'28 years' to get Welsh rail system up to standard

[CardiffKid]

Network Rail believes it will take 28 years to get the Welsh rail system up to standard, Economy Secretary Ken Skates has been told.

In a leaked letter, Mr Skates said he was informed this was because of the current level of investment.

He meets Network Rail officials on Thursday after describing conditions for rail passengers as "unacceptable".

Network Rail said it was committed to working with the Welsh Government to get value for taxpayers' money.

Mr Skates has accused the company - which maintains tracks across the UK - of a lack of investment in clearing leaves this autumn, which cause damage to train wheels because of the extra braking pressure required.

He believes this has led to over-crowding and reduced punctuality of services as it forces more rolling stock to be removed from routes.

Arriva Trains Wales said 54 out of its fleet of 127 have had to be taken away for repairs this autumn - an increase of 54% on the same period last year.

In the letter seen by BBC Wales, sent last month to Network Rail's route managing director Andy Thomas, Mr Skates said Arriva Trains Wales raised concerns about the level of work being carried out to clear leaves from the lines.

He wrote: "I have been informed that Network Rail responded that this was due to budgetary reasons and that at the current level of investment it would take 28 years to get the Welsh network up to the prescribed standard."

A Network Rail spokesman said: "We have jointly concluded with Arriva Trains Wales that the reduction in fleet availability cannot be solely related to Network Rail's autumn plan as we are increasing spend and activity.

"We are committed to working jointly with Arriva Trains Wales and the Welsh Government to ensure maximum value for taxpayers' money."

In a debate at the Senedd on Wednesday, Plaid Cymru's economy spokesman Adam Price described current conditions for Welsh rail passengers as a "national crisis".

He referred to three examples on social media yesterday in which one passenger told of his experience of a train catching fire, one had been on an overcrowded service where a passenger fainted, and another claimed to have a seat for the first time in 11 months.

An Arriva Trains Wales spokesman denied one of its trains had caught fire, instead saying there was a problem with an exhaust.

He said: "We understand and apologise for the frustrations around the capacity issues faced by commuters which has been made worse recently by the additional maintenance required on damaged train wheels caused by the autumn leaf-fall.

"We continue to work hard with our partners in Network Rail to reduce the impact of this issue."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-38225995

I know we have threads on the new W&B franchise, the metro and GWML electrification but I think this merits it's own thread.

 

[daikilo]

On face value that is Network Rail admitting that the current network is "below standard", whatever that means. I would be very interested in the content of the calculation of 28 years and what the final "standard" will be.

As to this years leaf issue, that is an example where "vertical integration" might have helped as presumably NR saved money by not running certain RHTTs presumably leaving ATW to pick-up the bill for wheel-set damage and the ATW passengers to be inconvenienced by delayed, cancelled and short-formed trains. Maybe we need an integrated valley lines subgroup right now.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

On face value that is Network Rail admitting that the current network is "below standard", whatever that means. I would be very interested in the content of the calculation of 28 years and what the final "standard" will be.

NR's Route Strategy documents go out to 2043.
This is the one for Wales: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/long-term-planning-process/welsh-route-study/
I suspect that is where the 28 years came from.

 

[Blindtraveler]

The problem, from my no doubt warped and not very inteligent POV is that the entire system is so disjointed. If privitisation was in the form of an at arms length government company running everything but letting a consession to run services LO style, the scramble by multiple parties for the same money would be less and the costs I think would be cleaer to all as less companies and individuals would be involved. The system we have now simply puts costs for a certain part of the service, as well as the responsabilitty for running it onto the private, shareholder or minister led entitty responsible for it and allows those at the top to say Dont Care Your Problem to another company who is suffering as a result of the first companys actions.

I know thats crap in many respects but it does IMO show up whats wrong with the system now and whilst renationalisation BR style wouldnt I dont think work it again highlights what needs looking at again.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
In terms of the 28 years I do wonder if NR are, like the WG burrying their heads in the sand a little? I know I moan about Transport Scotland but at leas they dont show the same complete Apothy shown by the Welsh who seam to lack any kind of stratogy other than the part they are playing in the upgrading of Cardiff Central. How are ATW or indeed Network Rail ment to cope with running, improving or indeed doing anything with the current mess?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Any transport minister who wants success right now should just put pen to paper and cough up for the 67s and 442s roomered and a largeish order of D trains allowing stock to be shuffled, Pacers retired and maybe in the medium term swallow up the entire AGA sprinter fleat meaning 158s and 175s can be both maintained, refurbished and consentrated on longer routes not worked by LHCS

 

[gareth950]

Any transport minister who wants success right now should just put pen to paper and cough up for the 67s and 442s roomered and a largeish order of D trains allowing stock to be shuffled, Pacers retired and maybe in the medium term swallow up the entire AGA sprinter fleat meaning 158s and 175s can be both maintained, refurbished and consentrated on longer routes not worked by LHCS

Excellent ideas and the money IS there in the govt coffers somewhere (eg. £1bn to be wasted on an unecessary M4 relief road) but the political will from the current parties in power in Westminster and Cardiff Bay is not.

Can you imagine the arguments between Cardiff and London over who would pay?

 

[Blindtraveler]

Not to mentio the fortunes being blown on HS2, the savings from the cansilation of same would retire every Pacer and refit still good but tatty fleats such as 175s to IC standard for semi fast and rural express work

 

[ruthtom010]

Just responding to the aside on the allegedly unnecessary M4 relief road. Very roughly, along the busiest stretches of the M4 (and indeed A55), if you take the link between any two junctions, about as many people are traveling each day as use the entire rail network in Wales.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not to mentio the fortunes being blown on HS2, the savings from the cansilation of same would retire every Pacer and refit still good but tatty fleats such as 175s to IC standard for semi fast and rural express work

The 175s certainly do need a heavy refurb!

 

[gareth950]

Just responding to the aside on the allegedly unnecessary M4 relief road. Very roughly, along the busiest stretches of the M4 (and indeed A55), if you take the link between any two junctions, about as many people are traveling each day as use the entire rail network in Wales.

Which is why the rail network in Wales needs massive amounts of invesment to bring it up to standard and encourage people OFF the roads and onto the rails. We don't need £1bn spent on a tiny stretch of road that will encourage MORE people to travel by car into SE Wales and in the long term make traffic congestion worse, massively increase air pollution, destroy scientifically protected wildlife habitats and will make the Welsh Govt break its own laws on sustainability and environmental pollution!

Politics isn't about long term thinking unfortunately though.

 

[ruthtom010]

The numbers just don't add up. You could double rail use in Wales and it would amount to knocking a few years off traffic growth. And in fact many of the passengers would be transfers from bus or new journeys.

 

[daikilo]

NR's Route Strategy documents go out to 2043.
This is the one for Wales: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/long-term-planning-process/welsh-route-study/
I suspect that is where the 28 years came from.

Sadly, you may be right, even if 2043-2016 is actually 27 (are they 1 year late already?) My view is that if you have decision makers uttering such comments they may as well have said that "the chaos will continue indefinitely as, despite being your elected representatives, we don't have a solution."

What is clear is that the new franchise does need to be given the authority and means to manage their own business as far as providing sufficient vehicles and ensuring adequate track is concerned. I don't see an easy mechanism to cover the cost of using LHCS v DMUs but somehow it is happening in Anglia and Cumbria, and the target service level is delivered. Who is paying for the Holyhead-Manchester LHCS v DMU?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I don't see an easy mechanism to cover the cost of using LHCS v DMUs but somehow it is happening in Anglia and Cumbria, and the target service level is delivered. Who is paying for the Holyhead-Manchester LHCS v DMU?

DB paid for supplying the LHCS Mk3 stock (as a "penalty" for buying out Arriva).
I should think the operating cost is met by the WG, as with "Gerald".

The Cumbria and AGA LHCS services are only temporary until more DMUs come available.

 

[DarloRich]

It is only Wales................

I think this has been blown out of all proportion or accuracy. It is clear the statement relates to long term route studies rather than any definitive timescale

 

[The Planner]

And a route study is basically an Argos catalogue for funders, all of it or some of it or none of it may happen.