:

Southport
Ormskirk
Kirkby
St Helens Central
Chat Moss
Warrington Central
Crewe
Chester via Halton Curve
Hunts Cross via Aigburth
West Kirby
New Brighton
Shotton
Ellesmere Port
Chester via Hooton

and so in no way accept a Manchester and the rest view of the North West rail network

 

[transmanche]

The rest of the north east is a bit of hotchpotch. "North of the Tyne" has a Labour metro Mayor but the rest of the area doesn't have such a mayor as there is no corresponding "south of the Tyne" area.

There is, it just doesn't have an elected mayor. The North East Combined Authority covers Gateshead, South Tyneside, Sunderland and County Durham council areas.

The North of Tyne Combined Authority effectively split from NECA, as the south of Tyne councils did not want a metro mayor whilst the north of Tyne ones were willing to accept one in exchange for additional government funding.

 

[Purple Orange]

To those who know far more than me, if Northern is split, does it then make it possible for a revision of the routes? E.g. the pointless Southport to Alderley Edge service being replaced by something far more sensible, like Southport to Victoria and Alderley Edge to Piccadilly?

 

[Glenn1969]

I doubt it given that that route was put together because the people of Southport and its politicians were adamant that they had to have a Piccadilly service

 

[RealTrains07]

The news it seems is spreading unlike what was previously thought

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...l-operator-Northern-two-public-ownership.html

Ministers plan to split the UK's worst rail operator into two and take it into public ownership.

It will become North West and North East under Whitehall plans, senior industry sources told The Telegraph. The provider will transfer into public ownership on March 31.

News of the split comes after Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham and Liverpool metro mayor Steve Rotheram urged ministers to 'get a grip of the chaos on the railways of the North and remove the franchise from Northern' in a joint statement.

The daily mail has add nothing new unfortunately, almost an identical copy to the telegraph, no surprise there

You might aswell look at the telegraph one at the start of the thread