MPs debate new GW franchise

[whole diary]

[RichardB]

Following on from Chris's post http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=10021.0,  these comments came during a debate in Westminster Hall (basically the "overflow" to the main House of Commons chamber) about the new GW^▸ (Great Western) franchise held on Tuesday.

The transcript of the whole debate is well worth reading and I think most Coffee Shop visitors will be pleased at what was discussed, the well informed united front presented by SW MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) of all parties and the assurances given so far by Theresa Villiers, the Rail Minister.

The debate was initiated by Sarah Newton, the MP for Truro and Falmouth and a lot of MPs took part.  Particularly relevant to me were Ms Newton herself, both Plymouth MPs and the MPs for South East Cornwall and Camborne & Redruth. 

You can read the transcript here

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111220/halltext/111220h0001.htm#11122039000001

and watch the debate here

http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=9666&st=09:30:25

[Chris from Nailsea]

Thanks very much for posting that, Richard. 

[Tim]

Pleased to note that Chippenham's MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) mentioned Melksham and the Trans-wiltshire line.

I was impressed by  the general level of knowledge of MPs about the issues facing their areas.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Chippenham's MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) is indeed very knowledgeable about Melksham and the TransWilts Line - and he is a member of this forum. 

[grahame]

Chippenham's MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) is indeed very knowledgeable about Melksham and the TransWilts Line - and he is a member of this forum. 

Duncan Hames is very well informed indeed.  Here is what he said:

20th December 2011. Westmister Hall debate on First Great Western Rail Franchise

Duncan Hames (Chippenham) (LD): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Sarah Newton) on securing the debate. I share the commitment of the hon. Member for Plymouth, Moor View (Alison Seabeck) that the Members of Parliament for the region covered by First Great Western will not be caught out in the franchise renewal, because that was certainly the experience of my constituents, in particular in Melksham, albeit before my constituency was created. Under the current franchise, a popular and well used service was cut to only two trains each way a day, and those trains run at times that are totally impractical for anyone hoping to use them for a sensible commute for a humane working week. I am determined that that should not be allowed to happen under the new franchise, but that instead we will see the franchise get Wiltshire moving and help people in my constituency to use the railways to get to work.

Three key, interrelated factors make a difference to the railway experience and to the potential of the railways to serve my constituents: service frequency, capacity and connections. Connections are an important solution to the conundrum, because they create the opportunity to relieve capacity and overcrowding in capacity bottlenecks and to increase the journey options, thereby disproportionately increasing service frequency for communities. In Wiltshire, we could have a few particular opportunities under the new franchise.

The railways Minister is more than familiar with the TransWilts rail service, which I have raised with her on countless occasions in the past 18 months. I am sure that she was as pleased as I at the success over the summer of the TransWilts rail partnership trial of extra Sunday services between Westbury and Swindon via Melksham. The take-up and the feedback on the service were good, and next year the partnership hopes to extend the trial to between May and mid-September. The TransWilts campaign group has comprehensive research behind it, demonstrating not only the need for more services but their cost-effectiveness and the strong support from the business community in our area for improved services through Melksham. The franchise specification process is an ideal opportunity to build upon that work; no line in the south-west region is better prepared for an expansion in services, having enjoyed them so recently, until the current franchise.

I was encouraged by the Government^s willingness to listen to us about the problems of overcrowding in my area, and chiefly by the prospect of additional capacity on the Cardiff to Portsmouth line which runs through Bradford-on-Avon in my constituency. There was certainly progress last Monday, when First Great Western announced two extra carriages on the 07.30 from Cardiff to Portsmouth, but only as far as Bristol Temple Meads. Unfortunately, that will not benefit Bradford-on-Avon passengers, who are still frequently unable to board trains or, even when they get on a train, to get a seat. That problem is not unique to Bradford-on-Avon or to my constituency; I often travel on First Great Western on Sundays and it is astonishing that even on Sunday afternoons it is not uncommon to find that one cannot get a seat on a First Great Western service into Paddington. Demand locally has risen well above the national level of growth, and I implore the Minister to consider overcrowding once more in further franchise specifications. I would appreciate her reassurance that in the Great Western franchise renewal process, bidders^ proposed efficiency measures will not be looked upon favourably if they involve cutting carriages and reducing seats. Franchisees should be required to deal with overcrowding not by pushing down demand with increased fares but by increasing capacity. Central Government can help by simplifying the rolling stock allocation system.

I have corresponded with the Minister about the opportunities presented by the new franchise, in particular on the prospect of services between Oxford and Bristol. I welcome the Chancellor^s support in the autumn statement for services between Oxford and Bedford, which will improve connections between west and east as far as Cambridge. There is a wonderful opportunity, on existing railway infrastructure, to extend the potential of such services with an Oxford to Bristol service under the Great Western franchise. Quite aside from the benefits of linking such high value-added university economies, there is also the opportunity of the reopening of Corsham station, which would be served by trains on that route.

Moneys have been set aside under section 106 agreements for redeveloping Corsham station, but progress has been slow and a real risk is that the developments seeking to contribute to improved railway infrastructure will have happened too long ago to draw upon. A commitment on Corsham station early in the course of the new franchise would be welcome. It should be noted that the road infrastructure often benefits from section 106 agreements. Substantial development of housing and employment sites around Melksham in my constituency has included funding for distributor roads and even a small bypass but, in that time, not a penny has been contributed to the rail infrastructure on which those same homes and businesses will depend.

I want to touch on the role of local authorities in the franchise renewal process. For a Government who believe in localism, it is important to ensure that the democratic voice of local areas is heard when determining the new specifications for the franchise. Liberal Democrat councillors in Wiltshire recently tabled a motion noting the opportunities that the stakeholder consultation presents for improving the county^s rail network. They welcomed the Minister^s encouragement to the council to

^discuss the potential for a Corsham station and a new Oxford-Bristol service with all bidders for the franchise^.

Welcoming the motion, the holder of the council^s public transport portfolio noted that, traditionally, the council has had nothing to do with the railways but that it now had clear objectives to include in the new franchise a number of the local schemes which I have mentioned this morning.

We could make the improved TransWilts service permanent. The council is bidding for ^5 million from the local sustainable transport fund. I hope that the Department will look favourably on the innovation of that bid, and its value in connecting three mainline services across the county and therefore dramatically improving the options for journey planning for my constituents by linking services calling at Westbury, Trowbridge, Melksham, Chippenham and Swindon on existing railway infrastructure. The council is certainly determined to support an Oxford-Bristol service, which would allow new stations at Corsham and^I am sure this will interest hon. Members from Swindon who are present^Royal Wootton Bassett, which would be more accessible for some of their constituents than existing services at Swindon.

I am encouraged by the council^s willingness to engage with the Government, and I am keen to hear from the Minister how she plans to reciprocate that willingness to engage, and what mechanisms she is considering to incorporate in the specification process the views and recommendations of local authorities, and of the hon. Members who have come to this debate. I look forward to hearing her thoughts on that.

The bolding is mine alone, concentrating on the elements about which I have personal knowledge (and wishing I could have written them as well.

[JayMac]

From The Oxford Times:

Oxford-Bristol rail link wins backing

Calls to resurrect a direct train service between Oxford and Bristol are gaining support as the future of the Great Western franchise is debated.

The suggestion, floated by a West Country MP^▸ (Member of Parliament), has been backed by an Oxfordshire railway users^ group.

A direct service between the two cities, via Swindon, existed for about five years, but was stopped in 2003, according to Chris Wright from the Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire Rail Action Committee. Mr Wright said: ^In a debate in Parliament, Duncan Hames, the MP for Chippenham, suggested that an Oxford to Bristol service should be reintroduced as part of the franchise.

^He also went on to say it could be part of the East West Rail project from Milton Keynes to Oxford on which we have been campaigning for for 25 years.^

He added: ^We think reinstating the service to Bristol would make a logical extension to that service. We would be delighted to see it.^

At present, the journey time between Bristol and Oxford is about one hour and 40 minutes, with a change at Didcot.

But Mr Wright said that could be cut by about 15 minutes on a direct train.

He said in addition to the time saved and convenience, the service would open up the possibility of reintroducing passenger services in and out of the Wantage Road Station in Grove, which ceased in the 1960s.

Speaking in a debate about the Great Western rail franchise at Westminster Hall on December 20, Liberal Democrat MP Mr Hames said he would welcome the reintroduction of a direct route between Oxford and Swindon.

He said: ^There is a wonderful opportunity, on existing railway infrastructure, to extend the potential of such services with an Oxford to Bristol service under the Great Western franchise.^

He said linking ^high-value university economies^ such as Oxford and Bristol would also bring major benefits.

First Great Western was awarded a seven-year contract in 2006 to run rail services between London, the Thames Valley, the Cotswolds, the West of England and South Wales.

But it has not taken up an optional three-year extension and its initial seven-year term ends in March 2013.

The Department for Transport is now drawing up a specification for the franchise.

Passengers can submit their ideas by March 31.

[Btline]

This service was axed in 2003/4 during the Alistair Darling cuts (or to "ease congestion")? The decision was slammed at the time.

It would be good though, as it would enable some Swindon calls to be axed from London - Bristol trains. It would require EW rail to be electrified, something which I doubt will happen!

[ChrisB]

Why?

[eightf48544]

Just for clarification March 2013 is given as the end of teh current franchise. I thought I'd read that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has ben given an extension until Dec 2013 or is old age catching up on me.

[super tm]

Just for clarification March 2013 is given as the end of teh current franchise. I thought I'd read that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has ben given an extension until Dec 2013 or is old age catching up on me.

Definitely no exstension to Dec.  They may extend it by 6 weeks to take it past easter as there is a major blockade over easter 2013

[Btline]

Why?

Good point, the trains could run under the wires from OXF^» (Oxford - next trains), wasn't thinking - too early in the morning.

[grahame]

Just for clarification March 2013 is given as the end of teh current franchise. I thought I'd read that FGW^▸ (First Great Western) has ben given an extension until Dec 2013 or is old age catching up on me.

Definitely no exstension to Dec.  They may extend it by 6 weeks to take it past easter as there is a major blockade over easter 2013

I would anticipate that the new franchise would continue to run the timetable it took over until the December 2013 timetable change, as happened when First took over the Wessex Trains / Network Express operation on 1st April 2006, but didn't cut back on change stock and services until the December.

[paul7575]

Regarding timetabling, Dec 2014 is the date for the current timetable to finish, as it is the first opportunity for the new franchisee based on normal planning headways:

The timetable proposal for the December 2013 timetable change will already have been made by the time the new operator takes over the franchise, so changes to the inherited train service are unlikely to occur before the timetable change date in December 2014.

This is comparable with recent franchise changes AFAICS^▸ (As Far As I Can See), major changes can only take place in a December, as May is just for tidying up and bringing in summer alterations/extras.

Paul

[ChrisB]

Yup, that's what I reckon too.

[Btline]

That's why it's annoying when a new franchisee takes over in November (like LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise)) as there are no changes for over a year! At least EC did Eureka in May.

We should move away from this stupid EU^» (European Union - about) rigid system and changes the timetable when WE want, and not some unelected Eurocrat in Brussels wants us to. I hardly think the "overlap" between E* and SE h/s is sufficient to warrant the current arrangement, even if you throw a couple of Thalyses or ICEs this way.