EE/12/4 Cabinet 14 March 2012

Great Western Rail Franchise Devon County Council Perspective

Report of the Head of Economy and Enterprise

Please note that the following recommendation/srecommendations areis/are subject subject to considerationto consideration and and determination by the CabinetExecutive (and (and confirmation confirmation unde underr the the provisions provisions of ofthe the Council's Constitution) before taking effect.

Recommendation: (a) that Cabinet endorses the principle of working with key stakeholders in the South West to present a shared view to Government; (b) that the detailed response to the franchise consultation questions as set out in Annex 1 be forwarded to the Department for Transport; (c) that Cabinet support the principle of a Western access route to Heathrow.

1. Summary

This report considers and proposes the County Council response to the Department for Transport’s Consultation on the Great Western Rail Franchise specification.

2. Introduction

The replacement of the Great Western Rail Franchise is an important issue for Devon County Council as rail plays a significant role in both local and long-distance communications, and has a vital role to the economy of Devon and the far SW.

The current franchise expires in April 2013, and Department for Transport (DfT) is at present consulting on the issues which might be contained in the franchise specification. The DfT consultation document is available at www.dft.gov.uk/consultations . This consultation runs until 31 March 2012.

DfT will issue the Invitation to Tender (ITT) to bidders in May 2012. The returned tenders should be submitted in August 2012 and an announcement made of the successful bidder before the end of the year.

3. Context for the New Franchise

The new Great Western Franchise will be awarded in circumstances which are very different from the current franchise. This is to be a long franchise, of 15 years, and hence there is an expectation that the successful bidder will be able to bring significant finance for improvements as part of their franchise bid. The Department for Transport is therefore minded to make the franchise specification much less specific than hitherto, in order to give bidders scope for innovation so as to get the maximum benefit from their investment.

The underlying context is one of year on year growth in passenger numbers on the Great Western network, even during the economic downturn of the last couple of years. Patronage on local train services across Devon and Cornwall has grown by 91% over the decade from 2001 to 2011.

It is anticipated that passenger growth will continue, partly as a result of land use planning policies which will deliver additional residential and employment development close to stations on the Great Western network both in the South West and more generally. Another key element in the context of this franchise is the fact that there will be significant infrastructure investment over the next decade, with completion of the major capacity increase at Reading station; delivery of the Crossrail project, and electrification the main lines from Paddington to Bristol, South Wales, Newbury and Oxford.

Electrification will be accompanied by the provision of a new train fleet, the Intercity Express Project (IEP) which is being procured separately by DfT. The IEP train fleet will comprise of electric units which will be the mainstay of express services on the electrified routes, replacing the current high speed trains (HST) on these routes. IEP will also be delivered in ‘bi-mode’ form which will allow trains to run on electric power over sections of route which have been electrified and then to continue on diesel power on the rest of their journey.

One of the key principles which must be sought from the franchise is that the train capacity which is provided under the franchise meets the increase in demand which is anticipated as a result of both planning policy and also the switch to rail resulting from local and national transport policies.

A further key principle is that the starting point for the new timetable should be the level of services being operated at present. The present timetable is significantly more extensive than the original specification for the current franchise, and it was hugely disruptive when services were reduced in 2006 as a consequence of moving to the then-new service specification. Such disruption must be avoided this time.

There are many stakeholders involved in the Great Western Franchise, given its significant geographical extent. There is a risk, if all stakeholders respond to DfT independently, that they would receive a great volume of advice which turned out to be contradictory and difficult to process. The County Council has therefore sought to explore the scope for common ground with other authorities in the South West Peninsula, through discussions with Cornwall, , and Somerset; City Council and Community Rail Groups together with Travel Watch South West and Business Representatives.

These discussions have suggested that there is indeed scope for a common objective in discussions with Department for Transport, as detailed below in relation to the various train service groups provided under the Greater Western Franchise.

4. Main Line Services to Paddington

During the period of the new franchise significant enhancements will be delivered in services to Bristol and South Wales, through electrification of these routes. Also, in the broader national context, major improvements are expected in services between London, the Midlands and North, through the High Speed 2 proposals. Hence, there is a significant risk of the South West Peninsula being placed at a relative disadvantage unless improvements are made to the mainline Great Western Services from the South West Peninsula to Paddington.

A key South West objective is therefore for faster journey times, together with trains which meet the needs of business and leisure travellers, in terms of comfort, wi-fi, etc. It is important to note that the objective is not just to get people from the South West up to meetings in London quicker, but also to enhance the South West as a business destination by faster journey times from London, and by a range of services out of Paddington that enables people to do a full day’s meeting in the South West at locations such as Taunton,

Exeter and Plymouth. This means earlier arrivals from London than at present and later departures.

Similarly, the South West is an important tourist region, and therefore it is important that the train services cater adequately for recreational journeys to Torbay, South Devon and Cornwall both in terms of arrival and departure times and the adequacy of the train accommodation.

It is felt that faster journey times can be achieved from the start of the franchise through adjusted stopping patterns, ideally the omission of intermediate stops between Taunton and Reading. It is believed that timings could be further improved incrementally through the duration of the franchise, as a result of track and signalling improvements together with extensions of electrification beyond the currently planned termination point at Newbury.

In addition to an hourly fast service, which would probably be operated by refurbished High Speed Trains, it is felt there should be a second hourly service between Paddington and Exeter, this to run as a ‘semi-fast’ calling at intermediate locations such as Westbury. DfT’s indicative train plan for the IEP includes the operation of such services, but not a complete hourly template throughout the day. It is suggested that a number of these services might be extended to Torbay, giving direct connections between Torbay and Paddington.

5. Intra-Regional Services

An hourly fast train from Cornwall to Paddington, as set out above, would give reduced connectivity for destinations particularly in Cornwall, and it is therefore suggested that this mainline service should be complemented by an hourly stopping service between Exeter and Penzance. At present there are some trains which fulfil this function, but not a complete hourly pattern.

A similar principle should be adopted on the route between Exeter and Bristol, as at present the regular stopping service from Bristol only goes as far as Taunton, leaving the gap between Taunton and Exeter to be covered by mainline services: these services should go through to Exeter St David’s.

6 Local Train Service – The Devon Metro Network

Over the past decade the County Council has worked closely with the rail industry to develop a consistent pattern of services on the routes radiating from Exeter to Exmouth, Torbay and Barnstaple, and this has resulted in impressive year on year growth in passenger numbers. In the past 5 years patronage on the Barnstaple line has risen by 59%, and on the Exmouth line by 29%. These increases have, in turn, given rise to capacity problems which have been mitigated to an extent through the securing of additional rolling stock.

The current service pattern, which has been improved during the current franchise with additional train services supported both by First Great Western and by Devon County Council is two trains per hour between Exeter and Exmouth, an hourly service between Exeter and Barnstaple, and an hourly service between Exeter and Paignton.

The Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy, prepared by Network Rail and adopted by the rail industry, supports the provision of two trains per hour between Exeter and Paignton. The existing infrastructure can support a two trains per hour service and it should be a clear objective of the new franchise to provide sufficient rolling stock for this to be operated from the start of the franchise.

In addition to these services, the new franchise offers the opportunity to develop regular services between Exeter and Okehampton, where at present there is just a summer Sunday service operated by First Great Western on behalf of Devon County Council and to provide additional trains between Exeter and Axminster where there are significant gaps in the local train service within East Devon that South West Trains operate. It is suggested that initially a two hour frequency service could be operated to Okehampton, and the existing infrastructure on the Waterloo to Exeter line will only enable one extra train in each direction every two hours between Exeter and Axminster.

There is one further local branch line, between Plymouth and Gunnislake. Here, it is proposed that the service should be hourly during the morning and evening peak periods, and otherwise two hourly, from the start of the franchise. The County Council is currently working with the rail industry, West Devon Borough Council and developers to secure re- opening of the former railway between Bere Alston and Tavistock. This would significantly increase the catchment for the line, and it is suggested that from the date of opening to Tavistock the objective should be an hourly train service.

7. Service Standards and New Stations

In addition to the new station proposed for Tavistock further additional stations are planned, in association with development, particularly in the Exeter Growth Area. A new station is set to open at Cranbrook new community, in East Devon, during 2013, served by the Waterloo to Exeter line and plans are being prepared for a station at Newcourt, between Digby and Sowton and Topsham on the Exmouth line. A further new station is planned at Marsh Barton, on the main line adjacent to the existing business park, and further stations are being planned for Monkerton, near the Met Office and Edgingswell near Torbay Hospital.

As well as specific issues in relation to timetable and train services, there are some general characteristics which should be sought from the new franchise. These include improved station standards, including information, accessibility and infrastructure. The proposed lease arrangements will transfer greater responsibility to the franchise holder.

In addition, it will be important that the franchise holder ensures adequate station staffing and arrangements for ticket purchase. Parking is also a significant issue, both the availability of sufficient parking and also the pricing, which should be considered reasonable by users in comparison with the fare for carrying out their journey.

8. Devolution

As part of the national McNulty review into rail industry costs, one of the proposals was for devolution of elements of train service management to more local bodies. This reflects an expectation that better value for money might be achieved if the franchise holder was more in tune with local needs.

A consultation paper on potential devolution options is to be published by the Department for Transport in spring 2012, but it seems that the response on the franchise specification response will need to be made to DfT in advance of this consultation on devolution.

The principle of more local determination of train service patterns is to be welcomed. However, the details of any potential devolution mechanism will need to be carefully considered, as it is unrealistic to expect local authorities with limited budgets to take a significant burden of risk through this process. It is suggested that local authorities might welcome engagement in the management of a ring fenced budget, to ensure that it best reflects the needs of local travellers, and that the best return is achieved from Government financial support for the rail industry.

9. Western Access to Heathrow

In addition to the infrastructure enhancements which are already committed by Government, such as Crossrail and electrification of the to Bristol and South Wales, a further major scheme under consideration is the provision of a Western Access to Heathrow. This would involve the construction of a new chord line, creating a direct route into Heathrow from Reading. The proposal is supported by the Thames Valley Berkshire Local Economic Partnership, and has been considered by Network Rail in their Route Utilisation Strategies.

This route would enable one change (at Reading) access by rail into Heathrow from locations on the Great Western network, effectively replacing the current Reading station to Heathrow coach link. Currently at high level feasibility stage, the project is estimated to cost £500m, and said to be fundable by the private sector.

This development would clearly give significant benefits for travellers from Devon, and it is suggested that it should be supported.

10. Financial Considerations

The County Council already works in partnership with the rail industry to secure additional train services, for example between Exeter and Barnstaple, and the summer service to Okehampton, and has contributed to securing an additional train unit in order to provide extra capacity to meet growing demand. DfT’s expectation is that the current level of financial support from local authorities will be maintained throughout the current CSR period, and that the DfT will then assume financial responsibility for such services in the following CSR period, if the services are deemed to be successful.

Some financial support may be available towards initiating more frequent local train service between and Torbay, under a European funding bid submitted to the INTERREG programme by Devon and Cornwall Rail Partnership. This would require matched funding by the train operator, and contributions from Torbay and the County Council - from within existing budgetary provision.

11. Sustainability and Carbon Impact Considerations

Rail travel forms an important element of Devon’s Local Transport Plan, as a sustainable transport mode for both local and long distance transport. In particular, it offers the opportunity for accommodating growth in housing and employment without exacerbating highway congestion. The ability to provide new stations close the future development areas is especially beneficial in this regard, as it enable additional journeys to be undertaken using trains which are already being operated.

12. Equality Considerations

There are no significant equalities issues posed by this consultation.

13. Legal Considerations

There are no significant legal issues posed by this consultation.

14. Risk Management Considerations

The consultation on the franchise specification does not pose any immediate risk management considerations for the County Council, providing the key principle of the starting point being the existing service pattern is adhered to.

However, if the specification were to involve a significant reduction in train service levels this could have uncertain implications for the County Council’s public transport budget.

15. Options/Alternatives

The County Council has the option of not responding to the DfT consultation. However, that would reduce its ability to influence the shape of an important element of transport provision, both locally and longer distance connections, over a 15 year period.

It is therefore suggested that the stance outlined in the sections above, and in the detailed response to the questions in the DfT consultation document as set out in Annex 1, be endorsed.

Ian Harrison Head of Economy and Enterprise

Electoral Divisions: All

Cabinet Member for Highways and Transportation: Councillor Stuart Hughes Cabinet Member for Economy, Enterprise and Employment: Councillor William Mumford

Strategic Director, Place: Heather Barnes

Local Government Act 1972: List of Background Papers

Contact for enquiries: Ian Harrison

Room No. AB2 Lucombe House, County Hall, Exeter EX2 4QD

Tel No: (01392) 382150

Background Paper Date File Reference

Nil

ih160212cba Great Western Rail Franchise DCC Perspective hk 05 050312

Annex I To EE/12/4

Great Western Rail Franchise: Consultation Questions and Devon County Council’s Proposed Responses

Introduction

Growth Context In addition to the County Council’s responses to the specific questions (below), we are firmly of the view that it is essential that government undertakes a wider reconsideration of investment in infrastructure and rolling stock that is needed in the far South West to ensure that the Franchise aims are met.

Given the key contribution of rail services to the economy, the need for future transport resilience in the face of rising oil prices, and the national policy aim to achieve modal shift from car transport to public transport, Devon believes that it is essential that future growth is able to be accommodated on all rail services throughout the life of the Franchise.

Prime Franchise Aim A prime aim of the Franchise must therefore be that passenger growth is not stifled or choked off by insufficient capacity. Given emerging current capacity problems over much of the Devon Rail network, while the Franchise starting point of current service levels is sensible, we need to recognise that this is unlikely to cater for future demand – even in the early years of the Franchise. We also need to understand that if growth levels continue to be high, existing infrastructure may not be able to meet future growth.

Infrastructure Needs over 15 Years We cannot predict what patronage levels will be like in ten or fifteen years, but in the context of current passenger growth, it is absolutely essential, if future growth can only be met through improved infrastructure, that funding is available for these infrastructure improvements to be carried out. Clearly these issues are, at the very least partly, outside the Franchise.

Without wishing to make firm predictions on passenger growth, a number of factors would indicate a high likelihood of significant passenger growth over the period of the Franchise:

• the recent upward trend in passenger growth, even while the economy is sluggish

• the relatively high population growth in the South West, with much of this growth broadly along the main railway corridors

• the trend of diversification of the far South West economy in relation to work patterns, home working, work type/internet working and how this affects travel needs

• the consensus that fuel prices can only go one way in the future as global demand outstrips production, which is likely to further add to demand - and to the need for the rail network to be sufficiently resilient to meet these future demands.

Governance To ensure that the Franchise does perform in this context, it is advocated that:

DfT, in parallel to the franchise, works with Devon Count Council - and with the five far South West Local Transport Authorities on issues concerning the main line Berks & Hants line to

Penzance and Paignton – and with the TOC, Network Rail and Devon & Cornwall Rail Partnership, with a clear aim to ensure that the Franchise is able to effectively cater for:

(i) passenger growth, and ensure that growing patronage is not stifled through lack of capacity;

(ii) improving line speeds, to minimise any disadvantage relative to other regions in journey time to London both currently and post-electrification to Bristol/Cardiff.

Given the length of the Franchise, this would require a regular ongoing formal review process (at least every two years) focussing on current and likely future patronage and capacity, and line speed improvements, to include all infrastructure aspects including consideration of:

• track improvements/line speed, signalling and passing loops to enable greater frequency and reduced journey times - and concern that the RUS does not cover these adequately;

• improved rolling stock - both improved quality and enhanced capacity.

------

1. Respondents are encouraged to consider whether the proposed franchise objectives are an appropriate expression of the priorities that should apply to the new franchise.

Devon County Council considers that the proposed franchise objectives are appropriate, but may not offer sufficient encouragement to the franchise holder to respond to growth in passenger demand. Bidders must have the scope to explore potential beyond the constraints of the current infrastructure and rolling stock.

2. Respondents are encouraged to consider any specific local factors that they believe might influence the future level of passenger demand and to comment on any specific HLOS recommendations that they believe the franchisee should be required to implement.

Growth in local rail patronage in Devon has outstripped national trends, and has continued through the recession. Land use planning policies will further increase demand for local train use, as development in the Exeter area in particular is being sited at locations convenient for access to the rail network.

One specific service improvement which should be included within the franchise specification is doubling of the local train frequency between Exeter and Paignton, to 2 trains per hour, as proposed in the Great Western RUS. In addition to providing improved service levels to the key settlements served by these trains it would also give better connectivity between Torbay and Plymouth.

3. Respondents are encouraged to consider issues arising from the planned schemes and identify any local factors that should be considered.

The planned deployment of some IEP trains to Exeter should be adopted, using the acceleration characteristic of these trains to call at intermediate stations between Reading and Taunton.

4. Respondents are encouraged to consider any specific local factors that they believe might influence the future level of passenger demand and to comment on any specific RUS recommendations that they believe the franchisee should be required to implement.

As noted in response to Question 2 above, planning policies are likely to deliver additional demand for rail travel, across Devon, and particularly in the Exeter growth area. Hence the RUS requirement for 2 trains per hour between Exeter and Paignton should be a core requirement of the franchise.

5. Respondents are encouraged to consider investment priorities for the franchise and are asked to highlight interfaces with any other schemes that are likely to be delivered during the life of the next franchise. We also welcome proposals for alternative approaches to enable the proposed investment programme to be achieved at a reduced cost.

During the franchise period it is anticipated that the railway will be re-opened between Bere Alston and Tavistock. New stations will be opened at Cranbrook (on the Waterloo to Exeter line); at Newcourt (on the Exmouth branch); at Marsh Barton (between Exeter St Thomas and Starcross) and at Edginswell (between Newton Abbot and Torre). Additional stations are also under consideration at Monkerton (on the Exmouth branch) and Cullompton (between Exeter St David’s and Tiverton Parkway).

With regard to existing stations, improvements to station access at , Newton Abbot, Exeter Central and Exmouth are already under consideration with prospective funding contributions from the Local Sustainable Transport Fund. At Newton Abbot and Exmouth these access improvements in particular are likely to involve joint working with the TOC to establish satisfactory design and revenue protection features.

6. Respondents are encouraged to consider any changes to the services included in the Great Western franchise that they would like to propose as part of a remapping exercise.

At present there is one element of local train service provision in the Exeter area which is not provided by the Great Western franchise. That is the local train service between Exeter and Axminster calling at all stations. This local train service is currently provided by South West Trains, in addition to the hourly through service from Exeter to London Waterloo. There is a logic in having the Exeter to Axminster local services provided by the Great Western franchise holder, particularly in view of the Great Western RUS proposal for two trains per hour between Paignton and Exeter, plus one train per hour between Barnstaple and Exeter. Together, this would give three trains per hour going eastbound at Exeter Central, of which two would go to Exmouth and the third to Axminster.

It is recognised that infrastructure constraints east of Exmouth Junction do not currently permit an hourly local service to Axminster, in addition to the hourly service to London. Hence, from the start of the Great Western franchise, it is suggested that an additional local service of one train every two hours be operated between Exeter and Axminster.

7. Respondents who wish to pursue increments or decrements should make these clear in their response to this consultation. Further information on the Department’s requirements for increments/decrements can be made available on request.

In addition to the provision of local services east of Exeter to Axminster (see Q6 above),

Devon County Council would wish to see regular services operated between Bere Alston and Tavistock, once the route has been re-opened, and weekday/Saturday service between Exeter and Okehampton.

8. Respondents are encouraged to consider: (a) Which responsibilities and types of services on the Great Western franchise might be suitable for more local decision-making? (b) Which options for devolving decision-making should be considered further and which should be rejected? (c) To which bodies might decision-making be devolved and how would governance, accountability and transparency be demonstrated, especially if consortia of sub-national bodies are formed? (d) How might risk be dealt with if responsibilities are devolved?

Devon County Council is interested in the prospect of decentralising some responsibility for local rail services, and looks forward to the impending consultation on the principle. In the absence of specific proposals from Government it is not easy to be prescriptive about options, but the following points give an indication of the County Council’s thinking:- • It would seem logical to decentralise decision making about local train services, such as the network of local train services in the South West peninsula. • One would expect that Local Transport Authorities would be the appropriate authorities to be involved. Clearly there is a potential synergy to be gained from integrating rail service provision with other modes of transport • Given the cost of operating rail services in comparison with local authority budgets it would seem more logical to use decentralisation as a means of using local sensitivity to get the best results from a relatively fixed budget, rather than passing financial risk on to local authorities.

9. Respondents are encouraged to bring to our attention research, evidence or publications which the Department should consider as part of this refranchising process.

The County Council has commissioned a brief study on the wider economic benefits of electrification to the South West. This indicates that there would be a sound justification for further electrification beyond the current approvals which only extend as far as Newbury on the Berks and Hants route to the South West.

10. The final specification will seek to avoid a prescriptive approach and to balance passenger, taxpayer and stakeholder interests. Respondents are encouraged to consider which aspects of the specification they believe should be mandated and which could be left to greater commercial discretion.

It is agreed that bidders should have scope to innovate and take a commercial view on developments, but that the starting point must be the existing level of services currently being operated, and at least the existing train capacity.

11. What balance should be struck between end-to-end journey times and intermediate stops on long distance services? 12. Can the indicative modelled intercity service pattern be improved (noting the IEP availability in Table 3.5 and the availability of other fleets)?

While providing information about current and proposed service patterns, the consultation does not pose direct questions about them. As far as the South West is concerned, given that this area will be served by a mix of HSTs and IEPs, these two questions are taken together.

Devon County Council is strongly of the view that the core inter-city service to the far South West peninsular should be accelerated, if this large part of the region is not to be put at a competitive disadvantage compared with Bristol and South Wales (who will have electrified services) and the Midlands/North (who will have HS2). In the first instance that acceleration can be achieved with HSTs by the omission of station calls between Taunton and Reading. In the longer term, further reductions in end to end journey times should be achievable through track/signalling improvements, and in due course replacement rolling stock. It is proposed that the core fast service to the South West should operate hourly, and that it should not be totally London oriented, but also have a time range to enable a full day’s work to be done by those travelling to the South West from London – with for example an arrival in Plymouth by 10am.

This hourly fast service to the South West should be complemented by an hourly semi-fast from Paddington to Exeter, with some extended to Torbay, This would be operated by the IEP units, as we understand is envisaged in the indicative IEP deployment plan.

Within the South West, the hourly fast service to/from Paddington would call at the more strategic stations in Devon and Cornwall, but in order to achieve faster overall journey times than at present there would be fewer station calls. This fast service should be complemented by a semi-fast, say between Exeter and Penzance, on an hourly basis. This is described in the consultation document as a “Local service overlay”, but the present pattern of such services is inconsistent.

Similarly, it would be logical to extend the current Bristol to Taunton local services to Exeter on an hourly basis, complementing the limited stop services operated under the Cross Country franchise.

13. Whether and, if so, how many of the current HSTs should be subject to life-enhancement refurbishment and what would be their revised life-expectancy be?

Given the significant rolling stock replacement programme already embodied in this franchise, with IEP and electrified outer suburban services, it seems inevitable that longer Inter City services to Devon, Torbay, Plymouth and Cornwall will need to use existing diesel rolling stock at least until the early 2020s.

Hence there seems to be a sound case for refurbishment and life extension of HSTs to provide a train fleet which is fit for purpose for the requirements of the South West Express services. The characteristics should be appropriate for longer journey times, for example:- • Seating aligned with windows • Greater leg room • Wi-fi/ improved mobile phone connectivity to enable effective business use • Retention toilets • Automatically opening doors and selective door opening

• A catering offer • additional space for large items of luggage.

There should be a franchise commitment to achieve such refurbishment early in the franchise duration, and a presumption that this will be the final refurbishment with the trains being replaced later in the franchise term (potentially by electric units following progressive electrification)

14. Should other InterCity rolling stock, either new or cascaded, be procured for these services?

It is an industry question as to whether other rolling stock would be more suitable than refurbished HSTs, but the key factor is having stock available to be refurbished at an early point in the franchise.

15. What should be the future of the overnight service between Paddington and Penzance, given that the sleeping cars and, especially, the locomotives, are ageing?

It might be appropriate to leave it to bidders as to determine how they would satisfy this demand.

It should be noted that the sleeper service also provides useful “first and last” services in seated accommodation. The absence of the service on Saturday restricts journey opportunities, particularly late journeys from Cornwall.

16. What is the best balance between fast outer commuter services and intermediate stops? How could the residual suburban services best be optimised once Crossrail services start?

17. Under current plans for electrification, direct services from the Henley and Bourne End branches to Paddington would still have to be diesel-operated. Respondents are encouraged to consider if these services would represent a good use of scarce timetable slots on the main line, given that these slots could be used by higher-capacity electric trains.

Given that the main bulk of the inner and outer commuting network from Paddington will be electrified, it would seem perverse to continue operating diesel commuter services into Paddington. Hence it would seem logical to extend electrification to include branch lines such as Henley, together with electrification of the Berks and Hants route to Bedwyn (at least), and preferably to Westbury.

It would also seem logical to operate Crossrail services from Reading, rather than Maidenhead.

18. Are the services that extend eastwards from Portsmouth to Brighton the best use of Great Western diesel rolling stock, in view of the fact that there are frequent electric services provided by Southern on this route, or could this rolling stock could usefully be redeployed elsewhere?

Given that there is already a shortage of diesel multiple units for regional and local services in the Bristol and South West areas of the franchise, it would seem logical to terminate Great

Western franchise services at Portsmouth.

19. Should branch line services continue to call at all branch line stations, or could the needs of most passengers be better met by omission of some of the intermediate stops on some or all of the trains, so that the final destination is reached more quickly?

There is no unique answer to this question, as every branch line is different. This is the sort of issue which could best be determined by a Train Operator and Local Transport Authority working together, in the context of a decentralised approach to franchise management.

20. Do the medium-distance regional services (e.g. Cardiff to Portsmouth and Worcester/Gloucester to Weymouth) adequately serve the needs of all passengers along their lines of route, or would shorter-distance services, targeted on local travel requirements, be more beneficial?

Again, there is no single answer to this question, as it will depend upon the route in question. Given the scale of the settlements along the Cardiff to Portsmouth route (e.g. Southampton, Bath, Bristol) it is likely that there is a significant level of longer distance travel, as well as local movements. By contrast, there seems less likelihood of long distance travel in the case of Worcester/Gloucester to Weymouth., and hence less logic for treating it as a single route.

21. Taking in to account the current service pattern and the future changes, respondents are encouraged to suggest train service changes that they believe will be affordable, deliver value for money and provide a strong commercial, social or economic case.

As noted above, in responses to Q12 • Hourly fast service from Paddington to South West, with no stops between Reading and Taunton • Hourly Semi-fast from Paddington to Exeter/Torbay • Hourly semi-fast from Exeter to:Penzance • Hourly semi-fast from Bristol to Taunton and Exeter In response to Q6 • Half hourly local from Paignton to Exeter • Half hourly local from Exmouth to Exeter all trains calling at all stations (potentially increasing to 3 or 4 an hour with patronage growth during the life of the Franchise) • Hourly local from Barnstaple to Exeter (potentially increasing to half hourly with patronage growth during the life of the Franchise). Later weekday services In response to Q7 • Two hourly local from Exeter to Axminster, with enhancement to hourly in due course with additional infrastructure • Two Hourly local from Exeter to Okehampton • Extension of services from Bere Alston to Tavistock (when open)

22. Respondents are encouraged to consider appropriate train times and service frequencies during planned disruption for the life of the new franchise. Respondents are also encouraged to consider alternative service propositions.

With resignalling of much of the Salisbury to Exeter line being undertaken in 2012 there may be scope for enhancing the ability of this route to serve as a diversionary route for Great

Western services, through provision of additional passing loops or extension of current double track sections. At present the capacity of the route to accommodate additional traffic is limited by the single line sections.

23. Respondents are encouraged to consider: (a) the steps which bidders should be expected to take to meet passenger demand and the most appropriate mechanisms for ensuring additional capacity is provided when it becomes necessary; and (b) how capacity should be measured and appropriate targets set.

The most urgent need is for additional diesel rolling stock to meet growth which is already occurring on local services. The best way of achieving this is probably by cascading diesel rolling stock from electrified routes, and by not running diesel services over electrified routes.

24. Respondents are encouraged to highlight any performance areas of particular concern.

Overcrowding on all lines during peak times is a cause for concern, particularly given the continued patronage growth on all lines in Devon. Overcrowding also reduces the possibility of ticket sales and effective revenue protection, provision of passenger information. This also impacts upon patronage data reliability.

25. Respondents are encouraged to consider how best to improve the overall efficiency of the rail industry to enable reductions in unit costs to be achieved.

There would appear to be scope along the main line for improvements to track speeds; this could also be improved on some sections (e.g. west of Totnes) with improved signalling. One off investment of this kind would help improve reliability, journey times and vehicle utilisation. Similarly, some passing loops on branch lines would facilitate the ability to cater for future growth, which in turn would ensure optimum unit costs as patronage grows.

26. Respondents are encouraged to consider the best method for funding major station enhancements and are encouraged to consider any local accessibility issues that they believe need addressing.

The station travel plan approach for key stations provides an effective platform for prioritising improvements. Given recent improvements to many stations in Devon, better car parking, cycle facilities and pedestrian/cycle routes to the station need to be considered further where needed.

Accessibility includes the need for greater inclusivity. Station staffing is a concern, where key stations are unstaffed in the evenings they can understandably be viewed as no go areas by women and older people. While it is understood that greater station staffing is not necessarily an easy answer, if we are to make the railway more inclusive to all people these issues will need to be addressed. In particular there needs to be further consideration of (a) whether day staffing should be replaced with evening staffing; (b) whether there is scope for use of station buildings by businesses which are open in the evening and/or which have synergies with rail travel - e.g. taxi offices - through beneficial rents etc.

At Dawlish the local circumstances require that wheelchair access to the down platform is only available during staffed hours (utilising the barrow crossing). There is a need to

preserve this arrangement and possibly extend staffing hours in order to provide improved access for all at this station pending a suitable alternative arrangement.

27. Respondents are encouraged to consider which locations merit consideration for future improvement under these schemes and how such schemes could be funded.

Key stations should be included such as Barnstaple, Crediton, Exmouth, Dawlish. Teignmouth, Totnes.

An Access to Stations Local Sustainable Transport Fund bid is currently being considered by the DfT covering some of these stations. Increasing use of Digby & Sowton would also suggest its suitability for permanent staffing.

28. Respondents are encouraged to consider how security and safety might be improved, together with any local safety issues that they believe need addressing.

Please see the response to Q 26 above.

29. Respondents are encouraged to consider how ticket purchase could be made easier and how to minimise revenue loss across the franchise.

Unless all stations are gated, which would appear to be unrealistic, effective revenue protection will require more mobile ticket issuing staff on trains. With a reliance on automatic ticket machines, a passenger can always have a reason not to have a ticket (e.g. they did not have time/the machine was not working). We are extremely concerned that revenue loss both masks the true level of passenger flows, and may indirectly result in unnecessary further subsidy over and above what is truly required to run the railway, including from the local authority where it subsidises services.

30. Respondents are encouraged to consider how best to communicate information with passengers across the franchise and how best to keep passengers informed during times of disruption.

Prior information on planned disruption would appear to be relatively well managed. For unplanned disruption Devon would favour considering the development of a mobile phone text system where regular passengers can register to a route; those registered would then receive texts when disruption takes place on that line, including unforeseen/short notice disruption in real time. This would appear to be more inclusive than e.g. an App that is only available for smartphone users. DCC considers that a 21 st century railway schedule be able to deliver 21 st century communications on delays.

Station-based real time information systems should similarly be used to provide information on unplanned disruption, and direct people to where they can find more details on planned disruption periodically.

Rehearsed contingency plans for dealing with predictable disruption caused by inclement weather at Dawlish and leaf fall on the South Devon banks would also improve communication and reduce delay to passengers. This may include better communications between TOCs and Network Rail control staff and front line staff and could be incorporated with the new route management structure.

31. The Department is considering the appropriate approach for monitoring and improving service quality in the new franchise, and respondents are encouraged to consider the proposals suggested, to highlight any alternative proposals and to make recommendations on any issues that may be identified.

Given that the Franchise is for 15 years, we consider it is absolutely essential for formal regular governance of the Franchise to take place with all relevant stakeholders, to include DfT, the TOC, Network Rail, and the local transport authority, to meet at regular intervals, to identify issues where additional inputs are required to ensure that the railway continues to perform and cater for needs. For the Berks & Hants main line, this should also include all five far SW Local Transport Authorities (Cornwall, Plymouth, Torbay, Devon and Somerset).

A prime responsibility of this Franchise Governance Group should be to identify what needs to be done to ensure that sufficient capacity exists at all times; TOCs/Network Rail/DfT should then be tasked with taking the relevant actions to this end. A key task therefore is to identify emerging capacity problems and, where this exists, to flag up for DfT consideration of investment in additional infrastructure – whether line speed, passing loops or additional rolling stock – where it is needed to meet growing patronage.

Above all, within the Franchise there needs to be a clear commitment on the part of the TOC, Network Rail and DfT that they will work to ensure that passenger growth is not choked off by insufficient train service capacity.

32. Respondents are encouraged to consider what level of catering provision should be provided.

Current levels are felt to be broadly adequate. However HSTs would appear to, too often, not provide any catering – which is felt to be unacceptable for a long journey between Paddington and Devon/Cornwall. The TOC should be required to provide a trolley service where there is equipment failure, and to provide adequate staffing levels to ensure that there are sufficient catering staff at all times on intercity mainline routes.

Current HST dining cars result in either (a) less seating capacity than would be the case if that carriage was seating only, or (b) reduced train performance (acceleration/ journey time) compared to if these cars were taken out. There needs to be a thorough assessment of which option is most preferable if the current dining car facilities were omitted from the franchise. We consider that adequate catering facilities could be provided using significantly less room than is currently the case.

33. Respondents are encouraged to consider local accessibility and mobility issues and suggest how improvements could be made.

It is recognised that providing full access at all stations is always going to be a challenge and that costs may be prohibitive at some stations. However an increasingly aged population (the SW is expected to have the largest rise in the country in the coming years) should provide sufficient business case to ensure that the railway is accessible to people with limited mobility.

34. Respondents are encouraged to consider what environmental targets could be set within the franchise specification.

All environmental targets should include factoring in the environmental benefits from further passenger modal shift from cars onto trains.