Plans for a landmark bill to reform and revive Britain’s railways, including setting up a powerful passenger watchdog to hold train operators to account, have been unveiled today by the government.
Rewired: East Croydon is one of the busiest stations in the south-east, but promised improvement works have been stalled by a decade of dither, delay and disinvestment
The reforms will “will sweep away decades of failure, creating a Great British Railways passengers can rely on”, transport secretary Heidi Alexander promised today.
According to the Department for Transport, “This once in a generation overhaul will establish Great British Railways, a new body bringing track and train together, delivering reliable services for passengers and catalysing growth across the country.”
Outlined in a consultation released today, the plans will “smash a broken rail system, put passengers at the forefront of all decisions made on the railways, and end major failure and disruptions like the 2018 timetabling crisis”, a statement issued from Whitehall said.
Talking about “rewiring the railways” – a curious choice of language – Alexander and the Labour government say that they want to put “an end to outdated and inefficient processes which have resulted in poor performance, timetable chaos and complex fares and ticketing”.
And they say: “It will also rightly be giving devolved leaders more of a say on the services that directly impact their towns and cities, working together to integrate transport, making it simpler to travel and attracting more people to our railways.”
The new watchdog will be tasked with ensuring Great British Railways addresses the issues that consistently rank highest in passenger complaints, rooting out the problems that cause poor journeys, ensuring passengers are given clear information when they travel and help tackle the maze of confusing rail fares and tickets passengers have to navigate.
Where poor passenger experiences are identified, the DfT says, the new watchdog will be able to refer this to the railway regulator for enforcement action.
And they say, “One of Great British Railways’ guiding principles will be to work closely with the private sector to create jobs and drive investment and innovation.”
This will include investing billions in the private sector supply chain so that improvements to the network are more coordinated. “A long-term rail strategy will give industry certainty on what they can expect, including a long-term plan for rolling stock.”
Heidi in a hurry: transport secretary Alexander is promising sweeping reform
Heidi Alexander, the Secretary of State for Transport, said: “Passengers have put up with broken railways for far too long. This landmark reform will sweep away decades of failure, creating a Great British Railways passengers can rely on.
“We’re giving passengers a powerful voice with a new watchdog dedicated to addressing their biggest concerns, building railways people can trust, improving our services and boosting the economy in the process – the priority in our Plan for Change.”
And Laura Shoaf, the chair of Shadow Great British Railways, said: “The plans set out today will mean a better railway for everyone that uses it, allowing industry to work closer together, putting passengers and customers first and providing better value for money for taxpayers.”
The proposals have been welcomed by some senior figures in regional government, such as Andy Burnham, the Mayor of Greater Manchester, who said, “This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to overhaul how the railways are run – creating a service that puts passengers first, with more reliable trains and simpler fares and tickets.”
Burnham’s Greater Manchester authority is already moving to revive and enhance the public transport network in the city, “moving from a fragmented system to one that is more accountable to our residents”, Burnham said.
“We look forward to helping shape the bill, with a statutory role for Mayors and city-regions in making the railways work for everyone.”
Commenting on publication of the government’s plans, Michael Roberts, chief executive of London TravelWatch, said: “Today’s consultation is another step closer towards Great British Railways becoming a reality and creating a guiding mind which nationally could help deliver better train services. The proposals rightly recognise the positives which devolved decision-making can bring as part of that.
“We will want to see the Mayor of London, the London Assembly and London TravelWatch continue to lead and champion the interests of people who use transport in and around the capital.”
The consultation begins today and will last for eight weeks.
Read more: Network Rail can’t afford staff for Bridge to Nowhere ticketing
Read more: 39 trains are stopped in the Croydon Bottleneck in two hours
Read more: MP backs Network Rail plans to unblock Croydon bottleneck
Read more: Brighton mainline rail improvements to be axed in Tory cuts
FREE ADS: Paid-up subscribers to Inside Croydon qualify for a free ad for their business, residents’ association or community group, just one of the benefits of being part of our online community. For more information about being an iC subscriber, click here for our Patreon page
PAID ADS: To advertise your services or products to our 10,000 weekday visitors to the site, as featured on Google News Showcase, email us inside.croydon@btinternet.com for our unbeatable ad rates
- If you have a news story about life in or around Croydon, or want to publicise your residents’ association or business, or if you have a local event to promote, please email us with full details at inside.croydon@btinternet.com
As featured on Google News Showcase
- Our comments section on every report provides all readers with an immediate “right of reply” on all our content. Our comments policy can be read by clicking here
Inside Croydon is a member of the Independent Community News Network
The state doesn’t have the expertise to run rail effectively. And all the infrastructure is ‘publically-owned’ anyway. Those of us who remember BR pre-nationalisation wouldn’t want that shambles back. I forsee trouble ahead
The State may not have the expertise to run rail effectively but the thousands of railway staff up and down the country do, from the platform guard through to the planners of engineering works and new lines. The pre-war train companies did not have the finance to rebuild after WW2 so the Labour Government of 1945 created British Rail. The idea was that the expense paid out by the Government in restoring and rebuilding the war damaged railway system would be paid back by British Rail via the ‘ War Debt ‘ payments. Annually British Rail made a profit but after paying back the ‘ War Debt’ made a loss. This was struck off by John Major to enable privatisation, a decision that could have been made easily by previous Governments which would have ensured that British Rail could have invested for the future. I have to view the idea of the ‘War Debt’ as a strange economic venture, the equivalent of putting money from the wallet to the pocket. However, I do tend to agree with Christopher that there could be trouble ahead because until the Rolling Stock companies are also brought in-house then GBR will have one hand tied behind its back. Incidentally, the RMT issued a interesting report on the Rolling Stock companies a little while back and worth checking out. Also the notion of a public-owned and profitable low fare railway seems to work in Europe and elsewhere.
No European rail services makes a profit. Germany subsidises its services to the tune of 17 billion euros, France 13 billion, the UK 9 billion, Italy 8 billion. Remember the rude, unhelpful BR staff? That’s been a magnificent change thanks to privatisation
A quick perusal and I see that French SNCF 2023 profit 2.3bn, German Deutsche Bahn 2023 -1.27bn, Italy FS 2023 +100 million and Portugal CP 2023 3.6million. Figures are in Euros. Results are complex as not all Railways are run exactly the same and profits are used as collateral for future investing. As for rude and unhelpful staff – facts and figures would be helpful.
The surly and rude BR staff is just as much a deliberately misleading construct of the pro-privatisation lobby as the British Rail sandwich.
Profit? That’ll need defining. My figures for government subsidy came via Wikipedia. Their source, was Alain Bonnafous and Yves Crozet from the Laboratoire d’Économie des Transports ay Lyon. Document here: https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/bonnafous-crozet_0.pdf
The Bonnafous Crozet report you cite concerned “Efficiency indicators of Railways in France”.
The authors noted – in 2014 when the report was published – that the SNCF had total rail subsidies of €13.2 billion euros and revenues of €23 billion. Define that difference.
In any case, a focus on profitability ignores the public benefit of services like rail, water and health. Should footpaths make a profit? Pay per step, anyone? How about the emergency services? Dial 999 and the first question they ask is “cash or card?”
I remember the BR sandwich too. Yuk
I remember some god-awful food provided on privatised railways, too.
The notion that BR had a monopoly on poor food is an urban myth, concocted by old farts who hanker, wistfully, after the long-lost days of Victorian era capitalism, top hats and children up chimneys.
Thanks for another informative IC news item.
I am taken aback by the expansive hyperbole and lack of clear concise language in the various ministerial and departmental statements.
I think that this railway renationalisation finally responds to criticism dating back to Covid lockdown of life-support Govt subsidy plus 2% profit, instead of just taking back the system in house, and not paying day owner foreign state railway companies profiting from British railways, identified by Private Eye magazine.
I think this news involves the private rail operator franchises being abolished as they end and the infrastructure and services being brought back under unified, Govt control. Though another commenter points out that the trains or rolling stock, are still owned and leased out at a profit cost by another company.
More could have been said re. what will happen to fares with their annual inflation-plus escalator, service levels, comfort, staffed stations etc which would mean more to me than these expansive, detail-light, aspirational but unclear statements.
One now has to frequently ask ‘Was the media release written by AI? `
Govt speeches often seem to declare unbelievably and negatively that everything is ‘broken’ eg. also the NHS. My own experience of two major kinds of NHS outpatient care has been excellent and definitely not ‘broken’.
‘Rewiring the railways’ is indeed an odd phrase.
I am also trying to fathom ‘the plans will “smash a broken rail system”.
Doesn’t that make things worse?
And we cut out some of the worst examples of AI-lite press release writing, too…
Excellent points. How the f are we supposed to even define profit when state aid is in the picture?
Capitalism built our railways and Beeching destroyed them under a Labour government. As to hats, bring back Sir Topham Hatt
Oh dear, just as I thought we were having a mature discussion not a fourth form debate rooted in petty and inaccurate point scoring. Fyi Christopher, the Beeching Axe reports were accepted by Harold MacMillan in 1963 and by the time Labour achieved power in 1964, implementation had begun. I allude back to my reference to the ‘War Debt’ that being no WD probably no Beeching. Mind you this was when Road was king. Railways originated for mine owners transporting goods to canals where some, in turn, were converted to rail. The Railways were indeed funded by capital but were built by the sweat, blood, tears and lives of mainly Irish, navigators ( hence navvies ). The same capital built mines, mills and factories all using the blood, sweat, tears and lives of uneducated, slum dwelling and poverty stricken men, women and children who were forced, by necessity to survive, worked in those unsafe environments. It is their immense and ultimate sacrifice that we are all still in debt to today.
We’re both right Bob, as you explain
Profits were defined in the 2023 annual reports of the companies I listed. It is a complex issue eg Spain has different railways on different gauges. However overall the general picture seems to indicate that with increasing passenger numbers since covid, more connectivity within the EU and outside, stabilising fares, new services with an increase in overnight travel services as well, the reliance on government subsidies are becoming less as profits are generated and used for reinvestment. I, too, use Wikipedia as a source for various informative reasons and jolly good it is too.
There is a broader point of public and social good, too, Bob.
There is actually nothing wrong with subsidising public transport, if that subsidy delivers other benefits – like jobs, in industry producing rolling stock or rails, on the railways themselves – and like cheaper forms of transport for working people and, of course, reduced pollution through reduced use of cars. Or even taxis…
Thing is, for the past 40 years, the British tax-payer has been subsidising foreigh-owned private businesses on the railways, without any real benefits in improved services.
Ditto water privatisation, but we can save that for another time.
Welcome back, Bob!