The Secretary of State for Transport (Chris Grayling)
I am pleased to take the earliest opportunity to update the House
on the recent difficulties around the timetable changes, in
particular on some GTR and Northern routes.
I want to be absolutely clear: passengers on these franchises are
facing totally unsatisfactory levels of service. It is my and my
Department’s No. 1 priority to make sure that the industry
restores reliability for passengers to an acceptable level as
soon as possible. I assure the passengers affected that I share
their frustration about what has happened, and that I am sorry
that this has taken place.
The timetable change was intended to deliver the benefits to
passengers of major investments in the rail network, meaning new
trains, including all trains on the Northern and TransPennine
Express networks, being either new or refurbished; the Great
North Rail Project infrastructure upgrades worth well over £1
billion, such as those at the Ordsall Chord and Liverpool Lime
Street; and in the south-east, through the Thameslink programme,
new trains and improved stations, including London Bridge and
Blackfriars.
The huge growth in passenger numbers in recent years demanded
expanded routes, services and extra seats, but this timetable
change has resulted instead in unacceptable disruption for the
passengers who rely on these services. The most important thing
right now is to get things back to a position of stability for
those passengers, but it is also vital to understand what has
happened and why we are in the situation we are in today. The
circumstances of the failures are different on the Northern and
GTR networks.
The investigations that are being carried out right now are
providing more information about what has gone wrong, but it is
worth being clear that the industry remained of the view until
the last moment that it would be able to deliver the changes.
That is the bit that everyone will find hard to understand and it
is why there has to be a proper investigation into what has taken
place.
On Northern, which is co-managed through the Rail North
Partnership by Transport for the North and my Department, early
analysis shows that the key issue was that Network Rail did not
deliver infrastructure upgrades in time, in particular the Bolton
electrification scheme, with damaging consequences. This forced
plans to be changed at a very late stage, requiring a complete
overhaul of logistics and crew planning. The early analysis also
shows that on GTR’s Thameslink and Great Northern routes, the
industry timetable developed by Network Rail was very late to be
finalised. That meant that train operators did not have enough
time to plan crew schedules or complete crew training, affecting
a range of other complex issues that impact on the service on
what is already a highly congested network.
It is also clear to me that both Northern and GTR were not
sufficiently prepared to manage a timetable change of this scale.
GTR did not have enough drivers with the route knowledge required
to operate the new timetable. Neither Northern nor GTR had a
clear fall-back plan.
In GTR’s case, the process of introducing the new timetable has
been overseen for the past two years by an industry readiness
board, comprising some of the most senior people in the industry,
which told me it had been given no information to suggest the new
timetable should not be implemented as planned, albeit with some
likely early issues as it bedded down. This body was set up
specifically to ensure that all parts of the rail network—Network
Rail, GTR, other train operators—were ready to implement these
major timetable changes. It should have been clear to it that
some key parties were not ready. It did not raise this risk.
The Department received advice from the Thameslink readiness
board that, while there were challenges delivering the May 2018
timetable—namely, the logistics of moving fleet and staff—a
three-week transition period would allow for minimal disruption.
My officials were assured that the other mitigations in place
were sufficient and reasonable. Indeed, as few as three weeks
before the timetable was to be implemented, GTR itself assured me
personally that it was ready to implement the changes. Clearly
this was wrong, and that is totally unacceptable.
The rail industry has collectively failed to deliver for the
passengers it serves. It is right that the industry has
apologised for the situation we are currently in and that we
learn the lessons for the future, but right now the focus should
be on restoring the reliability of its service to passengers.
This morning, I met again with chief executives of Network Rail,
GTR and Northern—the latest in a series of meetings that I and my
Department have been holding with these organisations—and the
Rail Minister has today been to Network Rail’s control centre at
its Milton Keynes headquarters. We have made it clear to them all
that the current services are still not good enough. I have also
demanded that Network Rail and the train operator work more
collaboratively across the industry to resolve the situation,
where necessary by using resources from other train operators to
support the recovery effort. Officials in my Department are
working around the clock to oversee this process. We have
strengthened resources in both the Department and Rail North
Partnership, which oversees the Northern franchise, to hold the
industry to account for improving services.
I would like to be able to tell the House that there is an easy
solution or that the Department could simply step in and make the
problems passengers are facing go away—if there were a way of
doing so, I would do it without a moment’s hesitation—but
ultimately the solution can only be delivered by the rail
industry. These problems can only be fixed by Network Rail and
the train operators methodically working through the timetable
and re-planning train paths and driver resourcing to deliver a
more reliable service. It is for such reasons that I am committed
to unifying the operations of track and trains, where
appropriate, to ensure that we do not encounter such problems in
the future.
Northern Rail has agreed an action plan with Rail North
Partnership that is focused on improving driver rostering so as
to get more trains running as quickly as possible; rapidly
increasing driver training on new routes; providing for
additional contingency drivers and management presence at key
locations in Manchester; and putting extra peak services into the
timetable along the Bolton corridor. Work on this action plan has
been under way for some time. They have also published temporary
timetables that will be more deliverable and will give passengers
much more confidence in the reliability of their service. This
will mean removing certain services from the new expanded
timetable while still ensuring an improvement in the total number
of services run by Northern compared to before the timetable
change. Alternative arrangements will be made for passengers
negatively impacted by the changes. I believe that this temporary
measure is necessary to stabilise the service and enable
improvements to be introduced gradually.
On GTR, there are more services running on a day-to-day basis
today than before the timetable change, while Southern and
Gatwick Express services are performing well on some routes but
not all. GTR is not currently able, however, to deliver all
planned services on Thameslink and Great Northern routes. In
order to give passengers more confidence, it is removing services
in advance from its timetable rather than on the day and reducing
weekend services to pre-May levels. These measures will be in
place until a full re-planning of driver resourcing has been
completed.
I would like to make it clear that, while I expect to see stable
timetables restored on both networks in the coming days, I expect
the full May timetable and all the extra trains to be introduced
in stages over the coming months to ensure it can be delivered
properly this time. Once the full service is operating on GTR, 24
Thameslink trains will run through central London every hour, and
by next year, 80 more stations will have direct services to
central London stations such as Farringdon, City Thameslink and
Blackfriars. There will also be 115 new trains and more than
1,000 new carriages providing faster, more frequent and more
reliable journeys for passengers.
On Northern, the great north rail project, an investment of well
over £1 billion in the region’s rail network, will enable by 2020
faster and more comfortable journeys as well as new direct
services across the north and beyond. By 2020, the train
operators, Northern and TransPennine Express, will deliver room
for 40,000 extra passengers, and more than 2,000 extra services a
week.
That, however, is the future. What matters now is restoring a
stable service for passengers today. I completely understand
their anger about the level of disruption that the timetable
change has caused in recent weeks. There must, of course, be a
special compensation scheme for passengers on affected routes on
both GTR and Northern. In the case of Northern, the scheme will
be subject to agreement with the board of Transport for the
North, although I doubt that the board will have a problem with
it. The purpose of the scheme, which will be introduced and
funded by the industry, will be to ensure that regular rail
customers receive appropriate redress for the disruption that
they have experienced. The industry will set out more details of
the eligibility requirements, and of how season ticket holders
can claim, but I think it is very important for
passengers—particularly in the north, where disruption has been
protracted—to be given entitlements similar to those conferred by
last year’s Southern passenger compensation scheme. Commuters in
the north are important, as important as commuters in the south,
and they should receive comparable support.
It is clear to me that, aside from Network Rail’s late
finalisation of the timetable, GTR and Northern were not
sufficiently prepared to manage a timetable change of this scale,
so today I am also announcing that work has begun to set up an
inquiry into the May timetable implementation. It will be carried
out by the independent Office of Rail and Road, and chaired by
Professor Stephen Glaister. It is necessary to have a full
inquiry, and Professor Glaister will lead one. The inquiry will
consider why the system as a whole failed to produce and
implement an effective timetable. Its findings will be shared as
early as possible with me and with the rail industry, so that
lessons can be learnt in advance of future major timetable
changes. The final report will be published by the Office of Rail
Regulation by the end of the year, but I want to see initial
responses much sooner than that.
In parallel to the inquiry, my Department will assess whether GTR
and Northern met their contractual obligations in the planning
and delivery of the timetable change. It will consider whether
the issues could have been reasonably foreseen and different
action taken to prevent the high levels of disruption that
passengers are experiencing.
In GTR’s case, the assessment will cover whether the operator had
sufficient resources and skills to deliver the new timetable and
whether drivers could have been trained in a faster and more
effective way, and will examine the contingency and risk
management arrangements currently in place. If it is found that
GTR is materially in breach of its contractual obligations, I
will take appropriate enforcement action against it. That will
include using the full force of the franchise agreement and my
powers under the Railways Act 2005, and consideration of how such
a failure affects GTR’s eligibility to hold a franchise bidding
passport. In the case of Northern, my Department will assess the
operator’s planning, risk assessment and resilience in preparing
for the May timetable change. Bearing in mind Network Rail’s
failure to deliver infrastructure on time, we will hold the
operator to the terms of its contractual obligations.
I will not be afraid to take enforcement action when it is
necessary, but it is right to go through the process of the
inquiry and to understand where fault truly lies. I will not hold
back from taking appropriate action if the review finds that
there has been negligent behaviour.
Given the importance that Members throughout the House ascribe to
these issues, I have arranged for both Northern and GTR to come
to the House this week to discuss with colleagues any specific
issues that they wish to raise with the operators. I am also
meeting Members in all parts of the House today to discuss the
issues with them. I am incredibly frustrated that what should
have been an improvement in services for passengers has turned
into significant disruption, and I am sorry about the levels of
disruption that passengers are experiencing. I am also sorry for
the staff members who have been caught at the sharp end of these
changes.
There clearly have been major failures that have led to the
situation that we are in today. I am clear about the fact that
the industry must and will be held to account for this, but my
immediate priority is to ensure that we improve train services to
an acceptable level as quickly as possible, and that will remain
my priority.
5.14 pm
(Middlesbrough) (Lab)
I am grateful for advance sight of the Secretary of State’s
statement—for once. Here we go again, with yet another chapter in
the never-ending story of our troubled railways. Not only have
train timetables been turned upside down, but the Transport
Secretary seems to have run into his own timetabling problems in
meetings with Members today.
It is said that Henry Kissinger once asked who he should call if
he wanted to speak to Europe. The answer was not clear.
Similarly, I would ask who I should call if I want to speak to
the UK rail industry. Therein lies the heart of today’s problem
and the whole rail debate more generally: no one will take
responsibility for Great Britain’s rail industry. But, amid all
the clamour, recriminations and buck-passing that characterise
discussions about rail there is one person who is ultimately
responsible: the Secretary of State for Transport, the right hon.
Member for Epsom and Ewell (Chris Grayling). But he blames
Network Rail for the timetabling failures. Yes, Network Rail has
not delivered, but he seems to forget that, as a company limited
by guarantee, Network Rail has one member: the Secretary of State
for Transport—him. He is the man in charge—allegedly. The right
hon. Gentleman might want to blame Network Rail, but it is he who
has failed in his responsibility to oversee it; the buck stops
with him. What is more, the right hon. Gentleman has burnt his
bridges with the leadership of Network Rail, which can only have
damaged his oversight of this process. Is not this a terrible
failure of him and his role atop the system?
The Northern Rail and Thameslink contracts were awarded by the
right hon. Gentleman’s Department to private operators. It is the
job of his Department to ensure that the companies fulfil their
contracts. Arriva and GTR have had years to prepare for these
timetable changes; neither have trained enough drivers to deliver
the timetable changes, yet the Department has failed to hold the
companies to account. Can the right hon. Gentleman confirm that
it is within the franchise agreement for Arriva to report
directly to him on progress in recruiting and training drivers?
Does not the buck, once again, stop with him?
GTR even had its own readiness board to implement the timetable
changes, except that it was not ready; we could not make this up.
Chris Gibb’s report on Southern exactly a year ago highlighted
the issue of driver numbers as a major operational issue within
rail. Why did the Secretary of State not take the report as an
alert to review the availability of the train drivers that were
needed across the country and do something about it? He says the
Office of Rail Regulation will report on the failings by the end
of the year, but, with the new timetable due in December, this
will be too late. What confidence can we have that it will not be
another shambles? Is not the reality that this Secretary of State
has been asleep at the wheel and this is just the latest episode
in a series of rail management failures on his watch?
The right hon. Gentleman is determined to cling on to the
micromanagement of the railway when it suits him, but he will
quickly point the finger of blame when things go wrong. He cannot
have it both ways. The Secretary of State says he is sorry for
the disruption passengers are facing. That is not good enough; he
should apologise to passengers for his failures that have put
their jobs at risks and played havoc with their family life.
The travelling public and the rail industry have no faith in this
Transport Secretary to fix this situation. Were the Prime
Minister not so enfeebled, she would sack him. If he had any
concept of responsibility, he would resign. The Transport
Secretary should do the right thing and step aside.
I was rather expecting the hon. Gentleman to say that, and I
respond simply by saying that it is my job to make sure that the
problem is fixed, and that is what I intend to do. But the
Opposition cannot have it both ways: half the time the hon.
Gentleman is saying to me that the Government should run the
railways, but when something goes wrong he says that it is the
Government’s fault that we are not running the railways properly.
They cannot have it both ways.
There are two specific points. On what we are going to do about
the timetable in December, I have been very clear in the letter I
sent to all colleagues last week that we are not going to do a
major change of this kind again in the way that has happened in
the last couple of months; it must be done in a more measured and
careful way. We are already doing work now on how that timetable
change should happen—how it should be modified—and the incoming
chief executive of Network Rail, Andrew Haines, who I think will
bring enormous experience to this, is the person who was
responsible 10 years ago for the very successful timetable change
on South Western. I have great confidence that as he comes into
the organisation in the coming months, he will be able to put in
place a plan for timetable change both at the end of this year
and in the future that works better for passengers, who are the
most important people in all of this.
The hon. Gentleman also asked me why we did not pay more
attention to Chris Gibb’s report last year. Actually, we did. We
appointed Chris Gibb chairman of the industry readiness board.
Chris is one of the most experienced and respected figures in the
rail industry, but that board still did not gather the scale of
the problem that lay ahead when it last reported to me in May.
Lessons have to be learned by the people on that board. We have
to make sure that this cannot happen again, and everyone in the
rail industry—and everyone in my Department, including me—is
working to ensure that that happens.
(Worthing West)
(Con)
Our constituents who are passengers, and our constituents who
work on the railways, want to get this solved, and the best thing
to do is to give backing to those in the industry and to the
Secretary of State to ensure that that happens.
Anticipating an article by Nigel Harris in Rail magazine, I would
suggest that those who have power need to be accountable and
those who are accountable need to have power.
Anyone who has no expertise should take advice from those who can
make things better. That requires getting everyone—unions,
managers and knowledgeable passengers—together to see how best we
can get out of the hole we are in at the moment.
It is too bad, and it has been too bad for too long.
I completely agree with my hon. Friend; I think that the railways
are going to have to change significantly as a result of what has
happened. However, I say to those who are saying that we should
sack the franchisees that simply sacking the people who are
working today will not solve the problem, because I do not have
some other group of people down the corridor who are able to take
over. We have to make sure that everyone has all the necessary
support from across the industry to deliver solutions for
passengers and get back to stability as quickly as possible. I
absolutely accept what my hon. Friend says.
(Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
(SNP)
Another week, another rail shambles. When will the Secretary of
State admit that the rail franchise system is broken and do
something to fix it properly? It was really disappointing to hear
that travellers who were forced to get rail replacement buses at
short notice were sometimes turned away because the buses were
full or simply did not turn up. That is even more ironic
considering that Arriva also operates overlapping bus groups.
That just highlights the farce that is going on at the moment.
We know that late-running Network Rail projects reduced the time
available for train operators to plan the new schedules, but what
assessment has the Secretary of State made of his Department’s
culpability in this, with regard to Network Rail? Despite
assurances that all was well, it is now clear that there was no
possibility of the timetables being capable of being operated in
full from day one. Why did no one in the train operating
companies, Network Rail or the Department for Transport ask for a
postponement of the new timetable roll-out?
The Secretary of State has said that he will take the strongest
enforcement action against GTR if it has broken its franchise
agreement. Will that action be stronger than that taken against
Virgin Trains East Coast, which has been allowed to walk away
owing the Department for Transport billions of pounds?
What is the Secretary of State’s exact timeframe for resolving
these timetable issues? He has mentioned putting in additional
resources. What additional resources will be put in from his
Department? What is he doing to ensure that the driver shortage
is not met by poaching drivers from other franchises, which could
have an impact on services elsewhere? On the question of
compensation, what will he do to ensure that the rail industry
does not recover the costs of compensation from other fare-paying
passengers?
The Secretary of State continually highlights Network Rail
failings, but when will he accept that he has responsibility and
culpability for Network Rail and fall on his own sword? An
apology is not good enough.
As I have said, the key issue now is to sort out the problems.
The hon. Gentleman asked about failings in my Department and
elsewhere. I have asked Stephen Glaister to look at everything
that has happened and to report back publicly so that we can know
exactly what has gone wrong and particularly so that we can
ensure that it cannot happen again. The hon. Gentleman asked
about resources. My Department is deploying extra people on this,
as is the industry. For example, GTR has borrowed drivers from
freight operators to try to deal with some of the shortages on
its rosters. On the question of compensation costs, my view is
that they should be paid by the people who are responsible.
(Chipping Barnet)
(Con)
GTR has told me that these delays are going to carry on until
mid-July. Does the Secretary of State agree that that is utterly
unacceptable? Will he ensure that Network Rail and GTR fix these
problems in a matter of days, not weeks?
I share my right hon. Friend’s frustration. The most important
thing is to end the situation in which we have mass cancellations
and people cannot plan their journeys. The important thing now is
to reintroduce the services that were supposed to be part of the
May timetable step by step, so that we do not end up having the
same problem all over again. First, we have to ensure that we
have a dependable service that people know will be there when
they turn up. Secondly, we need to move back, in a responsible,
phased way, to the expanded timetable with the thousands of new
trains that should have been there on 20 May.
(Nottingham South)
(Lab)
Train operators and Network Rail have undoubtedly failed
dismally, but the Department for Transport signed off GTR’s
unworkable timetable proposals in the face of Network Rail
opposition, delayed the decision to agree a phased introduction
of the new Thameslink timetable, rejected Chris Gibb’s
recommendation of a longer eight-phase implementation, required a
reduction in spending on train planning by 2019 despite the
biggest timetable change in more than a decade, and failed to
spot that driver shortages and training needs would undermine the
main timetable. Why has the Secretary of State, both in his
letter to MPs and again today, failed to take any responsibility
for his Department’s role in the shambles endured by passengers
up and down the country?
I fully expect Stephen Glaister’s review to look at all the
players in this, including my Department. The industry readiness
board set up by my Department to assess the process of
introducing the new Thameslink timetable recommended in May that
the timetable could go ahead. When experts are called in for
advice and they advise us to do one thing, it is generally a good
idea to listen to them.
Sir (North East Hertfordshire)
(Con)
At Letchworth station this morning, I spoke to passengers who
have suffered great delays and many cancellations, children going
to school whose train had been cancelled—one of them in tears—and
workers who have been told, “You can’t keep on being late like
this.” Is it not time that Govia Thameslink Railway actually
produced the timetable, the service and the reliability of
information that those people—my constituents—deserve? What is
going to be done to encourage them to get on with it and provide
that service quickly?
The No. 1 priority is to restore a reliable timetable, and I have
been clear that GTR has an urgent duty to do so. There is
unquestionably a large question mark over its future, but it
needs to sort the problem out as quickly as possible to have any
chance of surviving in the rail industry.
Mr (Luton South) (Lab/Co-op)
I have been in this House for the best part of a decade and I
have never seen such a complacent performance from a Secretary of
State at the Dispatch Box. He needs to understand that he is in
deep trouble over this. The situation will go on for months and
months, and the underlying issues behind the timetable changes
and why they have gone wrong land squarely with his Department.
Does he agree that his unwillingness to accept any responsibility
undermines his efforts to put things right?
This is simply about everyone in the industry and my Department
working to ensure that we have a stable timetable for passengers.
That is the most important priority right now.
Sir (Sevenoaks) (Con)
Is my right hon. Friend aware that two villages in my
constituency, Eynsford and Shoreham, are now virtually cut off?
Commuters cannot get up to London, and their children cannot get
down to school in Sevenoaks. Will he use the authority of his
office to persuade Southeastern to stop at least one or two of
its peak-hour fast services during the current disruption to give
those two villages a chance of normal life?
Absolutely. I have already asked my office to action work to try
to find a rapid solution to the problems at those two stations.
(Westmorland and Lonsdale)
(LD)
The Secretary of State knows that every single train on the Lakes
line is to be cancelled over the next two weeks, and at least 11
trains have been cancelled on the Furness line so far today. He
is clearly not immediately planning to remove the franchise from
either line, as he should, and he mentioned neither in his
statement. Will he clarify now that, if Arriva Northern asks for
an extension to this outrageous two-week suspension, he will
refuse such a request? Will he also commit to funding an
ambitious marketing campaign to relaunch the lines and boost our
local economy in the light of the colossal reputational damage
that they are now suffering?
I discussed that very issue with members of Rail North’s board
last week. I am profoundly unhappy about this. I have indicated
to Arriva that I am not prepared to accept more than the current
two weeks and that it should use that two-week period to do
engineering work, which will be necessary over the coming months,
so that we are not wasting time when a bus service is in place. I
have been clear to Arriva that doing this over the long term is
simply unacceptable and that it has to get the trains back very
quickly.
Sir (Mid Sussex) (Con)
I make a respectful suggestion to my right hon. Friend, which is
that the rail industry readiness board should be taken quietly
outside and disposed of. Is he aware that the rail service to
East Grinstead, in which he has always taken an interest, has
finally fallen over completely, that trains from Haywards Heath,
Wivelsfield and Burgess Hill are shorter and more overcrowded,
that people’s private lives are being destroyed and that this
whole thing is an absolute disaster that must be put right?
I completely agree with my right hon. Friend, and I have
communicated that to the company concerned.
(Leeds West) (Lab)
Last week 49 trains were cancelled in my constituency,
particularly at Bramley train station, meaning that passengers
were late for work, for college and for other appointments.
Frankly, passengers have lost faith in the Secretary of State. Is
it not about time he stepped aside and allowed someone who can
fix this problem to do the job?
This problem needs to be fixed as quickly as possible. I
respectfully remind the Opposition that a private rail company is
involved. Opposition Members keep telling me that we should
nationalise it and have the Government running the trains, so
they cannot have it both ways.
(Milton Keynes South)
(Con)
Enormous investment has gone into the Thameslink programme, with
a new fleet of rolling stock and a state-of-the-art digital
signalling system. Can the Secretary of State assure me that
these new systems are working as planned and that the cause of
the problem is not a technical failing?
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The real frustration is that
this is a consequence of major investment programmes and the
delivery at the end of those programmes has gone wrong. The thing
I find most frustrating about all this, and I absolutely feel for
every single passenger who has waited for a cancelled train in
the past week—I get the train every day, and I am as fed up with
this as everyone else—is that this is the consequence of a change
that resulted from a massive investment programme in the
railways. We should now be seeing the fruit of that investment
programme. We are not yet seeing it, and we have to make sure
that we see it pretty quickly.
(Luton North) (Ind)
I have thousands of constituents who commute daily from Leagrave
and Luton stations and who are suffering from recent service
failures—I have a sheaf of their complaints in my hand. Is it not
the reality that GTR has consistently sought to squeeze more
passengers on to too few trains and has employed insufficient
drivers in the interest of profits, at the expense of passengers?
When are the Government going to accept the grotesque failure of
private franchising?
I absolutely understand the pressures on the hon. Gentleman’s
line. Part of the objective of this upgrade is to deliver longer
trains and more trains, and it is a huge frustration to me that
that has not happened. We have to make sure it happens as quickly
as possible.
(Cleethorpes) (Con)
What estimate has been made of the cost to the industry and of
the potential impact on the various companies involved?
It is too early to work through that. I am more focused at the
moment on getting services back to normal. The companies will
undoubtedly bear a cost from this but, as far as I am concerned,
the most important thing is making sure that services are back to
normal and that passengers are compensated, and the companies
will have to meet the cost of that.
(Streatham) (Lab)
The Thameslink service in my constituency from Streatham to
London Blackfriars had 37 trains cancelled last Friday, and over
160 trains were cancelled over the course of last week. Every
time the Secretary of State comes to the Dispatch Box—like the
GTR managers—he blames everyone but himself. He has been in situ
for two years. Are not my constituents entitled to think that
this is just an utterly pointless Transport Secretary, because
nothing ever changes under his watch?
I seem to remember that when I took over there were real problems
with Southern metro services at other stations in the hon.
Gentleman’s constituency. Those problems have now been improved
and sorted, and those services are running very well—not across
the whole Southern network, but across the Southern metro
network. We now need to sort this problem out.
(Hitchin and Harpenden)
(Con)
I have spoken to the Secretary of State over many weeks and
months about the train issues in my constituency of Hitchin and
Harpenden. I know the inquiry he has announced will look into
culpability on this matter, but how much more evidence do we need
that the senior management of Network Rail and GTR are
incompetent, incapable and inept? How long can they go on?
We need to establish who is directly responsible for the decision
making that has been got wrong here, establish the truth through
the Glaister review and then take appropriate action—and we will.
Mr (Huddersfield)
(Lab/Co-op)
My constituents, and the people in Yorkshire and the north, love
their railway system, but they want it to be a good system that
is safe and secure and that runs on time, to get them to work and
to see their family. Does the Secretary of State realise just how
much misery has been caused to so many families over these past
weeks? I am not the most radical or left-wing member of my party,
but even I believe that the system of privatisation has not
worked and will never work, and that it is time we had a public
service railway system in our country.
Of course I understand the frustration that the hon. Gentleman
experiences. The irony is that these timetable problems have
resulted from a planned expansion in services for his
constituents and others across the north. It was designed to
deliver thousands of extra train services for people across the
north of England. It has not worked today and it must work soon.
(Elmet and Rothwell)
(Con)
My constituents at Garforth, Micklefield and Woodlesford stations
are agog at how bad the trains have got, and I lay the blame for
a lot of this at the door of Network Rail, not the Secretary of
State. There have been plenty of opportunities and plenty of
promises made over decades; I was using this train line 20 years
ago, and it was rubbish then and it is rubbish now. What can he
do to ensure that Network Rail gets a grip of the situation and
delivers on the promises it makes?
What we have to see is the completion of the investment
programme, the delivery of the new trains and, above all, the
sorting out of the timetable. Every train in the north of England
is being replaced with either a brand new train or a completely
refurbished one. The new trains are due to start arriving later
this year. We have big investments taking place. The transpennine
rail upgrade, at £3 billion, is the largest investment; it is
part of the next rail infrastructure investment programme. It is
just hugely frustrating that what has been done so far has yet to
deliver the improvements it should to passengers and has actually
made things worse. That must stop, and stop quickly.
(Dulwich and West Norwood)
(Lab)
My constituents have already faced three years of disruption and
continual delays at the hands of GTR, Southern and Southeastern,
and the chaos from the new timetable is making things worse. The
impact of that chaos is more than simply inconvenience; it is
taking its toll on relationships, family life and employment, and
we have the heart-rending sight of students unable to get to
important exams on time. The Secretary of State previously
refused, for entirely political reasons, to pass control of
suburban rail services in south London to Transport for London.
Will he now accept that my constituents deserve their rail
services to be run by an organisation that will put passengers
ahead of profit, and hand them to TfL to run?
The only thing I would point out, respectfully, to the hon. Lady
is that she has just called for the transfer of rail services
from Southeastern to Arriva, which runs Northern, while other
people are telling me that Arriva is not capable of running
Northern. That is the reality of what she is arguing for.
(Reigate) (Con)
I do not envy my right hon. Friend and neighbour in making this
statement today, but I know that he understands the position of
Redhill and Epsom only too well, because he has been to visit
Redhill station and see the infrastructure improvements that he
is putting in place. However, my constituents were promised an
improved service in 2014, after the London Bridge investment and
for the new timetable in 2018, but even if the timetable was
working properly they would have a worse service than they were
promised four years ago. They have the privilege of paying the
“Redhill hump” for being just outside the London zoning. My right
hon. Friend and his Department are part of the industry, because
they get the fare income generated under the GTR franchise, so
will he please look at being part of the industry and not just
dumping the issue of compensation entirely? Will he rapidly ask
the Rail Minister to bring forward plans to deal with the Redhill
hump? Redhill services have had more cancellations than those
anywhere else.
I say to Members on both sides of the Chamber that some places
have undoubtedly been inappropriately disadvantaged by the
timetable change. The Rail Minister and I are happy to sit down
in person with colleagues who represent those places to talk
through how we can address those issues in future timetable
changes. That offer is open to Members from all parties. We have
seen a large number of colleagues today to talk about more
short-term issues, and we are happy to have similar conversations
as we plan for further timetable changes.
(Blackburn) (Lab)
When the Northern franchise was awarded to Arriva, the previous
Secretary of State for Transport, the right hon. Member for
Derbyshire Dales (Sir Patrick McLoughlin), said:
“We promised passengers a world class rail service that would
make the Northern Powerhouse a reality—and I’m delighted”.
He also said that the new operator would
“bring the Northern Powerhouse to life.”
Such promises would be laughable, except that they are tragic,
because my constituents cannot get into Manchester for their
jobs, cannot get to hospital appointments and cannot return home
to pick up their children from childcare places. Why will the
Minister not take responsibility, stop passing the buck and fix
this now?
I would be delighted to fix it now. It is worth reminding the
House that the Northern franchise is a partnership between my
Department, Transport for the North and the Northern leaders. It
was designed by all of us to deliver precisely the improvements
that the hon. Lady describes. It is a huge frustration to me, and
I suspect to everyone in the north, that that has not happened,
and I assure her that I will do everything that I can. I trust
that through the Rail North partnership we will deliver the
improvements that have been promised and that her constituents
deserve.
Ms (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)
My constituents pay one of the highest prices for season tickets,
out of taxed income. For more than 13 years, I have been
complaining on their behalf as they have encountered one crisis
after another, including under the previous Government for the
first five of those 13 years. This is another crisis with which
my constituents have had to deal. Will the Secretary of State
please use his good offices to tell Thameslink to stop
cancelling, with little or no notice, stops at Flitwick and
Harlington and continuing the service on to Bedford, where people
are stranded and find it very difficult to get home? Will he also
insist that once trains are running normally, the compensation
scheme is not inadequate and does not mean one month’s free rail
use, but is more like six months’ free rail use on people’s
season tickets? I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement that
24 trains an hour will be running soon, but when? We need them as
soon as possible.
I completely agree with my hon. Friend, and I will make sure that
an appropriate compensation package is in place. First and
foremost, we have to make sure that there is a service on which
people can rely. The thing that I think is currently most
frustrating people is not being sure whether the train is going
to turn up when they go to the station to catch it. The most
important thing right now is for both Northern and GTR to deliver
a service on which passengers can depend, so that they know that
when a train is due it is actually going to turn up.
(Don Valley) (Lab)
The Secretary of State has said that he and his Department were
asking questions of the industry readiness board, the operators
and Network Rail, and that they did not provide him with
information that there was going to be such a disaster. In the
interests of transparency, would he be prepared to publish any
recorded letters, memos or emails that show that his Department
was asking the right questions at the right time, so that we can
see what answers he and his Department were given?
I am prepared to be completely transparent over this. I have
instructed Stephen Glaister to go through everything, including
the conversations with my Department, and that it should be made
public. I have no doubt that the Transport Committee will do the
same. I am aware of nothing that I would want to be kept hidden.
I want everybody to understand what has gone wrong and I want
lessons to be learned. The most important thing is that we make
sure that this can never happen again. That is my No. 1 priority.
(Bromley and Chislehurst)
(Con)
My constituents have suffered in exactly the same way as those of
many Members. Frankly, they were misled when they were told that
there would be an improved service after London Bridge was
sorted, because there has not been and will not be, even when the
timetable works as it should. More to the point, my right hon.
Friend says that these are consequences of change, and I
understand that, but is not the whole point of competent
management that people are supposed to anticipate and deal with
consequences? When Network Rail puts out a statement saying that
“we are looking at understanding the root cause”,
it sounds as if it is running a seminar rather than a railway.
Will my right hon. Friend get rid of these incompetents, now?
I assure my hon. Friend that I am sufficiently angry at what has
happened that anyone who has found to be negligent in this matter
should not carry on in the job they are doing now. It is simply
not acceptable to have a situation in which people are in
operational control of something and completely fail to deliver.
The whole point of setting up an independent review is to
understand exactly what has gone wrong so that lessons can be
learned.
(Liverpool, Wavertree)
(Lab/Co-op)
Two months before the changes, back in March, I asked the
Secretary of State in a written question what steps he and his
Department had taken to ensure that there was both adequate track
capacity and adequate train numbers to support the proposed rail
timetable change in the north-west, because my constituents knew
then that there would be a problem. A junior Minister told me in
a reply that it was the responsibility of the train operating
company to support the proposed timetable changes—nothing to do
with his Department. I have constituents who are standing in
sweltering heat for five hours, some of whom are fasting for
Ramadan—and that is if they can get a train at all. It is an
absolute disgrace. What will the Secretary of State do to make it
right today?
The answer to the hon. Lady’s question is that a temporary
timetable is being put in place on Northern that should stabilise
the timetable this week, and then, step by step, it will start to
put back in place the extra services that were promised post May.
(Croydon South) (Con)
For at least three years now, my constituents have on occasion
been unable to get to work, unable to reach hospital appointments
and unable to get home in the evening to see loved ones. GTR has
presided over an incompetent railway network for far too long.
Can the Secretary of State confirm that if the Glaister report
finds that GTR has been negligent in the handling of this
timetable introduction, which has certainly been a fiasco, and
that if GTR fails urgently to take the steps required to fix it,
the measures he is contemplating will include removing its
franchise?
I have been absolutely clear that, if GTR is found to be
negligent, I will use the powers that I have under the Railways
Act 1993 and under the contractual arrangements to deal with
this.
(Cardiff South and Penarth)
(Lab/Co-op)
There could not be a greater contrast between the millions of
pounds of new investment in our railways being introduced by the
Welsh Labour Government and the shambles over which the Secretary
of State presides. Can he explain what on earth is going on at
Great Western Railway? There have been repeated cancellations,
delays, trains that are understaffed with no catering services,
and trains breaking down. I have spoken to Great Western Railway,
to Network Rail and to Hitachi. Hitachi tells me that the
Department for Transport did not give a long enough period for
testing the trains, and Great Western tells me that it sold off a
load of its own trains to Scotland before the new ones were
ready. Will he get a grip on that situation?
The Great Western modernisation is delivering new trains and a
faster service, and by the end of this year it will deliver an
improved timetable. There have been teething problems with the
introduction of the new trains, but anyone who has travelled on
the new trains in which this Government are investing on the
Great Western route will say that they are a step in the right
direction.
(Hendon) (Con)
This really is an appalling situation and one that we should have
seen coming down the line given the history of the train
operating companies. I have emails from my constituents that
complain about lack of communication from Govia Thameslink. They
say that the refund procedures are lengthy and difficult to
navigate and that the timetable implementation has simply not
worked. Will the Secretary of State give serious consideration to
introducing a short deadline to ensure that GTR in particular
brings the service up to an acceptable standard, or finding
another train provider that will do so?
I am very clear that I expect GTR to deliver an improvement to
the current situation as a matter of real urgency. If it does not
do so, it will lack the credibility to continue as operator.
(Dewsbury) (Lab)
What a mess! How would the Secretary of State respond to my
constituent who contacted my office this morning to say that he
has already had to use a significant portion of his annual leave
allocation because he has arrived at work hours late every single
day over the past couple of weeks? Given the debacle that we have
seen on the trains recently, with not just this situation but the
delayed electrification and the problems on the east coast main
line, does the Secretary of State believe that he has the
competence to sort this out?
What I would say to the hon. Lady’s constituent is that I am
very, very sorry and that we will have a compensation scheme.
Somebody has to sort this out, and that is what I am going to do.
(East Worthing and Shoreham)
(Con)
I am sure that I speak on behalf of thousands of commuters in
Sussex when I say that this must be the end of the line for the
GTR franchise. We were constantly assured that the driver
shortage had been addressed, but now we are told that the problem
is the wrong type of drivers on the line. Will the Secretary of
State assure me that the compensation scheme will be a realistic
one, that it will be paid for not by his Department this time but
by the train operators, and that, within six months maximum of
the Glaister review reporting, he will be in a position to take
back that franchise?
The people responsible for this have to pay the cost. In terms of
the report, I will be absolutely clear that if I need to take
action, I will be ready to take action.
(Sefton Central) (Lab)
Before the timetable changed, Members across the House warned
about the problem. On a number of occasions, I have warned about
the problems for people travelling from Southport to Manchester.
It seems that anyone who knew anything about railways—especially
the travelling public—warned Ministers about the shortage of
drivers, the delays and the engineering works. Given all the
warnings, why did the Secretary of State not delay the
implementation of the new timetable? Frankly, given the chaos,
why is he still in his job?
One of the things I want the Glaister report to do is identify
why the train companies did not tell us that there was a
sufficient problem to delay or halt the introduction of the
timetable.
(Crawley) (Con)
What my constituent commuters and, indeed, I—as a passenger—want
to know is, why does Govia Thameslink have such a lack of
planning and future foresight? There are to be major engineering
works on the London to Brighton main line in October this year
and February next year. What assurances can I have for my
constituents travelling from Three Bridges, Crawley, Ifield and
Gatwick Airport stations that proper planning will be in place to
ensure that those engineering works, which are welcome, do not
cause undue disruption?
I will ensure that the Rail Minister sits down with my hon.
Friend and has a conversation with all those involved to make
sure that those works are not an issue. As he knows, there has
been necessary investment to sort out problems on the Brighton
main line, but we cannot have the works causing inappropriate
levels of disruption. There will inevitably be some disruption,
because engineering works cannot be done without it, but we have
to ensure that they are done in the right way.
(West Lancashire) (Lab)
To describe my constituents as incandescent would be an absolute
understatement. Colleagues across the House have described the
impact this fiasco has had on families and individuals. I have
listened carefully to the Secretary of State and he seems to have
been reassured by the information he has received, but he does
not seem to have tested that information to assure himself and
his Department that the information was correct. If that is so,
how can we be sure that he has tested and is assured of his
potential solutions?
I simply say that we have teams of people whose job it is to
assure this. They did not see this situation coming; nor did the
train operators. The Glaister review is necessary because this
should not have been able to happen.
(South Cambridgeshire)
(Con)
If GTR is telling the Secretary of State that things are getting
better in my constituency of South Cambridgeshire, it is not
being truthful to him. The experience of my constituents—and,
indeed, my experience of travelling in today—is that things are
getting worse. Network Rail may hold the lion’s share of the
responsibility, but the operators have a role to play too. Why on
earth did they not flag at minus three weeks that that period of
time was not going to be long enough? The operators clearly told
the Secretary of State that everything was fine, but last week
they told me that it was not and that three weeks would never
have been long enough, so which one of us are they lying to?
I ask the Secretary of State for two actions. First, he says that
the emergency timetable that has been implemented today would
take us back to pre-May levels. It is not doing so at all; it is
actually worse. By the end of this week, can we please aim to
have the pre-May timetable back in place? Secondly, we have heard
about compensation for Northern passengers being akin to that of
Southern last year. I have to tell the Secretary of State that
the GTR performance up and down the line in my constituency is as
bad, and we should be considered for the same levels of
compensation.
I will certainly take on board my hon. Friend’s points. I hope
and expect, and am insisting, that we see stabilisation during
the course of this week. What matters is that people know which
trains are going to run, and that they know a train will be there
when they turn up. That is the most important priority, certainly
on her line.
Mrs (Liverpool, Riverside)
(Lab/Co-op)
Many of my constituents are furious that they cannot get to work
owing to driver shortages and mass cancellations in the timetable
in what is supposed to be a situation of planned improvements.
How much worse does it have to get before the Secretary of State
will consider removing the franchise?
Of course the future of both franchises is a genuine issue, but I
honestly think that the most important thing right now is to
solve the problem. Sacking the people who are working to solve
the problem would probably not get us anywhere. As to what will
happen a few months’ time, when we have seen the Glaister
report—that is a very different question.
(Congleton) (Con)
Northern Rail has changed or reduced the already limited rush
hour services between Congleton and Manchester to such an extent
that my constituents say that they are having to face the
pressured M6 and M56 commute by car, and that this timetabling
change may even breach Northern’s service level agreement. Will
the Secretary of State take up with Northern Rail this wholly
inadequate rail service for a growing town, and will he require
improvement?
As I said a moment ago, the Rail Minister and I are happy to talk
to individual colleagues on both sides of the House to look at
places where there are issues of this kind. There are rolling
timetable changes each year. If we can look at cases where a town
has genuinely been disadvantaged, we can see what we can do to
sort that out.
(Bedford) (Lab)
Bedford rail users who lost their peak time East Midlands Trains
service are still facing the misery of cancellations and delays.
Trains are leaving St Pancras half full and are whizzing past
Bedford, while my constituents have been forced on to dangerously
overcrowded Thameslink trains. This is absolutely ridiculous.
Will the Secretary of State stop making excuses and reinstate the
Bedford EMT service today?
I have already asked the industry to look at whether it can
restore some of the East Midlands Trains services to ease the
pressure on Bedford in the interim period, while this disruption
is happening. It seems a logical thing to do, given that the
train paths are not being occupied by Thameslink at the moment.
(Sutton and Cheam) (Con)
This was supposed to be the light at the end of the tunnel, but
that is actually a train coming fast the other way. Commuters do
not want to play the blame game. They just want their trains to
work now. The short-term view of sacking a franchisee overnight
would really just mean the same people running the same lines
with differently spray-painted trains. I want us to look back and
find out how nobody, but nobody, thought to postpone the process,
but we should also look to the future: will the Secretary of
State tell us how many lifelines GTR needs to have before we
realise that it should have no place on the UK’s rail network?
I am very clear that once we know the full culpability for this
situation, the appropriate action will be taken if it needs to be
taken.
(Leeds Central) (Lab)
The more the Secretary of State has described this afternoon some
of the reasons why this disaster occurred—lack of preparation and
lack of time—the more commuters and others on Northern and
TransPennine, who have suffered so much misery, will wonder why
the introduction of the new timetable was not cancelled, rather
than their trains. It is quite clear that the Secretary of State
had no idea what was going on. The question that he has not
answered today is, why?
As I said, in the case of GTR I had the chief executive in my
office three weeks before saying that it would be fine. In the
case of the teams running the Northern branch, they indicated to
my Department that it would be a difficult start, but not on
anything like this scale. I have set up the independent inquiry
into what has gone wrong because I am not alone in this. When I
talk to other people—on the independent assurance panel and the
board set up to oversee the introduction of the timetable, the
Rail North team and other people on the Rail North board, and the
chair of Transport for the North—it seems that nobody was
expecting this. That is completely unacceptable. We need to
understand why it has happened and ensure that it can never
happen again.
(Cheadle) (Con)
My constituents have suffered huge delays, cancelled services and
unacceptable travel uncertainty. What reassurances will the
Secretary of State give Northern commuters that they will quickly
have a functioning service and that pre-existing timetable gaps
locally will also be addressed?
I have been very clear with the companies, as has the Rail North
Partnership, that they need to get back to a position of
stability. I expect that to mean that they will be running
slightly more trains overall across the network than they were
prior to 20 May, and that they will move over the next few weeks
to reintroduce services in order to get back up to the expanded
level that was supposed to exist. If there are individual issues,
as I know there are in my hon. Friend’s constituency, the Rail
Minister and I will happily sit down and look at how we can
address them as we move towards future timetable changes.
(Batley and Spen)
(Lab/Co-op)
On Saturday, two of my constituents, both in their 70s, were
unfortunate enough to find themselves on the 23:03 Northern
service from Leeds to Brighouse—the culmination of what they
called a tortuous journey due to timetable chaos. They described
the crammed Northern train as “filthy, a cheap product that has
been neglected and flogged to death”. Does the Secretary of State
agree with the Mayor of Manchester that Northern Rail is now in
the last chance saloon? Can he tell the House when he will stop
passing the buck and take full responsibility for this chaos?
Both Northern Rail and GTR have a whole lot of questions to
answer and they are in the last chance saloon, so the hon. Lady
is absolutely right. On the comments that her constituents
rightly make about the trains, it is time for all those trains to
be replaced, and over the coming months they are going to be.
Mr (Hazel Grove) (Con)
The announcement of an inquiry and compensation is of course
welcome. Leaving aside the atrocious implementation of the new
Northern timetable, will my right hon. Friend the Secretary of
State bang heads together to sort out the morning peak-time
45-minute gap in services that is affecting my constituents so
badly?
We will do that. I will ask the Minister of State, my hon. Friend
the Member for Orpington (Joseph Johnson), to sit down with my
hon. Friend and go through this to make sure that we address some
of the timetable anomalies that inevitably come out of a big
change like this, which are not just short-term issues but
actually structural issues in the timetable.
(Barrow and Furness)
(Ind)
Yes, of course the timetable changes have been a total fiasco,
but does the Secretary of State not understand that people in
Furness in Cumbria have been begging him for months to get to
grips with this appalling situation? Before Northern took on the
full franchise, there were 103 cancellations in a year on the
Furness line. Last year, there were 212. Then, in the financial
year that has just finished, there were 517—and that was before
the timetable changes. Will he stop treating my constituents as
though they have got the fag end of what is a pretty horrendous
deal right across the country and take this situation seriously,
starting tonight?
I and my Department have taken the situation seriously for a long
time. With regard to lines like the Furness line, this is why we
are investing in new trains to provide a better service. The
Cumbrian Coast line has to put up with knackered old trains that
should have been sent to the scrapyard years ago. It is finally
going to get new trains in the coming months, and they are long
overdue.
(St Austell and Newquay)
(Con)
I welcome the Secretary of State’s statement and his commitment
to investigate what has gone wrong and take appropriate action as
soon as possible. Does he believe that part of the answer to
ensuring that this situation never happens again is combining the
operation of track and train under one operator?
Bringing track and train back together is part of the solution
for the railways. I am absolutely sure that the railways are
going to have to change quite a lot as a result of what has gone
on, which has been completely unacceptable. Their ways of working
have got to change. We are going to need a reshaped approach for
the future.
(Colne Valley) (Lab)
Disabled passengers in my constituency have been told that they
will not be able to catch certain trains as TransPennine has
rolled out old stock to try to fix the broken timetables and
reduce delays. Does the Transport Secretary agree that this is
discrimination and unacceptable? Will he intervene to tell
TransPennine that it must make sure that each train is compliant
with disability legislation?
It is the duty of all train companies to ensure that that
happens. The rolling programme of train replacement means that
all trains will be disability-compliant. Every train in the north
is being replaced with either a brand new train or a refurbished,
as-new train. I will continue to make the point to all train
operators—as will the Under-Secretary, my hon. Friend the Member
for Wealden (Ms Ghani), who is responsible for accessibility—that
they have to make a priority of this.
(Southport) (Con)
My right hon. Friend has already visited my constituency and seen
the level of frustration and concern about the timetabling. Will
he continue to engage positively with me and with rail
passengers’ groups so that we get the best possible service for
Southport rail users?
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. We need to work together
to make sure that we get some services back to Piccadilly, which
I know is very important to so many of his constituents. He and I
will work together on that.
(Liverpool, West Derby)
(Lab/Co-op)
Does the Secretary of State recognise the very deep anger among
Northern Rail passengers in Liverpool and elsewhere about what
has happened? Let me press him on the issue of compensation. He
says that there will be a special compensation scheme. In the
past week, constituents have been in touch who have had only
partial compensation because they hold a Merseytravel Trio ticket
and Northern will not compensate them for that part of the
journey. Surely appropriate redress must mean full compensation
for every passenger.
That is a very serious point, and I am happy to make sure that it
is dealt with. There were some similar issues with Southern in
relation to Oyster card holders. We need to make sure that the
travellers who should be entitled to compensation do get that
compensation. That is why we are not rushing into announcing
details of the scheme right now: we are going to make it right.
(Fylde) (Con)
For over six months, my constituents have been using bus services
during electrification of the Blackpool to Preston railway line.
The current chaos therefore comes at the worst possible time when
people were looking forward to a good service, and they are
absolutely gutted. Can the Secretary of State assure me that they
will be able to enjoy the multi-million pound investment that has
gone in? When will he put the full force of his weight behind
Northern Rail to make sure that it fixes this problem now? Can my
constituents look forward to getting the railway that they had
hoped for?
My hon. Friend puts his finger on the frustrations. On his line,
the disruption has been a result of long overdue investment in
improvements for the future and a commitment to railways in the
north. It is a tragedy that the electrification delay has had
such disastrous effects for timetabling across the whole area. We
need to sort out these problems in the short term. We need to get
the electrification of his route up and running as quickly as
possible so that all the improvements that were planned actually
happen.
(Carshalton and Wallington)
(LD)
For four years, GTR has failed to run services efficiently and
provide sufficient drivers. So before the Secretary of State
walks the plank, will he do two things? First, will he confirm
that any compensation that is going to be paid will be based on
the timetable that the company should have been running, or
indeed better than that? Secondly, will he consider reversing a
U-turn that he performed some months ago? He had proposed handing
over the services in suburban London to the Mayor of London when
the Foreign Secretary was the Mayor, and then changed his mind
when became the Mayor. Will he
reconsider that decision?
I never took that decision in the first place. It is my view that
services running outside London should not be controlled by an
elected representative inside London. The approach that we have
taken in the north, the west midlands and elsewhere, and have
offered in London, is one of partnership so that we get
involvement from both sides. That is the right way to do it. With
regard to handing over services to the Mayor, London Overground
is a franchise run by Arriva, the same company that runs
Northern, so I am at a loss as to why people think that that is a
magic solution for the future.
(Lewes) (Con)
Do we really need a review before action is taken? People who
commute from Lewes, Polegate, Seaford, Newhaven and many more
stations have had to endure not just the timetable changes, but
18 months of strike action and 18 months of misery while the
London Bridge works were happening, and we now have fewer trains
than ever before. When trains do run, they sometimes do not stop,
as happened in Lewes and Polegate today, and when they do stop,
passengers cannot get on because of short formations, with trains
going down from 12 carriages to four today. The only question my
constituents have is, “When is Southern Rail going to lose its
franchise?” If I can be helpful to the Secretary of State, the
answer should be “Now.”
The important thing to do is to make sure that these problems are
sorted out. It may be that at the end of this there is a
franchise change, but I want to do anything like that in the
right way, in the right timeframe, and in a way that is
justifiable. I have to fulfil contractual commitments. I have to
look at where culpability lies. We need to go through that
process first. In the meantime, having short-formation trains on
Southern, which otherwise is performing pretty well, is
completely unacceptable, and it needs to fix that straight away.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker
Having heard the hon. Member for Brighton, Kemptown (Lloyd
Russell-Moyle) chuntering from a sedentary position, perhaps we
can now hear him on his feet.
(Brighton, Kemptown)
(Lab/Co-op)
Thank you, Mr Speaker.
If someone conspired to break into my garage and steal or
immobilise my car, they would face the full force of the law. The
Secretary of State’s Department has conspired with the railway
companies in an incompetent manner to change the timetables, and
despite repeated warnings from the Opposition, the companies went
ahead with it. When will they face the full force of having their
franchises stripped from them, or when will he be brave enough to
face up to this and resign?
I have mentioned to the House the industry bodies that we have
put in place. It is only a week since Labour was demanding that
the railways were run by rail professionals—actually, they are.
Those rail professionals have been overseeing this process, they
got it wrong, and that is why we are having the inquiry.
(Morecambe and Lunesdale)
(Con)
I have to thank the Secretary of State, because he has tried to
accommodate me three times today. I think we should have some
brevity in the House, because parties of all colours have the
same problems. The reality is that this is a mess. We have to get
a realistic timetable in order and make sure that when these
train companies cancel—I saw it today at Lancaster station, when
Northern cancelled on the commuters that I was standing on the
platform with—they have alternative transport already in place. I
ask the Secretary of State to sort these companies out, but in a
measured way, because I realise the pressures he is under, and I
am mature enough to realise the contractual obligations that he
has to consider.
This is the important thing. It is easy being the Labour party,
demanding this and demanding that, but we have to do what needs
to be done in the right way, focusing first on getting a stable
timetable, then identifying what has gone wrong and the
culpability, and then taking appropriate action. That is what we
will do.
(Manchester, Gorton) (Lab)
The new timetable came into effect today, but my constituents
have the same old problems. Despite axing 165 services, more than
60 trains had been cancelled by 8.30 am. All the while, rail
fares have risen by 32%, and the promised electrification has
been scrapped. Can the Secretary of State tell me when my
constituents can expect compensation and improved services and
what personal responsibility he takes for the chaotic
mismanagement of this country’s rail network?
The Labour party keeps saying that it wants the Government to run
the railways. We do not at the moment. The temporary Northern
timetable has been put in place this week. Some adjustment of
rosters is taking place right now. I hope and believe that by the
middle of the week, we will return to a point of stability, with
a lower level of cancellations today and tomorrow and getting
back to a reasonably dependable timetable within a day or two.
That is what I am expecting, that is what we have been promised,
and that is what we will be demanding of Northern Rail.
(Horsham) (Con) rose—
(Bexhill and Battle) (Con)
rose—
Mr Speaker
What a delicious choice: my former constituency chairman, the
hon. Member for Horsham (Jeremy Quin), and an Arsenal fan behind
him, most of whose family live in my constituency. I do not want
to be unkind to Horsham, but it has got to be .
Thank you, Mr Speaker—I’m always your man.
In the two years that the Secretary of State for Transport has
been in post and I have sat on the Transport Committee, he has
always been very honest, open and direct about the need for
change. For any project management exercise to fail to get the
sign-off from Network Rail and for it to find out only three
weeks before, by which time it is too late to turn the oil tank
around, has got to be a spectacular failure. Who was the project
manager and penholder for this exercise?
That is a very interesting question. My view is that the Network
Rail timetabling process has gone badly wrong, and I cannot
understand why GTR did not raise the alarm. I have asked
Professor Glaister to go through all this because I want to
understand exactly where the accountability should lie and be
able to take appropriate action.
(Heywood and Middleton)
(Lab)
Northern Rail has cancelled so many trains that an app has sprung
up called “Northern Fail”, to help commuters in the so-called
northern powerhouse make even the most basic of journeys. What
will the Secretary of State do to ensure that these commuters,
who have forked out for childcare, taxis, hire cars and hotels,
are adequately and fully compensated?
I am very clear that we have to provide a compensation scheme of
the kind that was delivered to Southern passengers after the huge
disruption they experienced a year ago. I am very clear that that
is what will happen for them.
To reassure you, Mr Speaker, an hour’s wait is sadly not unusual
for Horsham right now. I wish we were getting back to a far more
regular service. Significant investment has been put into our
line, which was meant to result in a far better service for our
commuters. I welcome an independent inquiry to find out what on
earth has gone wrong, but in the meantime, can we at least ensure
that where there are fewer, busier trains, they are not
short-form, so that people can get on them?
That has to be dealt with, and we will communicate that to GTR.
If there are fewer trains running, there should be not short-form
trains running.
(Plymouth, Sutton and
Devonport) (Lab/Co-op)
The Secretary of State told the House that sorting out the
timetable chaos was his Department’s No. 1 priority. That is a
phrase he has used before about Dawlish and the resilience work
in the far south-west, which was apparently his No. 1 priority.
What is his No. 1 priority, and will Northern and GTR passengers
have to wait the years that passengers in the far south-west have
had to wait for action on Dawlish?
The work on Dawlish has already started, as the hon. Gentleman
knows. In terms of the infrastructure period that is about to
start, delivering that work is, in my view, the most important
capital project in the country. The most important priority on my
desk now is self-evidently to get this sorted.
(Easington) (Lab)
My constituents are also experiencing their share of misery. The
hon. Member for Lewes (Maria Caulfield) said that trains serving
her constituency had four carriages, but most of the trains
serving mine only have two carriages to begin with, so they are
already overcrowded even before any cancellations. It is clearly
a failure of planning and co-ordination and a lack of
integration. Will the Secretary of State or his successor give an
assurance to the travelling public that a similar fiasco will not
occur with the next timetable changes in December?
We are working extremely hard to make sure that this does not
happen again. We have to deal with the short-term problem. We
also have to make sure that this is not repeated with the
December timetable change or future timetable changes. Where
major investment leads to a major change in services, we cannot
have a situation where that causes chaos on the network again.
(Bradford South) (Lab)
Does the Secretary of State understand the real human cost of
this fiasco and the fact that every disrupted journey represents
chaos for our constituents and losses for our businesses? He
talked in his statement of major failures and holding the
industry to account, but when will he take responsibility and
hold himself to account over his repeated and major failures?
My job is to do everything I can to make sure that the industry
gets itself back on the straight and narrow, and that is what I
will do.
(Kingston upon Hull North)
(Lab)
We have been going for an hour and fifteen minutes now, and the
Secretary of State has failed to take any responsibility for the
current chaos on our rail system. wrote in The Times today
about better economic advantages for the Humber area if we have
faster train journeys, which I am sure the Secretary of State
agrees with. However, with the new TransPennine Express
timetable, the early indications are that most journeys across
the Pennines are taking 15 to 20 minutes longer. Does he take any
responsibility for that? How does it fit with the Government’s
plan for the northern powerhouse and improving connectivity
between east and west by speeding those journeys up?
What we are delivering is this: starting next spring, the £3
billion upgrade to the transpennine railway will make a huge
difference to journeys; the TransPennine franchise is bringing in
brand new intercity express trains in the coming months; and of
course, Humberside will also benefit from the huge investment
taking place in new trains on the east coast main line.
(Makerfield) (Lab)
My constituents have been suffering outdated Pacer trains,
overcrowding and cancellations for years, and the recent
timetabling chaos and the removal of the transpennine service
just exacerbated that. A promise of a better service by 2020 is
just not good enough. My constituents need to get to work now,
and no compensation will make up for the written warnings and
even the job loss that one person has told me about. Will the
Secretary of State at least consider insisting that TransPennine
reinstates the stop at Wigan until he can sort out the Northern
chaos?
The hon. Lady and I are meeting later, so I will happily talk
through that with her.
(Stalybridge and Hyde)
(Lab/Co-op)
Northern’s new emergency timetable takes 165 services out of the
timetable. It has been running for the first day today. A further
40 trains have been cancelled and punctuality is running at under
50%. Those figures were correct as I came into the Chamber at 5
o’clock, so they do not include the evening peak. The one
question the Secretary of State has not answered so far is this:
who in the Department for Transport gave approval for this
timetable change to go ahead?
Timetable changes are not approved by the Department for
Transport. These are matters for the different parts of the rail
industry; they are the ones who take those decisions.
(Burnley) (Lab)
The new timetable implemented by Northern Rail on 20 May has
brought chaos and misery to Burnley rail users, with 22 trains
cancelled on one single day and over 50% of the trains from
Burnley Manchester Road station being delayed or cancelled
altogether every single day. I have been listening to the
Secretary of State answering questions for over an hour. Maybe I
missed this, but I still do not understand why these timetable
changes were permitted to go ahead when it was known that
infrastructure works were incomplete and there was a shortage of
train drivers. I would be grateful if he could cast some light on
that. Most importantly, could he tell my constituents when they
can expect the restoration of a reliable service? The interim
timetable that started today has not improved things one little
bit.
My understanding is that there is a need to align train crew
rosters with the new timetable. That will take another 48 hours,
but I am assured by Northern that the new timetable introduced
this week should, as the week goes by, restore stability to that
network. That is certainly—absolutely 100%—my expectation. It is
essential for the hon. Lady’s constituents and that has to be
delivered.
(Oldham East and
Saddleworth) (Lab) rose—
(Stretford and Urmston) (Lab)
rose—
Mr Speaker
People lower down the alphabet should not suffer discrimination.
I call .
These are not recent problems. They predate the introduction of
the new timetable. They predate the delay in the infrastructure
improvements, and I have been talking to the Secretary of State,
in this Chamber and in private meetings, for month after month
about the problems my constituents are experiencing. He says that
he took advice from industry experts, and of course he should,
but why did he not also take advice and ask questions based on
the information coming from Members of this House and on the
information from the travelling public that has been all over
social media for months? What questions did he ask these industry
experts?
The whole point about the new timetable—it has clearly not worked
and it must work—is actually to deliver a more reliable service
through reshaping timetables in a way that means there is less
congestion and more services can be run for passengers. This has
clearly not worked at all. This timetable was put in place for
the best possible reasons and it has so far delivered the worst
possible outcomes. That must change.
I first contacted the Transport Secretary back in November to
raise concerns about the proposed timetable and, unfortunately,
he completely ignored my concerns. Today’s interim timetable has
brought even more havoc to my constituents who use Greenfield
station, with five—up to now—trains being cancelled. What
immediate action is he going to take to resolve some of the
issues not just about timetabling, but about capacity? Will he
ensure that, this time, passengers are involved?
Of course, the reality is that the most important thing, as I
have set out, is that Northern Rail needs to deliver this week,
as it has promised, a more stable timetable and something that
people can rely on. Step by step, it then needs to put back in
place the additional services that were supposed to deliver
better options for the hon. Lady’s constituents and others. That
clearly has not happened and I deeply regret that. It is
unconscionable, and infuriating to all of us in Government, that
the things that were supposed to deliver a better outcome for
everyone have not done so. We will not be anything other than
relentless in pushing the rail industry to ensure that those
benefits are delivered. They should be there now. They are not.
It is worse than it should be. That has to change and it has to
change quickly.
