The basis for the consultation - key objectives - are they the right ones?

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Six key objectives have been endorsed by the Secretary of State. They are to:

* Effectively manage franchise changes by working with the Department and other industry partners to ensure that the Great Western upgrade, Crossrail project works and future transfer of services to the Crossrail operator, and the IEP^▸ (Intercity Express Program / Project.) procurement programmes are successfully delivered and the benefits envisaged are fully realised;

* Provide appropriate capacity for passenger services which is affordable, and delivers value for money for the taxpayer within defined infrastructure and rolling stock constraints on the Great Western network;

* Ensure the overall passenger experience improves throughout the life of the franchise. This will include but not be limited to improvements in: service quality; retailing; provision of information to customers particularly during times of planned and unplanned disruption; implementing ^smart^ technology and integrated ticketing throughout the franchise area on an interoperable basis; improving accessibility (including disabled access) to stations and services; passenger security and improving the transparency of information about the franchise;

* Ensure that train services perform to the highest practical reliability and punctuality standards, aiming to be amongst the most reliable and punctual services on the national network. Benchmark and optimise the overall environmental performance and minimise the carbon footprint for the franchise;

* Deliver services in the most cost-effective and efficient manner possible, and where appropriate consider improving the alignment between Network Rail and the franchise in keeping with the recommendations of the McNulty Report; and

* Consider the possible devolution of some specification or management of services and improve local accountability and assist the implementation of this devolution where appropriate.

From: Great Western Franchise Replacement Consultation
Republished here under: Open Government License

QUESTION (1)

"Respondents are encouraged to consider whether the proposed franchise objectives are an appropriate expression of the priorities that should apply to the new franchise."

[Trowres]

I'm not too surprised that this question has so far received zero feedback. This is a pity, as it deserves more attention.

[ellendune]

* Provide appropriate capacity for passenger services which is affordable, and delivers value for money for the taxpayer within defined infrastructure and rolling stock constraints on the Great Western network;

It also has to deliver value for money for the passenger.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Indeed: what is 'appropriate capacity' for passenger services?

Is it 'most people seated, most of the time', or 'sardine conditions are inevitable, given defined infrastructure and rolling stock constraints'?

 

[grahame]

I'm not too surprised that this question has so far received zero feedback. This is a pity, as it deserves more attention.

This is - indeed - the most important question in the consultation because it sets the strategy under which individual cases will be considered.

A couple of comments to start some discussions rolling here ...

a) I note "Six key objectives have been endorsed by the Secretary of State", but the question asks "whether the proposed franchise objectives are an appropriate expression of the priorities" ... so we're not actually being asked what the objectives should be - that's already been decided for us by government policy.  We're just being asked if they're correctly worded

b) "Provide appropriate capacity for passenger services which is affordable" ... is unclear.  Is this saying affordable by the passengers, or by the taxpayer?  It seems to be the only possible reference to keeping fares at a level which does not price people off rail, and it certainly does not seem to herald any suggestion to encourage additional traffic by having really attractive fares.

c) It talks about "highest practical reliability and punctuality standards" but is does NOT go on to add "with trains scheduled at times to meet the travel requirements of the area served", nor does it make any mention of journey times.   So it appears to endorse the 06:12 Swindon to Salisbury, which these days is reliable (because there's nothing in the preceeding hours to get in the way) and punctual (as it has some 12 minutes of slack in it schedule) in preference to an 08:52 service which would be fare more useful, but probably more frequently delayed if anything went wrong during the morning rush hour, and in preference to any magic "3 hour" scheduled trains from Plymouth to London.

[grahame]

It's ... rather interesting that we're getting very few comments on the overall objectives of the next franchise, and far more on certain specific issues.  Perhaps I should widen this even further to look at the objectives of the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) as a whole ...

The Department for Transport has four strategic objectives:
* sustain economic growth and improved productivity through reliable and efficient transport networks;
* improve the environmental performance of transport;
* strengthen the safety and security of transport; and
* enhance access to jobs, services and social networks, including for the most disadvantaged people.

[eightf48544]

within defined infrastructure and rolling stock constraints on the Great Western network;


Sums it up for me, it says don't bother thinking about offering a 2 hourly service to Melksham or a Bristol Oxford service or any other major improvements, there isn't the rolling stock and or infrastruccture to cope unless you cut back on other services to release stock.

You will also notice that objective 3 states:

[/b]Ensure the overall passenger experience improves throughout the life of the franchise. This will include but not be limited to improvements in: service quality with no real definition of service quality. The other things in 3 I would call cosmetic.

What is No 6 about? Transfer Swindon Control to India?

 

[paul7575]

What is No 6 about? Transfer Swindon Control to India?

Devolved control away from DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) to local authorities I think, in the context given...

Paul

[BandHcommuter]

I found that the Initial Industry Plan (published last September) http://www.networkrail.co.uk/IIP.aspx provided some interesting context around the key objectives. To quote from the executive summary:

The Secretary of State for Transport has stated that rail should be at the forefront of
the Government^s transport strategy ^ contributing to the Coalition^s twin goals of
economic growth and carbon reduction. However he has also made it clear that the
current cost of the railway is unsustainable as highlighted by Sir Roy McNulty^s Rail
Value for Money study.
....

A more affordable railway provides government with the opportunity to consider the
choices ^ and the appropriate balance ^ between fares, investment and subsidy in
specifying the outputs and funding for the railway.

Others have questioned the definitions and criteria for affordability and value for money. The industry appears to be suggesting that affordability can be improved without adversely affecting customer facing outputs, so the organisations must be looking at ways to reduce the unit costs of undertaking their core business. If this is the case, the good news is that the business cases for service enhancements are easier to prove, the cost denominator in the equation being lower for the same level of benefit. It is therefore important that options for the new franchise are appraised whilst taking into account the projected cost efficiencies which the industry appears committed to deliver.

"Appropriate" capacity is another interesting one. Does appropriate mean everyone getting a seat in the peak, or an acceptance that there will be large numbers of passengers standing for journeys of half an hour or more? Is an appropriate level of standing different in the London area from the Bristol area? It will be interesting to see if the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) bites the bullet and defines crowding standards in the franchise specification and/or HLOS^▸ (High Level Output Specification), and what the cost will be of providing the capacity which they deem "appropriate". Capacity which is only going to be used in the peak must surely have a high net cost compared with that which is earning money all day.

Sorry, just rambling a bit there...