So who are these 'faceless' decision makers at the DfT and why are they not held accountable to the public?

[tomuk]

Indeed. These are all abominations that should have been reversed over the years, but have been hard-baked into timetables since privatisation.

Maybe everybody really wants to go to Scunthorpe which line doesn't serve.

 

[yorksrob]

Maybe everybody really wants to go to Scunthorpe which line doesn't serve.

I like Snaith and would like to be able to do a day trip.

 

[zwk500]

I like Snaith and would like to be able to do a day trip.

So that's 1 prospective passenger, any more? A taxi might be better a better service from the railway.

 

[tomuk]

So that's 1 prospective passenger, any more? A taxi might be better a better service from the railway.

Well according to the ORR stats 736 entries and exists a year.

 

[zwk500]

Well according to the ORR stats 736 entries and exists a year.

1 daily passenger making a return trip?

 

[yorksrob]

So that's 1 prospective passenger, any more? A taxi might be better a better service from the railway.

Have you studied the prospect of the route as part of the regional railway

 

[zwk500]

Have you studied the prospect of the route as part of the regional railway

I haven't, but 'I like the place and would like to make an occasional day trip' does not sound like there is a stunning argument for spending a large amount of taxpayer money on running an hourly service 6 days a week.

In contrast, opening a new station in suburban Doncaster near the old airport and running a Doncaster-Gainsbrough-Barnetby service that might actually serve some local transport need may be worth having a look at.

 

[yorksrob]

I haven't, but 'I like the place and would like to make an occasional day trip' does not sound like there is a stunning argument for spending a large amount of taxpayer money on running an hourly service 6 days a week.

In contrast, opening a new station in suburban Doncaster near the old airport and running a Doncaster-Gainsbrough-Barnetby service that might actually serve some local transport need may be worth having a look at.

The route obviously justified a service before it was scrapped for political reasons.

 

[tomuk]

The route obviously justified a service before it was scrapped for political reasons.

Did it? And was it scrapped for political or completely understandable economic reasons.

 

[yorksrob]

Did it? And was it scrapped for political or completely understandable economic reasons.

It did, and the route was scrapped to make it more paletable for privatisation.

 

[zwk500]

It did, and the route was scrapped to make it more paletable for privatisation.

And you have the DfT's minutes outlining both that it was economically viable and that this specific reason was chosen as the justification for withdrawal?

 

[yorksrob]

And you have the DfT's minutes outlining both that it was economically viable and that this specific reason was chosen as the justification for withdrawal?

I don't, but then I don't have the minutes for the network being put on the slide now either.

We know its happening though !

 

[Dr Hoo]

Sorry, Rob, but the Brigg decision back in the early 1990s was nothing to do with privatisation.

I was a service manager with Regional Railways at the time when the 'de-bidding' of Class 158s was done to help out Network SouthEast. The Brigg line was down to two services each way by then, which had minimal commercial logic. Having Sheffield-Cleethorpes through workings split over two routes when we were trying to develop what became the South Transpennine axis made no sense at all.

BR had some very good operational and commercial teams who understood that longer distance semi-fast regional services with regular but short trains could almost break even and offer good value for subsidy. Both Waterloo-Salisbury-Exeter and Cleethorpes-Doncaster-Sheffield-Manchester fitted that model.

Places like Kirton Lindsey and Snaith didn't.

 

[godfreycomplex]

Maybe everybody really wants to go to Scunthorpe which line doesn't serve.

Tinie Tempah can’t keep a whole railway line open on his own now can he

 

[Starmill]

I like Snaith and would like to be able to do a day trip.

To be fair, you can easily do that by changing at Selby. The 401 takes under twenty minutes to Snaith and runs ten services per day Monday - Saturday. It continues through to Goole. Only £2 now too.

 

[yorksrob]

To be fair, you can easily do that by changing at Selby. The 401 takes under twenty minutes to Snaith and runs ten services per day Monday - Saturday. It continues through to Goole. Only £2 now too.

Well, it would take me an hour to get to Selby on top of that, whereas the train would be a direct half an hour or so.

 

[tbtc]

The final nail in the coffin came after the 1991 financial crash and the need to reduce Regional Railways DMU diagrams to free up Class 158s to go to Network SouthEast for Waterloo-Exeter. Reducing to a Saturday Only service meant that the route needed zero additional diagrams. Various other cuts around the same time, such as Dundee-Arbroath locals, Sheffield-York locals via Pontefract, Whitby branch down to a single diagram and Knottingley-Goole locals down to 'shoulder' peak extensions only, were all for the same reason.

A horrible era, but maybe one worth studying again to warn us of how a government controlled network might pan out

But BR were seemingly more than happy to rob Provincial to pay NSE, not just the 158s or the cutbacks you’ve mentioned above but also the cutting up of most 155s to squeeze thin resources further

This is why I’m tired of hearing just how wonderful BR apparently were because of the investment in NSE (and the fixation with some Artists Impressions of stock that they’d have introduced on NSE despite the financial realities)

Indeed. These are all abominations that should have been reversed over the years, but have been hard-baked into timetables since privatisation.

I’d say the opposite is true

BR would have closed these failing lines in a heartbeat. BR could be ruthless.

Whereas scared politicians created a privatisation that forced these useless services to continue as a price to pay to avoid the hysteria we get when a thousand people sign a petition to complain about scrapping a service used by a solitary gentleman and his canine

There was nothing stopping MTL/ Arriva Mk 1/ Serco/ Ned/ Arriva Mk2 from introducing extra services to Brigg or East of Knottingley etc…

… But whilst BR would have had the freedom to abandon those lines, privatisation effectively saved them

Tinie Tempah can’t keep a whole railway line open on his own now can he

:: opens thread about prospective direct service from Scunthorpe to Southampton (via my Aunt’s house) ::

 

[43096]

A horrible era, but maybe one worth studying again to warn us of how a government controlled network might pan out

But BR were seemingly more than happy to rob Provincial to pay NSE, not just the 158s or the cutbacks you’ve mentioned above but also the cutting up of most 155s to squeeze thin resources further

This is why I’m tired of hearing just how wonderful BR apparently were because of the investment in NSE (and the fixation with some Artists Impressions of stock that they’d have introduced on NSE despite the financial realities)

BR got far more out of the subsidy it was allowed than the current railway does. BR had the ability to control its costs - the privatised railway is utterly incapable of doing so.

 

[Energy]

That’s rather unfair on Conrad.

In my experience there is no one in the DfT who is advocating reducing the size of the network. Those that I know have spent much of the past 18 months frantically working out how to minimise the impact on passengers of the budget settlement. To be frank I think they’ve done a pretty good job in the circumstances, as the potential alternatives don’t bear thinking about. I don’t think anyone commenting on this thread would have done any better.

It seems often forgotten on here that there is a ~£2bn funding gap from increased work from home. The rise in leisure travel should hopefully see some investment in XC, the 8/9 car trains from the reduced timetable are well filled and the push for moving some business out of London should see them get busier.

 

[Starmill]

Well, it would take me an hour to get to Selby on top of that, whereas the train would be a direct half an hour or so.

Where from? Castleford to Snaith is 35 minutes so it would be over an hour from Normanton. Surely journey times to Leeds are what really matters though and these are about the same via Selby as a through train would be.

The rise in leisure travel should hopefully see some investment in XC

Quite the opposite I'm afraid. The loss of business travel means CrossCountry are in an even weaker position financially than they were before. Anyone who has travelled on their early morning trains will see they are very lightly loaded for long distance passengers.

 

[Tetchytyke]

A horrible era, but maybe one worth studying again to warn us of how a government controlled network might pan out

But BR were seemingly more than happy to rob Provincial to pay NSE, not just the 158s or the cutbacks you’ve mentioned above but also the cutting up of most 155s to squeeze thin resources further

This is why I’m tired of hearing just how wonderful BR apparently were because of the investment in NSE (and the fixation with some Artists Impressions of stock that they’d have introduced on NSE despite the financial realities)

Unless and until the railway completely subsists on its own, the government are in charge. The idea that the privatised railway is free of government interference is laughable. He who pays the money calls the shots. It’s why I don’t understand the franchise model, and never have. You don’t buy a dog then bark at burglars yourself.

The current malaise is because the government have turned the funding taps off. It was the same in the late 80s. But I think it is obvious that late-80s BR were able to get a lot more bang for their buck than any of the current TOC managers- nationalised LNER aside- are.

It’s almost as though late-80s BR managers were actively involved in their business whereas the current private TOCs couldn’t give a toss because they get their management fee regardless of performance.

 

[JonathanH]

The current malaise is because the government have turned the funding taps off.

Technically it isn't. It is because the taps are at their maximum flow, and can't go any further.

The railway is trying to cope with less money coming in and struggling.

But I think it is obvious that late-80s BR were able to get a lot more bang for their buck than any of the current TOC managers- nationalised LNER aside- are.

Late 80s BR didn't have the same cost base and it was a time when passenger journeys were increasing. The decisions early 90s BR took are some of the things being tried now.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Technically it isn't. It is because the taps are at their maximum flow, and can't go any further.

So the government say. I’m sceptical, to put it politely.

If the railways are burning through the money the government says it is then that’s an even more damning indictment of the privatised railway.

 

[tomuk]

So the government say. I’m sceptical, to put it politely.

If the railways are burning through the money the government says it is then that’s an even more damning indictment of the privatised railway.

It has been nationalised since March 2020

 

[43066]

Technically it isn't. It is because the taps are at their maximum flow, and can't go any further.

Yet they can somehow afford to freeze fuel duty and give tax breaks to pensioners…

Make no mistake, defunding the railway and other services is a conscious choice rather than something that can’t be avoided - of course it suits the government to push that line.

 

[JonathanH]

Yet they can somehow afford to freeze fuel duty and give tax breaks to pensioners…

Yes, both of those things are wrong. However, I don't think the railway would be getting any extra funding if different decisions were made regarding either.

 

[zwk500]

Technically it isn't. It is because the taps are at their maximum flow, and can't go any further.

I think you are being extremely generous to the government with this assessment. The taps are open to the level set by the government - they could be open more, but it is a political calculation not to do so.

The railway is trying to cope with less money coming in and struggling.

Definitely.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Late 80s BR didn't have the same cost base and it was a time when passenger journeys were increasing.

BR didn’t have the same cost base because it didn’t have contractors and outsourcers and franchisees and ROSCOs all taking their slice of the cake. And you didn’t have TOCs all paying different rates to staff depending on how acute competition was for staff in a given region (e.g. Northern eastern wages being higher than western because Freightliner kept nicking all their drivers)

The cost base is a political decision.

Passenger numbers are growing now.

The simple fact is the late 80s BR got a lot more bang for its buck because it was fully integrated.

It has been nationalised since March 2020

No it hasn’t. Management is still in the private sector.

I’d agree that the DfT are micromanaging, which makes the current situation even more stupid. DfT are paying significant management fees to companies and then doing all the actual management for them. Talk about buying a dog and barking yourself.

Still, First Rail’s dividends to the parent company were nice and fat.

 

[43096]

Yet they can somehow afford to freeze fuel duty and give tax breaks to pensioners…

Make no mistake, defunding the railway and other services is a conscious choice rather than something that can’t be avoided - of course it suits the government to push that line.

It is all about choices. Far more votes in fuel duty and pensioners and the NHS and whatever else is being funded than there are in railways.

 

[tomuk]

I’d agree that the DfT are micromanaging, which makes the current situation even more stupid. DfT are paying significant management fees to companies and then doing all the actual management for them. Talk about buying a dog and barking yourself.

Still, First Rail’s dividends to the parent company were nice and fat.

First rail declared a dividend of £65 million pounds that is absolute chicken feed for running the multi billion pounds rail business that includes;

Avanti West Coast (70% shareholding)
Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western)
Hull Trains
London Tramlink
Lumo
South Western Railway (70% shareholding)
TransPennine Express