Brexit’s rail impact
PHILIP HAIGH examines the effect Brexit will have on the rail workforce and staff skills, as well as on the passage of passenger and freight trains travelling between the UK and EU countries
What effect will Brexit have on the smooth passage of passenger and freight trains between the UK and the EU?
OF the 240,000 people working for rail companies in the UK, between 15% and 20% come from European Union countries outside Britain. For companies in London and southeast England, the proportion can be as high as half.
So say figures from the Rail Delivery Group and the National Skills Academy for Rail (NSAR). The railway’s workforce is ageing, such that the two bodies reckon on needing to recruit 100,000 people over the next decade to replace those retiring and to cope with expected growth in trains. They cite unnamed research to suggest the annual costs of not finding these new staff could be £300 million to the industry and £380m to government by 2024.
RDG and NSAR reveal their fears in a recent report in which they say: “A major concern for several employers in the rail industry is the uncertainty attached to retaining their current EU workforce. It has been suggested that Brexit could create more localisation of skillsets through a fear of not being able to obtain skilled workers from overseas. Despite this, employers continue to recruit individuals based on their merits, their skillset and having gained the rights to work in the UK, irrespective of their country of origin.”
RDG and NSAR acknowledge that access to European Union workers brings advantages as well as problems. The advantages include easy access to a wide pool of talent and more control over costs. The problems include fewer incentives for companies to train workers and widen Britain’s pool of staff.
If Brexit takes Britain out of the EU labour pool, then RDG and NSAR warn of labour shortages, higher costs, and difficulties in smoothing peaks in demand for staff. In addition, they fear that companies may stop working in Britain in favour of the EU, and that some British staff may move abroad to work in Europe.
It’s not just around staffing that Brexit might have an effect on UK railways. Leaving the EU’s single market and customs union will force changes to the way rail companies move freight through the Channel Tunnel.
Owner Eurotunnel reported 1,797 trains using the link in 2016, down 26% from the 2,421 trains of 2015. In tonnage terms, traffic fell 27% from 1.4 million tonnes to 1.0 million tonnes. This year there has been a slight recovery, with latest figures showing 1,530 trains (910,000 tonnes) for the first nine months - a rise of 15% and 19% respectively with the same timeframe in 2016.
By total UK rail freight standards, Eurotunnel’s traffic is a small proportion. In 2016-17, freight operators in Britain ran 223,800 trains, lifting 79.4 million tonnes.
The Channel Tunnel already has very tight security at its French end, to deter those trying to enter Britain illegally. In future, trains will need more checks to satisfy customs officials before being allowed passage, which may delay trains. Cargo details could be sent in advance to ease clearance and scanners could check trains as they move at low speed. However, borders will still need facilities in which to halt and more thoroughly check trains.
Customs checks are also likely to delay lorries, which might generate a switch to moving goods in unaccompanied containers rather than with a driver. Consultant Julian Worth argued in a recent Rail Freight Group newsletter that this might lead to an increase in short-sea containers arriving at UK ports (because containers could be double-stacked on ships unlike lorries and trailers). This might result in an increase in rail freight to and from east coast ports such as Tilbury and Teesport.
Even with an open border, there is no rail freight between Northern Ireland and Ireland. Whether Brexit changes this remains to be seen, but freight will need to be checked and cleared as it moves between the UK and EU.
Customs will also apply to passengers using trains such as Eurostar’s. St Pancras has suitable space for passengers arriving from Paris or Brussels. It may also need them for those leaving, because they are absent at the French and Belgian capitals.
RDG staff took a trip over the Atlantic last summer to study how American and Canadian officials
deal with trains between the two countries. They went specifically to see how a hard border affects travel, and chose the US and Canada because those two countries have a relationship most likely to be similar to that between France and Britain after Brexit. While RDG does not mention Ireland, a hard border between the UK and EU countries is likely to apply to Belfast-Dublin passenger services.
Despite the long border between the US and Canada, RDG found it is crossed by just three rail services: Eugene-Vancouver via Portland and Seattle; New York-Toronto via Albany and Buffalo; and New York-Montreal via Albany.
Each has different procedures. Heading north to Vancouver, passengers clear customs and immigration on arrival. Southbound passengers must check in an hour before departure to clear US immigration. Customs officers board at the frontier.
On the Toronto train, everything is done at the border. Northbound passengers must alight with their luggage onto an open platform for customs and immigration checks. While the train is empty, it’s checked for illegal goods. Those heading south must also alight, but RDG reports that there is a station with facilities for the checks the US needs. Train crew change at the border.
The Montreal train stops at its border, but passengers remain on the train. Operator Amtrak schedules an hour for them, but they can be done in anything between 30 minutes and two hours, reports RDG.
Despite co-operation and pragmatism between America and Canada, the RDG report concludes that hard borders hinder smooth operation of trains. RDG suggests that ‘pre-clearance’ is the best way to deal with customs and immigration, but adds that every station call between origin and border would need suitable facilities. Britain and the EU would need to develop systems for sharing information.
RDG’s report suggests using an ‘advanced passenger information system’ as airlines do. This will require international passengers to book in advance - 24 hours before travelling, it suggests. It remains to be seen whether such bookings give any flexibility to switch trains, as Eurostar passengers with flexible tickets can do provided there are available seats.
The report adds: “It will be key to build a strong relationship with partners across the borders to facilitate discussion and finding of pragmatic solutions in case of challenges. This includes the relationship between railway operators, infrastructure managers and regulatory bodies as well as relevant government departments. GB rail already has excellent relationships with regulators and operators on both sides of the Channel.”
Even with good relationships, there are matters that could yet trip rail operators. RDG admits that it does not know whether the European Union will continue to accept British train driving licences and certificates. If they are not recognised, then there will be more barriers and bureaucracy to navigate for international operators.
Few UK rail services cross borders. Very few passengers will be caught in prolonged customs and immigration procedures compared with the number of passengers using UK trains every year. Of more concern to most companies will be staff numbers as more employees approach retirement age. This will be a problem whether or not Britain was leaving the European Union.
Brexit will change the way rail companies operate across borders. At the moment, there are more questions than answers. While the RDG’s reports suggest ways forward, firm planning will not be possible until there’s considerably more clarity.
“If Brexit takes Britain out of the EU labour pool, then RDG and NSAR warn of labour shortages, higher costs, and difficulties in smoothing peaks in demand for staff.”