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

[47802]

Granda Reports has reported that the PM has 'full confidence' in Grayling.

Grayling needs to go, so does Arriva Northern. and Network Fail needs a good kicking.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Second story on BBC News at One today, Andy Burnham mayor or Greater Manchester is calling for direct action from the government on Northern Rail, potentially taking the franchise back into public hands. He said Arriva Northern are in breach of their franchise agreement. Suggestion was hinted that Chris Grayling ought to resign on that he said government need to take direct responsibility. He said words to the effect of they (governnent) need to take their attention away from Brexit for a minute and send someone up to the North West to take some action and responsibility for what is going on.

Mr Burnham said he has written to Mr Grayling twice directly about Northern, has received no response, and has now as of today written to the PM Teresa May demanding she take action herself rather than leave it to Grayling.

Can anyone confirm my understanding that the Mayor of Manchester is a 'constituent member' of the Greater Manchester Authority, which is in turn a 'constituent member' of Transport for the North, which in turn, according to its website is at least partially responsible for 'managing' the Northern Rail franchise?
Andy Burnham is surely part of the 'structure'.

 

[Sceptre]

TfN's powers are almost purely advisory. Grayling can, and does, reject TfN's advice, and TfN have no choice but to make mealy mouthed statements in support of the government where it's clear that even the cleaners in the TfN offices are privately fuming.

 

[Class 170101]

Grayling needs to go, so does Arriva Northern. and Network Fail needs a good kicking.

As much as Arriva Northern aren't liked, the timetable fiasco isn't of their own making so on this one I agree with you on Grayling and Network Rail but not Arriva.

 

[pt_mad]

Mr Burnham also made the point that the severe disruption had started before the timetable fiasco. Presumably he was referring to the DOO dispute?

Also re timetable problems wernt Northern's fault, wernt they responsible for the rostering? Wouldn't they have known well ahead that there wernt enough crew to cover it? Did they plan so that train crew were in the right place at the right time?

Surely the TOC would know before the actual morning of the new timetable that they didn't have train crew planned in the right places to match up with the trains?
Or was it a big shock on the day of the introduction?

 

[47802]

As much as Arriva Northern aren't liked, the timetable fiasco isn't of their own making so on this one I agree with you on Grayling and Network Rail but not Arriva.

While they may be not entirely to blame they are far from being blameless that's for sure, but Grayling will not want to put another franchise in DOR unless he has to.

For the absolute utter shambles and general incompetence during the 1st week of the new timetable, and the excessive amount of time that it tuck to stabilise the situation, and abysmal communication, Arriva deserve the boot on those issues alone in my view.

 

[pemma]

Mr Burnham also made the point that the severe disruption had started before the timetable fiasco. Presumably he was referring to the DOO dispute?

When did ASLEF members stop working overtime?

It's also the case that Arriva do less in response to disruption outside their control than their predecessors. Abellio/Serco were more likely to part cancel a service, organise a replacement bus or strengthen the following service. I'm not saying they always did one of those but they sometimes did one of those opposed to the full cancellation and nothing additional that we see under Arriva.

 

[pemma]

Can anyone confirm my understanding that the Mayor of Manchester is a 'constituent member' of the Greater Manchester Authority, which is in turn a 'constituent member' of Transport for the North, which in turn, according to its website is at least partially responsible for 'managing' the Northern Rail franchise?
Andy Burnham is surely part of the 'structure'.

Burnham is a member of TfN: https://transportforthenorth.com/about-transport-for-the-north/our-board/ but he's not the chair or vice chair. 'Rail North' now merged in to TfN was responsible for signing off the franchise spec but they have little control over the day to day running of the franchise.

 

[B&I]

TfN's powers are almost purely advisory. Grayling can, and does, reject TfN's advice, and TfN have no choice but to make mealy mouthed statements in support of the government where it's clear that even the cleaners in the TfN offices are privately fuming.

Why does TfN feel it has to.support the government, if the government is part of the problem ? Why is no-one in this country prepared to.stand up to the idiots in power ?

 

[B&I]

Granda Reports has reported that the PM has 'full confidence' in Grayling.

News for old people ?

She has full confidence in him being so incompetent that she looks better by comparison

 

[edwin_m]

A fairly entertaining read although it probably doesn't add much that's new.

https://www.citymetric.com/politics...resigned-northern-rail-trains-thameslink-4095

So, how has he done it? Why is this man still clinging to the government like an unusually incompetent barnacle? Here are some theories.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

News for old people ?

I am 73 years of age, so I suppose that I can be classed as one of the "old people", but I cannot ever recall watching "Granada Reports", but prefer other channels for my local information.

 

[Sceptre]

Why does TfN feel it has to.support the government, if the government is part of the problem ? Why is no-one in this country prepared to.stand up to the idiots in power ?

Why does the BBC start to fawn over the government when the year ends in 6? Because the government have a lot of non-statutory sway over these bodies.

Andy Burnham can get away with criticising the government because they wouldn't dare be so brazen as to abolish his post. TfN, on the other hand, can be done away with and be relegated to tomorrow's chip paper.

 

[pt_mad]

Andy Burnham can get away with criticising the government because they wouldn't dare be so brazen as to abolish his post. TfN, on the other hand, can be done away with and be relegated to tomorrow's chip paper.

Plus I think he happens to be quite popular doesn't he? And he was elected.

 

[pemma]

News for old people ?

I am 73 years of age, so I suppose that I can be classed as one of the "old people", but I cannot ever recall watching "Granada Reports", but prefer other channels for my local information.

There's plenty of people, probably younger than Paul's children, who share links to the Granada Reports site on social media. I read news stories both on the BBC website, newspaper sites (national and local) and social media and find both BBC and ITV news programs come up with stories which online sites tend to ignore or report but without giving much detail. Similarly there are stories which only get a brief mention on a news program but get detailed coverage on websites.

 

[FQTV]

I am 73 years of age, so I suppose that I can be classed as one of the "old people", but I cannot ever recall watching "Granada Reports", but prefer other channels for my local information.

There's plenty of people, probably younger than Paul's children, who share links to the Granada Reports site on social media. I read news stories both on the BBC website, newspaper sites (national and local) and social media and find both BBC and ITV news programs come up with stories which online sites tend to ignore or report but without giving much detail. Similarly there are stories which only get a brief mention on a news program but get detailed coverage on websites.

I assume that @B&I was referring to the typo in the post that they quoted, referring to “Granda Reports”, as opposed to “Granada Reports.”

Hence “Granda” and ‘old people’..........

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I assume that @B&I was referring to the typo in the post that they quoted, referring to “Granda Reports”, as opposed to “Granada Reports.”

Hence “Granda” and ‘old people’..........

Even so, any local Andalusian news items from its local capital are of little interest to me.

 

[krus_aragon]

Even so, any local Andalusian news items from its local capital are of little interest to me.

"Grandad Reports", on the other hand, might be of greater interest?

 

[Steamysandy]

[QUOT
E="krus_aragon, post: 3574512, member: 4110"]"Grandad Reports", on the other hand, might be of greater interest? [/QUOTE]
We used to have Ford Grandaddy and Angela's!

 

[Sceptre]

From the infrastructure subforum…

The Ordsall Chord and the Piccadilly/Oxford Road Capacity Scheme were both originally in Network Rail's CP5 Enhancements Delivery Plan, as related Northern Hub packages.

The Train Service Requirements in the 2016 Northern Franchise Agreement were specifed by the DfT. These assumed that the extra capacity through the Oxford Road corridor would be available for the December 2019 timetable change, enabling a third hourly Chord service.

At the time the TWAO landed on the SoS's desk for approval, the project appeared to be on schedule for delivery in 2018. It was not until January 2017 that Mark Carne said that Network Rail would have to look again at the cost--benefit ratio, separately from the Ordsall Chord.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Grayling needs to go, so does Arriva Northern. and Network Fail needs a good kicking.

Over in Eire, there are those with the same view about Fianna Fail.

 

[squizzler]

I am starting to think Grayling is a genius. Perhaps the appearance of ineptitude has been carefully crafted so that the industry decides it will be getting no guidance from on high and starts to work together amongst itself. As for his refusal to play by the rules of the blame game as regards the May timetable meltdown, passing blame is the safety valve which maintains the status quo, so perhaps the railways will actually learn lessons this time?

I was disappointed when he became a vocal opponent of electrification, but in retrospect even this might have ensured that electrification entered the public debate, and driven industry to respond to the challenge of low cost wiring.

He may be the man we love to hate - like Beeching - but on balance I think he will leave the railways in a more resilient state than before.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Interesting viewpoint - certainly one I had not thought of.

 

[tbtc]

I am starting to think Grayling is a genius. Perhaps the appearance of ineptitude has been carefully crafted so that the industry decides it will be getting no guidance from on high and starts to work together amongst itself. As for his refusal to play by the rules of the blame game as regards the May timetable meltdown, passing blame is the safety valve which maintains the status quo, so perhaps the railways will actually learn lessons this time?

I was disappointed when he became a vocal opponent of electrification, but in retrospect even this might have ensured that electrification entered the public debate, and driven industry to respond to the challenge of low cost wiring.

He may be the man we love to hate - like Beeching - but on balance I think he will leave the railways in a more resilient state than before.

Interesting ideas...

The industry certainly needs a "wake up call".

It's been getting away with increasing it's bills (staff wages, infrastructure costs, new trains etc) by way above inflation for years, building up huge debts (£50bn for Network Rail?), unable to deliver the kind of improvements that it promised, no proper strategy to deal with the 1 January 2020 accessibility deadline, soaking up bigger subsidies each year...

...but it's been getting away with this because passenger numbers continue to go up so nobody has needed to ask too many difficult questions. Maybe some of the increase in passenger numbers was due to the brilliance of the rail industry, maybe some of the increase in passenger numbers was due to changes in society (e.g. people regularly commute distances of fifty miles a day), but the numbers were growing year on year.

We could get away with ridiculous over-spends, we could massage away inconvenient truths like the procurement of the 800/801s, because we were part of a rising tide. It might take longer and cost more to electrify a mile of the GWML than for BR to do several miles, but nobody was asking awkward questions so we got away with it.

Now, passenger numbers may be plateauing (due to changes in society, due to regular strikes putting people off, due to the railway becoming less reliable as we try to cram more and more trains onto Victorian infrastructure, due to people not accepting RPI increases each year).

So something is going to have to be done - the Government aren't going to keep writing the blank cheques forever if we can't hide behind increases in passenger numbers. If the Government are pulling the open-ended funding for "electrification at all costs" then (as you say) we have to adapt - either find a cheaper way of doing things (remember when "Paisley Canal-style" was the future?) or accept things like bi-modes.

I'm reminded of the tale of Arsene Wenger (former Arsenal manager) standing in the dressing room at half time, his team losing at that stage in the match, and instead of shouting at the players, saying nothing, leaving them to work out what to do themselves.

Put it this way, blaming one person and demanding a resignation (whether Grayling, someone at Network Rail, someone at the DfT) would make for some cheap headlines for a couple of days but we need some structural changes, we need some deeper reform, we need to change - Grayling leaving his post wouldn't actually solve anything.

 

[infobleep]

Interesting ideas...

The industry certainly needs a "wake up call".

It's been getting away with increasing it's bills (staff wages, infrastructure costs, new trains etc) by way above inflation for years, building up huge debts (£50bn for Network Rail?), unable to deliver the kind of improvements that it promised, no proper strategy to deal with the 1 January 2020 accessibility deadline, soaking up bigger subsidies each year...

...but it's been getting away with this because passenger numbers continue to go up so nobody has needed to ask too many difficult questions. Maybe some of the increase in passenger numbers was due to the brilliance of the rail industry, maybe some of the increase in passenger numbers was due to changes in society (e.g. people regularly commute distances of fifty miles a day), but the numbers were growing year on year.

We could get away with ridiculous over-spends, we could massage away inconvenient truths like the procurement of the 800/801s, because we were part of a rising tide. It might take longer and cost more to electrify a mile of the GWML than for BR to do several miles, but nobody was asking awkward questions so we got away with it.

Now, passenger numbers may be plateauing (due to changes in society, due to regular strikes putting people off, due to the railway becoming less reliable as we try to cram more and more trains onto Victorian infrastructure, due to people not accepting RPI increases each year).

So something is going to have to be done - the Government aren't going to keep writing the blank cheques forever if we can't hide behind increases in passenger numbers. If the Government are pulling the open-ended funding for "electrification at all costs" then (as you say) we have to adapt - either find a cheaper way of doing things (remember when "Paisley Canal-style" was the future?) or accept things like bi-modes.

I'm reminded of the tale of Arsene Wenger (former Arsenal manager) standing in the dressing room at half time, his team losing at that stage in the match, and instead of shouting at the players, saying nothing, leaving them to work out what to do themselves.

Put it this way, blaming one person and demanding a resignation (whether Grayling, someone at Network Rail, someone at the DfT) would make for some cheap headlines for a couple of days but we need some structural changes, we need some deeper reform, we need to change - Grayling leaving his post wouldn't actually solve anything.

Will Grayling staying in his post resolve anything? In other words, sacked or not, will it resolve anything?

 

[Bodiddly]

Will Grayling staying in his post resolve anything? In other words, sacked or not, will it resolve anything?

Probably not but sacking the incompetent minister might make it an easier task to repair some of the damage caused by him and his department. He needs to go, now.

 

[dviner]

Probably not but sacking the incompetent minister might make it an easier task to repair some of the damage caused by him and his department. He needs to go, now.

If you sack a minister, they just take a pay cut.

 

[HH]

Perhaps Grayling is being set up as a scapegoat, so a replacement is able to put through a bundle of changes? Might the timing of the latest "investigation" be more than simple happenstance? Tune in next week for the latest episode of "Rail - the Soap".

 

[Railwaysceptic]

The industry certainly needs a "wake up call".

It's been getting away with increasing it's bills (staff wages, infrastructure costs, new trains etc) by way above inflation for years, building up huge debts (£50bn for Network Rail?), unable to deliver the kind of improvements that it promised, no proper strategy to deal with the 1 January 2020 accessibility deadline, soaking up bigger subsidies each year...

...but it's been getting away with this because passenger numbers continue to go up so nobody has needed to ask too many difficult questions. Maybe some of the increase in passenger numbers was due to the brilliance of the rail industry, maybe some of the increase in passenger numbers was due to changes in society (e.g. people regularly commute distances of fifty miles a day), but the numbers were growing year on year.

We could get away with ridiculous over-spends, we could massage away inconvenient truths like the procurement of the 800/801s, because we were part of a rising tide. It might take longer and cost more to electrify a mile of the GWML than for BR to do several miles, but nobody was asking awkward questions so we got away with it.

Well said, sir. I agree completely. I wish more people did.

 

[pt_mad]

Are they realistically going to start doing anything which combines track and train before this review has concluded and it's findings analysed?

Seems doubtful especially if XC is too risky to refranchise because of the troubles then combining track and train within a franchise could be deemed even more risky than that.