Great Western Coffee Shop

Meeting, this evening, at Pewsey on the Westbury / Pewsey to London concerns for the future:

http://www.wiltshiretimes.co.uk/news/9964074.Rail_users_plan_to_keep_high_speed_trains_through_Westbury/?ref=rss

I attended the meeting last night - a packed hall in Pewsey (far more than they expected), with representatives from the Bedwyn group, and from Westbury, and the West Wilts Rail Users Group amongst others.

Concerns on their web site - http://www.pewseytrainwatch.co.uk/ - and more will follow there.


Few if any members of the groups had been aware of the Greater Western Franchise consultation in January to March.  However, they are now aware of the pause in bidding process and that the October date is no longer the date on which bids are to be submitted.

I don't see how they can draw that conclusion at all (regarding the "likelihood" of having to change at Newbury). Why on earth would a new operator wish to give up the opportunity to serve highly lucrative through passenger traffic from Westbury and Pewsey to London (especially when they have to run a certain number of trains between Exeter and Paddington, and serve Westbury and Pewsey with a minimum number of calls each day)?

I guess that the user group is looking for absolute certainty in the specification, which as it stands gives operators some freedom as to the manner in which they serve individual passenger markets.

The way that the ITT is drawn up, there's little absolute certainty ... and that's not just on the Berks and Hants.    I think I commented on the "Heart of Wessex" board that if the next franchise runs an extra daily train to Weymouth, they could cut out all stops (bar 2 a day each way) at Thornford and Chetnole, for example.   Of course, some may consider that suggestion a statistical nonsense and something they wouldn't do ... you would think that the bidders would want to do right by the stakeholders / users in the area served by thelines they operate, right?

But history has shown that such assumptions can be dangerous. 

In 2005, the SLC2 for the service between Westbury and Swindon was drafted as being 2 trains each way per day, with one arriving into Swindon between 08:00  (change to 07:45 soon after publication) and 08:30, and one leaving between 17:30 and 19:00, with (I am told) the intent or providing a useful commuter service from Westbury, Trowbridge and Melksham into Swindon.  Under the prior service, a busy 2 coach train arrived in Swindon at around 08:15, and a busy one left on the return journey at 17:44.  These trains also picked dropped off (a.m.) people at Chippenham, both to work there and to transfer from Melksham onwards to Bristol for work, with opposite return in the evening.  The return working of these trains (from Swindon at about 08:44, and back into Swindon at about 17:35) provided a sensible commuter usable train from Swindon and Chippenham to Melksham and Trowbridge, and a long distance connection for business people from London to Melksham and Trowbridge.  So common sense for the local stakeholders in the area would have been to retain these two round trips

What happened?  The 08:15 arrival into Swindon got pushed earlier to 07:48, and the 17:44 departure got pushed back an hour later to 18:44; with an extra 90 minutes on the day, the well filled 2 car trains became much more thinly used.  The 08:44 from Swindon got pushed back to run earlier - at 06:20, long before anyone on a normal working day would want to be able to commute to Melksham or Trowbridge, and before there was a connection from London, even if someone wanted to try the train for a business trip.  And the 17:35 arrival was moved later - to 20:20 - an unsuitable time for commuters and business men alike. So in this instance, the new timetable was in line with the franchise requirement, but out of step with the intent of the requirement and with the needs of existing and potential future passengers.

Now - I have no reason to believe that any of the four companies bidding for the current franchise intent to read the specification for the Berks and Hants line in such a way that it provides such a travesty of a proper service as happened on the TransWilts, but I don't believe it can do any harm for the people of Bedwyn, Pewsey, Westbury (and Kintbury, Hungerford, Frome and Castle Cary too) to make it strongly known what would and would not work in the area, looking to make practical suggestions. 

All the bidders are (or rather have been) listening, and the delay caused by the West Coast stuff actually gives a short window of opportunity for them to make their case.   Normally, I would expect a billions-of-pounds bid that's been a year in the development to have been pretty close to complete by now - three weeks before submission - and any dramatic inputs to go into the file marked "interesting but too late to change what we've offered";  now there could be a chance that they trigger something.  I still don't think that a trigger's needed (I think the bidders probably have the line right), but it does no harm to ask and to make the case, I think.




Edit note: Amended to remove a one word typo, for clarity, as discussed with grahame. CfN. :)

From the Wiltshire Gazette & Herald (http://www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/towns/marlboroughheadlines/10022966._/?):

Is the Greater Western bid going ahead? I thought it was delayed due to the West Coast Fiasco!

Whatever delays there are would surely be unlikely to result in the actual service specification being altered? 

Also doesn't really alter the fact that these objections are probably too late - as has been discussed previously the most vocal objectors always seem to come to the fore AFTER the consultation period has finished...

Paul

Good point Paul about objections coming too late, but that's due to the rediculous timescales for the whole firago.

So how about reversing the franchising process? TOCS bid what they are prepared to run, based on improvements to the current timetable, new services eg Gloucester Weymouth via Swindon, increased frequencies etc.  what stock they would require (train lengths etc) plus any improvements and capital investment. The bids are then put out for public consultation. You could then put all the best ideas from each bid together as the spec and ask the bidders to cost running that level of service. The costs would then be based on a level playing field.
 
Treasury wouldn't like it but it would probably be cheaper all round.

So you ask bidders to put together their best ideas - that will cost them alot of money to work out - and then they are handed to their opponents for them to bid against them.  That really going to bring out the best ideas isn't it. 

I disagree about the 'ridiculous timescales'.  There's basically been a continuous re-iteration of plans for 'the railway' across various documents such as route plans, RUSs (to be replaced by some sort of long term plan process), franchise specs, DfT HLOS/SofA etc.  Everything is subject to consultation of some sort or another, and organisations and individuals with a real opportunity to inform opinion, such as MPs, local authorites, county councils etc, are firmly 'in the loop', as can be seen from distribution lists contained in the various consultations I've read.

It is minor local lobby groups who nearly always appear late to the party and pretend for the local paper's benefit that no-one was forewarned...

Paul

I agree

OK supposing each bidder comes up with a different new idea which because they are in the bid must seem viable to the bidders and would either increase their premium or reduce the subsidy.

How do you chose the "best"? Then disard 3 other viable "new ideas".

I believe First put in through trains from Bolton (and other places) in their WCML bid, which Virgin didn't, will DaFT  put those in the new  specification? Does anyone know if there were any other new ideas in the other two bids? 

As for local groups not realising consultation is going on were they told? Did they understand the implications of the documents.

I couldn't understand the implications for   stopping pattern of trains at  Taplow in the consultation document! Maybe I'm thick but it's not terribly obvious being in the form of the number of stops but not for one station but groups. See another post somewhere where someone kindly tried to explain to me.

Andrew Murrison, MP, will be at Westbury Station tomorrow morning at 08:20 for an "event" (that's the word I'm given).  Probably to talk to commuters and help raise the profile of the issue ...

Hmm. ::)

At the moment, I can't find any press coverage of that 'event' - and there's no mention of it on Andrew Murrison MP's own website, either.  :-\