Great Western Coffee Shop

Question 1 - Objectives
Generally agree with the objectives. Add Objective to provide transport at times and to destinations required, and prioritise reliabiity (cancellations at any station) over strict timekeeping

Question 2 – Splitting the franchise
There is a strong general view that the franchise should not be split.  There would be some support for a structure of management units within a single franchise.

Question 4 – Relationship between Train Operator and Network Rail
Passengers are looking to use rail services to travel and are not directy concerned with the relationship between the operator and the provider to the operator, save for wanting a set up that provides the end product effectively and without complexity to their journey.

Question 5 – Train frequency and length of day
Services should run as a minimum hourly serving all stations, in both directions, and from early in the morning through to late evening, seven days a week.  It is generally accepted that there may be some exceptions to this general rule, but forum members feel that it is up to members from individual areas to make their own knowleadgable comments for their own areas.

Question 6 – New Stations
Forum members are generally supportive of new stations and accept that they may add a few minutes to journey time.  They cannot see so many new stations being opened within the next 10 years that this timing becomes a problem.  There is a need for new stations to be provided with an appropriate train service with enough capacity to handle current and growing traffic on the line.

Question 7 – Leaving out stops
Maintaining frequency at intermediate stations is more important than shaving a few minutes from schedules.  There may be exceptions, but usually leaving the station skipped on some services with at least one train per hour each way

Question 8 – Direct (through train) provision
he thing that has come out time and again is the importance of end to end journeys where connections (train and bus) are involved – the total journey time, and the reliability of connections.

Where services abut end to end, they should be usefully joined up; 40% to 45% of business is lost at intermediate changes and so changes should be avoided where practical.

Question 12 – Rolling Stock
New stock where classes 143, 150, 153, 158, 165 and 166 run will be needed during franchise, with luggage space, corridor throughout and no 2 + 3 seating please.  Please ensure that train capacity allows everyone who wishes to sit to have a seat in all but the most exceptional of cases.

Question 15 - Ticketing
Ticket Vending Machines to offer lowest fare/combination & be clear on route & timing restrictions

Any reasonable route to be acceptable for travel on tickets NOT marked as either “via xxx” or “not via xxx”.  If you turn up at your starting station, reasonable routes should include whatever route will get you there soonest. That's in addition to any alternatives offered by the routing guide.

Question 16 – Community Rail
Passengers / members  strongly support Community Rail as providing a voice from outside into  promoting the passenger experience.    The forum requests that direct award and franchise requirements be written in such a way a to provide a continuity of operations for partnerships.

Question 18 – Any other business
1. Customer service performance levels.  There should be a target time for answering questions to customer services.  Currently routine answers take a month, with many queries extending for a lot longer for our members.   A monitored target, with an effective penalty clause in the direct award or franchise contract would help concentrate minds.

2. For the two years of direct award, forum members would like to see
a) Early morning to late evening service provision on all routes, stepping up to or towards hourly frequency as routine.
b) The opportunity of retimetablng to be taken to provide better journey opportunities, appropriate extra through journeys and much improved connections train to train and train to / from bus.

And finally
A big THANK YOU to our forum members for their inputs, and to the Department for Transport for inviting and considering our response.

Grahame, just a quick question.  When we like the post to add our signature to the document I assume you will adding our real names?  Personally I don't have a problem with that.

Grahame, thank you for doing this. Your conciseness will be welcomed by those who have to collate the responses. 

However could I suggest a slight clarification to the response to question 15:

"Ticket Vending Machines to offer lowest fare / combination and be clear on route and timing restrictions."

If anyone is going to cut and paste please note that (as someone who has had to collate and draft responses to consultations) responses that are worded exactly the same tend to receive less weight than those which, although they express the same views, do so in their own words.

Your views are therefore likely to carry more weight if you rewrite then in your own words. 

Question 12 might do with clarification? The DfT might wonder why we are asking for a cut in the number of seats but then request that everyone gets a seat. It is well known that services get crowded in holiday/summer

What do you mean by "West Fleet" I am not sure.

Thank you for that question.  I am planning to add forum names and NOT real names - otherwise we get really caught up in permissions, confidentiality and data protection stuff.  We don't even know some real names!

Where someone emails me as a lurker and asks to be added, that will need to be a checked identity with an audit trail like happens at the forum sign up process.

Thank you for that question.  I am planning to add forum names and NOT real names - otherwise we get really caught up in permissions, confidentiality and data protection stuff.  We don't even know some real names!

4. Please sign by 23:59 on Sunday, 18th February 2018 if you would like your forum name included on the signature list

Still a typo in the second paragraph. One of your usuals grahame.

advise instead of advice.  ;)

As noted earlier, although some forum members are happy for their real names to be included, some have not given any such indication and for consistency and clarity I have stuck with a standard format.  There is nothing to stop members writing in themselves with their real names with a copy of the .pdf and saying "I support this".

My understanding was that in liking the post we were agree to our real names being used.

Thank you for that question.  I am planning to add forum names and NOT real names - otherwise we get really caught up in permissions, confidentiality and data protection stuff.  We don't even know some real names!

Information provided in response to this consultation, including personal information, may be subject to publication or disclosure in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) or the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

●● If you want information that you provide to be treated as confidential, please be aware that, under the FOIA, there is a statutory Code of Practice with which public authorities must comply and which deals, amongst other things, with obligations of confidence.

●● In view of this it would be helpful if you could explain to us why you regard the information you have provided as confidential. If we receive a request for disclosure of the information, we will take full account of your explanation, but we cannot give an assurance that confidentiality can be maintained in all circumstances. An automatic confidentiality disclaimer generated by your IT system will not, of itself, be regarded as binding on the Department for Transport.

●● We will process your personal data in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 and in the majority of circumstances this will mean that your personal data will not be disclosed to third parties. Individual consultation responses may be shared with the current franchisee (and/or bidders in any future franchise competition) in an anonymised format to assist them in the development of their proposals for the future franchise.

●● By providing personal data in response to this consultation, you consent to the Department for Transport, or third parties contracted to the Department for Transport, processing your personal data for the purpose of analysing responses to this consultation.

●● It would be very helpful to the Department for Transport if, as part of its analysis of responses to this consultation, it was able to take into account certain sensitive personal data that you may wish to provide in response to this consultation, for example details of any disability you have. In providing your responses to the Department for Transport by email or post please indicate whether you consent to the Department for Transport, or third parties contracted to the Department for Transport, processing your sensitive personal data for the purposes of analysing responses to this consultation.

Final document with signatures added is at:

http://gwr.passenger.chat/gwf_cs_final.pdf
also works at
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/gwf_cs_final.pdf

and I will submit to DfT team via email at around this time (06:30) tomorrow.

Grahame, Just a quick thank you from me for taking time to put this all together on behalf of the forum.  I know how time consuming it can be doing that. 

My personal response has now been submitted

Duly submitted ... and I will follow up here with updates / notification of response.   I would expect little more than an automated acknowledgement, bearing in mind the volume I expect them to be getting - but bearing in mind interaction with the DfT team leading this consultation, I would be amazed (and disappointed) if we don't see any evidence of consultation inputs being used to word and shape tender invitations and indeed contracts that follow and are implemented.

It's nice to see Dennis the Menace still going strong after all these years. Not sure about his pink trousers though?

Those legal threats were baseless.....