Examination of Witnesses (Questions 10160
10160. CHAIRMAN: Well, Mr Garratt wants
to get away. Firstly, Mr Garratt, you had no part in helping them
to reach it except producing some of the inputs.
(Mr Garratt) No, but, bear with me, I would like to make
sure that people do understand the timetabling exercise which
led to that consensus. It is a different exercise. It is a traditional
railway planning exercise which takes a timetable and attempts
to fit more trains into that timetable, and that was acceptable
to both sides as a way forward. It took a couple of months. I
would like to say that that was an exercise which could be repeated
quite quickly to assess whether less infrastructure was required,
but the Promoters chose not to do that. Certainly I want to convey
10161. But you told us the other day that your
area of expertise does not include modelling PPM?
(Mr Garratt) That is correct. Absolutely.
10162. So you had no part in leading them, except
for some of the inputs, to produce the figure of 92 per cent?
(Mr Garratt) That is right. My part was in providing the
demand, if you like.
10163. Which was one of the inputs?
(Mr Garratt) Yes.
10164. So you have nothing to say about the
figure of 92 per cent, which is what they insisted upon?
(Mr Garratt) No. I just think that is clearly a railway industry
aspiration, and if that level of quality of service is not achieved
then less trains can be accommodated on the network.
10165. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: As
I understand it, it is like the Government target for CO2 emissions
to be achieved by 2010.
(Mr Garratt) I must say I am more optimistic about the 92
per cent than the CO2 targets!
10166. LORD BROOKE OF ALVERTHORPE: But
it is a target in that sense.
10167. MR ELVIN: I was going to try and
assist my Lord, Lord Brooke's point
10168. CHAIRMAN: I wanted to know what
role Mr Garratt played in all of this?
10169. MR ELVIN: I understand that. Perhaps
I can answer Lord Brooke's question after lunch.
10170. CHAIRMAN: Mr Garratt, I am very
grateful to you.
The witness withdrew
The Petition of Trustees of the SS Robin
10171. CHAIRMAN: Just before we adjourn,
Mr Elvin, I think the Committee would like to know before the
end of the day about infrastructure managers. How do they get
appointed? Is this under the Railways Act? Is this under ROGs?
10172. MR ELVIN: It is in accordance
with the definition
10173. CHAIRMAN: Are they able, as I
think must be the case, to contract out maintenance work?
10174. MR ELVIN: Yes. I can show you
the provisions later on today.
10175. CHAIRMAN: If you are not an infrastructure
manager like TfL, can you then come along and say: "I want
to do one of the contracts", or "I want to be able to
contract it out"? Are there powers to do that?
10176. MR ELVIN: The answer to that is,
on the dispute we are having as to who should be the infrastructure
manager, it is up to the infrastructure manager as to what is
contracted out. If Network Rail is the infrastructure manager,
it makes the decisions as to who to contract the works to. If
TfL is the infrastructure manager, it will make the decisions
as to who to subcontract to.
10177. CHAIRMAN: Yes, but at the present
moment do we know who is going to be the infrastructure manager?
10178. MR ELVIN: That was the point of
the debate yesterday, my Lord. That is an issue which remains
to be resolved through the processes I was describing yesterday.
10179. CHAIRMAN: Can you come back to
this and bring us up to date with what is the total situation,
because I think we are not entirely clear what the powers of the
infrastructure manager are.