APPENDIX 4
Memorandum submitted by the Rail Freight
Group
1. The Transport Committee have extended
their review of Transport Security to include consideration of
the British Transport Police (BTP).
2. Whilst Rail Freight Group (RFG) members
are not involved in the carriage of passengers, they are users
of the rail network, and funders of BTP. RFG members also operate
rail freight terminals, many with on site services such as warehousing,
processing, onward road distribution etc. Some of these terminals
fall within the scope of BTP activities.
3. This submission summarises RFG members'
position on the role and funding of BTP for freight operations.
BACKGROUND
4. BTP activities impact on Freight Operating
Companies (FOCs) in two areas:
— events affecting the operating network;
and
— policing at rail terminals.
5. Clearly, FOCs are not generally involved
with the movement of passengers, and therefore many areas of BTP
activity do not directly relate to them, other than to the extent
that they cause network disruption.
6. FOCs have been involved with DfT in the
recent review of BTP where the scope of activities, level of charge
and cost allocation with respect to freight have been challenged.
MANAGEMENT OF
NETWORK INCIDENTS
7. Incidents on the network should be policed
in the most appropriate manner, recognising the need for specialist
training needs for accessing and working on the track. These skills
are currently possessed by BTP.
8. Response to network incidents must recognise
the need to keep the network open for services to the greatest
possible extent, to enable FOCs to meet customer requirements
for quality, reliability and on time delivery.
POLICING OF
FREIGHT FACILITIES
9. Many of the incidents encountered at
freight terminals and facilities are not related to the fact that
they are rail linked. Such incidents include theft, vandalism,
graffiti etc. For such crimes, BTP do not generally provide a
better service than the regional police forces—indeed their
attendance is rare. Regional forces may therefore be able to provide
a more rapid response, and, with greater local intelligence, improve
crime prevention and detection rates.
10. RFG therefore believe there is a case
for regional police forces to take responsibility for the policing
of rail freight terminals. This would enable a potentially enhanced
police response, and free BTP resources to be focused elsewhere.
FUNDING
11. Under the "user pays" principle,
FOCs contribute towards the BTP costs, for costs relating mainly
to the policing of terminals. BTP policing of the network is currently
funded by Network Rail, and an element of the charge passed on
by them as part of the access charges to FOCs.
12. RFG believes that such charges are distortionary.
Direct competitors to the FOCs, (the road haulage industry, and
other non FOC operators of terminals and warehouses) are not required
to pay any direct charge for policing as this is provided through
general taxation and business rates.
13. As set out above, we believe the policing
of terminals should be conducted by the regional police forces.
As such FOCs should not be required to contribute directly to
policing costs.
SUMMARY AND
CONCLUSION
14. In summary therefore;
— The response to network incidents
should ensure continuity of service to the greatest possible extent.
— RFG considers that policing of freight
terminals could be better conducted by regional forces.
— The freight community should not
be required to fund BTP directly particularly where the transfer
of responsibility outlined above is progressed.
| 
