Merriman at Transport Committee 18/1

[Nicholas Lewis]

deleted

Huw appeared at TSC this morning reasonable outing and certainly picks up on a lot of issues shared across the forum. He has five goals for Rail

https://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/d3a22326-aa75-42c8-8acf-2f64289787d1

Hansard lags by a few hours

1. Sort out industrial disputes
2. Railway reforms
3. Publish RNEP
4. HS2
5. Train Operator Performance

some soundbites i picked up but far from comprehensive and nothing particularly new

Committed to DOO as it will deliver more reliable service but also wants a second person on the train

Sees ticket office closure as way forward to get more staff customer facing

Minimum service levels - going to consult with industry to determine what should be delivered. Apparently RSSB can't see how it work within current industry structure. Its was key service during covid so must be key service now!

IRP - we need to provide a better solution for Bradford. Leamside line will cost 200m we only have 500m for restoring railways.

Performance - TPE level of cancellations is unacceptable. I agree with ASLEF we need more drivers so we are less dependent on RDW. Some operators managed driver training well during covid AWC/TPE didn't. management don't have control over operations. Cites Northern not working so OLR isn't necessarily the answer. Looks at AWC/TPE performance weekly. Reckons AWC are turning a corner TPE is up for renewal in May. Operator management need to work with their staff to drive change

Chris Loder challenges over recruitment saying DfT have to approve - Kelly says she told operators to increase staff where its impacting performance

HW - Suggests that Northern/TPE should be merged and that AWC may need longer to prove themselves

challenged over the incentive of operators to stop fare evasion - HW poorly answers says he takes pictures of barriers left open! Goes onto say model does need changing over operators being able to flex services without DfT intervention for big events but given how much he said income needs to be maximised he didn't deal with operator incentives to do so.

He checked AWC website and says its not good enough you still cant book this morning!

P code cancellations count against operators for performance payments. TPE are overusing it but he generally wants the rules changing.

Whats happened to franchise commitments? We need to be honest with stakeholders

Scotrail is charged more for track access charges than rest of UK - we will look into that and come back to committee.

Lumo are getting the railway for nothing compared to LNER - Merriman says they need to pay more under rail reform

GBR - Harper will brief future at Bradshaw address 7th Feb. Merriman its the key to revitalise the industry but a lot can be done without legislation.

HS2 - is facing financial pressures from inflationary pressures as is the DfT capital programme cue some tough decisions required on the phasing of the capital programme. HS2 to Leeds route study is overdue Golbourne will be end of March but wont be by the sounds of it.

RNEP - far too many projects for funding available basically saying things will have to be culled driven by business case reviews.

Good committee but capital cuts coming nothing really said about day to day impact though.

 

[Snow1964]

Looks like busy day in Parliament for railways today, there is even an adjournment for train services in South Gloucestershire in main chamber of House of Commons today

https://whatson.parliament.uk/event/cal41152

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Nothing in there about the rumoured 10% TOC service cuts, or maybe a budget freeze which amounts to the same thing with inflation?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Nothing in there about the rumoured 10% TOC service cuts, or maybe a budget freeze which amounts to the same thing with inflation?

certainly no member of the committee raised the issue not even Loder yet on capital projects he was loud and clear that the programme can't be afforded on numerous occasions its now just taking the time to determine what remains.

 

[Peterthegreat]

Who is HW?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Who is HW?

I think that will be Huw Merriman, Rail Minister.
And until a few weeks ago, Chair of the Transport Select Committee he was being interviewed by today.
So it was a case of poacher turned gamekeeper today (or possibly the other way round!).

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, it's the potential day to day service cuts that are worrying me. I wonder if the committee are aware of the 10%

 

[Confused52]

I thought it was a very interesting performance and fitted in perfectly with the previous two hearings where we heard from firstly Avanti, Northern and TPE and Network Rail and secondly the network rail negotiator , Chairman of the RDG and RMT, ASLEF and the TSSA.

If you can spare the time it represents a clear and authoritative overview of what has been going on. It is not a career enhancing move to tell lies to a Parliamentary Select Committee.

Another important point made by Merriman in response to suggestions that DOR should be extended was that it may not help because “Management do not have control over their operations”. It has been apparent to most people on here over the last year. Merriman made the point that Northern fare no better in this regard even though they are the OLR.

He made it abundantly clear that workplace reform is not going away because he believes it to be essential. The previous week Mick Whelan made it abundantly clear that there would be no agreement on the terms and conditions.

That stand-off will, if maintained be at the heart of cuts in the coming year. If they are in the next timetable then we should find out soon because the May timetable process should be well under way and it is probably not realistic to change it significantly now, with the CIFs due out in four weeks from now.

 

[Master29]

Who is Merriman? Another chancer on the parliamentary roundabout I suppose. Like looking at the UK singles chart for weekly changes. A country run by headless chickens.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Who is Merriman? Another chancer on the parliamentary roundabout I suppose. Like looking at the UK singles chart for weekly changes. A country run by headless chickens.

Was Transport Select Committee chair for several years as well as being a member of the committee for considerably longer. A pretty good advocate for rail although as others observe he is poacher turned gamekeeper here but on this outing I felt he was closer to his past than previous. He has a clear command of his brief, yes some of it is naive, but he is a better ally to the industry than we've seen in a Rail Minister for sometime. Once the disputes are resolved there will be other fights but better to have someone who can see what benefits the industry can bring than the likes of failing Grayling or name changing Shapps.

 

[Thirteen]

Was Transport Select Committee chair for several years as well as being a member of the committee for considerably longer. A pretty good advocate for rail although as others observe he is poacher turned gamekeeper here but on this outing I felt he was closer to his past than previous. He has a clear command of his brief, yes some of it is naive, but he is a better ally to the industry than we've seen in a Rail Minister for sometime. Once the disputes are resolved there will be other fights but better to have someone who can see what benefits the industry can bring than the likes of failing Grayling or name changing Shapps.

I think Merriman being Chair has given him more insight into how rail and transport operates and of course he's met many of the key players before. The union leaders don't really have a bad word to say about Merriman or even Mark Harper.

Watching Select Committees does show that Parliament isn't always the shouting match it's perceived to be and MPs of opposing sides do work together,

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I think Merriman being Chair has given him more insight into how rail and transport operates and of course he's met many of the key players before. The union leaders don't really have a bad word to say about Merriman or even Mark Harper.

Watching Select Committees does show that Parliament isn't always the shouting match it's perceived to be and MPs of opposing sides do work together,

Bradshaw/Morris (Labour) are always well informed and ask pertinent questions that put Merriman and Kelly on the spot today but to be fair all members take a keen interest in rail despite the brief being all forms of transport.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Who is Merriman? Another chancer on the parliamentary roundabout I suppose. Like looking at the UK singles chart for weekly changes. A country run by headless chickens.

You do him a disservice.
From your 300-odd MPs you need to find a set of ministers with interest and knowledge in railways (actually, all transport, including roads, aviation and shipping).
Just as Secretary of State for Transport isn't seen as a top job in government, his/her Rail Minister is often trapped between party policy and pubic opinion.
Most "Rail Ministers" try hard during their appointment, but are often moved on just as they become knowledgeable enough to make a difference (Con or Lab).
The other interviewee today was Bernadette Kelly, Permanent Secretary at the DfT.
Despite being largely invisible, she is much more likely to be enacting policy than the ministers (eg negotiating rail contracts, or setting up GBR), and will be there whichever party appoints the next SoS or PM.

Labour are no different, of course.
They have a record of appointing the most useless Transport Ministers over the years - typically lawyers with no interest or experience in transport.

And don't forget the Treasury is always the most powerful part of government, not the individual departments/ministers.

 

[brad465]

BBC reporting his admission it would have been cheaper to settle the dispute months ago:

Train strikes: Cheaper to settle, minister admits

It would have cost less to settle earlier but reforms remained necessary, rail minister tells MPs.

www.bbc.co.uk

(Can't copy text as I'm on my phone)

 

[dk1]

Very interesting watch again today. Huw does come across better than most rail ministers I’ve known in the past. Main points now appearing on BBC News.

 

[Horizon22]

BBC reporting his admission it would have been cheaper to settle the dispute months ago:

Train strikes: Cheaper to settle, minister admits

It would have cost less to settle earlier but reforms remained necessary, rail minister tells MPs.

www.bbc.co.uk

(Can't copy text as I'm on my phone)

Rail strikes have cost the UK more than settling the disputes months ago would have, rail minister Huw Merriman has said.

The strikes have cost the UK more than £1bn, he conceded to a committee of MPs. However, he said accepting the rail unions pay demands would have set a precedent for other public sector pay disputes.
He also said the future of train operator Transpennine was under review.

When quizzed by the Transport Select Committee, Mr Merriman said the rail strikes cost rail organisations £25m per day on week days, and £15m per day on weekends. He cited a report that found the strikes had cost the wider UK economy £700m from June to Christmas. This has added up to a more than £1bn hit to the UK, he conceded to Labour MP Ben Bradshaw. "If you look at it [through] that particular lens, then absolutely, it's actually ended up costing more than would have been the case if it was just settled," Mr Merriman said.

However, Mr Merriman added that if the government had settled with rail workers last year, it would have set a precedent for other public sector pay disputes. "We have to look at what teachers are being given, and what nurses are being given as well," he said. The UK railway system, which is heavily subsidised by the government, is a patchwork of public and private sector organisations. Although the train operating companies are mainly private sector, it was the taxpayer who was largely funding these pay settlements, Mr Merriman said.

------

Transpennine problems
Mr Merriman also said train operator Transpennine Express' contract is under review.

Transpennine, which operates across the North of England and into Scotland, has been cancelling trains daily for months. The company blames high sickness rates and a backlog of driver training due to the pandemic for cancellations. Mr Merriman said that when the Transpennine Express contract comes to end in May, he is "already looking at what needs to be done... with regards to that contract".

He said he had weekly data on Transpennine and another troubled operator, Avanti West Coast, and was monitoring what they were doing to turn things around. The government recently gave Avanti six months to the end of March, to urgently improve. A spokesperson for TransPennine Express said on Thursday: "We are committed to the communities we serve and want to assure our customers that we are doing all we can to deliver a train service they can rely on."Transpennine "continues to work flat-out to deliver higher levels of service delivery and to tackle the issues that are being experienced by customers," the spokesperson added.

This is classic of this government trying to look at the short-term cost versus a long-term benefit.

 

[brad465]

This is classic of this government trying to look at the short-term cost versus a long-term benefit.

I also think he might have just emboldened the rail unions' negotiating hands, and quite possibly every other striking sector in the country right now too.

 

[dk1]

I also think he might have just emboldened the rail unions' negotiating hands, and quite possibly every other striking sector in the country right now too.

Good word ‘emboldened’ Had to Google it.

 

[Horizon22]

I also think he might have just emboldened the rail unions' negotiating hands, and quite possibly every other striking sector in the country right now too.

Yes it did sound like a rather crushing admission on their part! Evidently they didn't expect it to go on as long as it did which would have probably ended up less expensive dependent on the 'tipping point' but it certainly presents the government side as the ones without a coherent strategy in what is seemingly a war of attrition.

 

[InOban]

Maybe his primary audience was Sunak and Hunt.

 

[Confused52]

This is classic of this government trying to look at the short-term cost versus a long-term benefit.

And this is classic for the cherry picking that goes on here with the report going on to say that to be able to make rail pay deals viable, unions needed to agree to "modernise" working practices. So there wer two points to counter Ben Bradshaws question, one external to the industry in terms of overall pay policy ( which Labour don't deny) and the other about how to meet the problem of a lower Fare Box take. Bradshaw 's question was politicking but Merriman's answer, was to my mind honest. Even the BBC reported both points

I also think he might have just emboldened the rail unions' negotiating hands, and quite possibly every other striking sector in the country right now too.

Merrman said working practice changes matter a lot to him. If I were a union leader I wouldn't have been emboldened by anything he said.

 

[Horizon22]

And this is classic for the cherry picking that goes on here with the report going on to say that to be able to make rail pay deals viable, unions needed to agree to "modernise" working practices. So there wer two points to counter Ben Bradshaws question, one external to the industry in terms of overall pay policy ( which Labour don't deny) and the other about how to meet the problem of a lower Fare Box take. Bradshaw 's question was politicking but Merriman's answer, was to my mind honest. Even the BBC reported both points

I didn't copy the whole article true, but the relevant quote is

Mr Merriman added that to be able to make rail pay deals viable, unions needed to agree to "modernise" working practices, which have been a sticking point in negotiations.
"It's the reforms that will actually pay for these pay deals," he said.

There may be a case for "modernisation" (the quote is interesting in itself!) however you also have to think about the cost of the loss of not doing business which, as the Rail Minister has admited has become rather sizable. They could have agreed for a pay rise with no modernisation and that would have cost less than now. The wider issue is about whether doing so would be seen as "un-economic" in the long-term and kicks reforms down the road. But I don't think people / Unions are dead set against reforms, just really badly thought out ones.

 

[Thirteen]

I get the sense Merriman wants this sorted because I imagine he's just as frustrated by the Treasury as everyone else is.

I do think the cost to the economy shows how important the railways are to the economy.

 

[Confused52]

I didn't copy the whole article true, but the relevant quote is



There may be a case for "modernisation" (the quote is interesting in itself!) however you also have to think about the cost of the loss of not doing business which, as the Rail Minister has admited has become rather sizable.

You are right about the magnitude but the long term sustainability issue without reform continues every year and cannot be ignored if the markets will not tolerate increased government spending, and they will not.

 

[Horizon22]

You are right about the magnitude but the long term sustainability issue without reform continues every year and cannot be ignored if the markets will not tolerate increased government spending, and they will not.

The thing is the government has had years (13 in power) to deal with rail reform if they were genuinely serious about it. Instead they are having a rather knee-jerk reaction to revenue streams being down, taking advantage of the situation caused by Covid and lumping in other economic factors (some of their own doing) into this negotiation. Same is true for other striking sectors too which would suggest general malaise is high across the board.

 

[43066]

to make rail pay deals viable, unions needed to agree to "modernise" working practices.

That’s the clap trap that keeps being trotted out.

Funny how nobody seems to have said how much any savings from this supposed “modernisation” would be: DOO proposed nationwide (apparently now dropped) but retaining second person aboard, so very little saving that will take years to realise (as per GTR).

The fact the government refused to allow the resolution process to take place many months ago, rather than digging their heels in and pretending the disputes were nothing to do with them, speaks volumes about their real motives (ie deliberately perpetuating the dispute for a distraction/various political reasons).

 

[Confused52]

That’s the clap trap that keeps being trotted out.

Funny how nobody seems to have said how much any savings from this supposed “modernisation” would be: DOO proposed nationwide (apparently now dropped) but retaining second person aboard, so very little saving that will take years to realise (as per GTR).

The fact the government refused to allow this process take place many months ago, rather than digging their heels in and pretending the disputes were nothing to do with them, speaks volumes about their real motives (ie deliberately perpetuating the dispute for a distraction/various political reasons).

It is clearly not DOO, which is good as a distraction, It was fairly evident that starting with getting the management to actually be in charge of rosters was more important. DOO is clearly just a distraction but from Merriman's performance it wasn't the Governments doing.

 

[JonathanH]

BBC reporting his admission it would have been cheaper to settle the dispute months ago:

Put another way, now that the cost has been incurred, that money isn't available to settle to dispute now.

 

[43066]

DOO is clearly just a distraction but from Merriman's performance it wasn't the Governments doing.

Then whose doing was it? It was telling that Mark Harper didn’t deny that it was the government’s doing when pressed at the select committee.

It was fairly evident that starting with getting the management to actually be in charge of rosters was more important.

Not sure I buy that either:. A. What savings will this actually produce (rosters aren’t particularly inefficient, and TOCs are quite happy with the current arrangement so long as the work is covered), B. It only seems to have been recently introduced in the ASLEF “offer”. Another negotiating ploy that may well be rolled back on, one suspects.

The question still remains: if these are the changes the government/DfT want, why weren’t they proposed months ago so the negotiation could take place then?

Put another way, now that the cost has been incurred, that money isn't available to settle to dispute now.

But that also illustrates the folly of continuing to perpetuate the dispute. And adds weight to the argument that the wider economy is suffering due to the government’s ideological battle with trade unions.

 

[Confused52]

Then whose doing was it? It was telling that Mark Harper didn’t deny that it was the government’s doing when pressed at the select committee.



Not sure I buy that either:. A. What savings will this actually produce (rosters aren’t particularly inefficient, and TOCs are quite happy with the current arrangement so long as the work is covered), B. It only seems to have been introduced in the ASLEF “offer”. Something else they may well be rolled back on.

The question still remains: if these are the changes the government/DfT want, why weren’t they proposed months ago so the negotiation could take place then?

Well when the rosters aren't matched with the timetable because one of the unions will not accept them there is a distinct reduction in revenue which does make them inefficient. The loss of revenue is now noticed by the treasury. There has been noticeable silence on this issue which has plagued Northern during the last timetable period, at least it has rarely been admitted on this forum or in public. The need for reviewing rostering agreements were on the table in the Rail Industry Recovery Group Framework Enabling Framework Agreement - which Mick Whelan said ASLEF recognised last week in the Select Committee at the same time as saying he didn't recognise the role of the RDG. That means the unions, all of them, knew about the need for reform of rostering all the way back in Jun 2021. Why do you say they weren't proposed months ago?