Support our leaders and we can emerge stronger
Shouting from the sidelines is pretty easy. For Christian Wolmar ( RAIL 909) to suggest that a publicly funded railway that has been supported by enormous subsidies during this period should or could have declared mutiny and ignored the instruction of Government and its scientific advisors is as laughable as it is ludicrous.
To then turn that into an assault on the individuals seeking to work under immense strain to do the best for the country demonstrates an appalling lack of judgement that should not go unchallenged.
While I don’t always agree with everything Christian writes, it is often thought-provoking and stimulating, and I defend absolutely his right to make his point and challenge those of us in leadership roles.
In the biggest national crisis in more than 70 years, leadership can rightly only come from the Prime Minister and his government. You will not find me criticising and second-guessing them.
This is not out of some misplaced blind loyalty or ignorance, but because I have the self-awareness to recognise that I am not in their shoes, do not have to make the trade-offs they face, and because undermining leaders in a time of crisis rarely (if ever) leads to better decisions.
I am immensely proud of our industry. We have kept the trains running for key workers and essential freight, and we have accelerated upgrade and investment work across the network where other industries were forced to close down.
Now we are all able to travel again, rebuilding passenger numbers and confidence will be a challenge. But we will welcome passengers back, safe from this horrendous virus, as we emerge stronger.
Andrew Haines, Chief Executive, Network Rail
How very timely that both Sir Michael Holden and Christian Wolmar wrote in similar vein ( RAIL 907): yes, the train operating companies (TOCs) have thoroughly trashed the brand, and I fear there will be a price to pay.
I’ve just had to book essential train tickets for an appointment in London, and the experience was decidedly unpleasant.
Firstly, to the TOC’s website.
Even as the page is loading the line at the top of the browser has changed to ‘Necessary Travel Only’ - as in: what are you doing on this page?
Then there is a huge pop-up across the screen asking if I can’t travel some other way, and do I really need to be on a train?
At last the website - and another box about trains being for necessary travel only.
Still I press on! I click to select departure station but now a pop-up box headed ‘Is your journey necessary’ requires me to tick four conditions about COVID before I can continue.
Finally, I’m allowed to select a station. But immediately a warning comes up saying that train schedules are subject to alteration and to check nearer the time, which given that the default day is today is quite remarkable!
I press on - I have no choice and finally purchase tickets. This is what trashing the brand looks like at the point of sale.
Of course, my few pounds are neither here nor there set against the subsidies being given out to the TOCs, so what will the REAL customer make of all this? As Wolmar writes: “At the beginning of the pandemic, the people around Boris Johnson thought the railways would be one of the key industries pulling us out of the resulting economic downturn.”
I very much doubt if HM Treasury thinks it’s getting good value from the huge cheques it’s writing, and there will inevitably be a day of reckoning. Sir Michael Holden is spot on: “Railway companies have been actively complicit in the biggest piece of sabotage the industry has ever seen.”
Michael Womack, Norfolk
Christian Wolmar is absolutely right when he says that the message “don’t use public transport” will cause lasting damage to the railways ( RAIL 907).
It is already clear that commuter numbers will never return to their former levels. And leisure travellers will find other ways to get around - once you have purchased a car, the marginal cost of using it undercuts the railway for even one person for all but the very best advance fares.
The industry would do well to remember its history - the strike of 1955 lasted only 17 days but led to a permanent shift to the roads. It was one of the major causes of the Beeching axe.
If a Coronavirus vaccine takes years, then there might have to be a permanent reduction in services. Totally pointless to redesign a 12-car train to carry 100 passengers - it would be cheaper
to give them all a new car!
Personally, even though I love train travel and used to travel a lot, I have finally abandoned the railway. I was already finding that the experience of uncomfortable trains, bus substitution and strikes was taking all the pleasure out of train travel. Train travel today and for the foreseeable future is a totally joyless experience.
When the bill for all of the taxpayer’s money spent on the crisis comes in, the (by then very substantial) subsidy for the railways will again come under scrutiny.
Dr David Wisely, Ipswich
I share the concerns of Christian Wolmar and others, regarding the advice that trains should not be used for leisure journeys at this time.
Conversely, people are being encouraged to drive their cars really as much as they like within England, despite the pollution and congestion which arises from their extra use.
I have made some recent off-peak trips on a through train to Box Hill in Surrey, to enjoy some healthy country walking. Either no one or less than a couple of people have alighted from my train. Yet go to Box Hill itself and the area can be crowded, with the majority having arrived by car and mixing closely with others.
My train has been virtually empty, so I would question: what is the point of running that train if people are told not to travel on it? I am sure there is greater danger in walking round a supermarket, where social distancing is rarely followed.
I heard on the radio that
Brighton Council was concerned about people heading straight from the station to the beach and felt they should be sent home immediately. Yet a regular traveller says the trains are virtually empty
- it is the car drivers who are crowding the beach. Yet again, it is the public transport user who is singled out for criticism.
John Parkin, Carshalton
Christian Wolmar seems to have missed the whole point of social distancing.
The whole lockdown strategy has been based on cutting contacts to reduce the transmission of the disease throughout the community. Christian confused the probability to die with the ability to catch the virus and pass it on. There is no evidence (that I am aware of) that the less likely you are to die, the less likely you are to catch or transmit it.
With none of our actions and behaviours can we view them from just our personal risk and say: ‘I will do this and take the risk’. It is all about community risk.
To discuss a way forward in public transport and to not directly mention its importance in terms of being the basis of everything we have done over the past four months (whether you agree or not) seems bizarre.
I am a relatively old, probably overweight male, and a train lover. I long to get back on a train and encourage everybody to put forward ideas and work to enable this to happen as soon as possible, and with an acceptable level of risk for all.
Grahame Nasey, West Yorkshire
I am concerned that the COVID-19 instructions regarding travel on public transport may do irreparable damage to our railways.
The instruction to not use public transport has given the general public a conception of ‘Dirty travel - best avoided’.
This message could have been worded so differently, encouraging the continued use of public transport and wording the instructions in a manner which educated the public on how to do this wisely and safely.
I believe that there will now be a general perception of ‘dirty transport’ which operators will have to bear for many years to come. If my fears are confirmed by future usage, the whole business case for investment in future public transport expansion, including HS2, will become questionable.
Christopher Dyche, Stourbridge
I hope that a lasting legacy of the COVID-19 crisis will be more care about hygiene. Even if COVID-19 is defeated by vaccination and drugs, there will still be other germs to contend with.
It would be a good idea to return to designing passenger coaches divided into compartments, but smaller compartments with only one row of seats - with or without corridor connections. Existing coaches could be made more hygienic by installing screens or curtains.
It might also be a good idea for train operating companies to issue its staff with PPE. Some airlines have already done so, and fashion designers have made it look rather stylish.
Michael Hunneman, Taunton
Philip Haigh draws (literally) a pessimistic view of passenger spacing ( RAIL 905).
While this may be regarded as a reasonable starting point, we can expect to see progress beyond this situation when more people, having had the virus, become immune to further infection.
Only testing can verify their immune status and it may be that passenger testing will need to become a second priority after key workers. Such people will be safe at ‘normal’ seat distances and can use carriages to their full capacity. In addition, there is the longerterm likelihood that everyone can be immunised.
The challenge will be how to manage this transition - for example, at stations. Will we have longer dwell times as ‘safe’’ passengers first clear the platform before uncertified passengers disembark, or is there some other solution?
Some may well be up in arms against such segregation, even temporarily. It will be interesting to hear what workable alternative they propose.
Ray Kennion, Radcliffe