Memorandum by the Local Government Association
(RR 15)
RURAL RAILWAYS
The Association welcomes the opportunity to
submit evidence to this inquiry, although its timing in relation
to the consultation by the Strategic Rail Authority on community
railways, with a later deadline, means that only relatively brief
comments on broad principles can be made at this stage. The Committee
is welcome to a copy of the Association's response to the community
railways consultation in due course.
The Association has drawn the current inquiry
to the attention of member authorities and it is possible that
a number will take the opportunity of submitting comments direct
to the Committee.
BACKGROUND TO
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
PERSPECTIVE
The Association and its member authorities have
always been concerned about the maintenance of an integrated national
rail network. Many rural lines serve a key role in providing year
round accessibility for local residents who otherwise would suffer
social exclusion, as well as for visitors. Furthermore they provide
a degree of certainty which bus services cannot provide and links
which bus services have never been able to make. Relatively easy
to understand and access (and regulated) through fares, and co-ordinated
railway timetables, are valuable resources which need to be cherished,
and have been retained more or less successfully through the series
of upheavals in the railway industry over past decades.
From time to time reviews at Government, former
Railway Board, or now SRA level, have caused concerns to local
authority associations that there has been a closure agenda always
on the shelf waiting for another opportunity to be dusted off,
with a hit-list of lines ready prepared, and maybe hidden within
a wider industry review in such a way that the longer-term consequences
of a policy change are not always obvious. In that regard, and
notwithstanding the generally positive initial response of several
campaigning bodies to the SRA's current community railway proposals,
very close attention is being given to how its detailed proposals
might fit together as a package. This submission makes further
comments on some of the proposals within the SRA document in later
paragraphs.
The Association has submitted comments to the
current review of the structure of the railways being undertaken
by the Secretary of State for Transport, and a copy of this submission
is attached for information as Appendix A. [1]
THE IMPORTANCE
OF RURAL
RAILWAYS TO
THE COMMUNITIES
THEY SERVE
The Committee will be well aware of the Social
Exclusion Unit's report into transport and social exclusion published
in February 2003. In a number of rural areas the railway is the
only public transport link for rural communities. The report points
out that "in some rural and metropolitan areas (trains) can
be the basic means of getting to work, learning and healthcare".
Whilst aggregated national statistics may show that rail appears
to be used predominantly by relatively well off business commuters,
in rural areas this has never been the case. There year round
services are vital lifelines for local residents who do not have
access to cars but who need opportunities to access employment
and essential health and educational services. Additionally many
lines provide valuable services for tourists and visitors in the
summer and can bring vital revenue to the towns and villages they
serve, as well as help to reduce the impact of cars on narrow
roads. A good example brought to the Association's attention of
innovative rural rail/bus/tourism integration is the combined
train (via St Austell station) plus bus ticket to the Eden project,
with combined entrance fee. Some too still provide freight links
which keep heavy vehicles off narrow country lanes.
THE PROSPECTS
FOR INNOVATIVE
APPROACHES TO
THE FUNDING
AND MANAGEMENT
OF SUCH
RAILWAYS
The Committee will no doubt be receiving evidence
from bodies such as the Association of Community Rail Partnerships
(ACoRP). Many local authorities are associated with partnerships
and ACoRP itself has given an initial warm welcome to the SRA
community railways consultation proposals. The LGA is not in a
position at this stage to draw any instant conclusions about the
potential for further development of Partnership type management
structures, but no doubt the Committee will have been looking
at similar arrangements in other countries. When examining local
management as an option very key considerations must be the level
and long term security of funding mechanisms, and the retention
of network benefits. The recent experience with SRA partnership
grant funding, both passenger and freight, has shown how the passing
over a funding duty just before a funding crisis emerges can lead
to abrupt and unfortunate cuts.
The LGA has an established view that local and
regional government should never be put in a position where any
of its spending streams are "ring-fenced". The ODPM
has concurred with this principle and is striving to reduce ring-fencing.
There may always be circumstances where revenue funding of public
transport schemes will come under pressure, as they can do under
current circumstances. Local authority subsidy for supported bus
services is an area which has been under considerable inflationary
pressures for several years, particularly in rural areas, where
there are fewer operators to compete for tenders, and commercial
services continue to be withdrawn at short notice (see below).
The Association of Transport Co-ordinating Officers has given
evidence on this to recent inquiries undertaken by the select
committee. Thus, any mechanisms devised to devolve rail revenue
funding to either regional or local level will need to be evolved
very carefully, with appropriate safeguards put into place.
Innovative integrated ticketing schemes, which
do not lose and can improve network benefits, are being developed,
such as the Plus Bus initiative, which has been taken up by bus
and rail operators in towns at the end of some relatively rural
lines. That scheme has been approved by the OFT. On the other
hand the Committee will be well aware of the difficulties which
local government has in facilitating innovative joint working
involving more than one bus operator, and ensuring a degree of
control to ensure continuity of service provision—essential
for passengers arriving from outside the area. The SRA community
railways document appears to take a rather naive approach to the
current scope for integration between rail and bus services, especially
where more than one local bus operator is involved.
THE PROSPECTS
FOR TRAFFIC
GROWTH ON
SUCH RAILWAYS
No doubt other evidence will include statistics
about the growth in patronage on many rural lines in recent years.
The LGA does not have any statistics of its own about rail usage.
The Association of Community Rail Partnerships and others have
published statistics which show that some East Anglian branch
lines, for example, have shown dramatic increases. Even so, it
is possible to show on a chart of "per passenger" subsidy
by line that the cost of support on these lines appears to be
high, as is also the case for some rural community bus services.
This is a spurious argument for two reasons. Firstly, the overall
cost of maintaining relatively low speed branch lines is (or should
be) low, and is not rocketing because of the application of troublesome
new technology. Secondly the growth in rail usage which has taken
place on many rural lines shows that they are becoming even more
valuable to their communities than ever. If there was ever any
case to cut back rural services even further than was achieved
in the Beeching era, now is not the time, especially as the financial
crisis seemingly affecting the rail industry at national level
is not in any way due to the management or level of use of rural
railways.
THE IMPACT
OF MEASURES
SUCH AS
BUS SUBSTITUTION
FOR RAIL
SERVICES
The fact that bus substitution continues to
be raised as a possibility shows how difficult it is for the debate
to move on to a more positive agenda, despite the fact that such
a policy would be both socially and politically unacceptable.
Studies undertaken in the 1970s after the Beeching closures demonstrated
very clearly that bus substitution was an almost total failure.
The substitute services were devised and advertised to integrate
with the surviving rail services, yet most disappeared within
a few years. Indeed in recent years the Association understands
that de-registration of commercial bus routes in rural areas is
continuing at a high level. For example North Cornwall District
Council has informed the LGA that the local major operator "gave
written notice that at the end of May they will be withdrawing
from a series of services, making changes to other services to
prevent loss of money, and withdrawing from county council social
subsidy contracts. One of those routes is the connection to the
local railway station at Bodmin Road". Many rural areas do
not have road networks which are anywhere near parallel to rural
railway lines or serve their stations, and any substitute bus
services aimed at serving all stations along the line would almost
invariably take a very much longer time to complete their journeys.
In addition, the committee will no doubt be well aware of issues
such as the inability of many buses still to accommodate significant
volumes of luggage, push chairs etc. Modern buses will be more
capable than in the past because of Disability Discrimination
Act Provisions, although they are more expensive to purchase and
operate and will lose some seating capacity.
The SRA appears to have developed an agenda,
at a high level, to encourage bus substitution options to be put
forward in new franchise bids, apparently with the primary aim
of saving money rather than to encourage more integration. The
community railway consultation document suggests that integration
is an objective, which would be laudable if it could be achieved.
However, it is possible to conceive a situation, following all
of the consultation document's principles, where rail fares on
branch lines are "add-ons" to network fares, and at
the same level as possibly previously higher local bus fares,
then national financial restrictions are applied, and "difficult
decisions" have to be made locally to substitute cheaper,
at point of use, buses for train journeys. This might be the longer
term consequence of a superficially attractive set of proposals
in the community railway document. Hopefully the experiments being
implemented by the SRA to test the community railway principles
will alleviate remaining fears in this regard and demonstrate
that its stated objectives of facilitating more positive community
involvement and growing local railways can be attained.
CONCLUSION
The main issues covered in this submission may
be summarised as:
— Rural lines remain essential
to the communities they serve.
— They must retain essential national
network benefits.
— More local management and influence
could be beneficial given proper safeguards.
— Any transfer of control must
be accompanied by stable and long-term funding assurances.
— Rural lines have demonstrated
that traffic can grow and has grown with effective marketing.
— Bustitution is still a very
unattractive option.
April 2004
1 Not printed. Back
| 
