Thameslink

Thameslink passenger trains run between the East Coast Main Line and the South Coast via the Canal Tunnels.

Government faced the choice of either delaying the rollout of services on the Thameslink network or risking additional disruption, according to Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Chairman Meg Hillier.

A PAC report, Lessons of Thameslink Critical to Success of Future Rail Projects, has concluded that the Department for Transport and Network Rail took too long to start planning how the new railway would operate, and to decide to introduce the new services in phases rather than a single big bang. PAC recommended that in the future, clear arrangements should be established at the outset.

It said the complexity of the programme required a new approach to collaboration within the industry, and that while Government intends to establish closer working relationships between NR and train operators, it has not yet finalised how it intends to do this.

PAC recommended that by June the DfT should write to the committee to “explain how it will ensure that Network Rail’s plans for spending £48 billion on the network between 2019 and 2024 are based on a clear understanding of the condition of the network, and where work will be needed to support future major programmes”.

The report, released on February 23, said: “The Department and Network Rail have been slow to appreciate the importance of early planning for how the new services will operator, and how they will organise the rail industry to do this.”

Referring to a 9% budget increase from £5bn in 2013 to £5.5bn in 2015, the report said: “Network Rail told us that the budget increase was largely a result of forecast increases in the cost of London Bridge’s redevelopment.”

PAC said both the DfT and NR had “a poor understanding of the performance of the rail network, and did not monitor the impact that increasing services and failing infrastructure would have on either passenger disruption or the planned benefits of the Thameslink programme”.

NR Chief Executive Mark Carne, speaking to the PAC on December 6 last year, said that when the Thameslink Programme began, performance was 91.4% and it was anticipated that passenger growth would be around 0.5%1% per annum. Instead, it has risen by 40% since then, which he said had caused performance to drop to about 83%. He claimed the infrastructure was now 30% more reliable and that the reduction in performance was caused by congestion. He added that a further £900 million was needed to fund performance improvements.

Speaking on February 23, Hillier said: “Passengers and the practicalities of running services should be at the heart of public transport planning.

“Taxpayers have also taken a hit elsewhere, with budget increases on Thameslink contributing to other rail projects being abandoned.

“Government’s performance on recent rail infrastructure projects, such as its programme to electrify the Great Western route, has been poor. Overall progress on Thameslink compares favourably, but the project is not over yet and requires significant additional public funding.

“Unforeseen but essential maintenance is expected to cost £900m and, if passengers are to get the services they have been promised, the timetable must not slip further.

“There are critical tests looming for Network Rail and the Department for Transport, not least the redevelopment of Euston station for High Speed 2 – a project set to be more complex than the budget-busting work to prepare London Bridge for Thameslink.

“Government must apply what it has learned here to HS2 and future programmes, and in response to our report we urge it to demonstrate how it will do this in practice.”

PAC said NR’s estimates of the costs of the Thameslink programme “lacked the sophisticated understanding that it needs to manage its wider portfolio of projects effectively”. The recommendation was for DfT and NR to write to PAC with outlines of new arrangements put in place to estimate and oversee projects, and how these have improved the way of working.

PAC said the Thameslink programme has produced valuable lessons, including what challenges arise when managing complex station projects.