CP6 funding cut by £1Bn: Where should the cutbacks occur?

[PHILIPE]

This is an extract from TFW Journey Check and illustrates an occurrence over the last two days and brought about by the Branch being worked by a pair of 153s. A 150 has substituted from the re-opening until now because 2 x 153s are overlength for Dolgarrog.

11:36 Blaenau Ffestiniog to Llandudno due 12:46 will no longer call at Dolgarrog.
This is due to a short-notice change to the timetable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What do they need two 153s for? Is it so the guard can have a coach to himself?

It's not exactly going to be busy at the moment.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

What do they need two 153s for? Is it so the guard can have a coach to himself?

It's not exactly going to be busy at the moment.

Im sure it will be some union imposed door opening and passenger boarding and alighting protocol

 

[jw]

From the Financial Times

The government has cut funding to upgrade Britain’s railway infrastructure by £1bn, raising questions over the future of projects ranging from electrification upgrades to station works.

The rail enhancements budget covers a programme of investments to improve passenger and freight services over Britain’s largely Victorian-era railway system. The five-year budget, which runs to 2024, has been cut from £10.4bn to £9.4bn following last week’s government spending review, rail minister Chris Heaton-Harris confirmed in response to a parliamentary written question.

Schemes covered in the pipeline of projects include increasing capacity at Leeds station, a long-term fix to overcrowding at London’s Clapham Junction station and the electrification of lines linking Wigan and Bolton in north-west England.

The government has yet to specify what the immediate priorities for the money are.

Disappointing, obviously, and not something the Chancellor mentioned in his speech last week. I imagine our financial situation will remain unpredictable for some time, and with political factors such as 'levelling up' and 'building back better', I wonder what lies ahead for rail investment.

 

[DarloRich]

The devil will be in the detail. It could be that dft authorisatuon will not be forthcoming for projects

 

[yorksrob]

I think that realistically, electrification should take priority, while commuter capacity enhancement may be able to take a back seat.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What sort of percentage cut is that?

 

[yorksrob]

What sort of percentage cut is that?

It looked like about 10% in the original post.

 

[JonathanH]

I think that realistically, electrification should take priority, while commuter capacity enhancement may be able to take a back seat.

That seems about right - disbanding capacity enhancement projects or pushing them back - cutbacks from spending scheduled between 2019 and 2024 taking effect in year 3 (ie 2021) means that actually the cutback is greater than if it had been a 10% cutback had been made before CP6 started.

Presumably work on any future capacity enhancements for future CPs, especially those in the South East commuterland - eg Croydon - should come to a complete stop.

 

[yorksrob]

That seems about right - disbanding capacity enhancement projects or pushing them back - cutbacks from spending scheduled between 2019 and 2024 taking effect in year 3 (ie 2021) means that actually the cutback is greater than if it had been a 10% cutback had been made before CP6 started.

Presumably work on any future capacity enhancements for future CPs, especially those in the South East commuterland - eg Croydon - should come to a complete stop.

Probably things that haven't been started yet. I would have thought.

 

[JonathanH]

Probably things that haven't been started yet. I would have thought.

Yes, that was the point I was making but there are going to be fewer of those unstarted projects than there were two years ago.

Of course, the unfortunate extension of a £1bn reduction in project spend is a reduction in headcount, the loss of skills, scrapping of equipment and a general reduction in the ability to take forward projects in the future.

 

[Ianno87]

Probably things that haven't been started yet. I would have thought.

Depends what you mean by "not started". Shovels on ground or development?

Development and design work should continue of scheme to be "oven ready" when demand returns.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, that was the point I was making but there are going to be fewer of those unstarted projects than there were two years ago.

I must admit, I wasn't sure if they'd started Croyden yet.

Depends what you mean by "not started". Shovels on ground or development?

Development and design work should continue of scheme to be "oven ready" when demand returns.

Yes, it's always good to have a couple of those up your sleeve for whatever funding might come along.

 

[JonathanH]

Development and design work should continue of scheme to be "oven ready" when demand returns

But that is the easiest place to make cuts. Spending money on design work for projects that are now never going to happen doesn't make any sense.

 

[Ianno87]

But that is the easiest place to make cuts. Spending money on design work for projects that are now never going to happen doesn't make any sense.

How are they, with absolute certainty, *never* going to happen?

 

[Bald Rick]

£1bn is an absolute result, in the context of what’s going on.

 

[yorksrob]

£1bn is an absolute result, in the context of what’s going on.

Yes, could have been a lot worse.

Of course, we'll have to guard against damaging cuts in revenue funding as well.

 

[Bald Rick]

I must admit, I wasn't sure if they'd started Croyden yet.

Initial development work started over 5 years ago.

 

[Peregrine 4903]

£1bn is an absolute result, in the context of what’s going on.

That's what I thought. It could have been so much worse.

 

[Bald Rick]

Of course, we'll have to guard against damaging cuts in revenue funding as well.

I think you mean less massive increases than required to maintain current levels of service, but yes.

 

[swt_passenger]

In any given period more than 10% of agreed projects would probably be late anyway, so is this really a big problem...

 

[Bald Rick]

In any given period more than 10% of agreed projects would probably be late anyway, so is this really a big problem...

Given that Heathrow Western link is officially delayed, and there must be some projects running late (given Decision timescales being extended this year due to Covid), it cant be.

What might be a problem is any new projects coming along looking for money, like any reopenings. Also any due to be delivered beyond 2024 that are brought forward.

Only guessing, but it seems logical.

 

[squizzler]

We know from Scotland that the electrification costs can be vastly cheaper than those of GWML and MML, getting on to EU benchmarks.

If similar challenges were set to all the other types of enhancement as we have with electrification, and the industry was incentivised to pull in the same direction (per Williams review or whatever it spawns for post Covid world), I suggest ten percent saving in infrastructure costs across the board therefore looks quite doable, meaning desired savings can be achieved without reducing the outputs.

 

[Class 170101]

In any given period more than 10% of agreed projects would probably be late anyway, so is this really a big problem...

Except I think this time the money won't re-appear in CP7. However I thought the idea of the Control Periods and the Statemwent of Funds Available (SOFA) was aimed at stopping governments raiding the railway budget when it suited them to divert it elsewhere / make cuts. No longer the case by the looks of it.

 

[moggie]

The treasury equivalent of the Shell Game. Hyped up announcements of 'Beeching' reinstatements one week while plotting in dark corridors to remove 10% of network enhancements at the same time. So much for the 'build back better' / infrastructure / green agendas. Has the road budget suffered a 10% cut?
While some may see this as reasonable in the current context of rail use this cut will be felt at a time when the trains are full to bursting once again. It won't seem quite so reasonable then. It's cynical.

 

[swt_passenger]

Except I think this time the money won't re-appear in CP7. However I thought the idea of the Control Periods and the Statemwent of Funds Available (SOFA) was aimed at stopping governments raiding the railway budget when it suited them to divert it elsewhere / make cuts. No longer the case by the looks of it.

I suspect even if there still was the same HLOS and SoFA for enhancements, as in earlier CPs, it wouldn’t have necessarily survived the present emergency...

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Depends what you mean by "not started". Shovels on ground or development?

Development and design work should continue of scheme to be "oven ready" when demand returns.

Does that still work if, once the design and development work is completed, the commitment to put the shovels in gets delayed by some years due to lack of funding? Presumably, if the delay lasts too many years, at some point that design work will have become sufficiently out of date that it will end up being thrown away and re-started from scratch, but I'm not sure what the timescale for that would be before that becomes likely. 2 years? 5 years? 10 years?

 

[Jozhua]

The treasury equivalent of the Shell Game. Hyped up announcements of 'Beeching' reinstatements one week while plotting in dark corridors to remove 10% of network enhancements at the same time. So much for the 'build back better' / infrastructure / green agendas. Has the road budget suffered a 10% cut?
While some may see this as reasonable in the current context of rail use this cut will be felt at a time when the trains are full to bursting once again. It won't seem quite so reasonable then. It's cynical.

That time is not far away. Unfortunately, the government only seems to see short term. By this time next year, the picture will have changed dramatically.

"build back better", "carbon neutral" are all empty words until someone comes forward with a plan to do something about it. We're still waiting on two platforms at Piccadilly and a measly passing loop on the Hope Valley line. Millions get spent debating the issue in whitehall, while talented industry professionals and fare-paying passengers continue to suffer. An absolute charade.

 

[Aictos]

The post above which asked if the road budget had suffered a similar reduction in funding is a interesting question especially with the recent (as in last 4 weeks) announcement that petrol and diesel cars will be no more from I think 2030?

In any case, if the rail lobby has to suffer cutbacks in its budget then it's only fair that the road lobby also gets cutbacks in its budget with the freeze on fuel duty being stopped as one outcome.

 

[daodao]

We're still waiting on two platforms at Piccadilly

I presume that you are referring to proposed platforms 15 and 16. Not building this expensive white elephant would be a worthwhile saving. The Castlefield problem is best solved by changing its use and removing longer distance passenger services (to Chester/Lancaster/York and beyond) from it.