TransWilts CRP / not becoming a member of ACoRP at present

[whole diary]

[grahame]

The TransWilts Community Rail Partnership's application to join ACoRP^▸ (Association of Community Rail Partnerships) (The Association of Community Rail Partnerships) was turned down at ACoRP's board meeting on 16th March.

Trans Wilts application to join the Association of Community Rail Partnerships
 
As you know, all applications for full membership of ACoRP have to be agreed by the ACoRP board.  On this occasion I^m afraid the Trans Wilts application has not been approved as it was felt that your organisation did not yet meet the criteria or ethos of a community rail partnership.
 
ACoRP^s primary purpose is to promote existing train services and work co-operatively with the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) and other members of the rail industry.  Our remit does not extend to re-openings or major train service development, although of course we do take an interest in these projects.
 
Given the current lack of train services on your route therefore and the campaigning nature of Trans Wilts, we believe that a better home for your organisation currently would be RailFuture.   Of course, should you be successful in getting an improved train service, when Community Rail practices can be implemented to encourage communities along the line to use the trains, we would be happy to re-consider your application.

The TransWilts CRP^▸ (Community Rail Partnership) is naturally disappointed by this decision; a great deal of thought and work was done prior to the application, and the members felt that this was about the right time to apply to be a formal member of the support group for community rail lines, services and stations. Since the decison, of which we were informed on 22nd March, we have been discussing the situation around our wider group prior to announcing the result of our application.

The TransWilts line currently has 27 services per week (26 francshised services plus one extra) through the least well served section, and we are working with Wiltshire Council, First Great Western, Network Rail, Chambers of Commerce, our elected parliamentary representatives, local councils, organisations and members of the community to make the best use and publicity for these current services.  Our new CRP has already produced two editions of timetable leaflets have been produced for Dilton Marsh and distributed throughout the catchment area of the station (thank you to Wiltshire Council and a local business spondor for these).  We are working with the HoW^‡(resolve) CRP on a joint project to clear wasteland that's an eyesore at Westbury station (like many rail projects, this gets very much tied up with health and safety issues) and are adopting Melksham station to help keep it looking tidy by brighening up the environment and by making small but significant improvements.  We would like to thank the staff and children at Westbury Leigh school for their work in producing pupil silouettes to help decorate the station, and hope to have those displayed in due course.  We would also like to thank First Great Western and Network rail for a timetable change - moving the 09:02 connection from Westbury to Swindon on Saturdays to 09:05 thus creating a connection for passengers from Salisbury and Warminster to Melksham, Chippenham and Swindon.  The new (as required) stop at Dilton Marsh in the 18:18 Warminster to Westbury service gives a previosuly missing return journey opportunity from Salisbury to Dilton Marsh at 17:10, change at Warminster.

Looking forward, the TransWilts CRP is working with partners in the rail industry to look for an additional Sunday morning return trip from Westbury to Swindon this high summer, giving seaside day out opportunties to Weymouth from Swindon, Chippenham and Melksham, and an earlier than present option from Trowbridge. It would also give Westbury, Trowbridge and Melksham residents a Sunday day-out option to Swindon, the Thames Valley and London.  Should approval for this service come though, the CRP will produce leafletting to cover the summer service, and the ongoing autumn weekend service too, which does offer day-out northbound opportunities on Saturdays, and return trains on Saturday afternoons and Sunday evenings for countryside walks in Wiltshire.  Further ahead, under TransWilts Rail, the CRP aspires to further improvements (December 2011) increasing the service on the line towards an appropriate level as described in the GWRUS^▸ (Great Western Route Utilisation Strategy), and confirmed by MVA Consultancy (business case) and Network Rail (operational case).

The members of the TransWilts CRP have decided that - at this point - they will not rush to reapply for membership of ACoRP. Use of ACoRP resources / access to their newsletters and material would have been very useful, and perhaps some doors could have been opened, but we value our independent ability to discuss train service developments amongst our partners, and to put the case for them. At the same time, we will not take steps which will preclude a future reapplication for full membership. A more limited "associate membership" or ACoRP is not open to us, as that level is specifically for "organisations who are not CRPs".

TransWilts CRP and members will continue to work with other partnerships in the area - businesses, ACoRP members, local and national government, elected representatives, Rail user groups, groups such as RailFuture and Campaign for Better Transport, and the various elements of the rail industry to make best use of existing services on the TransWilts line and their appropriate improvement too, through support, publicity, work at stations, suggestions, and all the other means traditionally used by a CRP.

Edit to correct typo!

[eightf48544]

Quote:

ACoRP^▸ (Association of Community Rail Partnerships)^s primary purpose is to promote existing train services and work co-operatively with the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) and other members of the rail industry.  Our remit does not extend to re-openings or major train service development, although of course we do take an interest in these projects.

Seems very limited, so Community Rail Groups aren't allowed to lobby for re-openings or major train service improvements.

I would have thought for that most Community Rail Groups that would be one of their major objectives, given that they are often associated with poorly served routes with limited irregular services. Some of them may even have station reopenings in mind.

So presummably they can't lobby through ACoRP?

What happens if DaFT^» (Department for Transport - critical sounding abbreviation I discourage - about) in their wisdom do a "Melksham" to a line with a currently active group? Are they only allowed to lobby to get their old service back without any improvements? Would they be thrown out of ACoPR if they tried to getter a beteer service than beofre??


Is ACoPR for the Bonfiore of Quandos"

[grahame]

Excellent questions / comments ... I can't provide you with too many answers, nor do I wish to guess at what the answers might be.

I can confirm that Community Rail is about making the best of a line and the services on it - making people aware of existing services, stations more welcoming, etc - and perhaps asking for small service changes that make a big difference.   You'll see from my earlier comment / response that we feel we're doing exactly that.

TransWilts Rail (http://www.transwiltsrail.org.uk/) is a far wider group than the CRP^▸ (Community Rail Partnership) (http://atrebatia.info/), and TransWilts Rail IS looking for major service improvements.   Our CRP has a seat at that table, and is / was looking to do the CRP thing as defined above and on the ACoRP^▸ (Association of Community Rail Partnerships) site with existing services and as they may change with any extra service that are added.   Doing what we can with the current service, with a high summer Sunday extra if it happens (a definite answer on that is now 2 weeks past the "hope to let you know by" date), and further services should they come along.

[Deltic]

I'm flabbergasted by ACORP^▸ (Association of Community Rail Partnerships)'s decision.  Their logic seems to be that you have too few services to make promoting them viable.  So they would have excluded the Settle-Carlisle line, one of the most successful instances of community involvement in a railway, when it was down to two trains each way per day.  In which case this involvement might never have happened.  It appears that they are concerned about becoming involved with an organisation that is too involved with campaigning but it appears to me that you have two separate organisations already so that the campaigning and promotional roles can be separated.

Is there any mileage in asking them to reconsider?

[grahame]

Is there any mileage in asking them to reconsider?

The news came through to the group about 10 days ago and we've discussed it since of course, deciding on a route forward before announcing it in public.  It would have been all too easy to react negatively.   It would also have been all too easy to rush in an "are you sure" / "will you reconsider".

We've not done either of those.   I'll admit that many of us were somewhat surprised and disappointed. Perhaps it's a lack of clear input on our part. Perhaps it's because we don't fit the bill in a way we're trying to understand.  Or perhaps it's because we in Wiltshire have had to shout pretty loud over the last few years to keep our line on the agenda and so - that word ethos - doesn't match.  Things have moved on, and it's not necessary for the CRP^▸ (Community Rail Partnership) to arrange for ministers to get a big postbag ... we're now at "lets get this sorted" but there are perhaps still a few people around who may have seen us as radicals in the days that "Save the Train" was the headline, and not be totally comfortable to work with us as partners.

So - as you see - we're looking at ourselves and asking "why did our application fail?".  We have a request in to ask for guidance on the service level required for membership - your point about the Settle and Carlisle is a good one, and we've noted that there are even ACoRP^▸ (Association of Community Rail Partnerships) member organisation to represent stations on the Stockport -> Stalybridge line (1 train per week).  And a request is in for a little more information about the ACoRP board who make decisions.   We know they only meet very occasionally (we've been waiting since late last year for this to be put to them),  and it would be nice to know / understand that aspect too.   There's certainly no point in rushing in a "will you reconsider" and until we have a few answers at least, no point in doing so. 

They could be right that we shouldn't be members - we need to find out. Perhaps membership would straightjacket us into accepting that services twice a day, heading out over the TransWilts-only section at 06:30 and 19:01 are fair and reasonable, and so we're better off having an element more flexibility than that.  Let's find out.

[eightf48544]

Might be interesting to find out who funds ACoRP^▸ (Association of Community Rail Partnerships) and what their remit is before making another case.

If there is any public money involved they would subject to Freedom of Information requests.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Thanks for your comments, and for your support here on the Coffee Shop forum, eightf48544.

My understanding is that most of the funding for ACoRP^▸ (Association of Community Rail Partnerships) comes from the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about).  Our concern, therefore, is that any FoI request regarding the structure or remit of ACoRP may be seen as 'challenging', and may possibly antagonize the case for any future re-application by us.

However, that is not to say that anything is ruled out absolutely: as grahame has posted previously, we really do want to keep all of our options open.

CfN. 

[grahame]

Exactly so, Chris

It struck me on reading back through this thread that I should have provided a link to the ACoRP^▸ (Association of Community Rail Partnerships) site (which we have studied in great detail both before and again after the application, I can assure you!).   It's at http://www.acorp.uk.com/

For anyone who's new to ACoRP, here's part of their front page "statement of aims" (my title):

The Association of Community Rail Partnerships ^ ACoRP ^ is a federation of over 60 community rail partnerships and rail promotion groups.

We are an organisation of ^do-ers^, focused on practical initiatives which add up to a better more sustainable local railway. Improved station facilities, better train services and improved integration with other forms of transport are central to the work of ACoRP and its members.

The Government^s Community Rail Development Strategy provides a framework for partnerships to improve the effectiveness of local railways in meeting social, environmental and economic objectives.

The work of ACoRP and its members is applauded in the Government^s White Paper ^The Future of Rail^ and in the House of Commons Transport Select Committee report ^Rural Railways^.

ACoRP^s members: Community rail partnerships are a bridge between the railway and local communities. They are about positive development, bringing together a wide range of interests along the rail corridor. Some partnerships have been instrumental in achieving spectacular increases in use of rail through innovative marketing, improved services and better station facilities.

Their work includes improving bus links to stations, developing walking and cycling routes, bringing station buildings back to life, art and education projects and organising special events which promote the railway and its relevance to the community.

And here are some of their central activities which we might have been able to take advantage of 

Helps identify innovative solutions for local railways
Disseminates examples of good practice
Works with local stakeholders to develop new partnerships
Organises training sessions for members
Brings out regular reports on community rail issues
Runs three national conferences each year

You will note the use of the words "rural" and "local" within this text.  Every station on the TransWilts has (within 3 km of the station) a population of at least 10,000 - most have many more; that's hardly rural.  And journeys tend to be 20 or 30 miles on the line, with onward connections being important for many users.  So that's regional - it's hardly local. 

Edit to clarify my wording