MML Electrification: progress updates

[B&I]

It has nothing to do with political point scoring. Grayling is a weak minister who happens to be a Tory. What he and you haven't grasped is that bimodes are much more expensive to build, maintain and operate than straight electrics and as a result fares will be higher than they need be.
To a certain point we can control the cost of electricity but have no control over diesel prices as it is a global commodity.
Disregarding diesel particulates and the effect that has on pulmonary and cardiac disease, the hundreds of thousands of tons of greenhouse gasses produced by bimodes on the MML north of Kettering completely flies in the face of the agreement Britain made at the Paris Summit to reduce pollution and greenhouse gases that causes global warming.

Going on his performance at Justice, Grayling either doesn't understand these issues, or does understand them but has grasped on to the bi-modes as a way of saving face among the easily impressed.

In fairness to him, though, I doubt he is the only enthusiast for this idea. The DfT's antipathy to electrification is long-standing and well-known. The bi-modes are just the latest iteration of the 'bionic duckweed'-type excuses they have used over time to avoid electrifying.

 

[Kettledrum]

Surely this is the moment to demonstrate competence, jump back down the cost curve and let Grayling have his moment to say, "Only under a Conservative Government does the public sector control its costs. Now, with a general election looming, it's time to announce yet again that we will electrify to these marginal seats in the East Midlands."

There are lots of marginal seats in the east midlands and electrification is a very visible way of saying "look how much we are investing in your region". The expenditure benefits lots of constituencies at the same time. The political problem is that electrification has been promised before and the promises broken. I don't think the east midlands voters will fall for it again. Cameron and Osborne played to the electorate by promising lots of rail investment in East West Rail, electric spine, Northern powerhouse and MML. Grayling either doesn't believe there will be any electoral consequences of cancelling the MML or hasn't even thought about it. I think he's very wrong, but time will tell.

 

[A0wen]

There are lots of marginal seats in the east midlands and electrification is a very visible way of saying "look how much we are investing in your region". The expenditure benefits lots of constituencies at the same time. The political problem is that electrification has been promised before and the promises broken. I don't think the east midlands voters will fall for it again. Cameron and Osborne played to the electorate by promising lots of rail investment in East West Rail, electric spine, Northern powerhouse and MML. Grayling either doesn't believe there will be any electoral consequences of cancelling the MML or hasn't even thought about it. I think he's very wrong, but time will tell.

Or he's working on the basis a new fleet of trains will be welcomed by the day to day passengers.

Unlike enthusiasts, passengers seem to prefer newer stock to older stock - and if there are other route upgrades e.g. signalling, dealing with some speed restrictions which result in generally better services, you may find the 'man in the street' isn't that bothered by electrification.

 

[Chester1]

Or he's working on the basis a new fleet of trains will be welcomed by the day to day passengers.

Unlike enthusiasts, passengers seem to prefer newer stock to older stock - and if there are other route upgrades e.g. signalling, dealing with some speed restrictions which result in generally better services, you may find the 'man in the street' isn't that bothered by electrification.

Also transport is not an important consideration for the average voter compared with the economy, health, education and security. New bi modes, refurbished Meridians and refurbished or new EMUs for Corby will be satisfy most rail users.

 

[Kettledrum]

Or he's working on the basis a new fleet of trains will be welcomed by the day to day passengers.

Unlike enthusiasts, passengers seem to prefer newer stock to older stock - and if there are other route upgrades e.g. signalling, dealing with some speed restrictions which result in generally better services, you may find the 'man in the street' isn't that bothered by electrification.

maybe, or maybe not. Time will tell, but press coverage hasn't been very supportive in the east midlands so far. The consultation on the new franchise seemed to offer less - some stops and services cut from Melton, Oakham, Bedford, Luton and lack of direct services from some of these to Derby, Nottingham, Leicester and Sheffield. So why will a fleet of new bi-modes and service reductions be welcomed, when the all the communities on the network had previously been promised quieter, faster, more reliable electric trains? Although electric wires may look obtrusive, they are a very permanent reminder of the investment along the whole route. My view is that shiney trains don't have the same impact.

 

[A0wen]

maybe, or maybe not. Time will tell, but press coverage hasn't been very supportive in the east midlands so far. The consultation on the new franchise seemed to offer less - some stops and services cut from Melton, Oakham, Bedford, Luton and lack of direct services from some of these to Derby, Nottingham, Leicester and Sheffield. So why will a fleet of new bi-modes and service reductions be welcomed, when the all the communities on the network had previously been promised quieter, faster, more reliable electric trains? Although electric wires may look obtrusive, they are a very permanent reminder of the investment along the whole route. My view is that shiney trains don't have the same impact.

Well let's deal with each of those in turn, because there's several factors.

Oakham and Melton started to get a couple of direct services, primarily to retain route knowledge as the Manton route is EMT's diversion when there's engineering between Kettering & Leicester. Paradoxically, the electrification to Corby makes these services less viable because the Corby's will become a self-contained diagram rather than part of the Nottingham / Sheffield diagrams.

I suspect there *may* be a couple of services retained via Manton because route knowledge needs to be maintained, but they've never been planned as for development.

Bedford & Luton: as discussed many times, the key flow for them is London. The challenge is EMT's services have been used by huge numbers from Luton or Bedford, which causes overcrowding for people travelling in from further afield. If you look at the other lines into London, I can't think of one which has two stops quite so close to London. The ECML has Stevenage (about the same distance as Luton) or Peterborough (much further than Bedford), the WCML only really has MKC now - Watford Junction having lost most of its Inter City services. After that it's Rugby - which is about as far out as Kettering.

Luton Airport does justify some form of link from the East Midlands for practical purposes, but the reality is Bedford probably doesn't - in that sense it's likely to see the same fate as places like Northampton or Huntingdon - i.e. suburban based services with the interchange onto long distance being further out. Kettering is likely to be the beneficiary, but that's the luck of geography as it's where the lines to Corby & Leicester diverge and there it will be about maintaining the link there.

A good number of the journey time improvements could be achieved with infrastructure works - Market Harborough is already planned to be dealt with - there are other pinch points which can be improved. Electrics offer better acceleration, which due to the current EMT stopping pattern is part of the problem. If fewer Leicester and beyond services are stopping at Luton, Bedford and Wellingborough - that will shave several minutes from the overall journey time without the need to electrify.

If Luton, Bedford and Wellingborough are getting a half-hourly 2+2 seated 8 car EMU, the chances of getting a seat are much increased. The journey time is unlikely to be any different to that offered by a Meridian as an EMU will accelerate more quickly - offsetting the lower 100mph top speed. Yes, they may lose connectivity to Leicester and beyond, but if the timetabling is sensible i.e. a 5 minute wait at Kettering, the impact will be minimal.

 

[richieb1971]

Do passengers really educate themselves on the benefits of what trains they will be using in 5 years time?

I remember a news reel on East Anglia news a few years ago where some guy didn't realize the trains were extended to 12 carriages. All he knew was that suddenly there was more seats available

 

[RichmondCommu]

Do passengers really educate themselves on the benefits of what trains they will be using in 5 years time?

I remember a news reel on East Anglia news a few years ago where some guy didn't realize the trains were extended to 12 carriages. All he knew was that suddenly there was more seats available

What's so funny about that? He has no reason to care as to how those extra seats were added. Perhaps he just thought that the carriages were longer?

 

[RichmondCommu]

Also transport is not an important consideration for the average voter compared with the economy, health, education and security. New bi modes, refurbished Meridians and refurbished or new EMUs for Corby will be satisfy most rail users.

I concur. The majority of voters very rarely use the train because it's simply too expensive. Electric trains won't solve that problem.

 

[mallard]

Electric trains won't solve that problem.

Cost is by far the best arguement for electric trains (with environmental impact a close second)! The fuel savings alone would pay for the infrastructure on a line like the MML within a decade. The entire business case for the ECML wiring was based around operating costs and while infrastructure costs have increased, so have fuel costs.

 

[Mikey C]

I imagine in the East Midlands, trains are less of an electoral issue than in the SE of England, where an awful lot of people will commute in to London by train or have friends/relatives that do so.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Cost is by far the best arguement for electric trains (with environmental impact a close second)! The fuel savings alone would pay for the infrastructure on a line like the MML within a decade. The entire business case for the ECML wiring was based around operating costs and while infrastructure costs have increased, so have fuel costs.

Do you honestly think those savings will be passed on to the passenger?

 

[jyte]

Do you honestly think those savings will be passed on to the passenger?

The savings almost certainly would not not be, but the reduction in an increase in costs might be...if you see where I'm going.

 

[HowardGWR]

The savings almost certainly would not not be, but the reduction in an increase in costs might be...if you see where I'm going.

I presume where you are going is that BCRs for public projects take no account of who receives benefits or pays less costs, merely the size of them.

 

[paul1609]

Well actually they do.

And projects in each of those fields are regularly cancelled or deferred because of previous over-runs. The fact you don't know about them doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

I think that

It has nothing to do with political point scoring. Grayling is a weak minister who happens to be a Tory. What he and you haven't grasped is that bimodes are much more expensive to build, maintain and operate than straight electrics and as a result fares will be higher than they need be.
To a certain point we can control the cost of electricity but have no control over diesel prices as it is a global commodity.
Disregarding diesel particulates and the effect that has on pulmonary and cardiac disease, the hundreds of thousands of tons of greenhouse gasses produced by bimodes on the MML north of Kettering completely flies in the face of the agreement Britain made at the Paris Summit to reduce pollution and greenhouse gases that causes global warming.

You probably should disregard Diesel particulates in terms of Bi modes as the Class 800 have Stage IIIb compliant engines. Like a Cat 6 road vehicle engine particulates are all but eliminated.

 

[Kettledrum]

Well let's deal with each of those in turn, because there's several factors.

Oakham and Melton started to get a couple of direct services, primarily to retain route knowledge as the Manton route is EMT's diversion when there's engineering between Kettering & Leicester. Paradoxically, the electrification to Corby makes these services less viable because the Corby's will become a self-contained diagram rather than part of the Nottingham / Sheffield diagrams.

I suspect there *may* be a couple of services retained via Manton because route knowledge needs to be maintained, but they've never been planned as for development.

Bedford & Luton: as discussed many times, the key flow for them is London. The challenge is EMT's services have been used by huge numbers from Luton or Bedford, which causes overcrowding for people travelling in from further afield. If you look at the other lines into London, I can't think of one which has two stops quite so close to London. The ECML has Stevenage (about the same distance as Luton) or Peterborough (much further than Bedford), the WCML only really has MKC now - Watford Junction having lost most of its Inter City services. After that it's Rugby - which is about as far out as Kettering.

Luton Airport does justify some form of link from the East Midlands for practical purposes, but the reality is Bedford probably doesn't - in that sense it's likely to see the same fate as places like Northampton or Huntingdon - i.e. suburban based services with the interchange onto long distance being further out. Kettering is likely to be the beneficiary, but that's the luck of geography as it's where the lines to Corby & Leicester diverge and there it will be about maintaining the link there.

A good number of the journey time improvements could be achieved with infrastructure works - Market Harborough is already planned to be dealt with - there are other pinch points which can be improved. Electrics offer better acceleration, which due to the current EMT stopping pattern is part of the problem. If fewer Leicester and beyond services are stopping at Luton, Bedford and Wellingborough - that will shave several minutes from the overall journey time without the need to electrify.

If Luton, Bedford and Wellingborough are getting a half-hourly 2+2 seated 8 car EMU, the chances of getting a seat are much increased. The journey time is unlikely to be any different to that offered by a Meridian as an EMU will accelerate more quickly - offsetting the lower 100mph top speed. Yes, they may lose connectivity to Leicester and beyond, but if the timetabling is sensible i.e. a 5 minute wait at Kettering, the impact will be minimal.

All of the above is perfectly true, but this level of detailed explanation hasn't come across in the press and is a difficult line to spin in an election campaign.

It's still a solution full of compromises compared with the benefits of a fully modernised and fully electrified MML.
In all these marginal constituencies, the opposition's charge will be "the East Midlands missed out because the government broke the promises on electrification" fullstop. This will be the argument used on all the electors in all the constituencies along the length of the MML. Whether they are commuters or not, it still sends out a headline message about a lack of investment in their region.

 

[Kettledrum]

I imagine in the East Midlands, trains are less of an electoral issue than in the SE of England, where an awful lot of people will commute in to London by train or have friends/relatives that do so.

In the SE of England, there are lots of rail lines, and lots of investment. This is the main and the only railway line for lots of marginal constituencies. Graying has given his political opponents an open goal to shoot at, and of course they will exploit it. On it's own it's not a big single electoral issue, but it will be painted as part of a much bigger picture as evidence that "the government don't care about your region", and "you can't trust the government because they break their promises".

All the technical arguments about whether bi-modes are as good will get lost in the negative headlines. We all read "Grayling cancels MML electrification" and "MML boycots Bedford" and not "Grayling hailed for saving money on MML modernisation"

 

[jyte]

I presume where you are going is that BCRs for public projects take no account of who receives benefits or pays less costs, merely the size of them.

Yes, that's it.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Graying has given his political opponents an open goal to shoot at, and of course they will exploit it. On it's own it's not a big single electoral issue, but it will be painted as part of a much bigger picture as evidence that "the government don't care about your region", and "you can't trust the government because they break their promises".

All the technical arguments about whether bi-modes are as good will get lost in the negative headlines. We all read "Grayling cancels MML electrification" and "MML boycots Bedford" and not "Grayling hailed for saving money on MML modernisation"

This is exactly my belief and fear being a lifelong Conservative voter. The PM needs to grow a set and sack him sooner rather than later

 

[Kettledrum]

This is exactly my belief and fear being a lifelong Conservative voter. The PM needs to grow a set and sack him sooner rather than later

Unless he is embroiled in some sort of financial scandal and forced to resign, I'm afraid that's not going to happen. The prime minister doesn't have that sort of authority at the moment, and without a majority, the government doesn't have much political leeway on anything. Philip Hammond at the Treasury is just as culpable for the cancellation of the MML electrification. They would have got away with it politically if they had "re-phased" the electrification. It was completely cancelling it that will (in my view) come back to bite them.

 

[Mikey C]

In the SE of England, there are lots of rail lines, and lots of investment. This is the main and the only railway line for lots of marginal constituencies. Graying has given his political opponents an open goal to shoot at, and of course they will exploit it. On it's own it's not a big single electoral issue, but it will be painted as part of a much bigger picture as evidence that "the government don't care about your region", and "you can't trust the government because they break their promises".

All the technical arguments about whether bi-modes are as good will get lost in the negative headlines. We all read "Grayling cancels MML electrification" and "MML boycots Bedford" and not "Grayling hailed for saving money on MML modernisation"

I agree that it's electoral suicide by Grayling, but my point is that more people in the SE of England use the trains regularly, commuting into London every day, as opposed to using the train once a week or month.

As for Grayling, there's no reason to assume he'll be sacked, but at some point he'll be reshuffled, as that's what happens to ministers...

 

[Olaf]

Why does railway electrification have to demonstrate that, when (to pluck some random examples) road construction, public sector IT, and defence procurement rarely seem to have to?

They are all subject to the same procurement rules and the same fall-out when they go off-piste which may not seem apparent to the casual observer or those pushing political dogma.

 

[Olaf]

I can see how projects can be delayed ...

Basically you can not spend the same money twice.

If you provide funds to make-up for the no delivery from a prior commitment, you are penalising other projects competing for funding. That does not mean it does not happen - look at all the additional unplanned funding the DfT has had to provide to NR in CP5 just to see it through to end of the Control Period - but at some point you have to cut your losses and postpone the initiative to another date.

Bi-modes will be good enough and to degree are an excessive expenditure in themselves. Perhaps if some people at NT had been replaced with more competent and capable individuals, then the DfT might have relented on completing the electrification.

 

[Olaf]

So, blaming specific politicians for government decisions is a terrible, bad thing which no-one must do, unless it's a Labour poltician I don't like. I am reminded of Alexei Sayle's deathless line:- 'I'm not homophobic, but I one slept with a bloke who was'.

In my professional capacity, I watched Grayling's handiwork when he was Justice Secretary, or 'Lord Chancellor' (a title declined by his predecessor, a QC). Everything he touched in that role turned ro dark brown stuff. He seems to be repeating this performance at Transport. There is sawdust at your local timber yard which would be better at the job than Grayling is.

But you're right, it is unfair to lay all the blame on the shoulders of this one man. We are forgetting the man who, after several years playing at being chancellor, has now gone to play at editing newspapers. Perhaps if he had not called a pointless halt to almost all infrastructure spending in 2010, then pursued economic policies which have left the whole country outside London in recession ever since, these projects would be a bit further on by now.

If you want one man (or woman, or whatever) to blame, you may want to look to whomever made the suggestion to Nick Clegg to ignore the risks and considerations around having the MML Electrification added onto the CP5 work list and equally to whomever within the Government (party structure) of the time that relented, against advice, and allowed it to go ahead.

 

[paul1609]

In the SE of England, there are lots of rail lines, and lots of investment. This is the main and the only railway line for lots of marginal constituencies. Graying has given his political opponents an open goal to shoot at, and of course they will exploit it. On it's own it's not a big single electoral issue, but it will be painted as part of a much bigger picture as evidence that "the government don't care about your region", and "you can't trust the government because they break their promises".

All the technical arguments about whether bi-modes are as good will get lost in the negative headlines. We all read "Grayling cancels MML electrification" and "MML boycots Bedford" and not "Grayling hailed for saving money on MML modernisation"

Out of interest where are these marginal constituencies on the MML? They appear to be shire constituencies with large Con majorities or urban labour heartlands

 

[Olaf]

And, are you suggesting that it's Treasury that are the blocker here, rather than DfT? I can assure you that is not the right way round at all.

Treasury and it's various agencies have oversight of all Government spending; they are the ones with the big pointy stick.

 

[Kettledrum]

Out of interest where are these marginal constituencies on the MML? They appear to be shire constituencies with large Con majorities or urban labour heartlands

The following are seats along or near the MML that could be considered marginal or have changed hands in recent times (with the current party and majority in brackets:

1)Gedling (LAB 11.10%)
2)Derby North (LAB 6.10%)
3)Bedford (LAB 3.60%)
4)Ashfield (LAB 2.90%)
5)Broxtowe (CON 0.50%)
6)Mansfield (CON 0.10%)
7)Corby (CON 2.50%)
8)Derbyshire North East (CON 3.70%)
9)Loughborough (CON 5.90%)
10)Erewash (CON 7.10%)
11)Sherwood (CON 7.70%)
12)Amber Valley (CON 16.10%)
13)Derbyshire South (CON 20.70%)
14)Leicestershire North West (CON 22.80%)

All are straight fights between labour and conservative, and conservatives felt they were very lucky last time with unexpected wins in Corby, Mansfield, Derbyshire NE, and Broxtowe.

 

[A0wen]

The following are seats along or near the MML that could be considered marginal or have changed hands in recent times (with the current party and majority in brackets:

1)Gedling (LAB 11.10%)
2)Derby North (LAB 6.10%)
3)Lincoln (LAB 5.20%)
4)Bedford (LAB 3.60%)
5)Ashfield (LAB 2.90%)
6)Broxtowe (CON 0.50%)
6)Mansfield (CON 0.10%)
7)Corby (CON 2.50%)
8)Derbyshire North East (CON 3.70%)
9)Loughborough (CON 5.90%)
10)Erewash (CON 7.10%)
11)Sherwood (CON 7.70%)
12)Amber Valley (CON 16.10%)
13)Derbyshire South (CON 20.70%)
14)Leicestershire North West (CON 22.80%)

All are straight fights between labour and conservative, and conservatives felt they were very lucky last time with unexpected wins in Corby, Mansfield, Derbyshire NE, and Broxtowe.

I don't think you can count Lincoln in that - it's east of the ECML.....

Yes there is a daily St P / Lincoln service, but if you're looking at connectivity for Lincoln the ECML is far more relevant.

 

[Kettledrum]

I did wonder about Lincoln - only included them because there was a EMT leaving St Pancras for Lincoln last night when I was there, but agree it's best to remove from this list

 

[B&I]

If you want one man (or woman, or whatever) to blame, you may want to look to whomever made the suggestion to Nick Clegg to ignore the risks and considerations around having the MML Electrification added onto the CP5 work list and equally to whomever within the Government (party structure) of the time that relented, against advice, and allowed it to go ahead.

Blame whoever suggested that the project should go ahead in the first place for its eventual cancellation? Interesting logic.