matt_world2004
Established Member
- Joined
- 5 Nov 2014
- Messages
- 4,504
Any reforms should allow network rail to directly operate maintainence trains instead of them requiring a contractor to do it
I agree with your analysis.If you read the July Modern Railways, you will see the Treasury wants to know when the railway finances will be back to a sustainable even keel again, with proper cost control.
HMG also doesn't want to see the back of private capital and management in the industry.
That's more important than carving up the railway to suit the crayonistas.
You are also not going to get the regional bodies (TfN etc) to lose their newly-won control over local services, not to mention devolved Wales and Scotland.
The railway is not what it was in 1993 when the break-up started, and you can't just reinvent BR in fancy new colours.
In Germany and France they are heading for a centralised long-distance operation, with locally controlled regional/commuter services, all up for time-limited contracts.
There are many possible models.
The Treasury will go for the one with the lowest annual subsidy, with something more generous in the capital investment sphere.
Network Rail isn't just another arm of the DfT.
It has a quasi-independent statutory rule to operate railway infrastructure, with commercial relationships with all its users, public and private.
It has voting "Members" who are independent of DfT, and income streams from various sources including property.
It is also regulated by ORR and RSSB.
You could just as easily give the franchising role to ORR (in the beginning, OPRAF was independent of government), or to a new version of the SRA.
Given the (to me, at least) obvious synergy with freight operations in terms of traction and crew utilisation, etc., what would be the benefits of this?Any reforms should allow network rail to directly operate maintainence trains instead of them requiring a contractor to do it
Currently if network rail want to use say track recording train. They need to hire an outside contractor to drive that train as they are legally forbidden from doing it themselves or a deicing train or something similarGiven the (to me, at least) obvious synergy with freight operations in terms of traction and crew utilisation, etc., what would be the benefits of this?
Sort of makes my point though. As a generalisation Network Rail needs to run 'occasional' trains 'everywhere' but not 'regular' trains 'anywhere'. It is hardly obvious that it would be feasible to maintain an establishment of train crew, depot coverage, competency retention and so forth more efficiently than the 'local' operators on any given part of the network. This would include the hiring in of route conductors.Currently if network rail want to use say track recording train. They need to hire an outside contractor to drive that train as they are legally forbidden from doing it themselves or a deicing train or something similar
The railway is not what it was in 1993 when the break-up started, and you can't just reinvent BR in fancy new colours.
In Germany and France they are heading for a centralised long-distance operation, with locally controlled regional/commuter services, all up for time-limited contracts.
There are many possible models.
The Treasury will go for the one with the lowest annual subsidy, with something more generous in the capital investment sphere.
Currently if network rail want to use say track recording train. They need to hire an outside contractor to drive that train as they are legally forbidden from doing it themselves or a deicing train or something similar
I'm not sure with the track surveying trains they run daily across the network. The trains owned by NR but I think is operated by focIs there any framework whereby NR can effectively hire themselves to do it? are they allowed to own a company? I take it the idea that NR employs train crews & subcontracts them to TOCs has problems.
One thing about BR was at least they could make decisions & present them to govt, rather than be presented with decisions...
I'm not sure with the track surveying trains they run daily across the network. The trains owned by NR but I think is operated by foc
It has Caledonian Sleeper as well.and of course had its own franchises at one time (it still has 50% of Merseyrail).
Research would be taken back in house and become a new BREL.
BR Research wasn’t BREL. Far from it!
Looking at the Telegraph article quoted in one of the first posts; it says that Mr Shapps is comparing the new system to Transport for London where the London Overground Lines are run as concessions. It also says that Network Rail could be given the powers to specify and award contracts; which in itself is fascinating as it assumes here has to be a transfer of skills from DfT to NR. (I don't know where the Network Rail suggestion is from - is it Shapps or the Telegraph?)
I appreciate that even the government itself hasn't much of a clue what to do next, but the above suggests to me that Network Rail may be about to be asked to perform a TfL type role and the TOCs become consessions. (a la williams)
If all that happens, what about the marketing, branding and identity of the railway ?
RAIL Magazine said:Network Rail is expected to be given an enhanced role as a "strong, guiding, co-ordinated mind" to oversee the rail industry in England. [Under devolution]', Scotland and Wales have separate arrangements.
It's thought less likely that Network Rail will be put directly in charge of writing passenger service contracts, although sources suggest that has not been ruled out and that decisions have yet to be taken by ministers at the DfT.
This would largely complete the de facto re-nationalisation of the passenger railway, with only freight and the leasing of rolling stock outside direct government control.
With just two months to go until the expiry of six month emergency agreements that have replaced passenger franchises during the pandemic, the DfT is rapidly assessing future arrangements.
"The government is moving away from a new arms-length body to oversee the railway. It needs a much quicker solution that would involve giving Network Rail whole industry planning and other extra responsibilities" a well placed source told RAIL.
"Keith Williams is reviewing his review" the source said. "The whole structure of the industry has changed since he wrote his report. With franchises gone and the government already in charge of passenger operations,a White paper and new legislation are not needed. His report will not now be published. Keith is actively involved in looking again at the structure."
But this is Rail magazine, the total abandonment of the review would seem a little strange. I would expect them to release it and say they will work on these improvements to look good in the public eye even if they don't happen after all.RAIL magazine are reporting that the Williams review will never be published, as it's proposals have effectively already been scrapped. As the goverment is now shouldering all of the revenue risk of rail services in England, the English rail network is now nationalised in all but name.
View attachment 81594View attachment 81599
Wales and Scotland will be different.
Wonder how that will work with cross border services.
i suspect the intercity cross boarder services (GWR,Avanti,LNER and Crosscountry) will be kept considered as English/under DFT control while that devolved services (TfW and Scotsrail) will be kept as devolved even during cross boarder tripsWonder how that will work with cross border services.
I think it's more likely the Williams recommendations (whatever they were) are now being incorporated in a new railway organisation.
They've just leap-frogged the publication-consultation-white paper stage now that Covid has forced the EMA regime.
It means they have to work within the current legalities like Network Rail and ORR, and the 1993 Railways Act.
Franchises will probably become concessions, but the private operators will still be there (unless they voluntarily withdraw if they don't like the terms).
Network Rail looks like getting a larger role, but seemingly won't negotiate operating contracts (they are supposed to provide the level playing field for TOCs).
Wales and Scotland will be different.
Tony Miles is saying over on WNXX that its unlikely the Williams Review will ever be published as the Dft is blocking it as the recommendations on reduced private control and reduced competition (i.e. rationalising ticketing) increase costs to the taxpayer. He says the rumblings are that the government will not do a full nationalisation but make every franchise a concession, but it will also be doing some industry reorganisation walling the TOC's into their pigeon holes (i.e. Intercity cant try and attract commuters and commuter operations cant compete with Intercity, he cites the Liverpool-Euston West Midlands service as an example), they will be looking for savings from greater national integration and the main focus of that would be reducing operational staff where two tocs both employ staff to do the same job in the same place. Also as the government will be keeping all the revenue ORCATS will be ended.
Personally I could see it playing out as station staff and some planning staff becoming Network Rail employees rather than TOC employees and leaving the TOCs to purely operate the train services and onboard staff.