ROLLING STOCK SPECIAL
Increasing capacity across the network and ensuring the right rolling stock gets where it is needed is about more than just the Intercity Express Programme, says campaignerAlexandra Woodsworth.
T
here is a clear need for extra capac- ity on our railways. Although many
of the discussions about rolling stock have been dominated by the Intercity Express Programme (IEP), with negotiations back underway following the Government an- nouncement on March 1, there is a much wider need for new or additional rolling stock on the British rail network.
Alexandra Woodsworth, public trans- port campaigner at the Campaign for Better Transport (CBT), believes the Government’s spending review in October 2010 showed that spending on a few ma- jor investment schemes like Crossrail has been made at the expense of everyday transport.
She explained: “Whilst there will be some places – particularly around London – which will be benefiting from these in- vestments, everyday rail services could po- tentially suffer over the next few years. In terms of rolling stock, I think it is a case of wait and see.”
The Campaign for Better Transport has warned of the potential for unintended consequences from HS2.
Campaigns Director Richard Hebditch said: “High-speed rail could offer an op- portunity to improve transport in the UK and provide greener choices for long- distance travel. But the danger is that the Government is so focused on just getting plans through in the face of lo- cal opposition that it ignores the need for it to be part of improving the whole network.
“We’re very worried that ministers will need to cut budgets elsewhere to pay for high speed rail. That could mean even steeper fare rises and cuts in local rail services in order to pay for it. And the best way for rail to offer a greener alternative is to electrify much more of the network but plans for electrification could be put back as high speed rail eats up all the funding.”
It wants HS2 made part of a broader review of capacity on the rail network but argues against the current plans for RPI+3% fare increases.
Although much of the debate has focused on the HLOS and IEP, there is still a major issue - particularly in the north of England – concerning the quantity and age of the rolling stock being used.
This is something the CBT would like to see addressed.
Woodsworth argued: “Rail fares are due to go up by a significant amount, so people will effectively be paying even more for an even worse service which was supposed to have been improved but hasn’t.
“Overcrowding is a huge problem across the network, particularly in areas such as Leeds. People often think that the over- crowding issue is one that only affects London. That is not the case.
“We also know that overcrowding is a de- terrent to other people from choosing to use rail services. We need to get more peo- ple out of their cars and using the trains in order to cut congestion and tackle climate change. This is not going to happen unless we have rail services which are comfortable and pleasant. At the moment, Britain’s rail users are allocated less space than is re- quired for cattle under European law. This is a real crisis, and as the Transport Select Committee has said, the Government is se- riously failing to address it.”
Considering that both the current and last government have worked hard to get more people to use the rail network, it is surpris- ing that there has been so little investment in new rolling stock.
Woodsworth said: “We have seen a growth in rail travel over the last few years – there
are more people choosing the train which is great. But there is a risk of people being turned away if they do not think it is cost effective, or if they think services will be overcrowded or unreliable.”
Too much of Britain’s rolling stock on some routes is ancient compared to that being used by our European neighbours, the CBT says, which needs addressing if we are going to compete on a level play- ing field and if we want to be considered a modern, forward-thinking country by potential investors.
Woodsworth said: “I think that this issue really depends on where you are. In some areas we have great rolling stock but in others passengers are using relatively old trains which are not attractive to new pas- sengers.”
Longer franchises suggested by the Government could give more flexibility to train operating companies but in return force them to use their own funds to pro- cure more rolling stock. But Woodsworth admitted: “I think that it might be a little bit naive to assume that this would happen – essentially we can’t guarantee that they would do that.
“In terms of fran- chises, we need strong specifications coming from gov- ernment to ensure that passengers get the best deal.”
Alexandra Woodsworth
FOR MORE INFORMATION Campaign for Better Transport W:
www.bettertransport.org.uk
rail technology magazine Feb/Mar 11 | 25
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112