Great Western Coffee Shop

First Great Western is on a month-by-month order to drastically improve - or ministers will pull the plug on its franchise (link below.)
http://thisissomerset.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=147472&command=displayContent&sourceNode=242195&contentPK=20305579&folderPk=113662&pNodeId=251478

That was the pledge from rail minister Tom Harris yesterday, after he met furious West MPs.

Each month - starting from April 1 - First Great Western's performance, and how effectively its improvement plans have been implemented, will be closely monitored at the very top of Government.

The tough monitoring period will last into the middle of 2009 - meaning that on the first day of every month for the next 15 months, First Great Western have to satisfy ministers in Whitehall that things are steadily improving.

I doubt they'll keep it up. While there is still single track on some congested lines and a Reading bottleneck, they have no chance for Expresses and Thames Valley. >:(

They might improve the West services though...... ;)

However, they have a chance if they don't mess up the timetable (again)! ;D

Quoting from my email / I have been asked to add:

"What Mr Harris forgets to tell us that this no new thing. All Train Operating Companies are requested to attend meetings with the Dft on a regular basis!"

Are they all on the first day of every month and only for the next 15 months, starting from April 1st?.........

If you have agreed an improvement plan then regular meetings to monitor how it was progressing would be a given in the circumstances I would have thought. As has been noted elsewhere on the forum things are gradually improving and FGW are making a lot of good noises. I thought the tone of the piece appeared to be a bit malicious given what^s been happening on the ground.

A bit of ^non^ news, I^d be very surprised if Andrew Haines signed up for something he didn^t think he could realistically deliver.

Whether the This Is Somerset piece is seen as malicious or not (not sure its any worse than other press articles I've seen, to be honest), I still felt that it was right to post the article link, given that it was something that forum members would obviously want to express an opinion on.

I also think that my own post on the nature of the meetings stands up, given that they are obviously not the run-of-the-mill type of meetings that grahame's e-mail correspondent hinted that they were.

As I noted elsewhere on the forum, I welcome the improvements made by FGW on the network so far, and look for them to go further.

Sorry Lee it wasn^t my intention to seem critical of the post as the article is of interest, just that when I read it the first impression was that it portrays the fact that meetings are taking place in a very negative way, but as you say it^s not much different to other reports regarding FGW performance.

It just riled a bit that the author was giving the impression that meetings were to take place as further evidence of problems when it really should come as no surprise, and might even be welcomed by the company.

I was just wondering if there was any significance in the 15 months, approx 1 month into the May 2009 timetable.

No problem, tramway. I thought i'd better put something up clarification-wise, that's all.

You raise an interesting final point, as May in both 2008 and 2009 could be seen as being significant.

May 2008 :

- The 3-coach Portsmouth-Cardiff units are due to "officially" come in.

- Several timetable improvements are due to be introduced, not least on the Severn Beach line.

- The DfT are due to publish a 10-year plan for First Great Western.

May 2009 :

According to vacman, some lines are due to see major improvements, with Gunnislake mentioned as an example.

I think the answer to that question could well be found in the article links quoted below :



Although First seem keen to deny this type of view, it could actually be a very "good news story" for them. The timescale fits in with the 15 month monitoring period set by the DfT, and could suggest that their is no immediate prospect of them losing their franchise.

The timescale also ends at the time that the extra units allocated by the DfT in their rolling stock plan are likely to be transferred to FGW, and it would be natural for the department to be absolutely sure that they are sticking with FGW before that rolling stock transfer takes place.

So why are First so keen to deny this type of view? My guess is that the following have something to do with it :


First would naturally want to stamp out any panic in the ranks as quickly as possible.


"Reputational damage" is largely down to how passengers, politicians and the media view FGW every time something goes wrong. Yes, we can have intelligent and valid discussions about the DfT, Network Rail and others role in this, but at the end of the day, it is FGW's name on the side of the trains.

The DfT (and indeed all government departments) watch how such issues affect public opinion, and place particular weight on the media coverage that results.

It will be interesting to see what effect any slip-ups have on FGW's position in the next 15 months.