Paul Plummer
PAUL PLUMMER has led the Rail Delivery Group through turbulent times. As he walks away from a railway career, how does he view post-pandemic reform? Does his organisation even have a future? PAUL CLIFTON reports
Exclusive interview with outgoing Rail Delivery Group Chief Executive PAUL PLUMMER, as he leaves the rail industry.
We can make a difference for passengers and for taxpayers. I’ve always tried to stand for joining up the whole system, for putting a whole-industry view to Government.
For two decades, Paul Plummer has had a seat at the rail industry’s top table. For the past five years, it has been as chief executive of the
Rail Delivery Group, which represents the industry’s shared interests to Government and controls important back-office functions.
“Herding cats” is how he describes getting all the players to head in the same direction.
“Speaking truth to power” is how he refers to dealing with the Department for Transport.
But throughout his time at the RDG, there have been accusations that the organisation didn’t dare to bite the Government hand that fed it, or risk offending any of its competing stakeholders. Criticism that came, not least, from this magazine, which described RDG’s public pronouncements as bland or ineffectual.
Plummer defends his stance. This softly spoken but fluent communicator describes himself as an introvert who prefers not to shout from the rooftops. He believes that a quiet conversation with the right people is the most effective way to get the industry’s opinion heard by decision-makers.
The day before he retires (on December 11 2020), we meet for one of those quiet conversations. Not over a coffee - inevitably, this is a virtual meeting. Zoom wasn’t
designed for interpreting subtle expressions, shifts in body language or unspoken words - when the BBC taught me how to work in telly, it was drummed into me that only 10% of communication is verbal. But needs must.
Plummer can certainly claim successes. The rail industry is perceived as having handled the COVID crisis well, and the RDG had argued that the passenger franchising process was dying long before the pandemic finally padlocked it inside a coffin. It consistently argued for a new arm’s length body to run the railway, to slice politics out of operational choices. That looks like becoming Government policy - eventually.
But today, the Government has a tighter grip on the railway than ever, with decisions all made from the centre.
And the organisation which conducts the industry’s vital apportioning of fares income also called for the complete reform of the way passengers pay for travel. So far, that hasn’t happened. It hasn’t even come close.
“The Rail Delivery Group strives to bring everybody together. All parts of the industry,” says Plummer.
“And that is both frustrating and very satisfying. We can make a difference for passengers and for taxpayers. I’ve always tried to stand for joining up the whole system, for putting a whole-industry view to Government.”
Plummer has prepared thoroughly for this chat. His head of PR is both sitting in and recording it, just to make sure. So, the obvious “What are your achievements?” question elicits a well-crafted, on-message, crowdpleasing response. But there’s no doubting the honesty and commitment behind it, even on Zoom.
“I tried to stand for diversity and inclusion in the railway, and in RDG as part of that. I think I’ve made a difference. As an industry we have a lot further to go, but we have made good steps. Most significantly, we need visibly more diverse leaders at the top of the industry. People need to see those role models, to see that rail has opportunities for everybody. At RDG we have a very diverse top team now.”
The railway is infamously one of the least diverse, least gender-balanced industries in the UK. But Plummer is certain that is changing, and very keen to emphasise it. What didn’t go so well?
“It is fantastic that HS2 is under way. We started making the case long ago, when I was at Network Rail. But it got deflected into a conversation about speed, when it was really a capacity scheme. We could have done better in terms of making it clear to everyone that it is about levelling up the economy, about decarbonising.
“Electrification is another point. We made the case for a strategy. Then we had problems with the delivery. My hope now is that it will get started again. If carbon is the biggest challenge once we get through COVID, then surely we have to electrify more of the railway, and we have to decarbonise our whole energy system.
“And the whole customer experience: we have done a huge amount making the case for fares reform. People know our fares system is not sustainable. I am positive that we have done a lot. But I would have liked to do more.”
To what extent has the RDG genuinely led the industry, changing government thinking? Especially on fares reform. There hasn’t been any.
“Over the last decade, there have been many reviews of fares. Each concluded that it was just too difficult. It was put back in the box. There is now huge consensus that we need to reform the fares system, that we cannot carry on the way we are. COVID has accelerated the trend, but it has not fundamentally changed that trend. It highlights the importance of it.
“We have been saying for a long time that the franchising system is dead. We advocated what needed to be done, and a lot of that now is accepted as conventional wisdom. The acceptance that different sorts of contracts are needed to get the best out of the private sector, and that they need to vary in different
I think that during the crisis RDG did stunningly well in bringing together parts of the industry. We brought engagement and collaboration.
markets, with no one-size-fits-all.”
This isn’t quite answering the question, so we try again. To what extent have the
RDG and its members been afraid of the Department for Transport, because they are unwilling to criticise the source of their contracts, and therefore their profits?
“We deliver services: fares, ticketing, fee settlement. Separately, there is the trade body role. You need that because it is difficult for an operator to speak truth to power, in a situation where that power holds your contract to work. A trade body has to provoke those difficult conversations.”
Has Plummer’s RDG really spoken truth to power? Spoken against what it might see as an inappropriate government decision? RAIL Managing Editor Nigel Harris has argued on many occasions over many years that it hasn’t.
“The role of RDG is to challenge its members, as well as challenging Government. And I think absolutely we have done that,” responds Plummer.
“I am a relatively quiet, introverted person. I am not a shouty trade body spokesman, because I don’t believe that is the best way of influencing change. The best way is to have those discussions in an evidence-based way, quietly and professionally with key stakeholders.”
It must feel like herding cats, with 20-orso members and with the big five franchise owning groups. Finding a form of words to say in public that manages to avoid offending any of them, because they’re paying your bills…
“Herding cats is an apt phrase. It’s not just the members that have diverse interests. But the ultimate purpose is to make the system work for customers and taxpayers. If it works for them, it’s going to create opportunities for private operators. That’s what brings them together, aligning interests.
“Of course, they won’t always agree with each other. But it works when there is a common view, as with the need for a new body to be in charge of the railway, to take the politics out of decision-making. There is a common view about that, but a lot of diversity in the detail. The current system of contracts is not sustainable.”
2020 threatened to tear the railway to shreds: the collapse of those contracts, the direct government control of every aspect of operations. Does that neuter the RDG as an organisation?
“It has both accelerated and slowed down change,” Plummer answers cryptically.
“I know that’s a contradiction. The consensus for change was there. We made the case for it to happen. It was the right thing to do. It wasn’t bailing out an industry, it was keeping a key service functioning.
“Yes, it is much more Governmentcontrolled now. That is a stepping-stone towards what we all want, which is the Government stepping away again. I don’t believe anyone thinks this is a positive place to be. But it is a way towards getting a new arm’s length body away from the politics, empowering local teams and supply chains.
“It is painful in the interim. Where does that leave us as an organisation? I think that during the crisis RDG did stunningly well in bringing together parts of the industry. We brought engagement and collaboration.
“Now there needs to be a lot of work to flesh
out the detail of what will come in the delayed White Paper. What will come will be quite high-level.”
That’s an interesting phrase - ‘high-level’. Others have recently been using the same description of the Williams Review process. Could it be put another way: vague, short on detail, open to interpretation? Again, where will this leave RDG? What will be the point of it?
“People use ‘high-level’ in different ways. It may be short on detail, but it is also an opportunity for us to shape that detail. I think it’s really important that the new body does stay at a high level. That it does not get into solving all the issues. It has to set the framework for local people to work with.”
What Plummer advocates sounds a lot like the London system. The Transport Commissioner delivers the service, and the Commissioner and the Mayor are accountable for it.
But to roll that out nationally would entail the Government giving up responsibility. That’s not something any Government tends to do willingly.
And it would entail the Treasury having to trust the railway with a lot of money. That’s not something it tends to do willingly either, given the pre-2020 record of declining industry performance and reliability.
“We have said the model in London is really good in some markets,” responds Plummer carefully.
“It works in London because it covers multiple modes, in a place where customers can choose between different modes of travel. London has much more choice than elsewhere, so the concession model works. It’s about mass commuting where operators have little influence in terms of driving the volumes, where the emphasis is all about delivery of a specified service.
“In other markets, a concession model is not going to deliver value. In inter-city long-distance markets, it is not going to drive innovation and customer service that will deliver for taxpayers.
“Of course, a lot of the media debate is all about London - it’s what newspapers usually write about. London commuting is obviously going to change radically now. It was already changing, but we are not going to be commuting five days a week anymore.”
So, what will the new industry structure look like in, say, three or four years?
“Government has to make important strategic decisions about what the nation wants from its railway. To implement that, it needs an effective body which is able to implement the high-level strategy it sets.
“That body also needs to stay high-level, setting the framework for delivery by train operators and infrastructure providers and their supply chain. Supporting that, we would have a radically reformed fares system which matches the new travel patterns.
“It is a nonsense, for example, that once I have my season ticket, I am free to travel in the peak. That is what has driven the need for peak capacity, which drives the need for taxpayer subsidy. We could spread that demand through fares reform. Likewise, on long-distance it creates false peaks with inflexible ticketing. We need to use our infrastructure much more efficiently.”
We had a similar conversation for the current issue of sister publication RailReview.
Patrick (now Lord) McLoughlin wanted to reform fares during his time as Secretary of State for Transport. He observed that it was one of the failures of the RDG’s processor, the Association of Train Operating Companies. It had proved impossible to reform something absolutely everyone agreed needed to be reformed.
McLoughlin pointed out that he had announced a flexible fares system right back in 2003. Nearly 18 years later, it still hasn’t happened.
“Patrick is exactly right,” Plummer admits. “The industry has been calling for change, but it cannot do it on its own. Government needs to change the regulation in order for it to happen. I think that is clearer to people in power now. It is a regulated service. We need to be enabled to reform. The momentum for change is greater now than it has ever been.”
Plummer holds Lord McLoughlin in high regard. Who would be the three or four most effective, most influential people he has worked with during his long career on the railway?
This turns out to be the only question for
We need visibly more diverse leaders at the top of the industry. People need to see those role models, to see that rail has opportunities for everybody.
I’ve worked with 13 Secretaries of State in my time. Patrick was one of the strong ones. He listened. He was open to discussion, he did detail, and he was passionate about it. We are in a different world now - one where the Government needs to let go.
which Plummer has not fully prepared, and it takes him aback. Even on Zoom, it’s possible to see the desire to name-check a few favoured people conflicting with his realisation that he could cause offence by leaving others off his list. In fact, he’s so concerned about this that he phones back a couple of hours later, to proffer a more considered response to the question, and one which avoids upsetting anyone.
“I believe people have their time,” he says. “People are right for one period. Iain Coucher was a man of his time.” [Coucher was chief executive of Network Rail from 2007 to 2010, is now chief executive of the Atomic Weapons Establishment, and owns a country estate in Argyll and Bute.]
“He came into Network Rail and did things that needed to be done. He wasn’t thanked for what he did in a very difficult time. He had a massive influence.
“At the other end of the telescope, Andrew Haines [current NR chief executive] is somebody that has experience of all parts of the industry and from outside. He came in at the right time. He speaks very frankly, which is refreshing. Sometimes we speak too much in code, or not openly to each other. I expect Andrew to do more in future.
“Dyan Crowther [chief executive of High Speed 1] has also worked in all parts of the industry. One of the last British Rail graduate intake. We often talk about needing to replicate that. Dyan is naturally a great leader anyway, but she really benefits from that breadth of career path.
“It seems slightly wrong to name names, but for me these three stand out. I think the role of the owning group leaders is still critical in terms of strategic thinking and bringing in commercial capital. There’s a new generation of people just beginning to come into the senior posts, and they need to work across the piece.
“In terms of diversity this group of people is poor. I think we need to do more there.”
Politicians are notable in Plummer’s list only by their complete absence.
“I’ve worked with 13 Secretaries of State in my time. Patrick was one of the strong ones. He listened. He was open to discussion, he did detail, and he was passionate about it. We are in a different world now - one where the Government needs to let go.”
The Rail Delivery Group has a dual task. We generally only see the public face of it - the membership organisation with a leadership role, advocating the railway and promoting policy. But the RDG has 300 staff, and only a handful of them work in the bit we all recognise. Most perform back-office functions, including passenger information, ticketing, and allocating how the pre-pandemic £10 billion fares revenue flows between passenger operators.
As he departs, Plummer’s role is being split into two. Jacqueline Starr takes over as chief executive, while Andy Bagnall becomes director general.
“We have differentiated between service delivery and advocacy. Jacqueline came in about the same time as me and now firmly owns that space, supporting ticketing, information and fares. Andy came in a couple of years ago. Lots of trade body experience. He has learned about the railway and will help speak truth to power in Government.”
Does that mean it was exhausting being
Paul Plummer?
“It has been a massively intense role. It’s not what you do for a quiet life.”
What happens to him next? He’s only 55, clearly fit and active, and not at all ready to settle into a comfy chair in front of the fire.
“I am retiring from executive roles,” he says. “I’ve loved doing this. I feel like I have made a difference, and that is a luxury. I have had a positive effect on a lot of people’s lives.
“I am doing two non-executive jobs - one is in social housing; the other is in electricity. I want to do more of that. More sporting activities. I’ve worked very hard, and I want to do some different things.
“I delayed departing initially to see the White Paper through. And it is still not out. Then I delayed again because of COVID. But now the time is right.
“I am certainly not going to disappear completely. But I am not going to sit on the sidelines and comment. I’ve learned that unless you are absolutely in the heart of the difficult conversations, you never quite appreciate the nuances from the outside.”