Report highly critical of DfT

[HH]

Rail Franchising in the UK published by the House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts appears to be a damning (and deserved) inditement of DfT's handling of TSGN and ECML franchises (two of the most important rail franchises in the UK).

We are deeply concerned that the Department for Transport’s management of two of its most important franchises has been completely inadequate and could be indicative of wider weaknesses in its contract management capability. Passengers on the Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise have suffered an appalling level of delays and cancellations since the franchise started in 2014. At one point, less than two thirds of trains arrived on time. This totally unacceptable state of affairs which caused misery for passengers was due to a catalogue of failures by the Department, Network Rail and the operator, Govia Thameslink. The Department was too ambitious about what could be achieved, and it overlooked the poor condition of the infrastructure of the rail network. The Department was also ambivalent about the risk of industrial action and neglected to engage constructively with rail unions. The Department failed to see, or chose not to see, the perfect storm of an ambitious upgrade programme coupled with plans to increase driver controlled operation of trains. While there has been some improvement recently and there are signs that Network Rail and Govia Thameslink are now working together more effectively, we remain sceptical that this will address the serious and deep-rooted problems we have identified. On the East Coast franchise, the Department has failed to learn the lessons from previous failures of the franchise, and has again allowed the operator to promise more than it could deliver. The Department will have to put in place new arrangements for running train services. We are concerned that the Department could terminate its contract with VTEC yet still give the operator the opportunity to run the franchise again in the future. The issues we have found with the East Coast and TSGN, and the small pool of potential bidders in the market, highlight the broken model of franchising

IMO the criticism is entirely deserved and possibly a little generous if anything. Surely some heads must roll after this...

 

[D1009]

Rail Franchising in the UK published by the House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts appears to be a damning (and deserved) inditement of DfT's handling of TSGN and ECML franchises (two of the most important rail franchises in the UK).



IMO the criticism is entirely deserved and possibly a little generous if anything. Surely some heads must roll after this...

Who's head are you after? Yes, lots of mistakes have been made by many people, but it's very difficult to pin the blame on any individual. A bit like the Windrush scandal.

 

[HH]

Who's head are you after? Yes, lots of mistakes have been made by many people, but it's very difficult to pin the blame on any individual. A bit like the Windrush scandal.

Well, there have been calls for Amber Rudd's and even Theresa May's head over Windrush. Certainly some senior people at DfT have a lot to answer for - at least if you know how it's been operated for the last few years.

 

[w1bbl3]

The politicians really do not "run" the departments they are responsible for the day to day running is the responsibility of the permanent secretary who is a civil servant. In business terms the SofS is effectively the chair and the PUS the managing director, if the civil service was run on business lines then "responsibility" would rest with head of department / head of section e.g. the head of DfT rail and/or the head of franchising in DfT rail.

 

[adrock1976]

No matter how it is dressed up as, at the end of the day, somebody in the DfT and/or government signed off the franchise awards.

 

[Chrisgr31]

The reality of politics is that no one is ultimately accountable. In the case of rail franchises we can complain to our MPs but generally thats because either they are in opposition and those in power couldnt care less about their position, or they are in power but in that case they'll tow the party line and do nothing.

 

[daikilo]

I find it interesting that the committee should use the terms "the broken model of franchising" as the consequence is surely to require that it be fixed or rebuilt before any new franchises are let.

 

[Carlisle]

Who's head are you after? Yes, lots of mistakes have been made by many people, but it's very difficult to pin the blame on any individual. A bit like the Windrush scandal.

Overbidding on East Coast had been a consistent problem for the previous decade at least suggesting a much deeper problem with the actual franchising model , and on GTR the unions joint strategy against any additional DOO was agreed well in advance of the beginning of the Southern dispute, so the resultant problems were largely unavoidable without complete capitulation by the TOC.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

No matter how it is dressed up as, at the end of the day, somebody in the DfT and/or government signed off the franchise awards.

People always forget the Treasury, which will have demanded a tough franchise settlement (in order to pay for rail costs elsewhere).
DfT's job is to extract the highest premium from ICEC, not least to fund the IEP contracts for new trains.

 

[deltic]

Not sure in reality how things could be done any different with regard to EC. Companies have to gaze into a crystal ball to guess what future demand will be - those guesstimates are crawled over by financial and other advisors as to regards how realistic they are both with the bidders and DfT. They are never going to 100% right - in other franchises we have seen demand has been wildly underestimated.

Various models have been tried - risk/revenue sharing - concession/management contracts - nationalisation - the only model not tried in recent decades is a free market. All have their pros and cons

 

[exile]

What's being missed here is <policy> - even a genius can't make a stupid policy work. So, the DfT can't make a misguided franchise system into one that's fit for purpose.

 

[mde]

The reality of politics is that no one is ultimately accountable. In the case of rail franchises we can complain to our MPs but generally thats because either they are in opposition and those in power couldnt care less about their position, or they are in power but in that case they'll tow the party line and do nothing.

It's like an episode of 'Yes Minister' - just picture the DAA as DfT and it makes some sense…

 

[northwichcat]

I find it interesting that the committee should use the terms "the broken model of franchising" as the consequence is surely to require that it be fixed or rebuilt before any new franchises are let.

What should be remembered here is when Justine Greening oversaw the failed award of the West Coast franchise to First Group, it resulted in a new Transport Secretary and all existing franchises being extended so that the mess could be sorted out before future awards were met. However, for political reasons the Conservatives let the East Coast franchise award go ahead because they didn't want the risk of Labour winning the 2015 election with a major franchise already being in public hands.

 

[cf111]

The politicians really do not "run" the departments they are responsible for the day to day running is the responsibility of the permanent secretary who is a civil servant. In business terms the SofS is effectively the chair and the PUS the managing director, if the civil service was run on business lines then "responsibility" would rest with head of department / head of section e.g. the head of DfT rail and/or the head of franchising in DfT rail.

Sir Humphrey: Well briefly, sir, I am the Permanent Under Secretary of State, known as the Permanent Secretary. Woolley here is your Principal Private Secretary. I too have a Principal Private Secretary and he is the Principal Private Secretary to the Permanent Secretary. Directly responsible to me are ten Deputy Secretaries, 87 Under Secretaries and 219 Assistant Secretaries. Directly responsible to the Principal Private Secretaries are plain Private Secretaries, and the Prime Minister will be appointing two Parliamentary Under-Secretaries and you will be appointing your own Parliamentary Private Secretary.
Hacker: Can they all type?
Sir Humphrey: None of us can type. Mrs Mackay types: she's the secretary.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The politicians really do not "run" the departments they are responsible for the day to day running is the responsibility of the permanent secretary

The politician is the boss of the civil servants and is the one who dictates policy. And clearly policy at DfT has been to squeeze on industrial relations, hence the problems across the country, and to pursue privatisation at all costs before the 2015 General Election, hence the shambolic and rushed removal of DOR.

The politician is the one to blame. Just as with Windrush, where the stated policy aim from the Home Secretary Theresa May was to make life unbearable for any non-white people without the right paperwork, regardless of nationality. Amber Rudd just took her lead from the current leader of the Nasty Party.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Not sure in reality how things could be done any different with regard to EC.

The EC tender was rushed through to avoid the prospect of Labour winning in 2015 and keeping it in nationalised hands. Everyone knew the price had to be high to justify binning off DOR. That encouraged DfT to massively overstate the potential passenger growth and that, in turn, led the bidders to massively overbid on the franchise.

My view is that the profits DOR were making were pretty much as high as you were going to wring out of the ECML. I said that at the time and I've been proven correct. But getting the fat cats in to achieve less (after *their* profits have been removed from the franchise) than DOR wasnt going to cut it politically.

The blame here isn't just Stagecoach's, much as I find it disgusting that the gay basher and the bearded tax dodger aren't being made to sleep in the bed they made.

Hurried decisions don't work. Never have, never will.

 

[Starmill]

It's disingenuous to say that 'nobody is really to blame', although it is accurate that there is a great deal of nuance and blurred lines.

These mistakes have come from policy, not from nothing. Policy comes from Ministers and they get it from what they think is both popular and convenient to them... and their Manifesto.

Ministers came up with a policy which dictated that the new ICEC franchise must be awarded on time. If mistakes have been made or if that decision turned out to be the wrong one, it's difficult to blame it on anything other than Conservative Party policy. Some people might find that difficult to swallow and there is a lot of nuance as I say. But I don't think we can really say something more than that party and their policy has created this mess.

 

[mde]

Sir Humphrey: Well briefly, sir, I am the Permanent Under Secretary of State, known as the Permanent Secretary. Woolley here is your Principal Private Secretary. I too have a Principal Private Secretary and he is the Principal Private Secretary to the Permanent Secretary. Directly responsible to me are ten Deputy Secretaries, 87 Under Secretaries and 219 Assistant Secretaries. Directly responsible to the Principal Private Secretaries are plain Private Secretaries, and the Prime Minister will be appointing two Parliamentary Under-Secretaries and you will be appointing your own Parliamentary Private Secretary.
Hacker: Can they all type?
Sir Humphrey: None of us can type. Mrs Mackay types: she's the secretary.

The very episode. That and The Bed of Nails… where the DfT is prominently featured.

 

[TBirdFrank]

I am advised that the shambles that is the new TPE timetable is directly down to the DfT. They have completely destroyed a historic and well used facility serving east Manchester and it appears that TfGM MP's etc are powerless to challenge them

 

[Tetchytyke]

They have completely destroyed a historic and well used facility

Historic? TPE trains historically went via Victoria and Chat Moss. It's the quickest way from Leeds to Manchester and Liverpool. It only changed in the late 80s/early 90s, and there will still be two TPEs an hour into Piccadilly. I'd hardly describe the changes as shambolic, even though I don't agree with the skip-stopping.

 

[Carlisle]

Hurried decisions don't work. Never have, never will.

Didn’t the original franchising directior let about half a dozen franchisees in around a year, and aren’t processes generally expected to become quicker as they become more established ?

 

[TBirdFrank]

Shambolic it is - end of. Any service that is two trains an hour this month and two a day from next month is a shambles - and a slap in the face to established traffic flows. I am NOT prepared to run the gamble of getting a seat or standing when forced to change and many more will follow my example. The Jag and the Jeep are just as comfortable as a 185.

 

[Mugby]

Civil Servants in London running the whole of Britain's railways was never going to work.

Remember when it was a unified network with regional managers!

 

[TBirdFrank]

What we lost when it was a unified railway can never be replaced - professional competent managers who quietly got o with the job performing miracles with limited resources - £350k a year top dogs - pure fiction - and it should have stayed that way!

 

[HSTEd]

The railway subculture is essentially gone, and you can pay people to turn up and do a job, but you can't pay people to believe. And if they don't believe they won't go the extra mile.

 

[DarloRich]

Rail Franchising in the UK published by the House of Commons Committee of Public Accounts appears to be a damning (and deserved) inditement of DfT's handling of TSGN and ECML franchises (two of the most important rail franchises in the UK).

aka - PAC issue report stating the bleeding obvious!

I am advised that the shambles that is the new TPE timetable is directly down to the DfT. They have completely destroyed a historic and well used facility serving east Manchester and it appears that TfGM MP's etc are powerless to challenge them

what on earth are you talking about?

Civil Servants in London running the whole of Britain's railways was never going to work.

Remember when it was a unified network with regional managers!

when as that?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Didn’t the original franchising directior let about half a dozen franchisees in around a year, and aren’t processes generally expected to become quicker as they become more established ?

The jack and Jill book of how to privatise nasty inefficient nationalised industry's may say this however as the franchise system never panned out as expected by the Treasurys Provitisation Unit we keep getting attempts to guide the railway toward the intended outcomes as it won't happen organically.

 

[LLivery]

The way this government is playing out, I'm willing to bet they'll lose more seats in the next election; whenever that is. Therefore I can't see the franchise system lasting for much longer - it's on borrowed time, no matter what reforms they'll try to make.

As for heads rolling, the government minister is ultimately responsible for the goings on his or her department. A boss who doesn't know whats going on shouldn't be there and whoever signed it off should also go. I remember when the EC franchise was awarded, many people on here said they overbid again. If people knew here, then clearly, unless they are stupidly incompetent at the DfT, people in Whitehall knew. If no one at Stagecoach and Virgin never had doubts either I'd be worried, especially if I remember correctly, Virgin saying First did overbid for West Coast.

 

[Gareth Marston]

The way this government is playing out, I'm willing to bet they'll lose more seats in the next election; whenever that is. Therefore I can't see the franchise system lasting for much longer - it's on borrowed time, no matter what reforms they'll try to make.

As for heads rolling, the government minister is ultimately responsible for the goings on his or her department. A boss who doesn't know whats going on shouldn't be there and whoever signed it off should also go. I remember when the EC franchise was awarded, many people on here said they overbid again. If people knew here, then clearly, unless they are stupidly incompetent at the DfT, people in Whitehall knew. If no one at Stagecoach and Virgin never had doubts either I'd be worried, especially if I remember correctly, Virgin saying First did overbid for West Coast.

Virgin chucked the kitchen sink out the pram about First and a technicality was all that kept them on the west coast. They clearly learnt from the experience and told the Deprtment for Thickies what they wanted to hear about East Coast.

 

[Starmill]

Any service that is two trains an hour this month and two a day from next month is a shambles - and a slap in the face to established traffic flows.

What on earth are you talking about? There are still two TransPennine services an hour from Manchester to Liverpool and they are faster than before. There will be two other semi-fast services per hour too. Seems like just the thing for me, someone who regularly travels to Liverpool from Greater Manchester. I'm not sure what else could be provided.