Chris Heaton-Harris expresses an interest in suggested devolution of Southeastern services

[Hearadh]

Surprised that nobody has picked up on the announcement by Chris Heaton -Harris, yesterday in the house, that he has been in talks with London 's deputy mayor, Heidi Alexander, over devolution of parts of Southeastern 's franchise to TFL.

Any word being broadcast on the bush telegraph yet?

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commo...6432-7052-426E-9746-CF85E733924C/Southeastern

...I am interested to hear the proposals going forward for the devolution of certain areas of Southeastern’s franchise...

... I met Heidi Alexander, its deputy chairman, earlier this week ..

 

[Roast Veg]

It was determined before that SE metro had little to gain from becoming part of TfL, since the stock interworks quite heavily with the longer distance services to Tunbridge Wells, Maidstone, Sevenoaks, and the like.

The only thing to be gained is better revenue protection, which could be solved at the franchise changeover if it ever happens...

 

[hwl]

Key issues is that TfL don't have the money to implement much change at SE Metro the only change they can really make is better revenue enforcement which will then reveal higher passenger numbers and the need to do something about it. They can't afford to do train lengthening and are wedded to the overground philosophy of increasing frequency/simplifying service patterns but they also can't afford to sort key interchanges that need to handle more passengers if they are forced to change.

 

[43066]

It was determined before that SE metro had little to gain from becoming part of TfL, since the stock interworks quite heavily with the longer distance services to Tunbridge Wells, Maidstone, Sevenoaks, and the like.

The only thing to be gained is better revenue protection, which could be solved at the franchise changeover if it ever happens...

Yep it was discussed for years, and then filed in the “too difficult/no real benefit” pile, as far as I could tell.

TFL’s finances are in a pretty parlous state due to Sadiq Khan’s shamelessly vote-grabbing fares freeze, so I wonder if TFL has any real appetite to take on SE’s large and very complex metro operation.

I bet this latest announcement will turn out to be little more than hot air.

 

[bramling]

Yep it was discussed for years, and then filed in the “too difficult/no real benefit” pile, as far as I could tell.

TFL’s finances are in a pretty parlous state due to Sadiq Khan’s shamelessly vote-grabbing fares freeze, so I wonder if TFL has any real appetite to take on SE’s large and very complex metro operation.

I bet this latest announcement will turn out to be little more than hot air.

TFL I think would take it if the opportunity arose, if for no other reason than to expand the empire.

Naturally Khan would find a way of spinning “improvements”, I’m sure there are a few car parks which could find themselves the basis for a few hundred thousand flats, which seems to be about the limit of Khan’s transport imagination!

It’s interesting to observe that West Anglia suburban hasn’t been sweetness and light for the orange army. As far as I can tell the only thing they’ve achieved is a bit of train cleaning, which anyone could have done.

 

[SlimJim1694]

It's been on the cards for years. Hopefully TFL do take over and clear out some of the managers we've got. The tfl pass would suit me if I stay but I expect they'll probably find a reason not to give us pay parity with existing Overground drivers.

 

[ComUtoR]

The rumor for a long time has been that the franchise will get a two year extension from April.

TfL 'taking over' 'devolving' or 'getting their grubby little mitts' on Southeastern has been discussed and batted around for a few years now. I don't believe that anyone really know what that means. Does it mean that the Metro side will be split from the current franchise and taken from Govia and given to Arriva ? Does it mean that TfL will simply replace the DfTs involvement ? Are they going to fund the metro area stations/staff services ? Or do they just want to make demands and have a seat at the SE table ?

The old rumor was that the mayor wants all transport within the M25 to be his personal little toy playground.

 

[ComUtoR]

Way back in 2016
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/rail-devolution-business-case-narrative.pdf

2017
http://www.railtechnologymagazine.c...s-for-dft-rethink-on-south-eastern-devolution

in a letter to the transport secretary, the chair of the London Assembly transport committee, Caroline Pidgeon AM, stated that she was “extremely disappointed” that the government had not taken the opportunity offered by the franchise renewal to devolve London suburban rail services to the mayor and TfL.

Yesterday
https://www.newsshopper.co.uk/news/...ted-proposals-tfl-take-southeastern-services/

A transport minister has said he is "very interested" in new rail devolution proposals for the Southeastern rail route put forward by the Greenwich and Woolwich MP.

Labour's Pennycook has pressed the Department of Transport (DfT) to hand over responsibility for Southeastern services to Transport for London when the franchise ends in the spring.

There is also an article on The Times (paywall)

The Williams review will be interesting reading that's for sure.

 

[swt_passenger]

Odd that some of the media reports are considering this as a ‘first’ for partial devolution. If it’s just a case of TfL having more input to service specifications or station manning, didn’t they already do this with Southern Metro a while ago?

But if it’s to be more like the West Anglia inners being taken into “Overground” hands, then it’s not a first either - because that’s basically the same as what they did with the original Silverlink Metro.

 

[hwl]

TFL I think would take it if the opportunity arose, if for no other reason than to expand the empire.

Naturally Khan would find a way of spinning “improvements”, I’m sure there are a few car parks which could find themselves the basis for a few hundred thousand flats, which seems to be about the limit of Khan’s transport imagination!

It’s interesting to observe that West Anglia suburban hasn’t been sweetness and light for the orange army. As far as I can tell the only thing they’ve achieved is a bit of train cleaning, which anyone could have done.

But they will only lease those carparks from NR so no flats...

 

[43066]

Odd that some of the media reports are considering this as a ‘first’ for partial devolution. If it’s just a case of TfL having more input to service specifications or station manning, didn’t they already do this with Southern Metro a while ago?

I had understood that was only those stations also served by ARL. The same was done with stations such as Denmark Hill, which was formerly managed by Thameslink, I believe.

 

[swt_passenger]

I had understood that was only those stations also served by ARL. The same was done with stations such as Denmark Hill, which was formerly managed by Thameslink, I believe.

I’m sure there was something agreed between SN and TfL much earlier, around the time the Tattenham Corner branch was taken into the zones. I think that happened long before LO turned up on the South London line...

 

[PeterC]

Does it mean that the Metro side will be split from the current franchise and taken from Govia and given to Arriva ? Does it mean that TfL will simply replace the DfTs involvement ? Are they going to fund the metro area stations/staff services ? Or do they just want to make demands and have a seat at the SE table ?

Have Arriva negotiated a monopoly on operating the Overground brand? I can't think of any operational reason why TfL shouldn't use a different contractor for the Southeastern metro area if they take control.

 

[Horizon22]

My local MP has been banging on about this for some timeand indeed commented on it today. They've been interested in SE metro devolution for some time; whether anyone is prepared to actually give it a detailed look to try and split off the Metro side in a manner that works and boost frequency on a congested route is a different matter. If TfL did run it (highly unlikely due to finances etc.), passengers will probably need to be prepared for some unpopular decisions regarding rationalisation of London terminals.

 

[Aictos]

I had understood that was only those stations also served by ARL. The same was done with stations such as Denmark Hill, which was formerly managed by Thameslink, I believe.

You’re very much mistaken, Denmark Hill is still managed by Thameslink indeed IIRC the manager for the Catford Loop stations that transferred to Thameslink from SouthEastern is based at Denmark Hill.

 

[Horizon22]

I had understood that was only those stations also served by ARL. The same was done with stations such as Denmark Hill, which was formerly managed by Thameslink, I believe.

Denmark Hill & Peckham Rye all have regular SE, TL and LO services. Nunhead has SE & TL.

 

[hwl]

My local MP has been banging on about this for some timeand indeed commented on it today. They've been interested in SE metro devolution for some time; whether anyone is prepared to actually give it a detailed look to try and split off the Metro side in a manner that works and boost frequency on a congested route is a different matter. If TfL did run it (highly unlikely due to finances etc.), passengers will probably need to be prepared for some unpopular decisions regarding rationalisation of London terminals.

All the London terminal or key sections on the approaches are at capacity so there won't be any higher frequencies unless the Hayes line gets Bakerloo extensioned and those 6 paths / hours get reallocated to the other 4 via LBG metro routes.

Hence capacity increase is effectively via longer trains and changes to seating arrangements. But depot space and stabling are at capacity so this would need £200-250m minimum to address on top of any additional rolling stock.

All the previous TfL plans largely focused on improving reliability though simplification (services from stations down to 1 / 2 termini from 2 / 3 termini currently). This won't go down well with many users and Lewisham won't be able to cope with the increased interchange volumes without spend at least £70m on it. The previous TfL thinking also didn't include the then future additional Thameslink paths post London Bridge completion so many of the opportunities aren't do able in practice.

A lot of the TfL South London Metro (not just) thinking involves DfT/HMT giving NR about £1.5bn as starting point for infrastructure which they conveniently leave out of "their" costings which are effectively done on a TOC basis.

At this point is is probably worth waiting till crossrail phase 3 (Abbey Wood - Paddington) opens and the Thameslink Maidstone/ Ashford service starts up before assessing the effect on the SE network. A sensible direct award with more gating and staffing to capture actual user numbers would be a sensible to make accurate assumptions.

12car via London Bridge SE metro is much higher on DfT list than TfL's...

 

[43066]

You’re very much mistaken, Denmark Hill is still managed by Thameslink indeed IIRC the manager for the Catford Loop stations that transferred to Thameslink from SouthEastern is based at Denmark Hill.

Its been quite heavily rebranded and is now manned “first to last”, unlike many TL stations on the Catford Loop.

That certainly suggests some level of input from TfL, even if the management hasn’t formally been changed.

 

[Bald Rick]

It will cost more cash to run as two operations, even if the service provision was exactly the same. Surely it’s better to use that money improving the service?

Besides, given that it’s likely the Williams review will move franchises on to a concession model - just like London Overground - when they are due for renewal, and that SE is due in the next couple of years, I think it would be better to see how that works out.

 

[ScotGG]

Every time this comes up the same arguments are made. The Dft could do this or that. Extra staffing, longer trains and so much more. The trouble is they never do with every extension which is the problem.

Crossrail is no cure really. It'll help just one Metro line - which even then is seeing massive growth past Woolwich around Charlton, Greenwich and Deptford. Even the Bexleyheath line stations are too far from the north Kent and Abbey Wood for people to switch.

 

[Bald Rick]

Every time this comes up the same arguments are made. The Dft could do this or that. Extra staffing, longer trains and so much more. The trouble is they never do with every extension which is the problem.

Indeed. But then the DfT might not be in charge of such thing in the relatively near future if the suggestions coming out of the Williams review are correct.

 

[Meerkat]

How can the DfT not be involved in the spending of public money on transport?

 

[hwl]

How can the DfT not be involved in the spending of public money on transport?

SRA mark 2 ???

 

[Bald Rick]

How can the DfT not be involved in the spending of public money on transport?

It might not even exist by the end of the year if you listen to some of the rumours bouncing around Westminster!

 

[ComUtoR]

It might not even exist by the end of the year if you listen to some of the rumours bouncing around Westminster!

TFL will ruin SE. .... However..

I kinda get the impression that the Williams review will simply re-brand franchising. If the DfT was removed and they go down the 'Local Government Services' route; it will fragment the railway even further. There will be little to no joined up thinking and there will be more pathway clashes, rather than less.

Look what happened with SE and GTR. You end up sacrificing one TOCs services at the expense of the others. With more fragmentation, Local Government wil be less inclined to give up services and everyone will just fight and "send in more trains"

Franchising is dead, Long live franchising

 

[brad465]

What's the latest time roughly that a decision on the current franchise can be made by, before it's end in April, as the review will have to come out before then if SE is to stand a chance of seeing it's recommendations implemented?

 

[Horizon22]

All the London terminal or key sections on the approaches are at capacity so there won't be any higher frequencies unless the Hayes line gets Bakerloo extensioned and those 6 paths / hours get reallocated to the other 4 via LBG metro routes.

Hence capacity increase is effectively via longer trains and changes to seating arrangements. But depot space and stabling are at capacity so this would need £200-250m minimum to address on top of any additional rolling stock.

All the previous TfL plans largely focused on improving reliability though simplification (services from stations down to 1 / 2 termini from 2 / 3 termini currently). This won't go down well with many users and Lewisham won't be able to cope with the increased interchange volumes without spend at least £70m on it. The previous TfL thinking also didn't include the then future additional Thameslink paths post London Bridge completion so many of the opportunities aren't do able in practice.

A lot of the TfL South London Metro (not just) thinking involves DfT/HMT giving NR about £1.5bn as starting point for infrastructure which they conveniently leave out of "their" costings which are effectively done on a TOC basis.

At this point is is probably worth waiting till crossrail phase 3 (Abbey Wood - Paddington) opens and the Thameslink Maidstone/ Ashford service starts up before assessing the effect on the SE network. A sensible direct award with more gating and staffing to capture actual user numbers would be a sensible to make accurate assumptions.

12car via London Bridge SE metro is much higher on DfT list than TfL's...

Oh yes I'm fully aware. I was just stating that this is what everyone wants without realising that the Overground is no silver bullet.

Good luck waiting for the TL Maidstone service though...

 

[frediculous]

I wonder if TfL would indeed be keen to take over SE metro services. The Networkers are due to be replaced (potentially alongside the 376s) by whoever gets the new franchise. New trains = good PR boost for TfL even though its the expected change anyway

 

[urpert]

I wonder if TfL would indeed be keen to take over SE metro services. The Networkers are due to be replaced (potentially alongside the 376s) by whoever gets the new franchise. New trains = good PR boost for TfL even though its the expected change anyway

Not if there's yet another 2 year extension coming in April...

I reckon the best we can hope for is some cascaded 707s until a proper franchise is let, or they decide to separate out the metro stuff as discussed in this thread, and use the rest as a guinea pig for a brave new world of franchising!

 

[Meerkat]

Why wouldn’t the direct award include procurement of a new inners fleet?