Memorandum submitted by Network Rail
1. Further to the Committee's announcement
of its inquiry "How fair are the fares? Train fares and ticketing",
Network Rail would like to take this opportunity to respond to
the areas relating to Network Rail which the committee has outlined
it wishes to examine.
2. We particularly welcome the opportunity
that the Committee's enquiry offers, to highlight the significant
amount of work that has been undertaken in the past year by both
Network Rail and the rest of the industry to meet targets for
advanced passenger information.
3. Before commenting on this specific issue,
the other element of the enquiry that we would specifically wish
to comment on at this stage is with the comparative cost of rail
travel in the UK—something that is ultimately a function
of both cost and level of subsidy.
4. We do not propose in submission, to comment
on the questions relating to the charging regimes applied by train
operators—their current fare or ticketing structures and
any case for reform. The improvements in timetable planning that
we discuss in detail below allow the industry as a whole to offer
passengers certainty of travel on certain routes in advance of
travel. Beyond this, it is a matter for train operators to comment
on the existing regime of offering discounts for advanced bookings.
THE COST
OF THE
RAILWAY, AND
THE FARE-BOX
5. Network Rail would want to take this
opportunity to reinforce our commitment to reduce the cost of
operating, maintaining and renewing the railway by 31% over the
current five-year control period. In 2004-05 our Financial Efficiency
performance indicators set by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR)
showed an improvement of 17%—this was well in excess of
ORR's target and actually met the following year's target a year
early. For 2005-06 therefore, we have raised the bar on our efficiency
target—making it tougher than that set by ORR.
6. However, the level of future government
expenditure—and indeed the size and shape of the railway—while
regulated for cost efficiency by ORR, will be determined by the
Department for Transport and Scottish Executive through the "High
Level Output Statement" (or HLOS) as an input to the 2008
periodic review.
7. In developing the HLOS, the Government
will need to determine whether services offer good value-for-money
for both taxpayers' and passengers' money. Any decision on fare
pricing and strategy will need to take into account wider issues
including the growing cost of energy, regional development (including
land use planning and housing demands), home working patterns,
road pricing, the environment, market forces and government subsidy.
ENHANCING THE
ROUTES AND
IMPROVING TIMETABLES
8. In the short to medium term, Network
Rail will be leading the industry's work on Route Utilisation
Strategies (RUSs) to define how we plan to use and develop the
existing capacity to meet the growing demands of both passengers
and freight within the available resources.
9. The RUS process which we have developed
is very much a collaborative one in which we work closely with
train operators, government, passenger bodies and other stakeholders.
They can be expected to raise a range of alternative options for
dealing with strong growth on that part of the network: from longer
trains and platform extensions, to changes in the timetable.
ADVANCED NOTICE
OF ENGINEERING
WORKS
10. Network Rail is acutely aware of the
problems experienced by passengers last year, resulting from the
failure at the time of all industry parties to freeze the timetable
sufficiently in advance of the time of travel. Network Rail's
Network Licence requires that work should be planned on the network
in such a way that revisions to the national timetable can be
completed not less than 12 weeks prior to the work (this is known
as the T-12 obligation). This then enables timetable information
to be given to operators, who in turn make information available
to passengers. The expectation is that train operators will open
their systems for passengers at T-9).
11. During the second half of 2004, Network
Rail was already engaged in a programme to recover its compliance
with the T-12 licence condition. Network Rail had agreed a plan
with ORR in September 2004, committing itself to the following
milestones which allowed the industry and therefore Network Rail
to meet T-12.
T-12 Compliance Plan
| Level of compliance
| Full upload to Train Service Database (TSDB) by . . .
| . . . for the timetable week commencing . . .
|
| T-4 | 23 October 2004 | 20 November 2004
|
| T-6 | 12 February 2005 |
26 March 2005 |
| T-8 | 26 March 2005 | 21 May 2005
|
| T-10 | 14 May 2005 | 23 July 2005
|
| T-12 | 2 July 2005 | 24 September 2005
|
| | |
12. Network Rail met its commitment to achieving full
compliance by September 2005 by making organisational changes,
implementing new systems and introducing new management controls
in the planning processes.
13. The actions taken included:
— A £6 million investment in new, more
powerful planning software.
— A reorganisation of train planning, including
a 30% increase in the number of train planners and the appointment
of a Head of Operational Planning.
— More rigorous checking processes to review
the quality of data being uploaded into the Train Service Database.
— Instilling greater discipline within planning
teams, with late booked possessions require a personal sign off
from the Director, Operations and Customer Services.
14. ORR's assessment in a press release in July 2005
was that Network Rail "now has firm managerial control of
its planning of engineering work and is able to provide train
operators with the necessary advance notice of disruption to their
services. Network Rail has also improved its processes for producing
an accurate timetable in the light of this, reflecting the needs
of the train operators."
15. More recently, ORRs "Annual Assessment of Network
Rail" on 29 September 2005 stated that "The company
made substantial progress in meeting the milestones in the plan
and is now generally meeting its obligations."
16. This has brought about improved quality, accuracy
and timeliness of the journey information ultimately available
to rail passengers.
MAINTAINING COMPLIANCE
WITH T-12
17. In summary, the problems experienced last year had
been building up over some considerable time. Non-compliance with
T-12 had been an industry problem for at least five years and
it had been a problem for that long precisely because it was difficult
to resolve. Indeed, it is arguable that the industry had never
before achieved an Informed Traveller position of acceptable quality.
18. As the Committee is aware, the management team at
Network Rail is proud of its delivery record in addressing the
inherited problems caused by years of mismanagement and the achievement
of our T-12 recovery plan is an example of this.
19. We take seriously our role of coordinating the industry's
work on the T-12 issue, as it has been an industry problem requiring
an industry solution. As we approached the end of the recovery
programme, Network Rail planners were able to assist Train Operators
to meet the necessary targets. Where there are still complexities
and flaws in the existing planning process, we will review these
together as an industry.
20. We trust that the efforts we have demonstrated to
date in improving this service for passengers indicates the seriousness
with which we have treated these challenges. We are continuing
to closely monitor the position with each train operator and are
seeking opportunities to further improve the planning system for
the benefit of both the industry and, more importantly, its customers.
John Armitt
Chief Executive
| 
