Open access operators have revolutionised Britain’s railway network ever since privatisation, providing competition for franchised services as well as cheaper fares and better performance in some cases. You’d think that open access would be the utopia of train travel, but sadly I don’t think this is the case.
Firstly, the way the application system works combined with limited capacity on the national network makes it very difficult for a potential operator to find a suitable operation. Current rules mean the DfT cannot magic up paths for an open access operator that wants to run trains along a particular route, so they are limited to routes such as London to Hull, Bradford and Sunderland. Additionally, because of the rule on abstraction, existing OAs cannot serve certain stations where a call could greatly improve connectivity. Think of the journey opportunities opened up if Hull Trains and Grand Central were allowed to serve Peterborough for example.
Secondly, what if an OAO goes bust. Many services they operate have seen continuous growth in the years pre-Covid, and if these were to be withdrawn, existing DfT services would become saturated with displaced passengers. We’ve heard all the news about Covid completely collapsing demand for Eurostar, and it’s demise would be even worse as with no replacement, passengers would switch to less environmentally friendly modes of travel. There needs to be some sort of contingency in place that allows the DfT to take over the operations of an OAO if they suddenly go out of business while demand remains high for that route. For Eurostar, this could be a joint venture between GBR and SNCF.
Rather than have the DfT completely take over OAO operations, my proposal would give the government greater regulation over open access in terms of route planning to grant more freedom in return. Under this plan, a potential open access operator could run along any route they wanted, but rather than use their own paths, they would have to use one surrendered by the DfT. For example, if an OAO wanted to run a service from London Waterloo to Weymouth, the government will offer to give up an existing diagram for the open access operator to use, so in effect the DfT is handing over responsibility of a route and it’s revenue to the potential OAO. Once successful, the OAO will be free to operate the route at their own financial risk with their own rolling stock, but must stick to the timetable specified by the DfT or risk having the keys handed back.
Potential OAOs would still be allowed to suggest new routes, but it would become the governments responsibility to adjust existing paths to make room for these. With existing OAOs, the removal of the “must not primarily abstract” rule would allow them to call at additional stations, while the DfT could also run additional services along the route of these, allowing London - Bradford, Hull and Sunderland to become hourly. Or alternatively a different OAO could run these to provide additional competition.
The new system even allows for potential OAOs to take over entire DfT operators if they believe it is profitable. For example, there would be nothing to stop an open-access Virgin Trains requesting to take over all of Avanti’s routes, meaning that if it went ahead, the main intercity operator on the WCML would be entirely open access. There could even be cases where certain stations are only served by OAOs.
It’s a complicated idea and some may say this will remove all competition and risk from the railways, but at the end of the day, Great British Railways will never live up to its name unless they have full control over the national rail network.
Firstly, the way the application system works combined with limited capacity on the national network makes it very difficult for a potential operator to find a suitable operation. Current rules mean the DfT cannot magic up paths for an open access operator that wants to run trains along a particular route, so they are limited to routes such as London to Hull, Bradford and Sunderland. Additionally, because of the rule on abstraction, existing OAs cannot serve certain stations where a call could greatly improve connectivity. Think of the journey opportunities opened up if Hull Trains and Grand Central were allowed to serve Peterborough for example.
Secondly, what if an OAO goes bust. Many services they operate have seen continuous growth in the years pre-Covid, and if these were to be withdrawn, existing DfT services would become saturated with displaced passengers. We’ve heard all the news about Covid completely collapsing demand for Eurostar, and it’s demise would be even worse as with no replacement, passengers would switch to less environmentally friendly modes of travel. There needs to be some sort of contingency in place that allows the DfT to take over the operations of an OAO if they suddenly go out of business while demand remains high for that route. For Eurostar, this could be a joint venture between GBR and SNCF.
Rather than have the DfT completely take over OAO operations, my proposal would give the government greater regulation over open access in terms of route planning to grant more freedom in return. Under this plan, a potential open access operator could run along any route they wanted, but rather than use their own paths, they would have to use one surrendered by the DfT. For example, if an OAO wanted to run a service from London Waterloo to Weymouth, the government will offer to give up an existing diagram for the open access operator to use, so in effect the DfT is handing over responsibility of a route and it’s revenue to the potential OAO. Once successful, the OAO will be free to operate the route at their own financial risk with their own rolling stock, but must stick to the timetable specified by the DfT or risk having the keys handed back.
Potential OAOs would still be allowed to suggest new routes, but it would become the governments responsibility to adjust existing paths to make room for these. With existing OAOs, the removal of the “must not primarily abstract” rule would allow them to call at additional stations, while the DfT could also run additional services along the route of these, allowing London - Bradford, Hull and Sunderland to become hourly. Or alternatively a different OAO could run these to provide additional competition.
The new system even allows for potential OAOs to take over entire DfT operators if they believe it is profitable. For example, there would be nothing to stop an open-access Virgin Trains requesting to take over all of Avanti’s routes, meaning that if it went ahead, the main intercity operator on the WCML would be entirely open access. There could even be cases where certain stations are only served by OAOs.
It’s a complicated idea and some may say this will remove all competition and risk from the railways, but at the end of the day, Great British Railways will never live up to its name unless they have full control over the national rail network.
