Thameslink Upgrades Motion made, and Question proposed,
That this House do now adjourn.—(Kelly Tolhurst.) 7.02 pm Bim
Afolami (Hitchin and Harpenden) (Con) I thank the Minister
for coming to the House to discuss this issue, and for meeting me
to discuss it previously. I also thank the Secretary of State for
the numerous conversations about it that we have had in recent
weeks....Request free trial
Thameslink Upgrades
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now
adjourn.—(Kelly Tolhurst.)
7.02 pm
-
(Hitchin and Harpenden)
(Con)
I thank the Minister for coming to the House to discuss
this issue, and for meeting me to discuss it previously. I
also thank the Secretary of State for the numerous
conversations about it that we have had in recent weeks. I
have been forced to initiate this debate to ensure that
Harpenden commuters get the good service that they deserve
and pay good money for, rather than facing years of
disruption and a worse service.
Lest I forget to mention the other half of my constituency,
let me say at the outset that I am very aware of concern
about the changes in the timetable for trains travelling
from Hitchin station—in the north of my constituency—as
well as those travelling from Harpenden. I will correspond
with the Minister on that in due course and in further
detail, but it will not constitute the main thrust of my
remarks this evening.
I am sure that the desired outcome for Thameslink is, eventually, a
greatly improved service throughout the network, but the
immediate negative impact on commuters in Harpenden for the
next two years is unacceptable to my constituents and to
me. The key issue is a loss of services during peak morning
and evening hours. Thameslink deems the peak morning
period to be between 7 am and 9.59 am, which has led to
much disagreement between Harpenden commuters—and
myself—and the operator. Regardless of what Thameslink calls the “peak”, most
commuters from Harpenden travel to work between the hours
of 6.30 am and 8.30 am, and between these times Harpenden
will see a net loss in service of two fast trains. These
fast trains are only partly compensated for by lengthening
some trains from eight to 12 carriages, and Thameslink putting on extra trains
after 9 am to meet its peak-time requirements is not going
to help anybody trying to get to work on time in London. In
practical terms, the overall loss is eight carriages in
that key two-hour slot, which represents a loss of capacity
for over 1,100 people, who will mostly have to stand.
Not only is the current demand from Harpenden station to
London extremely high, but in addition there will be an
increased number of passengers on the train before it gets
to Harpenden station, as East Midlands Trains is reducing
the number of trains stopping at Bedford, so many thousands
of effectively new commuters will also be using these
services. To sum up, Harpenden is getting a reduction in
service and an increase in passengers—and I am not even
getting into the general growth of Harpenden as a town over
the next couple of years—making the commute not merely
inconvenient but, for many, unbearable.
Let us compare this situation with that for St Albans, a
town not far from Harpenden. Commuters from St Albans will
be gaining fast trains during peak hours, as well as slow
trains, and a net increase of 44 carriages. To put that in
context, that is six times the number that Harpenden is
losing. I am fully aware that St Albans has approximately
double the footfall of Harpenden, but it would be clear to
any objective observer that a considered approach
by Thameslink and Network Rail should
not lead to such a discrepancy.
I am a realist—as you know, Mr Deputy Speaker; you know
me—and I recognise that changes will always need to be made
to train timetables, but consultation for changes is, and
should always be, key, not just because people deserve the
chance to have their say on changes that can significantly
affect their working lives and their lives more generally,
but because it gives a chance to inform local people how
proposed changes can be improved for all concerned.
There was an embarrassing lack of consultation on these
changes. The Minister has admitted that there was never
going to be a consultation because it would be
“disingenuous” to consult as there were no “genuine
options”. That is not good enough for a timetable change of
this scale. I have had several meetings over the past few
weeks with experts on these matters, with expertise from
the technical—it took me a while to understand what they
were talking about, but I got there—to the bureaucratic and
organisational. Some of those experts live in Harpenden but
others live outside. They said to me that alternative
choices could have been made that impact on Harpenden, and
the entire line more broadly, much less and much more
evenly.
In addition to hearing the Minister’s response on the lack
of consultation, I would like to know what
measures Thameslink intends to take to
monitor the impact of the timetable changes that will be
introduced in May over the coming months, in order to
reassess them in the autumn and offer a clear timescale on
when customers can finally expect to see improvements. What
commitment is there to listen to and, more importantly, act
on, feedback from customers following the introduction of
the proposed timetable changes?
-
Mr (Luton South)
(Lab/Co-op)
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing this debate.
He will understand that the changes for his commuters from
Harpenden and mine from Luton are a direct result of East
Midlands trains being taken out in the peak in the mornings
and the running of fast services to replace that. He is
right to say that speed is of the essence, and making sure
this situation is not prolonged for three years or so is
something on which the Minister should focus.
-
The hon. Gentleman is well informed on these issues, and is
generally well informed when he speaks in the House. The
focus of my remarks is Harpenden, but I agree that this
affects many colleagues on both sides of the House, and I
urge the Minister to bear all these specific concerns in
mind.
It is a term of the franchise agreement
between Thameslink and the Department for
Transport that if there is a “material adverse impact” on
passengers because of changes, there must be a 12-week
consultation period. Before the debate, I asked the
Minister and the Secretary of State several times whether
they agreed that these changes did in fact represent a
material adverse impact. I also asked them how, if they
disagreed, they would characterise the changes.
I want to make this point clear to the House. The impact of
these timetable changes goes beyond just changing what time
people arrive at work or at home. A key issue that has been
raised with me time and again is the impact on working
parents, especially working mothers. Working parents have
particularly tight windows for getting into work and
getting home. I know, as the parent to two small boys, Zach
and Sam, and as the husband of a working mother, that
organising childcare around a commute is a hugely important
factor in any working parent’s day. It is therefore
unacceptable for Thameslink’s changes to cause so much
disruption to so many people.
Let me describe the impact of these changes on my
constituents. I shall use as examples two people who have
emailed me about this matter. The first constituent states:
“I am a mother of three school age children and am
recovering from breast cancer. In the recent months, I
have chosen to catch a semi fast service, 0718, to be able
to get a seat to minimise the stress and impact on my
health. This service will no longer stop at Harpenden. I
will have to catch an earlier train on which there is
unlikely to be seats due both to the reduction in trains
and the fact that Thameslink will have thousands of
extra customers a day due to East Midland Trains reducing
the services stopping at Bedford and Luton. I am concerned
about the impact on my health, my ability to get to work on
time and on the time I can spend with my children.”
The second constituent has said:
“I fear for my wife who has to drop our son at nursery at
0730 and therefore has no option but to travel at an
already busy time. I can’t see anything other than a
negative impact for her on what is already a far from ideal
journey given the current numbers of people using those
services, lack of space and seats. The return journey may
be considerably worse than today and the reduction in
services could potentially make it difficult to get back to
the nursery on time, particularly when there are problems
with track or trains.”
Those are just two examples, but similar concerns have been
repeated again and again by worried parents, and by people
across Harpenden of all ages and circumstances who commute
to London for work.
I accept—and I am sure the Minister will agree—that dealing
with Britain’s train network is a real challenge for the
Department, for Network Rail and for the Ministers and
senior civil servants involved. Overcrowding on the network
is nothing new, with rail passenger journeys more than
doubling in the past 20 years. St Pancras is a key
destination for Harpenden commuters, and at that station
alone, more than 36,000 passengers arrive during the
morning peak, with another 30,000 going to Blackfriars
station, which has the worst overcrowding in London.
Passenger numbers on the trains from Harpenden have grown
year on year, with the service now bursting at the seams,
as any Harpenden commuter who gets on the train at peak
time will tell us.
The use of Thameslink has grown faster than
was expected when the programme began. The predicted yearly
increase in passenger numbers was between 0.5% and 1% over
the lifetime of the Thameslink programme.
However, Thameslink now carries 40% more
passengers than it did seven years ago. The Public Accounts
Committee, of which I am a proud member, has reported
on Thameslink’s problems and recently found
that the knock-on effect of issues along the
entire Thameslink network means that the
number of trains reaching their destination within five
minutes of their scheduled time has fallen from 91.4% to
83%.
It is important to make the point that the growth in
passenger numbers is an indication of the success of the
service. Harpenden would not be such a desirable place to
live if the service was not, broadly speaking, a good one.
However, with that passenger growth comes the immense
challenge of managing it appropriately and keeping costs
down for passengers, and I am afraid that Thameslink appears to be failing on
both counts.
Bearing in mind the extent of overcrowding and the
increasingly stretched service that I have described,
Harpenden commuters into London currently pay just over
£3,800 a year for an annual ticket, and well over £4,000 if
a tube travelcard is included, which most commuters need.
In comparison, a season ticket from Woking—I have nothing
against Woking; they are very nice people—which is a
similar distance from London, is £400 cheaper.
Basildon—again, a wonderful place with nice people—to
London is £1,000 cheaper for a similar distance. My point
is that Harpenden commuters are paying their fair share.
They are travelling the same distance for more money and
face a real disruption to services without any
compensation.
All the issues—the timetable changes, delayed services and
overcrowding—have caused huge concern for my constituents
and have resulted in me raising questions repeatedly with
both the Secretary of State and the Minister. In respect of
the upcoming changes, due to come into force on 21 May
after at least two years, there are some key questions that
need to be addressed that have so far gone unanswered.
First, when was the decision made to make changes to East
Midlands trains that would impact Harpenden? At what stage
were changes to Harpenden’s services considered and decided
upon? Secondly, will the Minister explain why Harpenden is
experiencing a loss in services during peak morning and
evening times, while St Albans, as I have described, is
experiencing a big increase, especially considering the
increased footfall from Bedford through Harpenden?
Thirdly, given the increase in passenger numbers combined
with a reduction in frequency and capacity of service, what
will be the impact on Harpenden commuters of Bedford
passengers travelling on Thameslink services during peak
times? How many more passengers will be on the London
trains arriving in Harpenden in the morning as a result of
the timetable changes?
Fourthly, by GTR’s own admittance, some of the proposed
improvements that will come into effect at the end of 2018
are at the mercy of engineering works further down the line
in Kent. What is the risk realistically that those works
will not be completed in time, therefore extending even
further the problems that Harpenden commuters are facing?
Fifthly, there is huge concern about the lack of
consultation with local people, despite the material
adverse impact to services of timetable changes. To add
insult to injury, Thameslink still claims that the
service will not be significantly impacted. Does the
Minister agree that there will be a material adverse change
and that there should have been a consultation? If he does
not, how does he view the changes? Finally, and most
importantly, when will Harpenden commuters get the service
they deserve and have been promised for so long?
I have not come to the Chamber just to complain. There are
proposed solutions available that could be implemented as
soon as May, despite the insistence from senior officials
at GTR that they are not workable. I put several
suggestions to GTR officials when we met a few weeks ago,
yet there has been no consultation to discuss the
alternatives. One suggestion is that five trains from
Bedford to London should stop at Harpenden in addition to
stopping at St Albans, which would add between three and
four minutes to the journey. I understand that there are
complexities in getting all the trains to London at a
reasonable time, bearing in mind the extra three or four
minutes, but the experts to whom I have spoken do not
believe that they are insurmountable. Another simpler
solution that would increase capacity, although it would
not solve the issue of train frequency, would be for the
Minister to declassify all first-class carriages during
peak times. That would give some much-needed relief to
passengers on what will be an increasingly overcrowded
service.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the
Harpenden Thameslink Commuters Group, notably
Emily Ketchin, for its tireless campaigning and lobbying.
Harpenden councillors have not been far behind,
particularly Mary Maynard and Teresa Heritage, and I thank
them for helping me to understand how much the changes have
affected Harpenden residents.
There will be those, not in this Chamber now but outside,
who do not think timetable changes or impacts on commuters
are really that important, but I believe that that is of
critical importance, and not just to the individual
passengers, as I have set out. If we want to keep London
and the south-east as the most dynamic regional economy in
Europe, people need to be able to get to work on time, not
packed like cattle, at a reasonable price. Importantly,
when major changes are made to their service—such changes
must happen from time to time—passengers should be
consulted and treated like adults and paying customers.
I know that the Minister wants to do his best for Harpenden
commuters. I also know that he is a highly intelligent and
thoughtful man, as the whole House will appreciate. I ask
him to consider carefully the concerns of Harpenden
commuters that I have expressed in this debate, to give
them hope that the future will be better with an improved,
not reduced, service, and to strengthen their damaged faith
in our rail transport network.
7.20 pm
-
The Minister of State, Department for Transport (Joseph
Johnson)
I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin and
Harpenden (Bim Afolami) on securing this debate, which
follows on from our conversations in meetings we held on 22
March.
I begin with the specific issue of the changes to the
timetable. Harpenden is on the midland main line, which runs
from London to Nottingham and Sheffield and, as Members know,
is undergoing its largest upgrade since it was built in the
19th century. The upgrade is necessary and urgent, as the
number of passenger journeys taken on Britain’s rail network
has doubled in the past 20 years. As part of the upgrade, a
fourth track is being built north of Bedford to Kettering and
will provide space for an additional train path from December
2020. Unfortunately, to allow the works to take place, some
difficult decisions have had to be taken.
East Midlands Trains’ fast peak-time services will not call
at Bedford or Luton from May 2018 to December 2020. Instead,
displaced East Midlands Trains passengers from Bedford and
Luton will be able to travel on fast Thameslink services, which will not
stop at Harpenden. In answer to my hon. Friend’s first
question, the decision was made in November 2017, once the
industry had exhausted all alternative options.
Obviously, I completely understand the concerns of commuters
from my hon. Friend’s constituency. However, steps have been
taken so that, despite the unavoidable loss of two fast peak
services, overall the capacity from Harpenden in the morning
will be roughly the same as today, with only four fewer
carriages across the entire three-hour morning peak. There
will be an increase in capacity during the evening peak, with
an additional 20 carriages bringing an additional 1,242
seats. In addition, it is expected that most Bedford
commuters will opt to take the fast Thameslink services, rather than
those that stop at Harpenden. It is possible that that will
reduce, rather than increase, crowding on Harpenden services.
My hon. Friend raises the issue of St Albans City station,
which requires a capacity increase because, as he
acknowledges, it carries twice as many passengers as
Harpenden and already has issues of its own with crowding on
platforms. On the question of the potential for engineering
works in Kent to delay the improvements to Harpenden, these
are minor works and are currently on schedule to be completed
on time. There is minimal risk to passengers from Harpenden.
From December 2018, an additional service will be scheduled
in both the morning and evening peaks, and two trains will be
lengthened from eight to 12 carriages. That will provide a
capacity increase in both peaks. From December 2020, when the
upgrade to the midland main line is complete, Thameslink will reinstate the fast
services that have been withdrawn and will add four more
12-car peak services at Harpenden, resulting in an additional
two fast 12-car trains per hour compared with the May
timetable. That will provide a substantially improved service
for Harpenden commuters.
I apologise again to my hon. Friend as the full benefits of
the Thameslink programme will be delayed
for commuters from his constituency. In the context of the
major engineering works necessary to bring the midland main
line into the 21st century, this was the best available
solution. We should also not lose sight of the many benefits
the Thameslink programme will bring to
passengers from Harpenden and the wider Thameslink network: new trains; more
reliable journeys; and a substantial increase in capacity
from 2020.
My hon. Friend mentioned the problems with consultation,
which, again, we have discussed extensively in our previous
meetings. I would like to emphasise that ahead of this
timetable change Thameslink has carried out one of the
largest and, in some ways, most effective consultations we
have ever seen on the railways. In fact, as a result of these
consultations, Thameslink has made hundreds of
changes to its plans.
-
(Horsham) (Con)
May I endorse what the Minister has just said, in that we see
a net benefit in my constituency from the changes to the
timetable and I have encountered constituents who are very
impressed with changes that have been made as a result of the
consultation? However, like my hon. Friend the Member for
Hitchin and Harpenden (Bim Afolami), one station, in
particular, in my constituency is losing services during that
critical peak time, when people need to get into London to
work. In addition to dealing with the questions he has been
asked, will the Minister assure the House that this issue
will continue to be kept under review and we will be able to
look at it again when we see the full import of the timetable
and its impact on our commuters?
-
I thank my hon. Friend for bringing to our attention the
issues faced by his constituents, particularly at Balcombe
station. There will be further opportunities to lobby for
changes to the timetable at the next iteration; May’s is
obviously set in stone, but there will always be a December
timetable and subsequent timetables, so these things are not
set in stone. This has been one of the biggest timetabling
changes the network has ever seen and, understandably, not
everything is going to satisfy everybody at every moment in
time.
-
Mr Shuker
I am extremely grateful to hear that from the Minister. Of
course, it is a rolling series of timetable changes over the
next three years, at six-monthly interval. Members in this
House will be extremely grateful to hear the Minister’s
willingness to keep a close eye on things at each of those
timetable changes, rather than necessarily relying on the
plan as it currently stands to go for two and a half years.
-
This has been one of the biggest timetabling changes the
system has ever undertaken and, as I have said, it will not
have satisfied everybody in its first iteration. However,
December is coming along in not too lengthy a period of time,
and hon. Members are always welcome to put suggestions to the
Department and to their operators for consideration.
The impact of the midland main line works only became
apparent to us in November 2017, as I mentioned. This short
timeline meant that a specific consultation for Harpenden
passengers was simply not a viable option. To give my hon.
Friend the Member for Hitchin and Harpenden some background,
the detailed work to implement the May timetable on
the Thameslink routes began more than a
year ago. This timetable rewrite is unprecedented in its
scale. Every service on this part of the network is being
altered in order to bring about the full benefits of
the Thameslink programme. As work
progressed, the Department was advised that there were likely
to be some temporary negative impacts on some services as a
result of the complexity of this undertaking. By the time
this became clear, it would have been disingenuous to
consult, as he acknowledged, as there was by that stage only
one viable option before us. Since that point, industry
professionals have been working to address as many of these
negative effects as physically possible. Although it has not
been possible to eliminate them all, the industry will
continue to work to improve the timetable at every subsequent
opportunity.
As an MP whose constituency sits on the Thameslink network, I share many of
the concerns that have been raised in this debate. However,
we should not lose sight of the fact that the Thameslinkprogramme is an incredibly
ambitious investment, which will transform travel across the
south-east for the coming decades. We have already seen new
trains rolled out across the Thameslinknetwork, replacing trains that
were first introduced in the 1980s. The new trains carry far
more people and will allow Thameslink to meet the demand of a
21st-century city. These trains have live information screens
so that passengers know if their tube line is delayed. These
trains have wide entrances and gangways, making it easier for
passengers to move around, and get on and off the train. We
have also already seen substantial investment in stations.
The £1 billion redevelopment of London Bridge is perhaps the
best known, but investments have been made across the network
so that the benefits of the Thameslink programme can be felt
across the whole south-east. We have also seen substantial
investment in infrastructure upgrades, including the
replacement of tracks and signals, and the repair of tunnels
and bridges. This means that passengers will get the
resilient and reliable service that they deserve.
Question put and agreed to.
|