Return to Archive -by date - by topic - 2001 Archive.
Want to laugh? Want to cry? Read on.
GOVIA – the entente cordiale between Go Ahead Group and VIA GTI, is currently evaluating bids for 730 electric multiple unit vehicles for the Network South Central franchise which Connex is expected to hand over on 23 June. VIA GTI is another example of private sector entrepreneurial flair in our new railway, French Railways having a majority shareholding.
I say ‘hand over', but, of course, GOVIA will pay for the privilege. Pay how much? Well enough to compensate Connex for the loss of expected profits (vraiment?) plus the investment in hardware such as ticketing machines.
Connex Managing Director Olivier Brousse reckons this will be ‘small money' compared with Govia's promised investment in the franchise. Cardinal Richelieu would have been proud of that subtle piece of stiletto work.
Anyway, under the heads of terms for the replacement franchise signed on 23 October last year, GOVIA is committed to have 396 replacement vehicles delivered by 2002 and a further 334 by 2004. This is typically sloppy wording from the Strategic Rail Authority, since no one is going to build 99 four car EMUs ‘by 2002' since 2002 is only seven months away. So insert ‘end of' in each case.
Arranging new trains for South Central has raised fatuous complexity to new heights, even by the standards of this column.
Apart from GOVIA's procurement, there is also the SRA's own Mk 1 stock replacement exercise, plus the 240 Adtranz Electrostar vehicles (colloquially known as Batches 2 & 3) ordered by Connex and funded by Porterbrook, and another 160 Electrostar vehicles being acquired by Porterbrook as a speculative build.
Let's clear up the Electrostars first. Franchise replacement means that Connex' procurement of Electrostars for South Central Mk1 replacement could have been aborted. So the SRA has brokered a deal with GOVIA and Connex for the Batch 2 and 3 build to go ahead on the basis that the vehicles will remain in service with South Central at least until the end of 2004.
This takes some of the pressure off Mk 1 replacement. However, the deal allows GOVIA to replace these Class 375s with another design if Connex agrees on the move. Connex would probably agree, because the units could be transferred to South Eastern, although the interiors woul;d have to be revamped. SRA Director Commercial & Rolling Stock Toby deBurgh describes the deal as ‘flexible, because we are not going to disadvantage either passengers or the two franchisees'.
GOVIA is expected to decide on a preferred manufacturer in June. Hitachi (Modern Railways April) is among the bidders, Informed Sources suggest that HSBC is GOVIA's likely financier.
Now the SRA chose two preferred financiers and allocated HSBC Rail to SWT and Porterbrook to South Central. Its two preferred manufacturers, see above, were thought to be Alstom and Siemens, although with Siemens a bit pre-occupied (see above again) the third reserve may have been called into play, which could be Hitachi or Adtranz.
When GOVIA decides, the SRA will compare GOVIA's HSBC/Brand X Train Co package will be compared with the SRA offer of Porterbrook/A.N. Other Trains. Meanhwile, Porterbrook is sitting pretty with orders on Adtranz for a tad over the number of vehicles needed to meet GOVIA's end-2002 commitment. Even prettier, 240 of these vehicles have a guaranteed home on South Centre to the end of 2004..
And with Electrostars at last running in some numbers with both c2c and Connex South Eastern, the outcome on South Central is starting to look like a no brainer. Even, that is, before you realise that the new Managing Director and Engineering Director of South Central both have experience of Alstom's delivery record at First North Western and SWT respectively.
So for the next few months, at least one train builder bidding directly to GOVIA will also be competing against its own bid to the SRA. Similarly, Portebrook will be funding will be funding a done deal with Adtranz independent of the SRA exercise which it is also funding.
Does it matter? I think so. When I asked Toby deBurgh how the value for money of the GOVIA and SRA offers would be compared, he said there was a ‘host of things' including the franchisee's willingness to take performance risk on train delivery and ‘stand behind the manufacturer's project delivery and project management'.
For example, in the case of the Angel Trains deal with Stagecoach, deBurgh said that in overall terms the value for money and risk transfer was better than the SRA offer. Well, obviously. How could the SRA match the risk transfer that a franchisee, could obtain from a preferred bidder with builder, financier and customer in it together.
And to think I use to complain about BR procurement.