Railway organisations, Community Rail Partnerships, and the public

[whole diary]

[grahame]

Specification, planning, operation and informing people about rail services is complex, and there are lots of organisations involved.  In order to help newcomers see how they fit together, and see how our Community Rail Partnership fits in, I have drawn up a chart.



Organisation colours:
Red - Public, public facing organisations.
Black - The CRP^▸ (Community Rail Partnership), as the diagram's intended to show how we relate
Blue - Organisations not contacted by the public on a regular basis

Information flows:
Orange - public requests and enquiries
Yellow - public marketing information
Red - requests from professional organisations
Green - information supplied to other professonal organisations

Notes
* dotted lines - occasional information
* dashed line - to be applied for once new services have started and ratified by the AGM^▸ (Annual General Meeting) in Feb 2014.

1. What have I missed off?
2. What should not be there?

[eightf48544]

An excellent at what is very complex issue, what you have highlighted is how many vested interested parties there are in the current method of providing rail transport.

Some detailed points which in some cases make it more complex for which I apologies.

I notice you only show one two way communication channel out of DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) to the ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about). Is that deliberate or are all flows meant to be two way.

Also there appears to be no public interaction with DaFT again is that deliberate, it appears that all information received by DaFT is filtered through other organisations. You seemed to have missed off MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament), who I know don't do much, surely they have direct input to DaFT.

You have also missed off peripheral organisatios that can have an effect on the provision of rail transport such as the road lobby and in particular bus indusrty which is seen as a competitor not a co-operator. Then there's English Heritage, Paddington Staion upgrade, Sydney gardens etc., English Nature SSIs^▸ (Solid State Interlocking) and HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)). Maybe they could lumped in a box marked hostiles live here.

From my experience in a rail user group dealing with any part of the rail industry is like punching blancmange they can absorb a tremendous amout of requests for action without moving (look how long it's taken you to get an improved service for Melksham) and criticism without damage. For example a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) can be bottom of league one period but a slight improvement and it moves up the table out of mind so another TOC takes the flak for a while but neither has really changed that much.

[grahame]

Some detailed points which in some cases make it more complex for which I apologies.

There gets to be a point at which it's necessary to stop adding boxes for clarity and say "and others", and to leave out lines too.   But let me comment further on your specifics.

I notice you only show one two way communication channel out of DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) to the ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about). Is that deliberate or are all flows meant to be two way.

That has now been amended - and indeed I have added a couple of other "both way" enquiry lines too - I'll published a revised diagram later.

Also there appears to be no public interaction with DaFT again is that deliberate, it appears that all information received by DaFT is filtered through other organisations.

Apart from occasional and specific consultations, I don't think the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) encourages the travelling public to get in touch with them over their travel issues ... Passenger Focus (for which they are the paymasters) is there for the public's "we're not getting what the DfT have requested" inputs.

You seemed to have missed off MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament), who I know don't do much, surely they have direct input to DaFT.

I've added the bold because I disagree with it, at least here in the Chippenham constituency.  Without the assistance of Duncan Hames, I don't believe we would have got to where we are today.  Other current MPs have been helpful too.  Looking back to the previous parliament, the story was more patchy and indeed I had the feeling of lip service and not anything more in at least one case;  that may be fair enough for an MP who's trying to remain in favour with a section of his electorate who ask him to help with a case that he feels in unproven.

You have also missed off peripheral organisatios that can have an effect on the provision of rail transport such as the road lobby and in particular bus indusrty which is seen as a competitor not a co-operator. Then there's English Heritage, Paddington Staion upgrade, Sydney gardens etc., English Nature SSIs^▸ (Solid State Interlocking) and HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)). Maybe they could lumped in a box marked hostiles live here.

We could end up with a very complex diagram indeed ... and the box would NOT be marked "hostiles".   Railfuture, Campaign for Better Transport, Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, and many other are wholly or broadly supportive,  and almost all have positive elements however they may raised extra issues.

From my experience in a rail user group dealing with any part of the rail industry is like punching blancmange they can absorb a tremendous amout of requests for action without moving ...

 

Or you could call it "testing resolve" ...

[grahame]

I have added MPs^▸ (Member of Parliament) and BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) (that's Members of Parliament and British Transport Police - NOT Military Police and ...) and also provided a one-liner and a link to each of the public facing enquiry organisations, at:

http://www.wellho.net/mouth/4173_.html

Do take a look, and let me know of anything missed off / inaccuracies;  it's currently a blog article but may become more permanent as a point of reference ...

[grahame]

Updated diagram:

[eightf48544]

Looking at your diagram I am struck by the fact that there is an lot of information passing between a large number of organisations (17).

However, there seems to be no decision flows. So how does a reqest say from Trans Wilts for a late night train dealt with? Do you get an answer, one way or the other, if so who from FGW^▸ (First Great Western), Network Rail, Daft ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) someone else. In fact who do you make the request to in the first place?