DOCSLIB.ORG

Gla Transport Operations Scrutiny Committee: Scrutiny of Mainline Rail Services in London

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gla Transport Operations Scrutiny Committee: Scrutiny of Mainline Rail Services in London GLA TRANSPORT OPERATIONS SCRUTINY COMMITTEE: SCRUTINY OF MAINLINE RAIL SERVICES IN LONDON MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE FROM THE STRATEGIC RAIL AUTHORITY (SRA) Introduction 1. It is easy to lose sight of the fact that the railway is delivering each day, carrying a third more passengers than five years ago, and 40% more freight. Everyday 18,600 trains are run (21% more than five years ago). Every day 2.8 million passengers are carried, and 480,000 people are safely delivered to Central London between 07.00 and 10.00. The results of the last five year’s planning are starting to be delivered. New trains are arriving. The c2c fleet has been transformed. With LUL and TfL, the SRA has started work on the East London Line extension. We have set out details of the re-franchising programme and have extended the Rail Passenger Partnership Fund. We are spearheading the drive to improve rail industry skills. On 14 January the SRA will publish its Strategic Plan, a blueprint for how we are going to plan and deliver a better railway in line with the Government’s Ten Year Transport Plan. Seventy per cent of passenger journeys take place in the South East, from which much of the growth will come to fulfil our key targets. It is also the region that will benefit most from the share of the available resources.+ 2. But much remains to be done, working in partnership with TfL and others. Meeting the needs of rail users, and working towards the Government’s core targets, requires action to tackle the following key issues affecting mainline services: • safety; • industry stability and structure; • the need for better performance; • delivering improved capacity and major infrastructure projects; • the railway’s cost base; and • industry skill shortages. SRA January 2002 1 An appreciation of these issues provides the context for many of the decisions and trade-offs that need to be made. The SRA’s Strategic Plan addresses these issues, funding and priorities. 3. Performance remains poor, and the collapse of Railtrack has left uncertainty for passengers, for train operators and for rail staff. The priority is to restore a sense of stability and belief back into the running of the day-to-day railway. 4. The SRA will play a full part in this process and take a lead by prioritising what is done and when. In the railway industry, this means skills and technical resources as much as money. For example, in the next few years key signalling resources are in limited supply. 5. Focusing on delivery means some hard choices in the short term. But the longer term will not be forgotten. The projects that will define our future, such as cross London links, are being developed and planned now. This is a long lead time industry and many of the problems we face today are a direct consequence of short term investment thinking in the past. The SRA will not repeat that mistake. 6. The SRA is also committed to making sure it does not lose sight of smaller things that can be done relatively quickly to improve the quality of the overall travel experience. That is why we have re-launched the Rail Passenger Partnership (RPP) programme and made it easier and quicker to access such grants. Many schemes have been successfully implemented but we are keen to see them happen more quickly in the future. 7. The Strategic Plan sets a clearer vision for the future than has existed before. However, planning is not a static exercise, it’s a way of working. So the SRA is working with the Rail Regulator’s office to create a process designed to provide a better model of the investment needs of the railway. Railtrack SRA January 2002 2 8. Bringing Railtrack out of railway administration as soon as practicable is a top priority. The SRA has recently taken responsibility for the formation and sponsorship of the Company Limited by Guarantee (CLG) which is preparing a bid to take over Railtrack plc’s railway assets and its role as network operator. 9. A CLG is a private company without shareholders. It would not be a ‘not-for-profit’ company, but any profits or surpluses would be invested directly back into the network. The CLG would have the management, board and independence of a conventional PLC – including strong financial and other incentives for directors to achieve demanding performance targets. 10. The company would be accountable to members representing the key interests in the rail industry, including passengers, the Train Operating Companies and stakeholders. These members would effectively be the owners of the company. The Government always envisaged that the SRA would be a founder member of a CLG and it makes sense that the SRA should take on the sponsorship role. This includes agreeing the appointment of directors and legal and financial advisors to support Chairman Ian McAllister, and approval of the business plan and associated financing arrangements for the CLG bid. Railtrack CLG would, of course, be a national company requiring direction on a national scale. 11. The bid team will develop the Government’s outline for a CLG, which was published on 23 October. Like any other potential bidders, the bid team will need to take account of the guidelines published by the Secretary of State on 31 October to help those formulating bids to understand what the Government is expecting of its successor as network operator. 12. The CLG bid team will put forward a proposal to the Administrator, who will evaluate all the bids he receives before putting a proposed transfer scheme to the Secretary of State for approval under Schedule 7 of the Railways Act 1993. It is for the Administrator to assess and make recommendations on proposals for how Railtrack plc's railway assets are transferred out of administration as a going concern. SRA January 2002 3 13. It has been envisaged for some time now that major projects over a certain threshold could not be undertaken by Railtrack alone because of the risks involved. It is likely that future projects will be taken forward by stand alone partnership companies – Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) - a concept which the SRA has been developing with DTLR and Treasury. This has implications for how franchises are taken forward in future (see below). 14. The changed status of Railtrack also has potential regulatory implications. The Government announced on 15 October last year that it intends to streamline the existing regulatory structure, while still recognising that there will be a continued need for some form of independent economic regulation. No decisions have yet been taken. Franchising 15. The SRA announced a new franchising programme on 19 December last year, to deliver the Government’s objectives of 50% passenger growth and a reduction in overcrowding. We want franchises that put passengers first and get the basics right - acceptable performance, better services, improved facilities, less overcrowding and with safety paramount. The SRA will explore the full range of options for securing benefits for passengers. These include: • variations to existing franchise agreements without any increase in length; • franchise extensions; • early replacement of existing franchises; and • "on time” replacement of existing franchises. 16. This 'horses for courses' approach means we can move forward quickly and secure some early benefits for passengers, while also putting in place plans for the medium to long term. The new programme helps to stabilise and restore confidence within the rail industry. It is both practical and deliverable, and provides clarity for train operators competing for franchises. 17. The programme reflects the different needs of each franchise. It provides a balance between short-term extensions and long-term commitments. Details are set out in SRA January 2002 4 Annex 1 below. The Annex lists franchises for replacement and those for possible two-year extension, subject to negotiation of satisfactory terms which provide benefits for passengers and value for money for the taxpayer. Also listed are the franchises moving to expiry, but short-term improvements here may be sought through the Rail Passenger Partnership fund or through contractual agreement with the franchisee. 18. Clear guidance will be given to parties on the core requirements of a franchise, whilst leaving scope for innovation. Wherever franchises are replaced or extended, new contract terms will target improved performance and reduced overcrowding. 19. The length of new franchises will depend, amongst other things, on the investment needs of the franchise and the level of risk to be borne by the franchisee. It is also very important to establish structures that allow good quality operators to take a longer term view of their business and the needs of their customers. Where long- term franchises are appropriate these are likely to be up to 15 years (in line with emerging EU requirements) but, crucially, will be dependent upon delivering operational performance targets. Because this represents a considerable development in franchising policy the SRA will be consulting with key stakeholders on the proposed franchise term. Franchises would end after five or ten years if the conditions were not met. 20. The SRA is also looking at the longer-term benefits of combining franchises and a simpler structure. In particular, where two or more franchises share access to a London terminal, combination might produce benefits for passengers. It may allow better use to be made of available capacity, and would simplify the timetable planning process and contractual relationships, with the aim of producing a more reliable, cohesive and attractive service for passengers. The SRA will be consulting train operators, passenger committees, TfL and regional and local authorities on the value of combining franchises in such a way.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NS Annual Report 2018
    See www.nsannualreport.nl for the online version NS Annual Report 2018 Table of contents 2 In brief 4 2018 in a nutshell 8 Foreword by the CEO 12 The profile of NS 16 Our strategy Activities in the Netherlands 23 Results for 2018 27 The train journey experience 35 Operational performance 47 World-class stations Operations abroad 54 Abellio 56 Strategy 58 Abellio United Kingdom (UK) 68 Abellio Germany 74 Looking ahead NS Group 81 Report by the Supervisory Board 94 Corporate governance 100 Organisation of risk management 114 Finances in brief 126 Our impact on the environment and on society 134 NS as an employer in the Netherlands 139 Organisational improvements 145 Dialogue with our stakeholders 164 Scope and reporting criteria Financial statements 168 Financial statements 238 Company financial statements Other information 245 Combined independent auditor’s report on the financial statements and sustainability information 256 NS ten-year summary This annual report is published both Dutch and English. In the event of any discrepancies between the Dutch and English version, the Dutch version will prevail. 1 NS annual report 2018 In brief More satisfied 4.2 million trips by NS app gets seat passengers in the OV-fiets searcher Netherlands (2017: 3.1 million) On some routes, 86% gave travelling by passengers can see which train a score of 7 out of carriages have free seats 10 or higher Customer 95.1% chance of Clean trains: 68% of satisfaction with HSL getting a seat passengers gave a South score of 7 out of 10 (2017: 95.0%) or higher 83% of
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction by Our Chair, Sir Peter Hendy CBE
    Network Rail Limited Annual Report and Accounts 2018 Strategic report Introduction by our chair, Sir Peter Hendy CBE Railways are the economic arteries of our country and create economic growth, jobs and housing. We are really seeing a transformation take place at Network settlement, as will the System Operator. They will thus have Rail. We are now a much more customer-focused organisation, greater ownership and greater responsibility. with devolved structures that allow local managing directors and their leadership teams to put their customers and Our plan for CP6 will also start the railway’s digital age with passengers at the heart of everything they do. We have digital train control and signalling that will enable even more become more cost competitive, making over £85m of savings services to run, more safely and at a lower cost. To realise through our continuous improvement initiatives in the past these benefits there must be a whole system change across year alone. And we are also becoming a more diverse the industry to support it, and Network Rail is ready to play organisation. Since 2014 we have increased the number of its part in this transformation. women working at Network Rail by 32% and we have been The rail network is a complex set of national systems that recognised as an inclusive employer. need to work seamlessly in order to deliver for our customers. Since Mark Carne CBE took over as chief executive in 2014, he Unfortunately the May 2018 timetable change has not yet has completely transformed the safety culture at Network Rail.
    [Show full text]
  • Competitive Tendering of Rail Services EUROPEAN CONFERENCE of MINISTERS of TRANSPORT (ECMT)
    Competitive EUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS OF TRANSPORT Tendering of Rail Competitive tendering Services provides a way to introduce Competitive competition to railways whilst preserving an integrated network of services. It has been used for freight Tendering railways in some countries but is particularly attractive for passenger networks when subsidised services make competition of Rail between trains serving the same routes difficult or impossible to organise. Services Governments promote competition in railways to Competitive Tendering reduce costs, not least to the tax payer, and to improve levels of service to customers. Concessions are also designed to bring much needed private capital into the rail industry. The success of competitive tendering in achieving these outcomes depends critically on the way risks are assigned between the government and private train operators. It also depends on the transparency and durability of the regulatory framework established to protect both the public interest and the interests of concession holders, and on the incentives created by franchise agreements. This report examines experience to date from around the world in competitively tendering rail services. It seeks to draw lessons for effective design of concessions and regulation from both of the successful and less successful cases examined. The work RailServices is based on detailed examinations by leading experts of the experience of passenger rail concessions in the United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Sweden and the Netherlands. It also
    [Show full text]
  • London to Ipswich
    GREAT EASTERN MAIN LINE LONDON TO IPSWICH © Copyright RailSimulator.com 2012, all rights reserved Release Version 1.0 Train Simulator – GEML London Ipswich 1 ROUTE INFORMATIONINFORMATION................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........................... 444 1.1 History ....................................................................................................................4 1.1.1 Liverpool Street Station ................................................................................................. 5 1.1.2 Electrification................................................................................................................ 5 1.1.3 Line Features ................................................................................................................ 5 1.2 Rolling Stock .............................................................................................................6 1.3 Franchise History .......................................................................................................6 2 CLASS 360 ‘DESIRO’ ELECTRIC MULTIPLE UNUNITITITIT................................................................................... ..................... 777 2.1 Class 360 .................................................................................................................7 2.2 Design & Specification ................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • South Eastern Rail Franchise Consultation Response By
    South Eastern Rail franchise consultation Response by Campaign for Better Transport May 2017 1. Do our priorities correctly reflect your views? There are three omissions. Firstly, value for money is the number one issue for rail passengers, according to Transport Focus (https://www.transportfocus.org.uk/news-events-media/news/rail- passengers-prioritiesa-manifesto-for-improvement/). However, this is not mentioned in the consultation document priorities. In the recent weeks, passengers have been angry at South Eastern raising off-peak rail fares just before the holiday period begins, making it more expensive to have a day out at the Kent seaside or elsewhere. We would like the next franchise to prioritise keeping travel rail affordable. Secondly, we were surprised that improving the station environment is not listed as a priority. All journeys begin and end at stations and as it’s the last thing people experience as part of their journey, the experience stays with people and colours their experience of the whole journey and of rail travel generally. Especially when journeys are disrupted, passengers can end up spending hours every year at a station and so how pleasant or unpleasant it is makes a real difference. Finally, there is no mention of passenger representation. Passengers have deep experiential knowledge about what is needed on the line and how it is working. In line with the ethos ‘Nothing about us without us’, we would like a deeper level of passenger involvement, beyond just ‘engagement’. A supervisory board, involving regular South Eastern passengers as well as local authority representatives, would truly ‘put the passenger at the heart of the railway’, in the words of various transport ministers.
    [Show full text]
  • Drivers'union
    The train ASLEF drivers’ union >>> Rail Franchise Handbook 2019 ASLEF Introduction Welcome to our new Rail Franchise Handbook. I hope you will find it as interesting, and useful, as I do and a valuable tool for the political and industrial work you do for our union. We put this handbook together to give our reps and decision makers the inside track on who really runs Britain’s railways, how they run our railways, and what they take out from our railway industry every year. Because we believe the facts and figures revealed in these pages show, with crystal clarity, the utter folly of our privatised, and fragmented, franchise system. A structure – set up by John Major, 25 years ago, and continued by Conservative governments ever since – that separates the wheels and steel and is underwritten by an enormous public subsidy from every taxpayer in this country, and sky high passenger fares, while tens of millions of pounds haemorrhage from the system into the pockets of shareholders in the form of profits and dividends, or increasingly due inefficiencies. In fact whilst the system has never worked for passengers or taxpayers, there are now signs that it doesn’t work for operators either. The franchising system has been put on hold for a couple of years now due to a lack of bidders. This means direct awards have been handed out leading to even less competition. So we now have a system that exists to maintain the system itself, not our railway. It isn’t true to say that all the train and freight operating fill the pockets of shareholders; some TOCs and FOCs are owned by public, not private, operators where shareholders do not skim the cream off the top of the milk.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting on the Right Track
    spotlight LEVERAGED FINANCE GETTING ON THE RIGHT TRACK JOANNA HAWKES OF ANGEL TRAINS EXPLAINS SOME OF THE ISSUES FACING THE ROLLING STOCK LESSOR IN THE FUNDING AND LEASING OF TRAINS TO THE OPERATING COMPANIES. he purpose of this article is to outline the issues facing the rolling stock lessor, both from the perspective of financing the purchase of rolling stock, as well as leasing it to the trains operating companies (Tocs). It focuses mainly on the Tactivities and experiences of Angel Trains (Angel). BACKGROUND. The three rolling stock leasing companies (Roscos) Angel, Porterbrook Leasing and HSBC Rail (formerly Eversholt tandem with extended and renegotiated franchises. As the market Leasing) were originally formed in 1994 out of the privatisation of has developed, lease contracts have become more bespoke and very British Rail. Their business is owning, maintaining and leasing rolling heavily negotiated. stock. At the time of public offer, fears of re-nationalisation under For a number of reasons – partly strategic, partly historic – Angel an incoming Labour government were high. Offers to buy from the Trains finances about 80% of its portfolio in the banking market, finance sector were limited and consequently two of the three were rather than via its parent. Figure 2 illustrates the current simplified the subject of management buy outs. Over subsequent years, industry structure. however, Roscos have migrated towards their natural home for UK leasing companies, and each has become a subsidiary of a big TYPES OF LEASES. There are a number of variations in the types of financial institution: Royal Bank of Scotland (Angel), Abbey National lease structures, but generally capital rentals are fixed.
    [Show full text]
  • 2005 Annual Return
    Annual Return Reporting on the year 2004/05 31 July 2005 Page 2 Contents Executive summary.....................................................................................................................................................................................................5 Introduction..................................................................................................................................................................................................................16 Network Rail’s regulatory targets....................................................................................................................................................................20 Key performance indicators................................................................................................................................................................................24 Section 1 – Operational performance .........................................................................................................................................................27 Introduction...................................................................................................................................................................................................27 Summarised network-wide data (delays to major operators) ........................................................................................28 National delay data by cause...............................................................................................................................................................30
    [Show full text]
  • Kent Rail Strategy 2021
    Kent Rail Strategy 2021 County Hall, Maidstone March 2021 1 Contents Map of Kent Rail Network ……………………………………………………………… 3 Foreword by Roger Gough, Leader of Kent County Council ………………………. 4 Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………………. 5 1. Introduction ……………………………………………………………………… 7 2. National Rail Policy …………………………………………………………….. 9 3. Kent’s Local Transport Policy …………………………………………………. 15 4. Key Drivers of Demand for Rail Services in Kent ………………..……….… 18 5. Rail Infrastructure Outputs Required in Kent ……………..……………….… 23 6. Rolling-Stock Outputs Required in Kent ……………………………………... 29 7. Rail Service Outcomes Required in Kent ……………………………………. 33 8. Passenger Communications and Station Facilities in Kent ………………... 43 9. Community Rail Partnerships in Kent ………………………………………... 46 10. Rail Freight Services in Kent …………………………………………..…….…50 11. International Rail Services in Kent ……………………………………………. 55 12. Conclusion …………………………………………………………………….… 58 Summary of Recommended Actions …………………………………………………. 60 Glossary of Railway Terminology……………………………………………………... 64 Sources ………………………………………………………………………………….. 66 Tables and Maps ……………………………………………………………………….. 67 Appendix A - Proposed Service Specifications ……………………………………… 68 Front cover image The new Class 800 series produced by Hitachi is one example of a new train design that could provide the bespoke additional fleet which will be required for Kent’s High Speed services. The picture shows a Class 800 train on a test run before entry into service. [source: Hitachi Ltd, 2015] 2 3 Foreword By the Leader of
    [Show full text]
  • Performance Monitoring Report on NATIONAL RAIL
    Performance monitoring report on NATIONAL RAIL PASSENGER SERVICES IN THE LONDON AREA Quarter 1 2002-03 (April to June 2002) Prepared by LTUC Research and Policy Team 6 Middle Street London EC1A 7JA October 2002 CONTENTS Section 1 Public performance measure (PPM) Section 2 Lost minutes Section 3 National passenger survey (NPS) (not reported this quarter) Section 4 Passengers in excess of capacity (PIXC) (not reported this quarter) Section 5 Passenger complaints (not reported this quarter) Section 6 Impartial retailing survey (not reported this quarter) Section 7 Glossary and definitions Annex A PPM results for Quarter 1 2001-02 (table) Annex B PPM results for Quarter 1 2001-02 (chart) Annex C 3-year PPM trends – all trains (chart) Annex D 3-year PPM trends – London and south east peak trains (chart) Annex E Lost minutes – Quarter 1 2002-03 (table) Annex F NPS results (not reported this quarter) Annex G Narrative commentaries supplied by the following operators : c2c, Chiltern, Connex South Eastern, First Great Eastern, Gatwick Express, Silverlink, South West Trains, Thameslink, West Anglia Great Northern, Anglia, First Great Western, Great North Eastern, Midland Mainline and Virgin West Coast. OVERVIEW OF QUARTER • Reliability of most London and south east operators has continued to improve but was still below the levels reached prior to the aftermath of the Hatfield derailment. • Wide variations between operators continued, ranging from 9% of trains delayed or cancelled to 24%. • Nearly all operators performed relatively well in weekday peaks, with only a slight decrease on c2c, First Great Eastern and Silverlink. • Longer-distance operators’ performance was 1.5% better than in the previous year and 2% better than in the preceding quarter.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESS RELEASE 24 May 2018 the GO-AHEAD GROUP PLC (“GO-AHEAD” OR “THE GROUP”)
    The Go-Ahead Group plc 4 Matthew Parker Street, London, SW1H 9NP Telephone 020 7799 8999 PRESS RELEASE 24 May 2018 THE GO-AHEAD GROUP PLC (“GO-AHEAD” OR “THE GROUP”) TRADING STATEMENT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 31 DECEMBER 2017 TO 23 MAY 2018 The Go-Ahead Group plc today announces its trading update for the period from 31 December 2017 to 23 May 2018. The next scheduled market update is the Group’s full year results for the year ending 30 June 2018 which will be released on 6 September 2018. The year to date growth rates shown in this statement are for the period from 2 July 2017 to 28 April 2018. Overview • Overall full year expectations for bus unchanged; uplift in rail • Record customer satisfaction in our regional bus business • London bus expectations improved, with strong Quality Incentive Contract income in the period • Successful bid for a second bus tender in Dublin • Southeastern franchise extended to April 2019; bid submitted for new franchise Go-Ahead Group Chief Executive, David Brown, said: “In a challenging market environment with reduced retail footfall and pressures on local authority budgets, our businesses have performed well overall. “In bus, our London operations have seen an improvement in service performance resulting in higher Quality Incentive Contract income. Revenue and passenger trends remain mixed across our regional bus businesses. “In rail, trading has been good in the period, largely due to efficiency improvements and helped by the resumption of full Southeastern services through London Bridge station. In partnership with the industry, this week we began the introduction of the largest timetable change in decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Penalty Fares Scheme Template
    Penalty fares scheme – c2c rail limited 1 Introduction 1.1 c2c rail limited, give notice, under rule 3.2 of the SRA’s Penalty Fares Rules 2002, that we want to introduce a penalty fares scheme with effect from a date yet to be confirmed. This document describes our penalty fares scheme for the purposes of rule 3.2 b. 1.2 We have decided to introduce a penalty fares scheme in this area because 1. Although the vast majority of our stations is gated, it is still possible to access our railway system without a ticket and/or travel to a destination that is past the validity of tickets held and leave via a non-fully gated station. 2. The Penalty Fares Scheme is seen as a supplant to existing method of dealing with individuals who do not hold valid tickets for their entire journeys. 3. The Penalty Fares Scheme is seen as a visual deterrent, i.e. via the posters at all stations, that c2c rail limited is committed to reduce to the absolute minimum fraudulent travel on our trains. 1.3 We have prepared this scheme taking account of the following documents. • The Railways (Penalty Fares) Regulations 1994. • The Penalty Fares Rules 2002. • Strategic Rail Authority Penalty Fares Policy 2002. 1.4 In line with rule 3.2, we have sent copies of this scheme to: • The Strategic Rail Authority; • London Transport Users Committee • Rail Passengers Committee for Eastern England 2 Penalty fares trains 2.1 For the purposes of this scheme, all the trains that we operate on the c2c route will be penalty fares trains.
    [Show full text]