Great Western Coffee Shop

Consultation Question 1

a) To what extent do you agree or disagree with these objectives, and why? – Agree with the objectives
– Agree with the majority
– Disagree with the majority
– Wholly disagree
b) Are there any priorities you would change or add, and if so why?

---

Explanatory text

Taking account of the opportunities and challenges outlined above, and the Government’s objectives for transport more generally, we propose the following core objectives for the Great Western franchise in the 2020s:
●● Provide safe, punctual and reliable services with enough seats and space for people who want to use them;
●● Focus on the needs of the travelling public to provide an excellent and continually-improving customer experience for all passengers, whatever their particular needs and abilities;
●● Maximise the benefits for passengers from the current transformational investment in the Great Western railway network;
●● Maximise the contribution of the railway to driving local and regional economic growth, enabling planned growth in housing, and meeting the wider needs of citizens and society across the whole of the franchise area;
●● Be a responsible employer who invests in the welfare and the development of its workforce, motivating staff and equipping them with the right skills to provide the best possible customer service;
●● Strengthen the connection between the railway and the communities it serves, supported by strong relationships with all those who have an interest in the franchise and the services it provides;
●● Continue to improve the environmental performance of the railway and support wider environmental objectives by providing an attractive alternative to more polluting modes, and improving measures such as energy and water consumption and recycling;
●● Develop close collaborative working with Network Rail and other partners, bringing the operation of track and train closer together to deliver the best possible service for passengers and drawing in funding from the widest possible range of sources;
●● Work with the Government and other agencies to support the development and delivery of other major rail investment schemes, such as the proposed western rail link to Heathrow, East-West Rail and the interface with HS2 at Old Oak Common; and
●● Operate efficiently, providing best value for taxpayers’ and passengers’ money, thereby ensuring the maximum possible resources are available for further service improvements.

See http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=19037 for the background to this topic

add "making the journeys people want to make at the times they want to travel with a reasonable overall journey time"

Pretty well everything at least once an hour ... not much good having a "safe punctual and reliable" service to an employment hub with a gap in arrivals between 06:46 and 09:33, nor having an 08:57 arrival on part of a major flow for an ongoing connection at 10:30.

Examples are 2018 arrivals at Trowbridge from Swindon, Chippenham and Melksham Monday to Friday, and Sunday change from Warminster toward Swindon.

Develop close collaborative working with Network Rail and other partners, bringing the operation of track and train closer together to deliver the best possible service for passengers and drawing in funding from the widest possible range of sources;

This is the fundamental fly in the ointment. who runs the railway? Who is responsible for making decisions particularly on a day to day basis regarding train running?  Where does the buck stop?

Shouldn't all the money squandered attributing delay minutes go into preventing those delays in the first place? Then they won't have to be attributed. This would help implement  objective 1.

The part that worked out what caused the delay would still be needed to try and stop it happening again. 

Already given my thoughts via the online consultation reply(if you haven't done yours please make sure you do, the more the government knows what an idiot it is the better)

Myself I think the Brighton, & Gatwick services should go to SWR or Southern, the Greenford service should stay with GWR as most the drivers trained on the route, run services in the Thames Valley, so if its handed over to Chiltern then either they recruit a few drivers purely to run that route or they retrain several drivers to know the route, both of which are a waste of money.

GWR could always have a maintenance contract with Chiltern to maintain a 165 at Wembley, and change it weekly so it can have major servicing completed at Reading, as what is done at Laira or Heaton depots for Crosscountry.

Is anyone else finding it frustrating that the response form provided (and the online survey) have different numbering of questions, compared with the consultation document?    ???

Yes - you are not alone in that frustration  ;)