Would a Marples style review of the railway be sensible now? What form might it take?

[Mike Machin]

So long as those of us who don't drive, acquiesce.

It would probably be cheaper and greener to close non-electrified lines and to pay for people to have driving lessons to enable them to enjoy the freedom of having personal transport.

 

[A0wen]

Personally I think someone far less biased would have made a better Transport minister, like someone who didn't own a road building firm and hadn't rigged the sale if his shares in that firm.

You mean like a "a Scottish coal miner and trade unionist" - whou would have been against the railway reducing its use if coal?

Or a "a journalist for both Tribune and the Daily Mirror"

Which were his immediate successors.

The one which followed them had been an office for the Union NUPE though his father had worked for the GWR.

Or you could have a barrister, who's only notable act as a minister was when he was Defence Secretary, to fall asleep during the Queen's Jubilee Review of the Royal Air Force at RAF Finningley in 1977 when there was considerable noise around him. Subsequently the RAF referred to having a all sleep on excercise as having a "Fred Mulley"

 

[A0wen]

New technology is a bit of an outlayer.

As you yourself have confirmed, costs generally go up and up, therefore so will the subsidy.

New technology isn't the only one though.

Food is much cheaper in real terms than it was in the 70s or 80s.

A pint of milk in 1980 was ~17p - that would be about 92p now. It's less than 80p in most supermarkets and if you are buying mutiples (as most families would) you can get 4 pints for less than £1.50, whereas in 1980 it was very rare to see milk sold in anything other than pints.

 

[Krokodil]

It would probably be cheaper and greener to close non-electrified lines and to pay for people to have driving lessons to enable them to enjoy the freedom of having personal transport.

You think that the only reason that a quarter of the adult population don't have driving licences is that they can't afford the lessons?

What will happen to people who suffer from seizures? Blind people? The elderly? Teenagers? People who are just plain nervous?

There are enough motorists who aren't fit to be on the roads, we should not be forcing more people to join them. Quite apart from the congestion it would cause.

 

[renegademaster]

The Great Yarmouth branch could probably have the axe from a miserly government without annoying too many people from either Great Yarmouth or Norwich, since the bus is normally the most convenient. Would be annoying for the people in the immediate stations but would they be politically be powerful enough to stop a closure considering their relative small size?

 

[DJ_K666]

You mean like a "a Scottish coal miner and trade unionist" - whou would have been against the railway reducing its use if coal?

Or a "a journalist for both Tribune and the Daily Mirror"

Which were his immediate successors.

The one which followed them had been an office for the Union NUPE though his father had worked for the GWR.

Or you could have a barrister, who's only notable act as a minister was when he was Defence Secretary, to fall asleep during the Queen's Jubilee Review of the Royal Air Force at RAF Finningley in 1977 when there was considerable noise around him. Subsequently the RAF referred to having a all sleep on excercise as having a "Fred Mulley"

I wonder if Fred Mulley ever lived that one down...

 

[Dr Hoo]

Did PP initiate the Serpell review ? I thought it was gmt imposed.

Correct. Wikipedia and other sources say Serpell was commissioned by the government of Margaret Thatcher Not Peter Parker,

May I suggest that you (re-)read Peter Parker's autobiography, For Starters, Chapter 12 No Music at Midnight and Terry Gourvish's definitive history of British Rail 1974-97? To quote the opening words of Chaper 5 of the latter, entitled The Serpell Report: "The Serpell Report, Review of Railway Finances, published in January 1983, was the most important policy document of the decade to affect the railway industry. Emerging from a public debate initiated by Peter Parker on the state of the railways and the need for a long term strategy..."

The lesson is: 'If things are going quite well at the organisation that you have been leading for five years, do not suggest to the government that they should undertake a review that you will not be in control of!'

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Thanks. Gone on Amazon and ordered a copy. Does sound like a worthwhile read.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

It would probably be cheaper and greener to close non-electrified lines and to pay for people to have driving lessons to enable them to enjoy the freedom of having personal transport.

Yes, I really enjoyed sitting in a car on crowded motorways yesterday for 5 hours for a journey that was impractical to do by train. If only the government would close more railways so I could have the freedom to do that for more of my journeys.

 

[Magdalia]

The Great Yarmouth branch could probably have the axe from a miserly government without annoying too many people from either Great Yarmouth or Norwich, since the bus is normally the most convenient. Would be annoying for the people in the immediate stations but would they be politically be powerful enough to stop a closure considering their relative small size?

Evidently you don't know much about Norfolk.

Great Yarmouth is the 4th busiest station in Norfolk, only behind Norwich, Kings Lynn and Diss. It had almost 400k passengers in 2022/23. That is a 14% increase on 2019/20.

The Sheringham branch has been even more successful at building traffic. Both of Sheringham and Cromer had almost 250k passengers in 2022/23, a percentage increase for the two combined of about 20% compared with 2019/20.

The figures are from an appendix in this Norfolk County Council report.

https://norfolk.citizenspace.com/environment-transport-and-development/norfolk-rail-prospectus-consultation-2024/supporting_documents/Norfolk%20Rail%20Prospectus%202024.pdf

Executive Summary Rail is vitally important to the county of Norfolk. Rail provides links for business and leisure trips to London, Cambridge, Peterborough and other major centres. Rail also serves important commuting links, especially into Norwich from Sheringham, Great Yarmouth and Lowestoft. Before 2020 there had been a steady rise in passenger numbers over the previous five years. Although passenger numbers are increasing again from a drop during the Covid-19 pandemic some stations are recovering quicker than others.

And the bus isn't very good when there is a blockage on the single carriageway A47 between Acle and Yarmouth. The roads in Norfolk are notoriously poor, and, famously, it has no motorways.

 

[yorksrob]

May I suggest that you (re-)read Peter Parker's autobiography, For Starters, Chapter 12 No Music at Midnight and Terry Gourvish's definitive history of British Rail 1974-97? To quote the opening words of Chaper 5 of the latter, entitled The Serpell Report: "The Serpell Report, Review of Railway Finances, published in January 1983, was the most important policy document of the decade to affect the railway industry. Emerging from a public debate initiated by Peter Parker on the state of the railways and the need for a long term strategy..."

The lesson is: 'If things are going quite well at the organisation that you have been leading for five years, do not suggest to the government that they should undertake a review that you will not be in control of!'

He was correct in that there needed to be a long term strategy - other than managed decline.

The Serpell report turned out to be just the ideal political tool to galvanise the public against further decline.

 

[stevieinselby]

Great Yarmouth is the 4th busiest station in Norfolk, only behind Norwich, Kings Lynn and Diss. It had almost 400k passengers in 2022/23. That is a 14% increase on 2019/20.

The Sheringham branch has been even more successful at building traffic. Both of Sheringham and Cromer had almost 250k passengers in 2022/23, a percentage increase for the two combined of about 20% compared with 2019/20.

It would be interesting to know how much of that growth can be attributed to the new Flirt trains – could be useful in pushing for greater investment in high-quality new trains if it has had a tangible and significant effect in boosting ridership.

 

[Western Lord]

Extract from a speech made in November 1963:-
"There is no future for our cities on the basis of one-man one-car commuting; and since we can't have that then public transport becomes increasingly important. The lesson could not be plainer, and if anyone doubts it, what has happened in America should be enough to change their minds. I've said this before and every time I say it I am accused of declaring war on the motorist. That's the travesty of the truth. In this country there cannot be absolutely free use of cars on roads. It is a choice between the law of the jungle and trying to impose some rules."
The speaker was Ernest Marples as reported in Autocar magazine of November 22nd 1963.
Far from being the friend of the motorist, motoring lobbyists abhorred the snail's pace of motorway development in the UK. It is entirely possible that Marple's unpopularity with motorists was enough to swing the 1964 election away from the Conservatives (it was, as they say, a close run thing).

 

[Clarence Yard]

He was correct in that there needed to be a long term strategy - other than managed decline.

The Serpell report turned out to be just the ideal political tool to galvanise the public against further decline.

Parker knew what he was doing - Serpell was an agitator and Parker thought it would all blow up in his face.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Parker knew what he was doing - Serpell was an agitator and Parker thought it would all blow up in his face.

I am normally inclined to agree with your sound and knowledgeable posts but from reading Parker’s autobiography it seems clear that he did NOT anticipate the process or the outcome. To be fair, I don’t think that Serpell (previously a quite long-serving BR Board member) imagined that the Review could be subverted so much by other members and DfT civil servants either.

 

[6Gman]

Bear in mind that the line was reprieved as schoolchildren in Dolwyddelan couldn't get to school in Blaenau Ffestiniog when the Crimea Pass was blocked by snow, which still applies today (plus the flasks from Trawsfynydd of course)

How often has the Crimea Pass been closed by snow in recent years?

I know it used to happen - my primary school teacher commuted from Blaenau to Llandudno Junction and sometimes had to catch the train, but that was 60 years ago!

 

[yorksrob]

Parker knew what he was doing - Serpell was an agitator and Parker thought it would all blow up in his face.

I remember reading that Serpell was a Beeching man, involved in the original closure programme.

 

[Clarence Yard]

It was the other way round, Beeching was a Serpell man!

Serpell was the civil servant in charge of rail from 1960-63. He and his boss had a dim view of how the railways were being run.

 

[yorksrob]

It was the other way round, Beeching was a Serpell man!

Serpell was the civil servant in charge of rail from 1960-63. He and his boss had a dim view of how the railways were being run.

Certainly not a match made in heaven, either way !

 

[Yew]

I doubt, to be fair, its findings would be the same. Some very minor lines might be in danger of closure (stuff like the middle bit of the Cumbrian Coast), but in reality it'd mostly be talking of standardisation and simplification (and electrification)

It would be interesting to imagine an alternative world, where instead of the random micro-fleets of today, we had continued with the BREL/Metro-Cammel combo, I imagine a lot more things would be able to work together, and probably with fewer, larger classes.

What are people who cannot drive supposed to do? Just accept that it will now take twice as long to get to/from work on a bus?

The car will drive its self?

 

[Indigo Soup]

In the end, one of the reasons for mass closures in the 1960s and such was because strike action is way more effective at stopping changes short of closure than at stopping closure.

And, indeed, closing a line makes it very easy to make the case for redundancy of the staff required to operate it, thereby reducing the wage bill. Making operating efficiencies to achieve the same goal is far more likely to result in industrial action across the entire rail system.

What are people who cannot drive supposed to do? Just accept that it will now take twice as long to get to/from work on a bus?

More or less, yes. That does seem to be the desired outcome of the car lobby.

Buses have the great advantage for those who want a car-centric transport system that they use basically the same infrastructure, but offer a user experience that is worse in every way.

 

[Krokodil]

The car will drive its self?

I can't wait to see how autonomous cars will cope with single track roads with passing places (whether country lanes or due to street parking)

 

[Indigo Soup]

I can't wait to see how autonomous cars will cope with single track roads with passing places (whether country lanes or due to street parking)

Badly. The advocates of autonomous cars seem to rely heavily on an assumption that the road environment will be modified to suit the limits of their technology.

See also the idea of banning crossing the road, and requiring pedestrians to carry transponders so cars know they're there.

 

[Krokodil]

Badly. The advocates of autonomous cars seem to rely heavily on an assumption that the road environment will be modified to suit the limits of their technology.

So this scheme is supposed to save money because they can cut public transport funding?

See also the idea of banning crossing the road, and requiring pedestrians to carry transponders so cars know they're there.

No surprise that the country which has been an early adopter of autonomous vehicles is the one which has criminalised walking and demolished swathes of their cities to widen roads and extend car parks.

 

[Indigo Soup]

So this scheme is supposed to save money because they can cut public transport funding?

More or less. It leans very heavily on a 'Public bad, private good' view of the world. Those who lose out ought to work harder to prove they have a right to exist.

 

[Russel]

I wouldn't support closing lines, but I do think there is a need to cull some of the stations that are only still open because closing them involves too much paper work.

 

[Grumpy]

It was the other way round, Beeching was a Serpell man!

Serpell was the civil servant in charge of rail from 1960-63. He and his boss had a dim view of how the railways were being run.

You couldn’t really blame them. Spiralling annual deficits, poor timekeeping, electrification scenes seriously delayed with costs spiralling, rolling stock with years of life left being prematurely withdrawn, new rolling stock being delivered late and issues with introduction-and then found to be not needed. Money squandered on unnecessary investment projects.
Couldn’t happen today. Oh wait a minute……

 

[HSTEd]

Although they turned out to be operationally succesful, the Class 9Fs were financially a disaster for the railway, arriving far too late. Would have been better buying more Class 20s!

And that's one of the less terrible decisions the railway made in the pre Beeching era.

 

[Indigo Soup]

Although they turned out to be operationally succesful, the Class 9Fs were financially a disaster for the railway, arriving far too late. Would have been better buying more Class 20s!

The same can be said for all the BR Standard steam locomotives. Starting dieselisation and main line electrification at least five years earlier (and arguably as much as ten years earlier) would have been a far wiser investment. If any steam locomotives were needed to fill the gap, pre-Nationalisation classes would have done just fine without wasting drawing office resources.

 

[Magdalia]

Although they turned out to be operationally succesful, the Class 9Fs were financially a disaster for the railway, arriving far too late. Would have been better buying more Class 20s!

And that's one of the less terrible decisions the railway made in the pre Beeching era.

In the 1950s the most important thing that BR did was moving heavy coal trains, over long distances, for electricity generation, town gas and heavy industry. The 9Fs were already designed and delivery started before the Modernisation Plan was published. BR carried on building them because they were superior to any alternative diesels, or any pre-Nationalisation 2-8-0 steam locos, until the development of the Brush Type 4. That's why BR built 250 of them.

Use of class 20s in pairs on coal trains was not long distance work, mostly local trips. It only started in the mid 1960s after line closures eliminated most of the branch trip freights, for which they were first intended, making them available for other things. To buy pairs of class 20s instead of 9Fs in the mid 1950s would have required hundreds more locos and would have been hideously expensive. It would also have eaten up loco building capacity at English Electric that was more usefully employed building other classes.

It is easy to be wise with hindsight, but, looking at it from the perspective of what BR knew at the time, building 9Fs was a good decision.