Insider

Franchise bidders urged to raise quality

South Eastern franchise.

The South Eastern franchise is due for renewal in December 2018 after a 12-year period of operation by Govia, and a consultation process has started to identify passenger and stakeholder expectations for the subsequent new contract.

The Government acknowledges that the performance of the current franchise has been unacceptably poor, as a result of the redevelopment of London Bridge. With the completion of this project in 2018 it has set three objectives: to create more space for passengers by running longer trains; to reduce delays; to introduce improved ticketing and compensation arrangements. The latter will result in the delay repay scheme being improved, so that passengers become eligible for refunds when trains are 15 rather than 30 minutes late.

The bidders will be challenged to form partnerships with companies that have expertise in providing high levels of customer service, making investment in infrastructure improvements, and creating a company structure that provides greater staff involvement in the running of the business. Bidders will also be encouraged to disregard the current franchise boundaries and promote additional services that bring better outcomes for passengers.

Although passenger numbers are large (182 million in 2015-16), growth has been negligible in the past two years, which reflects disruption caused by work to enhance capacity for Thameslink services. Many of the journeys are over shorter distances between London and the Medway towns, but longer- distance routes serve the Kent Coast and include the domestic services using HS1.

A high proportion of journeys are within Greater London, which prompted the London Mayor to propose the transfer of routes to the London Overground network. Here a 35% growth in the number of users has been recorded in two years, as a result of an all-round improvement in product quality with rolling stock designed for metro operations, higher service frequency, simpler ticketing and improved station staffing.

Despite this success the Government has resisted the transfer of services to Transport for London, ostensibly on grounds that the capacity for running longer distance from coastal towns in Kent might be reduced.

Although the rolling stock is modern (following the replacement of Mk 1s), the interior configuration of inner-suburban vehicles is not ideal and the cramped interiors result in extended dwell time at stations during busy periods.

For shorter journeys there has been a growing realisation that providing everyone with a seat is not necessarily comfortable, and that providing more standing room is preferred by passengers. More standing space also meets the needs of wheelchair users and those travelling with young children in pushchairs.

There is a tradition of providing trains to a mix of London terminals, which allows a choice of terminal station best suited to work location. This carries a penalty of operational complexity that has affected performance, which in turn is judged to have caused a low passenger satisfaction level of 77% compared with comparable commuter journeys. The consultation exercise will test how users value the trade-off between a choice of terminal and the operational simplicity that it is believed will improve timekeeping.

Within the inner-suburban area a large expansion in housing by 2030 will feature significant population increases in the Medway towns of Dartford and Gravesend and at Ebbsfleet, which is served by HS1 domestic services. More seating capacity will clearly be needed and longer trains are seen as the solution, although it is accepted that many stations do not have sufficient concourse capacity to accommodate a large increase in passenger numbers.

It is easy to forget the needs of longerdistance commuters and leisure travellers on whom the coastal towns rely. Southeastern services have long lost any sense of providing a premium service to attract discretionary customers, with the Hastings route via Tunbridge Wells an obvious example.

Once trains provided spacious bay seating adjacent to windows, a buffet car, and First Class accommodation with a differential that was worth paying for. Today, you might as well be on an inner- suburban journey. The Class 375s at least have air- conditioning, but otherwise there is little to commend them. The seating is cramped and First Class accommodation was added as an after-thought by providing some window stickers and headrest antimacassars. There is no on-board catering.

Now the DfT suggests that it is not worth providing an opportunity to pay for a premium service, by removing First Class accommodation altogether. Yet it acknowledges that there is significant demand from locations such as Tunbridge Wells. I don’t really follow the logic of abolition - it won’t provide any additional seating because there is no physical difference from the rest of the coach.

It would be good if the vision was lifted from the ‘pile it high sell it cheap’ mentality. Southeastern requires revenue support to operate its services, and more premium business has the potential to improve that outcome. It must be disappointing to coastal towns struggling to recover their appeal that the quality of the train service is another hurdle they have to overcome.

The alternative to a First Class offer is to provide everyone with a higherquality journey experience, as is the case with the Class 395 Javelin units and the policy adopted by Chiltern Railways with its clubman brand, although there has been a cost in terms of revenue yield. Some Southeastern Class 375s have been designated for use on longer- distance journeys and provided with lower-density seating, but the journey experience remains poor with an unattractive seating layout.

A surprising and welcome commentary in the consultation document is that research has shown passengers like staff to be available to help them on trains and at stations. It points to the needs of infrequent, vulnerable or disabled passengers, who benefit from the visibility of staff. This is even more important when services are disrupted, and acts as a deterrent to antisocial behaviour on late-night services.

The franchise bidder is invited to suggest ways to increase staff availability. Hello, what is the message in the context of the year-long dispute at Southern, about the removal of guards from services? Perhaps it is judged that the change is no longer worth the cost.

“It would be good if the vision was lifted from the ‘pile it high sell it cheap’ mentality.”