Richard Clinnick says transparency is needed in electrification row.

Greater transparency needed in electrification row?

“To make nine HSTs compliant would cost £50m. And even then, they would still not be ready in time.”

On July 20 2017, a Department for Transport press release announced the benefits of bimode trains, using them as a justification for cancelling three electrification schemes.

The schemes cancelled on that final day of Parliament before the summer recess were Oxenholme-Windermere, Cardiff-Swansea and the Midland Main Line (MML).

In a statement, Secretary of State for Transport Chris Grayling said of the MML: “The next operator will be required to deliver modern, fast and efficient trains. This includes a brand new fleet of bi-mode inter-city trains from 2022, delivering more seats and comfort for long-distance passengers.

“The provision of these trains will replace plans to electrify the line north of Kettering to Sheffield and Nottingham, improving journeys sooner.”

He didn’t mention in his statement that the MML was originally due to have been wired by the end of 2020.

Grayling added: “Passengers expect and deserve high-quality rail services and we are committed to using the best available technology for each part of the network, delivering significant benefits for those who use our railways.”

The regions were far from happy ( RAIL 832). Just three days earlier, in a Parliamentary debate on HS2, Grayling had been praised by Chris Williamson (Labour, Derby North) regarding wires on the MML.

Now, a National Audit Office (NAO) investigation into the Department for Transport’s cancellation of the three rail electrification projects reveals that the Transport Secretary had made the decision in March 2017… four months earlier.

And it has emerged that discussions were ongoing over several months from late 2016 regarding how to save money, with the three cancelled schemes featuring prominently in those discussions.

It is also to be remembered that Network Rail had lost its capacity to keep borrowing to deliver such schemes, when it was put on the public books. It needed to save money, and that is what the Hendy Review of 2015 sought to accomplish.

HS2 also came into the equation - and rightly so. The Benefit: Cost Ratio for wiring the Midland Main Line declined significantly when the new railway was taken into account. That makes sense - there is an argument (one that has been made on this page before) that given HS2 will provide an electrified 360kph (225mph) railway to Toton and the East Midlands, it is at least prudent to ask if MML electrification therefore represents good taxpayer value?

So, Grayling’s grand plan was for bi-mode trains instead. However, he had been advised that no such product was available (at the time of his announcement) that was able to perform in a way that could enable the planned timetable to work. There was also uncertainty over the cost of the trains.

The NAO also discusses the impact of the Intercity Express Trains (IETs) on timings on the Great Western Main Line. It points out that even using electric power, the maximum speed between Cardiff and Swansea is 90mph.

Hitachi Rail Europe, which builds the IETs for GWR, estimates its Class 800s can reduce journey times between London and Swansea by 15 minutes along the whole route, due to the performance of the trains in electric mode east of Cardiff.

Cardiff- Swansea is where a bi- mode can make sense for the taxpayer, however. Running on electric power for 145½ miles out of 190 miles, with improved journey times, is sensible thinking and does save £ 500 million. That is the benefit the railway can gain from bi-mode trains.

There is a downside, of course. The NAO says Grayling was advised about the heavier weight and higher energy costs associated with bi-mode trains, and yet the MML will have to ‘make do’ with them.

Grayling expects passengers on the MML to travel just shy of 72 miles under the wires from St Pancras to Kettering, but then a further 86 miles on diesel power to Sheffield (54 miles to Nottingham). Is that really a passenger benefit, given the performance available via electric trains?

He has claimed in the past that erecting wires on the MML would cost £1 billion to save just one minute on journey times. But after this NAO report, this has been questioned. Certainly, Transport Select Committee Chairman Lilian Greenwood has expressed frustration at Grayling’s performance, when he’s been called by the TSC to explain the reasons for cancelling the wires.

At his most recent appearance before MPs on the subject, on January 22, Grayling argued that capacity enhancements along the route were more important than erecting wires north of Corby and Kettering. And yet the NAO report highlights how the original DfT estimation for the fully electrified MML was for 3,500 seats in London at peak-time. Cancelling the wires, but introducing electric units on just the Corby section, only increases the current number of seats from 1,800 to 2,900.

There is another issue created by the decision to announce these MML bi-modes. Unless the High Speed Trains currently used along the route are modified to comply with disability legislation that comes into force on December 31 2019, they will not be able to run on the line - leaving a rolling stock shortfall before the proposed bi-mode units are introduced (planned for 2022).

And I am told by sources close to the HSTs’ owners that even when we leave the European Union, it will be very hard to reverse that legislation. As such, from December 31 2019 the East Midlands franchise will lose 12 trains.

Solutions are being investigated, but to make nine HSTs compliant would cost £ 50m. And even then, they would still not be ready in time.

Then we come to the proposed bi-modes. There have been no details at all regarding who will build them, who will specify them, and how much they will cost. The current fleet of bi-modes being introduced on the national network (the IETs) are very good, let down by infrastructure delays and a rather bleak, uncomfortable interior specified by civil servants. The level of vitriol towards these trains on social media is rising, and there is concern regarding what is planned for the Azumas.

The MML has had its electrification taken away. And it has emerged that the decision was made before the last General Election in June 2017, but not revealed until several weeks later.

Imagine if the Department specifies these new trains. Will Government explain its decision, or will the new franchise have to defend itself against decisions made by others? I hope it’s the former… but I’m not confident.

Nigel Harris is on holiday.