Regional set-ups would enhance the North’s railways
Boris Johnson is promising to devolve powers to local authorities in the North of England, citing better services on Tyne & Wear Metro, Manchester Metrolink and Merseyrail as examples.
It should be noted that all three use self-contained infrastructure and resources, making them far easier to manage.
Not so for the rest of the local northern services, all of which are entwined in routes, rolling stock, train crews and financing - to name but a few of the managerial difficulties of separation.
During the 1990s, British Rail perfected the splitting of responsibilities when it introduced its Organisation for Quality (OfQ).
I was the Director of Operations for Regional Railways North West (based in Manchester), in charge of local services broadly between Crewe, Carlisle and Holyhead to various stations on the western side of the Pennines.
The area had a natural feel to itself, with services in Lancashire, Cumbria and Cheshire plus the Manchester and Merseyside Passenger Transport Executives. Likewise, the north east of England had its own Regional Railways North East set-up, covering Yorkshire and Northumberland plus the PTEs representing Leeds, York, Doncaster and so on.
Both had excellent working relationships with their InterCity colleagues, who managed the main lines with associated stations and infrastructure.
These OfQ organisations had everything they needed to run their railways and did so very efficiently - if only for a short period before privatisation. The only ingredient we lacked was investment - I only wish that we had had a fraction of the investment thankfully poured into the railways since 1997.
I am not saying that the War of the Roses still exists, but nobody living and working in Manchester ever thinks of Doncaster or Harrogate, and no one in Leeds ever thinks of Preston or Barrow. That was where the creation of Northern Trains went so wrong!
I was twice asked my opinion about its creation, and I made strong representation that it was a false economy to combine the North East and North West railways. It just does not work!
Nor will units that are too small - such as an individual PTE area. Railways work best as natural units of geography and resources - not artificial administrative boundaries.
PTE responsibilities ended in some weird and wonderful places, with stations renovated on the
PTE side and left rotting on the non-PTE side. PTE train services were augmented to the boundaries and left wanting on the other. I suspect that present mayoral boundaries might expose some new railway nonsenses.
So, let’s reorganise in a way that the railway can best serve the communities and not just the authorities. There is no need to reinvent the wheel:
■ 1: Close down the Northern franchise.
■ 2: Create non profit-making management structures for North Western Railways in Manchester and North Eastern Railways in Leeds, with the Pennine boundaries as they used to be in the 1990s.
■ 3: Form similarly aligned Alliances with Network Rail.
■ 4: Keep the North Wales Coast services with the Welsh Government.
■ 5: Keep the DC services with Merseyrail.
■ 6: Keep InterCity and TransPennine services as now.
■ 7: Create a small Transport for the North policy unit from North West and North East local authorities - to give guidance on policy plus the funding, investment and awarding of management contracts.
This unit would be the contact with Mayors and other local authorities, the DfT and Treasury. It would also be the pinnacle of the rail transport direct management organisation, taking the credit or the heat depending on results. It should be nonpolitical but a professional centre of excellence.
Remembering how quickly British Rail arranged the break-up of its integrated services, I estimate that all the above could be accomplished within a year of the go-ahead and at minimal cost. Let’s get it done while we have cross party-political agreement.