I don’t detect much feeling of urgency. This is a once-in-30-year change. These things always take longer than people think.”
This view of a train company managing director is widely shared.
“Someone is presiding over failure, and being paid a lot of money to do so. They think they know everything, have nothing to learn, and tell us world-class rhubarb,” says another industry leader.
“I’m not sure there is a consensus that GBR is the answer to the problems. And what is, in all but name, a new Government will not be tied to the same choices as the previous one.”
Alistair Lees, managing director of ticket retailer Assertis and chairman of the Independent Rail Retailers trade body, agrees: “To everybody, the Great British Railways Transition Team appears to be moving too slowly. It’s 16 months since the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail was produced, and it is still not clear where we are going or when we are going to get there.”
There is a sense of drift on the railway, not helped by a season of political drift as a new Prime Minister was chosen. Notwithstanding the long, hot summer of damaging strikes, it is difficult to imagine railways being anywhere near the top of any government agenda.
Around the Cabinet table, it’s safe to say that the Secretary of State for Transport will not merit a place directly opposite the new Prime Minister. Or anywhere close. Health, defence, social welfare and education all stand higher up the priority list.
With the cost-of-living crisis likely to dominate the news agenda through the autumn and winter, the only real pressure on transport will be to trim Treasury spending wherever possible. We have already been told that fares will not rise next year by the usual RPI+1% formula, as that would have produced a politically unpalatable largest increase since privatisation. We also know that any increase will be delayed from January until March. But while welcome for passengers, it will further squeeze the Government’s railway revenue.
The most recent meeting of the RailReview editorial board expressed frustration at the apparent lack of progress being made by the GBR Transition Team. As board chairman Sir Michael Holden puts it: “If I was in charge, I would not be investing in rail. I don’t think the time is right. So, we need to get our own house in order if we are to escape from more drift and decay. The question is: what can the railway do to kick-start its own revival that does not require government intervention?”
Progress is certainly slower than when the present system was created, in the 1990s.
“Privatisation went from start to finish in four years,” says Rufus Boyd, programme director, passenger and freight services at GBRTT. “From appearing in the 1992 Government manifesto to being done and dusted in 1996. Quite a feat.
“It’s clear to me that it is easier to break something up than it is to glue it back together again, especially when the shape will be slightly different.
“In the 1990s, we had a command-and-control rail network, where recalcitrant managers could be ordered to fall into line with the new structure. This time, the people we are getting to reassemble have real stakes in the game - not just personal responsibilities to protect, they have equity in a very real sense.
“You must also understand how much the context has changed in the past couple of years. COVID was huge - much bigger than was widely understood, even now, on the railway. That huge hit on our revenue made our case for GBR both stronger and more difficult, because it brought Treasury interest to a heightened level.
“The Ukraine war, inflation, Brexit and the long-term effect of COVID have created a storm. This is the background to what we are doing, and it must have an impact on expectations.”
So, is the political eye well and truly off the railway ball? The television and social media war of words between RMT General Secretary Mick Lynch and Transport Secretary Grant Shapps would suggest otherwise - the union has sought to move an industry pay-and-conditions dispute onto a national political footing, with considerable success.
“We anticipated that railways would not touch the sides of the political debate over who would be the next Prime Minister,” says Boyd.
“In fact, it did. It was clear that if you took a Tory hustings to the North, people would talk about levelling up. Transport is the area in which people can talk about levelling up most clearly. GBRTT will be a key part of levelling up.”
“Of course, that may never be,” counters Alistair Lees.
“I can see Government having entirely different legislative priorities, and I don’t see a Transport Act being one of them. With the cost-of-living crisis, even the Ukraine war is slipping down the order. And the Conservatives will want to give parliamentary time to things connected with maintaining their majority at
the next election - quite obviously their focus will be on votes, and transport is rarely a feature in that.
“Plus, Williams-Shapps is closely tied with what will be seen as a previous regime. The railway is good at quietly binning reports, and I am hearing hints of that from multiple sources.
“We really need something like GBR. We need direction, we need strategy, we need vision. We have a really good opportunity to reset rail, and it isn’t happening. Yes, there is work going on by people I like and respect in GBRTT. But I have little idea what these 200 staff are actually doing. It feels like inward navel-gazing.
“At the time of greatest need, it feels like a let-down. Fundamentally, we need an organisation that can move fast.
“Yes, you need a debate about principles first, but we are losing vast amounts of time to that. Is this delivering for passengers? I think not. It is not starting with: ‘How can I deliver something great for customers?’ This has nothing to do with customers at all.”
