Posted 30th October 2009 | 8 Comments
ATOC calls for longer franchises and less DfT 'micro-management' of railways
The Government should back away from fettering the railways with micro-management, according to the Association of Train Operating Companies, which has branded the present level of Department for Transport involvement with detail as 'inappropriate'.
ATOC is also calling for longer franchises, of 15 to 20 years, to encourage franchise-holders to invest for the longer term.
The Chief Executive of ATOC, Michael Roberts, said the Department for Transport would still be in control, even if it backed away from some of the day-to-day issues, and that holders of longer franchises would still be obliged to live up to their contracts: "We would keep the existing mechanisms to deal with any company that fails to perform. Terminating a franchise under our proposals would be no more difficult for a longer franchise than a shorter one," he said.
He also said that longer franchises would give companies a reasonable time in which to concentrate on improving services, rather than almost constantly having to consider their bids for the next franchise.
The Conservative party has already called for longer franchises, which it claims are the 'only credible alternative' to 'Labour's flawed process'.
In response to ATOC, the DfT said the Government was "committed to putting passengers first", while watchdog Passenger Focus said it believed that meeting passenger satisfaction targets should continue to be a key commitment for operators.
Reader Comments:
Views expressed in submitted comments are that of the author, and not necessarily shared by Railnews.
Tom Watson, Coventry, W Midlands
So Mr Blurton wants to make things even more complicated that they are? Priceless.
With three additional train operators, more expense on the franchising process, and more companies that won't wait for late connecting trains, is this really the way to run a railway?
Robbie R Craig, Romney Marsh, UK
whenever there is "micromanagement" like this - as the industry puts is, it usually means that there has been some kind of shenanigans and bad faith activities that need controlling and the government does not trust those acting on its behalf. This is the same reason the police and social servies have to fill in so much paper work.
Joel Kosminsky, london, Britain
It's all about 'not making enough money' - TOCs didn't complain when the pounds rolled in. Now it's a recession and the 'risk' element is 'too risky'. TOCs have consistently cut and cut, lowering operating standards (how many of today's trains will last to a comparable half-life overhaul with 'old' stock?) and taking more money out. Each sub-contractor demands their own profit and the end price paid by passenger and taxpayer is feather-bedding these charlatans and their subsidiaries - just look how many cross-holdings of shares and partnerships there are. This is legalised corruption and distortion of the market environment they all profess to bow down to.
Patrick Houghton, London, England
I agree with longer rail franchises. It gives them longer to invest in projects which will improve the service and lets them see a return for their investment over the course of the franchise. Shorter franchises haven't got the time or money to make such valuable investments. Also it is a complete waste of money seeing stations and trains change colour every 7 or so years (every time a new franchise starts)! Look at Chiltern Railways as an example of how long franchises can be very sucessful.
Lorentz, London
This is more to do with the Industry, i.e. those that know what the issues are, speaking up against those that know nothing about it, yet seem to think they know how the railways should be organsied. Unfortunately this is Britain, so it is the empty barrels amongst the public and otherwise unemployable of Parliament that will ensure we are burdened with an inefficient system, one way or another.
Robert C, London, UK
This is just special pleading for the entrenchment of a broken system which will just mean they cream off more profits and we have yet more unco-ordinated rail development.
Private UK rail remains an expensive and nonsensical shambles compared with other European countries' rail systems.
Joseph Pestell, Newbury
"Labour's flawed process". Tories must think that we all have very short memories!!! The franchise system is still basically the one that they created.
That said, longer franchises is definitely the way forward.
Andrew John Blurton, Stafford, United Kingdom
WHY SHOULD NT CROSS COUNTRY TRAINS BE SPLIT INTO THREE NEW OPERATORS TO SERVE ALL TOWNS & CITIES ON THE EAST & WEST COAST LINES & EAST ANGLIA & MIDLIND MAIN LINE NOW & CREATE MORE SERVICES VIA OXFORD & BEDFORD & STEVENAGE & MILTON KEYNES & WORCESTER & HEREFORD VIA THE MISSING EAST WEST RAIL LINK TO CORNWALL & DORSET & SUSSEX & WALES & PRESTON
VIA THE COTSWOLDS & THE SPALDING-LINCOLN CORRIDOR TO YORK & NEWCASTLE VIA HARTLEPOOL - SUNDERLAND CORRIDOR & CREATE CROSS COUNTRY TRAINS WEST & CROSS COUNTRY TRAINS EAST & CROSS COUNTRY TRAINS CENTRAL TO THE EAST & WEST MIDLANDS & NORTH EAST & NORTH WEST STATIONS & CITIES MORE LOCALLY & WHY DOESNT THE GOVERNMENT START THINKING ABOUT THIS WHEN THE RAIL NETWORK GETS ELECTRIFIED WITH NETWORK RAIL!!