The Departmental Annual Report 2004

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

The Departmental Annual Report 2004 House of Commons Transport Committee The Departmental Annual Report 2004 Fourth Report of Session 2004–05 Report, together with formal minutes, oral and written evidence Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 2 March 2005 HC 409 Incorporating HC 1280-i, Session 2003-04 Published on 10 March 2005 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £14.50 The Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Transport and its associated public bodies. Current membership Mrs Gwyneth Dunwoody MP (Labour, Crewe) (Chairman) Mr Jeffrey M Donaldson MP (Democratic Unionist, Lagan Valley) Mr Brian H. Donohoe MP (Labour, Cunninghame South) Clive Efford MP (Labour, Eltham) Mrs Louise Ellman MP (Labour/Co-operative, Liverpool Riverside) Ian Lucas MP (Labour, Wrexham) Miss Anne McIntosh MP (Conservative, Vale of York) Mr Paul Marsden MP (Liberal Democrat, Shrewsbury and Atcham) Mr John Randall MP (Conservative, Uxbridge) Mr George Stevenson MP (Labour, Stoke-on-Trent South) Mr Graham Stringer MP (Labour, Manchester Blackley) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publications The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/transcom. A list of Reports of the Committee in the present Parliament is at the back of this volume. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Eve Samson (Clerk), David Bates (Second Clerk), Clare Maltby (Committee Specialist), Philippa Carling (Inquiry Manager), Miss Frances Allingham (Committee Assistant), Miss Michelle Edney (Secretary), Henry Ayi-Hyde (Senior Office Clerk) and James O’Sullivan (Sandwich Student). All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Transport Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 6263; the Committee’s email address is [email protected] 1 Contents Report Page 1 Introduction 5 2 The Departmental Report 6 3 The Department’s targets 10 Developments since publication of the Annual Report 10 Congestion 13 Targets for Rail Use 14 Local transport related targets 15 Bus quality contracts 15 Environmental targets 16 Underperformance 16 4 Efficiency savings 18 5 Agencies 20 6 The Future of Transport 22 Private sector investment 23 7 Conclusion 24 Conclusions and recommendations 24 Annex 27 Introduction 27 Preparations for severe weather 27 Impact of the severe weather 28 Conditions at Heathrow on 28/29 January 28 Service cancellations 28 Failings identified 29 De-icing policy 29 Provision for passengers 30 Formal minutes 31 Witnesses 33 List of written evidence 33 Reports from the Transport Committee since 2002 34 3 Summary Each year, the Departmental Annual Report gives the Department for Transport an opportunity to set out what it is doing, why it is doing it, and how successful its policies have been. Used properly, it could set out a comprehensive and coherent picture of the Department’s policy and performance. The Department for Transport has failed to seize this opportunity. We believe that both the 2003 and 2004 Annual Reports have been inadequate. The next Annual Report must be more coherent. It should contain far clearer information about the Department’s major programmes, better, more comprehensible, information about the Department’s performance and a better account of the way in which the Department works with others to achieve its goals. The Department for Transport Annual Report should not be about the activities of the Department in isolation; it needs to include accounts of the work done by other departments, local authorities and the private sector. The need for a clear, comprehensive, Annual Report is increased by the new White Paper on The Future of Transport. Only time will tell whether the ambitions of the 10 Year Plan for Transport have been abandoned, or whether the White Paper’s emphasis on sustained investment, improvements in transport management and planning ahead will instead ensure they are fulfilled. We need clear, comprehensive information which will allow us to judge the Department’s progress. The Department’s Annual Report must become the key document setting out the Department’s strategy and performance for both Parliament and the public. Otherwise there is a danger that official energy will go into producing a plethora of substandard documents, rather than a single, authoritative one. 5 1 Introduction 1. Each year, Government Departments produce an Annual Report on their activities. It is part of a series of documents regularly presented to Parliament. Annually, the Department for Transport requests expenditure through the Supply Estimates, and Supplementary Estimates, and reports financial performance in its resource accounts. In addition, it now produces an Autumn Performance Report, presenting an interim report of progress against its targets. 1 2. We make a practice of taking evidence from the Secretary of State and the Permanent Secretary on the Department for Transport Annual Report, and its associated documents. Since December 2003, the Department has also produced three significant white papers; The Future of Air Transport, The Future of Rail, and The Future of Transport.2 The Secretary of State told us that these three White Papers were “designed to set out the framework for transport in this country over the next 30 years.”3 We took the opportunity offered by the evidence session on the Departmental Annual Report to discuss this framework with the Secretary of State, and include some observations on The Future of Transport in this Report. We very much value the wide ranging discussion we have in the evidence session on the Annual Report and we are grateful to our witnesses. We would also like to express our thanks to our specialist adviser, Dr Greg Marsden. 1 Department for Transport Autumn Performance Report 2004, Cm 6403 2 The Future Of Transport: a network for 2030, Cm 6234, July 2004. The Committee under took enquiries into Aviation(Sixth Report of Session 2002-03, HC 454-I) and The Future of the Railway (Seventh Report of Session 2003- 04, HC145-I) before each of the relevant White Papers appeared. 3 Q 3 6 2 The Departmental Report 3. The Annual Report is an opportunity for the Department to give an overview of its performance, and that of its agencies. It should be part of a series of documents clearly setting out the Department’s aims, the way in which it intends to achieve these aims, how resources are being spent, what targets exist to measure its performance and whether or not those targets will be reached. Unfortunately, the Department’s Report fails to do this. The associated Autumn Performance Report also needs to be improved. 4. In summary, it is difficult to see the links between the Department’s strategic objectives and progress reports against the Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets agreed with the Treasury. The format is ill-considered: for example, the Autumn Performance Report does not explain the links between the PSA targets and the Department’s wider objectives, which are not even included. The spending review and annual report contain no details about the way in which expenditure is related to the Department’s objectives, or has been re–allocated to ensure that particular targets are reached. Finally, there is little information about the department’s performance management and monitoring framework, which is particularly important since the Department for Transport relies on many external agents, including some in the private sector, to achieve its goals. The Department’s own guidance on Local Transport Plans identifies key priorities shared between central and local government – congestion; accessibility; safer roads, air quality and quality of life.4 We believe that future reports should reflect these priorities. We recommend that the Department for Transport reflects on the various documents in which it reports progress. We believe the Department needs to make sure that they give a clear view of the Department’s aims and its success in fulfilling them, and that they form a coherent series. 5. The Annual Report itself lacks coherence. It is divided into eight chapters; the first two look at the year in brief and at the responsibilities and organisation of the Department. Each of the subsequent chapters looks at a particular topic: the strategic networks; railways; local transport; aviation and shipping; safety and security; and sustainable transport. The fact that analysis is divided between transport modes (“the strategic route network”, “railways”) and more thematic chapters (“sustainable transport”, “safety and security”) means that programmes can be double counted. These chapters are followed by appendices setting out public expenditure changes, recruitment in public appointment tables, departmental strategies and other detailed information, much, like the Public Expenditure Tables, prescribed by the Treasury. We recommend that the Department considers a radical restructuring of its report so that chapters are more clearly related to the Department’s strategy and its Public Service Agreement targets. 6. The Report fails to give clear information about the Department’s programmes. The narrative chapters (Chapters 2-8) vary in quality and in the amount and type of information they give. In fact, the Annual Report may include descriptions of every single one of the Department’s programmes, but because there is no coherent structure the reader cannot be confident that is the case. A common failing is that the individual chapters do 4 Full Guidance on Local Transport Plans, Department for Transport, December 2004, p 22 7 not allow the reader easily to grasp what has been done by central government, and what by local authorities or other bodies, or how responsibilities are divided.
Recommended publications
  • Annual Report 2001: the Government's Expenditure Plans For
    Annual Report 2001 The Government’s Expenditure Plans 2001–02 to 2003–04 Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions Office of the Rail Regulator Office of Water Services Ordnance Survey Presented to Parliament by the Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions, and the Chief Secretary to the Treasury by command of Her Majesty March 2001 Cm 5105 £30.00 Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions Eland House Bressenden Place London SW1E 5DU Telephone 020 7944 3000 Internet service www.detr.gov.uk Acknowledgements Cover and inside: Yellow cleaner – Association of Town Centre Management. Cover and Inside: House and children – Rural Housing Trust and Colchester Borough Council. Inside: Landscape – South Downs Conservation Board. © Crown Copyright 2001 Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. This publication (excluding the Royal Arms and logos) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. This is subject to the material not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. The source of the material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and the title of the document must be included when being reproduced as part of another publication or service. Any enquiries relating to the copyright in this document should be addressed to HMSO, The Copyright Unit, St Clements House, 2–16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ. Fax: 01603 723000 or e-mail: [email protected] Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to The Copyright Unit, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2–16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ.
    [Show full text]
  • DIRECTIONS and GUIDANCE to the Strategic Rail Authority
    DIRECTIONS AND GUIDANCE to the Strategic Rail Authority ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STRATEGIC RAIL AUTHORITY 1. The Strategic Rail Authority (“the Authority”) has been established under section 201(1) of the Transport Act 2000 (“the Act”) as a body corporate. PURPOSES OF THE STRATEGIC RAIL AUTHORITY 2.1. The Authority is to provide leadership for the rail industry and ensure that the industry works co-operatively towards common goals. This objective should underpin the whole range of the Authority’s activities. The Authority will set priorities for the successful operation and development of the railway. It will work with other industry parties to secure continuing private investment in the railway, and to deploy public funding to best effect. To this end, the Authority has been given a wide range of statutory powers and duties. 2.2. Section 205 of the Act sets out the Authority’s purposes as: • to promote the use of the railway network for the carriage of passengers and goods; • to secure the development of the railway network; and • to contribute to the development of an integrated system of transport for passengers and goods. 2.3. Section 207 of the Act requires the Authority to exercise its functions with a view to furthering its purposes and it must do so in accordance with any strategies that it has formulated with respect to them. In so doing the Authority must act in the way best calculated: • to protect the interests of users of railway services; • to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development; 1 • to promote efficiency and economy on the part of persons providing railway services; • to promote measures designed to facilitate passenger journeys involving more than one operator (including, in particular, arrangements for the issue and use of through tickets); • to impose on operators of railway services the minimum restrictions consistent with the performance of its functions; and • to enable providers of rail services to plan their businesses with a reasonable degree of assurance.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ladbroke Grove Rail Inquiry Part 2 Report
    Responsibility for the regulation of health and safety on the railways was transferred from the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) and Health and Safety Executive (HSE) to the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) on 1 April 2006. This document was originally produced by HSC/E but responsibility for the subject/work area in the document has now moved to ORR. If you would like any further information, please contact the ORR's Correspondence Section - [email protected] The Ladbroke Grove Rail Inquiry Part 2 Report The Rt Hon Lord Cullen PC The Ladbroke Grove Rail Inquiry Part 2 Report The Rt Hon Lord Cullen PC © Crown copyright 2001 Applications for reproduction should be made in writing to: Copyright Unit, Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, St Clements House, 2-16 Colegate, Norwich NR3 1BQ First published 2001 ISBN 0 7176 2107 3 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise) without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. 1 Front cover: Taken from a photograph supplied by Milepost 92 /2 ii Contents Chapters 1 Executive summary 3 2 The Inquiry 11 3 The rail industry and its regulation 19 4 The implications of privatisation 39 5 The management and culture of safety 59 6 Railway Group Standards 79 7 Safety cases, accreditation and licensing 85 8 Railtrack and Railway Safety 109 9 The safety regulator 123 10 A rail industry safety body 155 11 An accident investigation body
    [Show full text]
  • Appointment of Her Majesty's Chief
    House of Commons Home Affairs Committee Appointment of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary Third Report of Session 2012–13 Volume II Oral and written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 26 June 2012 HC 183-II Published on 9 August 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £7.50 The Home Affairs Committee The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies. Current membership Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (Labour, Leicester East) (Chair) Nicola Blackwood MP (Conservative, Oxford West and Abingdon) James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Michael Ellis MP (Conservative, Northampton North) Lorraine Fullbrook MP (Conservative, South Ribble) Dr Julian Huppert MP (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge) Steve McCabe MP (Labour, Birmingham Selly Oak) Rt Hon Alun Michael MP (Labour & Co-operative, Cardiff South and Penarth) Bridget Phillipson MP (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South) Mark Reckless MP (Conservative, Rochester and Strood) Mr David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North) Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom. Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Tom Healey (Clerk), Richard Benwell (Second Clerk), Ruth Davis (Committee Specialist), Eleanor Scarnell (Committee Specialist), Andy Boyd (Senior Committee Assistant), John Graddon (Committee Support Officer) and Alex Paterson (Select Committee Media Officer).
    [Show full text]
  • Regulating Rail
    Regulating Rail For Whom Should Regulation Work? Chris Bolt On Track...? Politeia Debates POLITEIA 2008 First published in 2008 by Politeia 22 Charing Cross Road London WC2H 0QP Tel: 020 7240 5070 Fax: 020 7240 5095 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.politeia.co.uk © Politeia 2008 Policy Series No. 60 ISBN 978-1-900525-92-3 Cover design by John Marenbon Politeia gratefully acknowledges support for this publication from The Foundation for Social and Economic Thinking Printed in Great Britain by: Hobbs the Printers Ltd Brunel Road Totton Hampshire SO40 3WX Preface to the Series Transport and energy have rarely been of such importance to the policy debate as they are today. While central to a successful economy, they have also become important to voters because of their impact on daily life: travel today is unreliable – often with delays in the most routine journeys - and expensive; fuel costs are rising and uncertain; and there is growing sensitivity to the impact on the environment of too much of the wrong energy consumption. In transport there are fears that things will get worse: the Government’s ill - thought - out schemes for mass housing development and the influx of new people are adding to the strains on an already overburdened transport system – air, rail and road. What should UK policy be? Though the issues are complex, the fundamental questions of policy are clear. What course should be followed? What role should the government have? How should it set the rules? Who should bear the cost? The transport debate is an old one, and Politeia’s new series, On Track…?, opened by focusing on rail.
    [Show full text]
  • THE RAILWAYS in a THIRD TERM “Integrated, Accountable and Publicly Owned” Pre-Election Briefing March 2005
    THE RAILWAYS IN A THIRD TERM “Integrated, accountable and publicly owned” Pre-election briefing March 2005 In September 2004 Labour Party constituencies and affiliates voted at the annual party conference to adopt a policy of “resolving the fragmented structure of the [rail] industry by introducing an integrated, accountable and publicly owned railway”. It has long been recognised that such a move would be supported by an overwhelming majority of the public and would prove immensely popular at a general election. This pre-election briefing shows how this policy can be put into practice in a third term and beyond. We can afford to bring the railways back into public ownership. Such a move would make sound financial sense as well as reaping significant social, economic and environmental benefits in the longer term. SUMMARY • the government’s hopes for a “rail renaissance” with its attendant social, economic and environmental benefits have been frustrated by a privatised rail industry that has absorbed extra public investment without delivering real improvement or growth • ministers have proclaimed their commitment to “the principle of a public private and partnership” for rail. But the private sector is not delivering value for money on the railway – the public sector has proved itself to be more efficient and cost effective • any private sector investment in the railway must ultimately be paid for by farepayers and taxpayers – with interest. Around £800m a year is taken out of the industry as returns to private lenders and investors – a total leakage of more than £6b since 1996 • the majority of passenger services could be taken into the public sector by 2013 at no cost.
    [Show full text]
  • Railway Industry Health & Safety Advisory
    RIHSAC 100 – IN RETROSPECT When we look back at the history of the Railway Industry Health & Safety Advisory Committee (RIHSAC), what we are doing in effect is to review the last 40-odd years of railway policy in Britain, and in particular, the safety and regulatory challenges that have been faced by the industry during those decades - partly as a result of institutional change, partly as a result of technical progress, partly as a result of evolving societal attitudes and expectations, and partly as a result of advances in the understanding and systematic management of risk generally. 1974 Health & Safety at Work etc Act (HASWA) The story really begins with the passage of this act, which gave legislative effect to the proposals in the Robens Report of 1972, and brought into being the Health & Safety Commission (HSC) with its executive arm, the Health & Safety Executive (HSE). It placed the responsibility for delivering safety at work jointly on the shoulders of employers and employees, setting the test of reasonable practicability, and it continues to underpin the regulation of occupational health and safety to this day. However, it also imposes a duty to ensure the safety of third parties, and although Robens had specifically stated that the arrangements he was proposing were not intended to apply to transport users in general, there was no such exclusion clause in the Act. Railways were already covered by a body of prescriptive, industry-specific safety regulations such as “lock, block and brake”, going back in some cases for 130 years, which were not limited to occupational safety, and had their own enforcers in the guise of HM Railway Inspectorate (HMRI), which operated under the wing of the Department of Transport (DoT) and was also responsible for accident investigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Railways: Railtrack Administration and the Private Shareholders, 2001-2005
    Railways: Railtrack administration and the private shareholders, 2001-2005 Standard Note: SN/BT/1076 Last updated: 10 August 2010 Author: Louise Butcher Section Business and Transport Railtrack was set up on 1 April 1994 under the Railways Act 1993 to manage the rail infrastructure (track, stations, etc.). It was sold to the private sector on 20 May 1996. The Labour Government made changes to the operation and supervision of the rail industry in the Transport Act 2000, particularly to the regulator’s powers over Railtrack's investment plans. Railtrack's main sources of revenue were the charges it levied on train operators for track access and the lease income it received for stations and depots. Until 2001 Railtrack did not receive direct revenue subsidy from the government although it was indirectly dependent on the significant amount of public sector support received by the train and freight operating companies. Various reasons were put forward for the company’s troubles, some dating back to the time it was privatised. For example, privatising an industry that continues to need large subsidies leads to problems; the form of privatisation chosen involved a mass of complicated and antagonistic relationships between Railtrack and its customers and the regulator; and no account appeared to have been taken of the poor state of the railway. Poor management and inadequate direction did not help; nor did the three major fatal rail accidents that occurred on its watch – all attributed to factors under the company’s overall control. Railtrack plc was put into administration on 7 October 2001 and came out of it on 1 October 2002.
    [Show full text]
  • Ministerial Accountability and Parliamentary Questions
    House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee Ministerial Accountability and Parliamentary Questions Fifth Report of Session 2004–05 Volume II Appendices Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 17 March 2005 HC 449–II Published on 22 March 2005 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £20.50 The Public Administration Select Committee The Public Administration Select Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the reports of the Parliamentary Commissioner for Administration, of the Health Service Commissioners for England, Scotland and Wales and of the Parliamentary Ombudsman for Northern Ireland, which are laid before this House, and matters in connection therewith and to consider matters relating to the quality and standards of administration provided by civil service departments, and other matters relating to the civil service; and the committee shall consist of eleven members. Current membership Tony Wright MP (Labour, Cannock Chase) (Chairman) Annette Brooke MP (Liberal Democrat, Mid Dorset and Poole North) Mrs Anne Campbell MP (Labour, Cambridge) Sir Sydney Chapman MP (Conservative, Chipping Barnet) Mr David Heyes MP (Labour, Ashton under Lyne) Mr Kelvin Hopkins MP (Labour, Luton North) Mr Ian Liddell-Grainger MP (Conservative, Bridgwater) Mr Gordon Prentice MP (Labour, Pendle) Hon Michael Trend, CBE MP (Conservative, Windsor) Brian White MP (Labour, Milton Keynes North East) Iain Wright MP (Labour, Hartlepool) Powers The committee is one of the select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 146. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2004-2005
    Report of the Office of Rail Regulation To the Secretary of State for Transport and the Scottish Ministers I enclose the report of the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) for the year ending 31 March 2005 as required by section 74(1) of the Railways Act 1993 and the Scotland Act 1998 (Transfer of Functions to the Scottish Ministers etc) Order 1999. I confirm that during this period ORR: (a) made no references to the Competition Commission; and (b) received no general directions under section 69(2) of the Railways Act 1993. Chris Bolt Chairman, Office of Rail Regulation May 2005 Presented to Parliament in pursuance of section 74 of the Railways Act 1993 Office of Rail Regulation 1 Annual Report 2004−05 Foreword by the Chairman 5 Overview 7 Introduction Events in the annual reporting year ORR external relations Objective 1 13 Network Rail’s stewardship Train performance Local output commitments Cost efficiency Contents Network Rail monitor Asset management Land disposals Regulatory accounts Policy framework for investments Interim access charges reviews Assessment of Network Rail’s new financial structure Objective 2 19 Track access applications Passenger agreements Freight agreements Model clauses for track access contracts and related issues Network Code reform Stations Code Station access casework Depots Code Depot investment guidelines Depot access casework Licensing Rail Safety and Standards Board Standards Strategy Group 2 Office of Rail Regulation Annual Report 2004−05 Objective 3 25 Competition Act 1998 Competition casework EC Regulation
    [Show full text]
  • Passenger Rail Services in England
    BRIEFING PAPER Number CBP 6521, 9 January 2018 Passenger rail services in By Louise Butcher England Inside: 1. How do passenger services work? 2. Franchising policy since 2007 3. The future www.parliament.uk/commons-library | intranet.parliament.uk/commons-library | [email protected] | @commonslibrary Number CBP 6521, 9 January 2018 2 Contents Summary 3 1. How do passenger services work? 4 1.1 Franchising 4 What is it? 4 The early years 5 How does it work? 7 Direct awards 8 Scotland 9 Wales 10 1.2 Open access operators 10 1.3 Concession agreements 11 1.4 Track access contracts and charges 11 2. Franchising policy since 2007 13 2.1 Labour Government, 2007-10 13 2.2 Coalition and Conservative governments, 2010- 14 First reform paper & McNulty report, 2010-11 14 West Coast re-let failure, Laidlaw & Brown, 2012-13 15 Further reviews and reform, 2014- 17 2.3 Franchise length 19 3. The future 21 3.1 More competition? 21 3.2 More public ownership? 24 3.3 More partnership working? 27 3.4 More devolution? 29 London 29 Rest of England 31 Contributing Authors: Louise Butcher, Transport Policy Cover page image copyright: Michael Day – flickr/CreativeCommons 3 Passenger rail services in England Summary This paper explains how passenger rail services are provided in England and the policies of successive governments towards rail franchising. It also looks at those proposals which have been put forward for further reform – specifically more partnership working, competition, public ownership and devolution. Since privatisation in the mid-1990s, there have been two types of passenger rail service on the GB rail network: open access operators (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Developments in Rail Transportation Services 2013
    Recent Developments in Rail Transportation Services 2013 The OECD Competition Committee discussed the recent developments in rail transportation services in June 2013. This document includes an executive summary of that debate and the documents from the meeting: an analytical note by the OECD Secretariat, written submissions from Australia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, the European Union, France, Hungary, Indonesia, Italy, Korea, Latvia, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, the Russian Federation, Spain, Chinese Taipei, Ukraine, the United Kingdom, the United States, and a summary of the discussion. Railway reforms are still very much in progress in many countries. This Roundtable discusses the changes that have happened since the Competition Committee last examined this sector in February 2005 and examines their impact on the performance of the railway sector. The main changes have taken place in Europe where first the freight market and then the market for international passenger services have been opened to competition on the tracks across the whole Union. Domestic passenger services will follow suit in 2020, though a few countries have already liberalised this last part of the railway sector. The introduction of open competition is leading to numerous antitrust cases where separation between the incumbent railway undertaking and the infrastructure manager is not complete, thus keeping alive the debate on the pros and cons of vertical separation. In addition some countries have introduced tendering procedure to allocate concession for the provision of passenger services, mostly for heavily subsidised local and regional services, to obtain the benefits of competition even when the market cannot support multiple operators. From these experiences lessons can be learnt on how tenders should be run and contracts should be designed in order to maximise the benefits that competition for the market can bring.
    [Show full text]