• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Labour's 1992 General Election Manifesto

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sad Sprinter

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2017
Messages
2,612
Location
Way on down South London town
I was looking at Labour's election manifesto for that year and came across a few interesting things:

Firstly, under "Action for Industry", they state they would "allow British Rail to proceed with a leasing scheme of 188 new Networker trains on the North Kent line". Now the North Kent Line is the line via Gravesend, which would of had class 465s ordered for them in 1989. So what were they talking about exactly? Why single out just the North Kent Line and not the entire Kent Link/Kent Coast system?

Secondly, under "We will invest in modern transport" they mention a plan to build "high-speed rail network which will eventually link every region to the Channel Tunnel". Does this mean Labour would have built a nationwide high-speed railway, or connect HS1 to existing BR tracks? Which hardly seems revolutionary...

 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
21,249
I was looking at Labour's election manifesto for that year and came across a few interesting things:

Firstly, under "Action for Industry", they state they would "allow British Rail to proceed with a leasing scheme of 188 new Networker trains on the North Kent line". Now the North Kent Line is the line via Gravesend, which would of had class 465s ordered for them in 1989. So what were they talking about exactly? Why single out just the North Kent Line and not the entire Kent Link/Kent Coast system?

Secondly, under "We will invest in modern transport" they mention a plan to build "high-speed rail network which will eventually link every region to the Channel Tunnel". Does this mean Labour would have built a nationwide high-speed railway, or connect HS1 to existing BR tracks? Which hardly seems revolutionary...


This could have meant class 471s for the line to Ramsgate which were certainly on the NSE shopping list at that time - it is entirely feasible that North Kent Line refers to the route through Bromley South to Ramsgate and Dover in this context rather than the technically correct North Kent Line through Gravesend.
 

Sad Sprinter

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2017
Messages
2,612
Location
Way on down South London town
This could have meant class 471s for the line to Ramsgate which were certainly on the NSE shopping list at that time - it is entirely feasible that North Kent Line refers to the route through Bromley South to Ramsgate and Dover in this context rather than the technically correct North Kent Line through Gravesend.

Were these trains not intended for the Hastings and Tonbridge routes?
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
21,249
Were these trains not intended for the Hastings and Tonbridge routes?

As in why put 'North Kent' if the new stock was also going on the Tonbridge and Hastings routes? While 188 units is pretty close to the number of 465/466s (190), the number of CEP/CIG/VEP units must have been close to it as well with 121 CEPs at that time and a large fleet of VEPs.

The replacement of the CEP fleet was obviously the priority but clearly 471s would have replaced all of the slam door fleet.

The 365s when they came were predominately used via Bromley South and I think the first 375s went there too.

I do recall that John Prescott appeared on many documentaries in the early 1990s suggesting that British Rail be allowed to lease trains - it was very much a recurring theme in his interviews.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
21,249
Indeed leasing trains, North Kent and Kent Coast are all mentioned in this parliamentary debate


The one other point about Kent Link Networkers is that the fleet probably was short of what it could ultimately could have been if 12-car operation had happened. I don't think it was 188 units short though.
 
Last edited:

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
21,077
Location
Mold, Clwyd
Fancy that, a left-wing Labour MP (and later Transport Minister and Deputy PM) championing private ownership of rolling stock (which is what leasing really means).

I can't remember when the 365s were ordered/leased, but it might have been after 1992 and therefore the subject of the manifesto item.
Don't forget non-railway people have a habit of referring to "trains" when they mean "carriages".
It might only have meant 188 carriages or 47x4-car trains, close to what the 365 fleet became (41x4-car), which is what the leasing funds made available would buy.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
21,249
Fancy that, a left-wing Labour MP (and later Transport Minister and Deputy PM) championing private ownership of rolling stock (which is what leasing really means).

I can't remember when the 365s were ordered/leased, but it might have been after 1992 and therefore the subject of the manifesto item.
Don't forget non-railway people have a habit of referring to "trains" when they mean "carriages".
It might only have meant 188 carriages or 47x4-car trains, close to what the 365 fleet became (41x4-car), which is what the leasing funds made available would buy.


Ah, that makes sense - 188 carriages corresponds to the order of 47 465/1s which was not part of the intial order in 1989.

18 May 1992 vol 208 cc6-76

§6. Mr. Jacques Arnold
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on progress being made with the introduction of Networker 465 rolling stock on the north Kent line.

§Mr. Freeman
I understand that nearly all the infrastructure works have been completed and that the first of the new trains will enter service during the summer. Last month Network SouthEast ordered a further 188 Networkers to complete the replacement of the Kent link rolling stock.

The general election was on 9 April 1992 so the order followed that without recourse to leasing. For "North Kent Line", read all of the "Kent Link" network.

365s were post 1992 election.
 
Last edited:

Sad Sprinter

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2017
Messages
2,612
Location
Way on down South London town
I'm confused, why was there a follow on order for 465s in 1992 anyway? Were these for the extra units for 12 car services?

Also, was there any movement on leasing for the class 471s and class 381s?
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
21,249
I'm confused, why was there a follow on order for 465s in 1992 anyway? Were these for the extra units for 12 car services?

Also, was there any movement on leasing for the class 471s and class 381s?

No, the 465/1s were simply to complete what was needed for the replacement of the final EPBs on existing 6/8/10-car operation.

This debate from the House of Lords indicates that there was "no money" for these final 188 Networker coaches that were needed simply to see off the EPBs.


Regarding investment in Network SouthEast, which itself is up 70 per cent. over the past five years, BR envisages £900 million being available from the public service obligation grant over the three years commencing April 1992. Of this, £600 million is already accounted for by committed schemes and the remaining £300 million will principally have to cover essential infrastructure and safety renewals. No money will be available for the Kent coast networkers or for new trains on the Southend line. Nor can the next tranche —188 coaches—of the 465s proceed, despite authorisation by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport. The money required—some £150 million—is, and I quote, "not available". Previous tenders have expired and, therefore, the whole process of inviting new tenders has had, again, to get underway. In that respect, although he did not specifically mention it, I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Clinton-Davis: what a waste of public money!

This is from 1990

19 November 1990
Volume 181

Mr. Dunn

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on his policy with regard to the supply of the new Networker rolling stock for use on commuter lines serving north-west Kent; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Freeman

I fully support Network SouthEast's programme of investment in the Kent Link lines. A total of 400 Networker trains were approved in August 1989 at a cost of over £290 million with approval for a further 276 in principle. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has endorsed the 12-car Networker strategy for Kent Link routes. Infrastructure improvements at a cost of over £120 million are going ahead and more rolling stock is likely to be ordered. I understand that the first class 465 Networker is due for delivery to Kent Link in September 1991.

400 carriages for 100 4-car trains
86 carriages for 43 2-car trains
188 carriages for 47 4-car trains
total 674 carriages but no "growth build". Those last 188 appear to have taken 2 years to get from approval in principle to full approval. The 466s were approved on 13 May 1991.

British Rail Investments
HC Deb 14 May 1991 vol 191 c116W116W
§Mr. Adley To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will list all British Rail current investments approved by his Department which are being delayed or deferred due to falling British Rail revenue.
§Mr. Freeman The timing and implementation of investment schemes are matters for British Rail within the overall funds available to the board. But I am not aware of any schemes that we have previously approved which are currently being delayed for financial reasons.
§Mr. Speed To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will state the number of investment proposals over £100,000 submitted to him by British Rail which await decision; and if he will give the date of submission of each proposal.
§Mr. Freeman [holding answer 13 May 1991]: In general, only certain British Rail investment projects costing over £10 million require specific approval of the Secretary of State. We have just approved 86 class 466 Networker electric vehicles for south-east London and north-west Kent services. We ate currently considering proposals for a further 188 class 465 Networkers and for Ashford international station, both originally submitted in January, in the light of subsequent information from British Rail.

471s and 381s never got anywhere beyond being a Network South East plan by the looks of things but questions were being asked in 1990 about approval for them.
18 October 1990
Volume 177

Sir John Stanley
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether he has taken any decisions that will result in the delayed introduction of the new networker trains to serve the Kent coast routes; and whether he will make a statement.

Mr. Freeman
[holding answer 17 October 1990]: Decisions on the provision of external finance for British Rail for the three years to 31 March 1994 will be announced at the time of the autumn statement. It is for British Rail to decide its investment priorities in the light of the external and internal funds available to it; and it will be updating its plans in due course.


Network SouthEast
HC Deb 19 February 1991 vol 186 c103W103W

§Mr. Speed To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the current constraints on investment in respect of the investment proposals by British Rail to introduce the Networker 471 train on Kent coast lines in Network SouthEast.
§Mr. Freeman Proposals for the introduction of class 471 Networkers on Kent coast routes are still being assessed by British Rail and my Department has not yet received a detailed investment submission. I understand that British Rail is examining whether the project might be brought forward in the light of other investment priorities and its overall financial situation.

By October 1991, it was expected that Class 471s would arrive by 1995 but clearly that fell by the wayside.
 
Last edited:

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
11,169
"Allow to proceed" could well imply something already ordered. My hunch, given the context, was that it was originally written by the union representing the workforce at the manufacturing plant at York, as opposed to their operation.

TfL, and its predecessors, are past masters at re-announcing train orders as if they have done a new order, from well before original order to well after delivery is complete. I lost count of how many years were covered by them re-announcing the Central Line fleet from the 1990s as if they were doing something new, especially at times of fare rises.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
21,249
Secondly, under "We will invest in modern transport" they mention a plan to build "high-speed rail network which will eventually link every region to the Channel Tunnel". Does this mean Labour would have built a nationwide high-speed railway, or connect HS1 to existing BR tracks? Which hardly seems revolutionary...

I suspect this was just to link the existing lines to the Channel Tunnel Rail Link. As we know, there were "North of London" Eurostars which were ordered against the concept of through running from Glasgow / Manchester / Leeds to Paris that never came to fruition. Again, looking at the questions and debates in Parliament is illustrative of what was being considered.


Channel Tunnel
HC Deb 24 April 1991 vol 189

§Mr. Darling To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when direct passenger trains will start to run through the channel tunnel(a) from London to Paris, (b) from Leeds to Paris and (c) from Edinburgh to Paris.

§Mr. Freeman Day services from London to Paris will commence when the tunnel opens. Negotiations are continuing between British Rail and the manufacturers to overcome technical difficulties relating to the day trains for direct services from cities north of London. No timetable for the delivery of these trains has yet been agreed, but they are unlikely to enter service before 1994. British Rail still plans to run night services both from London and direct from cities north of London when the tunnel opens.
 

Helvellyn

Established Member
Joined
28 Aug 2009
Messages
2,251
Moves towards privatisation effectively killed off new train orders under BR after the 1992 election, not helped by the impact of Black Wednesday on the economy. "Lost" orders included:
  • 157 DMUs for Strathclyde PTE (would have replaced the refurbished 101s, plus possibly have allowed cascade of the 12 PTE funded 156s);
  • 323 EMUs for West Yorkshire PTE (facelifted 308s were introduced as a temporary measure but remained until the 333s were ordered by Northern Spirit);
  • 471s for Kent Coast services replacing 4-CEPs/4-VEPs with a common fleet (BR envisioned 200 units in publicity, e.g. when the mock-up was displayed).
The last BR order as such was for the 41 Class 365 Networker Express units, which ABB proposed when it became clear that privatisation meant the 471 project was effectively dead. That won funding from the Department of Transport against a competing bid from InterCity for 16 additional Class 91s and Mark 4 Pullman sets for use on the West Coast (primarily Manchester/Liverpool services). With no orders after the 365 fleet was delivered that finished off York works, which is why Derby ended up building the TurboStar/ElectroStar family.
 

Sad Sprinter

Established Member
Joined
5 Jun 2017
Messages
2,612
Location
Way on down South London town
Any idea what would have replaced the Sussex Coast 4VEPs/CIGs? More 471s or something else?

I have a train magazine that has an illustration of something called a class 481 but gives no description of what it was for.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
21,249
Any idea what would have replaced the Sussex Coast 4VEPs/CIGs? More 471s or something else?

I have a train magazine that has an illustration of something called a class 481 but gives no description of what it was for.

Network South East basically had plans to just keep on building Networkers throughout the 1990s.

From https://www.londonreconnections.com/2016/extending-bakerloo-not-transport/

GRAHAM H
30 January 2016 at 20:40
@Anonymously of 2314 on 27/1 – I am sorry not to have replied to your query about NSE’s plans for 12 car working, but I wanted to check two documents not in the public domain (but in my archives over the stairwell…). The (one and only) NSE Business Plan for the 15 years after 1992/93 assumed that growth (which was assumed to recover after the 1989-91 blip) would be met by cascading stock from the CrossRail and TLK projects, with a further continuing programme of cl 371 (the supposed TLK units). There was no mention then of 12 car sets specifically, nor of infrastructure, but the plan wasn’t detailed and I don’t have the underlying analyses any more.

However, there was a further document “Future Rail – the London Agenda” * which contained much more detail and which set out NSE’s actual plans. For Kent Link (the inners), we intended to buy another 356 cl465s to make up 10 and 12 car sets, and for the outers, another 900 cl 471 – later renamed 371s for the obvious reason – vehicles up to 2000, with the intention of making all the outers 12s. (At the time,we had authorisation for only 486 cl465s.) There was an associated programme of infrastructure investment totalling about £400m at 110 locations for station improvements (unclear at this distance in time how many of these were in Kent -probably most). In those days, platform lengthening was somewhat cheaper than it is now!

*The London Agenda was a deliberately subversive bidding document cooked up by Chris Green and his team (egged on by the Chairman**) which set out as plainly as we could the impact of cuts in funding on quality. DTp were aghast – as we intended – and ordered all copies to be destroyed. Some of us were less than diligent,however.

** The Chairman took a particularly active role in devising some of the more telling graphics as I recall.

TIMBEAU
30 January 2016 at 21:13
@Graham H
“we intended to buy another 356 cl465s to make up 10 and 12 car sets, and for the outers, another 900 cl 471

That’s vehicles, presumably. (so 89 class 465 units and 225 class 371/471).

“At the time,we had authorisation for only 486 cl465 (vehicles ”

That must include some 466s, unless you had authorisation for half a unit.

That compares with the number of new units that have actually appeared on Kent Rail

Total classes 465/466: 147×4 + 43×2 = 508+86 = 594 So the top up order was 108.

In addition there were Class 376 : 36 x 5 = 180. Total 288 v the 356 you had aspired to, a 20% shortfall. Thgere is also the odd Thameslink class 319 which gets through to Sevenoaks, but certainly nowhere near 68 units are on SE metals at any one time

Class 375 102×4 + 10×3 = 438: less than 50% of the 900 class 371s you aspired to.

Even if you include the class 395 Javelins (39×6 = 236) – which were not even on the drawing board by your target date of 2000 – this still only gets you to 75%.

It is evident that for all the bragging by the operators and politicians about how much has been invested in new trains since the days of NSE, it actually falls far short of these aspirations.

GRAHAM H
30 January 2016 at 22:35
@timbeau -I am most grateful for you teasing out the figures in relation to the actual deliveries (I can’t explain the half unit but given that we were looking up to 8 years ahead, I’m sure no one would swear to the precise mix of 10s and 12s needed- no work had been done on a revised timetable at that stage (and TLK still had its original service pattern). As you say,there is still a gross shortfall…

Basically, the plan was to knock out about 200 vehicles a year for the foreseeable future, with the 465/471 as the inital choice. Dis aliter visum.

NGH
31 January 2016 at 22:47
Re Graham H, Timbeau, Anonymously,
Having a look at the excellent NSE history website chronology pages is worth while:
http://www.nsers.org/chronology.html
Kent Link aka Southeastern suffered a massive loss in patronage in the recession 1989 onwards (20% fall on NSE from 1988 to 1992) which provided justification for far fewer cars and units to be replace the older rolling stock (even after assumptions about networkers having more official standing room so a 10 car networker would have the same theoretical capacity as 12 car EPB. (the 465 end cars being 1.5m longer and intermediate cars 0.6m longer than EPB cars helping add capacity)

Very selected excerpts:
31 August 1989 – Kent Link total route modernisation major announcements by Transport Secretary Cecil Parkinson during a visit to London Charing Cross and London Bridge stations:
-Networker 4-car EMU £257m orders placed today for 100 units – 50 each from BREL York (Class 465/0 – 465001-50) and GEC-Alstom (Class 465/2 – 465201-50) – delivery from September and October 1991, respectively;
-Networker EMU approval in principle given for a further 276 vehicles for Kent Link: these total 676 of the 842 vehicles required for Kent Link to replace EPB EMUs ;
-£200m route infrastructure works for 12-car Networkers which will provide 16% increased seating capacity over present 10-car EPB formations: covers 137 route miles and consists of – platform lengthening at 63 stations, Driver-only operation, power supply upgrade, resignalling, gauge clearance, layout remodelling including London Cannon Street, Charing Cross, London Bridge and Orpington, new train maintenance depot at Slade Green and 16 stabling sidings at Grove Park with new staff accommodation..

Note: Due to Government capital spending restrictions in the early-1990s recession, route infrastructure works are deferred two years in final completion to 1996
So first 400 ordered 276 authorised…

30 April 1990 – Kent Link Networker Total Route Modernisation – Transport Secretary Cecil Parkinson gives authority in principle to BR Chairman Sir Bob Reid for platform lengthening at 63 stations to accommodate 12-car Class 465s and for 276 further vehicles for Kent Link

1 November 1990 – DoT ‘Transport Statistics for London’ review reports commuting down 15,000 in 1989 compared to 1988 – although still 21% up on 1982 for NSE.

13 May 1991 – Class 466 ‘Networker’ 43 2-car EMUs authorised (466001-43); contract subsequently awarded to Metro-Cammell

31 March 1992 – Class 465/1 Networker 47 4-car EMUs authorised (465151-97); 10 April 1992 announced that contract awarded to BREL York.

So 274 ordered vs the 276 authorised i.e. 1 more 2 car 466 and 1 less 4 car then originally envisaged? Hence the magic loss of 2 cars. and 166 /168 short of the original number required to replace the EPBs. Graham H’s numbers put the short fall at just 86 cars (or the difference of all the 2 car units being 4 car instead!)

12 November 1992 – £150m new grant for train leasing announced in Chancellor of the Exchequer’s Autumn Statement; ultimately used to procure new Class 465/3 (later 365) ‘Networker Express’ EMUs (see 13 October 1993).
41 365s delivered delivered = 164 cars. Only 4 cars short of the original number, the first 16x 365 had 3rd rail equipment fitted.

One possible permutation for the original order works out at extending/converting all 2 car units to 4car and an additional 20x 4 car units to get to the original total which suggest what the plan was as it can’t have been all new 4 car units… (only 1 sensible permutation).

Re timbeau,

But the SE Metro services lost 34 465s to outer services (465/2 becoming /9s) so there was still a net loss on the introduction of the 376s! 36 x 376s = 180 cars a decade later and transferring 34x 4car 465 to medium distance services =136 cars, so net +44 cars on suburban still a long way short. Thus reducing the size of 375 order…

There are many peak 395 formation that are 6 car so it keeps happening!

Factoring in the long distance 465/9 use than makes 810 in service out of 900 or 90%.

The extra stock require for all javelin services to be 2 unit /12 car and 12 car south of Tunbridge Wells post power supply upgrade and the 10 3 car units would probably account for something like the last 10%…

As always the longer distance users always seem to fair better.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top