Memorandum by the Public Transport Consortium
(RR 28)
RURAL RAILWAYS
INTRODUCTION
1. This submission is made on behalf of
the Public Transport Consortium (the Consortium) an all-party
special interest group of the Local Government Association with
a particular interest in public transport. Although the consortium
draws its representation from local authorities outside of the
metropolitan areas, its Members and advisors have close ties with
the PTAs/PTEs and the submission draws on experience from partnerships
at local, regional and national level. The Consortium includes
Welsh local authorities and it is in contact with interests in
Scotland.
2. Most of the UK's branch lines are survivors
of the "Beeching" cuts of the 1960s but it would appear
that the railway industry has seem them as a nuisance rather than
an opportunity. There have been a number of success stories, almost
all have been due to local interests and local authority involvement.
The creation of Community Rail Partnerships has provided a focus
for line development and a number of local transport authorities
have been involved with the pilot projects. But until recently
there has been no clear interest from the Strategic Rail Authority
in our rural lines, apart from a perception that the SRA was concerned
to ensure that a round of closures was not seen as an option,
because of the potential for a major public and political backlash.
INVOLVEMENT OF
THE STRATEGIC
RAILWAY AUTHORITY
3. The report produced by the SRA in February
2004 document "Community Rail Development—a consultation
paper on a strategy for Community Railways" would appear
to provide the first concerted attempt at central government level
to seek a positive way forward for our rural railways.
4. The SRA has identified 34 lines for designation
as Community Rail routes in its document published in February
2004. The Consortium supports Richard Bowker's recognition that
"Britain's branch lines are important for social, economic
and financial reasons" and although many have a recognisable
local role the Consortium would agree that there is considerable
room for improvement.
5. Since its inception the SRA has focussed
on inter-city route development and given little attention to
developing passenger services and improving stations on local
and regional lines. Many local and regional lines (including lines
now termed as Community Railways) have been subject to Local Authority
Local Transport Plan proposals to improve passenger services and/or
stations with the anticipation that the SRA's Rail Passenger Partnership
fund would provide match funding. But the cancellation of RPP
funding in late 2002 blighted many projects.
6. The Consortium has responded to the SRA
and would wish to draw the Select Committee's attention to the
following key issues contained in its response:
— The SRA should ensure that proposals
for Community Railway development should be considered in the
context of the local authorities Local Transport Plan, Economic
Development, Planning, and Social Inclusion processes.
— The SRA should ensure the potential
of a Community Railway is considered as part of a formal well
defined consultation process involving local authorities, regional
assemblies, regional development agencies and the regional Government
Offices concerning proposals for new housing, workplace, education,
healthcare, retail, and leisure developments.
— The SRA should ensure that consideration
is given to a Community Railway's potential for rail freight including
the location of road/rail or rail/sea interchanges.
— The SRA needs to ensure the
availability of Rail Passenger Partnership, or other grant funding
for revenue (mainly train service operation) and capital projects.
— The SRA should recognise that
its internal funding needs to be considered in the context of
the funding and approval processes of potential partners (eg local
authorities seeking match funding from LTPs).
— However, the approach set out
should not be seen as in any sense the beginning of the transfer
of responsibility for these lines to local government without
a proper debate on that issue.
— The existing statutory local
authority half fare concessionary travel for elderly, blind and
disabled people should be extended to community railways (arrangements
already exist in some areas).
— There is a need to develop real
time passenger information systems integration rail, bus and community
transport services. These should be capable of interaction with
mobile phones and remote passenger information kiosks. The latter
could be multi-user and include other visitor information.
7. The Consortium welcomes the SRA's interest
in seeking positive ways forward to make better use of our rural
railways. The proposals mark a step in the right direction but
they must be translated into effective actions and cover all such
lines. Whilst it is acceptable that pilots are developed to provide
guidance on good practice the Consortium would recommend that
this must not become a protracted process. Many local authorities
have considerable experience with rail projects in rural (and
urban) areas and the Consortium would welcome the opportunity
to discuss the issues with the Select Committee.
April 2004
|
