Grayling: It's not my fault the May recast went wrong, I'm no rail expert

[pemma]

He wins the award for stating the obvious

Transport Secretary Chris Grayling today insisted he wasn’t to blame for the rail timetable chaos causing misery to thousands of commuters, insisting he was not a “specialist in rail matters”.

The Secretary of State was being grilled at a session of the Transport Select Committee, which started six minutes late.

Committee chair Lilian Greenwood told Mr Grayling the committee had seen a decision tree diagram, which positioned him with the ultimate responsibility for the decision to go ahead with Thameslink’s new timetable.

Asked if he accepted responsibility for the fiasco, he said: “Actually, I don’t. We have an industry readiness board, that on May 2nd gave a RAG [Red, Amber, Green] rating of the timetable change of “green, green, green and amber green”.

“So it would have been irresponsible in my view, for a Secretary of State who is not a specialist in rail matters, to intervene and say that this must not go ahead.”

And he said he had not considered quitting during the fiasco.

He added: “The secretary of state is not responsible for rail timetabling, and indeed should not be.

He said it would be a “crazy situation” if he was responsible for timetabling for a private railway, adding: “I’m not going to intervene in that decision. I don’t run the railways.”

Pressing him again, Greenwod asked: “Do you accept that ultimately you do have responsibility for ensuring the rail system works effectively.

“You organised the setting up of the industry readiness board and the Thameslink programme board is a DFT board.

She quipped: “Surely you would take responsibility for the overall system. I appreciate you’re not driving the trains.”

But Grayling insisted: “The Department for Transport (DFT) in my view, certainly the Secretary of State, doesn’t take responsibility for shaping a train timetable.

“Doesn’t take responsibility for establishing whether there are the right number of drivers to drive the trains, or whether they’ve been trained appropriately or not.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/shameless-transport-secretary-chris-grayling-12972977

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

He wins the award for stating the obvious



https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/shameless-transport-secretary-chris-grayling-12972977

That seems a very misleading way of putting things by him - the GTR service is almost run as a concession by the DfT. To say they "[don't] take responsibility for shaping a train timetable" is almost an outright lie, considering they set the exact specifications of the bids they wanted for the TSGN "franchise".

As ever, unsurprising to hear these kinds of comments from Mr Grayling, who has a reputation for refusing to accept responsibility and blame where it's due!

 

[Esker-pades]

If he doesn't have the knowledge to make an informed decision, why is he still in the job?

 

[class387]

Thanks for sharing this! Gave me something to laugh about.

 

[Busaholic]

If he doesn't have the knowledge to make an informed decision, why is he still in the job?

Because as soon as Theresa May announced her candidature for Prime Minister there he was by her side, her pet poodle (actually, I rather like poodles so I'll take back that remark). If ever anyone could have been said to have risen way above their station, it is him. He makes Liz Truss and IDS look like geniuses!

 

[Esker-pades]

Because as soon as Theresa May announced her candidature for Prime Minister there he was by her side, her pet poodle (actually, I rather like poodles so I'll take back that remark). If ever anyone could have been said to have risen way above their station, it is him. He makes Liz Truss and IDS look like geniuses!

The worst thing about him is how boring he is. If he wasn't so screamingly tedious, he'd be out of the job.

 

[Domh245]

He does have a point though, I wouldn't expect (nor particularly want) the Government minister to be individually involved in every decision made by the department - their job is to make the major decisions (HS2, Heathrow Expansion, electrification or lack thereof) across their entire remit but otherwise to appoint the right people to the right job and to set out strategy and vision for the department. Should the transport secretary be making decisions about the Thameslink Programme on a large scale, yes. Should they be go/no-going timetables, definitely not.

You wouldn't expect the CEO of most companies to be performing important, technical tasks such as setting timetables, but you would expect them to be outlining what they want from a project - why should the DfT be any different?

 

[Esker-pades]

He does have a point though, I wouldn't expect (nor particularly want) the Government minister to be individually involved in every decision made by the department - their job is to make the major decisions (HS2, Heathrow Expansion, electrification or lack thereof) across their entire remit but otherwise to appoint the right people to the right job and to set out strategy and vision for the department. Should the transport secretary be making decisions about the Thameslink Programme on a large scale, yes. Should they be go/no-going timetables, definitely not.

You wouldn't expect the CEO of most companies to be performing important, technical tasks such as setting timetables, but you would expect them to be outlining what they want from a project - why should the DfT be any different?

The Thameslink recast was a massive project.

 

[pemma]

You wouldn't expect the CEO of most companies to be performing important, technical tasks such as setting timetables, but you would expect them to be outlining what they want from a project - why should the DfT be any different?

You wouldn't expect a CEO to be unaware that there are major problems with delivering a project until the delivery fails and if that did happen there's a high chance there would be some staffing changes soon after.

 

[farleigh]

You wouldn't expect a CEO to be unaware that there are major problems with delivering a project until the delivery fails and if that did happen there's a high chance there would be some staffing changes soon after.

This exactly.
Grayling is absolutely accountable

 

[Dave1987]

So the Transport Secretary has no clue about railways. I thought when an MP was chosen to run as a Secretary of State of a particular department that was because they have skills and experience appropriate to that department so they can make the big decisions and take responsibility for those decisions. Grayling needs to quit as Transport Secretary now before he messes up the DFT anymore!

 

[Far north 37]

If he doesn't have the knowledge to make an informed decision, why is he still in the job?

I was thinking exactly the same thing.

 

[Esker-pades]

I was thinking exactly the same thing.

The answer is that politics since 2016 has displayed that you can be ignorant and still be in charge of everything as long as you can lie or shout "fake news" at everything.

 

[Far north 37]

The answer is that politics since 2016 has displayed that you can be ignorant and still be in charge of everything as long as you can lie or shout "fake news" at everything.

When a man is made transport minister then claims after two years in the job he still knows not a thing about railways there is something seriously wrong there.

 

[Domh245]

The Thameslink recast was a massive project.

Correct - but recasting a timetable (as big a task as it is) is hardly comparable to the sort of major projects that the SoS should be involved with. If Mark Carne (or Andrew Haines as his successor) had to be involved in every large technical decision taken by Network Rail, they wouldn't have the time to run the company.

You wouldn't expect a CEO to be unaware that there are major problems with delivering a project until the delivery fails and if that did happen there's a high chance there would be some staffing changes soon after.

The CEO can only go by what he is being told by the people he's appointed, if (as had been the case) he had been told that everything was fine and here is why we think that is the case, why would they then step in. As an example, if the CEO of a large automotive company was a businessman rather than an engineer, I wouldn't be expecting them to challenge their subordinates on every little technical detail. That then leads on to a question about how important it is for executives in certain roles to have technical backgrounds/training, etc. Don't disagree about the staffing changes point though, and of course whilst he isn't responsible (IMO) for the events leading up to the 20th of May, he sure is responsible for dealing with the aftermath (which has been poorly done)

So the Transport Secretary has no clue about railways. I thought when an MP was chosen to run as a Secretary of State of a particular department that was because they have skills and experience appropriate to that department so they can make the big decisions and take responsibility for those decisions. Grayling needs to quit as Transport Secretary now before he messes up the DFT anymore!

Slightly related to the point I was making in response to @jcollins, but does a minister need to have masses of the right experience for their department? Does a soldier need to run the MOD, does a bus or train driver need to run the DfT, do you need lawyers or prison guards running the DOJ?

I would argue that it is far more important for the permanent secretaries and other staff at the department to have the experience and skills to run the department, the ministers act as the go-between for the people who know what they're doing (department staff), and the people who set the agenda (the electorate/treasury/cabinet) - I don't know about anyone else but I'm not a big fan of micromanaging and it seems that a lot of people here want ministers micromanaging their departments.

 

[furnessvale]

So the Transport Secretary has no clue about railways. I thought when an MP was chosen to run as a Secretary of State of a particular department that was because they have skills and experience appropriate to that department so they can make the big decisions and take responsibility for those decisions. Grayling needs to quit as Transport Secretary now before he messes up the DFT anymore!

The revolving door that is the DfT and the DoT before it, demonstrates that has not been the case for many years.

Indeed, I recall over the years that oppositions have had shadow ministers in place with a good knowledge of the brief, only to be replaced by a party apparatchik when they have gained power.

 

[6Gman]

So the Transport Secretary has no clue about railways. I thought when an MP was chosen to run as a Secretary of State of a particular department that was because they have skills and experience appropriate to that department so they can make the big decisions and take responsibility for those decisions. Grayling needs to quit as Transport Secretary now before he messes up the DFT anymore!

Er, no!

 

[HH]

The CEO can only go by what he is being told by the people he's appointed...

And if it turns out to be a load of bull he can sack them; that this hasn't happened should tell us something...

 

[jon0844]

If he doesn't have the knowledge to make an informed decision, why is he still in the job?

They should move him to deal with Brexit. Brexit is something that requires no expertise at all.

 

[tbtc]

He does have a point though, I wouldn't expect (nor particularly want) the Government minister to be individually involved in every decision made by the department - their job is to make the major decisions (HS2, Heathrow Expansion, electrification or lack thereof) across their entire remit but otherwise to appoint the right people to the right job and to set out strategy and vision for the department. Should the transport secretary be making decisions about the Thameslink Programme on a large scale, yes. Should they be go/no-going timetables, definitely not.

You wouldn't expect the CEO of most companies to be performing important, technical tasks such as setting timetables, but you would expect them to be outlining what they want from a project - why should the DfT be any different?

does a minister need to have masses of the right experience for their department? Does a soldier need to run the MOD, does a bus or train driver need to run the DfT, do you need lawyers or prison guards running the DOJ?

I would argue that it is far more important for the permanent secretaries and other staff at the department to have the experience and skills to run the department, the ministers act as the go-between for the people who know what they're doing (department staff), and the people who set the agenda (the electorate/treasury/cabinet) - I don't know about anyone else but I'm not a big fan of micromanaging and it seems that a lot of people here want ministers micromanaging their departments.

Agreed - whilst it's nice for a few photo opportunities, I'm not bothered whether the Health Secretary can empty a bed pan or the Education Secretary can explain trigonometry.

I work for a large organisation, where the CEO wouldn't be able to do my job and possibly has no idea there are even people in the company with my job title - that's how bureaucracy works though - there are enough levels of competent managers who do understand things relative to their positions.

A lot of people seem to think that Chris Grayling should be like Sir Topham Hat, and know each aspect of the railway - maybe they think that if the railway is nationalised we'll have one "Proper Railway Man" controlling everything - but I'd rather that Grayling concentrated on the Macro issues - overall funding/ devolution/ long term strategy/ integrating the various arms of the railway/ keeping costs under control etc etc than spent his time assessing whether the 08:32 departure would have sufficient time to cross the flat junction outside the station before the 08:36 arrives - that's for people lower down the food chain to worry about.

Things I can blame Grayling for (re the timetable change):
Network Rail's failure to deliver infrastructure improvements on time/ on budget (e.g. the Bolton - Blackpool electrification that impacted upon Northern's planned timetable)

Things I can blame Grayling for (re the timetable change):
Whether services over the Ordsall Chord were given sufficient time to avoid clashing with the previous/next service at Piccadilly/ Victoria (because the Secretary Of State shouldn't be responsible for such minor details)

What next - demands that Grayling should resign because the vending machine at Leeds station was out of KitKats?

 

[jon0844]

That seems a very misleading way of putting things by him - the GTR service is almost run as a concession by the DfT. To say they "[don't] take responsibility for shaping a train timetable" is almost an outright lie, considering they set the exact specifications of the bids they wanted for the TSGN "franchise".

As ever, unsurprising to hear these kinds of comments from Mr Grayling, who has a reputation for refusing to accept responsibility and blame where it's due!

The documents for bidders suggested the DfT was very specific in its requirements for services, trains, number of seats, first/last trains etc.. The core was built many years ago with the tunnels put in to be fitted out in time for 2018, so we're talking 15+ years of planning. If you count the original TL 2000 project, it goes back another decade or so!

 

[Mag_seven]

Grayling's appearance before the TSC on BBC Parliament now.

 

[Steamysandy]

Based on personal experience of nearly 25 years in a large former government department., Grayling fits the job perfectly!
The bigger an idiot you are then the further you'll be promoted.
Don't have any idea about the job because the bosses don't want you messing up their dreams even if they are totally useless

 

[Esker-pades]

Agreed - whilst it's nice for a few photo opportunities, I'm not bothered whether the Health Secretary can empty a bed pan or the Education Secretary can explain trigonometry.

I work for a large organisation, where the CEO wouldn't be able to do my job and possibly has no idea there are even people in the company with my job title - that's how bureaucracy works though - there are enough levels of competent managers who do understand things relative to their positions.

A lot of people seem to think that Chris Grayling should be like Sir Topham Hat, and know each aspect of the railway - maybe they think that if the railway is nationalised we'll have one "Proper Railway Man" controlling everything - but I'd rather that Grayling concentrated on the Macro issues - overall funding/ devolution/ long term strategy/ integrating the various arms of the railway/ keeping costs under control etc etc than spent his time assessing whether the 08:32 departure would have sufficient time to cross the flat junction outside the station before the 08:36 arrives - that's for people lower down the food chain to worry about.

Things I can blame Grayling for (re the timetable change):
Network Rail's failure to deliver infrastructure improvements on time/ on budget (e.g. the Bolton - Blackpool electrification that impacted upon Northern's planned timetable)

Things I can blame Grayling for (re the timetable change):
Whether services over the Ordsall Chord were given sufficient time to avoid clashing with the previous/next service at Piccadilly/ Victoria (because the Secretary Of State shouldn't be responsible for such minor details)

What next - demands that Grayling should resign because the vending machine at Leeds station was out of KitKats?

Again, the Thameslink Timetable recast was a massive project. It wasn't the normal tweaking of times here, adding a peak service there. Everything changed. Fairly over-the-top analogy.

 

[physics34]

thats why there needs to be a British Railways board.... not loads of separate entities... the readiness board, the rail delivery group, RAIB, RSSB etc etc...

 

[DanTrain]

I'd suspect one of two things happened re Grayling. I’d like to think that he was genuinely unaware of the problems as he assumed (wrongly) that the relevant departments would handle the issue, and he needn’t micro-manage (in which case the failure isn’t directly his fault).

What I suspect may have happened given his general level of incompetence (i.e. about average for this government) is that he was aware of the issue but hoped it would magically sort itself out through the wonders of capitalism, and so he kept quiet.

What actually happened I suspect we will never know exactly, but my money’s on more of option 2 than 1!

 

[3141]

In an earlier thread about the Thameslink new timetable it was clear that there are many causes of the fiasco, including not enough drivers, not enough time for them all to be trained, Network Rail not having finalised the timetable in sufficient time for GTR to have made sure all relevant staff were fully familiar with everything they needed to know. Grayling as Sec. of State might be considered responsible, but in practical terms he wasn't. It's irrelevant and makes absolutely no difference to the real situation to spend time here slagging him off.

 

[plcd1]

I've watched the webcast recording of the session. The context for Grayling saying he was not in charge of the railways (or the TL t/table change) was Lilian Greenwood citing an official Thameslink project document that had a diagram of accountable / responsible people. It stated he was accountable for the Thameslink project. He said he wasn't. That's just ridiculous.

To be honest it was a very mixed performance from Grayling. It's clear he's got some grasp of detail and statistics and impending future legislation (even European stuff). That I would expect for someone at his level. However some of the so called "answers" about the future East Coast partnership and how it may work were rambling at best and clearly just his personal aspiration in many cases. "I want the railway to be less contractual" but he's still going to contract out rail and possibly maintenance / upgrade work. You have to have contracts to make such relationships work and to protect the interests of the parties. How often you resort to the contract in day to day terms is another issue altogether. He was also clearly desperate to avoid taking the blame for anything. Even his future "partnership" idea is about installing a "human shield" CEO that takes the blame rather than the SOS.

Other little highlights were
- SWR, LNER and GWR to remain as franchise identities regardless of future franchise reletting
- words that suggested the current franchising structure will not last for much longer
- a firm statement that Network Rail would not be privatised nor would its infrastructure move outside government control
- the ORR to be more focussed on customers (whatever that means)
- in response to qs from a West Country MP a commitment not to reduce Cross Country trains to the West Country
- following on on XC a view that the franchise would need more and longer trains (despite the consultation not saying this)
- the GWR franchise not to be split into two Inter City type franchises. Will remain as a single entity.
- oh yes he really likes the job and hopes to be there for several more years.

 

[PHILIPE]

When a man is made transport minister then claims after two years in the job he still knows not a thing about railways there is something seriously wrong there.

Square Peg in a Round Hole. May won't sack the arrogant Secretary , hasn't got the guts. I saw his smirking face on the TV earlier this evening.

 

[Merthyr Imp]

Reminds of Gilbert & Sullivan's 'HMS Pinafore' where great fun is had from the First Lord of the Admiralty knowing nothing about boats.