Select Committee on Public Accounts Twenty-Eighth Report


2  Operating performance and cost control

8. Immediate challenges for Network Rail had been to improve performance and cost control. Punctuality is usually taken as the main measure of performance (Figure 2). Network Rail's punctuality performance is measured by the number of delay minutes incurred, peaking at 14.7 million minutes of delays in 2002-03. Annual infrastructure costs had risen steeply and were expected to peak in 2003-04 at £6 billion. At £4 billion in 2008-09, the end of the current regulatory settlement, they were projected to remain 30% higher than before the Hatfield derailment of October 2000.[9]

9. Network Rail succeeded in improving punctuality but projected that it would remain below the levels that preceded the Hatfield accident until 2008-09. Delay minutes attributable to Network Rail were planned to fall by 43% to 8.4 million by 2012-13, helping the industry towards a punctuality target of 91.4%.[10] Network Rail considered this long term target to be meaningful despite annual revisions to targets.[11] Figure 2: Percentage of trains arriving on time



Source: C&AG's Report, Network Rail-Making a Fresh Start (HC 532, Session 2003-04) updated from National Rail Trends, published by the Strategic Rail Authority

10. Other performance improvements, such as faster services and better stations, also needed to be a Network Rail priority. Demand for rail services was increasing but unevenly. Certain parts of the network, such as Thameslink Services, had experienced demand growth of up to 70%, whereas rural areas had experienced much less growth.[12]

11. As Network Rail's knowledge of the condition of railway assets improved, it found more assets coming to the end of their useful life or needing attention for safety reasons. Network Rail's resulting infrastructure spending projections exceeded pre-Hatfield levels, despite measures to control costs.[13] The level of spending which an efficient Network Rail would be allowed to operate, maintain and renew the rail infrastructure is determined by the regulatory regime. A regulatory review completed in December 2003 had concluded that spending of £22.2 billion over the five years to 31 March 2009 would be needed. An additional £2.4 billion for enhancements had also been allowed.[14]

12. In practice Network Rail has some freedom to spend more or less than the regulatory settlement provides, depending on its commercial judgement and its ability to borrow. Figure 3 shows that Network Rail plans to increase total expenditure on the operation, maintenance and renewal of the network to £23.3 billion over the five years, mainly due to additional planned spending on signalling renewals. Completion of work on the West Coast Main Line accounts for most of the projected decline.

Figure 3: Trends in planned Network Rail spending



Source: Network Rail Business Plan 2004

13. The need for increased spending compared to pre-Hatfield levels is attributed, in part, to underinvestment in the earlier period. Railtrack had seen itself as the owner of assets which others maintained, so that decisions on the amount and timing of maintenance work were made by maintenance contractors. Railtrack paid for contractors' assessment of the work required. Network Rail decided what maintenance should be done and when and had secured both cost savings and improvements in performance.[15]

14. Network Rail's cost control measures included:

  • bringing maintenance in­house to control quality and costs, with initial savings of £70 million per year;
  • putting in place a series of renewals contracts at a lower unit cost than in the past, with targets to reduce the renewals cost further;
  • reducing management numbers by a target of 2000 over two years, including 600 middle managers in 2003-04; and
  • offering apprenticeships for new railway workers, increasing graduate intake, and taking engineers from other disciplines on to conversion courses for track or signalling.[16]

15. Under a Management Incentive Plan, top management can receive bonuses of up to 60% of salary. The principles behind the plan had been agreed by the SRA but were now mainly the responsibility of Network Rail's Remuneration Committee, composed of non-executive Directors. The Remuneration Committee takes independent advice as to the terms needed to attract the right level of skills and expertise.[17] One-third of the bonus payable under the Management Incentive Plan is set by reference to a financial efficiency index, which compares spending to budget but without taking unit costs into account. Network Rail has agreed with ORR that it will be examining the appropriateness of this measure for the 2005-06 Management Incentive Plan and the two bodies are working towards developing a more robust measure.[18]

16. For the future, the Department plans to decide on total rail spending and priorities through a series of iterative consultations with stakeholders, including regional/local interests. The aim is to introduce greater dialogue over route priorities both at the strategic and the local level. The Department intends to involve the devolved regions and passenger train executives in decisions on the best use of subsidy, comparing different modes of transport.[19]

17. The Department and Network Rail saw possible benefits in developing a longer term financial target for Network Rail. This would measure the cost of track maintenance and renewal over time, adjusting for the number of passenger miles undertaken. Such measures are used in many other industries and rail businesses overseas. Targets would be regularly reviewed and could be benchmarked against what others had achieved, adjusting for differences such as the age of the network.[20]


9   C&AG's Report, paras 2.3, 2.5  Back

10   Qq 69-73 Back

11   Qq 73-78 Back

12   Qq 87, 90, 105 Back

13   C&AG's Report, para 2.1; Qq 6, 98  Back

14   Qq 5, 79 Back

15   Qq 10, 12, 98, 142 Back

16   Qq 6, 10-14 Back

17   Qq 3, 33-36 Back

18   ORR Consultation for a balanced scorecard for Network Rail, November 2004  Back

19   White Paper, The Future of Rail (Cm 6233, July 2004), paras 2.5.16, 4.3.6 and Chapter 5 Back

20   Qq 4, 150-151 Back


 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 7 July 2005