Quick win schemes that would be good politically for our new goverment.

[BrianW]

Sorting XC capacity is the obvious one. Its overcrowding is well known, and the TOC spreads across the country (aside from Northern Ireland).

This has a lot in its favour. IF a motivation is to be able to increase the 'feel good factor' and to return another labour government at the next General Election then 'wins' must be not just promised but delivered within 4 years (well within if lost by-elections and local government elections are to be avoided). So an assessment of how many (and which) constituencies could and must be 'saved' may be revealing and pertinent. The relevance of XC to this is in the name. Could longer trains be introduced quickly using existing unutilised stock, and at little (or no?) extra cost.

Fare reductions risk increasing overcrowding.

I like the 'quick win' of Network North West, Network North East etc, but for the haggling over boundaries and the time and hassle to get it up-and-running. easy to 'announce' but that's an empty 'promise'.

How about 'get Great British Railways done'!

In passing, are Reliabity and Delay stats still recorded and published? Could they be made to relate to 'fining' of operators for poor performance- Offtrack, akin to but more effective than Ofwat, etc? Passenger Charter??

 

[Manutd1999]

Definitely not a "quick win" ... unlikely that we would see the new trains on the rails before the end of this parliament!
And unless there is an alternative use for the Voyager fleet, it doesn't seem like it's in the country's best interests to have them scrapped at only ~25 years old

But it would create/safeguard jobs, which would be popular. And the Voyagers could still be used, either to supplement the new bimodes or cascaded elsewhere (Scotrail for example....)

Popular with rail enthusiasts, most of the public couldn't care less

Most of the public couldn't care less regardless of what you do, but you have to start somewhere. Overall, I think the points I proposed would be supported

What exactly do you mean by no overtime

No reliance on overtime would have been a better phrase. New staff would cover all 7 days a week as part of their standard rota. Over time the need for rest day working and regular overtime would be eliminated, resulting in substantial savings.

 

[deltic]

Cap the currently exorbitant walk on rail fares to a maximum £X per mile. Fully funded with a tax on private jet usage.

End the abhorrent practice of making fare evasion a criminal offence.

Declare that rail staff won't get a single extra penny in pay for this entire parliament without reform to archaic terms and conditions.

Sack the current transport secretary.

Launch GBR with a huge advertising campaign explaining how it will actually improve the railway for current and future passengers.

Tax on private jet usage will enable minimum reduction in rail fares. Fare evasion is a crime. What are these archaic T & C's? What has the SofS done to deserve sacking? How will GBR improve the railway?

 

[InTheEastMids]

Sorting XC capacity is the obvious one.

This has a lot in its favour.

I agree with the sentiment on XC, especially as 221s become available from Avanti.
However, whilst there's been quite a lot of focus on changing the rules around debt to allow infrastructure spending to increase, there isn't going to be much changed around current spending (i.e. what I think a normal organisation would call opex). If train leases are opex, then we may be disappointed

Of course pushing that to a ridiculous conclusion could mean - for instance - investing in <Your pet "reverse Beeching" project>/HS2/EWR because investment in infrastructure is "allowed", whilst then having no trains to run on them because current spending on train leases and staff etc is not permitted
(Hoping somebody that better understands Govt spending comes and corrects me here, but this is mad enough that it might in fact be true)

 

[HSTEd]

I agree with the sentiment on XC, especially as 221s become available from Avanti.
However, whilst there's been quite a lot of focus on changing the rules around debt to allow infrastructure spending to increase, there isn't going to be much changed around current spending (i.e. what I think a normal organisation would call opex). If train leases are opex, then we may be disappointed

Of course pushing that to a ridiculous conclusion could mean - for instance - investing in <Your pet "reverse Beeching" project>/HS2/EWR because investment in infrastructure is "allowed", whilst then having no trains to run on them because current spending on train leases and staff etc is not permitted
(Hoping somebody that better understands Govt spending comes and corrects me here, but this is mad enough that it might in fact be true)

In that case buying new trains to own outright would be CapEx and would thus be eligible.

At that point it would be worth phoning around to CRRC, Stadler, Derby, CAF, Hitachi, Nippon Sharyu et al and placing some truly enormous orders.
Could save the industry a huge amount in leasing Operational costs - plus reducing the training and other burdens.

 

[bspahh]

On class 720s, remove the handles from the edges of the seats, that reduces the width of the gangway from not much to 2 inches less than not much. If there has to be a handle, put it on the top of the seat.

 

[quantinghome]

Sorting XC capacity is the obvious one. Its overcrowding is well known, and the TOC spreads across the country (aside from Northern Ireland).

Yes. And the solution is also very obvious - bring in all the 221s and 222s coming free from Avanti and EMR.

This requires no infrastructure investment, no overhaul of timetables (although heaven knows that would be welcome) and no complex mucking about with the fare system (which is needed but will take years). It's the JFDI to beat all JFDIs.

 

[yorksrob]

This has a lot in its favour. IF a motivation is to be able to increase the 'feel good factor' and to return another labour government at the next General Election then 'wins' must be not just promised but delivered within 4 years (well within if lost by-elections and local government elections are to be avoided). So an assessment of how many (and which) constituencies could and must be 'saved' may be revealing and pertinent. The relevance of XC to this is in the name. Could longer trains be introduced quickly using existing unutilised stock, and at little (or no?) extra cost.

Fare reductions risk increasing overcrowding.

I like the 'quick win' of Network North West, Network North East etc, but for the haggling over boundaries and the time and hassle to get it up-and-running. easy to 'announce' but that's an empty 'promise'.

How about 'get Great British Railways done'!

In passing, are Reliabity and Delay stats still recorded and published? Could they be made to relate to 'fining' of operators for poor performance- Offtrack, akin to but more effective than Ofwat, etc? Passenger Charter??

The scotrail off peak experiment saw quite a substantial fares reduction, yet I don't recall many reports of it causing substantial overcrowding.

Ultimately re-branding exercises don't in themselves provide enough benefit to passengers to provide the feel good factor.

The daddy of them all - NSE came with substantial fares offers and train refurbishments alongside the pretty branding.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Scrolling through the various messages on this thread it’s interesting how everyone’s quick wins involve spending money on enhancements.

With a government wanting spending cuts surely quick wins would be things that save the industry money without having a negative effect?

 

[InTheEastMids]

In that case buying new trains to own outright would be CapEx and would thus be eligible.

Obviously it's been hard to see what the point of ROSCos are where you have public/state-directed train operators procuring specialised trains that are only likely to ever work a single route (other than keeping the cost away from the public sector debt).

The scotrail off peak experiment saw quite a substantial fares reduction, yet I don't recall many reports of it causing substantial overcrowding.

Yes, the experiment did not drive ridership up in the way it might be predicted. I haven't seen market research that tells us why.
Perhaps people did not believe it would last, so did not change their habits
Perhaps fewer people are being priced off the railway than a lot of people thought.

With a government wanting spending cuts surely quick wins would be things that save the industry money without having a negative effect?

It's a good point and there are some suggestions buried in this thread
Making connections work better has come up a few times.
There's quite a lot of resource spent on delay attribution, that could be slimmed down (but it remains critical for somebody to know where delays are coming from)

 

[Manutd1999]

With a government wanting spending cuts surely quick wins would be things that save the industry money without having a negative effect?

If we're looking for quick cost savings then adjusting service provision is probably the easiest way. The majority of the railways costs go on staff and rolling stock leasing, so for efficiency it makes sense to look at fewer (longer) trains per hour.

Reducing the number of services would actually be fairly easy to implement, perhaps as early as next June's timetable.

It wouldn't be popular but maybe if it were combined with a fare freeze/cut it could be a "quick win"?

 

[HamworthyGoods]

If we're looking for quick cost savings then adjusting service provision is probably the easiest way. The majority of the railways costs go on staff and rolling stock leasing, so for efficiency it makes sense to look at fewer (longer) trains per hour.

Reducing the number of services would actually be fairly easy to implement, perhaps as early as next June's timetable.

It wouldn't be popular but maybe if it were combined with a fare freeze it could be a "quick win"?

Indeed, when I saw a post about ‘quick wins’ for the new government this is the sort of thing I was expecting to see not things requiring spending!

 

[deltic]

Yes, the experiment did not drive ridership up in the way it might be predicted. I haven't seen market research that tells us why.
Perhaps people did not believe it would last, so did not change their habits
Perhaps fewer people are being priced off the railway than a lot of people thought.

The outcome was as predicted by the industry's own forecasting guidance. There is a reason peak fares are high its because demand is pretty inelastic. Cutting them just loses revenue.

 

[Bald Rick]

4. Double Air Passenger Duty on flights where there a direct train <5 hrs. APD x10 on all private jets. Use the money to freeze fares for 5 years.

By far the quickest win that would help rail industry finances (and general government finances) would be to remove the ‘temporary’ 5p discount off fuel duty, commit to a further 5p increase (at least) in a year’s time, and to return domestic flight APD to the ‘Band A’ level.

That would raise about £3bn in year 1, £5.5bn in year 2 directly, and also raise rail revenue by an amount I guess to be several tens of millions. (As an aside, the current low fuel prices are causing a significant hole in VAT receipts for Government, as well as making rail travel comparatively more expensive).

 

[Magdalia]

By far the quickest win that would help rail industry finances (and general government finances) would be to remove the ‘temporary’ 5p discount off fuel duty, commit to a further 5p increase (at least) in a year’s time, and to return domestic flight APD to the ‘Band A’ level.

That would raise about £3bn in year 1, £5.5bn in year 2 directly, and also raise rail revenue by an amount I guess to be several tens of millions. (As an aside, the current low fuel prices are causing a significant hole in VAT receipts for Government, as well as making rail travel comparatively more expensive).

From a government perspective these are neither quick or win.

Tax changes are price signals that take time to have an effect, unless they are very large, like the recent increase in gas prices.

Increases in fuel duty are very unpopular, especially in areas that have poor public transport provision.

Both also have the huge disadvantage of feeding directly into increasing inflation. This makes things harder for the Bank of England setting monetary policy. It also increases the governments debt servicing costs because so much of it has interest rates that are index linked.

And when I was a manager, quick wins were things that I could change, not things that I was begging others to do for me. To misquote John F Kennedy: ask not what the country can do for the railway but ask what the railway can do for the country.

 

[yorksrob]

To misquote John F Kennedy: ask not what the country can do for the railway but ask what the railway can do for the country.

Move people around at a reasonable cost to them. This is the bit that much of continental Europe gets, but our Westminster Establishment doesn't.

 

[Helvellyn]

Quick wins? Strip out a lot of DfT interference/reporting and tell TOCs to focus on the basics - a reliable service. Calling it stripping the barnacles, trimming the fat, but concentrate on what's actually important. Clean, reliable, fully-formed services.

As an example EMR need 12 out of 21 units to run a half-hourly 8-car Connect service between St Pancras and Corby yet routinely 1 or 2 of the 6 diagrams can be 4-car. This is before they start sending units off for refurbishment. Constantly blaming having to get units to Northampton for maintenance is rubbish because pre-cocid their plans called for 18 out of 21 units to be in service operating as 12-car services.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

Quick wins? Strip out a lot of DfT interference/reporting

The new government seems to be a lot more about control so this would appear to be unlikely.

 

[Bald Rick]

From a government perspective these are neither quick or win.

Tax changes are price signals that take time to have an effect, unless they are very large, like the recent increase in gas prices.

Increases in fuel duty are very unpopular, especially in areas that have poor public transport provision.

They can certianly be implmemented quickly - as in the budget in 2 weeks. And both would be a win for the rail industry, albeit I agree it would take time to feed through.

Both also have the huge disadvantage of feeding directly into increasing inflation.

They always have done. But now that inflation is below the BoE target, there is no better time to do it.

 

[FlyingPotato]

No idea about how quick and easy it would be
But would be popular would be an equivalent of the Germany ticket as I often see people praising it on social media, I have no idea regarding the logistics of it and all that stuff

But the announcement and introduction of that would be very popular (as long as the price and validity was acceptable)

 

[HSTEd]

No idea about how quick and easy it would be
But would be popular would be an equivalent of the Germany ticket as I often see people praising it on social media, I have no idea regarding the logistics of it and all that stuff

But the announcement and introduction of that would be very popular (as long as the price and validity was acceptable)

Such a ticket would mean the end of the farebox as a significant contributor to the cost of the railway, unless it was so expensive as to be net damaging to the government.

That would nearly double subsidies! (The farebox covers around 40% of the cost of the railway)

 

[FlyingPotato]

Such a ticket would mean the end of the farebox as a significant contributor to the cost of the railway, unless it was so expensive as to be net damaging to the government.

That would nearly double subsidies! (The farebox covers around 40% of the cost of the railway)

Which I do agree with

However the ticket still fits in with the requests of the thread until people see their taxes go up

 

[HSTEd]

Which I do agree with

However the ticket still fits in with the requests of the thread until people see their taxes go up

The announcement of tax rises would probably have to be made at the same time as the commitment to avoid spooking the gilt market. It would essentially be announcing around nine billion pounds in extra public spending per year.

 

[WAO]

Probably the best win for this year would be an improved financial performance. The August MR cash profile indicates that this should be improving significantly. It is for the industry to win the confidence of both customers and HM Treasury by better outputs, this year particularly.

 

[Meerkat]

By far the quickest win that would help rail industry finances (and general government finances) would be to remove the ‘temporary’ 5p discount off fuel duty, commit to a further 5p increase (at least) in a year’s time, and to return domestic flight APD to the ‘Band A’ level.

That would raise about £3bn in year 1, £5.5bn in year 2 directly, and also raise rail revenue by an amount I guess to be several tens of millions. (As an aside, the current low fuel prices are causing a significant hole in VAT receipts for Government, as well as making rail travel comparatively more expensive).

Quick win for the railway, quick disaster for a government!

No idea about how quick and easy it would be
But would be popular would be an equivalent of the Germany ticket as I often see people praising it on social media, I have no idea regarding the logistics of it and all that stuff

But the announcement and introduction of that would be very popular (as long as the price and validity was acceptable)

Not popular to those paying more tax or suffering public service cuts to subsidise a minority's travel.
Spending the money on buses is better and more progressive.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Cap the currently exorbitant walk on rail fares to a maximum £X per mile. Fully funded with a tax on private jet usage.

Personally I quite like this in principle but in practice it quickly becomes too complex to be workable.

End the abhorrent practice of making fare evasion a criminal offence.

So theft is legal now? How about buses, taxis, planes, do we have to pay for those? If so, why not trains? If we don't, why pay for anything?

Declare that rail staff won't get a single extra penny in pay for this entire parliament without reform to archaic terms and conditions.

What specifically do you have in mind?

Sack the current transport secretary.

Why?

Launch GBR with a huge advertising campaign explaining how it will actually improve the railway for current and future passengers.

Definitely agree with you here.

 

[Bletchleyite]

So theft is legal now?

Fare dodging is not theft because it doesn't involve taking anything with the intent to permanently deprive. It doesn't even prevent a TOC selling the seat to someone else. It isn't OK to fare dodge, but it isn't theft in the same way as despite the protestations of the Federation Against Software "Theft" and the Business Software Alliance piracy isn't theft either, it's copyright breach.

I would agree with the suggestion - I think fare evasion should be decriminalised and treated simply as a debt which a TOC can sue for if they wish, though I'd keep Penalty Fares which would if unpaid be enforced as a debt. The option of prosecution for fraud would remain for serious cases of falsification and gross dishonesty.

I think it would be a good Government "quick win" in the light of other private prosecution scandals such as the Post Office one to either completely ban them (so only the CPS can prosecute) or require explicit permission from the CPS with a public interest test to be applied the same as a CPS prosecution. I don't think obtaining such consent for serious cases (e.g. where someone has "doughnutted" for many months) would be difficult, but it is clearly not in the public interest to prosecute someone for starting/ending short on a sub £2 Northern Advance fare - this is just silly.

The other thing I'd do in this regard is to modify the law on contempt of Court to include where one offers or takes a financial settlement to either discontinue a prosecution or not to press charges, as this is tantamount to bribery or the solicitation of a bribe - the justice system is intended to mete out justice, not to be used as a threat in order to extort money. Settlements are of course fine in civil cases because these are purely about money, but not in criminal ones - someone has either done something serious enough for a criminal record or they have not.

 

[Bald Rick]

Quick win for the railway, quick disaster for a government!

I’d say ending the temporary fuel duy cut is a nailed on certainty. There will be plenty more bad news in this budget.

 

[yorksrob]

Probably the best win for this year would be an improved financial performance. The August MR cash profile indicates that this should be improving significantly. It is for the industry to win the confidence of both customers and HM Treasury by better outputs, this year particularly.

That's not really going to set the electorate aflame with excitement though. To be politically beneficial it has to be of practical use to the electorate, day to day.

 

[LittleRedTrain]

A potential low-cost quick win that would please a lot of rail users:

A massive campaign to get passengers to behave more considerately on trains, and compelling the the TOCs to actually carry out education and enforcement.
This means things like playing music/videos out loud, feet on seats, leaving rubbish, vaping etc. Especially as many of these things are already illegal according to the byelaws so no new legislation required.

No big infrastructure spending required:
- More posters/signs on trains and stations (replacing e.g. Chiltern's threatening revenue ones)
- Updates to announcements (manual/automated): On Eurostar/TGV they announce that passengers must use headphones when using electronic devices and long calls should be taken in the vestibules, no reason that this shouldn't be the case on all UK domestic trains too.
- Briefing on-train staff that it is part of their duties to challenge antisocial behaviour when walking through the train (as long as they aren't actively putting themselves at risk), and making it part of training and assessments.
Nobody is expecting guards to challenge some drunken scrotes who might have a knife, but even a polite "please can you use headphones or turn the sound off" from another passenger is often effective, and would be more so from a person of authority!
- Potentially extending the Merseyrail policy of fining those behaving inconsiderately, and blocking drunk and disorderly passengers from even boarding.