The connecting link is https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/future-of-northern-and-transpennine-express-rail-franchises
Dear Sirs
Dear Sirs
Following are my responses to the Northern TPE consultation as now ongoing.
I live at Prudhoe a station with a 30 minute frequency service on the Newcastle Carlisle Tyne Valley railway line.
TO1:
What are your views on increasing below-average fares over time to
levels typical on the rest of the network in order to improve the
frequency, capacity and quality of local services? Do you have any
evidence to support your views?
This
is a good idea so long as fares are comparable to neighbouring bus
services and road tax is increased in line with the environmental damage
road transport causes. In our case the Tyne Valley line faces intense
competition from Go North East X84 and 10 routes. At present the railway
is fare competitive but uses dated uncomfortable trains with no Wifi.
Fares increases are only acceptable if the line is modernised with for
instance a service comparable to that of ELECTRIC Class 350 Trans
Pennine trains. If you raise the fares and continue to provide hand me
down trains, the passengers will walk. Twice in the life of the
nationalised British Railways, a totally new fleet of trains was
delivered, in 1958 and 1987-88. So far 17 years of privatisation has
delivered no improved rolling stock at all.
TO2: What are your views on giving priority to improving the quality of the Northern rolling stock at the expense of some reduction in lightly used services (e.g. fewer calls at low-use stations)? Do you have any evidence to support your views?
This
sounds good but I struggle to see how it will be accomplished. Any new
tranche of rolling stock is a major investment. The amount of money
saved by "fewer calls at low-use stations)? " is small
beer compared to the costs, There are ways to reduce cost in the rail
industry. The bringing in house to Network Rail of all maintenance work
would be one example. The abolition of the train leasing companies would
remove another huge tranche of spend. It is laughable that a Pacer
which is a 1980s Leyland bus on rails costs so much to lease. It owes
nothing to anyone and is fully depreciated.
TO3: What are your views on allowing some reduction in the hours ticket offices are open and staffed if this is accompanied by the ability for passengers to have widespread access to ticket buying opportunities (e.g. through new and improved approaches such as smart ticketing, increased advance purchase ticketing or via mobile phones), adequate measures to ensure vulnerable passengers are not disadvantaged and more effective customer service by both station and on-train staff? Do you have any evidence to support your views?
Personally
I don't mind as much cost saving as possible through demanning of
stations. Purely dedicated ticket office staff are unnecessary as the
example of London Underground shows. Staff can be redeployed onto
platforms and to advise on the use of machines and internet options. In
some circumstances a staff presence could be retained or even reinstated
through multi function staff who may for instance also be representing a
Community Rail Partnership or running a kiosk sellings teas and
coffees. The principle of corner shop PayPoints is a good parallel. If
Hexham station was demanned and some of the money saved was passed to
the CRP it would be interesting to see if it could deliver the same
service for less?
COM1: How can local communities, local businesses and other organisations be further stimulated to play an active part in the running of Northern and TPE rail services, including at stations?
Only
by the franchise holder having a dedicated team to expand these links.
It is all very well suggesting this idea, but transport is in large
measure a professional activity and a business, neither of those easily
thrive with amateur volunteers. Staff are required on the ground who can
develop volunteer and community skills. In the Tyne Valley there has
been some achievements with this. For instance websites like http://www.tvrug.org.uk/ and its facebook https://www.facebook.com/pages/Tyne-Valley-Line-Rail-Users-Group-Tvlrug/189782941052088?fref=ts .
Same exist for the Community Rail Partnership. These are all high
maintenance activities and to be really effective, few will be totally
voluntary efforts. Will the new franchise holder be empowering
organisations to run and develop relevant websites and print?
COM2: What opportunities are there for Community Rail Partnerships to expand their role and range of activities?
Dealt
with above however I understand that the East Coast franchise has
statements about support which I welcome to laterally connected
partnerships. Our CRP functions on a shoe string, one officer for
one/two days a week and the volunteers. He is the only person in the
entire rail industry whose only job is to develop the BUSINESS of the
Tyne Valley railway line. How does that work? How does a 60 mile double
track railway line thrive with one person for business development? The
answer is because a lot of other people have it as part of their work
but if you really want a business to grow, you have to invest in staff
time to do that.
TPF1: Are you aware of any proposals for third-party funded changes not already indicated? Please provide details.
I
am aware of a growing lack of money. It is said the NELEP will provide
solutions. I believe it employs 3 people and its chief executive has
left for a new job in banking? I sense a tense circle. It is now
acknowledged that the previous Northern franchise was let as a
standstill but growth that shows no sign of abating took place. Yet the
new franchise is expected to achieve growth with a lower bid. Difficult
to reckon with. People really want to use trains. The success of TPE
shows this. We in practice live on a Trans Pennine route. Perhaps our
line should go to that franchise? We already have through trains to
Glasgow which we don't want to lose. If TPE can make a great success of
Manchester Airport Glasgow/Edinburgh through as much empty moor as our
line, then Teeside-Wearside, Tyneside, Carlisle, Dumfries, Kilmarnock
Glasgow is no less of a corridor. Our line has been identified in the
Trans Europe network? Where is the investment in electric trains? EU
money could accomplish much of this.
FID1: What factors may impact on demand for travel on the new Northern and TPE franchises? Please provide evidence.
Look at the Tyne Valley timetable.
eastbound into Newcastle no arrivals between 0655 the first and 0807 the second. Then 0827, 0900, 0928. The first five.
westbound from Hexham, the first train is 0717, the next is 0858, how does that help commuters?
For
comparison eastbound into Newcastle in 1989 the first seven arrivals
were 0640 0724 0811 0831 0849 0858 0940 from Hexham or west therefore. A
loss of two morning peak trains since 1989.
So
in this growth cycle, the service in the peak has actually got worse
since privatisation and this on a double track cross country line. We
need a franchise that plugs these gaps and runs a 30 minute interval
service from service start to 1900 in the evening, then hourly to 2300.
We are not a branch line but a busy commuter route for a third of the
run to Hexham and the only rail crossing east west across Britain for a
100 miles north or south. We're a strategic route as is shown every year
when the East Coast weekend service is timetabled down our line. That
uses a third train an hour path which is why John Stevenson, the
Carlisle Tory MP's call for an express and a stopper service from
Carlisle east is completely achievable. The tracks and timetable could
deliver it, we need the trains and the committment.
However
even all that is on a line where the speed limit is generally between
50-60mph. If this line was electrified and substantial lengths improved
to 100mph running, and given the acceleration profile of a class 350, a
complete seachange in public transport in this corridor is achievable. I
understand Nexus and Northern are considering an extension of wires to
the Gateshead Metrocentre on our line. This I fully support as a first
step to electrifying the whole route and doing away with all the 19th
century signalling infrastructure which still works here. Does the DfT
understand that late 19th century signalboxes and equipment are what
operate the Tyne Valley Line on a day to day basis?
If
the Metrocentre Morpeth trains go electric as I hope they will, this
should be a first step to a connected up Northumberland strategy in
which trains on the re-opened Ashington Blyth and Tyne do not turn
around at Newcastle Central station with all those issues but speed on
to various locations in the Tyne Valley.
DTD1: What are your proposals for providing passengers better and safer access to different modes of transport at stations (including bus, tram, cycling and walking?)
Integrated
transport is essential. A Quality Transport Contract for the North East
is what is needed not just a Quality Bus Contract as Nexus is currently
studying. Our local bus company does everything possible not to connect
with trains. The new Prudhoe Interchange which I successfully campaigned
for with others in 2007 paid for by the DfT has worked very well.
Traffic figures have soared, but it is with car/train change. The bus
services consistently fail to connect, there is no through ticketing,
and I regularly observe the resultant frustration.
We also have an issue outlined here https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=819040288126347&set=a.189784267718622.46458.189782941052088&type=1 .
Since the early 1970s an effective bus/rail interworked service linking
rail to Hadrian's Wall has existed. In the last five years what was an
exemplar operation has been stripped down and minimalised. Visitor
numbers to the world heritage site that is Hadrian's Wall have fallen.
And that they have done steadily not just in the recession. There is no
One North East, no Hadrian's Wall Trust to do the overseas promotion
that is needed.
However there is a
station sat on top of the wall at one of its most exciting central
locations. This is Gilsland closed in 1967 and on the boundary of
Cumbria and Northumberland. The two MPs want it open, the local parish
and county councillors want it open. A properly resourced study by
transport planners has demonstrated that allowing for LOCAL and TOURIST
use re-opening this station will wash its face. We want a new franchise
to commit to a fully costed priced option integrated into the GRIP
process to develop this node. http://www.gilsland-station.org.uk/index.htm
OTH1: Do you have any other views on the future of the Northern and TPE franchises that you would like to set out?
The
new franchise should require as an early step the provision of free on
board Wifi. If this is not done many people of a younger generation will
choose buses even if the journey is longer.
Over
the last decade I have seen MANY instances of the bad results that
follow through a lack of local rail management, very visible and
accessible and based in the North East. This to handle day by day
instances of trouble and to develop strategy.
I
should be able to travel direct by train from Prudhoe to the two 1948
North East New Towns called Peterlee and Washington, Future Rail North
East from Regional Railways North East by British Rail identified in
1993 the need and achievability to re-open these. One is on the Durham
coast line our trains run on. The other is on the "Leamside" line which
was lifted last year. You cannot even find "Future rail north east" 1993
on Google or Yahoo but I have the report placed in the National Railway
Museum Forsythe Collection so I know how much this ground has been
repeated over and over again.
I worry that the
efforts myself and others go to to react to these consultations are all a
complete waste of time. A sop. I shall be fascinated to measure the end
outcome against my aspirations as outlined here and see if there is any
connectivity.
Yours sincerely
Robert Forsythe
No comments:
Post a Comment