More recently, Greater Manchester has been investing in its Metrolink light rail system, but the role once played by PTEs in rail has diminished as central government gathered more powers for itself - particularly around investment decisions. There are hints of change in last May’s final publication of the Williams Review, now rebranded as the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail.
Of devolution, it says: “Existing devolved authorities in Scotland, Wales, London, Merseyside, and Tyne and Wear will continue to exercise their current powers and to be democratically accountable for them. They will continue to award contracts and set fares on their services, for instance. As now, devolved rail authorities will need to work together in partnership with Great British Railways. This includes supporting a single national network, including one website and app and delivering consistent branding and passenger standards, such as on accessibility and compensation.”
The canny will note the similarities between Gourvish’s view that British Rail’s costs and revenues only came together on its chief executive’s desk and the Williams-Shapps view that “Great British Railways will bring the railways’ finances together in a single organisation across track, train and the rail estate.”
It then explains: “The costs of the railways will become more transparent and visible for government, taxpayers and investors.”
As ministers took ever-tighter control of rail, for example by specifying fare rises and controlling investment decisions over recent years, it seems they never noticed that they had substituted their desks for that of BR’s chief executive. In future, it will be the desk of GBR’s chief executive at which costs and revenues collide (or, perhaps, miss).
Williams-Shapps also says: “New partnerships between Great British Railways and local and regional government will be established to give local leaders a greater say in how the railways are run in their area. For the first time, these agreements will encompass the whole passenger offer and long-term strategy for railways in a local area.
“Depending on the needs and capacities of different places, partnerships will include the ability for local leaders to integrate ticketing and fares with other local transport services, control stations, and buy additional services or infrastructure to achieve local transport and housing priorities more effectively than today, using funds raised locally. Local railway managers will be scrutinised by local politicians through joint governance arrangements to provide clear accountability locally in areas where such arrangements are appropriate.”
Centro’s successor is Transport for the West Midlands, which is part of the West Midlands Combined Authority, itself formed of seven local councils as full voting members plus a further ten councils and three Local Enterprise Partnerships. West Midlands Mayor Andy Street chairs the combined authority.
Transport for the West Midlands Rail Director Malcolm Holmes explains his reaction to the Plan for Rail’s comments on devolution to RailReview: “The ambition that’s contained in the rail review is good, there’s some really positive ambition. I was steeling myself to be underwhelmed by the plan when it was ultimately published, but I was wrong. It was more ambitious that I was expecting and I’m quite happy for it to be that way.
“When it comes to local control, though, I have some worries. There are lots of warm words and positive statements, and lots of uses of the ‘p’ word - partnership. But it is very light on policy detail. My concern is that when we begin to explore the detail of what that looks like, I suspect that won’t necessarily reach our ambitions. I think it’s a long way from there being any options for further devolution.”
Holmes explains why his region wants more devolution: “It’s economic and it’s about connectivity. The rail network in the West Midlands is a very significant economic asset that supports the effective economic functioning of Birmingham and the wider region.
“Before COVID hit, actually back in 2017, rail became the most dominant mode for city centre peak-time commuting into Birmingham. It was huge in terms of its importance to the functioning of the economy.
“The very basic argument for more local control is that decisions over suburban and commuter rail networks into our towns and cities ought to be made locally and be accountable to local politicians, rather than accountable to ministers in Whitehall, because we’re close to it. For me, personally, I know every station in the West Midlands and I know every route.
“Civil servants are great people and there’s a lot of amazing talent in the DfT, but they can’t be expected to know what it’s like to travel from Cannock into Birmingham in the morning peak - it’s not reasonable.
“But further than that, and this is something where government does make positive noises, it’s about integration across transport modes.
“We’d like to have a solidly integrated transport system in the West Midlands. The West Midlands Railway brand is very much part of that, and with our West Midlands bus brand, our West Midlands metro brand, our cycling and walking brands, and the overarching Transport for the West Midlands brand - very much the TfL model - we’re trying to get the ticketing right through the Swift smartcard.
“But it’s difficult to run an integrated transport system, even to market an integrated transport system, if the control of one of the elements is divorced from or remote from the rest of the network.”
