PAC slams DfT over its rail resp ponsibilities
THE Public Accounts Committee has strongly criticised the Government’s management of the railway.
In its Rail Management and Timetabling report, published on February 27, PAC concludes that the Department for Transport “did not ensure, as it should have done, that those responsible for the railway are clear about their roles and that they work together effectively. This has contributed to major disruption and misery for passengers.”
It adds: “Given the fragmented nature of responsibilities for operating the railway, it is alarming that the Department has not ensured a clear line of ownership and oversight of the timetabling process, and that it did not sufficiently probe the assurances it was getting from industry on progress.”
The committee’s MPs say the DfT has not provided sufficient detail about what it is doing differently when letting new franchise contracts, and recommends that the Department “must set out once and for all a clear governance and accountability structure for the railway, including what the Department retains responsibility for and how it will gain assurance that the wider system is functioning as it intends”.
The DfT also comes in for criticism on the Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR) contract, with the report expressing concern that it is “still not adequately protecting taxpayers’ money and that there is a lack of transparency about the profit rate that the company will be able to earn”.
MPs disagree with DfT assertions that such information is commercially sensitive. They recommend that within three months of the report, the DfT must reveal details of the profit cap applied to GTR and how the £15 million passenger improvement fund will be spent - including the tangible improvements that passengers can expect.
A failure to learn lessons from previous programmes means the DfT’s strategic management of the railways is not evolving quickly enough to procure projects such as Crossrail, so that they do not face cost increases and delays, the PAC asserts. It says the DfT “did not sufficiently probe” assurances given by Crossrail Ltd about the programme and expected costs.
“It is disappointing that we keep seeing these similar issues in how the Department manages programmes, including the Thameslink upgrade and the programme to modernise the Great Western Railway,” the report says.
“It is worrying that as the Department embarks on another major programme - the £2.9 billion Trans-Pennine Route Upgrade - it is not learning lessons from previous programmes.”
It recommends the DfT should explain how it manages to “systematically capture and learn lessons” from programme delivery to ensure it avoids repeating mistakes.
The report criticises a lack of clarity on when East Coast Main Line passengers will receive the improvements promised to them from the failed Virgin Trains East Coast franchise, pointing out that the DfT could only tell the PAC that infrastructure works will be
completed throughout the early 2020s. It wants the DfT to set out in detail by the summer recess when new direct services to towns such as Huddersfield, Sunderland and Middlesbrough will begin.
PAC says the rail industry shares the blame with the DfT on the speed of making the railway accessible for disabled passengers. The PAC wants the DfT to write to it by the summer recess setting out how it will ensure train and station operators make sure that passengers with disabilities can use the railway, and to set out an enhanced monitoring regime to ensure companies comply with the plan.
PAC Chairman Meg Hillier said: “2018 was a year from hell for many rail users, and unless the Government gets a grip there is every chance that passengers will suffer in 2019 as well.
“Crucially, the Department for Transport did not ensure that those responsible for the railway were clear about their roles and were working together effectively. The result has been misery for passengers, who in many cases have had no viable alternative but to endure repeatedly delayed and cancelled services.
“The Department for Transport must set out clear governance and accountability structures for the rail system and move swiftly to provide other important information.”