After – finally – discovering what the Williams Shapps Plan for Rail actually said, I got together with Sir Michael Holden to discuss it. After all, who better to pick it apart than someone who’s actually run trains for the Government.
Michael Holden has first-hand experience of the strengths and weaknesses of both public and private sector, having twice been the Government’s go-to guy for bringing trains into the public sector when private sector franchisees collapsed. We talk through the strengths and weaknesses of Williams.
Join us for a wide-ranging discussion of the potential and pitfalls of the biggest change to the railways for 30 years.
I note that Sir Michael Holden’s chief worry is the same as that from a much less experienced person ( me ) …
Namely that the Treasury simply will not let go & will block really desperately needed schemes ( like electrifying everything ) just on the grounds of “first cost” without taking long-term savings into account, or the necessary decarbonisation – that most of the rest of government seems to want, at any rate.
Reception was more muted than anticipated. Universal acceptance that current position requires a reset but as stated detail to be developed.
My read on Open-Access was the opposite not that they would be squeezed out but that incumbents would no longer have a veto. Why would O-A abstract revenue if that is no longer the model? Their contract could have variable track fees based on performance/service criteria.
Ticketing is the hidden challenge. Simplification and universal fares are a goal like a continental pattern but that ignores the imbalances in demand. GBR will quickly need to add supplements to the trunk routes and leisure fares across country ones.