Benefits of more rail devolution

[Luke McDonnell]

Hi,

Just wondering if more rail devolution to mayoral combined authorities would be viable and a good idea as I currently work for Liverpool CR combined authority and we are responsible for the Merseyrail franchise as is the GLA/TfL with London Overground/Elizabeth line aswell as TfW and Scotrail which are under the control of the Welsh and Scottish governments respectively in fact I do support the idea of mayoral combined authority devolution and think it should be expanded further but just looking at it from a rail transport context here it looks like devolution is to occur in Greater Manchester too as part of the Bee Network. I do think that the likes of GM and Liverpool have done well in getting devolved transport powers considering the resistance within the Whitehall civil service of devolving control to local bodies. It is often said that the UK does have an especially centralised political culture just wondering why this is compared to other counties is this because we lack a written constitution or federal set up like Germany for example? As you would think that national politicians anywhere in the world would have the same instincts? - the centralised political culture is something I dislike about our system but I certainly think the metro mayors (along with the London mayor and devolved national parliaments) are a great step in the right direction but as far as rail is concerned central government/DfT have already devolved to these areas so it shows further devolution can happen? I am also curious to how regional control works in Germany at the Lander level - what control to the Lander have over local/regional services and has the devolution to the Lander been a success and has it led to an improvements of services? Also who does it work in Spain I know there are devolved services in Spain under control of the autonomous regions like FGC in Catalonia but was it just the narrow gauge network in Spain that was devolved was it called FEVE at one time and what is separate from RENFE?

And also do you see further rail devolution possibly under a Labour government - maybe transfer of the infrastructure for Merseyrail from Network Rail I read that this was agreed in principle with the DfT already last year but it seems to have gone very quiet on this front is this because of the turmoil we have had in central government recently and do you think devolution of the Merseyrail infrastructure would be a good think it would be like London Underground of Manchester Metrolink in which bringing it closer to a metro type system which would make sense IMO.

 

[RT4038]

As with all things, the key to this is going to be funding. It is all very well devolving powers, but will the funding come with them? The German Lander have a completely different funding model to any English local authorities, for good or for bad. Be careful what you wish for - some local authorities may rather use devolved rail funding on improving public transport (or other services) for everyone, not just those to whom rail services may be convenient.

 

[zwk500]

For Liverpool it could certainly have some benefits, but then in return for that there'd be responsibilities and risks taken on. It also depends what level of control you are seeking. It's not impossible a credible case could be made for transferring Merseyrail to a company owned by the devolved body (in the way TfL own the Tube, East London Line and Crossrail Core or TfW the Valley Lines) but that would require serious financing at a time of incredibly sensitive budgets. However other options might be to allow Liverpool Metro region to let Merseyrail as a concession in much the same way TfL does the Overground lines.

The reason we have a very centralised political system has many layers, much of it historic and rooted in the absolute monarchy that Parliament has largely supplanted in practice but maintained in theory. However it is also related to the two-party setup and the fact that government finances are heavily centralised, among other reasons. Germany is a very different political history to the UK and while we may want to emulate them, Westminster will never sanction such a system. The model to look more closely at is France - the French Regions are strong enough to fight their case with the central government but not too strong to prevent anything happening at all on NIMBY grounds, even if it sometimes leads to inefficiencies like the Beetroot TGV stations. France also has a much closer political arc to the UK.

 

[Luke McDonnell]

For Liverpool it could certainly have some benefits, but then in return for that there'd be responsibilities and risks taken on. It also depends what level of control you are seeking. It's not impossible a credible case could be made for transferring Merseyrail to a company owned by the devolved body (in the way TfL own the Tube, East London Line and Crossrail Core or TfW the Valley Lines) but that would require serious financing at a time of incredibly sensitive budgets. However other options might be to allow Liverpool Metro region to let Merseyrail as a concession in much the same way TfL does the Overground lines.

The reason we have a very centralised political system has many layers, much of it historic and rooted in the absolute monarchy that Parliament has largely supplanted in practice but maintained in theory. However it is also related to the two-party setup and the fact that government finances are heavily centralised, among other reasons. Germany is a very different political history to the UK and while we may want to emulate them, Westminster will never sanction such a system. The model to look more closely at is France - the French Regions are strong enough to fight their case with the central government but not too strong to prevent anything happening at all on NIMBY grounds, even if it sometimes leads to inefficiencies like the Beetroot TGV stations. France also has a much closer political arc to the UK.

Yes good example there of the French Regions which would be a more realistic level of devolution to aim for in England which we are already moving towards with the Mayoral Combined Authorities in the metropolitan areas France is a unitary state with some regionalisation I think the most recent trailblazer deals in GM/WM are certainly a very positive step meaning they will have more spending freedom including on transport projects. Also slightly OT but the bus franchising is a good idea IMO moving us away from the deregulated model and closer to the models used for bus services in mainland Europe (and London) GM and LCR are pushing forward with this and do you think it will allow for better integration with rail services? It means the CA will have greater control over fares and timetables.

Also do the PTEs or combined authorities have control over rail fares in the boundries e.g. does GMCA have control over rail fares within GM?

 

[Chester1]

Yes good example there of the French Regions which would be a more realistic level of devolution to aim for in England which we are already moving towards with the Mayoral Combined Authorities in the metropolitan areas France is a unitary state with some regionalisation I think the most recent trailblazer deals in GM/WM are certainly a very positive step meaning they will have more spending freedom including on transport projects. Also slightly OT but the bus franchising is a good idea IMO moving us away from the deregulated model and closer to the models used for bus services in mainland Europe (and London) GM and LCR are pushing forward with this and do you think it will allow for better integration with rail services? It means the CA will have greater control over fares and timetables.

Also do the PTEs or combined authorities have control over rail fares in the boundries e.g. does GMCA have control over rail fares within GM?

I agree France is the best European neighbour to eumulate on transport devolution within England. Germany has a very different history. It didn't unify until 150 years ago and its constitution is a reflection of this and the determination of US, UK and France to avoid a strong central government in West Germany at the end of occupation in 1949. England has been a country with (mostly) one government and (mostly) its current borders for over 1000 years. French history is more complicated but a central government has ruled it more or less constantly from the Roman Empire, which was followed by the Frankish kings, the power of the king waxed and waned but was there until the French revolution.

My hope is that under Labour there is a government owned inter city operator but with the likes of Northern and WMR staying under split DfT and regional control. Full German state operators are unfortunately unlikely in our political system outside of the devolved nations.

 

[The exile]

Worth pointing out that devolving funding down as in the German model also has its problems, especially when funding is tight - particularly around what then become cross-border services. Legislation can go some way to mitigate this, but it’s difficult to overcome the “not our problem” mindset that can then develop.