Rail services to be included as part of Bee Network: how should this be achieved?

[Greybeard33]

Of the eight routes identified in post 1 of this thread:

• Wigan – Victoria
• Stalybridge –Southport
• Glossop – Hadfield – Piccadilly
• Rose Hill – Piccadilly
• Buxton – Piccadilly
• Alderley Edge – Piccadilly
• Rochdale stopping services
• Manchester Airport stopping services

So four (as defined in the press release) operate solely within Greater Manchester, two have short extensions outside the county into neighbouring authorities, and two have longer extensions outside the county into one or more neighbouring authority. The first two groups would I suspect be relatively easy to manage. The third group would appear to present something more of a problem, but would Merseyside, Lancashire, Cheshire East, and Derbyshire really be that concerned about TfGM running services in these areas, given that Disley, Burscough, Southport and Buxton are all relatively peripheral to their own economic and populations centres? Derbyshire Council for one have co-operated with Greater Manchester before, for instance on the South East Manchester Rail study which focussed on these lines, so it doesn't seem that implausible that they would do so again.

Rochdale stopping services extend to Blackburn and Clitheroe in Lancashire, while Manchester Airport stopping services extend to Liverpool and to Crewe. All way outside Greater Manchester.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Perhaps it is just me in my dotage, but the term of "Rochdale stopping services" suggests naught but a short Manchester to Rochdale rail journey with intermediate stops at Moston, Mills Hill and Castleton.

 

[thenorthern]

Of the eight routes identified in post 1 of this thread:

• Wigan – Victoria
• Stalybridge –Southport
• Glossop – Hadfield – Piccadilly
• Rose Hill – Piccadilly
• Buxton – Piccadilly
• Alderley Edge – Piccadilly
• Rochdale stopping services
• Manchester Airport stopping services

So four (as defined in the press release) operate solely within Greater Manchester, two have short extensions outside the county into neighbouring authorities, and two have longer extensions outside the county into one or more neighbouring authority. The first two groups would I suspect be relatively easy to manage. The third group would appear to present something more of a problem, but would Merseyside, Lancashire, Cheshire East, and Derbyshire really be that concerned about TfGM running services in these areas, given that Disley, Burscough, Southport and Buxton are all relatively peripheral to their own economic and populations centres? Derbyshire Council for one have co-operated with Greater Manchester before, for instance on the South East Manchester Rail study which focussed on these lines, so it doesn't seem that implausible that they would do so again.

Not too sure about that bear in mind it would require a "Bee Network" TOC to have their own stock and depot as well as drivers and guards. It works on Merseyrail however that is largely self contained with soon to be 1 type of rolling stock.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Not too sure about that bear in mind it would require a "Bee Network" TOC to have their own stock and depot as well as drivers and guards. It works on Merseyrail however that is largely self contained with soon to be 1 type of rolling stock.

Unless it's a Bee Network branded train operated by Northern and maintained at a Northern depot. But that sort of skews the point anyway.

 

[WAB]

Not too sure about that bear in mind it would require a "Bee Network" TOC to have their own stock and depot as well as drivers and guards. It works on Merseyrail however that is largely self contained with soon to be 1 type of rolling stock.

Quite. And the effects that would have on platform capacity and stock utilisation could be pretty severe, I would have thought?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

In the event of a rail union announcing strike action, where would that leave those in charge of "Bee Network" train services and would they form part of any ongoing discussions?

 

[thenorthern]

In the event of a rail union announcing strike action, where would that leave those in charge of "Bee Network" train services and would they form part of any ongoing discussions?

There would also be the question of if it would be run directly by Greater Manchester Combined Authority or a concession. Let's not forget the Metrolink is run by a private company as part of a concession. As is London Overgound, the Elizebeth Line and Merseyrail.

 

[Burton Road]

Not too sure about that bear in mind it would require a "Bee Network" TOC to have their own stock and depot as well as drivers and guards. It works on Merseyrail however that is largely self contained with soon to be 1 type of rolling stock.

I was referring specifically to cross boundary issues in "taking over" those services. There's nothing about crossing the border into Derbyshire that require having their own TOC, stock or depot. Given that franchising as we've understood it is likely to disappear by the end of this decade it could simply be that TfGM will take over some of the responsibility from GBR for setting the terms in GMBs contract on these specific routes? Shapps Williams talks about contracts for city based partnerships (and even single line community rail partnerships) so which would be more local responsibility without needing the whole Merseyrail offer. The below is a pretty close list to what GM have been saying they want for years.

Shapps-Williams, Chapter 3, Section 11, p.41
New partnerships between Great British Railways and local and regional government will be established to give local leaders a greater say in how the railways are run in their area. For the first time, these agreements will encompass the whole passenger offer and long-term strategy for railways in a local area. Partnerships will mean that railways are more responsive to local priorities from Hampshire to Humberside.
Depending on the needs and capacities of different places, partnerships will include the ability for local leaders to integrate ticketing and fares with other local transport services, control stations and buy additional services or infrastructure to achieve local transport and housing priorities more effectively than today, using funds raised locally.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Given that franchising as we've understood it is likely to disappear by the end of this decade it could simply be that TfGM will take over some of the responsibility from GBR for setting the terms in GMBs contract on these specific routes?

Yet does it seem strange that in the bus industry, franchising is seen as "the way forward".

 

[Krokodil]

Yet does it seem strange that in the bus industry, franchising is seen as "the way forward".

Bus operations are different from rail though. It's easier to change services at will, the infrastructure is a free-for-all, and subsidies are much smaller. I'm not saying that it will work, just that it's different.

 

[The exile]

Just thinking - if trains / routes are to become part of the Bee network - does that mean they will be hived off from Northern?

Sorry…..

 

[Greybeard33]

Bus operations are different from rail though. It's easier to change services at will, the infrastructure is a free-for-all, and subsidies are much smaller. I'm not saying that it will work, just that it's different.

Moreover, the term "franchising" means different things in the bus and rail industries. Bus franchising is more akin to the current National Rail Contracts, where the Government takes the revenue risk, than to pre-Covid rail franchising.

 

[The exile]

Bus operations are different from rail though. It's easier to change services at will, the infrastructure is a free-for-all, and subsidies are much smaller.

A well-run franchising system can at least determine whose will is behind changes to services and ensure that the infrastructure isn't treated as a free-for-all.

 

[Some guy]

Does anyone know why on national rail Bromley Cross shows up as Bromley Cross(Lancs) when it’s within the boundaries of Greater Manchester in the metropolitan borough of Bolton

 

[Krokodil]

Well it was historically in Lancashire and presumably locals still think of it as such. Presumably the suffix is to avoid confusion with the London Borough.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Well it was historically in Lancashire and presumably locals still think of it as such. Presumably the suffix is to avoid confusion with the London Borough.

I think that Preston (Lancs) was meant to avoid confusion with Preston Park, even though the latter station is near to Brighton.

 

[edwin_m]

Does anyone know why on national rail Bromley Cross shows up as Bromley Cross(Lancs) when it’s within the boundaries of Greater Manchester in the metropolitan borough of Bolton

Perhaps if they put (Manchester) or (Bolton) on tickets, people would think they were valid to those places as well.

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Perhaps if they put (Manchester) or (Bolton) on tickets, people would think they were valid to those places as well.

I wouldn't think people would have a ticket identifying the name and location of a station (Such as "Atherton (Manchester)" or Swinton (Manchester)") and think they are valid to the city centre, I've never heard of it happening.

 

[Krokodil]

I wouldn't think people would have a ticket identifying the name and location of a station (Such as "Atherton (Manchester)" or Swinton (Manchester)") and think they are valid to the city centre, I've never heard of it happening.

I bet someone, somewhere has tried to blag it.