Letter from Department of Transport
Dear Mr Dunn,
Thank you for your letter of e-mail of 5 January to Rail Group at the Department for Transport about cancellations and overcrowding on the Bath to Bristol line.
I am very sorry to hear about the recent problems you have experienced travelling on this route and can confirm that these problems have indeed mainly been caused by lack of rolling stock. The teething problems you mention will have been caused by First Great Western’s (FGW) introduction of their new timetable on 10 December.
Franchise agreements include an obligation to plan the timetable to ensure, as far as possible, that overcrowding is not unduly concentrated on any particular Route or Passenger Service. The franchise agreement under which FGW operates, requires the Train Operator to use reasonable endeavours in planning its timetable and the rolling stock diagrams needed to implement it, to provide passengers with a reasonable expectation of a seat off peak and within twenty minutes of boarding during the peak period.
This does not mean that there is an absolute obligation to provide this capacity on the day of service, as the franchise agreement acknowledges that problems can occur in provision of rolling stock. We have been informed that FGW, and Wessex Trains before it, has suffered from problems with reliable provision of rolling stock from the depot in Cardiff. A number of problems with the rolling stock have also been identified which reduce its availability for use in service.
These sorts of problems can frequently result in trains being displaced from the services on which they should run and shorter trains than planned being used. They can also result in cancellations. In the past, FGW performance has been somewhat below the rail industry average and the Department is determined that appropriate action is taken to improve performance.
Much of this improvement will need to be achieved by Network Rail. However, the new franchise agreement commits FGW to two areas of significant investment in response to the problems which have been identified. Firstly, FGW is committed to establishing a new maintenance and servicing facility for the former Wessex Trains fleet of diesel multiple unit trains adjacent to the existing FGW depot in Bristol. Secondly, the franchise agreement commits FGW to implementing reliability improvements to the former Wessex Trains fleet used on services in the Bristol area. The improvements, which vary according to the type of train, include modifications to the electrical systems, doors, underframes, engines, transmissions, couplings, air systems, engine cooling systems and brakes.
First Great Western has discretion to vary its timetable where there is commercial justification and operational practicability. Its franchise agreement specifies the minimum level of service that FGW has to provide. It is free to make additional station calls, and operate additional services, provided that maximum journey times are not exceeded, and that network capacity is available. I can confirm that the question of sufficient train capacity on these routes will remain a priority, as improving train performance is a key objective for the Department. We are determined that appropriate action is taken to ensure that the performance of these train services improves.
The Department is now developing the High Level Output Specification (HLOS), to be published in July 2007, which will set out the railway the Government wishes to procure for the period between 2008/09 – 2013/14. Increased passenger capacity is one of the three key outputs that will be sought through the HLOS, the others being safety and reliability.
Yours sincerely,
Judith Shepherd
Rail Customer and Stakeholder Relations
Thank you for your letter of e-mail of 5 January to Rail Group at the Department for Transport about cancellations and overcrowding on the Bath to Bristol line.
I am very sorry to hear about the recent problems you have experienced travelling on this route and can confirm that these problems have indeed mainly been caused by lack of rolling stock. The teething problems you mention will have been caused by First Great Western’s (FGW) introduction of their new timetable on 10 December.
Franchise agreements include an obligation to plan the timetable to ensure, as far as possible, that overcrowding is not unduly concentrated on any particular Route or Passenger Service. The franchise agreement under which FGW operates, requires the Train Operator to use reasonable endeavours in planning its timetable and the rolling stock diagrams needed to implement it, to provide passengers with a reasonable expectation of a seat off peak and within twenty minutes of boarding during the peak period.
This does not mean that there is an absolute obligation to provide this capacity on the day of service, as the franchise agreement acknowledges that problems can occur in provision of rolling stock. We have been informed that FGW, and Wessex Trains before it, has suffered from problems with reliable provision of rolling stock from the depot in Cardiff. A number of problems with the rolling stock have also been identified which reduce its availability for use in service.
These sorts of problems can frequently result in trains being displaced from the services on which they should run and shorter trains than planned being used. They can also result in cancellations. In the past, FGW performance has been somewhat below the rail industry average and the Department is determined that appropriate action is taken to improve performance.
Much of this improvement will need to be achieved by Network Rail. However, the new franchise agreement commits FGW to two areas of significant investment in response to the problems which have been identified. Firstly, FGW is committed to establishing a new maintenance and servicing facility for the former Wessex Trains fleet of diesel multiple unit trains adjacent to the existing FGW depot in Bristol. Secondly, the franchise agreement commits FGW to implementing reliability improvements to the former Wessex Trains fleet used on services in the Bristol area. The improvements, which vary according to the type of train, include modifications to the electrical systems, doors, underframes, engines, transmissions, couplings, air systems, engine cooling systems and brakes.
First Great Western has discretion to vary its timetable where there is commercial justification and operational practicability. Its franchise agreement specifies the minimum level of service that FGW has to provide. It is free to make additional station calls, and operate additional services, provided that maximum journey times are not exceeded, and that network capacity is available. I can confirm that the question of sufficient train capacity on these routes will remain a priority, as improving train performance is a key objective for the Department. We are determined that appropriate action is taken to ensure that the performance of these train services improves.
The Department is now developing the High Level Output Specification (HLOS), to be published in July 2007, which will set out the railway the Government wishes to procure for the period between 2008/09 – 2013/14. Increased passenger capacity is one of the three key outputs that will be sought through the HLOS, the others being safety and reliability.
Yours sincerely,
Judith Shepherd
Rail Customer and Stakeholder Relations
posted by www.loial.co.uk at 11:31 AM
2 Comments:
Dear Mr Dunn
I'm really, really glad you've decided to do this! One thing to watch out for...it's sneaky... often a late train will keep being advertised as on time (if the information screens are working, eh!?) up to 6 minutes after it should have pulled out. Grr. I really don't know what FGW consider their priorities to be, but when you go to the station ( West Ealing for me)expecting the train to be late, because it is most of the time, then something's wrong. I heard a girl asking her friend a coupe of months ago "are they ever on time? No, I'm serious, whenever I have to get one they're late"
Best wishes, and good luck
Oli Bainbridge
“The teething problems you mention will have been caused by First Great Western’s (FGW) introduction of their new timetable on 10 December.”
This is an out and out cheek. It was the Department for Transport that laid down the new timetable as part of the integrated Greater Western franchise. While First Great Western will have had input, the changes weren’t primarily driven by them but by the Department.
“First Great Western has discretion to vary its timetable where there is commercial justification and operational practicability. Its franchise agreement specifies the minimum level of service that FGW has to provide. It is free to make additional station calls, and operate additional services, provided that maximum journey times are not exceeded, and that network capacity is available.”
Another bit of spin. First Great Western has to seek permission from the Department for Transport for any major variations in services; without their permission they cannot make significant alternations to the timetable. It’s as simple as that. Moreover, even if the Department were likely to agree to the changes First Great Western have to assess whether they can afford to run them. Don’t forget the DfT has slashed subsidy for Great Western services and now expects a £1bn+ premium to be delivered by First Group. A natural consequence of demanding this payback is that this money will not be reinvested in trains or customer service initiatives; rather, it will end up in the government’s coffers.
A very, very large proportion of the current issues have been caused by the Department for Transport trying to micromanage the network from Whitehall. It’s a political problem, not one caused by First Great Western as operator of the services.
Post a Comment
<< Home