Great Western Coffee Shop

Well, here's a thing!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/01/31/labour-pledge-renationalising-rail-starmer-woos-business/

The total of the management fees paid to TOCs basically, but allowing the TOC contracts to expire without renewal.

Has anyone found an up to date list of TOCs and their current management contract expiry dates?

Kind of old news City AM Monday 26 September 2022  https://www.cityam.com/labour-re-commits-to-nationalising-rail-if-it-wins-the-next-election/

The railway will still have auditors and accountants to sort out train delays etc.

Do away with train delay culture,if a train develops a train fault,or if the signaler can give the train a green light,so be it.

I should imagine that most of us have been on a platform when a train fault is attempting to be rectified.

Train crew are wound up like coiled springs,trying to answer there phones and dealing with passengers at the same.

This came up last month: Railway Codes does seem to keep its list up to date (http://www.railwaycodes.org.uk/operators/franchises3.shtm). For TOCs that have other forms of contract, including OLRs, use their link to Rail franchise operators (http://www.railwaycodes.org.uk/operators/franchises1.shtm).

I think I'd rather have First running GWR - at least they've got an incentive to get the job done rather than politicians and DfT wonks that will sacrifice the west for Labour heartlands in the north of England

My guess is Labour will use the opportunity of GBR Bill to enable the "bringing in house" of the ToC's, I suspect they are more likely to go for the management type contracts first than a whole sale re Nationalisation.  They will use break clauses in franchise contracts than just terminating without compensation to avoid challenges in the Courts.

Political rhetoric in a lead up to a GE is one thing the practical delivery of a policy after the GE is another

This is the most important aspect.  I have very little faith that any party will do what they promise they will.

I'd like to understand what differences would customers notice if the TOCs were renationalised and how would it improve the service they receive?

Is anyone here able to clarify that?

Naturally, all trains would run on time.
Network Rail would have as much money as they required.
Spare coaches; engines and sets in sidings ready for duplicates.
What more would you want!!!!!!!!!
It goes without saying that full catering/buffet cars on all InterCity runs.

You are Mick Lynch and I claim my £5.

* Train crew available to operate those spare train sets.
* Government and workforce working hand in hand with everyone include the passengers happy.
* Staff at all stations to help provide the best value tickets and re-assure / inform passengers
* Trains to run with an appropriate frequency and line with the capacity to allow that
* Affordable fares and encouragement to that long distance journeys shift from road and from flying

The TOCs have been adequately compensated already.

The schedule 8 payments would stop funding the bubbly at the share holders meeting and the excessive salaries paid to the senior executives of the TOCs, and just be used for the delay repay to passengers.  The savings would mean either increased funding in renewals and enhancements or lower fares for passengers.
The ability of the infrastructure maintainer to have access to the track for essential repairs around the last few trains at night without having to compensate TOCs again will be a great saving, the only cost would be providing the alternative transport for passengers (there will still be governance over this so it will not be a free for all for the infrastructure maintainer)
Better coordination of timetabling, easier to alter the service area of a passenger train service provider

........another thing of course - there would be guaranteed industrial harmony, no more strikes or disputes, with Union Leaders and Ministers joyfully linking arms, marching forwards together onto broad, sunlit uplands, and an immediate agreement outlawing BBQs on Sundays!

It will be nice to see the new uniforms.

In all likelyhood, the difference we will see will be dictated by the whims of the government at the time and thus changes every 5 years. 

Currently, we have one of the most anti-rail PMs in office.  I don't believe there will be wholesale reform of fares, services or stock under any government spending plan.  If the railways were fully nationalised today, the service would probably be remarkedly worse than it is.

And I don't really understand why Mick Lynch wants to see the railways fully under government control.  Disputes will become more frequent as public servants.  Or maybe that is why.

Nationalisation is therefore not a panacea.

The GBR model is for the trains to be operated by the private sector under a management contract, the stations will be branded GBR.   The services will be "operated by xyz on behalf of GBR" same model as London Overground and Elizabeth Line

Its unlikely a Labour Government will depart from the above GBR model, it brings the overall control under one wholly Government owned company, but leave room for competitive tendering of the service provision to manage costs

It's interesting (telling?) that a week has gone by and yet despite considerable clamour from some quarters for renationalisation, no-one has been able to articulate how it would improve service for customers.

I did enjoy some of the witty replies though!  :)

The honest answer…

Given the number of known unknowns, and no doubt a few unknown unknowns, I thought it too broad a question and didn’t consider it worth the effort of putting time into a reply.

"Yes, Minister"/"Yes, Prime Minister"

Tonight Matthew, IndustryInsider will be........Sir Humphrey Appleby!

Hacker and Sir Humphrey would no doubt be able to do a much more competent job than the current shower!  ;)

You might be able to buy a second-class return to the sunlit uplands, I suppose. Younger members of this forum may be surprised to learn that even in the glory days of British Rail, there were times that a train didn't run/didn't run properly/was overcrowded/broke down. I think it would have been 1974 when I heard the announcement, presumably on the announcer's last shift before retirement, that the train to Weybridge had been cancelled "because of a bloody cock-up", so it wasn't all as rosy as the tint in some folks' hindsight spectacles. Even before privatisation, it was common to have a whole smorgasbord of fares on offer to confuse or confound the traveller.

Privatisation may or may not have saved the railway or made it better, that's a debate for another day. Passenger numbers have soared since then, but whether that was because of or in spite of privatisation is anyone's guess. It follows that nobody can really say what renationalising the industry will do for standards. The one thing that will change if it happens is the blame game. At present, your journey can be affected by the actions or omissions of either the train operator whose train you caught or expected to catch, or the actions of omissions of another ToC, or the network operator, or a third-party contractor, and so on. If the railway is a single entity, then in the absence of sabotage, the fault for your inconvenience lies with that single entity. They can send your money back, and won't have to work out who should pay what contribution to the refund.

Succinctly then, Delay/Repay would be dealt with centrally.

The one thing that is the same today as with the BR days is that the Treasury has a tight reign on costs and no interest in growing the business to increase income. Whatever changes are to come this micro managed control on costs - rather than bottom line - must be resisted otherwise we will be back into the managed decline of the BR days. 

Not just managed decline, but also the distortions that come from the inevitable politicisation of investment. Money will go to big ticket projects in politicians' favourite areas, whilst rural stations will fall to bits for want of a few quid spending on them and no-one will be interested in investment for "posh southerners" in places like Somerset, Devon and Cornwall - even though most of us know how sorely it's needed.

Incidentally, roughly 100 stations have been added to the UK rail network since 2000. For all that its investment in rail is lauded, the figure for France is something like 82, but they are almost all Metro, tram, RER and TGV. A quick look at the list of openings suggests there's almost nothing suburban/rural, though perhaps there's less to reopen as there was less closed?

The German figure is better at 118. 

Always worth remembering that any proposed form of "renationalisation" will not recreate a fully integrated BR in the previously accepted sense. Labour is really only talking about nationalising the passenger TOC's (when contracts expire) and perhaps integrating them better with Network Rail to form ?GBR.

Large parts of the overall rail operation are now fully in private hands and unlikely to be brought into public ownership. These include ROSCO's + suppliers of new trains with/without maintenance contracts, infrastructure contractors, repair workshops, freight operations, open access passenger operators.

[/quote]


Incidentally, roughly 100 stations have been added to the UK rail network since 2000. For all that its investment in rail is lauded, the figure for France is something like 82, but they are almost all Metro, tram, RER and TGV. A quick look at the list of openings suggests there's almost nothing suburban/rural, though perhaps there's less to reopen as there was less closed?

The German figure is better at 118. 
[/quote]


That's genuinely very interesting, really had no idea we'd gained 100 stations in the last 20 years.

Gets lost in the background noise while people make waves about inconsequential closures such as at Newhaven Marine…

Paul

The numbers do add up ... I have just been through Wikipedia and added one or two not in their lists ..

2000
Brighouse
Dunfermline Queen Margaret
Lea Green
Warwick Parway
Wavertree Technology Park

2001
Howood

2002
Beauly
Brunstane
Newcraighall
Sampford Courtney
Sunderland

2003
Chandler's Ford
Edinburgh Park

2005
Chatelherault
Gartcosh
Glasshoughton
Kelvindale
Larkhall
Llantwit Major
Merryton
Rhoose

2006
Liverpool South Parkway

2007
Coleshill Parkway
Ebbsfleet International
Llanharan

2008
Alloa
Aylesbury Vale Parkway
Crosskeys
Ebbw Vale Parkway
Heathrow Terminal 5
Llanhilleth
Mitcham Eastfields
Newbridge
Risca
Rogerstone
Shephers Bush

2009
Corby
East Midlands Parkway
Imperial Wharf
Laurencekirk
Stratford International
Workington North

2010
Bathgate
Blackridge
Dalston Junction
Haggerston
Hoxton
Shoreditch High Street

2011
Armadale
Buckshaw Parkway
Caldercruix
Drumgelloch
Southenc Airport

2012
Fishguard and Goodwick

2013
Conon Bridge
Energlyn and Churchill Park
Stratford-upon-Avon Parkway

2014
James Cook
Pye Corner

2015
Apperley Bridge
Bicester Village
Cranbook
Ebbw Vale Town
Eskbank
Galashiels
Gorebridge
Islip
Newcourt
Newtongrange
Oxford Parkway
Shawfair
Stow
Tweedbank

2016
Bermuda Park
Covetry Arena
Edinburgh Gateway
Kirstall Forge
Lea Bridge

2017
Cambridge North
Ilkeston
Low Moor

2018
Kenilworth
Maghull North

2019
Meridian Water
Robroyston
South Shields Interchange
Warrington West

2020
Horden
Kintore
Worcestershire Parkway

2021
Bow Street
Okehampton
Soham

2022
Barking Riverside
Canary Wharf
Reston
Woolwich

2023
Brent Cross West
East Linton
Headbolt Lane
Inverness Airport
Marsh Barton
Portway Park and Ride
Reading Green Park
Thanet Parkway

One or two from the Wikipedia lists are, in my view, questionable as to whether they should be listed or not for various reasons.

Over that period it is very telling how percentage wise, when you take into account populations, England is so far behind Wales and Scotland- though it’s good to see a slight shift in that trend over the last five or so years.

Nice page on openings here: https://trundleage.co.uk/timeline-of-openings/ (https://trundleage.co.uk/timeline-of-openings/)

14 planned for 2024 (assuming they all open on time), almost all in England including three new lines (Levenmouth, Camp Hill, Northumberland)

The South Wales upgrade is going to be stunning, though its way over budget.

I don't think we should underestimate just how much the rest of the network has improved over the last couple of years either e.g. Bristol to Gloucester half hourly service.

 

Perhaps a reminder that good news is soon forgotten and bad news is remembered for a long, long time.  Sadly, a warning to he who dares sort of the fare system creating winners who will forget) and losers (who will remember for the next general election, and perhaps the one after that).

Yes, I am aware (and was reminded) of the prevelance of new stations in Scotland and Wales.  Intermediate stations on  the Borders line and the line to Ebbw Vale made quite some difference, of course; we just need a single re-opening in England (that won't be happening, I know) from Okehampton to Padstow with all its intermediates, and the pendulum could swing.  Or adding back on to the network Norton Fitzwarren, Bishop's Lydeard, Crowcombe, Stogumber, Williton, Watchet, Washford, Blue Anchor, Dunster, Butlins and Minehead Central ...

Wellington and Cullompton are relatively low-hanging fruit. Ashley Down should be open later this year - as should Portishead and Pill, although not yet. The 2020s could beat the first two decades of the millennium.

The Labour Party have broken cover on their plans for the railways. They will nationalise all TOCs as and when their contracts end. However, they have no plans to nationalise the RoSCos. Rolling stock will remain in the private sector.

www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68889345

Shadow Secretary of State for Transport Louise Haigh is due to make the announcement today, 26th April 2024.

Excellent news. Of course, the tories have poured scorn on the plan. Saying it is pointless and uncosted. We are over three years on from the Great British Railways announcement, and nearly six years since the Williams review was announced, and only at the stage of a draft bill, with legislation unlikely before the general election. They can find the money for new and interesting ways to kill people (£2.5bn for 'defence' announced this week). And can find parliamentary time to force through expensive and unnecessary legislation to send refugees to a tinpot dictatorship. Yet, sorting out the railways in a timely manner is beyond their wit.

and nothing will change,

will we go back to the "old days" of when all services waited for a late running connections,within reason?

and accountability for delay minutes will be done away with.

Good to see some actual commitments from Labour. I doubt a huge amount will change, but GBR does desperately need to happen ASAP as we currently have the worst of both worlds.

Delay minute accountability won’t change much IMHO.  All the privately owned freight and open access operators will still be running (probably more of the latter), who will need compensating if the agreements they have are breached.

Not too many crumbs of comfort offered to the unions either.

Who knows? We are in a different world.

Over half a lifetime ago, when I was in my first youth, I travelled a lot by train, including on a number of lines (but far too few) that closed soon thereafter.  Trains were infrequent and slow and sometimes perverse and I can't remember there being the problems we have / here about these days with overcrowding on them, nor with missing connections.   Stations like Slaggyford and Tumby Woodside come to mind - intermediate calls on quiet trains with few passengers getting on or off.  Chasing sheep with a DMU in the first case; people just groaning at all the stops from Firsby to Lincoln on a summer Saturday train taking holiday makers home from Skeggy.  And the train when it got back into Haltwhistle just sitting idle waiting for its next run a number of hours later.

In our different world, these lines have gone.  Other lines and stations, though, have broadened their services whilst at the same time slimming down the infrastructure sometimes too much and making staff and rolling stock utilisation so much more "efficient" that all too often there is no longer the capacity to cope with events out of the ordinary.   And so things like trains waiting for connections don't simply leave the arrival at a branch terminal a bit late - these days they bounce back on the return service too.  And service frequency increases mean that in many cases the wait for the next train in any case is far shorter than it used to be. 

There ARE times that services wait, but they are few and far between. The frustration we feel in coming home from London to Melksham and waiting for the next of 9 trains per day (i.e. onto a service that remains a poor frequency) is - well - frustrating (!!) but thank goodness that the 22:30 last train does wait a few minutes if the London express that connects with it is a few minutes late.  And it can do do because there are no onward connections or next duties to be covered.   In contrast, a delayed service Melksham to London is no problem - sure, if the connection fails at Swindon there is going to be another train a few minutes later.

Not sure how much this is changed by who runs the trains and how delays are analysed.  Perhaps what's needed is a modern vision that invests in making the service reliable rather than stretching resources to their extreme, and providing the resource to handle the resulting confidence in rail and its further growth as an integrated service which is environementally good and a pleasure for its customers to use.   Who manages that modern railway, who runs the trains, who sets the strategy from where the tactics become clear is irrelevant provided that the are committed to the public transport network as something that's a natural and loved part of everyday life.

And they’re, unfortunately, the biggest profiteers in the industry and are probably rubbing their hands with glee at this Labour Party plan!

I don’t see how you could nationalise the RoSCo’s.

Oh how I recall seeing all those ten coach sets sat in west Sidings (just after Parson Street train station) (Monday to Friday))

All "disappearing" for the weekend and most returning Sunday night into Monday mornings.

It could be done very slowly. Whenever a tender for new rolling stock is made the stock could be purchased by GBR.

However, I suspect the RoSCos will want some guarantees from the next government, including a promise that GBR will not buy their own stock in the future.

What would the RoSCos do if they didn't receive that guarantee?

Take their toys and go home?

I'm pretty neutral on this although a little confused that many on these pages constantly bemoan the fact that the Government exerts too much influence over the day to day running of the railway but now express approval that they will have much more control going forward.

Can someone set something out, perhaps in bullet point form, how this proposal will benefit customers? I'm thinking in terms of services, reliability, capacity, infrastructure, cost, efficiency but avoiding ideology?

Many thanks!  :)

I'd say the list would be a short one

Nationalised industries, in their heyday, rarely achieved the advertised potential.  Maybe investments would be planned, and even started, but some crisis would come along, and The Treasury would just cut back the funding, leaving the project falling short or not happening at all.  Plus ca change

If anything is under the control of politicos, the only things that matter are the electoral cycle and the headlines.  And that applies whether the thing being controlled is in public investor or private hands.  Politicos are far more interested in their careers and in having control, than they are in making life better for the fools who elect them

Certainly with FGW/GWR, I always thought that the current set-up made for a fairly effective balance of powers.

GWR have to keep the trains running, the punters and the employees happy, whilst balancing the books.

GWR can't do anything too silly if they want to keep on operating services, the DfT are protected from doing anything too silly by GWR.

My concern is that in the event of a central Government-controlled railway, the "difficult bits" tend to get sacrificed to sacrifice the high profile / politically sensitive bits. So West Country lines will be left to rot for want of a few million here and there whilst billions are poured into a shiny new lines for the Labour voters of Liverpool and Manchester to keep Andy Street et al off Keir Starmer's back. 

It was different times, and so-called renationalisation doesn't imply that the times are returning: is there a bit of a hat-tip owed to British Rail that Intercity was working and was it covering its costs too? Also, Regional Railways was being developed in interesting ways, starting to enhance inter-regional passenger services in a way that was providing very positive returns and attracting passengers new to rail (and in the west, ok, it did not make money but at least we still had the anglo-scottish west country sleeper with a steady 50000 passengers per annum). And driver route knowledge was presumably not so much shackled to individual TOCs and in some cases single routes, lending rail services more resilience.

Mark

Nigel Harris (late editor of Rail magazine) and Richard Bowker (formerly head of SRA) explain it fairly well, I think. You'll need half an hour to spare:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLTxYZPEo3U

Thanks for that. Also, a thread from @busandtrainuser on the ex-twitter comes with recommendations.

Mark

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1783459251584655502.html

Some very astute observations there.

This is a low risk strategy by Starmer I think - nothing like as risky or radical as messing around with Health, Education or Defence (sorry "defence"), far fewer votes at stake but it very much appeals to his party, especially those on the Left who remain to be convinced by him and wonder what he stands for.

I wonder what's next?

All well and good Labour wanting to renationalise the railways but Labour aren’t always going to be in power. The long term picture needs considering, not just a 5 year period and for that reason alone I wouldn’t be in favour of nationalisation

Usual considered opinion from Christian Wolmer
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/labours-rail-nationalisation-plan-will-put-our-trains-back-on-track-3024206 (https://inews.co.uk/opinion/labours-rail-nationalisation-plan-will-put-our-trains-back-on-track-3024206)

Interesting...........

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-labour-claims-rail-reforms-would-save-taxpayer-2-2bn-a-year

Isn't it? Someone needs to @ Christian Wolmer with it.

That last paragraph that starts "“Our plan for publicly-owned passenger rail goes above and beyond the Government’s long-delayed rail reforms" what part does? What I read indicated them just doing what the Tories suggested back in 2021 & haven't implemented (as it states elsewhere in the article), so what more are they proposing?

It’s certainly very similar, though did the Tories commit to taking all the NRC’s ‘in house’ as they expire?

I thought so, under direction of GBR. With no management fees but staff transferring to GBR payroll. There was going to be one overall colour scheme for the trains too.

I don't believe there are plans to introduce one overall colour scheme for the trains - that would just make things very complicated. I believe the plans are to retain the separate TOC identifies, and management structures, it's just the ownership that will transfer. So rather than GWR trains having the 'A FirstGroup company' sub-branding, they would say 'A GBR company' (or something similar) instead.

That was the whole point in creating identities at arms length from the owning company (First Great Western to GWR). So the owning company could change with minimal impact.

If all the trains were branded the same, how would customers (and staff) be able tell them apart? e.g. at Reading there are four separate TOCs that operate out of the station - GWR, SWR, XC and Elizabeth Line. If all these trains were branded the same, it would be a nightmare.

Trying to merge all the TOCs into one conglomerous super TOC would be a monumental headache. It's too much for one single management team, so keeping the separate TOCs, just under one ownership, is the logical solution. LNER, TPE & Northern are already nationalised, but they have all retained their separate identities and management structures. I could be wrong, but believe all others will simply follow suit.

And so there still should be when / if GBR starts operations. Making the railways better value for passengers / taxpayers means not spending money unnecessarily and the purchase of one appropriate brand/colour of paint is bound to be a cheaper option. The different TOC branding can be applied using vinyls.

I don't accept that, given the predominantly high quality of station PIS displays and PA systems, passengers would not be able to board the correct service.

For the future it would be a good idea for all rolling stock to have digital display screens on the coach exteriors next to the doors, like the IETs & Voyagers, but with scrolling 'calling point' displays.

Indeed.  Since I got involved we have moved from three different liveries in many of these parts - Thames Trains, Wessex Trains and First Great Western to the ubiquitous but smart green Great Western Railway, and I don't notice lots of people getting on the wrong train.   Where they do, for example assuming that all northbound trains from Trowbridge go to Bath and Bristol, the odd trains going somewhere more interesting are in the same fleet anyway.

There is something to be said for fleet / route marking though out or artistic influence, and open access / no general ticketing services could benefit from being distinctive

Interesting indeed. Particularly Channel 4's use of the word 'would' in the title. All Labour have said about savings is there 'could' be some. And as they rightly point out, the government hasn't produced detailed analysis for their projected savings of £1.5bn. So why should Labour? You don't share your battleplan with the enemy.

Fact checking political party aspirations is a pointless task.

It's funny in politics how quickly commitments work their way down to being claims and then aspirations, but without data all that's left is rhetoric I guess.

It's to be remembered also that these announcements are the usual pre-manifesto electioneering. There is a general election looming.

It's become very topical - I'm giving this topic a bump now!  ;D

I am not convinced that nationalisation would help.
Some aspects of "the railway" were better in BR days, but a lot was not.

Things that were better under BR
Train length and capacity
Passenger comfort, sprung seats and better legroom.
Luggage space, even local services had van space for cycles and heavy luggage.
Catering on almost all intercity services and many outer suburban ones as well.
Fares, relative to incomes were generally more affordable, and also simpler.

Things that have got better since.
Many services are more frequent.
Air conditioning on almost all long distance trains and some local ones.
Disabled access generally better.
Digital displays for train information and other announcements.
Safety has generally improved.

Some of those got better, would have inevitable happened under BR, likewise many of those that have got worse since BR would have happened.

Changes to the way the National railway is operated and maintained will be changed by an in coming Government, GBR will happen its just what shape it will take