Back to the bad old days’: swingeing rail cuts set alarm bells ringing

[quantinghome]

...because we see a need to provide kids with education or to provide people with a certain level of healthcare

These are very obvious areas of public spending which we'd all agree on. There are other areas of public spending which have less obvious benefit (e.g. some aspects of defence spending) but which nevertheless still get pushed through by politicians who are convinced of their benefits and are willing to consistently champion the case for them. The problem we have with rail is that few politicians in government are willing to do this, and we appear to be seeing a reversion in the Conservatives to a 1980s-style "rail bad road good" approach.

Whilst we want to provide public transport, if insufficient people are using heavy rail then it's no longer cost effective (so we look at either reducing it or providing public transport by other means)

Providing heavy rail is a means to an end, rather than a goal in itself

Society requires every to be educated to a decent level and taken care of when ill -society doesn't require every village in the UK to have a branchline

There's a huge difference between "we should focus resources on where best appropriate" and "we must pare the railway network back to only a profitable core" - I don't think that anyone is arguing for the railway to be profitable - it's just that different people have different thresholds of where heavy rail is appropriate or a sledgehammer to crack a nut

Well, yes. I'm not one of these people who believes in opening every cut branch line. Rail is very good a transporting lots of people between and within major centres of population. That's what it should focus on. That said, it would be a bit odd to cut back on rural lines when the biggest drop has been in commuting in the south east, particularly considering the trivial cost savings achieved by such an action.

So yes, focus resources by all means, based on changes in travel patterns. What this should mean in practice is bringing intercity and regional services back up to pre-pandemic levels, and running an all day standard timetable on commuter routes equivalent to the pre-pandemic off-peak.

Given demand is likely to be more elastic, we should also be putting significant effort into attracting people to rail, rather than buy into notions of a fixed demand to which the service must be tailored to.

 

[Starmill]

So... don't give them faster paths?

Just because the paths potentially exist does not require the railway to give them up.

Frieght operators have far more paths than trains they operate - why should passenger operators be any different?

This is not at all the basis on which the sale of access rights works I'm afraid.

 

[RailWonderer]

Which can be used as an argument for cutting any public service that is not self-financing - NHS, Schools, Libraries, Roads, Defence, mental health, social care, etc etc etc. Why is public transport considered unworthy of such support? Most other advanced countries recognise the social benefits of good transport and apply support accordingly.

Almost everyone has benefitted from the NHS, 93% of people attended state school, libraries are considered social and moral public goods, defence protects all of us, and social care is used by a majority but many people have never used the railways or use them rarely. The railways are also the only sector that can make money through ticket sales, the NHS alternative is private health care, the state school alternative is a public school, the public library's is a book shop.
The railway is still semi-public infrastructure in my mind and needs some level of government support but how much and when a bailout/bigger subsidy is needed is the big gray area.

 

[HSTEd]

This is not at all the basis on which the sale of access rights works I'm afraid.

Ultimately how access rights works is how the government states that it works.

The minister can sweep it away virtually with the stroke of a pen if he wants.

(Also charging freight operators full commercial rates is a way to reduce costs on the railway without politically unpalatable service cuts to passenger services)

 

[Agent_Squash]

I’m seeing Northern services a lot busier than they were before lockdown. Full and some standing on a 195 just after 10am on a week day. South East commuting may never be the same again - but the North still has so much untapped demand.

 

[RT4038]

This is not at all the basis on which the sale of access rights works I'm afraid.

Spend billions running unnecessary trains for the next few years, or change the rules, if they are a problem?

 

[Bald Rick]

The passenger railways have always had a multi-billion pound hole to fill. Imagining that it can ever be filled is a fantasy. Truly profitable passenger railways are very rare. It's high time the government finally understood the lessons of Beeching and Serpell.

Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear. It’s an additional £4bn a year hole, on top of what was already a substantial subsidy.

However, of all those people I personally know who were working 100% of the time at home at the height of the pandemic, every single one of them now goes to the office a minimum of twice a week.

As ever, one anecdote does not a trend make. I could name several people who were full time commuters to the office and have no intention of returning again - indeed can’t as they are now permanent work from home. But, even if every commuter returned twice a week, that’s a 60% drop*




* actually it isn’t 60%, but close enough for illustrative purposes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As ever, one anecdote does not a trend make. I could name several people who were full time commuters to the office and have no intention of returning again - indeed can’t as they are now permanent work from home. But, even if every commuter returned twice a week, that’s a 60% drop*

* actually it isn’t 60%, but close enough for illustrative purposes.

But not a 60% drop in income, as instead of using a season ticket each day, they'll probably use an Anytime Day Return. And if they take the kids to London on Saturday, that'll be an extra Off Peak Day Return rather than just using the season.

 

[quantinghome]

Almost everyone has benefitted from the NHS, 93% of people attended state school, libraries are considered social and moral public goods, defence protects all of us, and social care is used by a majority but many people have never used the railways or use them rarely.

That's quite a telling comment. We perceive libraries to be a social and moral public good, although most people don't use them. We perceive defence projects to benefit everyone even though most of the very expensive kit is never used in anger, because the deterrent argument (which I agree with) has been consistently made by politicians. And there are plenty of other areas of public spending which most people never use or otherwise directly benefit from, but which nevertheless have had a consensus built that spending public money on them is necessary.

It's interesting that railways aren't seen that way by many, even though there is a strong argument to be made that they are a general public good benefitting society as a whole, not just passengers.

The railways are also the only sector that can make money through ticket sales,

If you mean recoup some of its costs through ticket sales, fair enough. If you mean cover its entire costs then no, it's never going to happen.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's quite a telling comment. We perceive libraries to be a social and moral public good, although most people don't use them. We perceive defence projects to benefit everyone even though most of the very expensive kit is never used in anger, because the deterrent argument (which I agree with) has been consistently made by politicians. And there are plenty of other areas of public spending which most people never use or otherwise directly benefit from, but which nevertheless have had a consensus built that spending public money on them is necessary.

Libraries are an interesting one. I don't use one, but then I don't read that much. If I did I don't see why I would object to a small membership fee given the big benefit to a regular reader. It could be means-tested, with it remaining free for those on Universal Credit and those entitled to a bus pass.

TfGM clearly think a tenner a year for rail/tram validity on their passes is worth collecting, so a tenner or 20 quid a year for household membership of a public library seems quite reasonable to me.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Anybody know what might happen to much needed resignalling schemes? Presume these might be canned for the forseeable?

 

[baz962]

I don't think I've carried fresh air at any time since the first lockdown last spring. Anyone else...?

On Saturday I left behind around 50 passengers , I believe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Anybody know what might happen to much needed resignalling schemes? Presume these might be canned for the forseeable?

It would make sense to go forward with the ones that will save money, such as ones that remove boxes. But I bet they won't. A fortune would be saved by removing boxes like Rufford, North Llanrwst etc from branch lines so the only staff on the whole thing are driver and guard.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The railways are also the only sector that can make money through ticket sales, the NHS alternative is private health care, the state school alternative is a public school, the public library's is a book shop.

I mean that just isn't true. The NHS charges non UK citizens for treatment, charges for parking in most hospitals etc etc. Libraries often charge for printing and for services over and above just lending books (some lend music, video games etc etc), some schools charge for after school clubs / breakfast clubs etc (or outright just ask parents for contributions). Sure the others don't make as much money as a percentage of their operating costs as the railway does, but to outright say they can't make money is just not the case. So on that basis I'd say the railways actually do a pretty damn good job at raising money towards their operating costs compared to a lot of other public services!

 

[RT4038]

That's quite a telling comment. We perceive libraries to be a social and moral public good, although most people don't use them. We perceive defence projects to benefit everyone even though most of the very expensive kit is never used in anger, because the deterrent argument (which I agree with) has been consistently made by politicians. And there are plenty of other areas of public spending which most people never use or otherwise directly benefit from, but which nevertheless have had a consensus built that spending public money on them is necessary.

It's interesting that railways aren't seen that way by many, even though there is a strong argument to be made that they are a general public good benefitting society as a whole, not just passengers.


If you mean recoup some of its costs through ticket sales, fair enough. If you mean cover its entire costs then no, it's never going to happen.

Libraries, many (most?) of which have already been closed anyway, cost Government a tiny fraction that the railways do. When you go to the library they will be open the times it says on the door, you will get the book you want or they will be able to order it for you. They are simply not a useful comparator to railways.

Compare this to the public perception of railways (whether reasonable or not) - unreliable, belligerent staff (individually and/or collectively), overpriced , inconvenient, irrelevant, uncomfortable (other passengers, or seats/lack of). The private car is an acceptable, often preferable, alternative. And the railways want an extra £4bn a year........ How far would that go in funding existing libraries?

To most of normal transport needs, rail is not anywhere near the answer.

 

[Horizon22]

All the talk of passenger numbers down to 60% / 70% pre covid and arguments that its not uniform around the country well. I have always moaned about was Centro, then Nerwork Westmildands and now West Midlands Combined authority (thinks that's what they are now) for their absolute obsession with passenger counts at individual stations and also walking through trains not checking tickets but asking if the passengers have a ticket and probably getting some quite honest answers. This data is still being collected d to be honest I am very glad if their are de decisions made in the West Midlands that their should be an extremely good data set behind them. TFL with their card bed ticketing systems should also be just as good.

Are their any other parts of the country where passenger numbers etc are on the face of it actually very accurate?

It was always going to be uneven geographically in regards to the recovery of passenger numbers. Acccuracy is through both counts, revenue data and train loadings (even stock 20-25 years old can estimate loadings pretty well). Obviously urban areas have much more granular detail (e.g. Oyster / Contactless).

People in fairly prosperous London commuter towns (Oxford, Chelmsford, Guildford, Tunbridge Wells etc.) will probably not return to the rates they were at for decades in terms of commuting and this will probably just be through natural population growth. Some inner commuting routes remain very popular (“key worker” types or whatever definition you prefer). Home working is here to stay of course even if Covid disappeared tomorrow (despite what some in the forum might think!) The genie is well and truly out of the bottle there

Whilst some form of restrictions are still in place it is probably premature to start making absolute cuts that can’t be rowed back with relative ease. But most TOCs have now got very solid data & trends over past year or so to understand where the most popular areas are and can certainly make plans, even if it’s too early to bring them to fruition / sign them off with the DfT. Some areas have bounced back quicker than many expect yet planning teams & timetables haven’t quite adapted - see Sundays for instance. On the flip side going from 8tph to 6tph on a London metro route at peak time won’t be the disaster some claim it will be - and might actually improve reliability which let’s not forget the same commuters also complained about!

The problem is going to be plans / reductions that are made in relative haste and will be hard to reverse and that the feared “downward spiral” will begin in earnest which wouldn’t help urban congestion, nor plans for decarbonisation.

 

[Ex-controller]

I believe this is a First Group trait after hearing similar about TPE doing the same and paring back route and traction knowledge to the bare minimum.

Was this during First group's tenure? Would figure and tie in with the above if so. I also don't buy their argument that hacking away at route knowledge leads to less incidents, quite the opposite. Could make an interesting thesis for someone on an IRO course perhaps.

Yes, it was actually. Interesting that this was group wide as it was carried out by ScotRail management, but probably from on high.

 

[Horizon22]

On Saturday I left behind around 50 passengers , I believe.

Saturday is especially manic with demand easily over 100% of pre-Covid in some areas. I thought this would decrease post Summer but it’s December now! Foreign travel is of course still ‘inconvenient’ so it may decrease slightly post-Covid but we are social animals and if you’re not commuting on the train at 7am every morning, it’s maybe no longer such the chore it used to be to take a train.

 

[172007]

Yes, it was actually. Interesting that this was group wide as it was carried out by ScotRail management, but probably from on high.

At my TOC there is a element of empire building and restday work protection with regards to route knowledge it appears. Depots don't want other depot's doing their work even if it's 1 train early and late (to retain route knowledge) for the fear of losing restday work even thought
the other depots wouldn't be able to be offered it until the main depot has fully used its resources.

With Driver shortages on the routes and not a single depot that signs all the routes (even the central depot) there are inevitably cancellations even with some depots actually managing to have restday available drivers or the rare spare whilst other drivers travelling passenger for the best part of an hour every shift or a fair amount of shifts. It's bonkers but it will cost too much I training ro get everyone to cover everywhere.

 

[the sniper]

Compare this to the public perception of railways (whether reasonable or not) - unreliable, belligerent staff (individually and/or collectively), overpriced , inconvenient, irrelevant, uncomfortable (other passengers, or seats/lack of). The private car is an acceptable, often preferable, alternative. And the railways want an extra £4bn a year........ How far would that go in funding existing libraries?

So bad that many trains were bursting at the seams pre-Covid and passenger levels are at 60% to 70% of what they were now, when things still aren't 'normal'. The railways aren't quite as irrelevant as some here would have people believe.

If it were up to some people here the Serpell report would have been dusted off and fully implemented by the end of 2020... and it would have been blamed on the unions. The forum's not so enthusiastic 'enthusiasts' are quite something.

 

[Glenn1969]

Yes. That fact, however, doesn't mean that Wolmar is wrong to note that the coldly rational thing to do in order to realise savings at the present time would indeed be to prune services that have some of the biggest costs for the smallest returns.

But the present time is the wrong time to be taking these decisions because as soon as the pandemic is over ridership will recover. Trouble is no one knows when that will be

 

[Bletchleyite]

But the present time is the wrong time to be taking these decisions because as soon as the pandemic is over ridership will recover. Trouble is no one knows when that will be

Not all of it will. Daily London commuting is dead and won't return.

 

[43066]

I'd also point out that... it's December 2021 now... a number of people were assuming that numbers would bounce back after the first lockdown, or the second lockdown, or maybe after the 2021 summer holidays ended... but things haven't bounced back yet..

They haven’t “bounced back” to 2019 levels but we are back up to 70% across the network - with peaks and troughs as discussed upthread. That’s less than six months after coming out of heavy restrictions, with Covid still very much “live”, being featured on the news and (sadly) quite a bit of volatility, with potentially more restrictions to come.
It will be interesting to see what happens next year assuming a more sustained return to normality.

Saturday is especially manic with demand easily over 100% of pre-Covid in some areas. I thought this would decrease post Summer but it’s December now! Foreign travel is of course still ‘inconvenient’ so it may decrease slightly post-Covid but we are social animals and if you’re not commuting on the train at 7am every morning, it’s maybe no longer such the chore it used to be to take a train.

I’ve honestly never seen off peak especially weekends so busy, especially weekends. Sadly I’ve also never seen quite so much such dreadful behaviour from people who have had a few too many (or something stronger).

You’re probably right that there is a changed psychological aspect, with the train now being viewed as something that takes people on exciting day trips, or to meet with friends and loved ones, rather than just taking them to the jobs they hate with their noses pressed into peoples’ armpits!

Off topic , but I would love to see you on a treadmill.

Ha. We’ve all let things slip during Covid, but I suspect I’ve been on one rather more recently than some others we know . .

 

[quantinghome]

Compare this to the public perception of railways (whether reasonable or not) - unreliable, belligerent staff (individually and/or collectively), overpriced , inconvenient, irrelevant, uncomfortable (other passengers, or seats/lack of). The private car is an acceptable, often preferable, alternative.

Where railways actually exist and provide a decent level of service they are generally very well-used by the local population. Of course they're never going to compete with the private car for flexibility. But they are excellent at transporting large numbers of people between and within built-up areas, a job they are doing very successfully, right now.

I trust your description of railways is imagining what some people think, not what you actually think...

And the railways want an extra £4bn a year........ How far would that go in funding existing libraries?

To most of normal transport needs, rail is not anywhere near the answer.

Well, you can reduce that funding gap either by cutting services or growing services and bringing passengers back. Past experience tells us the former method is doomed to failure.

Railways are a vital component of 'normal transport needs'. Motorways and major roads into cities would be absolute mayhem without them.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Dec 2021 ==

Not all of it will. Daily London commuting is dead and won't return.

What, not ever? Let's come back in 5 years' time and see what's happened.

Perhaps we should mothball Crossrail, or heck, just fill the tunnels with concrete. They're never going to be used and it will just cost money to keep them open.

 

[matacaster]

I'm avoiding long train journeys while masks are required, but I don't seem to be in the majority from what I can tell.

Maybe not the majority, but I'm with you.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Perhaps we should mothball Crossrail, or heck, just fill the tunnels with concrete. They're never going to be used and it will just cost money to keep them open.

Crossrail is still useful, though it could perhaps have a reduced service frequency. In particular it will, as it's fully accessible, enable the withdrawal of a huge swathe of bus routes and potentially pedestrianisation of Oxford Street.

 

[21C101]

I would imagine that the biggest potential savings will come from widespead DOO and also the introduction of technology that makes more than cursory route knowledge necessary for drivers enabling any driver to drive anywhere.

However even without considering industrial relations that will take years so I think we will, with the end of revenue earning TOCs see a return to keeping within fixed yearly budgets, which means that the only way to balance the books is the way BR did it. Cut staffing hours, reduce offpeak evening and weekend services, defer renewals and leave TSRs in place for months and years, defer resignallings leaving ever more unreliable systems in place, sending stock off lease so short formation running trains etc, in other words kicking off a spiral of decline which will drive passengers away and justify further retrenchment.

Meanwhile the hawks will look at the Luton and Cambridge busways and the Gosport unguided busway and will see (despite all the oppribium) what is effectively a railway but with minimal p'way costs, no signalling costs, no ASLEF, no RMT, all vehicles DOO, drivers paid a fraction of train drivers with no route knowledge needed so can be hired and up and running with a few weeks training, vehicles that cost a fraction of the cost of train vehicles and reliable end to end journey times at tube like frequencies with no need for bus replacement when there is engineering works as the buses are self diverting.

And they will proceed accordingly and do to the rail industry what Murdoch did to the print workers.

 

[HSTEd]

Perhaps we should mothball Crossrail, or heck, just fill the tunnels with concrete. They're never going to be used and it will just cost money to keep them open.

If we were going this route we wouldn't mothball Crossrail.

We would use Crossrail and sell off the suburban platforms at several London termini (and probably finish off Marylebone) for redevelopment instead.

Crossrail train count could basically take over essentially all suburban traffic on the Great Western and Chiltern Main Lines, and probably basically everything out of the GEML and take a chunk out of South Eastern commuter traffic too.

 

[The Planner]

Ultimately how access rights works is how the government states that it works.

The minister can sweep it away virtually with the stroke of a pen if he wants.

(Also charging freight operators full commercial rates is a way to reduce costs on the railway without politically unpalatable service cuts to passenger services)

Not without something to replace it they can't. Without a certain level of protection that the Network Code provides TOCs would likely just hand keys back.

 

[HSTEd]

Not without something to replace it they can't. Without a certain level of protection that the Network Code provides TOCs would likely just hand keys back.

In the glorious new world TOCs are on management contracts - what services they run or do not run are now essentially immaterial.

And so what if they handed the keys back, the same staff would just turn up to work doing the job they were doing before anyway?