Examination of Witnesses (Questions 14680
- 14699)
14680. Let's put up EWS 4 please.[15]
(Mr Smith) That represents the
growth graphically. The firm red lines up to 2006, which is 2005/06,
show the growth from a low point in 1994/95, which was 13 billion
tonne kilometres, and in the last full year we moved 22.2 billion
tonne kilometres. The Rail Freight Operators' Association, which
I mentioned earlier on that I am the Chairman of, and Freightliner,
GB Rail Freight and DRS are also members of that, have forecast
further growth and that is reflected up to the year 2014/15.
14681. That deals with the approximate date
of the opening of Crossrail. Is that right?
(Mr Smith) That is correct,
and I believe Mr Watson, in giving his evidence last week, acknowledged
that significant rail freight growth was anticipated. We have
worked hard to achieve what we have done so far and we have invested
heavily. I would just make the point that rail freight operators
are not franchises, but we are in this for the long term, recognising
that building growth is part of our basic business plan. It is
our livelihoods that are on the line if we cannot build rail freight
growth.
14682. So, at the least, when Crossrail is introduced,
is it your case that it ought to be able to accommodate 2015 anticipated
freight levels?
(Mr Smith) There will be
significant growth between now and 2015. To pretend that growth
is not going to happen, not to take account of that, effectively
to ossify and set in stone the network now in anticipation of
Crossrail coming in 10 years' time is unacceptable. Crossrail
and these routes have to accommodate the freight growth that we
are expecting.
14683. What about after 2015 because your graph
stops in 2015?
(Mr Smith) There are a number
of public policy statements in the public domain, including the
national ports policy which extends to 2030 which shows even further
growth built on the fact that the UK economy will continue to
grow, built on the fact that we will continue to be an importing
nation which will bring in traffic from the east coast ports and
built on the fact that, in order to meet our environmental objectives,
we actively want to encourage freight to move from road to rail.
All of those add together to even more growth beyond 2015.
14684. What is the position so far as discussions
and negotiations with the Promoter are concerned?
(Mr Smith) Well, we have
sought to have a number of discussions and negotiations with the
Promoter. It has not been the easiest of exercises. After considerable
pressure by the industry, we were pleased that the Railway Industry
Stakeholders' Forum was formed which involved all the railway
interests and was chaired by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary.
At that forum, after a particularly tense meeting, we pressed
very hard for the industry Timetable Working Group to be formed,
about which you have heard much, and I am glad to say it was.
We have been talking about timetabling capacity, it seems, for
a long time, although perhaps not with the progress we had hoped.
On the property side, there have been discussions with the Promoter
on the properties, but we are still some way from any conclusion.
There have been heads of terms proposed in a general way, but
there are still an awful lot of issues between ourselves and the
Promoter to give us and, more importantly, our customers the comfort
that we are still going to be able to operate rail freight to
and from these sites.
14685. Could we please put up EWS17, taking
it a little out of order.[16]
This is a letter sent to EWS last week on 4 July at a time when
Crossrail and the Department knew of your concern on the temporary
against permanent acquisition point, as we can see from the heading
to the letter. Is that right?
(Mr Smith) That is correct.
14686. There is some explanation of their thinking
here, but is there anything by way of positive reassurance or
commitment in this letter?
(Mr Smith) There is not
because, irrespective of the words in the letter, the compulsory
purchase powers still remain in the Bill and we have to face that
fact, that, whatever letter is written of general comfort or suggestions
or hints of what might happen, in practice we have to deal with
what is on the paper and on the paper are compulsory purchase
powers.
14687. Mr Smith, you have set out a series of
undertakings which you require from Crossrail on these property
matters. Have you any reason to suppose that if they gave those
undertakings, there would be any problem in the Promoter constructing
Crossrail and the various works in the Bill?
(Mr Smith) It would clearly
depend on the form of the undertaking and the undertaking would
need to be in the form that we require. Once we have those undertakings
and see the form of them, then perhaps we can come to an agreement,
but we are not there yet.
14688. But so far as the undertakings you are
seeking are concerned, are they in any way in conflict with the
construction of Crossrail or do you think that if they gave those
undertakings, they could perfectly readily construct Crossrail?
(Mr Smith) We believe they
could construct Crossrail with those undertakings. They relate
to purchase, they relate to temporary versus permanent occupation.
We recognise that you cannot build something like Crossrail without
having a little impact, but not the scale that is in the Bill
at the moment.
14689. As far as the advantages of rail freight
are concerned, to some extent these were mentioned in evidence
last Thursday. What would you like to draw to the Committee's
attention on this?
(Mr Smith) I would like
to reinforce the point that rail freight has grown significantly.
A variety of commodities are moved from stone from the Mendips
and Leicestershire to containers from the east coast ports. Rail
freight is not just about moving coal, although we move a significant
volume of that, it is about servicing all of the UK industry,
whether it is supermarket goods, manufactured goods, cars, or
imported goods through the Channel Tunnel.
14690. If we can put up EWS5, you have put the
various commodities in the first column, which I do not think
we need to read out, and then what have you done in the flow column?[17]
That is where it is coming from, is it not?
(Mr Smith) That is where it is
coming from and going to and this shows the traffic and the flows
that impact on the Great Western Main Line and they draw out what
this traffic is used for. There is a significant amount of construction
material of various kinds, but I just would like to focus on the
bottom rows, which draw out steel, petroleum, cars and components
and manufactured products which are also all part of the freight
traffic on the Great Western Main Line.
14691. How important is the Great Western Main
Line for freight traffic to and through London?
(Mr Smith) It is absolutely
critical. It is the primary route linking Somerset and south Wales
with London and the home counties. It is a line that had high
capacity. It is a line that rail freight has used for many years
from the days of the Great Western Railway until today. Without
the Great Western Main Line, we would not be able to bring these
kinds of freight into London.
14692. We go to EWS6 please.[18]
(Mr Smith) This draws out the
importance of rail freight when compared with road haulage. At
one end of the spectrum, a car train of 240 cars moving from Oxford
would be the equivalent of 12 road vehicles. At the other end
of the spectrum, a train of nearly 4,000 tonnes of aggregates
coming from the Mendips into Acton for onward distribution throughout
London is the equivalent of 128 lorries which would otherwise
be not just on the A4 and the M4, but also on the minor roads
in west London, seeking to access the construction materials distribution
sites.
14693. Here you are really anticipating what
Mr Knapman is going to develop later today.
(Mr Smith) That is correct.
14694. Any other benefits you want to refer
to?
(Mr Smith) I am sure that
the Committee will be aware of this, so forgive me for repeating
some of the basic statistics about rail in general. Although not
directly freight related, in 2005, 3,201 road users were sadly
killed on Britain's roads. There was not a single fatality caused
by a train accident during that same year. Rail freight produces
around about one tenth of the emissions that are produced by road
freight for every mile that one tonne moves. It is particularly
efficient and effective in terms of carbon dioxide and global
warming. Moving freight by rail produces about 40% more fuel efficiency
than the equivalent volume moved by road, which is particularly
important when oil prices are high and oil products at a premium.
14695. If we put up EWS7, this shows some European
Commission figures, does it not?[19]
(Mr Smith) Yes, this takes Europe-wide
the comparative external costs of road and rail and other modes.
External costs are the costs relating to emissions, safety, pollution
and congestion, and it draws out that whereas rail will cost,
and I apologise to the Euro-sceptics here, 19 euros per 1,000
tonne kilometres, road will actually create an external cost of
88 euros per 1,000 tonne kilometres. It is probably a good job
we are not debating an aviation bill here.
14696. And the policy context please.
(Mr Smith) Well, this is
where it is really rather curious because the Government is extremely
supportive of freight by rail and so is the Mayor of London.
14697. Perhaps we can put up EWS8 and if we
could go to the sidelined passage in the Government's document
on rail freight, a very recent statement of 19 July 2005, what
we are seeing there is a substantial commitment to freight.[20]
Is that right?
(Mr Smith) That is correct, a
statement by the then Secretary of State for Transport which replaced
the previous freight strategy issued by the now defunct Strategic
Rail Authority. This document which runs to about three pages
is a resounding statement about the importance of rail freight
and the Government's commitment to work with the rail freight
industry to grow freight on rail.
14698. If we can just scroll down to the next
highlighted passages and in particular if we go to the bottom
bullet point there, we can see that the Government wants to work
with the industry and Network Rail to establish how freight growth
can be accommodated in the network, and that is all you are seeking,
is it not, precisely what is government policy?
(Mr Smith) It is government
policy and it applies throughout the United Kingdom, England and
Wales, and the Scottish Executive have similar policies. We have
up to now worked extremely well together, private sector interests,
growing rail freight and investing heavily, the Government being
very supportive, and it is only now that we seem to be facing
a clash of those interests.
14699. Later on in that same exhibit, EWS8,
you have extracts from the Mayor's Transport Strategy and that
is a strategy which has got a specific section on freight delivery
and servicing and I think I can summarise it by simply saying
that it is highly supportive of freight and rail freight in particular.[21]
(Mr Smith) Yes, the Mayor and
his officials and the elected Members are very supportive of rail
freight and have gone out of their way to publish documents emphasising
the importance of freight coming into London by rail and identifying
locations where, for example, it would be possible to bring international
freight via the Channel Tunnel Rail Link into the London area
for distribution rather than in by road.
15 Committee Ref: A168, UK Rail Freight Volume Growth
(LINEWD-19605-004). Back
16
Committee Ref: A168, Correspondence from Department for Transport
to EWS, Temporary versus permanent acquisition for freight yards
and depots (LINEWD-19605-061). Back
17
Committee Ref: A168, Crossrail: typical commodities moved by
rail on the Great Western mainline (LINEWD-19605-005). Back
18
Committee Ref: A168, Moving freight: the lorry equivalent of
typical freight trains using the GWML (LINEWD-19605-008). Back
19
Committee Ref: A168, Rail freight-the environmental benefit (LINEWD-19605-009). Back
20
Written Ministerial Statement on Rail Freight, House of Commons
Hansard, Cols 72-74WS, 19 July 2005 (LINEWD-19605-010 and -011). Back
21
Committee Ref: A168, The Mayor's Transport Strategy, 4K freight,
delivery and servicing, www.london.gov.uk (LINEWD-19605-013) Back
| 
