DfT rail planning is an ‘uncoordinated’ failure, says Labour
Truncating and cancelling electrification schemes in favour of bi-mode trains has been dismissed as ‘ludicrous’ and ‘uncoordinated’ planning by Shadow Secretary of State for Transport Andy McDonald.
Speaking on October 20, he used the DfT’s policy reversal in July as evidence of the need for a BRB-style strategic authority to improve long-term coordinated planning on Britain’s railways.
He slammed the environmental and financial costs incurred by abandoning electrification and re-engineering a Great Western Railway-operated fleet of Intercity Express Programme trains that are now required to run for longer than planned in diesel mode on un-electrified routes to destinations including Swansea and Bristol.
He also cited the findings of Chris Gibb’s report that was published in June into the management of the Southern franchise to further support his claim that cost effective and sensible decision-making was suffering under the current operational organisation of Britain’s railways.
He said: “The planning of the railways at the highest level suffers from a lack of a guiding mind. Multiple official reports have been published that highlight inefficiencies and all point to fragmentation. Chris Gibb’s report into Southern highlighted that there were three different station managers from three different train operators at London Victoria and this, in a small way, points to the problem of the whole railway. This situation is not sustainable or acceptable.
“Due to uncoordinated
planning, we are also committed to buying [IEP] trains that are unnecessarily expensive, slow and overweight, and that have too many emissions. I can’t think of anything more ludicrous than hauling a diesel engine [using electrical power] from London to Cardiff, which then spews fumes into the atmosphere to continue its journey.
“The lack of a guiding mind is therefore one of the major reasons why Labour would like the railway reintegrated into public ownership, so our plan is to take franchises back into public hands and, at the earliest opportunity, to deliver a strategic guiding mind to undertake planning of the railways.”
McDonald stressed that Labour’s guiding mind would not resemble the BRB which held responsibility for strategic planning until the break-up of British Rail two decades ago, nor would it reflect the structure of the Strategic Rail Authority which existed between 1999 and 2004.
He instead described it as a supervisory board, that would include representation from unions, passenger groups and various layers of government.
However, this seems to raise the prospect that it would be susceptible to political instruction from government agencies or ministers, in a similar way to the BRB and SRA - which both fell under the direction and guidance of the Secretary of State for Transport.
He added that any cost savings from more streamlined planning, lower operating costs and the absence of operating profits being absorbed by privately-owned train operators would be passed on to passengers in lower fares.
“Our plans are considerably progressed and we want to engage with major stakeholders,” added McDonald. “It [Labour’s guiding mind] would include devolved authorities, passengers and the workforce, and provide England, Scotland and Wales with the opportunity to direct operations in their own territories. The sort of supervisory board I’m talking about will ensure that all parties not only look at their own priorities, but also look at the broader context.
“The whole purpose of our plan is to get a better deal for passengers whose fares have rocketed and, with no franchises, we can get unregulated fares into a sensible sustainable structure. Passengers must be the focus of everything we do and we are of the view that our plan can secure savings for the travelling public.”