Campaign for Better Transport : Reopenings Fund

[Colind]

Click here if you'd like to add your name to a letter to DfT calling for a fund to be set up to finance reopenings.

https://www.bettertransport.org.uk/rail-letter?utm_source=Updates+from+Campaign+for+Better+Transport's+campaigns&utm_campaign=9931d9abeb-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_03_15&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_9d19dd71f5-9931d9abeb-50819945

We were delighted when the Government announced plans to expand the rail network as part of its Strategic Vision for Rail. But this 'vision' must be backed by real funding.

We've written to ask the Government to set up a 'network development fund' to support new and reopened rail lines and stations. Will you sign our letter?

Dear Government

We welcome your pledge to grow the railways, which featured prominently in the recent Strategic Vision for Rail.

Many communities want to see a larger rail network and there is demand for new and reopened rail links across the country. Such investment can bring many benefits. It gives people better access to vital services and jobs, makes new housing and other development more sustainable, and reduces pressure on the roads.

But rail projects are difficult to deliver. Despite good will and a strong business case, many local authorities lack the skills and resources to take projects through a long and expensive development process.

To ensure that you can deliver on your committment to grow the railways we are therefore calling on you to establish a 'network development fund'. Administered by the Department for Transport, the fund would pay for project development for new and reopened stations and lines which reach an agreed standard with the best projects joining a pool of national projects to be taken to full development and implementation.

We call on you to establish such a fund at the earliest opportunity.

Yours sincerely​

 

[DarloRich]

why? What would this proposal fund, support or deliver?

 

[Dr Hoo]

why? What would this proposal fund, support or deliver?

I thought that there was already a 'new stations fund' at the DFT. I am sure that some schemes were announced last year, such as Bow Street and Portway Parkway. Sums of around £16m have been mentioned.

 

[tbtc]

why? What would this proposal fund, support or deliver?

It's not intended to actually *deliver* anything, surely... it's just another petition that mentions "the 1960s" and "Dr Beeching" in its first paragraph, another thing to sign for people who have a nostalgic love of the railway, rather than worrying about specifics?

All well intentioned, but... we've seen it all before (and we'll see it all again)

 

[yorksrob]

It's about time.

We have a budget for road building and large measures. There should be a fund for route re-openings. The new stations fund has shown how different proposals can compete effectively so that we can get those with the best business cases underway. The winners might all be uninspiring urban stub ends so beloved of some on here, rather than the long lost country routes we would prefer anyway.

We need to get away from endless studies about re-openings and just get on with some.

 

[Chester1]

It's about time.

We have a budget for road building and large measures. There should be a fund for route re-openings. The new stations fund has shown how different proposals can compete effectively so that we can get those with the best business cases underway. The winners might all be uninspiring urban stub ends so beloved of some on here, rather than the long lost country routes we would prefer anyway.

We need to get away from endless studies about re-openings and just get on with some.

The reason why there are repeated studies but no action is because most reopenings have terrible business cases. The priority should be upgrading and reintroducing passenger services on freight lines e.g. Middlewich and Ashington. Then mothballed lines should be considered and then finally some complete reopenings. Wales and Scotland have had reopenings but so too has England. The problem for enthusiasts is that they are primarily light rail and busways in urban areas, not rural branch lines that closed 50+ years ago.

 

[yorksrob]

The reason why there are repeated studies but no action is because most reopenings have terrible business cases. The priority should be upgrading and reintroducing passenger services on freight lines e.g. Middlewich and Ashington. Then mothballed lines should be considered and then finally some complete reopenings. Wales and Scotland have had reopenings but so too has England. The problem for enthusiasts is that they are primarily light rail and busways in urban areas, not rural branch lines that closed 50+ years ago.

Wouldn't reopening mothballed lines be eligible for such a fund ?

Unfortunately, mothballed lines also seem to suffer from 'endless studies' syndrome, and the reason for that is not because they all have terrible business cases, but because there is no one to put up the capital outlay (see Wisbech).

 

[northwichcat]

I thought that there was already a 'new stations fund' at the DFT. I am sure that some schemes were announced last year, such as Bow Street and Portway Parkway. Sums of around £16m have been mentioned.

The new stations fund provides funding to build stations on railway lines which already have regular passenger services to support housing or other developments. If new housing or a business park is built next to a freight only line (or even on a line with just a parliamentary service) then the new stations fund won't help. MP Fiona Bruce tried to find a loophole in the new stations fund so that Middlewich could apply but she wasn't successful in doing so.

 

[Rob F]

It's about time.

We have a budget for road building and large measures. There should be a fund for route re-openings. The new stations fund has shown how different proposals can compete effectively so that we can get those with the best business cases underway. The winners might all be uninspiring urban stub ends so beloved of some on here, rather than the long lost country routes we would prefer anyway.

We need to get away from endless studies about re-openings and just get on with some.

What he said!

Rob

 

[Clip]

It's about time.

We have a budget for road building and large measures.

We have a budget for the railways though and i believe it far exceeds what is spend on roads

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road-user-taxation-highways-spending-data-chart


http://orr.gov.uk/rail/economic-reg...sessment/historic-income-and-expenditure-2014

Was just from the top two google results so how much more spending does the railway require compared to the low levels of road funding which you claim is a 'large measure'?

 

[yorksrob]

We have a budget for the railways though and i believe it far exceeds what is spend on roads

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road-user-taxation-highways-spending-data-chart


http://orr.gov.uk/rail/economic-reg...sessment/historic-income-and-expenditure-2014

Was just from the top two google results so how much more spending does the railway require compared to the low levels of road funding which you claim is a 'large measure'?

It's interesting that the the first report concludes that road freight is a net contributor, when there seems to be a general acceptance that road freight doesn't cover the cost of the damage it does to the road network.

Either way, George Osborne, when chancellor announced a slew of new road building schemes. There is no corresponding slew of local railway openings.

 

[Railwaysceptic]

It's interesting that the the first report concludes that road freight is a net contributor, when there seems to be a general acceptance that road freight doesn't cover the cost of the damage it does to the road network.

Either way, George Osborne, when chancellor announced a slew of new road building schemes. There is no corresponding slew of local railway openings.

Well, that's easy to understand! There are many road building schemes that will benefit large numbers of people. There are very few railway re-openings that will benefit more than a few thousand people, and most mooted re-openings will benefit only a few hundred.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Well, that's easy to understand! There are many road building schemes that will benefit large numbers of people. There are very few railway re-openings that will benefit more than a few thousand people, and most mooted re-openings will benefit only a few hundred.

"Benefit" the Welsh Government got a consultant to publish a report on the "benefits" of its road building schemes in the period 1999-2007. Expecting a look how good we are to have done this type of investment report it came as surprise when they concluded that there was no discernible economic effect at the sub regional level that could be ascertained and what economic activity they did observe was of the displacement type. In other words the schemes were not generators of any economic stimulus. The perceived wisdom of shiny new roads are good for the economy was disproved. The report remained on Welsh Government website until 2011 and was then taken down after the new all Welsh Labour Government won the 2011 election. When questioned about the report the Welsh Government have subsequently tried to deny its existence.

 

[Clip]

It's interesting that the the first report concludes that road freight is a net contributor, when there seems to be a general acceptance that road freight doesn't cover the cost of the damage it does to the road network.

Either way, George Osborne, when chancellor announced a slew of new road building schemes. There is no corresponding slew of local railway openings.

That's not what your argument was though. You said the railway needed more money as the roads get plenty of funding yet the figures seem to show a different picture

 

[tbtc]

Yes, we spend money on roads, we spend money on new roads.

Note that the proposals for new roads tend to be along the lines of "how can we connect large places faster, how can we remove bottlenecks, how can we increase capacity" rather than "which old road should we open"?

If road enthusiasts were like some rail enthusiasts then there'd be demands that we restore the A625 at Mam Tor as a useful diversionary route for when Winnats Pass is closed... we need to restore the A6 from Buxton to Matlock into the prime Anglo-Scottish route that it was before those horrible modern motorways diverted Glasgow - London passengers onto a different route that avoids the Pennine hills.. we should re-open every old Roman Road, even the ones that are just farm tracks nowadays.

It's about time.

We have a budget for road building and large measures. There should be a fund for route re-openings. The new stations fund has shown how different proposals can compete effectively so that we can get those with the best business cases underway. The winners might all be uninspiring urban stub ends so beloved of some on here, rather than the long lost country routes we would prefer anyway

I love it when you get dismissive!

Perish the thought that we'd chose to build mass transportation in such ugly/ busy areas where people live/ work/ shop in such large numbers - it's all so vulgar - where's the romance in that, eh?

The reason why there are repeated studies but no action is because most reopenings have terrible business cases

True, but then we keep spending large sums of money on consultations/ studies/ focus groups because the people demanding such things never take "no" for an answer - they ignore the terrible business case because it doesn't suit their agenda - they find a patsy politician who will prioritise such schemes. For example, most people can see that a line from Carmarthen to Aberystwyth isn't going to be a massive boost for Wales (there are a lot of things they could do in the populated bits of the principality), but that kind of thing is a vote winner for the kind of people who wouldn't actually use it in large numbers, so it's a nice sounding election pledge to make.

We have a budget for the railways though and i believe it far exceeds what is spend on roads

https://www.racfoundation.org/data/road-user-taxation-highways-spending-data-chart


http://orr.gov.uk/rail/economic-reg...sessment/historic-income-and-expenditure-2014

Was just from the top two google results so how much more spending does the railway require compared to the low levels of road funding which you claim is a 'large measure'?

True - we spend huge sums of money on the railway - the "nationalisation" brigade are always keen to point to this increasing subsidy as proof that privatisation has been a disaster - it's just that, despite this huge budget we choose to invest it on improving existing lines, more capacity, better signalling, that kind of thing - but having a large rail budget and having a large budget for reopening failed lines through quiet parts of the country are two very different things.

 

[yorksrob]

Yes, we spend money on roads, we spend money on new roads.

Note that the proposals for new roads tend to be along the lines of "how can we connect large places faster, how can we remove bottlenecks, how can we increase capacity" rather than "which old road should we open"?

If road enthusiasts were like some rail enthusiasts then there'd be demands that we restore the A625 at Mam Tor as a useful diversionary route for when Winnats Pass is closed... we need to restore the A6 from Buxton to Matlock into the prime Anglo-Scottish route that it was before those horrible modern motorways diverted Glasgow - London passengers onto a different route that avoids the Pennine hills.. we should re-open every old Roman Road, even the ones that are just farm tracks nowadays.

That's not really a direct comparison though is it.

How often when a motorway is built, is the A road it replaces torn up and built over so that no one can use it again ?

In most cases the A road remains and is indeed used for diversionary purposes when the motorway is closed off.

The correct comparison with this country's disasterous railway closure programme would be a town that had its A road torn up and built over without even a motorway to replace it.

I love it when you get dismissive!

Perish the thought that we'd chose to build mass transportation in such ugly/ busy areas where people live/ work/ shop in such large numbers - it's all so vulgar - where's the romance in that, eh?

I aim to please.

However, the point remains the same. Such a fund would be available to such projects, so why dismiss the idea !

 

[yorksrob]

That's not what your argument was though. You said the railway needed more money as the roads get plenty of funding yet the figures seem to show a different picture

Well, firstly the road network doesn't have the equivalent investment backlog that the railway experienced between the Beeching/Marples era and about ten years ago.

Secondly, my argument was that there is a budget for spending on new roads, why not one for new local railway routes.

 

[Bald Rick]

That's not really a direct comparison though is it.

How often when a motorway is built, is the A road it replaces torn up and built over so that no one can use it again ?

Regualrly for new dual carriageways. For motorways it is a bit different because of traffic regulations (although the old A48 around Briton Ferry is a good example fo where this has been done). However dual carriageways often lead to the old road being removed in part. The proposals for the A303 at Stonehenge / Winterbourne Stoke are a good example.

Well, firstly the road network doesn't have the equivalent investment

Secondly, my argument was that there is a budget for spending on new roads, why not one for new local railway routes.

There is a budget for new transport infrastructure.

Some is spent on new roads.

Some is spent on new railways.

All is spent on projects that have good value for money for the taxpayer. (Except for viewers in the Borders TV area).

 

[Railwaysceptic]

"Benefit" the Welsh Government got a consultant to publish a report on the "benefits" of its road building schemes in the period 1999-2007. Expecting a look how good we are to have done this type of investment report it came as surprise when they concluded that there was no discernible economic effect at the sub regional level that could be ascertained and what economic activity they did observe was of the displacement type. In other words the schemes were not generators of any economic stimulus. The perceived wisdom of shiny new roads are good for the economy was disproved. The report remained on Welsh Government website until 2011 and was then taken down after the new all Welsh Labour Government won the 2011 election. When questioned about the report the Welsh Government have subsequently tried to deny its existence.

Politicians and civil servants play around with theoretical formulae about economic benefits. Road users and people who want a bypass to remove heavy traffic from outside their houses are well aware that there are many types of benefit which have nothing to do with any esoteric economic formula.

 

[yorksrob]

Politicians and civil servants play around with theoretical formulae about economic benefits. Road users and people who want a bypass to remove heavy traffic from outside their houses are well aware that there are many types of benefit which have nothing to do with any esoteric economic formula.

Just as public transport users, non drivers/car owners and people suffering from traffic congestion know that there are benefits to being on the national railway network that don't appear in the economic formulae. Only difference being that there is never any capital funding to build those rail links in the first place.

 

[tbtc]

That's not really a direct comparison though is it.

How often when a motorway is built, is the A road it replaces torn up and built over so that no one can use it again ?

In most cases the A road remains and is indeed used for diversionary purposes when the motorway is closed off

It's not uncommon for a new road to mean that the old road is downgraded, dual carriageways turn into single carriageway etc.

Well, firstly the road network doesn't have the equivalent investment backlog that the railway experienced between the Beeching/Marples era and about ten years ago

Have a look at the massive growth in (road) traffic volumes over the past fifty years and tell me that there's no backlog in investment?

How many miles of new motorway have we had in the past generation, despite the boom in car/van/lorry driving?

We argue about opening branch lines to serve small conurbations in Devon/ North Yorkshire etc whilst motorists see no long term solution to the jams on the M62, M25 etc. I'm not convinced that rail gets a rough deal in terms of investment (when you consider the tiny number of overall journeys).

Just as public transport users, non drivers/car owners and people suffering from traffic congestion know that there are benefits to being on the national railway network that don't appear in the economic formulae. Only difference being that there is never any capital funding to build those rail links in the first place.

If you can prove that your favourite scheme has a great business case then I can be convinced of its merits. Plenty of small scale (re)openings seem to stack up in BCR terms.

But if your case is based upon unquantifiable benefits then there are plenty enough other schemes that deserve to be higher on the list.

 

[Mikey C]

It's interesting that the the first report concludes that road freight is a net contributor, when there seems to be a general acceptance that road freight doesn't cover the cost of the damage it does to the road network.

Either way, George Osborne, when chancellor announced a slew of new road building schemes. There is no corresponding slew of local railway openings.

Hardly a slew, the road building programme is minuscule when compared to the Motorway building programme of the 60s, 70s and 80s

Especially when compared to the expense of the likes of Crossrail and HS2

 

[DarloRich]

Well, firstly the road network doesn't have the equivalent investment backlog that the railway experienced between the Beeching/Marples era and about ten years ago.

That must be why the A66 is a dual carriageway all the way from Penrith to Teesside. Oh hang on.......................

 

[yorksrob]

It's not uncommon for a new road to mean that the old road is downgraded, dual carriageways turn into single carriageway etc.



Have a look at the massive growth in (road) traffic volumes over the past fifty years and tell me that there's no backlog in investment?

How many miles of new motorway have we had in the past generation, despite the boom in car/van/lorry driving?

We argue about opening branch lines to serve small conurbations in Devon/ North Yorkshire etc whilst motorists see no long term solution to the jams on the M62, M25 etc. I'm not convinced that rail gets a rough deal in terms of investment (when you consider the tiny number of overall journeys).



If you can prove that your favourite scheme has a great business case then I can be convinced of its merits. Plenty of small scale (re)openings seem to stack up in BCR terms.

But if your case is based upon unquantifiable benefits then there are plenty enough other schemes that deserve to be higher on the list.

But you can still use a downgraded A road, whereas you can't use a closed railway.

There are lots of local railway proposals that have a BCR of greater than one. Such a fund would be a way of funding some of them.

 

[yorksrob]

Hardly a slew, the road building programme is minuscule when compared to the Motorway building programme of the 60s, 70s and 80s

Especially when compared to the expense of the likes of Crossrail and HS2

It was an A4 list of projects as I recall, the vast majority of which were new roads. I call that a slew.

 

[yorksrob]

That must be why the A66 is a dual carriageway all the way from Penrith to Teesside. Oh hang on.......................

There has been massive investment in new roads over the last fifty or so years at the same time that railways were being closed or rationalised. That's not to say that investment in the road building programme didn't have to be prioritised.

 

[DarloRich]

There has been massive investment in new roads over the last fifty or so years at the same time that railways were being closed or rationalised. That's not to say that investment in the road building programme didn't have to be prioritised.

So why hasn't a major trans pennine link between the A1 and M6 not been doubled throughout? The last 20/25 years during which this main road has been dualed in small chunks have seen how many railway lines close? I would suggest this work has a better business case than opening a branch line to Wisbeech

 

[Mikey C]

It was an A4 list of projects as I recall, the vast majority of which were new roads. I call that a slew.

Most of which are minor bypasses and junction improvements, akin to line speed improvements on rail lines. And the road network is in a shocking state now with terrible potholes

There has been massive investment in new roads over the last fifty or so years at the same time that railways were being closed or rationalised. That's not to say that investment in the road building programme didn't have to be prioritised.

The last 50 years has seen quite a bit of electrification and line speed improvements, The Jubilee Line extension, HS1, many light rail projects (Manchester, Edinburgh, Sheffield etc)

Rail to me has been treated pretty fairly in relation to road, especially in the last 30 years.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Politicians and civil servants play around with theoretical formulae about economic benefits. Road users and people who want a bypass to remove heavy traffic from outside their houses are well aware that there are many types of benefit which have nothing to do with any esoteric economic formula.

Is this the benefit of increased traffic congestion elsewhere caused by induced traffic?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Most of which are minor bypasses and junction improvements, akin to line speed improvements on rail lines. And the road network is in a shocking state now with terrible potholes

The last 50 years has seen quite a bit of electrification and line speed improvements, The Jubilee Line extension, HS1, many light rail projects (Manchester, Edinburgh, Sheffield etc)

Rail to me has been treated pretty fairly in relation to road, especially in the last 30 years.

A lot of extra rail funding form Government in the last 25 years has been squandered because of the inherent inefficient nature of the post 1993 railway. £ in doesn't always equal outputs.