Return to Archive -by date - by topic - 1999
For the first time in five years we sense a lightening of the mood of the railway industry. To describe it as optimism would be going too far. Rather, there is emerging confidence that something can be done to make the dysfunctional railway created by privatisation work and a grim determination among hard core railway managers to bring this about.
Newly appointed Chairman Designate of the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) Sir Alastair Morton expressed this mood in the first sentence of the SRA's mission statement: ‘To make the (rail) privatisation work as a public service'.
This is very much an old railway manager phenomenon. The arriviste franchise owners from the bus and other transport sectors continue to whinge about the unfairness of the railway into which they so willingly bought. And those at the top of the black tower at Euston still reject the corollary that state subsidy imposes obligations above and beyond those to shareholders.
But among real railwaymen, the drive to reclaim the passenger railway is well and truly underway. You can tell this from the outburst of political incorrectness at a recent conference on Railtrack's infrastructure maintenance contracting policy.
To give the operator's view point they invited Mr High Profile himself – Chris Green of Virgin Rail. Chris illustrated the problems the industry faced with a simple diagram showing the passenger's relationship with the railway.
On one side was 1993, with each of the passenger businesses fully integrated under Organising for Quality. Trains, track, marketing , operations all belonged to the business which presented a single face to the customer.
In contrast to this ‘golden age', yes he really said that in public, was 1999, with 25 Train Operating Companies, seven Railtrack Zones, three Rolling Stock Companies, six infrastructure maintenance groups etc etc.
Next up was Chris Leah, Railtrack's Director Operations. He too was equally forthright. ‘We are looking to recreate the vertically integrated industry with private sector partnerships'. Yes, he really did use the ‘V' word in public.
John Curley, Railtrack's Performance Director is fostering vertical integration at the operations level. His chosen acronym for this programme has an old BR ring Process for Performance Improvement or PfPI for short.
Area delivery groups bring together front line zone staff with their maintenance contractors in the same offices, or co-location in management speak. Now Area Task Groups are being set up through which train operators can come to the Railtrack/contractor party. A year ago, this would have been seditious stuff indeed.
And, it seems to be working. PfPI was piloted on Railtrack's Londopn North Eastern and East Anglia Zones. On LNE the result has been what Railtrack Chairman calls ‘economic architecture' problems.
Translated this means that the incentive regimes between Railtrack and its contractor and the train operators and Railtrack have reached the caps set on bonuses. To put it another way, even though performance is improving, this cannot be rewarded until contracts are re-negotiated.
Of course, all this is no more than Noah's dove returning with an olive branch. There are patches of dry land, but there is still a hell of a lot of water.
Even so, it does indicate that what politicians tore assunder may yet be put together by the industry itself. Another indicator will be the first Timetable conference in June which could sign the death knell for aggressive open access competition on the tracks.
With Sir Robert Reids' old railway trying to get its act back together, morale is going to be a vital factor. Here we, at last, have a congruence of interests between Railways and the Government. Or as Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott put it so eloquently . ‘If you're failing We're going to cop it as well. We're in it together'.
In the past, bad news was good news for a Labour opposition trying to discredit privatisation. Now, bad news is really bad news for a Government in power for two years and with nothing to show for it but a worsening railway.
With the Summit over, what the railway needs now is a period of peace and quiet in which the still raw wounds of privatisation an heal. Yes there will be troubles ahead. Yes, Railtrack will be criticised for the contrast between its investment projections and what is really being spent. Yes, public rows are about to erupt as new trains are delivered late. Yes the Regulator and Franchising Director may have to slap wrists.
But what would help if the performance of the industry was not analysed to death with fresh statistics almost weekly as the Office of the Rail Regulator, the Office of Passenger Rail Franchising and sundry Rail Users Consultative Committees seek to show what a good job they are doing protecting the travelling public.
Perhaps the next OPRAF performance bulletin could be sent out late on a Friday afternoon (an old Department of Transport trick) with no spin and no sound bite press release from the Director. Perhaps the RUCC Chairmen could look for something positive, or at least refrain from the more extreme soundbites calling for yet more punishment. Perhaps John Prescott could let the fat cats enjoy their wind fall gains in retirement. That's a sunk cost.
A plea for peace and quiet may seem contrary coming from part of a railway press which heartily endorses the famous definition of news as something somebody doesn't want published. But the big national media stories are fuelled not by investigative reporting but by official statistics.
Does anybody believe that ‘OPRAF says railway performance getting better' will be front page news? If ‘sources close to the DPM' revealed something positive about railway investment the poor spin doctor would be laughed to scorn
Of course, justice must continue to be done though the heavens fall, but if the fragile confidence we detect is to grow, an excess of regulatory zeal should be avoided. The facts, ma'am, just the facts, will be enough.