Network Rail upgrade delayed by government (BBC News Article)

[snowball]

File on 4, on Radio 4 at 8pm this evening, is about NR's upgrade programme.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b060zvnd

Works behind schedule; costs going up; an inquiry into poor performance announced by the industry regulator. It's a depressingly familiar story on our railways. From brand new station escalators at a standstill in Birmingham, to only 10 per cent of trains on time at one of London's busiest stations, even the Chancellor's planned Northern Powerhouse is threatened as line upgrades between Manchester and York are delayed.
Allan Urry investigates Network Rail's woes as pressure mounts to deliver £24 billion of infrastructure improvements.
Reporter: Allan Urry Producer: Rob Cave.

 

[Starmill]

""One of the problems is we have a lot of people at Network Rail who know nothing about Railways."" Hahaha
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Tells us a lot of what we already know, and in an exceptionally grave light. The pain of Mancunian and West Yorkshire commuters, and anyone who wants to travel between the two conurbations over the next few years is only going to get worse. Loco Hauled 442s. Unbelievable.

 

[HH]

The Independent has an article on Network Rail being required to sell off property interests.

The problem is that it's already difficult enough to get NR property to consider the railway when it's making decisions; give it to non-rail companies and it will become impossible.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

File on 4, on Radio 4 at 8pm this evening, is about NR's upgrade programme.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b060zvnd

A useful exposition of the problems, mostly by Tony Miles, with some sensible comments by Louise Ellman, chairman of the Transport Select Committee.
No answers though, as Network Rail wouldn't take part.
Maybe the scariest thing is that we don't yet know the real depth of the GW problems.
And they didn't even mention ETCS and the resignalling issues.

Roger Ford's remarks about NR not knowing how to run a railway, really relate to the Board of Directors and NR HQ.
I don't think he was aiming at the people on the ground.

I wish I understood the issue of the design of GW electrification being incompatible with the HOPS design.

 

[Philip C]

I felt the biggest omission in the programme was the question of whether the Government knew what was happening at the time it was making promises in the run-up to the election. Personally I find it hard to believe that they were unaware that their railway promises were unsound.

I rather suspect that the Conservatives really didn't expect to emerge from the election with a majority and being left holding this particular baby!

 

[The Planner]

The problem is that it's already difficult enough to get NR property to consider the railway when it's making decisions; give it to non-rail companies and it will become impossible.

If there was ever a need for the like button, this is it, best post in a while.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The pain of Mancunian and West Yorkshire commuters, and anyone who wants to travel between the two conurbations over the next few years is only going to get worse. Loco Hauled 442s. Unbelievable.

By the simple expedient of changing just one numeral in your posting above, you then have the nightmare scenario of...Loco Hauled 142s...

 

[philjo]

Mentioned in PMQs today:

, PM promises there will not be "an indefinite" pause to trans Pennine rail improvements #PMQs #budget2015

- just tweeted by Norman Smith of BBC News.

https://twitter.com/BBCNormanS/status/618741777055510528

 

[kieron]

Mentioned in PMQs today:


- just tweeted by Norman Smith of BBC News.

https://twitter.com/BBCNormanS/status/618741777055510528

I thought the convention was that parliament does not bind its successors.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Mentioned in PMQs today:
- just tweeted by Norman Smith of BBC News.
https://twitter.com/BBCNormanS/status/618741777055510528

George Osborne mentioned "a new Oyster-style smart ticketing system for the north" in his speech, as about the only transport-related item.

In the Labour response to the Budget speech, Harriet Harman banged on about the TP electrification "pause" and asked him to commit to reinstating the project.
I haven't heard the answer to that, but I doubt it will be "un-paused", not by George Osborne anyway.

 

[snowball]

I thought the convention was that parliament does not bind its successors.

It's not a convention, it's a fact that parliament cannot bind its successors.

Parliament can pass a law purporting to compel its successor to do something, but the next parliament (or the same parliament a little later) can repeal it (or, if it prescribes no penalties for non-compliance, just ignore it).

In the last 10 years politicians have increasingly thought of passing such laws in the misguided belief that this will counteract the public's cynicism about politicians. For example, the Labour government passed a law that child poverty must be reduced, and Osborne proposes a law to require that the government must run a surplus in "normal" years.

None of this is relevant to the politicians' habit of making promises that span more than one parliament.

In this case it's not even clear that the promise in question does span more than one parliament.

 

[northwichcat]

George Osborne mentioned "a new Oyster-style smart ticketing system for the north" in his speech, as about the only transport-related item.

In the Labour response to the Budget speech, Harriet Harman banged on about the TP electrification "pause" and asked him to commit to reinstating the project.
I haven't heard the answer to that, but I doubt it will be "un-paused", not by George Osborne anyway.

The Northern Powerhouse is mentioned in more detail in the full report.

Building on the government’s commitments set out in Chapter 2 to improve transport
connections throughout the country, the government is launching an ambitious new
transport devolution package for the North to take the Northern Powerhouse to the
next stage and create a single northern economy that is genuinely stronger than the sum of its
parts. Building on the Northern Transport Strategy that was jointly published by the government
and Transport for the North (TfN) earlier this year, the government is now committing to:
• devolving far reaching powers over transport to the North’s Mayor-led city
regions to deliver fully integrated public transport systems, supported by smart and
integrated ticketing technology
• establishing TfN as a statutory body with statutory duties to set out its transport
policies and investment priorities in a long-term transport strategy for the North,
underpinned by £30 million of additional funding over three years to support TfN’s
running costs and enable them to advance their work programme
• appointing an interim Chief Executive and executive team for TfN by autumn 2015
to accelerate TfN’s work programme, and appointing a Chair by the end of the 2015,
with an update on the Northern Transport Strategy to be published by Budget 2016
• working with TfN to advance the introduction of Oyster-style smart and
integrated ticketing across bus, tram, metro and rail services throughout the region,
making this one of the top priorities for TfN’s newly accelerated work programme
• working with TfN to push forward plans to transform east-west rail and road
connections via TransNorth and options for a new TransPennine Tunnel, with a
prioritised list of scheme options to be produced by Budget 2016, and an interim report in
time for the Spending Review later in 2015

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...232/50325_Summer_Budget_15_Web_Accessible.pdf

Perhaps George feared Labour's response would be more focused on rail projects being delayed if he went on about projects that are years off.

 

[HH]

Maybe if they split out NR North (as in Scotland), we might get to see more progress.

 

[Senex]

Maybe if they split out NR North (as in Scotland), we might get to see more progress.

Wouldn't that depend on how Westminster stitched up the funding split?

 

[HH]

Wouldn't that depend on how Westminster stitched up the funding split?

It would be harder to do that as a separate entity than as a part of the much larger whole, wouldn't you think?

 

[Senex]

It would be harder to do that as a separate entity than as a part of the much larger whole, wouldn't you think?

I mean the initial split of the whole NR amount into an amount for NR (Remainder) and NR (North) -- I would confidently expect the North to get much less than its fair share.

 

[CdBrux]

More rail details from the budget, much relevant to NR:

Over the last 10 years, rail passenger journeys in Great Britain have increased by 57% and today over 4.3 million journeys are made by rail each day77. To support this level of growth, the government has committed to upgrading the railway and bringing this largely Victorian asset into the 21st century, including by spending £38 billion on the railways over the 5 years to 201978. As problems at Network Rail have become clear, the government has acted to put the rail investment programme back on track.

Specifically, the government has appointed Sir Peter Hendy, formerly the Commissioner of Transport for London, as the new Chairman of Network Rail. The government has asked Sir Peter Hendy to bring to bear his experience and expertise and do what is necessary to ensure Network Rail can deliver effectively and operate the railways safely, and in particular to report by autumn 2015 with a plan to get the rail investment programme back onto a sustainable footing.

The government will also take further action to improve incentives and drive improvements in Network Rail and the wider rail industry:
•the government has asked Sir Peter Hendy and Mark Carne, Chief Executive of Network Rail to continue with the work started in Network Rail to devolve more power to route managers closer to the front line, so that the railways are more focussed on delivering what passengers need and to drive comparative benchmarking of the efficiency and effectiveness of individual routes – to drive up performance across the network
•the government will also change the way it channels public money through the industry, directing it through the train operating companies, so that Network Rail focuses firmly on the needs of train operators, and, through them, passengers – this will put the customers of the railway back in the driving seat in demanding efficiency and improvements that matter to them, making the best use of scarce capacity on the rail network
•the government will introduce a new approach to station redevelopment and commercial land sales on the rail network, building on the experience of regenerating land around Kings Cross Station and Stratford in East London – the government will establish a dedicated body to focus on pursuing opportunities to realise value from public land and property assets in the rail network to both maximise the benefit to local communities and reduce the burden of public debt

Looking further ahead, the government has also asked Nicola Shaw, Chief Executive of High Speed 1, to advise the government on how it should approach the longer-term future shape and financing of Network Rail. Nicola Shaw will work closely with Sir Peter Hendy in conducting her work, which will be concluded before Budget 2016.

From section 4.2 of this: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...backing-business-and-improving-productivity-1

 

[DarloRich]

aka sell off all the juicy property plums and ensure the railways don't benefit from the long term income!

as for the funding route - let me guess what they come up with.......................

 

[HH]

I mean the initial split of the whole NR amount into an amount for NR (Remainder) and NR (North) -- I would confidently expect the North to get much less than its fair share.

There's no evidence that this happened in Scotland. Chip? Shoulder?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

There's no evidence that this happened in Scotland. Chip? Shoulder?

The first money to go to Rail North will be TOC/franchise money, not NR/CPx money.
The NR Direct Grant which currently goes from DfT straight to NR will also be routed via the TOCs and therefore via Rail North.
Carving up NR's base cash via HLOS/SoFA etc will be hard work, especially with 2 NR Routes involved (LNW North and LNE) and many cross-Pennine issues.
It will indeed be interesting if NR is restructured around the devolved groups, but there's no plan for that yet.

 

[NotATrainspott]

There's no evidence that this happened in Scotland. Chip? Shoulder?

In Scotland, the same Network Rail company works with the Scottish Government and receive funding and direction from them rather than from the UK Government, which deals with the rest of the country. This is made significantly easier by the fact that Network Rail (and British Rail before it) have Scotland as a separate 'unit' within them, whereas the same is not the case for England and Wales. From a railway perspective, there's significantly more sense in putting Swansea and Cardiff in the same administrative region as Paddington than Holyhead, which is instead in the same administrative region as Euston. That would make it rather complicated to separate out a 'Northern' region from Network Rail.

 

[HH]

In Scotland, the same Network Rail company works with the Scottish Government and receive funding and direction from them rather than from the UK Government, which deals with the rest of the country. This is made significantly easier by the fact that Network Rail (and British Rail before it) have Scotland as a separate 'unit' within them, whereas the same is not the case for England and Wales. From a railway perspective, there's significantly more sense in putting Swansea and Cardiff in the same administrative region as Paddington than Holyhead, which is instead in the same administrative region as Euston. That would make it rather complicated to separate out a 'Northern' region from Network Rail.

I agree it wouldn't be easy. But NR has a history of restructuring itself, so I dare say it wouldn't be that hard either.

 

[WatcherZero]

NR already has had a arm that invests in property development, creating commercial retail space in stations and office developments. Government last year vetoed them investing a Billion pounds in Office development as non-core activity.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

NR already has had a arm that invests in property development, creating commercial retail space in stations and office developments. Government last year vetoed them investing a Billion pounds in Office development as non-core activity.

Glad to see that you have made this posting, as it appears that some forum members are unaware of recent events.

 

[Busaholic]

Gerald Corbett was Chairman and the main public face of Railtrack.
Johnson Cox was hired as Chief Operating Officer and made the decision after Hatfield to "export the risk" by imposing 20mph speed limits for weeks on the major routes.
He was 9 months with Railtrack before being shown the door, before they imploded completely.
Actually I think he was in exactly the wrong place at the wrong time.
The problem was deeper than one man.

Gerald Corbett also managed to do splendid things at Woolworths - a presence at the heart of virtually every High Street one minute, a complete basketcase within months (one could almost call it a train wreck, but that would be too macabre). And still there are calls by some financial journalists to bring this nincumpoop back to be put in charge of something else, presumably something they wish to disappear without trace.

 

[Darren R]

Gerald Corbett also managed to do splendid things at Woolworths - a presence at the heart of virtually every High Street one minute, a complete basketcase within months (one could almost call it a train wreck, but that would be too macabre). And still there are calls by some financial journalists to bring this nincumpoop back to be put in charge of something else, presumably something they wish to disappear without trace.

For every fool, there is a greater fool who admires him!

 

[yorksrob]

Whatever the faults of Mr Corbett, I suspect the far greater problem with Railtrack was that it was expected to be a profit making company paying dividends, when it was clearly in no position to do so requiring (as the railway still does) subsidy and substantial capital investment of a sort that the private sector couldn't manage. Jonny Major and his circus were to blame for that fiasco.

Of course, that won't stop the Establishment attempting to repeat the same mistakes.

 

[HH]

Whatever the faults of Mr Corbett, I suspect the far greater problem with Railtrack was that it was expected to be a profit making company paying dividends, when it was clearly in no position to do so requiring (as the railway still does) subsidy and substantial capital investment of a sort that the private sector couldn't manage. Jonny Major and his circus were to blame for that fiasco.

This is true and what probably led to Railtrack becoming a property company that did a bit of rail stuff on the side.

 

[High Dyke]

Not quite on the same scale as major investment projects across the rail network, but this was announced yesterday.

Network Rail puts plans for 'misused' level crossing bridge on hold

Plans to build a footbridge on the site of a "misused" level crossing in Lincoln have been put on hold.

Network Rail said the current plans for a pedestrian bridge at Brayford Wharf East were unaffordable.

It previously said the bridge was necessary to discourage pedestrians from "misusing the crossing and putting their lives at risk".

Conservative MP for Lincoln, Karl McCartney, said the announcement was disappointing.

There have been a number of near misses at both crossings, which have seen pedestrians trying to cross when warnings have started, Network Rail said
A Network Rail spokesman said: "We are still trying to move forward with a new footbridge at Brayford Wharf East but planning conditions, as a result of its sensitive location, has made the current plan unaffordable.

"As with all public funded companies, money is tight but we remain committed to reducing the risk at all of our level crossings.

"We are now talking to the university, the local authority and others about how we might find extra funds, or how we might be able to alter our plans to make them more affordable."

Work on a new footbridge over the High Street level crossing is going ahead as planned.

In response to the announcement about the Brayford Wharf crossing, Mr McCartney said: "Network Rail's decision to push more freight through the centre of Lincoln means that public safety will be put at risk if we do not have a footbridge over both our city centre level crossings.

"The only alternative is to begin to limit the amount of freight on the East Coast Main Line that diverts through Lincoln to free-up capacity."

He added: "I will make it my business to be a problem to all involved in the fiasco and will use all influences at my disposal... to ensure that promises are kept to the people of Lincoln."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-33461181

 

[ivanhoe]

Whatever the faults of Mr Corbett, I suspect the far greater problem with Railtrack was that it was expected to be a profit making company paying dividends, when it was clearly in no position to do so requiring (as the railway still does) subsidy and substantial capital investment of a sort that the private sector couldn't manage. Jonny Major and his circus were to blame for that fiasco.

Of course, that won't stop the Establishment attempting to repeat the same mistakes.

Quite correct. The organisation I worked for then held a number of Railtrack shares which were of high value and paid good dividends. We got shut before they went 'south' more luck than judgement, I might add.