Treasury ‘losing patience with rail’

[Meerkat]

No. You fall into the trap (of many London civil servants no doubt) of thinking that just because a line runs through "empty countryside" its trains are also empty. This is not the case.

Although you are a useful reminder of the mindset of the type of people who need to be resisted.

Depends. Non-empty trains doesn’t mean a great deal if that is just four two car trains a day.

 

[greyman42]

Finally, the guard and driver got into their respective cabs and we departed Bridlington, some twenty minutes late.
The guard then announced that we were late because of the train being overcrowded, and people were not able to social distance - I was under the impression that’s what face coverings were for so people could use public transport in these circumstances.
Unfortunately the guard then went on to say that the rulings and laws were changing every day about the various measures, and so they had to get the advice from Control.

Did we have these problems at Bournemouth and Southend with passengers returning home from the packed beaches?

 

[RT4038]

I find the idea of closing lines whether temporarily or fully a bit rich coming from a government who only a while ago were trumpeting the reversal of Beeching.

Why? A 'while ago' we had lots of passengers on the railways. They aren't there now and it doesn't look like they are going to be for some time in the future. I would expect the government to react to changes in circumstances.

I don't want to see lines close, but neither do I want to pay increased taxes to run empty trains around which I am only using as a last resort. So some pretty hefty service cuts are required, plus the cost of what is operating needs to reduce too.

 

[yorksrob]

Depends. Non-empty trains doesn’t mean a great deal if that is just four two car trains a day.

It can mean quite a lot to the area. Also if you only have four trains a day and they are non-empty, it suggests a greater demand, not a smaller one.

 

[Meerkat]

It can mean quite a lot to the area. Also if you only have four trains a day and they are non-empty, it suggests a greater demand, not a smaller one.

Or a level of demand that is better suited to buses.

 

[yorksrob]

Or a level of demand that is better suited to buses.

Unlikely really.

The example that springs to mind is the Whitby branch, and that already has a plethora of buses. Theoretically the trains should be empty, but they aren't.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Aug 2020 ==

Fundamentally, what's needed are good offers and campaigns to get bums on seats, even if they don't generate as much revenue as one might wish.

Politically it's much more difficult to close a busy line, regardless of the revenue. The treasury's room for manouvre politically must be closed down.

 

[2L70]

Fundamentally, what's needed are good offers and campaigns to get bums on seats, even if they don't generate as much revenue as they wish

What LNER are starting to do now.

I used plenty of Central Trains’ half price fares when they were first introduced.

 

[yorksrob]

What LNER are starting to do now.

I used plenty of Central Trains’ half price fares when they were first introduced.

Yes, I did see an Azuma go by yesterday which looked to be well loaded.

 

[Reliablebeam]

This is disturbing news, but as ever one must be cautious of 'leaks' coming through the media with this government. It seems rival factions in cabinet arrange for 'leaks' to see how ideas are received.. Although I really think the rail unions need to be careful here. This has great pyrrhic victory potential...

I must say I think my usual operators, Gwr and Swr have been pretty decent through all this, as has TfL despite the bluster of the Dear Leader of London.

 

[Carlisle]

It's hard to reconcile Sunak moaning about funding essential public transport services with wasting money on the ridiculous dining scheme.

Government support has enabled hundreds if not thousands of rail staff to sit at home spare on full pay for half the week during the reduced timetables of recent months rather than being furloughed, laid off, or made redundant, so what’s wrong with helping the hospitality industry too ?

 

[yorksrob]

An interesting point about the article. If we do get 60-70% of pre-covid rail travel back, that would still be more journeys than at the time of privatisation. We weren't anticipating swingeing cuts then, so why should we in that scenario !

 

[Meerkat]

An interesting point about the article. If we do get 60-70% of pre-covid rail travel back, that would still be more journeys than at the time of privatisation. We weren't anticipating swingeing cuts then, so why should we in that scenario !

I thought it was privatised on the basis of managed decline?

 

[bramling]

Government support has enabled hundreds if not thousands of rail staff to sit at home spare on full pay for half the week during the reduced timetables of recent months rather than being furloughed, laid off, or made redundant, so what’s wrong with helping the hospitality industry too ?

Certainly not the case at my place.

On the contrary the (frontline) staff have generally been run ragged, especially as timetables have been notched up. It’s been a stretch to keep up once shielding is taken into account, and the operating staff have been also working like blue-arsed flies juggling everything to cover uncovered duties and doing all the other behind-the-scenes stuff that keeps a train service moving. The local taxi firms have certainly had some much-needed business too as a result of moving staff around!

 

[yorksrob]

I thought it was privatised on the basis of managed decline?

Well, "decline" can mean what people want it to mean. People were saying that the railway was "in decline" before privatisation, even though passenger numbers had stopped their long term decline in about 1983.

I don't recall there being a political appetite for a programme of cuts at the time. Infact there was a lot of worry that privatisation might lead to that.

 

[Meerkat]

I don't recall there being a political appetite for a programme of cuts at the time. Infact there was a lot of worry that privatisation might lead to that.

sorry, which way are you arguing??

 

[yorksrob]

sorry, which way are you arguing??

I'm saying there wasn't a political appetite for a programme of cuts. That's one of the reasons why privatisation was so heavily regulated when it did happen. Cuts wouldn't have been acceptable.

 

[37424]

Isn't the eventual plan by some TOC such as Northern to put about 90% of services back but with 100% capacity by running longer trains in some cases, in order to gain the improved reliability that the TOC's have seen by running less services, obviously that will be difficult where trains are already at maximum length, and if the is a long term reduction in commuting into the major cities which I see as a positive in many respects there clearly have to be adjustments to peak commuter services.

 

[cactustwirly]

We shouldn't encourage people back to work if people can viably work from home. In the vein of reduce, reuse, recycle it's better that people don't make journeys than that they make them by public transport. What's worst is them going by car or flying.

What's totally wrong here is the suggestion that lopping country branch lines that don't carry heavy commuter loads anyway is the way to deal with a problem which dictates as its solution a reduction in commuter services primarily around London to essentially an all-week Saturday (or in some cases Sunday) service. It sounds like "burying bad news", not finding the correct solutions to the problem.

We should because people are more productive than when they WFH. I know of several companies who are recalling staff to the office from next month anyway.

Plus all the businesses they support like cleaning firms, coffee shops etc.

 

[Carlisle]

Certainly not the case at my place.

On the contrary the (frontline) staff have generally been run ragged, especially as timetables have been notched up. It’s been a stretch to keep up once shielding is taken into account, and the operating staff have been also working like blue-arsed flies juggling everything to cover uncovered duties and doing all the other behind-the-scenes stuff that keeps a train service moving. The local taxi firms have certainly had some much-needed business too as a result of moving staff around!

Ok, clearly it must’ve varied depending on the TOC & what proportion of their workforce were shielding for the duration, anyway

 

[Baxenden Bank]

No. It would be reasonable to cull permanently a number of routes running through empty countryside. Examples include Dingwall to Kyle of Lochalsh, Fort William to Mallaig, Carlisle to Settle, Reedham to Yarmouth, Retford to Barnetby and Llandudno Junction to Blaenau Ffestiniog. There are many others.

Don't forget Carlisle to Carstairs, that's pretty empty countryside too!

 

[2L70]

Retford to Barnetby would be an interesting Service, who would run it?

 

[bramling]

We should because people are more productive than when they WFH. I know of several companies who are recalling staff to the office from next month anyway.

Plus all the businesses they support like cleaning firms, coffee shops etc.

Yes we really really *should* be encouraging a mass return to the workplace now.

I think the workplace gives some people a much-needed dose of reality into their lives. Too much longer of all this and we’re going to start seeing some major issues with many people. It’s already generally accepted that alcoholism has boomed during the last few months, and that’s before the mass job losses.

Over time I suspect we’re going to look back on this period as having been extremely damaging in a number of ways.

Like it or not there’s people who really simply can’t be bothered to return to work, and are doing everything possible to milk this for all they can. My place has two for a start.

 

[telstarbox]

What does a "dose of reality" mean?

 

[tbtc]

For years, one of the main justifications for heavy rail has been it's environmental credentials (despite modern cars/buses being significantly greener than their predecessors).

Now we've reached the stage where the argument is "people who've been working from home for the past six months should be forced to commute into city centres each day so that we can justify running diesel trains to take them there".

As for there being no "appetite" for rail cuts... there are going to have to be a lot of harsh decisions taken over the next couple of years to try to keep the economy sustainable (as we deal with both the post-Covid world and the looming no-deal Brexit)... I don't think that the Government are going to have time to read every well meaning petition that gets sent to them, as they start wielding the axe across public spending. I'm not saying that things will be as significant as in the OP - we have a Government headed by ex-journalists after all - they are good at being seen to suggest things that never actually happen - but if the railway is really loosing hundreds of millions of pounds each week then don't be surprised if some cows that you assumed were sacred end up slaughtered.

The railway didn't control costs in the "boom" years, it managed to require increasing subsidies despite increasing passenger numbers, it managed to keep getting money thrown at it even as Austerity decimated other public services - I think that some would like to think that heavy rail is untouchable and that the rules don't apply to trains.

 

[bramling]

What does a "dose of reality" mean?

Exposure to different views and opinions, rather than sitting at home watching the shower that is the tv news, or elements of social media which tends to act as an echo chamber. Likewise cracking on with work keeps empty minds occupied, and even the act of getting up for work encourages good self-discipline and self-respect.

 

[yorksrob]

Now we've reached the stage where the argument is "people who've been working from home for the past six months should be forced to commute into city centres each day so that we can justify running diesel trains to take them there".

Why diesel trains ?

The electrified commuter services in the South East are more dependant on commuters. The diesel trains up here seem to be busy anyway, without forcing people back to offices (not that they will need forcing - people will return eventually to some extent anyway).

 

[BrianW]

It's quite reasonable, in the current circumstances, for the Treasury to want a lower cost for funding the railway.
The rest of the government's budget is under huge pressure, to fund furlough and all the other support schemes for the economy at large.
The railway cannot possibly expect to be exempt from the fallout, especially when it is seen as part of the problem.
I imagine the Treasury has asked DfT to reduce its support cost by a figure, let's say 10% for illustration (it might be much greater).
It's then up to the DfT to find cuts in rail of 10%.
Where do you start, given that it takes an age for the railway super-tanker to even notice there is a problem?
Line closures take years. Train leasing is also contracted for years (all those IEPs for 27 years!).
Timetables can be re-written in months.
So I would expect service reductions, especially in commuter peak operation, is the most likely place to start.
You might then aim to park large numbers of older high-maintenance stock.
There will then have to be staff reductions, which are inevitable with service cuts.
It might be only the first of several budget cuts, depending on how severe the economic fallout of Covid is.
The UK is currently running at 20% below last year's GDP figure - that's the scale of the problem.

Have folk not noticed what is happening to the rest of the travel sector (especially airlines)?
It would be better if DfT had decided on the future organisation of the railway, but it seems unable to announce anything meaningful.

For years, one of the main justifications for heavy rail has been it's environmental credentials (despite modern cars/buses being significantly greener than their predecessors).

Now we've reached the stage where the argument is "people who've been working from home for the past six months should be forced to commute into city centres each day so that we can justify running diesel trains to take them there".

As for there being no "appetite" for rail cuts... there are going to have to be a lot of harsh decisions taken over the next couple of years to try to keep the economy sustainable (as we deal with both the post-Covid world and the looming no-deal Brexit)... I don't think that the Government are going to have time to read every well meaning petition that gets sent to them, as they start wielding the axe across public spending. I'm not saying that things will be as significant as in the OP - we have a Government headed by ex-journalists after all - they are good at being seen to suggest things that never actually happen - but if the railway is really loosing hundreds of millions of pounds each week then don't be surprised if some cows that you assumed were sacred end up slaughtered.

The railway didn't control costs in the "boom" years, it managed to require increasing subsidies despite increasing passenger numbers, it managed to keep getting money thrown at it even as Austerity decimated other public services - I think that some would like to think that heavy rail is untouchable and that the rules don't apply to trains.

Sadly I agree with these guys. I may not have voted for this government but lots did. No-one voted for Covid though.
Beeching-reversal promises may have won seats- that was then. Next general election is not due for years.
I picture 'promises' that will take years to design let alone deliver.
No closures but plenty of service reductions- longer trains, so improved reliabilty.
I see some people never going back to work; many taking fewer work journeys with working at home and Zoom meetings.
Who needs Costa or Starbucks etc- or maybe they will start paying taxes

I can't see government being swayed by a bunch of nostalgic trainspotting anoraks as they (we) may be seen.

 

[yorksrob]

The problem is that you can possibly reduce some frequencies, but once you get beyond a point, the damage becomes self-fulfilling. One only has to look at the temporary timetable west of Skipton, with massive gaps when leisure travellers need them. If it lingers much longer, it will kill those routes.

 

[bramling]

Sadly I agree with these guys. I may not have voted for this government but lots did. No-one voted for Covid though.
Beeching-reversal promises may have won seats- that was then. Next general election is not due for years.
I picture 'promises' that will take years to design let alone deliver.
No closures but plenty of service reductions- longer trains, so improved reliabilty.
I see some people never going back to work; many taking fewer work journeys with working at home and Zoom meetings.
Who needs Costa or Starbucks etc- or maybe they will start paying taxes

I can't see government being swayed by a bunch of nostalgic trainspotting anoraks as they (we) may be seen.

I suspect many or most of the election promises will now be quietly binned.

I have to say I am extremely dispirited with this government, and I lay a lot of the blame for this directly at Boris Johnson. The trouble is this country has lacked decent leadership talent material for a number of years now. Johnson was at the time the best of an extremely bad bunch, though I’m getting serious second thoughts about even that now. Certainly we have the worst cabinet in recent memory, worse even than Major’s.

Relevance of this? I think we now have four years of total mess, and the last thing they will be thinking about is election promises like railways. The big things are going to be who replaces Johnson, and what on earth happens next from an economic point of view. Sunak has stacked up the credit card, at some point he’s got to turn off the creepy smile and get real.

 

[geoffk]

Covid infection rates might be going up but the death rate is now very low. Even in countries where the death rate has gone up it's still very low relative to the numbers dying of other causes. A figure was quoted on BBC news tonight about numbers on ventilators - I think it was over 3,000 back in April but only 72 now. This suggests that the virus is now weaker - a view supported by some NHS consultants. Yes we've got winter coming up so can't afford to be complacent. But all this should suggest that public transport is safe to use and the Government and rail industy/unions should all be encouraging it. Yes there is some scope for running fewer, longer trains on some routes, e.g. York to Newcastle, and thinning out peak services in the South-East.