APPENDIX 3

TransPennine Express and Franchise Renewals Stakeholder Consultation

Response from the Line Community Rail Partnership

Contents

1. Summary of Key Points

2. Background

3. Existing Services

4. CRP Preparation for Consultation

5. The Consultation Principles and Proposals

6. Key Response Points from the Community Rail Partnership

7. Answers to Consultation Questions

Annex A Furness Line Study by The Railway Consultancy

Annex B Fares comparison 1. Summary of Key Points

1.1 The current service on the Furness Line is unfit for purpose: o there is a strong case for the retention, and restoration of previous levels of service between Barrow-in-Furness and Airport; o local services on the line are failing to provide for key markets, particularly commuters wishing to travel west towards Barrow and ; o the timetable is uncoordinated and irregular and fails to provide adequate capacity at key times.

1.2 Remapping, with potential loss of through services to Manchester, will result in: o over-crowding of TransPennine Scottish services south of Lancaster; o uncertainty of connections at Preston/Lancaster, where poor historical reliability results in passengers having to wait an unacceptable hour or more for the next train. o uncertainty of through connectivity with interchanges on the Northern Hub and HS2 developments.

1.3 Maintaining and improving the quality of rolling stock serving the route, especially on longer distance services, is a strong necessity.

1.4 Franchise planning needs to provide for massive growth in the local economy: o up to ??? new jobs in Barrow and Ulverston alone in next few years; o up to £17 billion investment on Cumbrian coast by mid 2020s.

1.5 There is an urgent need for a principal or lead operator on the route to: o develop a properly co-ordinated timetable; o upgrade stations to a common standard of facilities along the line; o manage and control all services in times of disruption to minimise hardship to passengers.

2. Background

2.1 The Furness Line serves towns and villages round the northern side of , extending 30 miles west from its junction with the at . The effective junction for interchange with other operators and services is 5 miles further south at Lancaster. The line was designated with Community Rail status in June 2012. From Barrow the railway continues northwards along the Cumbrian Coast which comes within a separate Community Rail Partnership.

2.2 The population served by the line is about 120,000. Barrow (c. 70,000) is much the largest town with a range of industries dominated by the shipbuilding and engineering company BAE Systems. Ulverston (c. 12,000) is also an important employment centre with international firms GSK, Siemens, Marl and others. Grange-over-Sands and Arnside are small bay-side resorts and residential centres.

2.3 The line carries a wide range of traffics including commuters, especially to Lancaster and Preston, school children in substantial numbers to Lancaster, and also to Ulverston and other schools. Barrow, Lancaster and Preston are important service centre attractors for education, health services, retailing and other urban purposes. The Manchester Airport service provides a vital direct link for local businesses with their international connections, as well as for incoming visitors and local residents. Off–peak services are dominated by the leisure market and this accounts for 60% of the journeys.

3. Existing Services

3.1 Train services on the line are currently worked by two Train Operating Companies. TransPennine Express operates modern Class 185 trains on services between Barrow, Preston and Manchester Airport, though the number of services running beyond Preston has been reduced in recent years. Northern operates local services mainly between Lancaster and Barrow, with some services extended beyond Barrow over the to and from using elderly Class 142, 153, and 156 trains.

3.2 Problems with present services: there is a lack of capacity on some trains and on connecting services at Lancaster, irregular timetable, poor connections and wide variations in quality at stations and on trains. The Railway Consultancy’s Furness Line report (2014) states that, “The current service pattern fails to meet the needs of many user groups (e.g. commuters, business, local leisure trips and holiday-makers). Despite trend growth in demand, recent reductions in services have generated problems of crowding, long waits, unsuitability of train timings, and enforced interchange”. In terms of longer distance services the report also states, “The withdrawal of some Manchester Airport trains has already led to passengers forsaking the train for such journeys, which are otherwise ideal for rail. This has a knock-on impact on business, for which the link to Manchester Airport is of strategic importance”.

Evidence: As pointed out by colleagues at TPE, loss of longer-distance services with substitution of connecting services in their place will seriously erode the contribution of these highest value fares make towards the overall revenue from the line

4. CRP Preparation for Consultation

4.1 Serious concern has been felt in South as what has perceived as a threat to the pattern of services which has operated with little change since 1994, providing a local shuttle overlain by a two-hourly service to and from Manchester Airport. Erosion of this pattern commenced with the progressive strengthening of TPE’s Scottish services and then again with the introduction of the new TPE class 350 units on these services. The class 185 units are not able to couple to the class 350’s, allowing trains for Barrow (and ) to split at Preston and their availability has decreased as some now operate the Liverpool – Newcastle service.

The Community Rail Partnership, in conjunction with local MP John Woodcock, arranged a conference in Barrow Town Hall on 17th January, 2014. Attended by over 50 representatives of local employers and other organisations, strong support was expressed for the concept of an economic study of the line, its services and potential for the future. Before the conference closed £12,000 had been pledged towards the cost of such a study, mainly from the private sector, and subsequently this fund was increased to over £30,000.

4.2 In April 2014 The Railway Consultancy Ltd of Crystal Palace was engaged to conduct this study and much of following response is based on the findings of the study. A full copy of the study report is submitted with this document (Annex B).

5. The Consultation Principles and Proposals

5.1 The main references in the consultation document which are relevant to the Furness Line are (references are to the consultation document) :

 Rail North’s vision is to create a world-class railway for the whole of the North of England (page 8, para 11);  Rail North has three over-arching objectives for devolved rail services in the North of England (page 8, para 12) - - To support economic growth by delivering more rail capacity and better rail connectivity - To improve the quality of railways in the North, with a better offer for passengers to encourage more use. - To deliver a more efficient railway and to secure greater value for money.  The Secretary of State’s objectives are stated separately for the two franchises. These are very similar for each and may be summarised as (page 11, table 1.1): - Help the economy of the north of England thrive by offering good quality rail services; - Realise the benefits from rail investment in the north of England with improved journey times, frequencies, reliability and connectivity benefits for passengers; - Deliver excellence in customer service; - Secure efficiencies in operation by working in partnership across the rail industry; - Support local communities to help deliver local transport regeneration and investment in and around stations; - Improve social and environmental sustainability to reduce carbon emissions, use resources efficiently and built skills and capability within the business and supply chain.  Further electrification (page 30, para 3.16): the Furness Line is not included in the list of routes to be examined for extension of electrification in the North but the list is not closed to further additions.  Staffing(page 33, paras 3.28 to 3.31): the consultation document suggests that future operators need to consider more efficient use of staff, including the potential for driver-only operation and more modern ticket retailing.

5.2 Where appropriate these points are answered below as far as the Furness Line is concerned. See also answers to Consultation Questions in Annex A.

6. Key Response Points from the Furness Line CRP

6.1 - Remapping (NW1)

The current service offering is seen as a minimum baseline. Critically for the Furness Line this needs to support advanced manufacturing growth, with links to nuclear and energy excellence in South West Cumbria. The SEP identifies the visitor economy as presenting significant growth potential with improving the movement and accessibility to the county being critical to accommodate international visitor needs. Improved rail connectivity will be fundamental in supporting this SEP priority. The Furness Line CRP stresses that the current service offering must be maintained as a minimum. Due to the significant differential quality experience of TPE compared to the current Northern franchise, the CRP stresses that the new franchisee operates to a minimum quality standard based on the TPE delivery model. Infrastructure investment, particularly in stations and signalling as well as rolling stock, is vitally important to maintain and enhance the economic attractiveness of the area. Maintenance of through services to Manchester International Airport is critical for the line, as shown in the Furness Line study. To this must be added the growing need for through connectivity with interchanges on the Northern Hub and HS2 developments. Any potential remapping must be discussed with the CRPs who have the local knowledge and can communicate proposals to the local communities.

6.2 Principal Objectives

 To support economic growth by delivering more rail capacity and better rail connectivity.

 To improve the quality of railways in the North, with a better offer for passengers to encourage more use.

 To deliver a more efficient railway and to secure greater value for money.

 Realise the benefits of rail investment and further electrification: electrification of routes between Preston and Manchester, coupled with potential further electrification from Carnforth to Barrow, would bring substantial journey time and other advantages to rail passengers in South Cumbria. The journey time from Barrow to Manchester Airport is currently in excess of 2 ½ hours. The aim should be to reduce this to a little over two hours.

7. Answers to Consultation Questions

TO1: What are your view on increasing below-average fares over time to levels typical on the rest of the network in order to improve their frequency, capacity and quality of local services. Do you have any evidence to support your views?

Below average fares do not apply on the Furness Line where passengers do not benefit form subsidised fares which apply in the former TPA/TPE areas.

Comparisons from John’s research into fares

TO2: What are your views on giving priority to improving the quality of the Northern rolling stock at the expense of some reduction in lightly used services (e.g. fewer calls at low-use stations)? Do have any evidence to support your views?

There are no lightly used stations on the Furness Line, none having fewer than 20,000 passengers per annum. Usage at smaller stations, especially Cark and Kents Bank, is likely to respond positively to improved rail services because of the withdrawal/reduction of local bus services after withdrawal of financial support from the County Council, as well as from significant housing development now close to these stations.

TO3: What are your views on allowing some reduction in the hours of ticket offices are open and staffed if this is accompanied by the ability for passengers to have widespread access to ticket buying opportunities (e.g. though new and improved approaches or via mobile phones), adequate measures to ensure vulnerable passengers are not disadvantaged and more effective customer service by both station and on-train staff? Do have any evidence to support your views?

The Furness Line CRP considers that here still remains the critical need to offer staffed ticket offices to provide a quality service experience and resilience for the whole of the travelling public. Recent stakeholder engagement recognised the importance of staffed ticket offices and of the need to maintain and expand the customer offering. Staffed ticket offices should be developed as community hubs to provide an enhanced range of local services such as tourist information, post office functions, library services and wider retail provision. Outstanding exemplars of how stations can evolve are and Carnforth. There are opportunities offered by innovative ticketing technologies and print at home tickets but given the age profile of many leisure customers and the unreliability of mobile ‘phone signal around the coast, there remains the need for normal ticketing and the Furness Line CRP would stress the need for enhanced revenue collection.

COM1: How can local communities, local businesses and other organisations be further stimulated to play an active part in the running of Northern and TPE rail services, including at stations?

The CRP is giving priority to developing relationships with local visitor and tourist attractions and major events organisers with a view to exploring the scope for encouraging visitors to arrive by rail.

Key to stimulating further activity is the need to strengthen the role of CRPs and Development Companies with committed funding throughout the course of the franchise, There also needs to be closer partnership working with the franchisee to enable the CRP to have greater involvement with the operational elements of running the franchise. The CRP and other community groups can lever in additional capital for station enhancements and marketing.

There is a need to define and scope the role of a Community Business Unit which will harness a localised management approach on behalf of all local organisations. COM2: What opportunities are there for Community Rail Partnerships to expand their role and range of activities?

The CRP needs to expand its contacts with major employers along the route, and to involve them more in the work of the partnership. However, until they can be served by a good Barrow-bound commuter service this is unlikely to meet with a positive response.

The CRP has been instrumental in driving increased footfall and passenger fares revenue. The Association of Community Rail Partnerships (ACoRP’s) report, Value of Community Rail Partnerships, concludes that active and effective CRPs can increase footfall and fares revenue by an additional 7% over 3 years. This can only be done with continuing financial support for the Furness Line CRP and sufficient resources.

TPF1: Are you aware of any proposals for third-party funded changes not already indicated? Please provide details.

Not aware of any current third-party proposals.

DTD1: What are your proposals for providing passengers better and safer access to different modes of transport at stations (including bus, tram, cycling and walking?)

Cumbria County Council’s Vision document for the Furness Line includes proposals for walking and cycling links at the stations. The Morecambe Bay Partnership is also working with the Furness Line CRP to develop Grange and Silverdale railway stations as hubs for visitors to the area. These hubs will improve pedestrian, cycling and disabled facilities as well as visitor information about the local natural and cultural heritage.

Lancashire County Council’s response, also applicable to the southern section of this line also makes good points about safer access to stations, one of which is Silverdale. Other stations along the line with major access problems are Arnside, Kents Bank and Ulverston.

DTD2: How do you suggest your proposals to improve door-to-door journey experience might be funded? This is a role for the local transport authority. Cumbria County Council, through it’s Moving Cumbria Forward: Cumbria Transport Plan Strategy 2011-2026 will work with the District Councils to decide appropriated levels of developer contributions to maximise the use of public transport, walking and cycling for new developments. TPE1: What are your views on the degree of flexibility proposed for the train service specification for the new TPE franchise? Do you have any evidence to support your views?

The CRP welcomes the reference to protecting minimum service levels for social and economic purposes. It is imperative that there is no reduction in the current service offering. This must include the maintenance and enhancement of direct services to Manchester International Airport. The CRP can playing a key role in delivering an effective community focused service specification.

TPE3: Where, if anywhere, would you like to see any changes to first and last trains on the TPE network and why? Do you have any evidence to support this?

A longer traffic day is recommended for services between Barrow and MIA and for weekend leisure travellers as evidenced in The Railway Consultancy’s Furness Line report.

Evidence: The Furness Line report states, “A thorough examination of the Furness Line through stakeholder liaison, surveys of users and non-users, and timetable analysis shows some very significant failings in the level of service provided. Put simply, the current service is not fit for purpose, failing frequency, capacity and through service requirements. As well as background trend growth supplemented by growth from specific ongoing commercial developments (e.g. at Ulverston), we have also been appalled to discover that significant existing markets are not being addressed, leading to major losses of traffic and social benefit”. Also, “.. in 2013, timetable changes resulted in a reduction in the number of trains. The morning peak service now combines commuter and educational traffic onto the same train, causing crowding. TPE’s earlier “morning leisure” departure from Barrow at 0850 created severe overcrowding on the following 1010 from Barrow, which was booked to be formed of a single-car unit but which from May 2014 is a two-car train, after many instances of passengers actually being left behind”. Therefore, we require earlier trains in order to get people to MIA to connect with morning flights and also trains into Barrow to get people to work, seven days per week.

NW1: What factors do you consider should be taken into account in the assessment on the North West remapping options for Blackpool North, Windermere and Barrow-in-Furness services? What evidence you have in relation to any of these options?

An analysis is given (pages 48-49, paras 4.22 to 4.23) of the pattern of rail demand to and from Middlesbrough and Scarborough. Services to Barrow fulfil a similar role in providing services to local and longer distance, regional and national destinations but no similar information is provided in support of suggested remapping of North West services.

Blackpool, Windermere and Barrow are all major destinations and benefit from having direct train services to Manchester and MIA. Passenger numbers have grown as a result of being part of a bigger network. The Furness Line CRP strongly opposes any relegation of the Furness Line to “branch line” status. The destinations are all major tourist/investment centres and need to be connected directly to the regional capital.

Evidence: As stated in the Furness line report, “The withdrawal of some Manchester Airport trains has already led to passengers forsaking the train for such journeys, which are otherwise ideal for rail. This has a knock-on impact on business, for which the link to Manchester Airport is of strategic importance (e.g. in encouraging inward investment). Demand is forecast to increase more quickly than trend growth, as a number of significant new developments (e.g. new power stations at Moorside on the Cumbrian Coast line, factory expansions in Ulverston) come on stream. Unless the service is restored to its recent level, and supplemented with the filling of obvious gaps, local people will find it increasingly difficult to access employment. This problem is exacerbated by reductions in local bus networks”.

NW2: What factors do you consider should be taken account in the assessment of the Barrow and Windermere services? What evidence you have in relation to any of these options?

The current provision of 5 services from Manchester International Airport (MIA) to Barrow-in-Furness (BIF), and 6 only 5 services from BIF to MIA, offers very limited levels of direct connectivity for Barrow to benefit fully from the economic prosperity of the Manchester City Region and its international airport. Distribution of services through the day is irregular and very skewed towards the necessary of returning units to Barrow depot in the evening.

The Government is committed to improving the transport system in the north of England to support economic growth and so the Furness Line CRP stresses the vitally important need to maintain this connectivity to ensure the Furness area, Barrow and West Cumbria benefit.

Annual passenger surveys on the Lakes Line since 2002 have shown that passengers prefer through services. One of the main markets for the line is tourism, with around 60% of journeys surveyed being for leisure and tourism purposes. Due to the Buddhist festival in Ulverston and international businesses at Ulverston and Barrow, there are significant numbers of international visitors. Services through to MIA are critical to support these markets.

The current services will require radical changes to take account of new power stations at Moorside (), development of Siemens factory at Ulverston, Barrow industrial development and tourism.

NW3: What factors do you consider should be taken into account in the assessment of the options for Anglo-Scottish services? What evidence you have in relation to any of these options?

The current pattern of TPE Anglo-Scottish services has increased capacity by means of more seats and more trains. However, these benefits apply most strongly north of Oxenholme as the increased capacity south of Oxenholme has been countered by the reduction of through services between Windermere and Barrow to/from Manchester Airport. This frequently means that TPE trains have little capacity to accommodate passengers to/from these two lines at certain times of day. Passengers joining at Oxenholme and Lancaster frequently cannot find seats.

One of the main problems with Anglo-Scottish services is the skip stopping and this inhibits connectivity. Skip-stopping reduces the attractiveness of train travel between key service centres regionally and locally. From a FLCRP point of view, skip stopping affects connections to the stopping services to Barrow. There needs to careful co-ordination with WCML services to ensure connections, southbound at least, are available from all local services to provide best long-distance connectivity. Connections must be reliable and not timed too tightly as during some weeks up to 60% of connections onto Northern Rail services at Lancaster for Barrow are missed. This is often due to late funning north bound services on the WCML and the need to allow for the 8 minutes walk from platform 2 at Lancaster via lifts to platform 4. Connections should not be too long either and the current interchange facilities Lancaster for services to Barrow, need improving.

NTSR1: Please indicate, with evidence where available, where passengers would be better served, and revenue increased by:  Reducing the number of calls at low-use stations?  Increasing frequencies on busier sections of routes or at busier times?  Speeding up the service for longer-distance passengers?  Improving connections with other services where there is evident demand?  Adjusting train services to meet seasonal changes in demand?  Adjusting the time of the first/last train? Local services play a critical role in remote communities and contribute to the local economy and society. There will be the increased use of rail as a result of the phased withdrawal of scheduled bus services as subsidies are withdrawn over the next few months by Cumbria County Council. In our view, there is an overwhelming need for reliable stopping services on community lines as shown by local stakeholder engagement. The CRP can help to drive growth in footfall at these stations. Provided that a regular interval hourly local service can be provided at all stations to encourage use, then an additional, limited stop service through/from Manchester Airport is appropriate.

NTSR2: Please set out, with evidence where available, any other approached that might improve route utilisation and make better use of existing resources on the Northern franchise.

A key requirement of the future franchise(s) is the need for a clear and streamlined management structure which will drive forward improved operational performance. The franchisee, the CRP and must work together more closely in respect of operational responsibilities and project delivery. One option for the line, as set out in the Furness Line report states that continuation of existing arrangements (alternate Northern slow & TPE semi- fast services) is an ambiguous alternative, because the “existing arrangements” have been reduced recently, with fewer through services to Manchester. Resumption of the strictly-alternate arrangement running at regular hourly intervals would seem to be a minimum, although stakeholders’ concerns about disaggregated commercial and operational management would still not be addressed. Therefore, it is vital that the operator(s) of the train services along the Furness Line work closely with the CRP to establish the most suitable train frequency to maximise the markets using the line.

NTSR3: Please indicate, with evidence where available, where services should be improved on weekends, resources permitting.

On the Furness line Sunday train services should be at the same level as those on Saturdays at the very least. Furness line services run through or connect to those on the Cumbrian Coast line and there is a need to introduce a full Sunday service on that line. At present, visitors can get to West Cumbria by train on a Friday or Saturday but there is no Sunday train service between Barrow and to get them home again. In a modern economy, the absence of a Sunday service on such a critical line which supports isolated rural communities, a burgeoning nuclear industry and a buoyant tourism market is indefensible. Saturdays, almost throughout the year, tax train capacity on the Furness Line; during holiday periods finding a seat can be almost impossible, with passengers having to stand for long distances.

NTSR4: Please indicate, with evidence where available, where weekend services provide poor value for the subsidy required to operate them.

A critically important role needs to be played by the railways right across Cumbria, seven days per week.

NTSR5: Question not applicable.

OTH1: Do you have any other views on the future of the Northern and TPE franchises that you would like to set out?

The occasional use of Pacers to provide more seating than a single class 153 unit has been welcomed but the Furness Line CRP welcomes the requirement for bidders to include plans which would enable the withdrawal of all Pacer units from Northern services. There is widespread recognition of the poor quality of the Northern rolling stock which provides a poor image of rail travel and discourages rail usage. We would expect the introduction of new electric rolling stock and the upgrading of cascaded rolling stock to be a priority in the new franchise (s).

There needs to be greater acknowledgment and emphasis given to the role that railways play in the social and environmental agenda, alongside that of economic development. For sustainable economic growth to be realised, this growth has to enhance society through supporting access to health, educational and employment. The Furness Line CRP, backed up by the Furness Line study, sees the significant need for investment in the line.

Annex A Furness Line Study by The Railway Consultancy, July 2014 Annex B

Fares Comparison – Furness Line with route of comparable length

Based on Single Anytime Fares – route length 35 miles ± 2miles

Rugby to Smethwick £ 9.20

Shrewsbury to Chester £10.10

Darlington to Newcastle £11.00

Cambridge to March £11.00

St Pancras to Harlington £11.90

Carmarthen to Neath £12.20

Barrow to Lancaster £13.60

Dover to Sittingbourne £14.00

Waterloo to Wokingham £14.60

Kings Cross to Letchworth £15.30

It will be noticed that a fare over the full length of the Furness Line is towards the upper end of a range of fares randomly selected across the country

A further comparison of fares in the North with other parts of the country on routes of varying lengths again shows a limited range of costs, expect for one where the northern route is considerably more expensive: miles Bournemouth to London 100 £52-50 Newcastle to Leeds £49-70

Sittingbourne to London 42 £21-40 Manchester to Sheffield £18-20

Cambridge to London 63 £22-60 Middlesbrough to Leeds £32-40

Guildford to London 32 £12-40 Preston to Manchester £12-40

Stevenage to London 32 £13-60 Liverpool to Manchester £12-80