RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE AND IMPROVED PASSENGER SERVICE COMMITTEE

INTERIM REPORT

March 2006

RAIL INFRASTRUCTURE AND IMPROVED PASSENGER SERVICE COMMITTEE

INTERIM REPORT

March 2006

If you would like further copies of this report or a version in the following formats (large print, Braille, audio cassette or compact disk), please contact: Leanne Hatcher Rail Infrastructure and Improved Passenger Services Committee National Assembly for Wales Cardiff Bay CF99 1NA Tel: 029 2089 8429 E-mail: leanne.hatcher@wales.gsi.gov.uk

Committee Members

John Marek AM (Chair)

Wrexham

Leighton Andrews AM

Rhondda

Eleanor Burnham AM

North Wales

Rosemary Butler AM

Newport West

Janet Davies AM

South Wales West

Lisa Francis AM

Mid & West Wales

Carl Sargeant AM

Alyn & Deeside

Secretariat

Chris Reading

Committee Clerk

Sarah Bartlett

Deputy Clerk

Leanne Hatcher

Team Support

Contents

Page Number

1. Introduction 1

2. Roles and Responsibilities 2

3. Strategic Planning 8

4. Key Issues 9

5. What happens next? 14

Annexes

1. Schedule of Committee Papers

2. Verbatim Record of Committee Meetings

3. Consultation Letter

4. Schedule of Organisations Consulted

5. Summary of Consultation Responses

6. Structure of Welsh Rail Passenger Industry

7. Map of Rail Network

1

1. Introduction Background 1.1 The committee was established, in accordance with Standing Order 8.1, by a motion (NDM2735) that was approved by plenary on 6 December 2005. This motion set parameters for committee membership, terms of reference and various other matters; including the requirement to report to the National Assembly by the end of March and to terminate on 19 May 2006. 1.2 The committee held its inaugural meeting on 1 February 2006 to agree various procedural matters, including the election of the Chair. The committee heard oral presentations on 15 February, 8 March and 22 March; the committee papers and a verbatim record of these meetings can be viewed on the National Assembly website – www.wales.gov.uk 1.3 A schedule of committee papers is at Annex 1 and a copy of the verbatim record of these meetings is at Annex 2. Terms of Reference 1.4 The terms of reference for the committee inquiry are:

• To formulate a programme of costed, achievable improvements in rail infrastructure and improved passenger services affecting Wales; and

• To make recommendations to the Assembly on the improvements identified.

Consultation 1.5 A written consultation was carried out during February and early March 2006. The consultation letter is at Annex 3; a schedule of organisations consulted is at Annex 4 and a summary of responses is at Annex 5. The consultation was publicised in news media, specialist publications and on the National Assembly website. Purpose 1.6 The purpose of this interim report is: to set out the roles and responsibilities of the key organisations involved with planning, funding and providing rail passenger services in Wales; to give our understanding of the strategic planning process; and to explore some of the key issues to emerge from the evidence received. 1.7 It is not intended to present any conclusions, as these will be included in the final report. 1.8 The next stage is explained in Section 5.

2

2. Roles and Responsibilities Legal Framework 2.1 The Railways Act 2005 transfers most of the functions of the Strategic Rail Authority (now defunct) to the Secretary of State for Transport in the UK Government. The Act requires that the National Assembly for Wales be a joint signatory with the Secretary of State for Transport to any franchise that provides services wholly within Wales. Under the Government of Wales Act 1998, these powers have been delegated, via the First Minister, to the Assembly Minister for Economic Development and Transport. 2.2 Under the Act, the Assembly Government can also:

• Give financial assistance to any organisation for the purpose of developing Welsh railways (including Network Rail and Train Operating Companies);

• Publish guidance jointly with the Secretary of State in relation to, and make any proposals for, closures of services or facilities that it funds;

• Designate, where applicable, new services it funds as experimental for a trial period of up to five years.

2.3 In October 2005, the National Assembly became a joint signatory, with the Department for Transport, to the Wales and the Borders franchise, operated by Arriva Trains Wales (ATW). Transitional arrangements apply under that scheme until 1 April 2006, when the National Assembly will receive a resource transfer from the Department of Transport, become an active party to the franchise, and be responsible for funding all ATW services, except for a few services that operate only in England. Some of the features of this franchise will be outlined later. 2.4 From 1 April 2006, an agreement will be made between the Department of Transport and the National Assembly that will govern which party exercises which rights and liabilities under the franchise agreement. For example, the July 2004 White Paper, ‘The Future of Rail’, made it clear that the National Assembly will specify the services and fares for local services, within and bordering Wales. 2.5 The Transport (Wales) Act 2006 makes the National Assembly responsible for preparing a Wales Transport Strategy and gives it a general duty “to develop policies for the promotion and encouragement of safe, integrated, sustainable, efficient and economic transport facilities and services to, from and within Wales.” 2.6 The Act also provides measures to ensure that local transport planning is consistent with the Assembly’s overall transport strategy and provides for joint working arrangements and for joint transport authorities in Wales, so that local authority transport functions are carried out on a regional basis. 2.7 Part 3 of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, which covers access to goods, facilities and services, says that people providing transport services

3

must make reasonable adjustments to their services so that they are accessible to disabled people. This duty is ‘anticipatory’ and transport providers should expect that disabled people will be getting on, travelling on and getting off their vehicles. They should consider what adjustments might be needed and put the necessary arrangements in place without waiting to be asked. This includes transport infrastructure (for example: stations, ticket sales, transport information), but excludes transport vehicles. 2.8 Requirements on station operators, contained within Part 3 of the Act have been introduced in three stages. Since 2 December 1996, there has been a legal obligation on service providers at stations, like other types of service provider, not to discriminate against disabled people by: refusing them service, providing them with service on worse terms or providing a lower standard of service. 2.9 Since 1 October 1999, service providers at stations, like other public buildings, must take reasonable steps, in all the circumstances of the case, to make ‘reasonable adjustments’ for disabled people, if it is necessary and reasonable to do so, in order not to discriminate, but only to the way in which goods, facilities and services are delivered – by offering extra help, or making changes to the way they provide their services (whether paid for or not). 2.10 The final stage of Part 3 came into force on 1 October 2004 and requires the following: 2.11 If there is any physical feature that makes it impossible or unreasonably difficult for disabled people to access a station’s services, the station operator will have to take reasonable steps, in all the circumstances of the case, in order for it to seek to either remove or alter this feature or provide a reasonable means of avoiding it or to provide a reasonable alternative method of making the service in question available. 2.12 The station operator cannot avoid making alterations to the station purely because they are not the owner of the station. Section 27 of the Act says that any lease will have effect as if the operator may make the alteration with the written consent of the owner. If a station operator is occupying the station under a lease, the owner cannot unreasonably withhold consent to meet the requirements of the Act. An owner could refuse consent, if they had reasonable grounds to do so, although this would be most unusual. 2.13 The Disability Discrimination Act 2005 amends the law in relation to the use of transport vehicles, including trains – which were previously exempt. The Act enables the Government to make regulations to lift the previous exemption of certain types of transport vehicles and in particular circumstances. It is expected that these regulations will come into force from the end of 2006. The Act also sets 1 January 2020 as the date by which all rail vehicles must fully comply.

4

Department for Transport 2.14 The Department for Transport (DfT), is headed by the Secretary of State for Transport, and is responsible for setting the broad strategy for the development of rail passenger and freight services in England and Wales. The Department has established new processes for strategic planning; through both a High Level Output Specification (HLOS) and Regional Planning Assessments (RPAs). These will be explained in more detail later. 2.15 At present, funding for railways is focused on paying for franchised train services and towards Network Rail, which receives its income through direct grants from the UK Government and from train operators. The Department for Transport is responsible for setting the outputs required from Network Rail, in terms of performance and capacity, for a price that is set by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR). 2.16 The current Memorandum of Understanding between the Department for Transport and the Welsh Assembly Government, which sets out their respective roles and responsibilities, will require updating to reflect the provisions of the Railways Act 2005. National Assembly for Wales 2.17 In addition to the powers referred to above, the National Assembly must be consulted by the Secretary of State for Transport before giving guidance to the Office of Rail Regulation. 2.18 The Secretary of State must also consult the National Assembly before issuing an invitation to tender for, or before entering into, a franchise agreement that includes Welsh services; defined as those running within, or to or from Wales. 2.19 The National Assembly can appoint a member to the Rail Passenger Council, now called Passenger Focus. Network Rail 2.20 Network Rail owns and manages the rail network and associated infrastructure, including stations and signalling. Network Rail is a ‘not for profit’ company, and is regulated by the Office of Rail Regulation. 2.21 Network Rail receives funding from the Department for Transport and the Train Operating Companies. Network Rail uses this funding to maintain the existing network. In addition, it receives a modest funding (some £50 million per year for England and Wales) to allow for some enhancements to the network during routine maintenance works, where these can be shown to represent value for money. Network Rail can also receive funding for infrastructure improvements from other organisations, including the National Assembly for Wales.

5

2.22 Network Rail has a well defined Enhancement Business Process, via its Guide to Rail Investment Projects (GRIP). All enhancement projects must progress from definition of need and outline scope, to delivery and implementation, in accordance with the GRIP rules and processes. 2.23 For third party enhancement schemes; for example, those proposed by the National Assembly, the preparation and validation of the business case is the responsibility of the third party. 2.24 Network Rail meets regularly with all those involved in the rail industry to discuss current and future projects. 2.25 Network Rail publishes a ten-year rolling business plan, as part of its license conditions. The plan lists all the work that is to be carried out, route-by-route, and all of the aspirations for the network over the next ten years. The 2006 plan is due in April. Office of Rail Regulation 2.26 The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) is the independent regulator of the railway industry in Great Britain. From 1 April 2006, responsibility for the safety regulation of railways in Great Britain will be transferred from the Health and Safety Commission and Executive to the Office of Rail regulation. 2.27 Key roles:

• Monitoring compliance with, enforcing, and developing health and safety legislation for railways in Great Britain;

• Determining Network Rail’s access charges and outputs consistent with what government wants to achieve from the railway and the funds it has available;

• Monitoring and enforcing delivery of those outputs;

• Influencing and, in some cases, setting the terms of key relationships in the national railway; including, in particular, the track access contracts and network code under which train operators use Network Rail’s network; and

• Acting as competition authority for the railway industry. 2.28 The ORR published its first corporate strategy in April 2005. Following consultation in December 2005, the ORR intends to publish a revised strategy for 2006-2009 shortly, alongside its business plan.

6

Train Operating Companies 2.29 The train operating companies provide the passenger services under the terms of their franchise agreement. They obtain income from Government subsidies and from fares. From this income they have to pay staff costs, general operating costs and the cost of using the rail network. 2.30 There are five such companies operating in Wales:

• Arriva Trains Wales • Central Trains • Virgin Cross Country • First Great Western • Virgin West Coast

Local Authority Transport Consortia 2.31 There are four local authority transport consortia covering Wales:

• South East Wales Transport Alliance (Sewta) is a partnership of ten local authorities covering South East Wales;

• South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium (SWWITCH) is a partnership of four local authorities covering South West Wales;

• Trafnidiaeth Canolbarth Cymru (TraCC) is a partnership of three local authorities covering Mid Wales; and

• Taith is a partnership of six local authorities covering North Wales. Note: Gwynedd is a member of both TraCC and Taith. 2.32 Each consortium works with a range of stakeholders; including bus and rail operators, user representatives, business representatives, universities, neighbouring authorities and the National Assembly in order to prepare strategic plans for all modes of transport within their region. 2.33 In July 2005, Sewta published its proposed rail improvement programme; entitled ‘Moving People – Improving Rail: The Next Five years’ – and it has commissioned a longer term strategy to cover the period 2010 – 2018. The other Welsh transport consortia are preparing similar strategic plans.

7

Wales and the Borders Franchise 2.34 The franchise was awarded to Arriva Trains Wales (ATW) by the Strategic Rail Authority in December 2003. The franchise includes the lines serving the South Wales Valleys and the Marches. The term of the franchise is 15 years, subject to performance review assessments after five and ten years. If targets have not been met, then the franchise could be terminated but this would require a two-year notice period, to allow for re-tendering. ATW receives an annual subsidy that will be about £140 million in 2006-07 which will become the responsibility of the National Assembly from 1 April. The franchise sets out what level of service will be delivered and includes detailed monitoring arrangements. Network Rail compiles a detailed record of journey times, delays and reasons for these delays. This database is used to check whether specified performance targets are being met. The timetable has been agreed as workable and manageable. Financial penalties are imposed, if targets are not met. Overview 2.35 The structure of the Welsh rail passenger industry is shown diagrammatically at Annex 6 and a map showing the areas covered by the four transport consortia is at Annex 7.

8

3. Strategic Planning 3.1 The strategic planning process emanated from the ‘Future of Rail’ white paper, published in June 2005. The Secretary of State for Transport, via the Department for Transport, is responsible for setting strategy and will determine the rail budget for infrastructure outputs and access charges in England and Wales. The Department will achieve this through guidance, known as the High Level Output Specification (HLOS), covering the whole of England and Wales. The National Assembly for Wales must be consulted on the HLOS. It should take account of a series of Regional Planning Assessments, including one for Wales. 3.2 By June 2007, the Department for Transport will submit the HLOS to the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR), along with an indication of the funding available. It will set out what the Government expects from the railway industry over the five year period 2009 to 2014. From the HLOS, it will be for ORR to determine what Network Rail should be required to deliver and the funding available to do it. If ORR considers that the outputs sought are not consistent with the funding available, it can ask for revised guidance, and ultimately must give priority to the funding available. 3.3 In March 2008, Network Rail will set out how it will deliver the HLOS outputs. In the meantime, Network Rail is also producing Route Utilisation Strategies (RUS). These will focus on formally appraising changes which might be contemplated on the railways in the short to medium term. Network Rail is consulting the Welsh Assembly Government and local authorities in the development of these plans. There will be a RUS for passenger services covering the whole of Wales (due for preparation from late 2006 to 2008) and a RUS for freight (already in preparation and due for completion by 2007) covering the whole of Great Britain. The Route Utilisation Strategies will aim to make better use of existing capacity and examine detailed business plans for options generated during the Regional Planning Assessment. 3.4 The Regional Planning Assessment (RPA) for Wales will set out a longer term (20-year) view of how the railway might develop; given the market for travel, and the objectives and plans set out in wider housing, economic and spatial strategies. The RPA for Wales is being produced jointly by the Department for Transport and the Welsh Assembly Government, in consultation with the four regional transport consortia of local authorities. The aim is to have it completed by the end of 2006, as an adjunct of the Wales Transport Strategy, so that it can be taken into account in the preparation of the HLOS. When preparing the RPA, it is hoped that the findings of this Committee will be taken into account. 3.5 There will inevitably be some cross-fertilization in the preparation of these various plans. They are sequentially dependent, and so a delay to earlier activity will impinge on the preparation of later plans. The Network Rail Business Plan for 2008 will reflect the outcome of the whole process described above, and then a new cycle will begin.

9

4. Key Issues Introduction 4.1 The Committee has taken evidence from the main bodies responsible for planning and funding the provision of rail infrastructure and passengers services in Wales. In addition, we received over 130 written responses from individuals and organisations. The Committee is very grateful to all those who sent us their comments and suggestions. We are aware that some would have liked to present their views in person but, unfortunately, time did not permit. We are particularly grateful to those who did present papers in person and answer our questions, often at short notice. 4.2 The purpose of this interim report is not to present conclusions but to review some of the key issues raised, to enable the Committee to select its recommendations for inclusion in the final report. Funding 4.3 The Welsh Assembly Government will invest some £37million per year over the next three years on rail and air services, in addition to the £140million per year the Wales and Borders franchise. 4.4 Formal spending decisions are taken annually by Assembly Ministers in the light of the final budget, which is approved by the National Assembly each autumn. 4.5 For the financial year 2006-07, some £28million is already committed for various improvements; including the Ebbw Valley line, capital expenditure on stations in North Wales, revenue expenditure on rolling stock for the Valleys lines and the Heart of Wales Sunday service, and the Sewta rail improvement capital programme. 4.6 The Committee acknowledges previous investment in rail infrastructure and passenger services over the past few years. These were tabulated in an annex to the paper presented by Transport Wales, and also referred to by Network Rail. These included the Vale of Glamorgan Line (£13million), Aberdare Line platform extensions (£2.5million) and the Caerphilly to Bargoed frequency upgrade (£2.8million); together with provision of rolling stock, various station improvements and elimination of unsafe crossings. 4.7 The Department for Transport will transfer funds to the National Assembly for operation of the Wales and Borders franchise, operated by Arriva Trains Wales. The National Assembly would be responsible for providing funding for any additional, or accelerated, enhancements to rail infrastructure or passenger services, as a consequence of our recommendations. 4.8 Other possible sources of funding are European Union structural funds, following the recent agreement of the EU budget, although this still has to be ratified by the European Parliament and the European Commission. West

10

Wales and the Valleys are likely to receive some £1.3 billion in ‘convergence funding’ (previously Objective 1) over the next seven years. 4.9 The National Assembly might wish to negotiate a further transfer of funds from the Department for Transport to cover those parts of the South Wales Main Line services that operate within Wales. 4.10 We heard from the Office of Rail Regulation that local authorities could play a role in providing additional funding for improvements in and around stations; for example, improvements to car parks to facilitate ‘park-and-ride’ schemes, and also environmental and security improvements to make travel by rail more appealing. It might be possible to obtain sponsorship from local businesses for such projects. Improvements to Rail Infrastructure 4.11 Sewta has recently published its five-year improvement plan and the other consortia are in the process of producing their strategies. As previously mentioned, Network Rail will publish its latest business plan in April. The Committee will base its recommendations for improvements on these plans, together with the summary of consultation responses. 4.12 In his paper, Professor Cole outlined an integrated approach to setting priorities for investment in railways. Any new schemes put forward will have to meet evaluation criteria set out in guidance from the Welsh Assembly Government. The Department for Transport’s New Approach to Transport Appraisal is about to be replaced by the Welsh Transport Appraisal Guidance. 4.13 Professor Cole suggested the following priorities: Priority Route Actual or Potential

Traffic Volumes 1 Metro (Cardiff, Newport and Valley Lines) High 2 South Wales Main Line High 3 North Wales Main Line High 4 North – South Service Medium 5 Carmarthen – Manchester Medium (in Wales) 6 Cambrian Low 7 Pembrokeshire – Conwy Low 8 Heart of Wales Low 4.14 Whilst noting these rankings, the Committee felt that if other factors (for example, environmental issues, tourist and freight potential, and the availability of other modes of transport) were taken into account, that some of these priorities might change. We have not yet decided whether our final report will prioritise our suggested list of infrastructure improvements. 4.15 The Committee noted the additional (or earlier) improvements that Transport Wales and Arriva Trains Wales would like to make to the Valley lines services, subject to additional funding, most of which would require

11

infrastructure works; including provision of double track at ‘pinch points’, station improvements (making them higher, longer and safer) to improve capacity and disability access, signalling improvements and major works at Cardiff Central, Cardiff Queen Street and Newport stations. 4.16 We noted particular concern about the single track section on the line between Wrexham and Saltney Junction, which reduces capacity for passenger and freight traffic and has a high impact on service reliability. A project to dual this section is included in the Taith Rail Strategy. 4.17 We noted concern about a similar constraint west of Swansea, where there is a single track section between Swansea (Cockett) and Llanelli (Duffryn), which limits capacity to two trains in each direction and inhibits the development of improved services to and from the west of the region. Two possible solutions are being assessed by SWWITCH. 4.18 There was support from the transport consortia, including those not directly affected, for the proposal by the Wrexham Shropshire and Marylebone Railway Company to provide through trains between Wrexham and London, via Shrewsbury. This would allow passengers from Mid Wales to access additional services at Shrewsbury for London or Wrexham. We note that this proposal is subject to a satisfactory business case and obtaining an operating licence from the Office of Rail Regulation. 4.19 We noted proposals by TraCC for the provision of additional passing opportunities on the Cambrian Main Line, to ensure maximum benefit from the forthcoming trial of the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERMTS). The optimal location of these passing loops is yet to be determined by the Assembly Government and Network Rail. 4.20 The Committee was interested in the study commissioned by Taith to maximise the potential of the Wrexham – Bidston (Boderlands) Line by electrifying all, or parts, of the line and integrating operations with the Merseyrail Electrics network, to provide direct links to Liverpool. 4.21 We noted the desire to improve north-south services and also to improve east-west links, to facilitate access to Manchester and Liverpool (particularly John Lennon airport) and also the South Wales Main Line, to improve services to London, with possibly a spur to Heathrow airport. 4.22 In his paper, Professor Cole indicated the broad range of new investment, over the next ten years, required to provide either a ‘smartened-up railway’ or a ‘thoroughly modern railway’: £0.2billion and £1.2billion respectively. After allowance for renewals, maintenance and contractual payments (subsidies) these figures increased to between £1.2billion and £3.0billion.

12

Improved Passenger Services 4.23 For the purposes of this report, we list the common generic service improvements that we feel passengers require. They are in no particular order and some will require infrastructure improvements to be completed first. Specific examples can be seen at Annex 5.

• More rolling stock at peak periods on busy commuter lines;

• Better quality rolling stock;

• More frequent services;

• More weekend services;

• Faster journey times on longer distance routes, either by signalling/track improvements or by eliminating some stops;

• Improved accuracy and presentation of passenger information at stations (both by electronic display screens and by staff);

• Better staff training in dealing with the public;

• Better co-ordination of connecting services, including better communication between the various train operating companies;

• Improved maintenance and cleaning of rolling stock, to improve reliability and to make journeys more enjoyable;

• Improved cleaning and maintenance of toilets on trains and at stations;

• Extend free concessionary travel for students and the elderly on the more rural services, where capacity is not a major problem;

• More security (including CCTV and staff) on trains and at stations;

• Improved access to stations and trains for disabled passengers;

• Improved facilities for interchange between rail and other modes of travel;

• Innovative services (possibly with specially adapted rolling stock) at appropriate locations and times to encourage more tourists to travel by rail, either as a means of getting to their final destination, or for specific leisure-related activities; for example - walking, cycling or attending a particular event;

13

Freight 4.24 The consideration of freight services was not included in the Committee’s remit. However, this was mentioned several times in responses to the consultation and by presenters. We were interested to hear of innovative projects in Mid Wales:

• An Assembly Government sponsored scheme to transport slate waste along the Conwy Valley Line to terminals in Northwest England and the Midlands;

• An Assembly Government sponsored scheme to transport timber for the Forestry Commission along the Cambrian Main Line from Aberystwyth to Chirk;

• TraCC is due to meet with a local regeneration group, to explore the possibility of using the disused line between Trawsfynydd and Blaenau Ffestiniog, where it joins the Conwy Line, for freight traffic;

4.24 We support such projects and suspect there will be more opportunities to transfer freight from road to rail in the more rural areas. The potential for further projects should be identified in the freight Rail Utilisation Strategy being undertaken by Network Rail and the Assembly Government.

14

5. What happens next? 5.1 The Committee has completed gathering information for this inquiry, other than various supplementary notes to be provided by some of the presenters. 5.2 We shall consider the evidence and determine our recommendations to be included in our final report. This will be submitted to the Assembly Minister for Economic Development and Transport and the report will be debated by the National Assembly for Wales before 19 May 2006. 5.3 Following this debate, we expect that the Welsh Assembly Government will issue a written response within about two months, in accordance with the agreed protocol.

Annex 1 – Schedule of Committee Papers RIPS(2) 01-06 (p1) Consultation Letter RIPS(2) 02-06 (p1) Arriva Trains Wales RIPS(2) 02-06 (p2) Network Rail RIPS(2) 02-06 (p2a) Network Rail – Briefing Background RIPS(2) 02-06 (p3) Transport Wales RIPS(2) 02-06 (p4) SEWTA - Moving People - Improving Rail (The Next

Five Years) - July 2005 RIPS(2) 02-06 (p5) SEWTA - Rail Strategy Study - Executive

Summary - January 2006 RIPS(2) 02-06 (p6) SEWTA - Rail Strategy Study - Draft Final Report -

January 2006 RIPS(2) 02-06 (p7) UK Department for Transport RIPS(2) 03-06 (p1) Transport Research Centre, University of Glamorgan RIPS(2) 04-06 (p1) TraCC RIPS(2) 04-06 (p2) SWWITCH RIPS(2) 04-06 (p3) Office of Rail Regulation RIPS(2) 04-06 (p4) TAITH Rail Strategy RIPS(2) 04-06 (p4a) TAITH - The Borderlands Rail Study Executive

Summary

Annex 2 – Verbatim Record of Committee Meetings

Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru Y Pwyllgor ar Seilwaith y Rheilffyrdd a Gwella

Gwasanaethau i Deithwyr

The National Assembly for Wales The Committee on Rail Infrastructure and

Improved Passenger Services

Dydd Mercher, 15 Chwefror 2006 Wednesday, 15 February 2006

Cynnwys Contents

Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a Dirprwyon Introduction, Apologies and Substitutions ................................................................. 20 Cofnodion y Cyfarfod Blaenorol a Materion yn Codi Minutes of the Previous Meeting and Matters Arising............................................... 21 Trenau Arriva Cymru Arriva Trains Wales................................................................................................... 22 Network Rail.............................................................................................................. 38 Trafnidiaeth Cymru ac Adran Drafnidiaeth y DU Transport Wales and UK Department for Transport ................................................. 50

Cofnodir y trafodion hyn yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir cyfieithiad Saesneg o gyfraniadau yn y Gymraeg. Mae hon yn fersiwn ddrafft o’r cofnod. Cyhoeddir fersiwn derfynol ymhen pum diwrnod

gwaith.

These proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in

the committee. In addition, an English translation of Welsh speeches is included. This is a draft version of the record. The final version will be

published within five working days.

Aelodau o’r Cynulliad yn bresennol: John Marek (Cadeirydd); Leighton Andrews; Eleanor Burnham; Rosemary Butler; Janet Davies; Lisa Francis; Carl Sargeant. Swyddogion yn bresennol: Robin Shaw, Prif Weithredwr, Trafnidiaeth Cymru. Eraill yn bresennol: Bob Brierley, Ysgrifennydd Cynghrair Trafnidiaeth De-ddwyrain Cymru (SEWTA); Graham Bunker, Rheolwr Gyfarwyddwr, Trenau Arriva Cymru; Robbie Burns, Cyfarwyddwr Llwybrau Teithio, Network Rail; Stephen Clark, Rheolwr Rhanbarthol, Is-adran Polisi Rhanbarthol y Rheilffyrdd a Darparu Gwasanaethau, Adran Drafnidiaeth y DU; Roger Cobbe, Cyfarwyddwr Polisi, Trenau Arriva Cymru; Mike Gallop, Rheolwr Gwella Llwybrau Teithio, Network Rail; Charlie Nelson, Is-gadeirydd, Cynghrair Trafnidiaeth De-ddwyrain Cymru (SEWTA); Paul Plummer, Cyfarwyddwr Cynllunio a Rheoleiddio, Network Rail; Alison Teague, Pennaeth Masnachfraint a Chyswllt â Budd-ddeiliaid, Trenau Arriva Cymru; y Cynghorydd Tom Williams, Cadeirydd Cynghrair Trafnidiaeth De-ddwyrain Cymru (SEWTA); Stephen Wolstenholme, Is-adran Polisi Rhanbarthol y Rheilffyrdd a Darparu Gwasanaethau (Yr Alban a Chymru), Adran Drafnidiaeth y DU . Gwasanaeth Pwyllgor: Chris Reading, Clerc; Sarah Bartlett, Dirprwy Glerc. Assembly Members in attendance: John Marek (Chair); Leighton Andrews; Eleanor Burnham; Rosemary Butler; Janet Davies; Lisa Francis; Carl Sargeant. Officials in attendance: Robin Shaw, Chief Executive, Transport Wales. Others in attendance: Bob Brierley, Secretary, South East Wales Transport Alliance (SEWTA); Graham Bunker, Managing Director, Arriva Trains Wales; Robbie Burns, Route Director, Network Rail; Stephen Clark, Divisional Manager, Rail Regional Policy and Delivery Division, UK Department for Transport; Roger Cobbe, Director of Policy, Arriva Trains Wales; Mike Gallop, Route Enhancement Manager, Network Rail; Charlie Nelson, Deputy Chair, South East Wales Transport Alliance (SEWTA); Paul Plummer, Director of Planning and Regulation, Network Rail; Alison Teague, Head of Franchise and Stakeholder Management, Arriva Trains Wales; Councillor Tom Williams, Chair, South East Wales Transport Alliance (SEWTA); Stephen Wolstenholme, Scotland and Wales Rail Regional Policy and Delivery Division, UK Department for Transport. Committee Service: Chris Reading, Clerk; Sarah Bartlett, Deputy Clerk.

Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 9.00 a.m. The meeting began at 9.00 a.m.

Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a Dirprwyon Introduction, Apologies and Substitutions

[1] John Marek: Good morning, everyone. It has just gone 9 a.m., and we need to start on time. I welcome everyone to this meeting. This is the first meeting of this committee to take oral evidence, although we have met before. [2] There are people here who will present evidence, and I will welcome you all in due course. However, I remind presenters of this committee’s remit. This committee is here to collate evidence, primarily. We want a list of desirable and achievable improvements in railway passenger services, and in railway infrastructure in Wales—or at least pertaining to Wales, as not necessarily all of it will be geographically in Wales. The National Assembly in Plenary has charged us to collate all this evidence and all these suggestions. I am delighted that you are here to help us on this. [3] Together with this list of evidence, we need to have a costing. The costings need be only a ballpark figure—we do not need detailed costings as, in many ways, they are impossible to give. However, we need a ballpark figure. Finally—and there may be an element of politics with a small ‘p’ in this—we need your assessment of how desirable these improvements are. Should they be improvements in the top category, namely to be undertaken and completed before, say, 2010, or are they improvements to be carried out in the medium term, or are they simply aspirations that we could consider if Santa Claus appeared one Christmas? [4] That is all that we are here for, really—nothing else. We are not here to decide whether the structure of Network Rail is right, or whether the regulator has the powers, or whether the franchise could have been different. I will be fairly light on this, as Chair, but I want people to realise that the job of this committee is to get a comprehensive list of these desirable improvements in infrastructure and passenger services. That also includes freight, as the paths of freight trains impinge on passenger services. We then need to give a ballpark figure as to how much that would cost. I guess, therefore, that it is the possibility of it being done, because Network Rail cannot do everything at any one time anyway, because of its capacity constraints. Finally, we need an indication of the importance that you, who present these suggestions to us, attach to each suggestion. [5] Members and presenters can speak in either English or Welsh. To hear the translation, you can use the headsets, which are available from the ushers. Please switch off your mobile phones, BlackBerrys, and so on, as they interfere with the broadcast—and this meeting is being broadcast live. Therefore, please switch them off completely; do not even have them on ‘silent’ mode. I would value your attention to what I have just said. In an emergency, ushers will direct everyone to the nearest safe exit. [6] I have not received any apologies. Do Members wish to make any further declarations? There is no need for Members to repeat declarations of interest already made at a previous meeting. Are there any other declarations? [7] Eleanor Burnham: I am the chair of a little charity called Making Tracks, which is associated with disaffected youth. [8] John Marek: Is it a declaration of interest? Does it benefit from National Assembly for Wales funds?

[9] Eleanor Burnham: Yes, it might do. [10] John Marek: I see. In that case, it is probably advisable to note that. Is that sufficient? [11] Eleanor Burnham: It is declared in the register. [12] John Marek: Thank you. Members have been asked whether they are content to hold an additional meeting in the evening of 7 or 8 March. We need to agree a date, so do Members have any views on that? [13] Eleanor Burnham: I will need to check, as I do not have my diary with me. [14] John Marek: We could decide after the break, if that would be helpful. [15] Lisa Francis: I would prefer 8 March. [16] John Marek: Okay, the suggestion is that we meet on 8 March. [17] Janet Davies: I would have to give my apologies as I cannot make that date. [18] Carl Sargeant: I think that we should decide after the break. [19] John Marek: Yes, okay. Remind me after the break, as I will probably forget. We can decide with a show of hands. [20] Eleanor Burnham: What time would the meeting start? [21] John Marek: It would start 15 minutes after Plenary finished, but we will decide that after the break. 9.06 a.m.

Cofnodion y Cyfarfod Blaenorol a Materion yn Codi Minutes of the Previous Meeting and Matters Arising

[22] John Marek: We need to agree the minutes. Do Members agree that they are an accurate record? I see that they do. [23] I thank Members for their suggestions for organisations and individuals to be added to the consultation list. We have a list of extra bodies, and we have sent consultation letters to all those that were suggested. Should Members have any further additions to make to the consultation list, they should give them to the clerk. It is still open for written submissions. The notes of the informal briefing session held on 24 January have been circulated to Members. Are there any other matters arising? I see not. Cadarnhawyd cofnodion y cyfarfod blaenorol. The minutes of the previous meeting were ratified.

9.07 a.m.

Trenau Arriva Cymru Arriva Trains Wales

[24] John Marek: It gives me great pleasure to welcome Graham Bunker, who is the managing director of Arriva Trains Wales, and his team. You may assume that we have read what you have sent us. It is always a waste of time to go through the papers that you have printed. However, please give a five-minute introduction, after which I am sure Members will ask you questions. [25] Mr Bunker: Good morning, everyone. My name is Graham Bunker. Some of you may know me already. I am the managing director of Arriva Trains Wales. To my left is Roger Cobbe, who is the policy director for the Arriva Trains division of Arriva Group plc, and to my right is Alison Teague, who is the head of franchise and stakeholder management for Arriva Trains Wales. I hope that the three of us will be able to answer any questions that you might have today. [26] We are the national operator for Wales. We also operate in the border counties of England, as far north as Manchester and across to Birmingham and Gloucester. We run around 950 trains a day, seven days a week, although we run slightly fewer at the weekends, and our network stretches right across Wales. [27] We won the franchise, which started in December 2003, for a 15-year term, ending in 2018. We needed to deliver a number of key improvements, the main one being the standard pattern timetable, which was introduced in December. It saw an overhaul of all services in Wales and significant improvements to through-journey opportunities. For example, the Manchester to Cardiff route became the Manchester to Cardiff to Carmarthen and Milford Haven route. The new Holyhead to Cardiff service, which is proving popular, was introduced in December, and there has been an increase in the number of trains on suburban routes around Cardiff. 9.10 a.m. [28] I appreciate that this is a meeting focusing on the future and looking forward, but it would be remiss of me not to mention the current state of play, which is of interest, I am sure, to the committee. What we have seen, under the new timetable, is a steadily improving trend of increasing punctuality, but, at present, we need to ensure that we deliver the capacity to go with that. On its own, punctuality is not enough. I think that there has been some media coverage, which people will have seen. I took the 7.40 a.m. service from Caerphilly this morning, and I was talking to passengers who told me that the key thing for them is consistency. Their general view was either that we are very good, or we were not good at all. They were very disappointed when we got it wrong. That message is taken home, and we are very keen to ensure that we deliver consistently. That, for us, means ensuring that we have the right trains in the right place at the right time and delivering reliability. We are working very hard with colleagues at Network Rail to ensure that that happens. I am sure that they will add their points of view to that.

[29] We have also undertaken a number of items beyond our franchise commitments. We are currently spending £1.5 million on refurbishing a number of our sprinter trains. There are now four of those in service, which are used right across the Valleys line network, particularly on the Taff side at the moment. I am reliably informed that one came in from Aberdare this morning, so some people may have used that. Our customers are giving us very good reports that that is the kind of standard that they want to see. We are aware of the criticism that, when we inherited the units from ScotRail, they were not up to the standard of the rest of the fleet. [30] In terms of what we are doing around the network, we are investing a seven-figure sum—I will not say exactly what it is because we are still in negotiations—on an expanded depot at Machynlleth, which will see all the Cambrian units that operate up there and also serve the Birmingham to Chester corridor being maintained on the network. So, they will not come back to Cardiff for their maintenance; there will be a dedicated facility for them. [31] We are also investing across our stations, although not in Wales. At Chester, we are spending around £1.5 million on massive improvements to that station, which is used by many Welsh constituents as a gateway to services to London, the north west and beyond. We are also investing in improving the passenger journey by having a new customer information system in north Wales. I am pleased to report that the final landlord’s consent has been obtained and the final part of that phase across north Wales stations will be rolled out very swiftly. We are installing ticket barriers and ticket vending machines across our network. They are already in place in Cardiff’s Queen Street station, Bridgend, Swansea and Newport. They are proving very popular with customers, when they get used to them. It is not necessarily what they look for first off, but they are actually much quicker at dealing with queues than a manual system. Our vending machines have been so successful that we are now having to install a second one at Queen Street station because we are going to wear the first one out. There is such a demand and we are going to meet that demand. All these things are above and beyond what was in the franchise agreement and what was for the start in December 2003. I think that this is evidence of the flexibility of how we can work with the Welsh Assembly Government and partners in England to deliver improvements to the railway as time goes by, because 15 years, the length of our franchise, is a long time. [32] In terms of what we have brought to this committee, what our aspirations are and where we think investment should be directed, as always in this situation, I think that it is a matter of choice. Nothing on the railway is usually that quick in delivering investment. You cannot decide to spend on something one day and then, a few months later, it is complete. Unfortunately, it usually takes a year or two to deliver investment. We see expanding the railway as a priority. We see strong growth across Wales. Everyone talks about Cardiff, and, yes, we see growth around Cardiff, but we also see growth across our network, and there is an opportunity to grow the railway to accommodate that. We will be operating many more class 175s, which are the newest units in our fleet, on our inter-urban services, and 16 of the 27 that we will have from the end of the year have three cars, so there will be more capacity on north-south services, which is important, I am sure, to our customers and to Members. [33] For me, our priorities are about seeing how we can expand the use of rail in other areas, to continue the positive trend in and around Cardiff and on the Cambrian line, and to ensure that the good growth that we are now seeing in west Wales continues.

[34] I would be happy to answer questions on specific schemes, or on how to improve the way in which we deliver those. It is fair to say that, across Wales, something is happening everywhere. Network Rail has ambitious plans in Newport, and we are supporting it on what is, effectively, a new station. There is a significant European rail transport management system project on the Cambrian line, which could potentially be the mechanism that unlocks some partnering investment to give an hourly service to Aberystwyth, which we would support. The contracts have been signed for the Ebbw valley railway, and we are working with Network Rail and others to ensure that that is delivered in 2007. [35] John Marek: Thank you very much. That is quite useful. Do not worry, as everyone will have a go. Perhaps I should have said this when outlining the purpose of this committee, but I just want to be clear that, once the committee produces its report and its ordered list of suggestions for improvement, the Business Minister has been instructed to put down a debatable, and therefore amendable, motion before Plenary, and Plenary will make its decision on what to do. A certain amount of money—not a lot—is available through the Welsh Assembly Government, though it is made available by the National Assembly, and it was the will of the National Assembly that there should be openness or, hopefully, a consensus at least as to those schemes that ought to be progressed early and those that should be progressed later. So, there is purpose in the list that we are trying to— [36] Leighton Andrews: Hang on a minute. [37] John Marek: Hang on; I will give you a chance, Leighton. There is purpose in what we are trying to do in this committee. [38] Leighton Andrews: That is ridiculous. [39] John Marek: No, it is not ridiculous, Leighton. Please save your comments for later. [40] There is purpose in your providing a list, and you have a number of things in your submission. Would it be possible for you to perhaps give ballpark costings? Not now, obviously, but could you go away and produce some idea of the ability of Network Rail or you to do it in the short, medium or long term, as I think that that would help us? [41] Mr Bunker: I think that it would be possible for us to give a range of cost and an idea of how long it might take from decision to implementation on certain schemes. We would have to work closely with Network Rail on many of the infrastructure items. If I may make a suggestion, Chair, it would be to put together the items that everyone has suggested, as there would probably be a lot of duplication given that some ideas lend themselves naturally to the debate. Perhaps we need a shortlist first before we go down that track, because it would involve a lot of work and, for time reasons, it would be better to have a priority list that the committee wished Network Rail and us to undertake. [42] John Marek: I will obviously leave that to you, but I do not think that you need to put in things that you are already committed to doing. We are

interested in those types of things that might be desirable if you had a little bit of extra finance, which would swing the argument from not doing it until after 2010 perhaps to doing it in the next two or three years. [43] Mr Bunker: I am comfortable for us to take that away and look at it, to see what we can do. There are some things that we will not be able to answer and some that we may. [44] John Marek: Do the ones that you can. Thank you very much for that. You can write to the clerk in due course on that one. Lisa is first, and then Leighton. [45] Lisa Francis: I would like to ask you about your relationship with Network Rail. It would be useful to know how often you meet to discuss progress reports and how you implement plans with Network Rail. Could you give a brief outline of how that works? Why is your performance currently not meeting the targets as set out in the franchise? Why do you think that is? What would be the cost implications of purchasing new trains given long-term agreements with the rolling stock leasing companies? 9.20 a.m. [46] Mr Bunker: I will take the local position in terms of Network Rail, and I will ask Roger to answer on the wider context of the UK debate. In terms of the local level, you will hear later from Robbie Burns from Network Rail. He and I generally speak every day; we have an excellent working relationship and I think that it is fair to say that that was not necessarily the case previously, in terms of the relationship between what was Railtrack, which became Network Rail, and the local rail operators. It was never a bad relationship, but I think that we can now say that we have a very good relationship. [47] In terms of Network Rail’s change to becoming a more customer-focused organisation, it is not unusual for Robbie and me to be travelling on our network together to see first hand what is going on, and it is not unusual for our teams to be out together. It is very hand in glove at the moment in terms of our relationship. As all friends do, one might say, now and again we fall out. Whereas previously in the rail industry, you fell out and did not make up for a year, now you agree to disagree and move on. While some things disappoint us, we do not disagree on that. If there is a particular performance issue, a significant disruption or something around the project, it can be frustrating, but we try to learn the lessons together about how both organisations can operate better. I think that customers will see that in terms of our performance. [48] I think that we are seeing, across our network, an increase in the punctuality of our services. As I have mentioned, we are working on the difficult issue of capacity in south Wales, but if we look across Wales as a whole, performance is improving. Certainly, for you, in terms of the Cambrian coast, we are regularly running every train on time. I no longer get the school going, ‘Hello, what are you doing about this?’ We have listened to the concerns and we have been able to deliver on that. However, we know that the main line on the Cambrian is not as reliable as it should be. That has had my personal attention, and that of Robbie Burns, and we are

implementing a number of speed increases that will go through in the next few weeks. We are also changing the way in which we use radio signalling up there—it is not quite unique, but it is the only line in Wales with that system—so that we can see significant improvements in reliability. Also, Network Rail has led some changes to the timetable in the Birmingham area to improve the resilience of the service, so that trains do not have to turn around at Wolverhampton. That is a specific example of how we have worked well together. I will ask Roger to talk about the UK context. [49] John Marek: I need to gently say to you, with all due respect, that we need shorter answers otherwise we will never get through it. We have about 13 minutes and I want to protect Members’ time so that they can ask their questions. Please bear that in mind, if you would. However, if you have not finished and you want a quick addendum to that, you should carry on. [50] Mr Cobbe: It is a very quick addendum. I was just going to say that Peter Telford, the managing director of Arriva Trains, and I, as the holding company and the franchisee, meet quarterly with senior representatives of Network Rail’s management. That gives us a chance to compare performance and issues in Wales with what is going on in the whole national rail network, to ensure that we are being treated fairly and that any policy issues can be addressed at a senior level. [51] Lisa Francis: Why do you feel that you are not meeting the targets as set out in the original franchise agreement? Why are you currently not meeting those targets? What reasons would you give for not meeting them? [52] Mr Bunker: There are two sets of targets in the franchise agreement: the milestone targets and the threshold targets. We are above the threshold, but we are not quite where we planned to be on the milestone targets. On the reasons for that, I think that, last year, the infrastructure was not as reliable as forecast, but improvements have been made. Also, the fleet has not been as reliable as we would have wished—some of the units that we have inherited have needed work to bring them into line. [53] We always knew that it would be difficult during the first two years of the franchise to achieve the milestones, until we rewrote the timetable. As time went by, in those two years, the services got busier and punctuality became even harder to achieve. However, I am pleased to be able to say that, right across the network, punctuality is significantly better. It is not where we want it to be, but it is significantly better. In what we call period 1, which is broadly the month of January, we delivered a punctuality rate of 87.4 per cent across Wales. That is a published, audited figure: it is a Network Rail figure; we do not produce it, Network Rail does. It shows that we are now on track, and where we said we would be, in terms of delivering the improved service with the new timetable. [54] John Marek: If Members want to jump in on a particular point, please do, because I think that the committee works best when that can happen. Perhaps I can jump in now before I call Leighton. On that, let me give you a counter example. I think that you have extended the journey time from Wrexham to Cardiff by 25 minutes, with the result that the train now stops for five minutes in Shrewsbury and in Hereford, and arrives in Cardiff early. [55] Rosemary Butler: It is 20 minutes. [56] John Marek: Yes, that is right. I have arrived 10 minutes early. Does that mean that you do not have to pay penalty payments to the Welsh Assembly

Government for being late? It certainly bumps up the reliability figures. Is that the reason? I think that it may well be. [57] Mr Bunker: The issue that we have at the moment is that we are using new class 175 trains and the older class 158 trains on north-south services, and they do not go at the same speed. However, because they are used turn and turnabout, you have to work to the lowest common denominator, which means that, as the new trains are faster, you could therefore potentially have wait time.

[58] John Marek: I travel on the 158 train at 10.37 a.m., and it always gets in 10 minutes early, and then hangs about. [59] Mr Bunker: In terms of capacity on the network, and this is particularly on northbound journeys, I would challenge the assumption that we plan to have trains waiting at Shrewsbury for 20 minutes. We plan to have that train—which is the Cardiff to Holyhead service—waiting for 10 minutes, as is shown in the timetable. The reason for that is because the train must wait for access onto the single line between Wrexham and Chester, and that is the specific reason why that train has that parking time. [60] John Marek: That is for down journeys. Fine, thank you for that. Lisa, have you finished? [61] Lisa Francis: Yes, I can come back in on another point. [62] John Marek: Then I call Leighton. [63] Leighton Andrews: One thing I am certain that we cannot do in Wales is to run the railways by committee, and I do not think that we should get into competitive auction on routes. I have had the opportunity to meet you, so I will not repeat questions that I have already asked on behalf of my constituents. [64] However, I will start with an e-mail I received this morning, which I assume was inspired by an article in the South Wales Echo on Monday by a traveller between Cardiff and Treforest, who says that since the introduction of the new timetable, the service he experiences has become worse. You may answer that the journey between Cardiff and Treforest has been extended for some, but has been improved for my constituents further up the line in Treherbert. I would like to ask you what your view is on that. [65] Are your performance statistics for rush-hour peaks different from the overall average? Is there a legal limit on the number of people who can be crammed into a coach on a train? Also, in terms of the quite substantial subsidy that you receive from the Assembly and Department for Transport, presumably there are penalties if you fail to perform on certain services to which you have committed in the franchise. Can you explain what those are? [66] Mr Bunker: In terms of the new timetable in the Valleys, we have always said that we cannot satisfy everyone’s aspirations through one timetable, and it is a connecting timetable. The old-style Valleys timetable, which was very unreliable, generally meant that you could do a through journey from virtually anywhere in the Valleys, so in certain cases you could go from Radyr to Caerphilly direct. That was potentially advantageous, and when passenger numbers were lower it was sustainable, but given the sheer volume of passengers now and the number of trains needed to meet that demand, that style of timetable is not feasible to deliver the

reliability that passengers demand. Therefore, some people must make a connectional change. I am happy to look at that specific case, and perhaps write to you on that in terms of the detail. If there are lessons to be learned and improvements that we can make, we will make them. [67] In terms of our punctuality, it is on an all-day basis, so it includes the peaks. If we turn around and quote a figure, that includes the peaks. As you would have expected, I checked what it was this morning before I came in, and we delivered 90 per cent punctuality during this morning’s peak. So, we are delivering in line with where the franchise wants us to be. On many days we deliver over the figure, but on some days we deliver under it, and our challenge is to ensure that we minimise those days. [68] In terms of the wider context of the franchise agreement and the mechanisms, Roger, you were present when the deal was done, so perhaps you could explain the overall context of the penalties and rewards regime. 9.30 a.m. [69] Mr Cobbe: There are two types of control in the franchise agreement that are contractual obligations. If those are not met they form a contractual breach for which the Department for Transport, up until now, and the Assembly Government in future, can impose either unlimited penalties or take other action. There are performance regimes whereby performance is measured and converts into a flow of money, either towards us or against us. Up until now, there have been no breaches of the franchise agreement. We have met all our contractual obligations and the financial regime is driven, essentially, by the public performance measure, which is the one that was discussed earlier. While we are below the trajectory that we forecast, that results in a payment from us to the Department for Transport, and as we reach and get above that trajectory, it would reverse the flow of money. Therefore, there is a financial incentive on us, in addition to our own determination, to get the public performance measure to the level at which we wish it to be. [70] Leighton Andrews: I do not think that you answered the question on the cramming into carriages. [71] Mr Bunker: I will take that; that was the next one to answer. There is no specific number in the way that there is for a bus, for example, where there is a number of seated and standing passengers, but all of our conductors are trained to look at the number of people on a train. We continually re-assess it. To give you an idea, we are currently monitoring Llandaff station every morning during peak hours by means of CCTV to be aware of the situation. Therefore we do keep it under review. As I said, I was on a train this morning. It was a four-car train that was on time, fortunately, as I was on it, and the key thing that we noted was that there were some 30 people standing on it. I cannot run a train that is longer than four-cars on that route. However, in the recent announcement there is investment in six-car platforms. We say in our submission that six-car platforms on the Rhymney valley line, and to Treherbert, are a priority if we wish to keep growing the Cardiff suburban network as we have. [72] Leighton Andrews: The reality is that, despite the timetable, the number of complaints that I get from my constituents has increased rather than decreased. One of the key questions that I get from them is how you define a cancellation. For example, a frequent complaint—and I have raised

this with you before—is that many of my constituents are put off at Porth; they are on a train and think that it is going to Treherbert but end up having to be put off at Porth and then have to wait for a subsequent train. Is that a cancellation? [73] Mr Bunker: Yes. [74] Leighton Andrews: Therefore, that is a cancellation. [75] Mr Bunker: To clarify, I would recommend appendix 3 in the Welsh Assembly Government submission, which is very helpful because it explains the public performance measure. Rather than necessarily term what is a cancellation, I will turn it around and ask, ‘What is success?’, because it is quicker. Success is only when a train completes its timetabled journey, calling at all stations, and arrives within four minutes and 59 seconds at its terminating station in line with the timetable. Therefore, if I turn a train around in Porth, the train that was going to Treherbert and did not is a cancellation, and the train coming back that starts at Porth is also a cancellation, because it did not start in Treherbert. To pre-empt a point, sometimes we run faster, and recover the service for the benefit of most passengers. I know that that sometimes can cause inconvenience. We have improved the way in which we have done that since we met with you, Leighton, and we are doing it a lot less. That is also a cancellation. The only trains that we ever say ran on time are those that ran on time, within four minutes and 59 seconds, and called at every single station exactly as the timetable says. Everything else is either a part-cancellation, if it does some of the journey, or a full cancellation. [76] John Marek: We need to speed up if possible. Leighton, do you wish to carry on? [77] Leighton Andrews: I am fine. [78] John Marek: Janet is next. [79] Janet Davies: I had understood that the purpose of this committee was to look at what the Assembly Government would prioritise for spending in the future, and the relatively small amount of money that the Assembly Government has compared to— [80] John Marek: That must be right, to put it roughly. [81] Janet Davies: Yes, I think it was that, rather than criticism of the present running of the franchise. [82] John Marek: That is right; the witnesses are not here on trial for anything. We want their help. [83] Janet Davies: We can all bring up issues and compare the overcrowding on the Valleys lines south of Pontypridd with the fact that there is only a rail bus from Haverfordwest to Fishguard with what is happening on the north-south line. However, what I would like to ask is whether the list that you have at the back is all about Assembly Government spending. I think that we need a clear distinction between what Arriva or Network Rail, in its case, would see to be spending, and what the Assembly Government would want to spend. Each item should have some sort of comparison, as in Jacobs Consultancy’s study for SEWTA, which showed how much

an objective related to environmental, economic and accessibility reasons. We need to do all that as well as being able to get into line the fact that there is no point doing some things because you can do others. For example, I do not think that there is any point in building extra car parks until you have enough room on the trains for people in the Valleys area. It would just make that situation worse. So, I would like to know whether you can make this clear distinction, and whether you can say how they relate to Assembly Government objectives. [84] John Marek: That is presumably when you write back to us with your ordered list. [85] Mr Bunker: I am comfortable about doing that. On the list of aspirations, they are all non-committed ones. So they are not by us, Network Rail or the Welsh Assembly Government at this time. However, I am happy to clarify where we would seek to be involved. [86] John Marek: Lisa, did you want to come in on this point? [87] Lisa Francis: Yes. I wanted to know if they were all non-committed because, in terms of appendix 1, I wondered on which ones no work had been done to date. Are they all in that situation? How many of them have business plans? [88] Mr Bunker: I think some of them are within the SEWTA programme, which we are a part of and work very closely with. We are very supportive of the aspirations within that programme. I think that others are at various levels of development. It would be fair to say that none are, at this stage, certainly to my knowledge, committed, although we will double-check that no recent announcements have been made that may have overtaken the submission. However, generally, they are not committed aspirations, although Network Rail may have them in its longer-term plans because of its renewals work and the infrastructure maintenance that it does. [89] Lisa Francis: Could we have that in writing? Could we know which ones fall into which categories, because that would be very helpful? [90] John Marek: Can that be done? [91] Mr Bunker: I think that we can do that. [92] John Marek: That is very helpful. [93] Carl Sargeant: It is great to have the opportunity to have Arriva in this committee. Like Janet said, this is about future proposals because we all have experiences and, as you said, they are either very good or very bad. I think that a very bad experience with Arriva Trains is bad. We experience that regularly, as do 13 per cent of the people to whom you refer in your equation. I imagine that that is a great deal of people. [94] I have two points. People will judge you on their good experiences and one of the issues is station improvements. You touched on the north Wales stations and, in terms of tapping into this pot of money, securing improvements in north Wales stations is important. As a Member from north Wales, I know that it is a long journey to the south, whether you travel by car or train. It takes four hours, or thereabouts, of your day, so the customer needs to have that good experience and the station is where it starts. That is an important point.

[95] Secondly, recognising bad points is always key, because you can then do something about it. Perhaps money should not be invested purely in the infrastructure, but also in the backroom side of it, for example, taking complaints—I do not want to say ‘seriously’ because I am sure that you do take complaints seriously—and acting on them by not just giving an answer as to why a train is late, but resolving the problem so that it is not late again. [96] We have a great deal of anecdotal evidence from people writing and telephoning us, saying that they were late again—they never say that the train was on time. It is like being a politician—we do not get many pats on the back, but many complaints. However, I tested the Arriva Trains complaints system three weeks ago and I have a paper for you to take away. I have still not received a response. You allow a 10-day window in which to respond to complaints, but I did not receive a response. I am just one of the 13 per cent who has received a poor service. How many times does that happen and what are you doing to address the problems in order to improve that service?

9.40 a.m. [97] Mr Bunker: I will answer the part on stations and I will ask Alison to respond on the customer complaints in terms of the customer relations department, which she heads. I am pleased to be able to say that, of all our mainline routes in north Wales, it is our most reliable. Over 91 per cent of services were on time in period 1, which will hopefully start coming through to you guys, in terms of constituency feedback, and to our passengers. We see good growth there. We know that a reliable railway is a strong railway that grows. [98] We are repainting all of our stations; Llandudno and Bangor, in time for the Eisteddfod, were first. Unfortunately, the winter turned up and it is not good to paint stations in the winter, but we will be back out there with our paint brushes and hanging baskets will be placed and even palm trees will be planted. We take it very seriously and we are delivering, particularly in north Wales. I think that this is an opportunity to look elsewhere, and we have suggested in our submission improvements in closed circuit television and customer information systems along the north Wales coast. Other areas could benefit from that, and there is no doubt that the Maesteg line is an early candidate. [99] In terms of other initiatives, we are putting ticket barriers in. They do two things; yes, they ensure that those travelling have bought a ticket, but they also improve security on stations, which we know is a particular issue for customers. There will be an announcement shortly regarding some initiatives jointly with the Welsh Assembly Government and the British Transport Police, but we have employed a security manager, who is an ex-police inspector, to look primarily at this issue. While we have taken all our cleaning in-house, improved the quality of our stations, trained our staff and invested considerably in the systems, with ticket vending machines and so on, one of the key issues for us is that we want to make stations a welcoming environment and ensure that people do not feel threatened when they are on a station. [100] John Marek: As an aside to that, you can have all the security you like in Cardiff Central station, but all the rouges who do not want to pay use the lifts. Do not reply to that; it is just an aside. [101] Mr Bunker: You will be pleased to note that we are putting barriers in the lifts.

[102] John Marek: Please reply to Carl. [103] Ms Teagne: In relation to customer correspondence, Carl, you are, regrettably, quite right. At the moment, we have had an upsurge in customer contact. We have brought some temporary staff in to try to help with the sheer volume and to meet our timescales for responding. In fact, it is fair to say that, in the last couple of weeks, complaints have gone down, or customer contact has gone down a bit, but we need to get on top of it. I fully acknowledge that we are not as up to speed on this issue as we would like to be. [104] Carl Sargeant: I accept that it is about the peaks and troughs of service delivery, but my point was that if the future is about improving services, should we not identify what the problems are? If we are struggling to identify the long-term problems, are we ever going to get it right? [105] Mr Teagne: From our customer correspondence, we see that what happens is that, every month, a report is generated for the executive team in ATW and that feeds into the key areas of customer contact during a particular month, the issues and so on. Clearly, we know what some of those issues are; it is all about performance and capacity, and that is what informs our decisions about planning for the future. They are analysed every month and they are split down into categories such as special needs, assistance and so on. [106] Rosemary Butler: Janet is right that we are looking at the future, but what we do not want is more poor service in the future. Customer comfort is incredibly important. Obviously, you need to ensure that the train is going to come and that it is on time, but something that concerns me is that penalties are incurred if a train is not on time, but what about the cleanliness of trains? I have travelled on a few trains up and down to north Wales and cleanliness issues are not just about stuff that people have recently left behind—it is days’ old dirt. We travelled on a brand new train a fortnight ago and it was filthy; it obviously had not been cleaned for a few days. That is the issue. Thankfully, there was a 20-minute stop at Shrewsbury, even though you say that there was not, because we all had to get off to go to the toilet. That is not just one train—that is ongoing. How are you seriously going to address that? If we are to have increased numbers of trains on the system, people are just going to get more and more disgruntled; once trains are on time, then people can concentrate on how dirty they are. That is my concern. I will not go on about the stations at the moment, as that is obviously something that is being addressed, but I would be interested in an answer on that. [107] Mr Bunker: In terms of the quality of our trains, many have been refurbished recently. There are two fleets that have not; four of the 19 of our sprinter fleet, which are predominantly on the Valleys network, have been done. We continue shelling them out at a rate of one every two weeks, so we should have them all done by June. We also have a number of class 158 units that we use on longer-distance services, and you will be pleased to know that they are leaving the franchise at the end of the year, or sooner, if we can do it. Our problem—and it has lead to a hiatus in investment—is that we have to give 11 of our class 175 units, which are our new trains, to the TransPennine Express in north-west England every day to operate its services. That is something that we inherited. From the end of this year, all of those trains, which are nominally four years old, will be with us, so that will make a difference to the core. [108] However, I take your point on the need to ensure that they are clean. We

have just let a new contract for on-board cleaning, and we have also introduced new cleaners at Shrewsbury to deal with trains that are stabled there overnight. There are new cleaners at Crewe and we have just revitalised what we do at Cardiff. If there are any specific cases like this—Eleanor has kindly pointed one out to me already—let me know, because that is not good enough. We realise that it is not good enough, and when we know that it is occurring, we can do something about it. [109] Rosemary Butler: I will take this outside committee; it is a major issue, but, obviously, it will take more time than we have. [110] John Marek: That would be helpful, because we are slowly running up to our limit. [111] Janet Davies: As you know, I wrote to you in July about a complaint on the north-south line, and I have not had a reply as yet. [112] Mr Bunker: I would like to say that that is an exception, but we will investigate that thoroughly. [113] John Marek: Yes, out of committee, I think, but it is an important point. I call Eleanor—last, but not least. [114] Eleanor Burnham: If only we had all day. [115] John Marek: You have five minutes. [116] Eleanor Burnham: Where does one start? There is a yawning gap between your perception and the reality for passengers, who include me. I have already discussed issues with you this morning, which I know we do not have time to discuss here, but I will point to them. Let us be honest, the quality of rolling stock is appalling. I know that you say that the future looks bright, but in the meantime, last week, on the very late train back up to north Wales, two loos were not working. [117] There are more issues than that. What are you going to do, in the future, about your staff’s motivation, morale and general attitude and aptitude towards customers who are hostages to fortune on a train? Customers cannot just nip off to use the loo if the two loos on the train are not working, because they do not know how long they are going to be at the station and they might miss the train. These are basics of business performance. [118] I am horrified by how constrained the franchise is, because, basically, you can do what you want; you can cock a snook at all of us. The franchise does not tell you to hurry up the train and not to give it a two-hour lag here, there and everywhere, which is what it feels like when you are on the train. What exactly can we in this committee do to ensure a better future? How can we kick you in the wherever-you-need-to-be-kicked? I am, as you can appreciate, very emotional and impassioned about all these things, because, quite frankly, these are basic issues of customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction, customer care and comfort. It is about time that you got your act together, because the present situation is absolutely appalling. [119] You can sit there looking really satisfied with yourself, but there is an enormous gap between your perception and reality. It is about time that you got out there, talked to your staff and did something. I was in charge of quite a considerable number of staff at an early age in social services, and I can assure you that I was kicked daily by MPs and so on, so I know what it is like. But, it is about time that you

did something, and not just come here feeling that you are doing really well. [120] The future, if we cannot do something, is quite bleak for us politicians. We are facing the electorate next year. How do I face my electorate in north Wales when they face such enormous difficulties? Getting down from north Wales is a considerable miracle, but to have to put up with the discomfort that you cause them is appalling. You are making huge profits, but you have not even told us what percentage of that you are investing. Are you really serious about this? The fact that you have the franchise until 2018 fills me with horror, quite frankly. What is the future for us, because I feel pretty miserable about it? [121] You talk about doubling the track from Chester to Wrexham. Are you discussing that with Network Rail, or is this fanciful? [122] John Marek: A business case is being prepared on that, Eleanor. [123] Eleanor Burnham: Okay. What about better stations and safe stations? I notice that you only have two stations that comply as being secure stations in Wales. Does that include any stations in north Wales? We do not have time to discuss every aspect of secure stations, but it is not just about CCTV. I used to be a magistrate, and once CCTV came in— This is to do with staffing. 9.50 a.m. [124] John Marek: Eleanor, go gently, and within five minutes. [125] Eleanor Burnham: Gently? [126] John Marek: Let me tell you. If you want an answer, you will need to— [127] Eleanor Burnham: Fine. Excuse me for a minute, Chair; if I can just finish, that will be it. [128] John Marek: You are running out of time. [129] Eleanor Burnham: Okay. I have not really had any say until now, and you know how passionate I am about improving matters for my constituents. [130] It is not just a matter of CCTV; this is about expanded staff hours. If you have a disability, you cannot possibly use the trains properly, because if the staff are not there, the lifts are not available. How often does that happen? People are left stranded. On the train the other night, not only were the loos not working, but an elderly lady would have been stranded if it had not been for Karen Sinclair and me, because, for some reason, she could not get off the train. She may not have been used to the train. However, all these issues must be addressed if we are to have a brighter future, for goodness’ sake. [131] John Marek: Thank you, Eleanor. I need to protect you a little, because you had lots of exposure in the South Wales Echo last week, and you must feel that you are in the same position here. The serious point about it—and I do not disagree, Eleanor—is that many people have the same view as that which Eleanor has just expressed. There are many people who put it in different ways, and Eleanor makes a valuable point in her own way. Is there anything that you can say to us to demonstrate that you realise that there is this view? What hope is there of being able to tackle the matter?

[132] Mr Bunker: I will take it in two parts. First, let us take the staffing issue that you raised, Eleanor. In terms of our staff, we have made some changes. We now have a week-long induction for every member of staff joining the business, no matter what grade, whether they are customer-facing or not. There is a full induction, which— [133] Eleanor Burnham: Okay, but can you take those two guys on the 7.20 p.m. from Shrewsbury or wherever, and discuss that? [134] Mr Bunker: I have already said that I will identify and investigate that situation. In terms of what we are doing in the wider context, though, every member of staff, instead of getting a one-day induction, now gets a week-long induction that covers many things, including diversity and disability issues. We are, this year, embarking on a customer training package for every member of customer-facing staff, and then we will do every member of non-customer-facing staff. So, all the management and the behind-the-scenes people will be taken right through a full package of customer-service training. What we have is inconsistent. I am sure that you can give me an example of a really good member of staff, who is great and looks after you and you are really pleased when he or she is on the train. We have to deliver consistency, and that is what we are investing in customer-service training to deliver. [135] In terms of not being out on the trains, I have been on trains with you, and I spend a lot of time on trains. I know that the South Wales Echo has decided various things. As I said, I was on a train this morning, and I am always out and about. If you want, I will come on the 7.20 p.m. with you, and we will go for a trip to Wrexham. I am quite happy to do that whenever anyone wants. I might not go with a journalist, because that is the nature of it, but I will certainly go with any Member who wants to go anywhere on any train with me—no problem at all. I am sure that Leighton will take me up on that. [136] John Marek: You do know that this meeting is being broadcast live and will be heard all over Wales? [137] Mr Bunker: I have already made that commitment to every AM that I have met. I am always on the trains, so I am quite happy to join you. [138] In terms of the franchise agreement and the issues there, it may well be useful that we give a written brief at some point to colleagues— [139] Eleanor Burnham: The point was about the constraints. [140] Mr Bunker: I do not think that we necessarily feel that it is a constraint, but we need to explain why. I will ask Roger to respond on that point as to why it is actually quite a flexible document. [141] Mr Cobbe: We believe that the franchise agreement offers a lot of opportunity for constructive work with the client body, which is now to become the Welsh Assembly Government, and, because it runs to 2018, for us to look for investment opportunities where we can do things over and above the franchise. We have to recognise that this is the sort of railway that does require a public subsidy. There is no getting away from that. The cost structure of a rail industry of the level of demand and the level of fares is such that almost every single train that we operate requires a subsidy. In general terms, the more trains that we operate, or the higher

the capacity of those trains, the greater the subsidy. [142] At the time that the franchise was let, we are aware that the Strategic Rail Authority had a very significant funding problem. Therefore, the form of the franchise did not involve any material investment whatsoever. That was a shame, but it was a fact of life. But the structure of a franchise agreement is such that investment can be bolted on to it. It can be bolted on if the client body requires it, and because we have the franchise until 2018, we have, as Graham indicated earlier, looked for situations where things that are not required by the franchise agreement can make a commercial return. [143] Eleanor Burnham: Can you give an example of that? [144] Mr Cobbe: I will give you two quick examples. [145] John Marek: One will do. [146] Mr Cobbe: There was no requirement to refurbish the sprinter trains, but we have decided that, if we spend that money and the trains are of a higher standard, more people will travel on them, paying more fares. Over several years, that will repay the investment that Arriva is making at its own risk. If those extra people do not travel, it is Arriva’s money that has been spent refurbishing those trains; it is not the SRA’s money. [147] John Marek: We are already five minutes over time; I do not want to be more than 10 minutes over time and, hopefully, it will be less than that. We will have a quick mopping up. Lisa, you may ask a very quick question. [148] Lisa Francis: On your generic aspirations, I wanted to know about platform heights and services for the visually impaired in the future. Do you have any outline plans for that? Do you have anything on paper that we could see on where you would intend to roll those services out? [149] Mr Bunker: In terms of platform heights, we would like to see standardisation across the network. It is Network Rail’s responsibility, as they are its platforms, as it were, but we are challenging it across some of those areas where there are particular platform height issues. Realistically, the Department for Transport has set a national target on compliance, on which Network Rail will be able to update you. [150] On what we are doing for the visually impaired and those with disabilities, be they physical or otherwise, Alison, do you want to add something about our plans that are already in place? [151] Ms Teague: We have fed into the DfT’s global pot of money for accessibility. We have been quite strong in saying what we would like to see across our network and we have given it a list of the top stations, which is largely based on footfall, inter-connectability and that sort of thing, on which we would like to spend money if it is available. We are also working on engaging with the wider community. We are working with Disability Wales to try to set some focus groups up—there will probably be one in north Wales and one in south Wales. We want to get some people in and to say to them, ‘If you had £500, £1 million or whatever, what would you like to see at our stations?’. That will help us form a list of what people who use the stations want and, from that, we can seek funding with third parties, we can talk to the Welsh Assembly Government about funding, and use some of our own funding to try to do some schemes at stations to help improve accessibility.

[152] John Marek: Would it be possible to send us that list? [153] Ms Teague: At the moment, we do not have that list. We have the list that we have submitted to the SRA in terms of the requests that it has made but we have yet to run focus groups. [154] John Marek: This is an avenue that I am sure that the committee would want to consider: putting that expenditure— [155] Ms Teague: When we have run those focus groups, we will be happy to share the outcome with you. [156] John Marek: Remember our timetable; it is quite tight. If it is to be included in our list, it has to be done quickly. [157] Eleanor Burnham: My question has not been answered. [158] John Marek: It will have to be a very short one. [159] Eleanor Burnham: Excuse me, but— [160] John Marek: It is not a question of ‘excuse me’; we have run out of time. It will have to be a very short one. [161] Eleanor Burnham: On stations, you did not answer my question. That is not just to do with what Lisa has been discussing; it is also to do with expanded staff hours. If you do not have staff there, you cannot use the lifts. There will be people with children, pushchairs, prams— [162] John Marek: The point was well made. That is a point, is it not? [163] Mr Bunker: Part and parcel of this is developing an overall package. CCTV is only a part of it; it is also about staff and looking at the design of stations and so on. We are looking at where we can obtain the secure station mark. Eighteen car parks have already been identified for the park mark qualification, which includes security as well as other aspects. I would suggest that we write to you specifically, Eleanor, on where we are looking at taking that forward, with the focus on north Wales. We do have plans in place. [164] John Marek: I will just wind up quickly. To support Eleanor on this, Wrexham—and I know that this is qualitative—has quite a low rate of pay for staff. You cannot hire the staff there and, therefore, they go off at 5 p.m., which means that you cannot use the lift in Wrexham, and people who are disabled or in wheelchairs, or have heavy luggage, do not get off there. I know of one passenger who had to go to Chester and wait for 40 minutes to come back again to get to platform 1 instead of getting off at platform 2. That was Eleanor’s point and it needs addressing. [165] I have a final question. You have not mentioned Maindy junction improvements. Will that be taken care of in the resignalling of the western main line? As you know, there is a 10-mile-an-hour section for quite a long way once you come off Maindy junction, on the way to Cwmbrân. [166] Mr Bunker: Absolutely.

[167] John Marek: It will; it is part of the resignalling, is it? 10.00 a.m. [168] Mr Bunker: No, sorry. I am aware of it, and I assume that it will be done. In terms of the renewal that is done there, working with Network Rail, we will look at the high speed that we can get on the geometry. However, it is a sharp curve, so it will never be that fast, but there might be some room for improvements above 10 miles per hour. [169] John Marek: It is more than the sharp curve, you see. It goes as far as the bridge. [170] Mr Bunker: We will look at that, and Network Rail has it on its radar when it gets to the renewal. [171] John Marek: If you have it, let us have that costing on your list, as that would be useful. [172] I do not think that there are any more questions. It remains for me to thank you very much. I hope that you do not think that you were on trial. We are trying to work together here. [173] Mr Bunker: Not at all. We are very happy to come here. [174] John Marek: We all have our different ways of putting these things, so I am grateful to you. A verbatim record will be available in due course. You have given us some commitments as to what you will do, and we look forward to receiving that information as and when you can provide it. Thank you very much. [175] Mr Bunker: Thank you very much. 10.01 a.m.

Network Rail

[176] John Marek: We are running just 10 minutes late, but we have just received an important set of evidence. We now move on to Network Rail, and another set of important evidence. [177] Mr Plummer is in charge. Welcome to you and your team. We also have Mr Burns—we have met, have we not? The same rules apply: you have about five minutes for your presentation, and then shorter answers, if possible. I was rather lax on Arriva. We will try to get a few more questions in. Over to you. [178] Mr Plummer: We will try to be brief, Chairman. [179] By way of introduction, my name is Paul Plummer, and I am director of planning and regulation at Network Rail. On my right is Robbie Burns, the route director, and the single point of contact on issues around Wales with the Welsh Assembly Government. Mike Gallop, on my left, is the newly appointed route enhancement manager, which I will refer to again in a moment. [180] I will briefly say a few things about some of the changes that we have made, particularly following the rail review, and how we are dealing with that. Some of the

fundamental issues coming out of that review are that we are now seeking to work far more closely and jointly with train operators across the country, focusing jointly on the final users of the railways—passengers and freight users. As well as that, given the other changes following the review, we are trying to focus and work with all of our funders, which include the Department for Transport, the Welsh Assembly Government, and others more locally, to help in the specification of the outputs that they wish to buy from the railway. That is a major area of work that we have to help to facilitate and deal with. [181] There are three areas that those changes impact on particularly: performance, planning and projects. On performance, we are trying to work closely with train operators in what we refer to as joint performance improvement plans to identify and better understand what can be done between the parties, rather than us separately from the operators, to improve performance. That process is working well. Performance is improving. There are still some parts of the railway that are clearly inadequate in terms of performance, and we are focused on trying to improve those particular areas. However, we are seeing some good progress, and we need to keep pushing that hard. [182] On planning, we are working with a wide range of funders and our train operators on the planning assessments that are being done at a regional level, including for Wales. Moving on from that, we will be developing our route utilisation strategies, which go into more detail about how we best use the existing capacity, and identifying how we can improve that with the funds that we have available to us. The Welsh route utilisation strategy will start next year, but we are doing a lot to try to lead into that, so that we are running fast by the time that we start that formally. We are also drawing up a freight utilisation strategy, which includes consideration of, and lots of discussion on, freight issues in Wales. [183] Those areas of work feed into the process with Government around the high-level output specifications—the things that it wishes to buy at the next review. We are talking extensively with a lot of people in the industry about how to build up our plans for that and how we understand everyone’s requirements so that we can develop our business plans as an input into that process. However, ultimately, it will be the Government that decides on the basis of those plans what it wants to buy from 2009. [184] The third area was projects, and we are very conscious of the fact that doing business with Network Rail has been hard in the past, and we are determined to put that right. We have already made a number of changes to address that, such as the establishment of route enhancement managers, and Mike is one of those. They manage small teams, at a route level, that focus on trying to facilitate and help people who want to invest in the railway, rather than making that difficult, which has been the perception, if not the intention, in the past. That is very important. [185] We have also changed fundamentally the way in which we contract, and we now have much more balanced template contracts that enable anyone to invest in the railway. They are proportionate to the scale and risk involved, which is a big step forward. Those contracts are on the verge of being approved by the regulator, so we will then be able to use them across the whole railway. [186] Another important point is that, although our funding relates primarily to the core operation, maintenance and renewal of the network, we are trying, particularly in discussion with train operators at a local level, to do more economically efficient enhancements on the back of renewals projects. In many cases, that provides the best opportunity to get best value for money and the least disruption to existing

services. If that can be done as part of a clear strategy for the route over a period of years, it offers real opportunity for improvement. All of the work on the route utilisation strategies and so on should feed into smaller scale incremental improvements on the back of the renewals. I am sure that we will come back to that. [187] Finally, and this is linked to your earlier discussions, we are putting an enormous amount of investment and energy into training people and improving the customer focus of the organisation, by which I mean the relationship with our direct customers, such as our train operator, and the focus on the final users of the railway: passengers, freight users and other funders. That concludes my brief introduction, Chairman. [188] John Marek: Thank you. You heard the discussion with Arriva Trains Wales, so I will not repeat it all. Are you able to give us the same type of information, which the committee is looking for on improvements? We need some ballpark costs and the possibilities of implementation. Are you able to provide us with a list for Wales in the same way as Arriva has promised? [189] Mr Plummer: I would like to work with Arriva and come back to you with some ideas. [190] John Marek: I would be very grateful for that, because it would help the committee; we are charged with constructing such a list. Importantly, it would be useful to know about the improvements that you plan to do yourselves, because there is no need for any extra funding for those—and be honest about that. There are also improvements that you would probably not do unless you found 100 per cent of the cost from elsewhere. Then there are the projects for which a bit of pump-priming money might help, and the committee would be interested in such improvements. If you could come back to us in due course on that, we would be grateful.

10.10 a.m. [191] Mr Burns: We could generate a long list; there are many things that we could do. However, we would need a bit of guidance from you, because we need to understand how you want to see the railways develop in Wales. We could concentrate on the best bang for your buck and on specific areas, whereas your own focus might actually be elsewhere. It would be helpful to have some clear guidelines about your own priorities, and then we could match schemes to them. What we will produce is a pretty endless list of good ideas. [192] John Marek: I think that we should probably return to that question at the end of the half hour that we have. On the other hand, we have to produce an ordered list, and any help from you on the order would be helpful. There is no value for money in spending tens of millions of pounds on something that would have a minimal impact on improving passenger services or punctuality. It is a value-added judgment. The only thing that I would say at this stage is that you are the experts, not us. We are passengers, of course, but it is all qualitative or subjective to us, whereas you have an overview. That is why I am very glad that you are here to give us the benefit of that experience. [193] Janet Davies: Following up on that, that is why I was asking Arriva whether it could relate the list that it puts forward to the Assembly Government’s environmental, accessibility and economic aims. From our point of view, I think that we have to sort out what importance we give to various things. Clearly, different parts of the rail network have different levels of importance in those different criteria, so some are

more important than others. Do you have any problems in actually carrying out the work that the Assembly Government may add? Would you have any problems with capacity in implementing extra spending in Wales? I suspect that, as the west coast main line improvements are coming to an end, there may be some spare capacity there, or will it all move to the east coast main line or to the London area? Would you actually be able to carry out the work? You would have the lead on doing the work itself. [194] On the ERTMS project for the Cambrian coast line, I think that we are all very pleased that the spending is going there. We realise the importance of this new signalling system. However, I have some concerns about whether there might be any particular challenges and pitfalls in terms of the existing service while the system is going in and when it is first implemented. Do you have any contingency plans to deal with any problems that may arise? [195] John Marek: Before you answer, I have a housekeeping announcement to make. Someone has a mobile phone on and it is interfering with the transmission. I do not want you to identify yourself, but please just reach into your pocket and turn it off completely. [196] Mr Plummer: I will say something briefly, and possibly Robbie will add some more. In terms of capacity to do the work, an enormous amount of work is being carried out on the railway across the UK as a whole. Although the west coast work is ramping down now, there is still some very major work planned on the west coast over the next few years. Other really big projects are also coming on, such as Thameslink, potentially. [197] One of the other things that I would say is that we have been focusing very much on trying to deliver work efficiently. It is important that we scope things properly and are able to procure that efficiently. Sometimes that has meant that things take a while to get well developed. That is another constraint, as well as the pure deliverability and management of the supply chain, and obtaining access to the network in order to do the work with minimum disruption. [198] Mr Burns: Specifically in Wales, I think that, principally, across the network, capacity issues focus on signalling resources, which tend to be a constraint. In Wales, because we are moving forward with the south Wales resignalling scheme and we are looking to dovetail additional enhancements into it, quite a lot of our signalling resources will be tied up in that scheme locally. I see that more as an opportunity than a threat in terms of capacity. So, that is good news in one sense because we are going to have a lot of contractors in south Wales from now through until 2011-12. [199] In terms of ERTMS, as you know, the project is moving forward to commissioning in 2008. This year, we are moving forward to let a three-stage contract with suppliers, and we are currently in negotiations to do that. The contractual framework will certainly ensure minimal risk to passengers in terms of running services during the construction of this piece of work. It is new technology, so there are risks associated with it. It will be the first time that we have had an ERTMS system on the network, but we will do our best to mitigate those risks. [200] Janet Davies: It is a bit worrying about scoping in the most efficient way. We feel that we are rather out on the edge of Network Rail’s thinking when it comes to work being done here. I have never been able to find out any figures, and you may not have them, but I suspect that the percentage spend on the rail infrastructure in

Wales is certainly less than the 5 per cent of the population, because we have less than 5 per cent of the railways. [201] Mr Burns: In my view, this is an exciting time for enhancement for Wales. My patch includes Paddington station and the south west, and I can tell you that all the big schemes and interesting schemes are in south Wales. That is why I managed to attract Mike Gallop here to be my route enhancement manager. He is growing a big team to manage those schemes. If you look at the schemes that we have delivered in the past year in the Vale of Glamorgan, Aberdare and we have just commissioned Caerphilly, and the schemes that are in development—the Newport incremental development scheme, Newport station regeneration, Rhymney valley platform extensions, Rhondda valley platform extensions, Merthyr frequency enhancements, and Maesteg line platform extensions—you will see that they are not happening in other parts of my patch. In other parts of my patch, I have two principal schemes. One is to improve the line speed of a goods loop at Swindon, and the second is to put a third platform at Bristol Parkway. So, the majority of the schemes on my patch are actually in south Wales. That is because you people are bringing the money and the focus to exactly the right places, so I am really excited about it. [202] John Marek: I will just make the observation that this is the National Assembly for everyone from Barry to Holyhead. I will say no more. Rosemary, is your question on the same point? [203] Rosemary Butler: Yes, it is on this issue. You talk about being efficient, but I hope that you are effective as well, because you can be efficient without being effective. I was interested in Janet’s point about the Cambrian line, and you went on to say that you have all this capacity, and to tell us what is happening in south Wales. I got the inference that you would take people off that scheme to do the other scheme. [204] Mr Burns: Far from it. It is a separate contract. [205] Rosemary Butler: Yes, but you did actually say, ‘Well, we have all this capacity here, which could perhaps help with that’. [206] Mr Burns: What I meant was that we have the capability to do a renewal in south Wales with the signalling team that is in south Wales. If there were a need to place an enhancement on top of that renewal, because we are principally doing like-for-like modern equivalent replacement in the renewals, and if there were a view that we would like to spend more money to enhance the piece of the network that we are renewing, we have the contractors on site and the skills and the capability to absorb that work. [207] John Marek: Thank you. Janet, have you finished for the time being? [208] Janet Davies: Yes. [209] Eleanor Burnham: I understand that The Sunday Times reckoned that you were reprivatising. Is that true? I also understand that the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee has been highly critical in its report on railway stations, suggesting that you act as a barrier to station improvements through unduly complex procedures. In view of our previous discussion with Arriva—particularly in relation to secure stations—which you may or may not have heard, I am particularly concerned that we can all access rail services, regardless of whether we have lots of luggage or are disabled or have children in buggies and so on.

[210] On the rail infrastructure, I think that it is really exciting, particularly for me, because my first short debate here—it was blue-sky thinking and completely off the wall—was about reopening the Ruabon to Barmouth railway line. We will park that for the time being. Are you serious about dualling the Wrexham to Chester line in future? What is your future involvement in the Conwy valley, possibly the Dyfi loop and the Heart of Wales line? Are these all issues beyond Cardiff—and which are very exciting—that you will look at? Do you also see a bright future for freight? [211] John Marek: Before you answer those important questions at the end, I just refer you to the last diagram that you have. You will see that Wrexham has been written out of that diagram completely. Is it a bus link that you are planning to Saltney? There is a dotted line on the plan and that usually represents bus links on railway timetables. Eleanor has made a good point and any comments would be welcome. 10.20 a.m. [212] Mr Plummer: I will deal with the first two and ask Robbie or Mike to deal with the latter ones in a moment. In terms of reprivatising, we are a private sector company, independent of Government, and the Government’s role is to specify the outputs that we produce. We have a very arm’s-length relationship regarding how we, as a business, deliver that. The articles in The Sunday Times are more about the way in which we raise finance on the back of the Government commitment to the railway, and I think that that is a slightly different point. [213] In terms of barriers to improvement, as I said in the introduction, we certainly recognise that doing business has been hard in the past and we think that a lot of the concerns are being addressed—many of them have been addressed in the changes that we have already made—and a lot of it will be about making a real cultural change in the business, to follow through on the changes that we have put in place. I think that a lot of that is working better. We do not have money to do many of the things that you are talking about, but we do have a much better mechanism now, better processes, and better people in place, who can work more constructively with the people who are in a position to make that investment and to facilitate it, in a way that has not been there in the past. I hope that that answers your first couple of questions. [214] Mr Burns: On stations, the Arriva Trains stations are leased to the company and it is responsible for their maintenance and upkeep. We are responsible for major renewals. We own are a dozen or so major stations, including Paddington, and we run them from top to bottom. In terms of significant improvements, we are delighted to be involved in them. One of the biggest pieces of work that we will do in the next two years is at Newport, where we are going to reconfigure the station, working closely with the local authorities and the Welsh Assembly, in time for the great golf competition, the Ryder Cup, which is taking place in 2010. [215] In terms of the Wrexham to Chester line and the Dyfi valley, I think that— [216] Eleanor Burnham: The Conwy valley. [217] Mr Burns: Sorry, I beg your pardon. [218] John Marek: There were two—Conwy and Wrexham.

[219] Mr Burns: The first point is that we are taking part in a route utilisation strategy for Wales. This is a big piece of work that our planning and regulation department is doing. It is consulting widely to produce a plan, which will be the view on where we should invest and where we should develop. This would be part of that plan. It is a long and detailed exercise, which needs a lot of consultation and we are about to kick that process off. I think that that process will be completed in 2008. [220] Mr Plummer: It will. [221] Mr Burns: Any individual scheme needs to be taken in the context of the entire plan and where we think that you are going to get best value for money. [222] John Marek: We do not have that amount of time, because we have to produce our report by the end of March, and 2008 is a bit further down the line. It would be helpful to have some sort of ordered list from you, which you have already promised to provide. There are two other points that Eleanor made and, rather than discussing them now, perhaps you could take them on board and give us your considered views at your leisure. [223] Mr Gallop: I will just make a comment regarding the freight issue that Eleanor raised, if I may. First, last week, we met the Rail Freight Group in Cardiff at its quarterly meeting and discussed in great detail its aspirations for freight in Wales. Secondly, last week, the volume of steel hauled from Port Talbot to Llanwern broke all records, using our infrastructure, so freight is an extremely important part of the infrastructure of south and north Wales and we fully recognise that. [224] John Marek: Rosemary, are you coming in or are you okay for the time being? [225] Rosemary Butler: I think that Leighton was indicating. [226] John Marek: Are you okay for the moment? You can come in later if you like; it is up to you. [227] Rosemary Butler: Yes, okay. [228] John Marek: Lisa is next. [229] Lisa Francis: Mr Burns, I am looking at point 18 in the letter that you sent to us, which sets out—if I have read it correctly, as it is a rather long and complicated paragraph—what difficulties and constraints third parties could expect if they entered into any scheme with Network Rail for improvements. Is it possible to say what timescales we are looking at? Obviously, there are improvements under way at the moment that the Welsh Assembly Government has funded and is involved in, but if the Assembly was to give further funding, can you tell us what the rate of progress could be on additional improvements? You mentioned 2008 a little while ago, and as the Chair correctly said, we do not have that sort of time. I know that it is a very difficult question because you do not know what constraints and barriers we will come up against, but, roughly, can you give us an idea about that? [230] On the European rail traffic management system scheme, which you say is scheduled to start operating in 2008, that would facilitate the ability to install two passing loops on the Cambrian line, and to increase capacity. Do you anticipate that that work will be undertaken at the same time as the ERTMS? Are we looking at 2008 as the date for installing passing loops on the Cambrian line?

[231] Mr Burns: On the first part of your question, if I could take you back to Railtrack days—I joined just as Railtrack was in its demise—I was the major projects director. We had 12 major projects, and they were all over budget and they were all running over in terms of time and schedule. So, the company was not delivering on its major projects. I was involved in writing the guide to rail investment projects process, which pins down stage gates so you do not move forward with the project until you have nailed the scope properly, and you understand how you will move it to contract. That formal process was essential to bring us back into a position of being able to deliver and honour our customers’ requirements. It depends on the size of scheme, but if you are talking about a relatively modest scheme, there is probably a year’s worth of development in it, and probably a year’s worth of delivery. So, if money was available now, you might expect to commission a relatively small scheme at the end of 2007. That might be reasonable. Even then, you are having to book possessions well in advance, and the possession regime is a protracted one. For bigger schemes, you are talking about perhaps four years for delivery, and even that might be tight. [232] In terms of the ERTMS, we are working very closely with Robin Shaw and the Assembly’s team to see how we can fold-in the enhancements that you are talking about into the ERTMS project. It is not a simple matter, and it is not necessarily clear where the loops might be, or where the money will best be spent, but we are working very closely with Robin—I spoke to him yesterday morning on that subject. [233] John Marek: That should be on your list when you send it back to us, because I am sure that there will be great interest in that. [234] Mr Burns: We are very conscious that the need for an hourly service on the Cambrian line is a key requirement for you. [235] Carl Sargeant: You talked about specific schemes in your paper, but you talked about modest schemes in general to Lisa. On your paper, I am being very parochial but I think that it is a north Wales issue, and you mentioned— [236] John Marek: I do not want to break things up, and you will get your own shout later. [237] Carl Sargeant: Yes, but this is about third party involvement. You talk about modest programmes. The Flint and Shotton station enhancements, which are small to modest in size, have been ongoing for 12 months or so. How soon can we be confident that these schemes are taking place? [238] Robbie Burns: It is a fair question. Flint station was managed by London North Western Railways, another part of Network Rail, until we became the single focus. That will now be managed by Mike, and we know that Flint station is an issue that we need to get to grips with. We will come back to you off-line to tell you exactly how we will deliver. [239] Carl Sargeant: More so Shotton station, which is extremely important. [240] Mr Burns: We will come back to you in writing to tell you where we taking it. [241] Leighton Andrews: I have a relatively simple question. You spoke of your previous experience at Railtrack, when projects were delayed and were

not necessarily on budget or on time, if I understood what you said. You have all these enhancement schemes in development, starting from mid-2007 to spring 2009, including the Rhondda Valley platform extensions, which is the one that concerns me the most. How confident are you that these will be delivered on time?

10.30 a.m. [242] Mr Burns: I think that the first issue is to decide whether they will be delivered by the third party and we are going to support them, or whether we will deliver them ourselves on your behalf. In a number of instances, that has not been decided yet. Clearly, it is within the gift of the person who will fund it whether he wants to deliver the scheme himself and have a contractual relation directly with the contractors, with us in support, or whether he wants he wants us to deliver them on his behalf. If we are going to deliver on his behalf I will first want to be absolutely sure about the schedule and about the requirement before I confirm exactly what the date is. Once we have confirmed the date, we will deliver on that date. [243] Leighton Andrews: Okay, but that means that these dates are not fixed but are notional dates. [244] Mr Burns: These are dates that have been produced by the Welsh Assembly Government and we are working with the Government to deliver these schemes. However, the schemes are in various stages of development and contractual commitment. [245] Leighton Andrews: Are there clear cut-off dates as to by which time those kinds of decisions need to have been taken in order to ensure the delivery of the dates set down here? [246] Mr Burns: Yes, there are. That is correct. [247] Leighton Andrews: Are we approaching any of those? [248] Mr Burns: No, we are okay. [249] John Marek: I call now on Carl in his own right. [250] Carl Sargeant: I have just one point, as I covered one of my points earlier. I am interested in the Wrexham to Bidston line. There has, for future programmes, been consideration of the electrification of the line, which I certainly support, because it would link into the north-west economy of Liverpool and Merseyside. I think that that has its advantages. Do you have any comments on that, and how would that feature in a projected future programme of funding, potentially from the Assembly? [251] Mr Burns: This is the third line, is it not? [252] John Marek: It would be the third line. [253] Mr Burns: That would also be very much an issue for Mersey Rail, in terms of the commitment to that kind of scheme. We currently have no plans to do it within Network Rail, but, if a third party wanted to do it, we would be supportive. [254] John Marek: I think that it would be useful in your list to give us a ballpark

idea, if Mersey Rail did it as far as Neston, or wherever the English border is, how much would it cost us in Wales to continue the third railway line all the way to Wrexham central station. [255] Mr Burns: The figures that we would use would be very much ballpark ones. [256] John Marek: Yes, absolutely. [257] Mr Burns: You would need to do a detailed study to understand the figure. [258] John Marek: We want to avoid that. This is not that type of committee. Carl, did you want to carry on? [259] Carl Sargeant: I am fine. [260] John Marek: I call Eleanor, and then Rosemary. [261] Eleanor Burnham: You did not actually answer about the Heart of Wales upgrade or whatever. However, I was also concerned that there is quite a move in the area to re-open Rossett station. In fact, Wrexham council is talking about park and ride, which would then serve as a park and ride into Chester. [262] John Marek: I am sorry to interrupt, but is this not this question more for Arriva than Network Rail? [263] Eleanor Burnham: No. Well, I would imagine that it is an infrastructure issue, is it not? You can tell me whether it is or not. Is the re-opening of stations partly to do with you? [264] Mr Burns: Yes. I do not know about the detail of that particular issue, I have to be honest with you, Eleanor. I will have to take it off-line, I am sorry. [265] Eleanor Burnham: I understood that Network Rail, as a body, seemed to be quite positive towards the idea. I just wanted to know what future there is, because a lot of the local people are very keen to re-open it. Could you just give us some thoughts in your submission about where you might go in the future on that? [266] Mr Burns: Yes. [267] John Marek: You might also need to ask Arriva, because it involves passengers. [268] Rosemary Butler: To go back to the earlier question from Janet, I think, about the ability of Network Rail to deliver on additional investment, and then to refer to some things in your presentation, Mr Burns, I think, talked earlier about the reconfiguration—which is a wonderful word—of Newport station specifically for the Ryder Cup in 2010. We also have the re-signalling scheme in 2008-09 and phase 2 in 2011-12. If any of that slips, what effect will it have on the very important re-opening of the Ebbw Vale rail link into Newport? [269] Mr Burns: The re-signalling is in four phases, as you know. It will be in Port Talbot first, which is ongoing now until 2007, and is pretty much set in concrete. We then move to Newport and the first phase of Newport, which is 2008-09. That is quite a complicated piece of work. It starts in 2008, and some of the major commissioning work is in Christmas 2008. The subsequent commissioning work is around the spring

bank holiday 2009. That is split into various stages to reduce the risk of each stage impacting dramatically on passengers. It is a complicated package and we are in negotiation with the train operating companies on it, so it would be inappropriate to give you the detail of that until we have confirmed it and they were happy with what we proposed in terms of the commissioning plan. [270] Most of the works are done, either in already booked possessions, which will not affect passengers, or without possessions. The difficult periods are the commissioning periods, where you need a wheels-free period to test the signalling and ensure that it will work. That is the Newport part. We then move to Cardiff and we split that up into four stages. That will be the next stage. We then return to Newport and go north of Newport to do the final stage of the work, so that is broken into four stages. Certainly, if we overrun, there will be issues. There is no doubt about that. We are very focused on the Ryder Cup and on Newport and the condition in which it needs to be for that event, so we are planning not to overrun. [271] John Marek: You no doubt heard me mention Maindy Junction to Arriva Trains Wales, and, of course, you can go fast if you want to go off to the Severn Tunnel Junction, but you go very slowly backwards and forwards from Newport station if you want to go northwards to Abergavenny. That has ramifications for not just the north Wales and south Wales services, but commuter services to Cwmbran and Abergavenny. Will the re-signalling improve the very slow stretch of 10-mph line from the junction right up to the bridge? You do not need to answer now, but when you come back to us, that is an improvement that I would like this committee to, at least, consider at some stage. [272] Mr Burns: I can answer that. It is part of the works. The commissioning in Christmas 2008 does not take that into account, but between the commissioning in 2008 and the spring of 2009, that junction will be remodelled. [273] John Marek: That is good. [274] Rosemary Butler: I do not know why you would want to rush through that lovely part of the countryside, Chair—it is just below my house, so I do not think that you should rush past it. [275] On this issue of people’s expectations, I would like to go back to the Cardiff-Ebbw Vale-Newport line and the effect that this work will have on that. It strikes me that if it does have a relationship, then that line is slipping back by a considerable number of years. [276] Mr Burns: No, it is not. There are two phases, as you know, to the Ebbw Vale project. Phase 1 will bring services into Cardiff and phase 2, into Newport. I know that that has been a very sensitive issue, but that is how it was constructed and agreed with the Assembly Government, and there should be no impact. [277] Rosemary Butler: So, what are we talking about in terms of finishing that Ebbw Vale to Newport line? [278] Mr Burns: Do you mean phase 2? [279] Rosemary Butler: Yes. [280] Mr Burns: I think that phase 2 is scheduled for 2009 to 2011.

[281] Rosemary Butler: Is that a start or finish date? [282] Mr Burns: It starts in 2009 and finishes in 2011. I think that those are the dates. [283] John Marek: You are doing your best to finish the immediate phase this year. [284] Mr Burns: Actually, it is not being delivered by us this year. [285] John Marek: No, it is not. [286] Mr Burns: It is being delivered by you, with Amey, and we are in support. The delivery is between you and Amey. [287] John Marek: Yes, I understand that. I do not want to prolong this issue. We have two minutes left. Does anyone have any quick wind-ups? [288] Lisa Francis: It might be a wind-up, Chair; I do not know. I wanted to know if you could say how you assess your working relationship with the Welsh Assembly Government. Could you tell us what type of communication you have, how many round-table meetings, how often those occur and how often you have progress reports? [289] Mr Burns: I will speak to what happens at my level and then ask Mike to say a few words. Mike has only been in post for a month, but he is already establishing, hopefully, a good relationship with the Welsh Assembly Government. I have met Andrew Davies two or three times. I have had a separate session with him in terms of briefing about what we are trying to achieve here, and getting an understanding from him about what he is trying to achieve. I have met with Robin Shaw twice, but we regularly talk on the phone. I think that the relationship is good and I would be disappointed if the Welsh Assembly Government felt that it was not.

[290] Eleanor Burnham: Just to wind-up next— [291] John Marek: No. There is an answer from Mr Gallop first, and I think that we will then be out of time, but we will see. 10.40 a.m. [292] Mr Gallop: I will be brief, Chair. As Robbie says, I am new to the post. I am establishing and helping to reinforce the already good working relationship that Network Rail enjoys with the Welsh Assembly Government. I have met Robin Shaw and several of his team recently to discuss progress issues arising and so on. We also meet the South East Wales Transport Alliance regularly—that is a well-established contact point, and going forward, we recognise its importance. Personally, I am due to meet representatives of Taith on 8 March to discuss its aspirations for north Wales, and, later in March, I am also due to meet with SWITCH to discuss its aspirations for west Wales. [293] Mr Palmer: We also meet very regularly with people from the Welsh Assembly Government in relation to industry framework issues. There has also been a very good relationship there. [294] Eleanor Burnham: I was going to ask about Taith, but is there a very good relationship developing with Arriva as well?

[295] Mr Burns: Yes. Graham used to work for me, in a former life, when I first joined Railtrack, so Graham and I work very well together. [296] John Marek: Thank you very much. We are coming up to the break. I thank you and your team for coming along. I repeat that we have a verbatim record, which you will receive. I am very pleased that you will be able to give us an ordered list of ballpark figures of costs and implementability, if such a word exists. Please send that to the clerk. Thank you very much—we appreciate it. The committee will now adjourn for 15 minutes.

Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 10.41 a.m. a 10.58 a.m. The meeting adjourned between 10.41 a.m. and 10.58 a.m.

Trafnidiaeth Cymru ac Adran Drafnidiaeth y DU

Transport Wales and UK Department for Transport

[297] John Marek: It gives me great pleasure to welcome Transport Wales, which is the transport arm of the Welsh Assembly Government. If it is convenient for you, we could take two groups together—the next item was the UK Department for Transport, of which there are two representatives, with Robin Shaw. [298] Rosemary Butler: Could we close the door? [299] John Marek: Yes. Do we have an usher to shut the door for us? Alison, can you shut the door so that we can get on with the committee? Members must know that these committees start on time. [300] We have Stephen Clark, divisional manager, rail regional policy and delivery division, together with Stephen Wolstenholme, Scotland and Wales rail regional manager for policy. I welcome both of you. I also welcome Robin Shaw, who heads up the Welsh Assembly Government side of rail policy. 11.00 a.m. [301] Can we take both together? Robin has given the committee a briefing before, so we do not want a repeat of these things. Obviously, if you want to say something, Robin, please do. There is a correction in something that you want to bring to our attention, is there not, Robin? I will call on you to do that first, then you have five minutes or so for a presentation, and then we will get on with questions. Robin, over to you [302] Mr Shaw: As you say, Chair, I have already given the committee an informal brief, explaining where we are and the various initiatives that are running. So, I suggest that, as far as I am concerned, this session be predominantly a question and answer session for any issues have been raised from that briefing or from the discussions that you have just had with Network Rail and Arriva. [303] There is one point to correct. In paragraph 4.6 of our paper, the final sentence should read: [304] ‘Stakeholders, including the Assembly Government, will be consulted on the

HLOSs, but this is not a joint document.’ [305] I have provided that amendment to the clerk of the committee, and that will be put in the formal minutes. It is a minor typing adjustment; it does not change anything of any significance. [306] Eleanor Burnham: Can I clarify that? Is that on page 13 of this particular document? [307] Mr Shaw: I do not have a page number, I must admit. It is paragraph 4.6 of the paper from Transport Wales, if that is the one that you have. [308] Eleanor Burnham: So that is paper 3, Chair, is it? [309] John Marek: Yes. [310] Mr Shaw: If you find paragraph 4.6, which is just down from the top of that page, it is the back end of that. It currently reads, ‘the Assembly is a statutory consultee’, but it should read ‘stakeholders including the Assembly Government will be consulted on the HLOSs, but this is not a joint document’. Okay? [311] John Marek: Thank you, Robin. Are Members up with that now? I see that you are. Is that all you want to say at this stage, Robin? [312] Mr Shaw: I think so, unless there is anything else, in which case we can take it as a question. [313] John Marek: Let us turn to the Department for Transport. I invite you give us— [314] Eleanor Burnham: Are we not allowed to ask Robin questions? [315] John Marek: We will take both at once, do you see? The answer is ‘yes, you are’, but not now. So, if we can, let us have the DfT presentation, and then we will— [316] Eleanor Burnham: But they are different questions. [317] John Marek: You will be entitled to ask both of them. [318] Eleanor Burnham: All right. [319] John Marek: So, please, Mr Clark, go ahead. [320] Mr Clarke: Thank you for your invitation to appear. We are glad to be here. It is an interesting time for railways in Wales. As you will be aware, the rail White Paper of 2004 set out the UK Government’s intention to devolve a lot of decision-making powers affecting the railways. In particular, a number of powers have been devolved to the Assembly. We are very glad to be working well with the Assembly in actually implementing those aspects of the rail White Paper. [321] Two or three years ago, the Strategic Rail Authority set up the new franchise that has become the Arriva Trains Wales franchise, and that franchise was reconfigured to serve, principally, the needs of Wales and the border counties. One of the things that that franchise has introduced, as you know, is the standard-pattern timetable. We see that as a good thing, and as an innovation. I realise, from this

morning’s discussions, that a lot of issues need to be sorted out to improve that. However, we see that standard-pattern timetable as an improvement, on the whole. We also see the work of Network Rail to be very important for Wales, and, in particular, some of the projects that colleagues from Network Rail have mentioned this morning in their evidence. [322] The devolution is very exciting. It is already the case that the franchise for ATW is managed jointly between ourselves and the Welsh Assembly Government, and, from 1 April, we will transfer the bulk of the resources that go with managing that franchise to the Welsh Assembly Government and put in place arrangements for that franchise to be managed directly from Wales. We are looking forward to that taking place. [323] Finally, I have some very good working relationships with Robin and the Assembly in general, and with that, I close my remarks. [324] John Marek: Thank you. That is very useful. I think that Robin will agree that the document, ‘Future Rail Projects for Wales’, which we as members of the committee received, should properly be before the committee. We have all had a copy of it. To my mind, it is a very good compendium of the Welsh Assembly Government’s view on what ought to be done. You may wish to revise it at some stage over the next month. If you do, Robin, please let us know. [325] Mr Shaw: The only comment on that is that, in that document, we have included schemes that we are taking forward and, in that sense, are committed to, but also a range of aspirations that we have been made aware of and on which, in many cases, we are carrying out joint studies and feasibility assessments. I have not included that in the formal paper to committee because, obviously, many of those schemes are not yet committed Welsh Assembly Government policy to take forward, so, I do not think that it should be part of our formal evidence to the committee. However, the information is for your benefit. [326] John Marek: It is all public information, is it not? [327] Mr Shaw: Yes. [328] John Marek: In that respect, I do not see anything wrong in that. We accept that. [329] Janet Davies: I have a question for Robin and then a question for the two Stephens. I do not know whether you are able at this point to give any priority to the aspirations in this document, but how would you see yourselves driving forward the ones that do get priority? [330] Mr Shaw: Apart from anything else, that is one of the purposes of this committee: for you to give your views and thoughts on that. As far as we are concerned, the focus has been on the one or two key commitments, such as the opening of the Vale of Glamorgan and Ebbw Vale lines and the enhancements necessary on the Valley lines in order to deal with the spectacular growth of, and the success story that is, the Valley lines. That is where our prime focus is. That does not mean that we are not addressing issues elsewhere in Wales but those have been the key priorities. [331] On going forward, we have several challenges in terms of the decision-making process. It is clear that, in terms of the commuter traffic in any part of Wales,

but predominantly in south-east Wales, there seems to be a huge latent demand and we could provide additional capacity at peak times on the rail network in south-east Wales and find that it was virtually full the day that we put that capacity on. Given that peak capacity inevitably requires public subsidy because of the operational issues around it, that is a big challenge for us and that is where the difficult decisions will be focused. Having said that, we wish to maintain and improve accessibility to rail services for all of Wales. [332] The other challenge that we have is the rural services, which, again, will never be commercially viable. The competing challenge of whether we should invest and put additional resource into additional capacity on the Valley lines compared with, say, increasing the frequency on a rural line into west or mid Wales is a very difficult decision. Those are some of the future challenges that we will face. We have asked the transport consortia—and you will see some of this later in the submissions from SEWTA—to assist and facilitate us in providing an evidence base in order to make those forward decisions. [333] So, those are the issues and challenges that we face, as far as I am concerned. We will have some very interesting debates, I suspect, going forward, as to what the relative priorities are and balancing the geographical and travel-demand issues that are very different for different parts of Wales. [334] John Marek: I will just interrupt you Janet, if I may, but I will come back to you. On that point, it would be useful if you could give us some sort of list. It would not be fair to ask the Department for Transport, but we could certainly ask you, Robin, for your ideas about prioritisation. The committee will have to consider that because we have been charged with providing an ordered list, so we will have to make the type of judgment to which you have just referred. Would it, therefore, be possible for you send us something in written form? 11.10 a.m. [335] Mr Shaw: That would be quite difficult for us at this point in time, Chair. As an example, we asked the South East Wales Transport Alliance to prepare the document on its longer term future proposals, but I read it for the first time last night. The timing of this committee has probably facilitated the publication of that document. Therefore, it has not been possible for us to consider that in any detail. It certainly has not been possible to give advice to Ministers on that basis, and therefore I do not think that it would be appropriate for me to set down, if you like, a set of priorities going forward in that respect. [336] In the paper that we submitted to you, we have given you the schemes that we are currently working on, and the schemes that we currently consider we are committed to. However, beyond that, it would be a problem. [337] John Marek: In that case, if I may suggest, perhaps you could have a word with your Minister on this, because the committee will have to produce an ordered list, and it wants to produce the best ordered list possible. That will be debated by the Assembly in Plenary, and it may well be that priorities and decisions are made—though I am not prejudging anything—and we would not want not to have an input from the ministerial side, if one is available. [338] Mr Shaw: Okay. I will put that to Andrew Davies. [339] John Marek: Sorry, Janet, I interrupted you.

[340] Janet Davies: That is okay. [341] Robin, you are right about preserving a balance, and there are different factors in different parts of Wales. I must mention south-west Wales, because it has hardly been mentioned today, but that is another factor there. So, the fact that I want to talk about the Valleys lines into Cardiff does not mean that I am not thinking about other parts of Wales. Am I right in thinking that the more passengers you have, the bigger the subsidy the Assembly must make? I was told in a recent Economic Development and Transport Committee meeting that increasing the number of passengers would not help to reduce the subsidy. Therefore, would it actually increase if there were more passengers? [342] Mr Shaw: It would if those passengers were, as I would expect them to be, largely commuter flows over a short period of the day. The expensive part of providing a rail service is the fact that the asset is underutilised for the rest of the day. However, that is one of the relative challenges, because it may well be that by improving services to other parts of Wales we can get a better return in increasing patronage levels across the whole of the day. However, in simple terms, if we put additional rolling stock onto the Valleys lines to provide for those peak-hour flows, it will cost increased levels of public subsidy, unless we significantly increase the fare box. [343] Janet Davies: You will need to balance that against increasing congestion on the roads in a very urban area. [344] Mr Shaw: Yes. [345] Janet Davies: Therefore, are you working on the road/rail balance as well? [346] Mr Shaw: Yes. However, again, we must recognise how limited the contribution of rail is in percentage terms to overall traffic movements. The exception is to the centre of Cardiff, where rail services already provide about 30 per cent of the commuter flows into the city centre. However, outside that, the rail contribution would be probably less than 10 per cent in most areas. Therefore, we have to recognise that balance. [347] The challenge is how we deal with the increasing demand for travel. You are right that that challenge exists across any mode. We are not likely to provide road capacity going forward for an ever-increasing capacity for peak-time travel with one person in a car; it is not sustainable. In fact, in many parts of Wales, it is not even physically possible. The challenge then is whether you try to compensate by increasing public transport—the answer to that must be ‘yes’. However, should we provide all the capacity to satisfy demand, or do we acknowledge and recognise that there are techniques to manage that demand, including regenerating some areas to reduce the need to travel? [348] Janet Davies: May I ask a question to the Department for Transport representative? [349] John Marek: Yes, of course. [350] Janet Davies: Since the demise of the Strategic Rail Authority, you have handled many of its powers. Many of those powers will transfer to the Assembly Government shortly. What plans have you put in place for the future that you can

hand over to the Assembly Government? [351] Mr Clark: First, the franchise agreement itself is jointly signed by the Assembly Government and us, so all of the plans that that contains are jointly owned, if you like. The management of those plans and of the franchise transfers to the Assembly Government on 1 April, hopefully. So, the package of plans in the franchise comes under the management of the Assembly Government. [352] With regard to other plans, in the run-up to the 2007 spending review, we are working to produce something called a ‘high-level output specification’—HLOS is the lingo for it—which will set out the outputs that the UK Government wishes to buy from Network Rail over the five years from 2009 to 2014. That is quite a lengthy process, but it is timed to coincide with the Chancellor’s spending review in 2007. So, we are working on plans that will go into that high-level output specification. [353] One of the key inputs to that is the work that we are doing with the National Assembly on the Welsh planning assessment, which is a daughter document, if you like, to the Wales transport strategy. That work is ongoing; it started in the past few months. The other key input, as Network Rail colleagues mentioned this morning, is the work that it is about to initiate on the short to medium-term route utilisation strategy. [354] Eleanor Burnham: I have some questions for Robin. The document is very interesting, but you have almost disowned it, because, to paraphrase your words, it is virtually meaningless. I am sure that you can put me right on that, but that is the impression that I got from your initial presentation. We have these wonderful people sitting behind us who are as keen as I am, and everyone on the committee is, to improve the railways. However, I am concerned that we do not raise expectations unduly and create another reality gap between what is possible and what we, as passengers, would like. [355] I am going to be parochial, obviously, and you spoke about the doubling of the track from Gobowen to Chester. My understanding was that it was to be done from Wrexham to Chester. That is possibly a mistake, which could have an impact on your not-known timescale and not-known cost. I find that quite frightening. In that area, many people, and Wrexham council, are very keen to have a park-and-ride scheme, for example. If you were to reopen Rossett station, which I mentioned earlier, you could provide park-and-ride schemes to Wrexham and north to Chester and beyond. [356] It does not seem that there is much comfort for people in north Wales given the figures that I noted on Flintshire commuting when I substituted for a member of the Economic Development and Transport Committee last week. Forgive me if I am paraphrasing incorrectly, but you said something quite fascinating: that rail is not so cost-effective. Commuting out of Flintshire is horrendous. Surely we should be doing everything that we can to ensure that we use rail in every capacity—park-and-ride schemes included—to take a holistic approach. The only exception to that approach is with regard to what you said about preventing people from having to commute so much, with which I wholly agree. [357] Mr Shaw: I do not think that I discounted the document. I think that you are referring to the document that I gave you at the informal briefing. What I said was that we had included, for your information, the schedule of schemes that were considered as aspirations for enhancements to the rail network in Wales. We have promoted some of those aspirations, and some have been promoted by others.

Therefore, we were providing a comprehensive list. A number of them are actively being worked on, including the doubling proposal. 11.20 a.m. [358] You are quite right; it is from Wrexham to Chester. That is an active project, which is at the feasibility stage. In fact, consultants have been appointed in the last few days to take that forward. Obviously, whether we would then consider it a priority for future investment from the budget that we have at our disposal will depend on the outcome of that report. Until we see the report, the costs and the cost benefit analysis, which will be done as part of that assessment, I do not see how I can give you definitive evidence-based advice on where that would sit in relative terms as far as the future is concerned. [359] You also have to recognise that the budget that I have at my disposal is only for the next two/three years at any one time. So, in terms of absolute commitments, we are working on a rolling programme. Yes, we seek to prioritise, and the point of asking for studies such as that one and the work that you have seen by SEWTA, which was produced by Jacobs Consultancy UK, is to help us to facilitate the decision-making process and to arrive at a forward programme. You have heard from Network Rail this morning that it has some quite long planning timescales to deal with the resignalling and the renewals. We need to be ensuring that no opportunities are lost as it is taking forward and designing those works, which we would regret subsequently if an aspiration were no longer deliverable. So, we have to maintain the real world, in terms of what the programmes and budgets are and what we know we can deliver, as well as an aspirational one, to help in the long-term planning process. [360] John Marek: I would be grateful if you could, when you send us information, differentiate between those two. This committee may decide to do nothing, but when it comes to us before Plenary, we may decide to set the priorities for you. We may not, but you need to be mindful of these possibilities. [361] Mr Shaw: I am sure that we will be very interested in your recommendations. [362] John Marek: They will not be recommendations, but they may well be motions carried by Plenary, and that is a little bit stronger than recommendations. [363] Mr Shaw: To respond to the other point that you raised, what I was saying in terms of commuter traffic is that, yes, it is expensive to provide commuter capacity by heavy rail if there is very little demand for those services outside the peak period. It means either that the trains have to be parked up for a good part of the day doing nothing and earning no resources or, alternatively, that you are running empty trains for the rest of the day. [364] Eleanor Burnham: Is it possible to use light railway to do this? Have you thought about that? There is a company in Stourbridge called Parry Associates, which keeps telling me how wonderful its system is. [365] Mr Shaw: Light rail has been looked at as an option in a number of locations, particularly in Cardiff and down to the bay. Sadly, I think that the evidence to date is that light rail and tram systems are very expensive to implement, and not many of them are actually making a return on the investment. So, I do not think that that is necessarily the solution, but, clearly, in terms of any particular problem or issue, we should be considering all the options.

[366] Eleanor Burnham: I have a question for the Department for Transport. [367] John Marek: Yes, of course, but we need to speed it up a bit. [368] Eleanor Burnham: I will be as quick as I can be. I am really interested in your take on the ‘improvement’ to the standard pattern timetable. As a regular user, and as Dr Marek will confirm, I think that it is disputable whether the standard pattern timetable, as applied by Arriva, from Holyhead to Cardiff is improved. There is so much time lag in it. From my knowledge, the franchise seems to be quite strict, and has parameters to do with quantity and monitoring regularity rather than quality. Can anything be done to improve what you believe to be an improved standard pattern timetable? How can we have quality, which is just as important, as part of the franchise agreement? [369] Mr Clark: Can I take quality first? [370] Eleanor Burnham: Please do, as it is very important. [371] Mr Clark: In terms of quality, the franchise agreement is now signed. The franchise agreement covers a range of different things that Arriva Trains Wales has to do for us, for the Department for Transport and for the National Assembly. Those things can be changed if we are not satisfied with them. Depending on what that change was, we may have to agree between the two of us, but there are some changes that could be made at your behest. It is possible to change the quality that comes out of the franchise agreement, which is stipulated on Arriva Trains Wales. However, many things can probably be done before you need to do that. The way in which the franchise is managed is particularly important in seeking and delivering improvements in the outputs that you see. The lever of franchise management and the transfer of the franchise management to Wales will give you greater control over the way in which that franchise is managed in future. [372] Lisa Francis: My first question is to the Department for Transport. In your paper, if I have understood it correctly, you say that local authorities together with the National Assembly for Wales will inform Network Rail of things called ‘route utilisation strategies’. Their purpose is to appraise changes that need to be made across the board and, in turn, they develop things called ‘high-level output specifications’—I know that this is complicated. What confuses me is that you say in your paper that the high-level output specifications that you develop seem to be different from those that Network Rail develops, or that they work on a different basis. Could you explain that? [373] Mr Clark: It is complicated, and I wish that it was not. The UK Government spends around £3 billion a year with Network Rail, so we want to take a lot of care in figuring out exactly what that money should be spent on. The money is effectively defined in five-year chunks. There is a five-year chunk that runs from 2009 to 2014. The high-level output specification that we are currently developing will set out what we want to buy for that period of time. It will be a lot of money, and it is a complicated process, but it needs to be to discharge our public responsibility to spend taxpayers’ money wisely on the railways. So, yes, it is a complicated process. It is a high-level process, as it is a national task. The route utilisation strategies sit beneath it. They are more detailed pieces of work that look at around 20 parts of the English and Welsh railway network. They look at the plans in a lot more detail and ask

‘What sorts of things could be done on this part of the network?’. Some of that is about what you might call ‘schemes’, that is, physical works, but a lot of it is asking how we can use the railway network more smartly. For example, can we re-timetable the railway network to get more capacity out of what is already there? So, they are much more detailed. [374] Lisa Francis: It is very useful to have that explained. Thank you for that. My next question is what sort of level of involvement will the Welsh Assembly Government have, or expect to have, in preparing those high-level output strategies, which will be developed after June 2007? [375] Mr Clark: The high-level output specification will be developed around June 2007. We will work closely with the Welsh Assembly Government in developing that high-level output statement. As statute is written at the moment, the responsibility for that rests with the UK Government, so the formal responsibility rests with us. [376] John Marek: Not Network Rail? [377] Mr Clark: No. Shall I explain that? [378] John Marek: Yes, of course. [379] Mr Clark: We write the specification, and Network Rail then comes back to us and says, ‘We think that it will cost this much to deliver what is in that specification’. To complicate things slightly further, the Office of Rail Regulation then sits back from that and says, ‘Network Rail, you have quoted a fair price’, or ‘You have not quoted a fair price’. The rail regulator will look at the efficiency with which Network Rail is delivering that which the Government wants. We, effectively, figure out how much we want to spend and write a specification and Network Rail tells us how much that will cost to deliver. 11.30 a.m. [380] John Marek: For Members’ information, the rail regulator will be before us at our March meeting. If the committee comes up with an ordered list, you ought to be able to see that list at some stage in order to be able to say, ‘Yes, all these things are achievable’, or ‘No, they are not achievable’. [381] Mr Clark: Absolutely. That will be a very important input to a number of key rail industry planning decisions. [382] John Marek: Lisa, have you finished? [383] Lisa Francis: I have some more questions, if I may. In the paper you mentioned that the UK Government has enabled Network Rail to create a discretionary GB-wide fund of £50 million per annum that can be used to part-fund enhancements costing less than £5 million each. Can you give any examples of what sort of schemes might be eligible for that funding? I would like an example from Wales, if you have one. [384] Mr Clark: It could be a new station proposal, it could be speeding up a section of track to make the journey times faster, or it could be the doubling of a

section of track and so on. I should say that the £5 million limit is exclusive of any part funding that might come to Network Rail from other parties. [385] Eleanor Burnham: On the back of that, Chair— [386] John Marek: It must be on the same point. [387] Eleanor Burnham: I am absolutely determined to dual the track between Chester and Wrexham and to reopen Rossett station. How would I go about doing that and who should I lobby most strongly? [388] John Marek: You go about it by playing your part in this committee, Eleanor. [Laughter.] [389] Eleanor Burnham: Well, apart from the committee, which will be wound up quite soon, how would I go about it? I am serious about this. There are so many people in this equation that it becomes like swimming in custard. [390] John Marek: You could just have a chat with these gentlemen out of committee. [391] Eleanor Burnham: No, I think that I would like it recorded what procedures an Assembly Member, or someone else, following the demise of this committee, would have at their disposal to try to move a project forward. [392] John Marek: Go on. [393] Mr Clark: Network Rail has taken responsibility since the Railways Act 2005 for leading rail industry planning. So, simply put, it is your first port of call. [394] Eleanor Burnham: So, it is Network Rail— [395] John Marek: It is Lisa’s shout at the moment. [396] Lisa Francis: Thank you for that. My other questions are to Mr Shaw. What other discussions you are having with the Department for Transport on lines that may be designated as community rail lines? Can you tell us which lines they are, in Wales? We have had hints about some, but it would be useful to know if anything has been laid in stone on that. [397] On the other comment that you made, when you said that rural services will never be completely commercially viable, I wondered where you would put the Cambrian line in that equation? That line is a star performer in terms of year-on-year passenger growth, with a steady growth recorded since 1995 at 7 per cent per annum—in full figures, in excess of 0.5 million per annum. We had a conversation during the break about the growth of Aberystwyth and how that was affecting matters, and the fact that transport services are not commensurate with that growth. I think that there is potential for that line. Would you class that as a rural service that will never be completely commercially viable? [398] Mr Shaw: To answer that last point first, I am fairly convinced that the Cambrian will never be commercially viable. In terms of its classification, I would suggest that it provides both functions: it is predominantly a rural railway, but it also provides commuter services at both ends, into Aberystwyth and into places such as Newtown and Shrewsbury. So it performs both functions and is clearly an important

part of the transport infrastructure in Wales. [399] There are no tablets of stone as yet on community rail networks and, in fact, discussions are ongoing and a particular team in the Department for Transport is looking at this issue across the whole of the UK. It is meeting various groups, including those representing lines such as the Heart of Wales line, to consider whether converting that line to a community rail network would be the best way forward for that line and its long-term preservation. No definitive decisions have been taken on any of the lines in Wales at the moment. Conwy is another one. [400] Leighton Andrews: It has been clear to me from previous discussions that if you look at the Welsh franchise as a whole, some parts are obviously more subsidised than others. There is probably more subsidy per passenger mile in some of the rural areas than in some of the more urban areas. When I tried to pursue this recently with Mr Shaw in another committee, it appeared that there was no breakdown by line, for example, as to the level of that subsidy. Since the Transport for Department negotiated the original franchise with Arriva, you must have looked at the cost of the franchise, the subsidy and all the other issues that you have just talked about, and you must have some methodology for calculating cost per passenger mile, surely? Otherwise, how do you determine ultimately what is going to be a cost-effective route, or, in terms of the example which Mr Shaw just gave, the Cambrian line, one that will be very expensive? It may be socially worthwhile to have those routes—I am not saying it is not—but you must have some financial measurements, yet I found it very difficult to extract any from the previous discussions on this subject. [401] Mr Clark: From a technical point of view, it is sometimes quite difficult to extract a subsidy per line, because, from an operational point of view, quite a lot of the resources that are used to operate a rail service are used across a network. So, technically, it is quite difficult to do. Let me try to come at it in another way. When we re-let a franchise, we are not starting with a blank sheet of paper. Typically, we will start with what is already there. We are generally looking at making changes on the margin to what is in that franchise. When we draw up a specification for the franchise, it goes out to the market. So, we are normally looking at changes that are just a little bit up or down on what was previously there. For appraising those changes, we use a standard technique that is used across Government for transport appraisals, which looks at the costs and revenues, and it also looks at wider issues such as the impact of any change on the environment, safety, integration and accessibility. So, we look at all those factors in formally appraising any change from what you might call the baseline franchise. That process is technically quite complex, but it is laid down in writing in various places. [402] Leighton Andrews: Okay. If you cannot do it on a line basis—I understand the difficulty of that—could you work out the levels of subsidy per station in relation to footfall and that sort of thing? [403] Mr Clark: It would be very difficult to do it in a meaningful way, because the subsidy for any individual station would depend on the rail services that serve that station. However, one could do it. In fact, if one looks at the business case for a new station, that is what one has to do. One has to figure out what new revenue that new station will attract, what the costs of running it will be, what benefit or disbenefit it will have for people who are perhaps travelling through the line where that new station is, and whose journey is a bit longer. So, you have to look at all those factors, and though that sort of work, you come up with a business case for the station that goes into the appraisal process and that gives you a way of prioritising that station versus

other things in the railway network on which one could spend money.

[404] Leighton Andrews: So, it would be technically possible to take, to use examples from outside my constituency, stations like Pontypridd and Newtown, for the sake of argument, and work out the different level of subsidy going into support those in practice, in terms of services and passenger footfall? [405] Mr Clark: It would be technically possible to do it. [406] Leighton Andrews: Okay, that is helpful. My final question is to Mr Shaw. In answer to questions about the enhancement schemes that it has in development, Network Rail said that these were your timescales for desired delivery of these schemes. Presumably, they remain fixed at the moment. You have made public commitments to them. Are you confident that they will be delivered on the timescales here? 11.40 a.m. [407] Mr Shaw: The timescales, if I am being absolutely pedantic, to which you referred earlier, are probably from SEWTA, and it will be talking to you about that after this session. However, we are also signed up to them, and those are what we are planning for, based on the expected profile length of time to generate and design the scheme and on the level of available resource that we anticipate having to be able to fund them. In that context, yes, I think that we have some realistic timescales now. We did not have some realistic timescales three or four years ago; people were very optimistic about what could be delivered. The demise of Railtrack and the creation of Network Rail, without doubt, caused something of a hiatus in the development of enhancements and we, in Wales, have suffered from that. I think that we would have had some of our schemes delivered earlier had that not been the case. There is now a robust planning system. I think that Robbie Burns talked about the guide to rail investment projects process, which he was largely instrumental in implementing, and that really does give a very firm project management control to the development of schemes. For those that are only at feasibility study stage, the dates are not committed; they are simply the dates that are being worked to as the scheme is being taken forward. There will be a series of decisions on the way as to whether that is delivered in that way. I think that he also touched on how the scheme is procured. We will have to make a decision as to whether we go to the market directly or whether we procure through Network Rail. We have done both. The Vale of Glamorgan was delivered by Network Rail on our behalf; for Ebbw Vale we are doing it through the group of local authorities there, and it is being procured directly from the market with Network Rail only acting in its asset protection role. That is an option that we have and one which I would wish to maintain, because it also gives me a measure of the efficiency of Network Rail and the value for money compared to going directly to the market for that enhancement. [408] Eleanor Burnham: Chair, may I come in? [409] John Marek: Is it on this point? [410] Eleanor Burnham: Yes. It was a political decision to privatise the railways, but surely taxpayers are now spending as much on investment in the railways as prior to privatisation. Would it be more productive if— [411] John Marek: Hang on, Eleanor; this is a committee about identifying railway improvements.

[412] Eleanor Burnham: Yes, that is what I am trying to say. Would there be more railway improvements if some of the structures that are in place at present were simplified, because, as Stephen Clark said earlier, it is a bit like swimming in custard in that there are so many people in this equation. Is there any role that the Welsh Assembly might take in simplifying matters in Wales, for instance? Is it within our possibilities as an Assembly? [413] Mr Shaw: The development of the organisation that I lead has been working towards that. We are taking a direct role and responsibility for Wales in delivering rail infrastructure, which was something that simply did not exist before. We have significant project management expertise within that organisation to ensure that the projects in Wales are delivered. That is what we intend to do. [414] Eleanor Burnham: Thank you very much, Chair. [415] Carl Sargeant: I have an open question. I have reservations about the role of this committee, although it has the remit from the Assembly, with regard to what uses it may have for the future guidance of improvements to stations. I read your document, Mr Shaw. It is like a Christmas list for train-spotters really. However, yours is not unique across the board; this committee’s wish list will be similar. It will be about what we would like to see and what we want. Eleanor wants to see double tracks in Rossett; we can all think of an idea, or paint a station here or there. [416] Possibly, there will not be a huge amount of funding to support the committee in its recommendations in the future. It concerns me that the priorities of the Government, or of Transport Wales, have already been identified. Do you see this as potentially troublesome in a committee with our own views—six people around the table having identified our priorities? Do you see that dangerously impacting on the future development of Government priorities? With regard to the franchise that Arriva Trains Wales mentioned this morning, I think that the figure was around 87 per cent of what it is currently achieving within the financial constraints that it has now, so, there is a great deal of improvement there—13 per cent or so—within the current funding stream. Do you see any route for improvement without any further money within the current franchise? How that could be achieved? [417] John Marek: You answer first, Robin. We can overrun by around five minutes, but no more, so we need to be pretty brisk now. [418] Mr Shaw: I do not consider that anything that this committee produces will be a hindrance. I hope that it will be useful, beneficial and a perspective on the issues. On making decisions on priorities, you could make it a very mechanistic process. You could do a cost-benefit analysis of every scheme, but in order to do so, you would need to have taken the development of that scheme to a level such that the financial estimates are robust. Many of the schemes in that document have not reached that level. So, it would not be currently possible to carry out that mechanistic assessment regime. That is certainly how road schemes have been traditionally approached. A cost-benefit analysis has been carried out and they have been ranked in priority terms. However, I would never suggest that it is not an appropriate role for a political view on what the relative priorities are within Wales for spending and investment. That must be where this committee, and ultimately any Plenary debate that flows from it, contributes to that process. [419] As I said at the beginning, there are some real challenges and, in some cases, it is an apples-and-pears situation in terms of the relative priorities. No

amount of mathematical analysis will necessarily bottom that out. So, I think that there is a very strong role to be played in terms of representing the different parts of Wales and ensuring that priorities are focused in that way. So, that would be my take on that. [420] Mr Clark: I would have thought that the committee’s work would be quite helpful in setting out inputs into some of those planning processes that I discussed earlier. On performance, and whether more can be achieved without spending any more money, I should think so. Railway performance is partly about physical parameters, but it is also partly about how the railway is managed. It is true that both ATW and Network Rail, in respect of the ATW franchise, are doing quite a lot at the moment to improve how they are managing their businesses and they should be encouraged to do more of that. [421] Lisa Francis: I want to return to the question of commercial viability and what your definition of that is. When you define what is commercially viable, do you look at growth forecasts or potential growth? I go back to the Cambrian line, because that is the line that I am familiar with. Aberystwyth, for example, is a town that is expected to have 500 extra jobs delivered in the next few years, and that is obviously going to impact on rail services. Do you look at that when you define what is commercially viable? We know that more people started using that line when the timetable enabled the people to get to work by 9 a.m., for example. So, if there are improvements, then that will help its commercial viability, but do you consider growth scenarios when defining commercial viability? [422] Mr Shaw: There are two distinctly different issues there. When I talked about commercial viability, I was referring to whether a rail service is self-financing, in other words, whether or not it needs a public subsidy. On the second part of the question, with any scheme, when the analysis is done, looking at the costs and benefits of that scheme, those benefits will be quantified—they are perhaps journey-time savings for the people concerned, irrespective of what they are paying for the journey. So we consider what the benefit to them is. That is an integral part of any cost-benefit analysis for any enhancement scheme. [423] John Marek: Are then any more comments on that? No? Members seem content. 11.50 a.m. [424] I will wind up. Robin needs to talk to his Minister. On your side, I think it would be unfair for us to ask for a list from you, but what we could do, if Members are content, is to send a list to DfT, at an appropriate time, for its comments. Would you be prepared to comment on our list? [425] Mr Clark: I should think so. [426] John Marek: I think that that would be helpful for us as well. [427] Leighton Andrews: If you are talking about a list, I just want to be clear about this. Is this a list of proposed improvements? [428] John Marek: It is in the remit of the committee. [429] Leighton Andrews: It would be important for us to have a sense, in

terms of those improvements that we set down, of precisely how many passengers would benefit and what the costs per passenger might turn out to be. [430] John Marek: I am sure that that is probably right. Not all of them will be passengers, because it is wider than that, but what you are saying is that it will certainly include that. [431] Leighton Andrews: Our remit is passenger services. [432] John Marek: It includes railway infrastructure improvements, and freight impinges a bit on that. [433] Mr Shaw: One of the problems that you will have in getting to that definitive point is that, for some of the schemes, the analysis is simply not being done to the point where we have a robust estimate and a robust cost-benefit analysis for the schemes. So, that will be the difficulty in arriving at that definitive point. [434] John Marek: However, I agree with Leighton. [435] Rosemary Butler: It would be helpful if we could have a discussion on it because we could come up with a shopping list within the money that is available; it might be that we could spend all the money on scheme, or we might want to spread the jam very thinly. So, can we have a discussion on that at some point? [436] John Marek: The clerk has noted that. [437] Eleanor Burnham: Surely, Chair, the academic research and consultative research that has been done will come in to the clerk. [438] John Marek: We have an academic before us at a later meeting, on 8 March. I think that that is it. Thank you. You have come from London, have you not? [439] Mr Clark: Yes. [440] John Marek: Thank you very much for coming. It is two hours if a train is on time, and is reasonably comfortable, but you have still taken a good part out of your day. [441] Mr Clark: We are more than glad to do so. [442] John Marek: Thank you, and thank you, Robin, for you time; you came from Cathays park, which is a bit nearer of course. 11.53 a.m.

Tystiolaeth gan SEWTA

Evidence from SEWTA

[443] John Marek: We will be meeting the other transport consortia, but we are very pleased that the South East Wales Transport Alliance was able to come today. We are just a little bit ahead of time. Tom Williams and I know each other, do we not? [444] Mr Williams: Yes, John, we do. [445] John Marek: You have grown a lot older, but so have I. [Laughter.] We have not seen each other for 20 years. [446] Mr Williams: I will have to dye my hair. [447] John Marek: That was probably unfair and I apologise for saying that, but it is nice to see you. [448] Mr Williams: That is quite alright. [449] John Marek: You have been sitting here all morning, so you will know what I have said to the others. If you could keep it to about five minutes, we will then question you. [450] Mr Williams: Thank you, Mr Chairman. For those who do not know, I am the chairman of SEWTA, which is a formally constituted body, and which has existed for two years. We are made up of 10 local authorities throughout south-east Wales and we also have other partners, such as Arriva Trains Wales, to whom we have listened, the Confederation of Passenger Transport UK, Network Rail, Bus Users UK and the Rail Passenger Committee for Wales, which is now called the Passenger Focus, and Sustrans has now joined the board. We have a fairly wide range of people on the board, and with me today is the secretary of SEWTA, Bob Brierley, and the vice-chair of the rail working group, Charlie Nelson. They are the people who will give you the ideas behind the strategy that we have just gone through. I am sure that we will listen to all your questions and, hopefully, at the end of the day, we may have convinced you with our strategy that the money is very well needed and that it can be spent. I will ask Bob Brierley to say a few words. [451] Mr Brierley: SEWTA’s core aim is to work for better co-ordinated and more effective transport for people and businesses in south Wales. Our role is to oversee the whole spectrum of regional transport developments within an area that includes about half the population of Wales. Our key objectives are listed in the leaflet that I think that you have been given, so I will not repeat them, but, specifically, with regard to your remit, they are to prepare regional strategies, plans and programmes. The documents that you have been given—the red book, the two final reports and the executive summary from the Jacobs Consultancy report—are part and parcel of our working towards those strategies, plans and programmes. I suggest that you might like to think of some of the output of that as being something like the list that you talked about earlier today, because all the schemes in there—Charlie will speak a bit more about them in detail—have been through a rigorous process of evaluation and assessment. [452] SEWTA is well-advanced with each strategy’s preparation and, last month,

the board endorsed the report that I just showed you as part of the development of a comprehensive SEWTA-wide rail strategy for the period leading up to 2018. I anticipate reporting on parallel bus, walking and cycling strategies to the board in the near future. All these consultant strategies for individual elements of transport will be brought together through the process of developing a regional transport strategy, which we will be charged to do under the Transport (Wales) Bill. We will take those individual strategies a bit further and integrate them into a comprehensive and, as I said, integrated strategy for the whole of south Wales. For example, the regional transport strategy will bring together the cycling strategy and the rail strategy and start to look at how rail will interface with the provision of cycle facilities in stations, routes to stations and these sorts of things. [453] We are conscious, as was said earlier, that our role is about more than just the improvement of transport. We are keen, as was Robin earlier, to emphasise the need to influence the location of development and the way in which people travel. In that respect, we interface and liaise with all manner of people, geographically with the adjacent consortia, with the planners and the economic development people, and, specifically, with the Welsh Assembly Government, with which, as you heard earlier, we work almost hand in glove on the promotion of the strategies and the delivery of the programmes. [454] You have heard about some of the successes, so I will not go on about them, but it is fair to say that the recent £20-odd-million transport grant decision for south-east Wales rail schemes was encouraging, and we look forward to continuing to develop on that. We would just like to note that we have been experiencing growth on the network of about 10 per cent per annum in the Valleys network, which is very encouraging, over the last seven years. That represents something like 62 per cent growth over the period of 1998-2004. [455] We see enormous potential in the rail network. I refer to the lines as corridors of opportunity, and we believe that we are capable of trebling the number of people that they could deliver to Cardiff. At the moment, that represents something like 6 million people per annum and we are looking to build on that success, with the consequential benefits, as you discussed already, for overcrowded roads. At this stage, I will hand over to Charlie, who will say a little bit more about the rail specifics. [456] Mr Nelson: The current rail improvement programme goes up to 2010 and you have all had a copy of our red book. It is basically the result of detailed transport studies that have been aimed at maximising the increasing patronage and producing a modal shift towards rail. Its development has involved a rigorous assessment of a wide range of aspirations. The red book derives much of its strength, not from what is in it, but from what has been left out, because those schemes that did not provide value for money or deliver immediate benefits have been rejected or deferred for consideration in the longer term. 12.00 p.m. [457] Our current five-year programme consists of a range of measures, such as new passenger lines and stations, increased service levels, capacity and line-speed enhancements, and improved stations, all of which are consistent with the committee’s remit. Our approach is based firmly on working in partnership with the Assembly, Network Rail, train operators and other stakeholders. In fact, Network Rail has assembled an implementation team that covers the suitor area, and this has helped to secure the funding, develop the cost estimates on an ongoing basis, and develop an achievable programme.

[458] Our programme has been revised since it was first approved by the former Minister, Sue Essex, in around 2000. Currently, we are focusing on providing the infrastructure and rolling stock necessary to provide longer four-car trains and, in some cases, where the demands are heaviest, six-car trains. Capacity, therefore, will increase significantly above the levels of the current two-car trains predominantly used on the local network. All this dovetails quite nicely into the newly-introduced standard-pattern timetable, and our programme for the next five years further enhances those frequencies and provides additional services. [459] You have seen the progress, as Network Rail mentioned, made over the last 12 months with the Vale of Glamorgan line, the Aberdare line, and the resignalling between Caerphilly and Bargoed, all of which have been in the course of development over a few years and have now come to fruition. We are working with Network Rail on an ongoing basis to develop the projects in the red book through feasibility stage to outline-design stage. We anticipate that design and build contracts will then be implemented along the timescales identified on page 15 of the red book in accordance with a programme that represents £100-million-worth of investment. [460] To provide the capacity and service frequency enhancements proposed in our programme, we need additional rolling stock. That costs money, and SEWTA is working very closely with Arriva Trains Wales and the Welsh Assembly Government and the rail industry to achieve this common aim. Again, a start has been made, and the Assembly is already providing an additional £50 million to Arriva during the life of the franchise for rolling stock, and we hope that more rolling stock can be secured over the next few years to help deliver the longer platforms strategy. [461] John Marek: Have you finished? [462] Mr Nelson: I will just say a few words about the 10-year programme, if I may. [463] John Marek: Very quickly. You have had 11 minutes. You are eating into Members’ time, which I must try to protect. However, do finish. [464] Mr Nelson: Funding is essential to deliver the programme. We use transport grants and we use Objective 1, but it is also important that Wales should try to secure its share of the premium from the Greater Western rail franchise, which is something like £1.1 billion. With a quarter of the franchise’s revenue coming from the south-Wales-to-London service group, we feel that a share of that money for Wales should help address some of the capacity issues through the Severn tunnel and to the west of Cardiff. [465] The longer-term strategy beyond 2010 is detailed in the Jacobs Consultancy report that you have had. It has been the subject of work over the last nine months. Its outputs have been approved by our committee and, during the next 12 months, with Assembly funding, we will be taking those recommendations forward and developing further economic and technical analysis that will stand us in good stead for making business cases for funding to deliver the projects in the next decade. [466] John Marek: Thank you. We should probably just go straight to questioning. As has been said, we need your support, because we are trying to produce an ordered list. You are not on trial or anything like that. This is a co-operative effort. Rosemary, you can go first. [467] Rosemary Butler: Thank you for your presentation. These documents are

really interesting and concise, which, for a lay person like me, is great. It is interesting to see an integrated approach to transport. Especially where we have so many people living so closely together, integrated transport is the answer. [468] I am asking one of my questions as Chair of the Culture, Welsh Language and Sport Committee. The issue of rail transport to Cardiff bay and the Wales Millennium Centre has been raised again and again and I said that I would raise it here. I am not sure whether that is for you or for Cardiff County Council but I thought that I might raise it this morning. [469] On the lengthening of platforms, you are talking about extending trains to possibly have six cars. How are you dovetailing the work on extending the platforms on the necessary stations? I understand that, in Cardiff particularly, that is an issue. Also, is the funding secured for the Ebbw Vale rail link? [470] Mr Williams: Are you talking about from Ebbw Vale to Cardiff? [471] Rosemary Butler: No, to the capital of Wales: Newport. [472] Mr Williams: We believe that it is because the National Assembly keeps telling us that the link from Ebbw Vale to Newport will be up and running in 2009. We would like to see it earlier and I am sure that you would all agree with that. If you listened to what Network Rail said this morning, it all comes down to funding and getting programmes up and running. Charlie or Bob, do you want to answer on the other two? [473] Mr Nelson: Taking them in order, on rail services to Cardiff bay, the council and Network Rail worked closely together on getting improved access, an egress, from Cardiff bay station last year. The rail service has been increased as part of the standard-pattern timetable, so there are four trains shuttling back and forth every hour. Other than that, we do not have any further plans in terms of infrastructure. [474] John Marek: One point that I would raise, and I think that Rosemary also meant this, is that, if you come down for a performance in the Wales Millennium Centre, can you get back at night? That is probably the issue. [475] Mr Nelson: I would contend that that is an operational issue for the train operator to pick up. Most of our concerns have been primarily about assisting with the infrastructure development. [476] Rosemary Butler: Is it not a problem for it to be available 24 hours a day, in terms of the infrastructure of the railways? [477] Mr Nelson: The infrastructure is constrained by Network Rail and signallers’ availability but we operate a fairly intense railway through Cardiff, which runs throughout the day. [478] John Marek: Janet would just like to interrupt you very quickly on this point, Rosemary. [479] Janet Davies: It is on what Rosemary mentioned, namely the Ebbw Vale to Newport line. You said that you hoped that the funding is in place. I do not know whether the Minister has seen the business plan yet, or whether there is a business plan yet. I had an experience with a station in my local area, namely Llanharan station, which was promised several years ago, but when I pursued the issue last

autumn, it turned out that the Minister had not seen the business plan. So, it was there in all the programmes, but the money was not allocated until, I think, November last year. Can you throw any light on whether it is a similar situation with regard to the Ebbw Vale to Newport line? [480] Mr Brierley: My understanding is that we have programmed it within our medium-term strategy for 2009 onwards and, as Robin, I think, was saying earlier, he only has funding two, or was it three, years ahead. So, your assessment, I believe, is right: the funds are not committed 100 per cent but it is in the programme and if the funding is put in place, it will continue. [481] John Marek: We will go back to Rosemary—or are you okay for the moment? [482] Rosemary Butler: That is fine. They have given me enough now; I can pursue it elsewhere. [483] John Marek: Eleanor is next. [484] Eleanor Burnham: You do not cover my geographical area but I have some questions. I am interested in your views on how the system works at the moment, in terms of Network Rail, the train operating companies and even the rolling stock companies—I am not even sure whether we will be talking to the rolling stock companies or whether that is relevant. Are the partnerships strong? Are you being restricted or restrained, other than with money, and what are your views on deregulation? When we devolve, how do you feel that the future of railways in your area will improve, mentioning the fact that we have rolling stock issues, and the renewal of infrastructure, such as signalling, or whatever? What is your general view on the future, with devolution? 12.10 p.m. [485] Mr Brierley: I start as a relatively new boy, having come to this back in October. I perceive a very strong partnership relationship with everyone with whom we are engaged. That includes all the people who have been mentioned who are our formal partners, and it includes the Welsh Assembly Government. We have a structure of committees through which all these people can engage formally, but an enormous amount of informal engagement goes on throughout the industry. [486] I think that I should pass on to Charlie, who runs the rail group. Perhaps he can say something a wee bit more specific. [487] Mr Nelson: We have good working relationships with Network Rail and Arriva Trains Wales. However, I must admit that I agree with you that dealing with bodies such as Network Rail is sometimes like walking through treacle. It is a slow process, and can be quite tortuous. However, as the years have gone on, and Network Rail has developed itself—and Robbie Burns talked about the guide to rail investment projects, or GRIP process, this morning—all those processes are helping us to understand our respective relationships. It sees us as a third-party funder of enhancements and, because its prime role at present is maintenance and renewal, it tends to be fairly risk-averse towards enhancements. However, through working with it, and developing the projects that are in our programme, through the various stage gates, we can remove some of the risk. On the projects that we have delivered over the past 12 months, the Aberdare line and the Caerphilly to Bargoed signalling, in particular, have been delivered to time, and well within budget.

[488] John Marek: Do you want to come back, Eleanor? [489] Eleanor Burnham: No, that is fine, thank you. As I say, it is not in my geographical area. [490] John Marek: No, we are an all-Wales committee. Do remember that. [491] Leighton Andrews: I am pursuing questions that I have taken from Network Rail and then to the Welsh Assembly Government, and now I am told that it is SEWTA. On the timetable for the enhancement schemes that were listed in the Network Rail document that was given to us earlier, I now understand that these are your timescales. To repeat what I have asked the others, I am particularly interest in the Rhondda valley platform extensions, and the Minister has announced some money towards those on the Treherbert line in the last week. However, are you confident of these timescales for delivering the enhancement schemes that have been listed by Network Rail? [492] Mr Nelson: We are as confident as we can be. The schemes that are listed in our red book up to 2008 will all be part-funded by Objective 1 money. On that basis, we have to have works contracts in place by December 2006, and we are certainly moving towards that. Our current targets for platform extensions are not detailed in the red book. Rhymney to Penarth will be in 2007, Maesteg will be in 2007, and Treherbert to Cardiff will be in 2008. In terms of priorities, we would all contend that it is a greater priority for the Treherbert line to go to six-car than it is for the Maesteg line to go to four-car. However, the reason for the timing is because of the works that are involved on the Treherbert line, particularly at Pontypridd station. It might have the longest platform in Wales, but, on the downside, it has an interesting problem to resolve on the up-platform, which will involve a possession of the railway, probably around Christmas 2007. [493] Leighton Andrews: Okay. That is helpful, but, to be clear, there is no difference between what is in the Network Rail document and what is in your plans? I want to be clear about that. [494] Mr Nelson: That is right. Those are the timescales that we have talked to Network Rail and to the Assembly about, and the three parties together agree that they are the most realistic timescales as we work through the development of these projects. They are still progressing to outline design, and we hope to have that process completed by the middle of this year. [495] Leighton Andrews: Under your current plan, you have put ‘winter 2008’ for the Rhondda valley platform extensions. So, by Christmas 2008, those extensions should have been completed, is that right? What does ‘winter’ mean? [496] Mr Nelson: ‘Winter 2008’ is more Network Rail’s terminology rather than mine. Some people might say that winter is January, while others would say that it is December. In view of the European dimension, we are talking

about the Treherbert line platforms being completed by April or May 2008, at the latest. [497] Leighton Andrews: That is earlier than Network Rail has said. [498] Mr Nelson: That depends what you class as ‘winter’. [499] Leighton Andrews: Network Rail says that it will be done by winter 2008, and you say that it will be done by April or May 2008. [500] Mr Nelson: I was classing ‘winter’ as January or February 2008. [501] Leighton Andrews: I am sorry to be pernickety, John, but I had originally read ‘winter 2008’ to mean the end of 2008. Mr Nelson is now saying that it will be the beginning of 2008, which is very good news, as far as I am concerned. [502] Mr Nelson: That is the programme that we are running with. [503] Janet Davies: I wish to ask you about your strategy with the adjoining regional transport consortia. Do you find that you are able to co-ordinate and work with your neighbours? To achieve something that is really integrated, you obviously have to work with the people on either side of you. I think that Mr Nelson mentioned the Greater Western franchise, the amount of money that is going into that and how we should be getting our fair share of it. What sort of role do you see for the Assembly and the Assembly Government in fighting to get that money? [504] Mr Nelson: On consortia, we have an excellent working relationship with the south-west integrated transport consortium, to the west of us, to the extent that, when the Greater Western mainline route utilisation strategy was being discussed with the Strategic Rail Authority around 12 months ago, we held joint meetings with the consortium and the Assembly to get our points across to the Strategic Rail Authority. Similarly, when the Department for Transport and the SRA were consulting on what should be within the Greater Western franchise, we again held very productive joint meetings with SWITCH and the Assembly. One of the matters that our board has asked us to progress in the next few months is the setting up of a working party with SWITCH to deal specifically with First Group in order to talk about the Greater Western franchise regularly. [505] On how the money that the DFT has promised to reinvest in the railways should come to Wales, councillor Williams is considering sending a letter to Andrew Davies—if he has not already sent it—following our board meeting a couple of weeks ago to highlight a few issues relating to the franchise and how we feel the Minister could take those up on our behalf, as Welsh people, in discussions with the Secretary of State. [506] Mr Williams: To follow on from that, we feel that we cannot afford to lose out. Charlie is right to say that we have met the other organisations, and I

think that they all agree that there needs to be closer co-operation between the four or five authorities. We are quite happy with that. [507] Janet Davies: You mentioned improving the state of the Severn tunnel. Is there any likelihood of getting money from the European cohesion funds to go with money from the franchise perhaps? It is a big strategic issue, is it not? It is not a minor project. [508] Mr Brierley: I must say that I do not have detailed knowledge of these funds, though I know that they are being discussed at the moment. We have recently commissioned consultants to give us some advice on innovative ways of funding what we are trying to do—and that is not just on the rail side; that is across the board. We will obviously look for advice on the sum of Objective 1, the cohesion funds and so on, and we will look at how we can take that forward. At the moment, I cannot answer your question. 12.20 p.m. [509] Janet Davies: It is not an Objective 1 area, but it supplies an Objective 1 area. [510] Mr Brierley: Some of it is, and will remain so, as I understand it. The comforting news is that there seems to be a suggestion that there will be more funds for regional improvements and perhaps for transport as well. However, I understand that that is all to be decided. [511] John Marek: Are there any further questions? I see that there are none. [512] You have a very well-presented set of documents, and I do not take anything away from them, but it might be useful for you to tell us for which schemes money has already been found—not that we would want to dismiss those schemes; I am sure that we would want to consider them and put them in our ordered list, but that would be helpful to the committee. It would also be particularly helpful if you were to itemise the different schemes. Could you also note the other schemes that you would like to happen, but for which you do not have the money, either because it is not in an Objective 1 area or for another reason. I think that the committee would be quite interested in that, to see whether we would like to put those schemes in our list. Could that be done, do you think? [513] Mr Brierley: I am sure that we can do that relatively quickly. [514] Rosemary Butler: Could we also add the number of people to the information, if we are to have a shopping list? One region may put on a scheme and we would have to compare the numbers of people using each one when the time comes. [515] John Marek: Yes, please include anything in support, such as the value of the scheme. We are not experts here; you are the experts. While I know where Bargoed and Caerphilly are, and I know that people get on and off, I do not really know the situation at 8 a.m. or whenever—that is by way of an example only. Any additional information along the lines—I am sorry about these metaphors—that Rosemary has suggested would be useful. [516] Leighton Andrews: I assume, on the basis of what has been said by

Network Rail, the Welsh Assembly Government and SEWTA, that there is some commitment to funding the schemes that are seen as priorities. The transport grant announcement certainly seemed to indicate money going in the direction of some of these last week. It is important to be clear about that, because I am sure that there would be a number of commuters in south-east Wales who would be unhappy to find this committee undermining plans that they have come to expect to be implemented. [517] John Marek: Precisely. [518] Mr Nelson: All of the schemes that are included in the red book are either currently being funded for implementation or have been funded for feasibility. Every single one of those schemes is being taken forward with Network Rail, or in the case of Ebbw Vale— [519] John Marek: If they have been funded for implementation, that is fine, but, with feasibility there is still a way to go. If there is any meaning in feasibility, it must be that it allows for the possibility of something not going ahead. [520] Mr Nelson: The ones that, at the moment, do not have funds for implementation— [521] John Marek: There is no need to do it now. [522] Mr Nelson: I can give it very quickly. [523] John Marek: Okay, but I think that it would be useful if you could send us a note on it. At the end of the day, we will have to have it before us as a committee to look at it. [524] Mr Williams: I can get you that information, without a doubt. [525] John Marek: Thank you very much. [526] That leaves me to say that I am very pleased that you have come, and I hope that, as a result of your appearance before us, our report will be that much better. I am sure that it will be. [527] Before I close the meeting, we have a quick bit of housekeeping to do. It is all right, we are ahead of time; it is only 12.24 p.m.. Shall we arrange a date for our next meeting? Mr clerk, what is your advice on all of this? I am sorry, you did show me but I have forgotten. [528] Mr Reading: Members have very kindly replied to my e-mail to give their availability. Some are available on the seventh, some on the eight—as you would predict—and some on both. One thing that I would point out, which I had not realised when I sent the e-mail, is that there is a meeting of the Panel of Chairs on the evening of 7 March, which Rosemary might have to go to. [529] Rosemary Butler: Yes, I will have to go and so will Janet Davies. [530] Mr Reading: Therefore, at least two committee members will be unavailable. [531] John Marek: I am available on both dates, so which one will give us the best

attendance? [532] Mr Reading: The best attendance would be on 8 March. [533] John Marek: I am sorry about that situation for some Members. [534] Janet Davies: I do not think that I can do either date; I will have a look. [535] John Marek: There is a subsequent meeting to that one. I think that Professor Cole is coming on 8 March. [536] Mr Reading: Professor Cole has offered to come. [537] John Marek: He is a well known academic and I think that his input could be useful. Should we invite Professor Cole? I do not see any objections to that. I think that we will have a little time on that day to have a private meeting to decide how we go forwards. We should probably allow 20 minutes on the agenda for that. Is there anything else that we ought to be doing? [538] Lisa Francis: May I confirm that the meeting scheduled for 8 March is to take place after Plenary? [539] John Marek: Yes. Shall we say 15 minutes after Plenary has finished, in a committee room somewhere, or would you prefer 30 minutes after Plenary? I see that you would prefer 15 minutes after Plenary. We will therefore do that in a committee room. Is there any other business? I see that there is not. Therefore, that brings this meeting to a close.

Daeth y cyfarfod i ben am 12.26 p.m. The meeting ended at 12.26 p.m.

Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru Y Pwyllgor ar Seilwaith y Rheilffyrdd a Gwella

Gwasanaethau i Deithwyr

The National Assembly for Wales The Committee on Rail Infrastructure and

Improved Passenger Services

Dydd Mercher, 8 Mawrth 2006

Wednesday, 8 March 2006

Cynnwys Contents

Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau, Dirprwyon a Datgan Buddiannau Introduction, Apologies, Substitutions and Declarations of Interest .......................... 77 Cofnodion y Cyfarfod Blaenorol a Materion yn Codi Minutes of the Previous Meeting and Matters Arising............................................... 77 Canolfan Ymchwil Trafnidiaeth Cymru, Prifysgol Morgannwg Wales Transport Research Centre, the University of Glamorgan ............................. 78

Cofnodir y trafodion hyn yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir cyfieithiad Saesneg o gyfraniadau yn y Gymraeg. Mae hon yn fersiwn ddrafft o’r cofnod. Cyhoeddir fersiwn derfynol ymhen pum diwrnod

gwaith.

These proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, an English translation of Welsh speeches is included. This is a draft version of the record. The final version will be

published within five working days.

Aelodau o’r Cynulliad yn bresennol: John Marek (Cadeirydd), Leighton Andrews, Eleanor Burnham, Rosemary Butler, Janet Davies, Lisa Francis, Carl Sargeant. Gwasanaeth Pwyllgor: Chris Reading, Clerc; Sarah Bartlett, Dirprwy Glerc. Eraill yn bresennol: Yr Athro Stuart Cole, Cyfarwyddwr Canolfan Ymchwil Trafnidiaeth Cymru, Prifysgol Morgannwg. Assembly Members in attendance: John Marek (Chair), Leighton Andrews, Eleanor Burnham, Rosemary Butler, Janet Davies, Lisa Francis, Carl Sargeant. Committee Service: Chris Reading, Clerk; Sarah Bartlett, Deputy Clerk. Others in attendance: Professor Stuart Cole, Director of the Wales Transport Research Centre, University of Glamorgan.

Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 5.48 p.m. The meeting began at 5.48 p.m.

Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau, Dirprwyon a Datgan Buddiannau

Introduction, Apologies, Substitutions and Declarations of Interest

[1] John Marek: I welcome everyone to this committee. I particularly welcome Stuart Cole, but I will do so more fully later, when we come to the item upon which he will address us. I ask everyone to please switch off mobile phones and BlackBerrys completely, and not just switch them to silent mode, because that still interferes with the electronics. In an emergency, ushers will direct everyone to the nearest safe exit. I have not received any apologies. Does anyone wish to make a declaration of interest under Standing Order No. 4.6? Now is the time to do that. [2] Eleanor Burnham: If we have made a declaration before, we do not need to make it again. Is that so? [3] John Marek: No, we do not. [4] I ask Members to confirm that they are content for item 4 to be taken in private session under Standing Order No. 8.24, on the grounds that the committee is deliberating on the conclusions or recommendations of a report. Are you content with that? I see that you are. 5.49 p.m.

Cofnodion y Cyfarfod Blaenorol a Materion yn Codi Minutes of the Previous Meeting and Matters Arising

[5] John Marek: Have the minutes been agreed out of committee? [6] Mr Reading: They have been circulated, but we have not had any comments. [7] John Marek: So, they have been circulated, and the clerk has had no

comments. The word that I have here is to ratify the minutes as an accurate record. Can I take it that they are accurate? I see that Members agree. [8] Are there any matters arising that Members wish to raise? I see that there are none. In that case, please note the actions outstanding that the clerk has nicely presented to us, and we will see what happens in due course. Cadarnhawyd cofnodion y cyfarfod blaenorol. The minutes of the previous meeting were ratified. 5.50 p.m.

Canolfan Ymchwil Trafnidiaeth Cymru, Prifysgol Morgannwg Wales Transport Research Centre, the University of Glamorgan

[9] John Marek: I welcome Professor Stuart Cole, who is the director of the Wales Transport Research Centre at the University of Glamorgan. We have all read your paper, Stuart, and I thank you very much for coming here to present your evidence. I will just say that this is not a scrutiny committee, which is why, before we started the committee, I changed a few things around so that you were not at one end of the table while the rest of us were at the other. This is a collaborative effort. We want to get a comprehensive and achievable list—and I do not know yet, but we may decide to order that list—of railway infrastructure improvements that could be made in Wales. We also want a list of any passenger service improvements. [10] Leighton Andrews: I hear what you say, John, but I would not want to state, at this stage, that there is necessarily any commitment to an agreed report. [11] John Marek: No. I said that we could make a report. We are all aware of the procedures and if, in due course, you want to propose anything, Leighton, which no doubt you will, you will have my full support in being able to do so. [12] As I said, this is a collaborative effort. We have been charged by the National Assembly to present this list. That is certainly what I will try to do. So, the time is yours, Stuart. [13] Professor Cole: Diolch yn fawr iawn, Gadeirydd.

Professor Cole: Thank you very much, Chair.

[14] Thank you also to the committee for the opportunity to present what evidence I might be able to today, and particularly for agreeing to hold this individual session, because I will be unable to come to your main session in a week’s time as I will be in Poland. [15] I will quickly summarise, within a minute, what I have said in the paper. I have tried to put the railways in the context of an integrated transport policy. I have set priorities for improvements. This is a framework, which the other papers that I read in the last session had not considered. I felt it useful for the committee to have a formal framework within which you might choose to select your criteria and your priorities when you come to deliberate the evidence, which you have. I included criteria in there for setting priorities; it is an integrated approach. There are assessment criteria for passenger service upgrades. That is the essence of the infrastructure and the passenger service improvement issue. [16] I have taken those criteria from my recent book, which I shall invariably

mention, Applied Transport Economics. It brings out a set of fairly straightforward criteria, such as optimising existing capacity and making best use of that, having longer trains, modifying carriage layout to get the increased capacity, changing crowding standards, changing the fare level and the structure of fares, and increasing capacity. So, to get that, you have a combination of infrastructure upgrades. That means that you can increase the frequencies and speeds of trains, have major interchange stations perhaps en route—and exactly where those interchange stations might be might be one area to examine—and refurbish what is called ‘cascaded stock’. Much of the stock that has recently arrived in Wales is older, which is what cascaded stock is, although we have newish trains on the north Wales mainline and will soon have them on the Carmarthen-to-Manchester service. [17] What I have tried to set out in the paper is slightly different from the lists of some of the earlier evidence presented to you, because many of those lists had many similarities and it seemed that perhaps I could try to give some kind of framework within which those lists might be judged. There is, in the paper, a more detailed set of criteria, should Members wish to look at those. However, I have tried to break that down so that there is a fairly straightforward approach to how some of the ideas might be developed. Of course, there is a whole set of other criteria that Members might like to consider. In terms of common sense, if there were some ideas that the committee was intent on putting forward, then dovetailing those into any work being done by Network Rail would clearly make sense in terms of timing. [18] The other issue to think about is peak-period demand, which I know from listening to the evidence at the earlier committee meeting was very much in evidence. It was very much a discussion of the fact that there are problems in the mornings and evenings on the Cardiff/Newport metro services, and Valleys lines services, and I think that those problems need to be looked at in the context of the overall picture of the railways. That is a serious problem, but there are also other issues to do with the railways. If there is limited funding, the priority that you might wish to set will take that into account. So, it is not just the problem of overcrowding on Valleys lines into Cardiff in the morning that is at issue here. [19] There is a series of alternatives to the railway. I am not for a moment suggesting any railway closures; I am just saying that there may be alternatives to building new railways in some circumstances. [20] We must also keep in mind the fact that the growth rates on Wales’s railways have been quite extraordinary over the past five or six years. We have seen growth rates of 10 per cent per annum, so, over the next few years, we will, effectively, have doubled the number of people travelling by train in Wales. Between 2000 and 2006, we will have doubled that number. [21] In addition, rather than pick on particular station schemes, which were mentioned in much of the other evidence that you had—although I am more than happy to discuss them, Chairman—I have tried to identify routes rather than stations, to see where the key routes, the big flows, and the population densities are. I have taken more of a big-picture view perhaps, but I am trying to help the committee to determine where it might see the priorities as lying. [22] John Marek: Thank you very much. If you will take questions, the first one is from me. You have a table in part 4, under ‘Routes/Schemes—Suggested Priorities’, and then, later on, under point 5, you have a table of alternative expenditure levels. First, is the table that you have in part 4 something that you recommend for us to start with as a structural base from which to order the schemes that are put before

us? [23] Professor Cole: On what page is this table, Chairman? [24] John Marek: It is on page 8 and has the headings ‘Priority’, ‘Route’ and ‘Actual or Potential Traffic Volumes’. Your order is ‘High, High, High, Med, Med (in Wales), Low, Low, Low’, with Heart of Wales on the bottom and metro services at the top. [25] Professor Cole: In that table, I have tried to set out the routes in order of the criteria, which I mentioned a moment ago—actual volumes of traffic, potential volumes of traffic, sizes of populations, passenger flows on both rail and road where there is a high potential attraction of people onto the railway. So, yes, I am suggesting that those are the routes that would get a funding priority on the basis of that set of criteria. [26] John Marek: What is the ‘metro’? Is it the Valley lines? [27] Professor Cole: It is Cardiff. I try to avoid Cardiff Valleys, because there is the Newport issue in there with the development of the Ebbw Vale line and so forth. So, I have called that whole set of services ‘metro’—Newport, Cardiff and the Valleys, down to Barry and up to Ebbw Vale. [28] John Marek: Would you include in ‘metro’, for example, the north-east conurbation and the Wrexham-Bidston line? [29] Professor Cole: No. I was specifically talking about Cardiff-Newport. [30] John Marek: Just Cardiff. That is okay. Fine. Thank you. [31] Rosemary Butler: On that, does NWML stand for the north-west metro link? [32] Eleanor Burnham: It is main line. [33] Rosemary Butler: It stands for main line rather than metro link. Okay. [34] John Marek: NWML and SWML are the north Wales main line and the south Wales main line. [35] Rosemary Butler: I am sorry. I just thought that ML might have stood for ‘metro link’. Thank you. [36] John Marek: We will take questions from Eleanor, Janet, Lisa and then Leighton. Off you go. 6.00 p.m. [37] Eleanor Burnham: My first question was on that figure. Why have you not taken Flintshire into that? I was on the Economic Development and Transport Committee a few weeks ago and the figures for commuting, morning and night, seemed to be as high in Flintshire and that area of north-east Wales as they are in this area. [38] Professor Cole: Yes, and that is what the north Wales main line implies—any of the stations on the north Wales main line, between Bangor and Chester, will

be included in that. [39] Eleanor Burnham: I beg your pardon. [40] John Marek: Just to be clear on that, because we want to avoid being parochial and we must make that clear, where would you put the Wrexham-Bidston line, for example? [41] Professor Cole: I think that the Wrexham-Bidston line has to be considered separately because its function is attempting to change. It was a line that was due for closure not so long ago, as you know, Chairman, and I think that it is now being looked at in a new light. I have not put it in here for that reason. There are opportunities on that line that should be considered separately to the general picture. [42] Eleanor Burnham: Why do you say that, because with the Liverpool metro going native and changing its structure, it seems to me that we are opening up huge possibilities that could take in the conurbation of Chester and Wrexham? Reopening Rosset station would fit in nicely, with a park and ride to the north to take in all of that area or to the south into Wrexham. Or am I being parochial? [43] Professor Cole: If you are looking at the Wrexham-Bidston line as a commuter line, which takes in parts of the Wirral as well as the part in Wales, you have to start to look at issues such as having an interchange station between the north Wales main line and the Wrexham-Bidston line, at Shotton, for example. It would be somewhere where the lines cross, of course. The reason that I did not put it in was because I think that it is new and developing and it has a lot of potential, but we do not really know enough about what it can do yet, and it will be an expensive development, whatever you do, if you electrified it, for example. [44] John Marek: Do you have any views on building a curve between the north Wales main line and the Wrexham-Bidston line at Shotton? [45] Professor Cole: I have heard you mention this on previous occasions, Chairman. It has advantages in terms of the journey time between Bangor and Cardiff, for example, on the north-south services. One of the issues is that if you take out Chester, although it is a delaying factor on that line in terms of the overall journey, it is an important destination for people in north Wales and an important source of revenue for Arriva Trains, which is running the service. Therefore, putting a curve in would be tempting, to exclude Chester. The secret to improving journey times on the services between north and south Wales is increasing line speeds rather than cutting out somewhere such as Chester. [46] Eleanor Burnham: I have just a couple of questions. Looking again at the same figure, I am surprised to see that you have designated the north-south service as ‘medium’, given the amount of people who are travelling out of necessity on Assembly business from north to south daily. Given that potential, could you ever envisage having a double decker, for instance, on that line rather than a longer train? You cannot have longer trains because the platforms are not big enough. [47] Professor Cole: There is a technical reason for not having double-decker trains, which is that the bridges are too low for them. I know the type that you mean: the French trains. We do not have the loading gauge that they have in France to take that. [48] In terms of your question about the north-south service being in my ‘medium’

category, it is one of those cases of having to stop somewhere. They can all be set as ‘high’ in different sets of criteria, but the criteria that I chose were actual, current and potential usage, then the three biggies are the Valleys lines/Cardiff/metro/Newport, the south Wales main line and the north Wales main line, and then you get onto the next one. [49] John Marek: Your view is valuable on that. [50] Eleanor Burnham: The other question was about the security of stations and priorities. Do you have a view on how we get around that in view of the fact that we perhaps do not have the money that we would like? [51] Professor Cole: Interestingly, the traffic research centre for Wales is about to undertake a study on this issue for Arriva Trains. Arriva Trains has commissioned a study to look at the impact of introducing an extra 21 community police officers onto the network. Associated with that are the various investments that have already been made in terms of CCTV and improved lighting. Our task is to see whether people think that this is a good idea and what their perception of personal security is as a result of putting these additional officers in. I think that we will find that a combination of factors, such as CCTV, plus very good lighting, are what will start to dissuade the ne’er-do-wells who hang around some of our stations.

[52] Eleanor Burnham: But security would be about disability— [53] John Marek: I will jump in very quickly, if I may. What about extra staffing—where do you place that? Do you place these things higher than extra staff? [54] Professor Cole: The staffing issue depends on what you are trying to achieve and over what period of the day. There is a significant cost implication—by staffing, I assume that you mean ticketing staff, for example, on stations. There is that issue, because people then have an information source, particularly if there is no electronic information source. My local station, which is Llandaff North station in north Cardiff, has a large movement of people but no electronic information and there is a ticket office that is open for a number of hours, in the morning and evening peak hours. To what extent that kind of presence relates to personal security is a different question from to what extent it provides a service to the travelling public. The ticket collector is not the person whom we are looking at to provide personal security reinforcement to the travelling public. That is the role of the security/police service, which is what the study is about. There are two different issues here. [55] Eleanor Burnham: Having said that, I have an example from Wrexham station last year. It was the middle of the day, and the ticket guy was having to do 40 things at once, including seeing to someone who was having an emergency, and helping a disabled person to get on the train. That is bad enough during the day, but if you are talking about accessibility and security for disabled people, for instance, they cannot possibly use the railways, because if staff are not on duty later on, they cannot use the lifts and so on, so they cannot get on the train. There was a stupid story in our paper that disabled people had to go to Chester to come back to Wrexham to get on the right side of the platform to get off the train without having to use the lift, which makes nonsense of the arrangement. Are you concerned and do you have any views about how we can move forward on those kinds of issues? [56] Professor Cole: Again, it depends on what and where you want your priorities to be. It is a sad situation that the railway has not received sufficient investment over the years in a whole range of things. So, you must decide whether

you put particularly small stations into a category where facilities for people who have movement difficulties are poor. I can speak from personal experience of taking my elderly father by train, and it is very difficult for people who have difficulty walking to make journeys by train. On the bus side, moves have been made to try to deal with this issue, but it is an expensive proposal if you try to do it on every station. So, perhaps it is again a matter of prioritising those key stations where you might want to do it, and maybe the apocryphal tale that you gave, Eleanor, is one which is more common than perhaps we think it is, but it is a matter of deciding where the money should go. Whatever happens, there is only a limited pot of money from which to determine what the expenditure should be.

6.10 p.m. [57] Janet Davies: First of all, Professor Cole, thank you for the paper. It is beginning to address some of the questions that we must look. Turning to the table on page 8, I am not quite sure what criteria enabled you to arrive at these figures. I am concerned, looking at the situation on the Valleys lines going north and south, and the different needs of people on the Heart of Wales or the Cambrian, about how you arrive at these traffic volumes of high, medium and low. Are social factors included in what you are talking about here? What weighting is given to different elements? This is crucial. It may be that you have got it right, but I have some concerns in that I do not feel convinced that I have seen evidence that would enable me to say, ‘This one should be higher or that one should be a lower priority’, and that is the crunch of what this committee is supposed to be about. [58] On page 11, you talk about the implications for rail freight if we increase the passenger trains. Clearly, getting freight, particularly long-distance freight, off the roads and on to rail is important. So, how will we deal with that? We have a situation with the moving block signalling being tried out on the Cambrian line in the next few years; does that have the potential to ensure that the trains run closer together? If you stand in Brussels Central Station, you see the darned things going through every two minutes. We cannot do that in this country: we have to have a much longer time between trains. [59] Finally, this all comes back to money—well, not all of it, as we can do some things for a reasonable cost, but to make a real difference, as you say in another table, demands an awful lot more money. Something that worries me is the amount of subsidy that we have to put in. Can you tell me whether the more passengers you get, the more subsidies you will have to be put in? In other words, are passengers not self-supporting? Every time we get 100 more passengers, will it cost the Assembly or somebody else that much more? That is a huge issue because, if that is the case, we are really up against it when we are trying to increase usage of the lines. [60] Professor Cole: Taking the first point, on the criteria for setting the priorities in the table on page 8, the key priorities are those that I have listed on page 6. I have taken the economist approach. Whether that was the right approach to take or not is a matter for you to judge. I tried to come up with some kind of formal layout or framework by which particular routes could be judged. Very often, we can look at individual stations, and that is what the South East Wales Transport Alliance rail strategy does, and the listings that the committee received from the Assembly Government do. I do not particularly differ from those; they are similar in that similar stations have been picked and so on. [61] I have tried to take those particular routes and apply to them the criteria set

out on page 6, which were the ones that I mentioned earlier. That is, optimising existing capacity, places where running longer trains would make a difference, modifying the layout of carriages, changing the crowding standards, changes to fares to try to shift demand from the peak to the off-peak if that is possible—however, there is a secondary issue, which I might mention in a moment—and, lastly, how we increase capacity. That is all based on a whole series of potential demand patterns and existing demand patterns and using those criteria to solve the routes on which the demand figures are highest. That is really what I have done—it is a combination of actual and potential traffic, plus the range of options that could be adopted on those lines. [62] Some lines, such as the Heart of Wales, have very low numbers of passengers and the issue is probably more to do with marketing and promoting that line as a tourist attraction rather than changing the service, particularly, because most people on that line, apart from the commuters into Shrewsbury—and possibly commuters into Llanelli and Swansea in the mornings, but in the main those going to Shrewsbury in the mornings and coming back in the evenings—have plenty of time and enjoy the fact that the train does not go through at 150 mph, but is a nice, stopping train, and that they can get off to go and look around Llandrindod Wells, perhaps, and then get back on the next train. It is that kind of experience that people are looking for there. So, we are not looking for a massive investment there; it is about trying to get more people to make that kind of trip. [63] I will answer the third question first, if I may, because I think that it is linked to that. Janet’s third question was about money and subsidy: if you had more passengers, would it mean more subsidy? More passengers on the Heart of Wales line would not mean more subsidy; if anything, it might mean less, provided that you have the capacity. As we have had more passengers on the Valleys lines, that is where we start to have to acquire new trains. The Assembly has put £50 million into leasing trains. The discussion going on now is about buying new trains, which is probably the more sensible way of doing it. That was not available to the Assembly when the discussions on this franchise were being put about, as the Strategic Rail Authority was looking after the franchise and, in my view, it did not look after us as well as it should have. The Assembly would have had the opportunity then to spend that £50 million—which it subsequently spent to try to meet the increased demand for trains—on brand-new trains that it would own permanently, not trains that it would lease for 10 years. That was no fault of the Assembly or Assembly Government; it was just the situation that we were faced with at that time. [64] So, in the case of Valleys lines, as the number of passengers has increased, so the number of train units and carriages that have had to be leased has gone up and that has cost more money as a result. There is also an issue in terms of revenue collection on Valleys lines. In some cases that is due to the passengers; in some cases it is to do with the impracticality of collecting fares on overcrowded trains. That, again, is being addressed by Arriva and I am happy to say that Arriva has commissioned us to do a study on what it likes to call ‘ticketless passengers’, that is, passengers who do not have tickets for whatever reason—it is not necessarily about fare evasion, as some will have not paid their fares because it has not been possible for them to do so. That is a serious issue on Valleys lines, in particular. The revenue is not being collected there and, therefore, the subsidy is being affected by that. Hence the claim by, I think, the SRA in evidence to this committee and the committee of the House of Commons that Valleys lines are the most highly subsidised lines, per passenger, in Britain. Much of this is to do with that, but there are two quite different circumstances.

[65] Similarly, increasing passengers during off-peak periods must be an objective that the railways go for, because there is plenty of capacity in off-peak periods. One of the issues that faces First Great Western in terms of matching up to the financial targets that it has now agreed with the Government, is to increase off-peak travel, and Arriva clearly has to strive for that. It is leisure travel in the main, but there may be an opportunity to get some business travel from road onto the railway. If that is during the off-peak period, there is capacity there and it does not require investment in the infrastructure and investment in new trains, then there is no need for further subsidy. It is when you start to say, ‘I want faster trains; I want trains that have more capacity because they are overcrowded’, that, potentially, the subsidy goes up, because there may not be any more revenue; all you are doing is reducing overcrowding on the trains, and not necessarily generating more revenue as such. 6.20 p.m. [66] Moving block signalling is the other issue that follows on from that. The desire to make trains go faster is one of the objectives that, in my view, we should strive for in order to reduce journey times, for example, from Bangor to Cardiff. I remember evidence from Chris Green, who is now a director of Network Rail, that the cost of increasing journey times on the Bangor to Cardiff service by increasing line speeds was somewhere in the region of £30 million to £50 million. That sounds like an awful lot of money, but you have that investment for the next 35 years. [67] John Marek: I am sure that they have done some of that. [68] Professor Cole: They have done on the north Wales main line, yes. [69] Technical issues such as moving block signalling can make a difference to journey times and speed. However, there are implications for the freight railway. Every time that we decide that we want more passenger trains on the railway, fewer paths are available for freight trains. Every time that we increase the speed of passenger trains on the existing railway, we have to start either having moving block signalling or we have to extend the length of the signal block, that is, the distance between one signal and another. That means that there are fewer paths available for freight trains, particularly during the day. [70] The final point, I think, that Janet made, was about the central station in Brussels. It is possible to move trains through quite rapidly at the central station in Brussels; it is also possible to do that now at Cardiff Central station, because of the new signalling system there; you can get three trains onto a platform, for example. [71] Did I cover your issues? [72] Janet Davies: Yes, except that in Brussels the trains go through without having three trains to a platform. [73] Lisa Francis: I refer you back to page 6, Professor Cole. You say that capacity could be increased through having larger trains, and you also talk about the importance of a higher service frequency, and that one way of doing that might be through infrastructure upgrade. Has any audit of potential infrastructure upgrade been undertaken in Wales? If not, how could that best be undertaken? It is important for relieving overcrowding problems and frequency issues. It is difficult to know whether a line is more of a tourist line, or whether it is a commuter line; it is rather like falling rolls in schools—if you

do not provide a service, people do not use it. It is difficult to judge growth potential in that respect. That is the first question. [74] Secondly, you talk about improving one large interchange station. Could you give an example of one that would fall into that category, and give us more of a visual idea of how that would work? [75] I am fascinated by your paragraph about trams and bus ways—that is worth considering. Perhaps it is not for this committee to consider. However, I recently read a report about how disused railway lines in Cambridgeshire had been used as bus ways. Is there any potential for that in Wales? I had thought about the Conwy valley line, say from Blaenau Ffestiniog to Trawsfynydd, which, I understand, is disused. It is quite a straight piece of track, I would think, from just that particular section. What about the potential there? [76] On staff on trains, and in railway stations, there are issues about people using a service if they have mobility problems or if they are older, and platform heights, and so on. Arriva says that it carries a moveable set of steps, but I understand that passengers have to alert the authorities beforehand if they intend to make a journey and they need to use those steps. It is an awful lot of hoops to jump through—you should just be able to turn up at a station and find that staff could perhaps be more service-orientated and help out with that. In surgeries, people have said to me that, because they failed to notify the authorities of their need to use the steps on the train, they could not make their journey, which is a dreadful pity. [77] On rail freight, I know that timber trials have been undertaken on the Cambrian line, which were quite successful. Can you give us any idea as to which lines in Wales would lend themselves particularly well to freight? I know that the problem with freight is that you need a lot of it to make any sense, and that it all has to start and end up in the same place. However, I just wondered what your thoughts are on that. [78] Professor Cole: I will take those one by one. On the audit of infrastructure upgrades, there have been a number of examinations of what has been done and what could be done. Network Rail has carried out its own examination of various parts of the network in Wales. The route utilisation strategy is probably the most comprehensive of those currently being carried out. A national route utilisation strategy for Wales will begin its consultation in January next year, and will be completed by spring 2008. That will examine all of the train routes in Wales. The Assembly Government is about to carry out a rail assessment plan study to examine the potential for the railway, what aspects of infrastructure and service exist at the moment, and which have potential for development. That is currently in hand by the Assembly Government. You will have seen the evidence from the Assembly Government; I believe that the committee has a copy of the letter from Robin Shaw to the Strategic Rail Authority in May last year. That replied to the initial ideas of Network Rail in terms of what the Assembly Government was looking for. It was looking at issues such as maximising the existing use of capacity on lines like the Great Western main line. Most of these investments, as I am sure that the committee is aware, are not instant investments. Investment in the railways can take up to 10 years to achieve, simply because of the planning process, the design process and the process of finding the engineers, who, sadly, are not as much in evidence as

they were 20 years ago, as you know from your experience on the railways, Chairman. [79] The draft route utilisation strategy has elicited comments from the Assembly Government to the effect that it does not want to see any significant reductions on the Great Western main line. It wants to see improved service to south-west Wales, particularly direct services from Paddington to south-west Wales. It is looking at the demand for rail services in south-east Wales, and to ensure that the improvement in those services is consistent with the increase in demand and with the increase in wealth in south-east Wales. This particular commentary was about the original route utilisation strategy for the Great Western main line, which was the one that Network Rail initially produced for Wales. The new route utilisation strategy is for the whole of Wales, so we will get a comprehensive picture. That in itself is a move that we should welcome, because it is now not looking at just particular main lines that emanate from London. Our traditional network is London-centric, wherever you happen to be on the mainland of Great Britain, and Wales is no exception to that. What we now have, and Network Rail has fortunately taken this on board, is the opportunity to look at the whole of the network, not just in terms of how Wales links into England, but also how Wales links to other parts of Wales. Both are important, of course. 6.30 p.m. [80] I apologise to those Members from north Wales that what I am about to say is largely about south Wales, but that was the commentary on the south Wales route utilisation strategy. The developments that the Assembly Government has already put into things such as the Vale of Glamorgan line and the Ebbw Vale line, which is now being rebuilt, are part of that issue. It is not just the Great Western main line that we are talking about, we are talking about the commuter lines and the branch lines into the main line, as well. We are also talking about the stations along those lines, so it is not just the track, the rail speed and capacity that we are talking about, but also the kind of stations. [81] This may, in itself, answer the fifth point that Lisa made about mobility and the position at stations where the train is not flat against the platform. Much of it is to do with the fact that a lot of the stations in Wales were built in the 1850s and, therefore, even the access and egress to the stations are not particularly friendly towards people with mobility problems, because, in those days, it was not something that people thought about terribly much. We are now running trains that were built between 1970 and 2000, and maybe we should say that those trains should have been built to fit the platforms, but often the platforms were built by different companies, at different heights, over 100 years ago. It would not be possible to try to match those trains to each of those platforms. [82] Your second point, I think, was one large interchange station, Lisa— [83] John Marek: Stuart, we need to speed up, if we can. I am not going to constrain anyone, but some Members want to catch the 7.20 up north, and so we have to get on with it. However, I do not want to cramp your style in any way. This is a friendly committee. [84] Professor Cole: If I throw in some names of interchange stations, then Members can either agree or disagree with me. Clearly, Cardiff is a major interchange station, Shrewsbury, though it is in England, is a major interchange station, and places like Chester could be major interchange stations for us, or

Carmarthen, if the decision is made that Carmarthen is to be a feeder station, where mainline trains go to Carmarthen and shuttle trains come in from Pembrokeshire. We have an argument with Pembrokeshire County Council, but that is one option for that kind of interchange train station. There are different kinds of stations. Cardiff is clearly a big interchange station, with mainline commuter and local services. Shrewsbury is an important station for us, because it links north Wales with south Wales, links us into Chester and it also links to Aberystwyth. The shape of our network is in a reverse E, if you like. [85] John Marek: You can come in briefly on that point, Eleanor. [86] Eleanor Burnham: I just wanted to ask why is Wrexham not— [87] Leighton Andrews: What about south Wales Members? [88] Eleanor Burnham: He has been talking about south Wales, he apologised for not talking about north Wales. [89] John Marek: Eleanor, do not get distracted by people who want to make you miss your train. [90] Eleanor Burnham: Why was Wrexham not one of the stations that you named? [91] Professor Cole: Wrexham is a through station; only one line goes through Wrexham. Interchange stations, by implication, have more than that—Bidston could be an interchange station, or the point where the Wrexham-Bidston line crosses the north Wales main line. [92] John Marek: Have you finished answering Lisa’s points? [93] Professor Cole: No, she had two other points. One was on trams, and I agree entirely, I think that trams are a brilliant idea, although not too many people agree with me, because they are, in the words of the Minister, very expensive to build in the first place. However, it seems to me that there are opportunities to examine or re-examine the light-rail option in Cardiff again. [94] On bus ways on the Conwy valley line, that particular line is a difficult one. I have no doubt that there are opportunities for some disused parts, and I guess that you are talking about the disused part from Blaenau to Trawsfynydd. One assumes that Trawsfynydd will not be used again for its existing purpose, and maybe there are opportunities there to either have cycle ways or bus ways. I would not look towards buses replacing trains where there are existing operations, and, certainly, on the rest of the Conwy valley line, the desire or the plan to move large quantities of slate waste along that line is an admirable one. Clearly, the funding for that has to be found, which is another freight issue. [95] John Marek: Are you happy with that, Lisa? [96] Lisa Francis: I was aware of the Conwy valley slate freight project, but do

you have any other ideas of where freight could be used in Wales or have you been approached about that? [97] On the bus way idea, I just used the Blaenau Ffestiniog to Trawsfynydd line as an example because the forest is there, along with the mountain biking centre and so on, which I thought could link into tourism. Are there any other stretches of disused lines that might lend themselves to a bus way? [98] John Marek: Perhaps you could let that clerk know. That would be useful. [99] Leighton Andrews: I want to follow up one or two of the points that Janet Davies made. I am glad that you touched on revenue collection, which I have taken up myself with Arriva, and I think that it has some measures in place to look at that. However, trying to work out rail subsidies and what lines and stations are subsidised is very difficult. In every conversation that I have been in, including in the Economic Development and Transport Committee, I have tried to narrow this down to get a clear answer, and I keep being told that the train companies themselves, even in their franchise applications, find it very difficult to break down subsidies on the basis of lines or stations. Is that not the case? [100] My second question is on the prioritisation of routes. I am glad you clarified that the Metro includes the Valleys lines, as that was not initially clear from the table. In your report, you say that there have been many ways of looking at priorities. You referred to the evidence from the train companies, the Assembly Government’s work, SEWTA’s work and so on, but at the end of the day, in terms of the table on page 8, you have proposed a ranking process, which is fair enough, but it seems to me that whatever judgment is made at the end of the day, it will be a political judgment. [101] The reality is that we can sit around this table and assess whatever criteria we like and look at the rankings that have been made by bodies such as the Assembly Government or SEWTA, but trying to balance judgments—which, as Janet said earlier, may effectively involve a whole series of different social questions and so on—is a difficult set of choices. There is nothing simple about this process is there? So, you have gone for a particular prioritisation, and I might welcome that if it means that the Valleys lines are at the front of the queue, but that may cause problems for colleagues in other parts of Wales. It seems to be very hard to get a process unless you are looking to make very clear judgments about passenger utilisation and about, ultimately, quite crude utilitarian judgments about the use of subsidies. [102] Professor Cole: I agree entirely that the decision at the end of the day—and I make that point in the report somewhere—will be a political one. I judged the eight primary routes, and I mentioned earlier why I excluded the Wrexham-Bidston. I tried to divide Wales into those eight routes. The approach that I took was one of economic benefits. Clearly, you can build on top of that issues relating to a greater emphasis on environmental factors and social inclusion, which would be quite justified. However, at the end of the day, the decision has to be made by the National Assembly for Wales or by Ministers on where they would like to see the money go. That is the decision that has to be made, and it is often a difficult one. So, I would not dispute that at all. The democratically elected Government has to decide how to spend public money. [103] Therefore, I drew on years of experience of advising public bodies in putting forward a formal structure based on a set of formal criteria, but the ultimate decision must lie with you, the politicians, in terms of spending priorities in any area.

6.40 p.m. [104] Returning to revenue collection, there is an issue in relation to Valley lines, which I explained earlier. I saw your report some weeks ago on Valley lines, which I found very interesting. That revenue collection issue is one that it is trying to deal with, and it is very much a matter of the company’s staff and the public working together. [105] In terms of the calculation of rail subsidies, you put your finger on the key issue of trying to identify how this money is spread around. Before we had the kind of franchise structure that we have now, we tried once to identify how much subsidy was coming to Wales, let alone to particular routes. That was seven or eight years ago. Denzil Jones, who was the head of policy at the Assembly Government at the time—or it was the Welsh Office then—the SRA and I separately tried to work out what it was. We came up with more or less the same figures, as I recall, which was just under £100 million, based on factors such as passenger numbers, passenger kilometres, and kilometres of railway distances. [106] When money is being allocated to a franchise that partly runs in England and partly runs in Wales, it is difficult to split that up, even within a route. It is possible to do it; it is not an impossible task. If Arriva has said that it cannot calculate it, that is not quite what it means. I think that you said ‘difficult to calculate’, Leighton. It is difficult to calculate, because you have to try to work out which tickets are going where, which passengers are going where, and whether there are particular costs on a particular length of railway. Railway bridges and tunnels, for example, are a lot more expensive to run than railways on open land. Therefore, it is a difficult process to try to deal with. [107] We have also had difficulties in terms of certain aspects of the railway. Trying to allocate labour costs is not that difficult. Even trying to allocate train operational costs is not that difficult. You can do it on a mileage basis and you can split up the costs of maintenance and drivers’ time. [108] The difficulty, I think, comes with infrastructure, where first, you have a separate company, and, secondly, as I said, you have the different kinds of infrastructure that cost different amounts. Also, you have the legacy of Railtrack, whereby the basis on which the railway was managed and the asset register disappeared effectively. Railtrack handed out the asset register to the contractors, whereas a company such as Glas Cymru, which has exactly the same kind of situation, keeps its asset register very much within its own control. Every piece of piping, every reservoir and every other asset that it has is closely monitored by its engineers, because they hold the asset register. That asset register, now having to be rebuilt by Network Rail, will eventually be able to tell us exactly what costs what and where. Glas Cymru can tell you exactly what every bit of piping costs to operate. We cannot do that in relation to the railways. In railway terms, the infrastructure is around 60 per cent of total operating costs. You cannot correctly predict that at present. That presents us with a big problem as regards the kind of figures that you would like to see in terms of subsidy payments. [109] Leighton Andrews: To what extent is it reasonable, or is it valuable, to look at the growth in certain services over recent years? You went back to 2000 earlier, and if we went back to the days when you were writing papers for the ‘Yes for Wales’ campaign before we had an Assembly, I think that we have seen a considerable change. You have expressed the growth per annum on the Valleys lines, for

example, and on other lines. One would get something of an impression that things were being done right if you are starting to see that level of double-digit growth in passenger usage. [110] Professor Cole: Certainly, part of that growth has been an improvement in rail services, an improvement in rolling stock. We have not necessarily seen that in Wales, but there is a lot of new rolling stock around the Great Britain system. The other reason for growth has been congestion on the roads. People have not been able to make effective journeys by road. Cardiff is the microcosm of the London situation—growth in London has been because of jams, from our point of view on the M4, causing the kind of problems in Reading that reverberate right down the Great Western main line. Similarly, we have problems in Cardiff and, increasingly, problems in Swansea, where we are seeing traffic jams at 7.30 a.m., which never occurred before. People are switching to the railways simply because it is the only effective way of getting into the centre of somewhere like Cardiff in a reasonable time. There are a number of reasons for the increase in usage. Going back to an earlier question, I think that the off-peak demand pattern is the one where the biggest potential lies for increasing usage by passengers in general. [111] John Marek: Leighton, you can come back in afterwards, but would it help you, Carl, if I called you to speak next, so that you, and Eleanor, can get away if you want to? [112] Leighton Andrews: I am finished for now. [113] John Marek: Rosemary, are you happy for Carl to go next so that he can get away? I see that you are. Carl, you may begin. [114] Carl Sargeant: Thank you, Chair. May I thank you for your paper, Professor Cole? I must say that you made some interesting points regarding the heavily subsidised Valley lines. It is difficult for me to say that because I have a south Wales Member sitting either side of me. One of my disappointments was that you did not mention the Wrexham-Bidston line. I think that your criteria was based on current and potential usage, and I just wondered how you measured potential usage within the spatial plan, which is a living Government document, with regards to interactive working with the north-west economy in Liverpool, Cheshire and so on? I am being very parochial. Deeside has one of the largest industrial estates in Europe, which has huge potential for the whole of north Wales, not just Deeside, if it could have some sort of rail structure to support it, offering rail, freight and passenger services. I expressed my disappointment because that does not seem to be highlighted in your document. If you could do a paper on that, it might be helpful to the committee, but, initially, I would welcome your thoughts on that. [115] Secondly, you compared Cardiff and London as being the capitals where people want to go. You can get to London easily from north or mid Wales, in wonderful comfort and in a shorter time than you can get to Cardiff. You are also usually guaranteed to get there. I have concerns about the comments that you made regarding travelling time on infrastructure other than rail. It takes as long to travel in a car to Cardiff from the north as it does to travel on the train, so there are no real benefits. The benefits of the car are

that you can go as and when you want to, whereas you are stuck to a timetable on a train, but you are not driving. Do you have any thoughts on that? [116] Professor Cole: As I mentioned earlier, the reason that I did not consider the Wrexham-Bidston line was because the development of that line is changing, and I did not feel happy that I had enough information on it to include it in what I hope was a reasonably robust paper for the committee. I am more than happy to see what has been done on that, if the committee wishes me to do so. [117] John Marek: You could send a note in on that point; it would be helpful. [118] Professor Cole: I will do that. In terms of the spatial plan, you are absolutely right, because one of the key issues in the spatial plan is the cross-border movement between north-east Wales and the Wirral and Cheshire. In fact, it is defined as one of the sub-regions within the plan. Clearly, Wrexham-Bidston, and not only that line, but services into Cheshire and the electrified services from Chester to Birkenhead, similarly form part of the process. Just to illustrate how long it takes to develop a new service in an area, I can tell you that, in 1976, when I worked for Cheshire County Council, I worked on the economic evaluation of the modernisation and the electrification of the Chester to Rock Ferry service, which only actually happened about four or five years ago. So, here we are, 25 to 30 years later. That gives you some idea of how long it takes to develop some of these schemes. That scheme was No. 1 in the transfer policy and planning programme of Cheshire County Council at the time. 6.50 p.m. [119] On the journey time from north Wales to London, I am not sure whether it takes less time to get from north Wales. It depends where you are coming from. [120] John Marek: I did Wrexham to London in 2 hours 29 minutes the other day. [121] Professor Cole: Okay. On what ought to happen on the north-south service, my view is that I would be looking for the kind of trains that we are running on the north Wales main line—the 175-unit, three-car sets. There is a demand for a small premium class on those trains, which generates revenue. On the improvement in the railway infrastructure on the north Wales main line, the Marcher main line and the south Wales main line, to get the speeds up to 90 mph to 100 mph, we are talking about £30 million to £50 million or thereabouts. We are talking about amounts in that kind of region. It is not an enormous sum of money over the period that it would last, and that can bring the journey time from Bangor to Cardiff down to three hours. [122] John Marek: Eleanor and Carl, it is 30 minutes before your train leaves if you want to go. I hope that I speak on behalf of the committee that we will not make any decisions if you decide to go, so you will catch the train if you go now. If you do not go now, you will be here for the night. I am sorry for interrupting you again, Stuart—I am not doing very well as a Chair. Rosemary, it is your turn. [123] Rosemary Butler: The subsidy issue has been explored. Can someone remind me when the railway assessment study that WAG is doing is due to finish?

[124] Professor Cole: The Assembly Government, do you mean? That has only just started. I will have to look it up to be certain, but we are talking about six to nine months. [125] Rosemary Butler: So it is in the near future, and not the distant future? [126] Professor Cole: No. The Wales Transport Research Centre and Halcrow are working on that project. [127] Rosemary Butler: It is just that it links up with this report, and so it would have been nice if we could have had that first. I have said this before, but it might be helpful if we could have a map, so that we can look at which bits are electrified.

[128] John Marek: I think that the clerk could organise that. [129] Rosemary Butler: Yes. We have all this technology, so I am sure that Chris could knock something out. If you could do that in publicising the Heart of Wales line, for example, it would get far more use. I know of a group of people who tried to book a tour. They wanted to get a coach and get off and get on a train, and so they wrote to try to arrange it but they were told that they could not do it. If 60 of them had turned up as individuals, they could have got on the train, but because they turned up as a group, they could not book them on. Sixty may not be the right figure, but the point is that if they had all turned up as individuals, they could have got on. So, it is about trying to utilise those lines.

[130] The issue about the north-south line is not just to do with the length of line but the sheer comfort. People do not mind travelling for a longer time if they travel in comfort. The idea of a premium section for business people or better conditions on the train would certainly help. [131] You said that around 60 per cent of the total cost is infrastructure. Is that correct? [132] Professor Cole: Yes. It varies a little, but the bulk of the expenditure on the railways is on capital expenditure. Around 60 per cent is infrastructure and train operations. It is almost the opposite in the bus industry, where labour is the bigger chunk of the costs, and capital expenditure is the lower. So, you have something like 60 per cent for infrastructure, capital and trains and so on, which are capital assets. Around 20 per cent goes on labour, and the rest goes on materials, fuel and so on. However, if the committee would like me to, I can supply something more detailed. [133] Rosemary Butler: To come back on one small point, the issue of people being driven onto trains, this morning, to come just 19 miles, I left home at 7.30 a.m. and I got here at 9.15 a.m. and that was just coming from Newport to Cardiff. [134] John Marek: By car? [135] Rosemary Butler: Yes, by car. It is now getting gridlocked, so the more convenient stations we can have, the better. [136] Professor Cole: With regard to that issue, one thing that I might recommend to the committee is the development of more park-and-ride facilities where people can be sure that both they and their cars are secure. So, stations like that would be covered by good lighting, they would have closed circuit television, as well as an

increased presence of community police officers, which is now promised by Arriva and the British Transport Police, who would visit these sites regularly. That would encourage people, I think, even if it was only to encourage them to drive part of the way—a railway can never serve everybody by being within walking distance. If you have that facility, it would mean that the crowded bits of the road network in Cardiff and Newport may be alleviated. Although people might drive to park-and-ride stations further out, on Valley lines or perhaps when the new line is built to Ebbw vale, we have really good, well planned park-and-ride sites. I know that land is expensive, and double-deck car parks are even more expensive, but that is one way in which we can encourage more people to leave their cars at home or at least to drive them to a station. [137] In terms of publicity, I do not know what this year’s figures are. The last time I looked at the figures was in 2001-02. Public transport spent £50 million on publicity. The car industry spent £450 million. You will never see a glossy magazine without an advertisement for a shiny car; you rarely see a glossy magazine with an advertisement for a shiny train. You will see some train advertising in some of the newspapers, but there is not a lot of television advertising and there is not a lot of glossy-magazine advertising. That is part of the problem: people are getting an image of the railway that is not the image that I see all the time. I would like to see new trains on Valley lines. I would like to see the recently acquired class 150 trains have a deep-cleaning exercise, and I notice that some are going through that. On the main line, First Great Western trains are in better condition because of the way in which it has historically operated its trains. It now has the challenge of having to deal with some of the local trains coming in and out of Cardiff going to the west country. We will see how it performs with those. [138] There are big differences in the quality of the network, between what was once called ‘intercity’ and local services, and we still have that, sadly—at least, in Wales we do. However, we have seen in other areas that that does not necessarily have to be the case. However, publicity is a key part of trying to persuade people, first, that the image that they get from some parts of the media is not correct throughout, and, secondly, that it is just the sheer quantity of publicity for the motor car that persuades people that that is what they should have. We just do not have the aspirational aspects of car advertising for public transport in general and the railways in particular. [139] John Marek: Does anybody else have a question? I must say that I do not have one for the very good reason that I have read your paper, Professor Cole, and I have listened to your remarks, and I now have a feel as to how we should go forwards when we do. I see that Members do not have any further questions, and so I thank you for coming. [140] Professor Cole: Thank you for the invitation. 7.00 p.m. [141] John Marek: It is a pleasure to have you here. You are an expert and you have given us your advice for free, and it is good of you to do that. We appreciate it. [142] Professor Cole: Thank you for the invitation. If you want anything else, perhaps Chris will contact me with any other bits of information that I could provide. [143] John Marek: We will not be long: about five minutes. If you want to stay outside, I would not mind having a word with you afterwards. We will now go into

private session.

Daeth rhan gyhoeddus y cyfarfod i ben am 7.00 p.m. The public part of the meeting ended at 7.00 p.m.

Cynulliad Cenedlaethol Cymru Y Pwyllgor ar Seilwaith y Rheilffyrdd a Gwella

Gwasanaethau i Deithwyr

The National Assembly for Wales The Committee on Rail Infrastructure and

Improved Passenger Services

Dydd Mercher, 22 Mawrth 2006 Wednesday, 22 March 2006

Cynnwys Contents

98 Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a Dirprwyon

Introduction, Apologies and Substitutions 99 Cofnodion y Cyfarfod Blaenorol a Materion yn Codi

Minutes of the Previous Meeting and Matters Arising 99 Trafnidiaeth Canolbarth Cymru

Mid Wales Transportation 113 Consortiwm Cludiant Integredig De-orllewin Cymru

South-west Wales Integrated Transport Consortium 121 Swyddfa Rheoleiddio’r Rheilffyrdd

The Office of Rail Regulation 134 Taith—Consortiwm Trafnidiaeth Gogledd Cymru

Taith—North Wales Transport Consortium

Cofnodir y trafodion hyn yn yr iaith y llefarwyd hwy ynddi yn y pwyllgor. Yn ogystal, cynhwysir cyfieithiad Saesneg o gyfraniadau yn y Gymraeg. Mae hon yn fersiwn ddrafft o’r cofnod. Cyhoeddir fersiwn derfynol ymhen pum diwrnod

gwaith.

These proceedings are reported in the language in which they were spoken in the committee. In addition, an English translation of Welsh speeches is included. This is a draft version of the record. The final version will be

published within five working days.

Aelodau o’r Cynulliad yn bresennol: John Marek (Cadeirydd), Leighton Andrews, Eleanor Burnham, Rosemary Butler, Janet Davies, Lisa Francis, Carl Sargeant. Eraill yn bresennol: Michael Beswick, Cyfarwyddwr, Uned Bolisi Swyddfa Rheoleiddio'r Rheilffyrdd; David Blainey, Swyddog Gweithredol Dros Dro Taith—Consortiwm Trafnidiaeth Gogledd Cymru; Malcolm Cowtan, Trafnidiaeth Canolbarth Cymru; Phil Jackson, Trafnidiaeth Canolbarth Cymru; Gareth Roberts, Trafnidiaeth Canolbarth Cymru; Trevor Roberts, Cadeirydd, Trafnidiaeth Canolbarth Cymru a Taith—Consortiwm Trafnidiaeth Gogledd Cymru; David Sandy, Swyddog Strategaeth Gludiant, Cyngor Sir Benfro a Gweithgor Swyddogion Consortiwm Cludiant Integredig De-Orllewin Cymru; Bob Saxby, Taith—Consortiwm Trafnidiaeth Gogledd Cymru. Gwasanaeth Pwyllgor: Chris Reading, Clerc; Sarah Bartlett, Dirprwy Glerc. Assembly Members in attendance: John Marek (Chair), Leighton Andrews, Eleanor Burnham, Rosemary Butler, Janet Davies, Lisa Francis, Carl Sargeant. Others in attendance: Michael Beswick, Director, Policy Unit, Office of Rail Regulation; David Blainey, Acting Executive Officer Taith—North Wales Transport Consortium; Malcolm Cowtan, Mid Wales Transportation; Phil Jackson, Mid Wales Transportation; Gareth Roberts, Mid Wales Transportation; Trevor Roberts, Chairman, Mid Wales Transportation and Taith—North Wales Transport Consortium; David Sandy, Transport Strategy Officer, Pembrokeshire County Council and South-West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium Working Group; Bob Saxby, Taith—North Wales Transport Consortium. Committee Service: Chris Reading, Clerk; Sarah Bartlett, Deputy Clerk.

Dechreuodd y cyfarfod am 9.00 a.m. The meeting began at 9.00 a.m.

Cyflwyniad, Ymddiheuriadau a Dirprwyon Introduction, Apologies and Substitutions

[1] John Marek: Good morning, everyone, and welcome to this meeting. We have headsets for simultaneous translation and sound amplification. Translation from Welsh into English is available on channel 1, and a verbatim reproduction is available on channel 0. If there are any problems, the ushers will assist. Please switch off your mobile phones, BlackBerrys and pagers, as they interfere with the broadcasting equipment. If the fire alarm sounds, please follow the instructions of the ushers. The assembly point is at the rear of the Pierhead building. Please do not touch the microphones, and please wait until the red light comes on before you speak. Have we received any apologies? [2] Mr Reading: No, there have been no apologies.

[3] John Marek: Does anyone wish to make a declaration of interest under Standing Order 4.6? [4] Eleanor Burnham: I am the chair of a little charity called Making Tracks, which works with the British Transport Police and other worthy bodies to help young people who are offending on railway lines, primarily around Colwyn Bay. I have declared this previously. [5] John Marek: Does Eleanor need to declare that every time? [6] Mr Reading: No. [7] John Marek: There you are; you have learned something new. [8] A briefing has been prepared by the Members’ research service, which is available to Members. 9.02 a.m.

Cofnodion y Cyfarfod Blaenorol a Materion yn Codi Minutes of the Previous Meeting and Matters Arising

[9] John Marek: The minutes have been circulated out of committee. Are Members content to ratify the minutes? I see that they are. [10] We will now consider the matters arising. I have none, as we are collecting evidence at this stage. [11] Rosemary Butler: On that point, Chair, the closing date for comments was 3 March, but I am still receiving some. Can we still pass these through? [12] John Marek: We are flexible. The purpose of this committee is to gather the evidence. It would be foolish of us not to accept those comments. However, the clerk is in the process of analysing the evidence and picking out the different points within each piece of evidence to produce a list. Therefore, the time for that is coming to an end. We will have to discuss, at the end of the meeting, how we will produce our report. [13] Are there any other matters arising? I see that there are none. Cadarnhawyd cofnodion y cyfarfod blaenorol. The minutes of the previous meeting were ratified. 9.03 a.m.

Trafnidiaeth Canolbarth Cymru Mid Wales Transportation

[14] John Marek: It gives me great pleasure to welcome Councillor Trevor Roberts. With him are Phil Jackson, Malcolm Cowtan, and Gareth Roberts. I hand over the floor to you. [15] Mr T. Roberts: Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you for your warm welcome. It is nice to see some old faces, or should I say young faces. Sorry about that, Rosemary.

[16] I know that you have had our paper, and I would like to highlight two or three points over the next three or four minutes and then hand over to the three experts, who really are experts in this field, particularly on one matter, which I will highlight later and which I am sure you will want to question them about. [17] On the first page, under point 2.0, we mention access to educational opportunities for those travelling by train. On the Cambrian coast section, journeys made by those going to the two schools at Tywyn and Harlech, and by the students going to the college in Pwllheli, represent approximately 3,700 journeys per week. You can see the importance of that service and why the timetables are sometimes designed around the traffic flows of the school. It is an important market. [18] Moving on, we talk about disused railway lines and potential freight use and so forth. I will touch on that in a few minutes. [19] Sundays are our big thing, and I come back to the Cambrian coast line. On a Sunday in winter, a train travels southwards from Pwllheli through to Machynlleth and then goes back in the evening. Anyone who lives in my area of Barmouth and who wants to travel northwards can go back only in the evening and therefore they have to stay overnight before they can come back. It is impossible to do one journey. [20] Seeing that those trains just stand—we are not looking for extra units—the train has time to go from Machynlleth, instead of staying there for four to five hours, do one more quick return trip up the coast, thereby giving opportunities. Car ownership in that part of Wales is quite low. Therefore, it is important. We have found that people use a through bus to Bangor hospital, although it is 60 miles away, to visit patients. Bus companies have suddenly realised that not everyone has a car or did not like to ask someone who had a car whether they could have transport on a Sunday. [21] However, in terms of train services on the main line, as we call it—the Aberystwyth-Shrewsbury line—we are looking for an hourly service. We can have a regular-pattern timetable, and I know that the standard timetable is the flavour of the month, if you like. This would be important on the mid Wales line because, although we have a two-hourly service on the Cambrian coast line, it would feed in for people waiting two hours, or an hour and three-quarters as they do now. There would be a train every hour for them to catch. It is important in terms of the hospitals that people use. In the Aberystwyth area, you have the hospital there, so you have the flow from south Meirionnydd and from Newtown going that way or going to Shrewsbury the other way. The other important aspect is that you now have this fine, lovely building down here and, to give people easier access, we need more regular train services to Shrewsbury, from where we now have almost an hourly service to Cardiff, which is to be welcomed. We would like to see that added. [22] In respect of the hourly service, we all know that there is a new company in talks about having a London train from the Wrexham area—for your area, Dr Marek—through to Shrewsbury. We would like to see that extended. One early morning service, such as the Aberystwyth service, could be added to it at Shrewsbury, and you would then have a through train from Aberystwyth to London, and one back in the evening without too much hardship in relation to costs. Perhaps it is easy for me to sit here and say that, but it would be only an add-on to the service. I understand that there is a new service that is an add-on of the Chiltern line services from Marylebone to Birmingham, and perhaps the Arriva Wales train from Wrexham to Chester could join it. We think that it would be a lot easier to add on

another unit from the Aberystwyth area. [23] Moving on to the Heart of Wales line, which is dear to us, I know that it is a slow line with a lot of crossings and so forth. I think that money could be spent to speed up some of the crossings and to perhaps eliminate some of the underused crossings. The service is looking for one more extra train. We have four trains. I understand that it is a single-coach train most of the time, and it is quite full. We are trying to encourage people. There is nothing worse for a service if people have to stand for an hour or more on a journey, because you are never going to get them to come back. I think that that is something that we were looking for there. [24] In terms of infrastructure work, as I say, although we could do with having all of these small crossings eliminated, not a lot of money needs to be spent in relation to the track. Are you are aware that it is a diversionary route for freight trains when the main Hereford line is closed? Therefore, it is what we call a route 9 or 10, which, depending on route availability, can take the heavier trains. If you like, the track is in very good fettle. Therefore, as far as infrastructure work is concerned, it should not be too much of a pain. [25] We look for passing loops and so forth. As you know, on the Cambrian coast, we are having this new system, which will be piloted next year, called the European rail traffic management system. We understand that unless we can put into place any changes that we need—a new passing loop anywhere in mid Wales—it will be more difficult. While the system is being trialled, we may not be able to have any improvements carried out for several years. Therefore, we are led to believe—and the officers will come back on this—that if we are to have a loop, we need to identify and start the work in the next 12 to 18 months before the trialling of the ERTMS. Therefore, this is something that we need to keep an eye on. [26] Going back to crossings on the main line, I know that a lot of you travel along the A470, so you will know that the road crossing at Caersws can often be a bind; we caught it last night. Therefore, it is about things like that that we could do something with our trunk road agencies. Obviously, we are looking to the Assembly on that. [27] We obviously support the South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium because, as is stated in 3.3.2, and going back to the Heart of Wales line, it is looking to eliminate the major choke at the southern end around Gowerton. We fully support that. I know that you will hear from Taith later. We also support its proposals for the Conwy valley line. The end of the line is within the track area of Blaenau Ffestiniog. I will speak about that in a moment with regard to freight possibilities. 9.10 a.m. [28] To return to the issue of Sunday services, although we would like to see an increase, the other problem, especially on the main line, is the engineering work. I know that people make complaints because people cannot travel until after lunch time. Why on earth can we not persuade Network Rail to use some block possessions? Since Christmas, on the Cambrian coast, there have been two weeks during which the line was closed completely for four days at a time. In that time, they

achieved 12 to 14 weekends’ worth of work. If they can pick the right times for the work, that would be a lot easier. For some people, Sunday is a religious day, but it is also leisure time, and people like to travel. I think that we are missing many opportunities to attract people to use the railway.

[29] Security at stations is an issue that is near and dear to us. Some of you may not be aware that we had security problems involving youths four or five years ago on the mid Wales line. We formed a committee, which I chair, with Dyfed Powys Police, North Wales Police and the British Transport Police. We have had a great deal of success. We have a station accreditation system, and, thanks to the Assembly, which funded a great deal of this, we have closed circuit television at Barmouth, Machynlleth and Aberystwyth. That is starting to be extended. We welcome the fact that a community rail police officer is going to be appointed. However, we notice that the officer will be based in Shrewsbury. We would ask that that officer be based in the Machynlleth area. This initiative is done through the Assembly, the railways and the British Transport Police. [30] Shrewsbury has British Transport Police, which polices mid Wales down to Aberystwyth, Barmouth and so on. I think that the officer should be based at Machynlleth. The British Transport Police has been keen to post someone down there and, several years ago, Dyfed Powys Police offered premises. I believe that the offer still stands to use the old police station at Machynlleth. It was quite happy to make a room available for a British Transport Police officer. It is not too late in the day for that to happen. Before an officer is designated for Shrewsbury, we beg that the officer be based at Machynlleth, so that he or she can cover the area. It is about 50 miles from Shrewsbury to Machynlleth if there are any problems. [31] On refurbished units, we are not looking for brand new trains, although we would love to have them. The 158 units are air conditioned and could receive a general makeover. With ERTMS, because the trains work with a satellite system, they are going to designate 16 units. So, those could have a major refurbishment. They can be joined up to make units of two, four, six or whatever length you want to cope with summer traffic. If someone were to offer us more money to buy new trains, we would obviously welcome that. However, we are trying to be realistic. If they received a really good makeover, I think that we could get a few more years out of the 158 units, because when they are working properly, the air conditioning in them is superb. [32] I want to come back on two main issues, one of which is the concessionary fares scheme. The Assembly gave this wonderful free bus travel scheme to Wales for people over 60. We are looking to have that extended to the railways. I understand that, 12 months ago, there may have been some money around. I am not saying this with tongue in cheek, Chair. The money was for some pilot schemes. One was for the border line, the Wrexham to Bidston line, and we also looked at the Cambrian line. It would be only between Pwllheli and Aberystwyth. I want to bring this up, but I cannot speak on it too much because the expert is Mr Cowtan. When I finish, we can ask Malcolm, who can make a case for a way to do that for next to nothing, and at no cost to the Assembly, because it is already paying money to the railway. I will leave Malcolm to deal with the technicalities, because he baffles me sometimes when he tries to explain it. However, he has really convinced us that it can be done. It is an important point. [33] Turning to freight, a rail freight pilot scheme was carried out on the line from Aberystwyth to Kronospan, the timber place at Chirk. We understand that it was a very successful trial. I understand that the total costs were approximately 1p a mile

per tonne more to go by rail than by road. When you think of the environmental benefits of keeping lorries off the road, I think that that is a must. We would certainly like to see that expanded, together with—I come back to the northern area of the track—the Alfred McAlpine Slate Ltd initiative at Blaenau Ffestiniog. I have been involved with the north Wales authorities on that and I would like to see that project given a grant. I know that the Assembly is on our side and I know that the grant came to a stop because the rail facilities grant was stopped in England. I am wondering whether you, as politicians, could apply pressure to try to re-open this, because it would keep hundreds of lorries a day off the roads. Having them on the roads is a worry. [34] As we are talking about that end of the railway line, we have a meeting tomorrow night, as it happens, in Trawsfynydd, of all places, of a partnership called Trawsnewid. The railway line is still in situ to the old power station and we think that that could be developed and extended. The track therefore exists from Blaenau, from the Conwy valley. We would look at timber markets and we, as officers, are going to talk to the freight association on that. [35] There is a big cycling adventure centre at Coed-y-Brenin, between Dolgellau and Trawsfynydd, and we think that we can encourage people to come by train, bringing their bikes with them. The other thing that came out of all this is the issue of all the lorries that run from wholesalers in Queensferry and so on. Remembering that we do not have an A55 or another major road, trains could bring those loads to Trawsfynydd. All that you would need is a roadway alongside and a lifter to take containers off and put them onto the lorries to move them from there, which would save a lot of journeys. This has been working in northern Scotland. Safeway tried, 12 years ago, with two trucks from Inverness going up to Georgemas Junction for Wick and Thurso. There is now a full freight train each day, because all sorts of freight use it. I understand that, next month, another trial is starting in Ayrshire, using the same units that we use to take timber from Aberystwyth, which you can put containers on. They are the types of things that we should be exploring. From the environmental point of view, and being green, it is a matter of using the railway tracks that are still there, but which are not being used. On that point, I will shut up. We have three experts here who are far more knowledgeable than I am. [36] John Marek: Thank you; that was a useful exposition. You have made a lot of points. A verbatim record is being produced, so none of this has been lost. The fact that I have been staring at you or into space, or whatever you think that I have been doing, does not mean that we have not been taking it in. It will all be done and the clerk will produce a list of points raised. I say to everyone that this committee wishes to gather information and all the different points and suggestions that you made are gratefully received. [37] We may decide to put the recommendations in some sort of order, but we may not; that is something for the committee to decide. You have a slot of 40 minutes and we started early, so out of those 40 minutes we probably have 21 or 22 minutes left. I know that Members will want to ask questions, there are six Members and they all want to ask questions, so we have only about three minutes each. However, would any of your experts like to raise any new points which you have not raised? If they would, that is fine and they can do so now, but, if not, I shall ask Members to ask questions for the elucidation that they want. Is there anything that you would like to add? [38] Rosemary Butler: Could we hear about the concessionary fare scheme?

[39] John Marek: Leave that matter for your question, Rosemary. [40] Rosemary Butler: I thought that we were going to move into it. [41] John Marek: I want to give them a free hand first. Is there anything that your chair has not mentioned that you feel ought to be put into the pot? If there is, go on, because I think that we ought to hear it. [42] Mr Cowtan: There is an issue about stations, particularly on the Cambrian coast line. Aberdyfi is the worst, with a difference of 16 inches between the platform and the train doors. There have been accidents at Aberdyfi. Other stations are involved as well and that issue just does not seem to be able to be resolved easily. I am just flagging that up as a matter of concern. [43] John Marek: We now have that on the record. Are there any other points? 9.20 a.m. [44] Mr G. Roberts: The only other point is about the frequency on the Cambrian line, and the developments that are going on in Aberystwyth at the moment, with the relocation of the Assembly buildings. We want to put in place a transport system for the next 20 years that will get people out of their cars. It will be a slow process, because of the problems with Network Rail and providing loops. We want to develop a frequent train service into Aberystwyth, and develop small hubs along the line, if possible, for park and ride. I know that it is difficult to re-open a station, but we are thinking of places like Bow Street or Dyfi Junction where people can use an eco-friendly parking area, where they can cycle and catch the train in, or leave their cars there. Unfortunately, at the moment, Dyfi Junction is totally inaccessible apart from on foot—there is not even room to turn your car around. So, we can build on the strength of the Cambrian line, especially with the hourly service, because Aberystwyth does suffer from congestion, in relative terms to the size of the town, at peak times—it gets very congested. We want to get people onto the trains and buses, and out of their cars, but we must have the base service there initially.

[45] Mr Jackson: Briefly, I will just mention rolling stock, which Councillor Roberts touched on when he talked about refurbishment. There is also the question of unsuitable rolling stock, particularly on the Heart of Wales line. The 153 single carriages that are currently being used are not really suitable for either a scenic route or for a long-distance route. In particular, the charges for leasing them could be a disbenefit when it comes to the one additional service for which they are asking along the line. [46] John Marek: Before I ask my questions, I think that there will be some improvement on the Heart of Wales line, because the proposals by the Government, between the draft budget and the final budget, included an extra carriage or some improvement. That is something that you need to take up with the Welsh Assembly Government or with Arriva. The fact that you have one 153 single carriage packed to the gunnels in summer will be somewhat alleviated. You may need to explore that.

[47] My other point was about the Marylebone train, which has extended past Birmingham as a result of Shrewsbury being keen on it. It is stand-alone—no subsidy is required at this stage—but that does not mean that subsidy cannot be given, if it is cost-effective, to extend that service. That point is well-made, and we will take it on board.

[48] I have no other questions. I will go to Rosemary first because she asked about concessionary fares first, then on to Eleanor. [49] Rosemary Butler: You mentioned in the proposal that there is a possibility of free fares which would not cost anything to the Assembly. [50] Mr Cowtan: It might be a naive interpretation from a non-economist, but we believe that, on 1 April, when the Assembly Government takes over the budget from the Strategic Rail Authority for running the railways in Wales, that this is an issue which could be negotiated with Arriva Trains Wales. Given that all the services that Arriva Trains Wales runs are essentially loss-making, and that the Assembly Government has a commitment to running these services, give or take some requirements on the part of Arriva Trains for efficiency, this global amount will have to be paid to Arriva Trains to run the services. Whether the payment comes entirely from a revenue budget or from partially a revenue budget and partially a concessionary-fare budget, the global amount need not necessarily be any different if pensioners are carried for nothing on some local services. So, I believe that this is an opportunity, if discussions are held with Arriva Trains, for extending the scheme to cover some local rail services in Wales where rail is the only form of local transport. Blaenau Ffestiniog to Llandudno is one that springs to mind. However, in other cases as well, it is the only viable means of local transport. [51] John Marek: Is that okay, Rosemary? [52] Rosemary Butler: Yes, thank you. [53] John Marek: Fine. Eleanor is next, and then Lisa. [54] Eleanor Burnham: You will probably know that I am a railway nerd. My first Assembly short debate was about reopening the Barmouth to Ruabon railway line, so I have high aspirations. [55] I will get back to reality. On tourism, I have been on the Heart of Wales line, and one thing that struck me was, have you ever costed the development of tourism, and how two extra units, perhaps, could help in the summer, with cyclists, for instance? I noticed that you can barely get one bike on, let alone two, but you could have a group of cyclists wanting to travel, because it is a beautiful route. Has that ever been costed? [56] The other practical issue is, I am always a loo watcher—both on and off trains. Have you costed what are the basic necessities of travelling—all of us who travel on the trains know this—namely loos and cafes, along either the Cambrian line or the Heart of Wales line? We must get the basic necessities right, other than the platform height, which is obviously a basic necessity. Without loos and cafes you cannot bring in tourists; you do not have the room, either, to do this because you have only one stupid unit that you would not travel 10 miles on, ideally, let alone the Heart of Wales. Do you have any costings that you may have done over the years, or recently? [57] Mr Jackson: We are currently running a Sunday service, additionally, with the Assembly’s help, which costs about £20,000 for one extra journey in the winter. Through the Heart of Wales line forum, we are paying for a similar additional train, if you like, during the summer. However, that is not one new train all year, which I think is what you have in mind. The Heart of Wales line forum has been talking with the Wales Tourist Board—in whatever guise that will exist—about the possibility of a

single new tourist train, which could be used on any number of lines, but including the Heart of Wales line, during the season. That work is ongoing, as I understand. [58] Eleanor Burnham: How many units would that have? Would it have three carriages? [59] Mr Jackson: Yes, that is what we are looking at—a new train, with better visibility, but not quite scenic. [60] Eleanor Burnham: Would there be facilities to bring on bikes, and so on, or wheelchairs, for goodness’ sake, for people who are disabled, because that is another issue, is it not? [61] Mr Jackson: Yes. That would go back to the earlier point about the unsuitability of the current stock, ever since the loss of the guard’s van. [62] Eleanor Burnham: Exactly. [63] Mr Jackson: The possible danger there is that the reintroduction of the so-called heritage stock, namely the old diesel units, would make good the lack of capacity. However, it might not be quite the right image for a railway line in this day and age.

[64] Eleanor Burnham: What about loos and cafes? [65] Mr Jackson: At present, there is only one staffed station on the Heart of Wales line, which is at Llandrindod Wells, where a ticket agency exists. There are no other premises available, as far as I know, other than possibly at Llandovery station, where there is a unit available for hire, where a cafe could be placed. Therefore, the tendency has been to work with the local tradespeople in the towns along the line.

[66] Mr T. Roberts: To add to that, a cafe has opened in mid Wales, in Machynlleth, just over 12 months ago. That has been extremely successful, because the station is also an interchange; it is on the platform. [67] Lisa Francis: I know, Trevor, that you outlined the ERTMS pilot, and you say in the paper that it might be a blight. We have always been led to believe that ERTMS would be the catalyst for providing passing loops on the Cambrian line. However, if what you say is correct, do those passing loops need to be in place before the ERTMS starts? Can I confirm that that is what you meant? [68] Mr T. Roberts: That is what we have been told; that is what we understand now, which has come as a surprise to us. Like you, we thought that that was the bees’ knees. [69] John Marek: That is a useful point. [70] Lisa Francis: That is very interesting. [71] Secondly, on the concessionary fares scheme—and I may have asked you about this before, Malcolm—but, in Gwynedd, am I right in understanding that senior citizens have a choice between free parking, free bus travel, or

free rail travel, and that they must opt for one of those? 9.30 a.m. [72] Mr Cowtan: No, free parking is not an option at all. The choice is between free bus travel and a senior railcard at a reduced price—essentially, for £5. If they choose the option of the senior railcard at £5, they have to forego the bus pass. If they want both the railcard and the free bus travel, they can buy the railcard for what it costs us to buy them in bulk from the railways, which is about £14. [73] John Marek: But if they were to buy them as individuals, what would they cost? Are they about £20 now? [74] Mr Cowtan: Something like £20. [75] Lisa Francis: On the Conwy valley slate freight project, which is something that I have been interested in for a long time—I put a paper together on it—I wondered why the project had slowed down. I want this recorded for the purposes of the committee, Chair, as I have discovered that the Welsh Assembly Government commissioned WS Atkins plc to produce a cost estimate study report on the possibility of moving slate waste via freight from Blaenau Ffestiniog northwards. That was in April 2004, but Network Rail informed officials that it did not agree with some of Atkins’s costings, and Atkins was asked to revisit those costs. At that time, the Welsh Assembly Government concluded that it could not afford to fund this project. After this, Network Rail was supposed to prepare revised costs for the Conwy valley line upgrade. I do not think that we are in possession of those revised costs, and until we are, that project will not really move forward. So, I just wanted to note that for the committee, because it is an important project, and one that we would like to see more of its type happening in Wales. If it were to go ahead, it would be the only freight project in north Wales, so it would be very useful and the spin-off from that could be the Trawsfynydd to Blaenau Ffestiniog connection, which would also be useful from a tourism point of view. [76] Mr G. Roberts: Just for information, the main item in last week’s New Civil Engineer was on this particular problem. Highlighting the difficulty in getting Network Rail to agree to any form of development has now become a national issue. The whole story has now been pushed out nationally. There was a commission on the Blaenau Ffestiniog to Trawsfynydd proposals two years ago with the Wales timber transport group, where a mapping of the potential of using the Maentwrog Road facility was carried out. The figures that came out were that about 6,000 to 7,000 tonnes a year of timber could be moved. That was purely looking at timber. There are issues there that could be developed, but it is a case of getting these facilities off the ground. So, people are willing to invest, if you can move Network Rail into allowing those things to travel on the network. [77] Eleanor Burnham: I would like to be associated with Lisa’s comments. [78] John Marek: We are just gathering evidence at the moment.

[79] Eleanor Burnham: I am just saying that I am well aware of this, because I am constantly lobbied on this issue by Tad Deiniol from Blaenau Ffestiniog. However, the impact does not suit everyone down the line, even though there is huge potential there, particularly for Blaenau, which has suffered greatly over the years. [80] Lisa Francis: I will just add that I discovered, in gathering this information, that this project will provide income of approximately £15 million to Network Rail through track access charges. So, I would have thought that it is something that we should be asking it to take seriously. [81] John Marek: We need to put that on our list, and give it consideration when we come to it. Have you finished, Lisa? [82] Lisa Francis: Yes. [83] Janet Davies: Taking that up from the timber market point of view, it is important to get freight on rail, because it does not take many heavy goods vehicles on mid-Wales roads to clog them up completely, does it? However, I have some concern about the timber markets, because I know that the world price for timber is low. Will that have an effect on the viability of moving timber by rail? [84] I have a few other questions. My second question is on concessionary fares. We have had an awful lot of problems in recent months in being able to get information on what the subsidy costs are for the different services that go through and in and out of Wales. Given that, I do not know whether you know of any way of getting accurate information on the subsidy costs on the Heart of Wales line. Clearly, concessionary fares would be very helpful in terms of getting people to use the service. We have also been told that, on the Valley lines—and this may be different because of the investment that would be needed—the more people you get travelling on them, and it does not matter how high the usage goes, the subsidy actually increases. It struck me when you were talking, Mr Cowtan, that, if the Assembly was seeing that the more passengers there were on a line the more in subsidies it was going to cost, there is a real disincentive there to actually do much about the lines, because you would want to keep the passenger numbers fairly low. I do not know whether you have any comments on that. [85] I am concerned about disabled access at some of these rural stations and how good it is. If you already have a platform at Aberdyfi that is too low for active people, how on earth are disabled people managing? [86] Finally, I travelled to and from the agricultural show this year by train, starting from Bridgend. I came back on the diesel-engine train, and I thought that it was absolutely charming when that came around the bend. It had to battle its way through the trees and the overgrowth to get through, but I thought that it was a real attraction. [87] Mr T. Roberts: Before Malcolm comes in, I wish to make it clear what we are looking for in terms of the concessionary scheme. This is not about filling the trains but about giving people an opportunity. If you take the Cambrian coast line—you know the area, Dr Marek—it is a nine-and-a-half-mile journey by train to go around to Tywyn; it is 28 miles by road. We do not have the bus services, and, with due respect, the Valleys have trains every few minutes; we have one every two hours. It

is about giving people an opportunity. People are being denied the ability to move from town to town, if you like, over distances of 20 or 30 miles. This would open it up and put more bums on trains, but not quite in the way in which you are looking at it. We are looking at the overall picture of the pilot scheme. The border line from Bidston to Wrexham is another one. [88] Mr Cowtan: In terms of the lines in south Wales, particularly the Valley lines, we acknowledge that there would be a capacity issue, and we have never envisaged the concessionary-fares scheme extending to those lines, principally because there is a choice of a bus service for most journeys on the south-Wales network. On the lines that we have considered, we do not think that there would be a capacity problem, except perhaps for a few weeks in the middle of the summer on the Cambrian coast line, and perhaps that would need to be managed slightly differently for that period. [89] Janet Davies: Yes, but the point that I was trying to make was about whether it would discourage the Government from making the improvements in services that you are asking for, and, if the scheme were successful, further improvements, if it felt that it was going to cost it more in fare subsidies. [90] Ms Cowtan: I do not see that it would cost it more in fare subsidies. Essentially, the Assembly Government will be paying Arriva Trains to run the train services that it is currently running. If it then asks Arriva to carry pensioners for nothing on some lines, it would not affect the cost of running the trains. So, it should not affect the amount that Arriva requires for running the services. [91] Janet Davies: So, you are not suggesting that there should be a subsidy per older passenger then. [92] Ms Cowtan: I do not know how the sums would be done between Arriva Trains and the Government, but the global amount paid to Arriva should be set for a number of years ahead for the life of the franchise. Whether or not this amount is paid entirely through the revenue budget or partially through a concessionary-fare budget, the global amount need not necessarily be any different. That is the way in which we see it. [93] Janet Davies: I think that it is very complicated. [94] John Marek: I know. Do you want to come in on this point, Lisa? [95] Lisa Francis: No, not on this point. [96] John Marek: Is your question on this point, Rosemary? [97] Rosemary Butler: Yes. What capacity would there be? What is the take-up of passengers at the moment? It is 25 or 50 per cent? [98] Ms Cowtan: For buses? [99] Rosemary Butler: No, on the trains. If we are going to offer this, and we are talking about this free bus pass— 9.40 a.m. [100] Mr Cowtan: Consultants have done some surveys to try to measure

the likely take-up. We are expecting a final report from the consultants soon. The answer at the moment is that I do not know until we get the final report. [101] Rosemary Butler: To look at it the other way, how many passengers are there at the moment? [102] Mr Cowtan: At the moment, some of the trains are pretty lightly used, except in the middle of the summer. That is why we do not think that the net result will present a problem to Arriva Trains in terms of capacity. [103] John Marek: Is your question on this point, Eleanor? [104] Eleanor Burnham: No, it is not. [105] John Marek: Let me take Carl’s questions first, and then we will have two or three minutes for Lisa and yourself. [106] Janet Davies: Can I have an answer on the disabled access? [107] Mr Jackson: You asked about access in particular, which is a key point for all railways. One of the problems that we come across is that Arriva Trains leases the stations, and Network Rail thinks that it is its responsibility to provide some of the access, and vice versa. With the Assembly transport grant, we have been able to provide improvements on the Heart of Wales line at Knighton and Llandrindod Wells with fully accessible bridges across stations, which is one of the most common points of difficulty in access. There are some arguments that the full standards should not necessarily apply at all halts. That has been brought up along with the community railways designation, which I have some misgivings about, but which we are collectively still happy to look at. [108] The key problem that we currently have on the mid Wales lines—if I had to pick one—would be the disability access at Machynlleth station. One platform is adjacent to the town and is quite accessible, but the second is not. A number of solutions have been put forward over the years. One simple solution was an improvement to signalling that would allow 99 per cent of the trains to call at the easily accessible platform. That was nearly achieved some years ago for a cost of between £80,000 and £100,000 at the time. However, in the end, that did not go ahead. With so many stations on the Heart of Wales line—so many halts—it would probably be impossible to provide full access at all of the key points. Our discussions with disability groups in the past have led us to believe that, provided there is excellent access at a number of key places, probably where the passing loops are, then that would satisfy the need. [109] Carl Sargeant: I have three points. I was quite excited that you raised concessionary fares, and the potential of a small investment for a big return. However, I am not convinced about the workings of that, although I do not wish to belittle the project. It would be helpful for the committee if you could provide a more detailed paper on that. I think that your reasoning that the

global figure paid to Arriva has capacity for additional personnel to be on the trains is probably right, but I am not sure what the capacity is. How would this work if more people are getting on the trains and less people are paying? I soon learned that you get nothing for nothing in this life, and I am a little sceptical about the whole concept. I would, therefore, appreciate a note. This would be helpful for the committee. [110] John Marek: Is that possible? [111] Mr Jackson: We could produce a note within seven days. [112] John Marek: Could you please send it to the clerk? That would be very useful. [113] Carl Sargeant: My second point relates to cross-border working with the other consortia. Could you outline some details of how you do that, if you do that? Thirdly, I think that it is fair to say that you have come with a wish-list of what you would like and what you think is needed to enhance services in your region. For the smallest amount of investment from the Assembly, what improvement would there be to your region? Is that a fair question? [114] Mr T. Roberts: I will just answer quickly on the other consortia. As you know, I am a Gwynedd councillor and Gwynedd is in a position where we have both camps. The Meirionnydd part of Gwynedd is within mid Wales, hence I am the chairman. I am actually a board member of the Taith consortia. I understand that I may be back in to introduce its officers later on. However, we work extremely closely. Public transport officers take the Gwynedd side, and there is obviously Malcolm, who sits as an officer within Taith. So we have total cross-co-operation. [115] The situation for SWWITCH is the same, because I know that Powys County Council is in talks. Therefore, we are not separate organisations as such. We can be a partnership and we sign up to each other’s aspirations and so forth. [116] On the final point, if the Assembly funded a couple of units—a couple of extra trains—without any further infrastructure work, it would not meet all of our aspirations of an hourly service here and there, but it would certainly provide a major boost. For instance, since December, Arriva Trains has put on one early morning train around 6.30 a.m. from Birmingham to Aberystwyth. It is the first time that you can come to Aberystwyth in the morning well before lunch time. The offshoot from that is that, without there being an extra train, there is a connection with the train at Machynlleth that has been running for years to Pwllheli. We can now get to Pwllheli before lunch time, and all through that one train being put on. [117] Therefore, if the Assembly had the money and could fund two extra units, we would have a wonderfully improved train service all around and that is without infrastructure improvements. Perhaps the officers would groan, because we want to see speed limits here and there, but a minute here and there makes no difference. If you can get a couple more units, the service would be strengthened in the summer when we are in need of trains, and it would open up a whole range of opportunities. [118] John Marek: I will not ask your officers to contribute, unless they insist, because we are over time. Carl, had you finished?

[119] Carl Sargeant: Yes. That is fine. [120] John Marek: Okay. I will take two quick points. [121] Eleanor Burnham: These have not been mentioned, so I thought that I would just flag them up. You have your projects and costs in your matrix, which is wonderful, but do you have a timescale on that? You have obviously been in discussions. [122] Looking at the various points in your paper, you mention level crossings. Would you have a timescale for improving those? Also, on secure stations, there are obviously barriers. What is the take-up? The other issue is about police response times. I note that you say that they are unacceptable. It is obviously a big worry. Do you have that in your matrix and is that a cost that you have to sort out or is it something that can be done fairly quickly? [123] John Marek: It is the type of thing that cannot be answered now. We could ask for a paper on it. [124] Eleanor Burnham: Yes, fine. That is not a problem. It has not been mentioned before, so I thought that I would raise it. [125] John Marek: If the witnesses could send a note to the clerk, the clerk will circulate it to Members. Thank you, Eleanor. [126] Lisa Francis: I think that park-and-ride initiatives are a brilliant idea, particularly around the Dyfi junction area. I was interested in that in relation to Aberystwyth, because I know how many people use that train to attend hospital appointments at Bronglais, which serves a huge catchment area. In the past, the problem has been that park and ride in Aberystwyth goes all around the town. Have you had any discussions with Ceredigion County Council about having just one leg from the station to the hospital? [127] Mr G. Roberts: This is ongoing and it is a difficulty that we have with the operator, Arriva buses. The main difficulty is going into the hospital itself: because people are dropped off at the accident and emergency and out-patients departments, buses have to go around to the back of the hospital. It is private property and there is an agreement that the buses are allowed around, but, unfortunately, there are deliveries of oxygen and so forth that cannot be regulated. On many occasions, therefore, the vehicles cannot go around the hospital, therefore they are withdrawing and dropping people off at the entrance of the hospital instead. To make the service at all viable, it has to pick up passengers in town. Unfortunately, the authority has decided that it is no longer subsidising the service, and it has been offered back to Arriva to run on a commercial basis. 9.50 a.m. [128] John Marek: Do you have any idea of the cost of the two extra units? [129] Mr T. Roberts: It would cost £134,000 for a two-car unit.

[130] John Marek: Per annum? [131] Mr T. Roberts: Yes. [132] Mr Cowtan: That is for leasing. [133] John Marek: For both? [134] Mr T. Roberts: There are two coaches on the train. [135] Rosemary Butler: What is a unit? Do you mean a train engine? [136] Mr T. Roberts: I mean two trains. It would cost £250,000 for two trains. [137] John Marek: Thank you. We are wiser as a result of your visit. Please send us your notes. [138] Mr T. Roberts: Thank you for the opportunity. It is nice to see our Assembly getting to grips with these issues. 9.51 a.m.

Consortiwm Cludiant Integredig De-orllewin Cymru South-west Wales Integrated Transport Consortium

[139] John Marek: It is my pleasure to welcome David Sandy, who is the transport strategy officer for Pembrokeshire County Council and a member of the South-West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium working group. You have about 40 minutes, starting now. [Laughter.] Only joking. The floor is yours to address us and then we will then ask you questions. [140] Mr Sandy: Thank you. I am David Sandy. I am the transport strategy officer for Pembrokeshire County Council and a member of the SWWITCH officer working group. One of my main responsibilities is rail matters across the SWWITCH region. First, I thank you for inviting me, on behalf of SWWITCH, to give evidence to the committee. There are several matters that we wish to bring to your attention. I propose to briefly summarise the background to SWWITCH and how it works and then to set out a couple of studies that SWWITCH has carried out using consultants. I shall tell you about the key findings of those studies, including the main constraints on the development of rail services in the SWWITCH region, and then I shall set out the priorities for investment over the next 20 years. [141] SWWITCH was formed in 1998. As the Chair said, it is an acronym for the South-West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium. The letter ‘h’ has been added. It comprises the four unitary authorities in south-west Wales—Carmarthenshire County Council, Neath Port Talbot Country Borough Council, Pembrokeshire County Council and the City and County of Swansea Council. It has always been a general transport consortium, dealing with all modes of transport, unlike some of the other consortia, particularly that in south-east Wales. We have carried out several studies, not only on rail but on freight, with rail freight as a particular aspect of that, and on public transport generally. [142] How does it work? Since its formation, we have had a steering group, which is now, in effect, a joint committee of the four authorities. It is not a separate body, as

it were. The steering group has elected members—usually the cabinet members of the four authorities with responsibility for transport. Under that, there is a management group that comprises the four chief officers with transport responsibilities together with the officer working group. Finally, there is the officer working group, which carries out the work of the consortium. [143] John Marek: Sorry, I do not wish to delay you, but do not worry about that, because it is in your paper, which we have all read. I hope that you do not mind my saying that. [144] Mr Sandy: No. If I am going on too long, please tell me. I just want to point out that SWWITCH covers a very diverse region and it is important to realise that. It has a mainly urban eastern area, although there are rural areas within that, and a very rural western area, particularly beyond Llanelli. It is the second largest of the four transport consortia, in population terms, with 22 per cent of the population of Wales in 2001. The rail routes in the region are set out in figure 1 of my paper and the current services are described on page 2. It is important to realise—as I believe one of the members of TraCC said earlier—that, in all but one case, the rail services in the region are in receipt of net subsidy, therefore, anything that we do will need to attract additional funding. [145] We have undertaken a couple of studies. The first was a rail study in 2002. The objectives and vision for rail services in the SWWITCH area are set out on page 3 of the paper, and they remain the vision and objectives of SWWITCH. Following that, we launched a stakeholder consultation on that study. We received one comment saying that the study was not quite visionary enough; it did not look far enough into the future. Therefore, we commissioned a further study, using the same consultants because they had the specialist knowledge that they had gained from the first, and that study was completed in October 2005. Subsequently, the findings of that study were adopted by the SWWITCH joint committee in December. [146] It is important to realise the things that we do in rail. We have an informal partnership with Arriva Trains Wales and its representatives come along regularly to our steering group meetings, and work with me and other members of the SWWITCH working group. There have been a number of improvements since the last study was done and I will mention those. The SWWITCH local authorities have shown their confidence in rail services. There have been a number of investments at key railway stations in the region: Swansea in particular has quite an improved forecourt and there are ongoing discussions about improving the interior of the station. Two or three years ago, Haverfordwest station had its forecourt, bus stops and bus access improved considerably. There have been improvements at Neath, with the park-and-ride car park and a new footbridge and lift over the railway line, and similar improvements, without the lift, at Port Talbot Parkway. Since that study, the Port Talbot panel signal box re-signalling scheme is now under way, which is key to the area, as it controls the signalling between Bridgend and Baglan, near Port Talbot. We understand that the design of that scheme allows for the adding on of improvements, including the use of faster trains, should that become possible in the future. [147] There have been improvements to the Heart of Wales line timetable, which you heard about from the previous contributor, so I will not go on at length about that. Since then, we have formed a community rail partnership in south-west Wales and we have a partnership officer and much of the funding for that comes from

SWWITCH and Arriva Trains Wales. As you know, the Welsh Assembly Government has an increased say in the provision of rail services since the recent enactment of the Railways Act 2005. [148] It is also important to say that there have been improvements to rail services since the new franchise timetable took effect in December 2005. We now have a standard-pattern repeating timetable, which is much more user friendly and gives much faster access to Cardiff and beyond. One of our main concerns was that that should be the main link across the region, particularly on the central line through the region from Milford Haven, Haverfordwest, Carmarthen, Llanelli, Swansea and beyond. The infrastructure there is much better, for example, than on the Pembroke Dock line, where the infrastructure is of a small railway company that was developed in the nineteenth century and it is not of the same standard as the line that I am talking about. Therefore, most of our key improvements have been prioritised along that line. 10.00 a.m. [149] The study has shown that rail travel in the area, in terms of the number of people boarding and alighting trains and buying tickets from 2001 and 2004, has increased by about 11.4 per cent. Forecasts suggest that with the introduction of the new timetable, which I have just mentioned, and the class 175 trains—although they are not new or very modern trains, they are only four years old, and we believe that the rest of the fleet will be in operation by the end of this year—should make a big difference to the patronage on the line. [150] The study identifies some key infrastructure constraints in the region, which are barriers to the development of rail services. Perhaps this is the key point that I would like to get across to the committee. In particular, most of the line between Clarbeston Road and Swansea is still double track, but there is a missing section of about 5.25 miles long from Duffryn junction, which is just east of Llanelli, through to Cockett, which is just west of Swansea. That includes Loughor bridge and Gowerton station. The study has identified that there is perhaps a case to look at improving services between Carmarthen and Swansea, particularly with commuters and business travellers in mind. However, in order to provide that service, should it prove to have a good business case, we would need to overcome this bottleneck. [151] Bearing in mind the statement made by Sue Essex before Christmas as part of the budget preparations, she gave an undertaking that the Welsh Assembly Government would fund pre-feasibility studies at Gowerton. I presume this to mean that the single-track section of the line is what they are talking about. SWWITCH has therefore allocated part of its budget to carry out parallel or linked feasibility studies on the business case for improving the services along that stretch of line from Carmarthen to Swansea. We have held preliminary discussions with Network Rail with a view to collaborating on that, as I believe that it may be asked to carry out the infrastructure investigations on that stretch of line. It will obviously involve a look at the signalling, and there are options. It may mean a complete redoubling of the line or something in between with improved signalling. [152] Until the study has been done, it is difficult to say what the outcome will be and whether the business case would support an additional service. As things stand, the line is at capacity at two trains a day, and, as you are probably aware, the Heart of Wales line trains have difficulty connecting into the mainline services and to other service operated by Arriva Trains Wales.

[153] John Marek: That was one of the areas where extra money was provided in between the draft budget and the final budget, because there was concern across the Assembly about that particular area. We are apprised of that. [154] Mr Sandy: That is our main consideration and priority for further investment. We are now investigating that and seeing whether we can overcome that bottleneck and attract additional funding to enable us to do that. We must be very pragmatic in the development of such schemes—we must have a rigorous assessment of the costs, community benefits, the business case and value for money of any scheme that we develop. We regard that as the first priority at the moment, and we are working closely and developing that. [155] The other thing that we are concerned about is the management of connections between Arriva Trains Wales services and First Great Western services, and, to some extent, the Heart of Wales line. In particular, we are concerned about connections at Swansea and Cardiff between Arriva Trains Wales and First Great Western services. We are concerned that the new timetable that is proposed from next December by First Great Western should do nothing to worsen the service; we hope that it will improve the connections between trains. However, we are also concerned, notwithstanding the scheduled arrival and departure times fitting in with one another, that the interface between the management of both companies manages the connections properly, so that passengers are not left standing at stations and that they are taken forward to their final destination, which, as I am sure the committee is aware, has not happened on occasion in the past. [156] The other thing that we are keen to do, at key stations, is to integrate the rail network with bus services and other forms of transport, including private cars and taxis, and, to some extent, community transport. The investment that we have seen at the major stations, which I alluded to earlier, is an attempt to start that process. I know that we are now looking in Haverfordwest, for example, to ensure that passengers are able to board buses to access the wider bus network in Pembrokeshire via a service that links the railway station with the new bus station, which we completed earlier last year. [157] Similarly, in Carmarthen, I am sure that you are aware of the scheme to link the town centre with the railway station, with a new bridge across the river. That will change the gateway into Carmarthen, which is a key interchange point on the SWWITCH rail network. [158] I have alluded to the ongoing discussions about Swansea High Street station. [159] Finally, on rail freight, this is of importance to the region. We have Corus Trostre and the Corus steelworks at Margam, Port Talbot, and several other locations, and there is a limited number of trains from the Elf-Murco oil refinery near Milford Haven. Although there is extra traffic at present, due to the construction of liquefied natural gas developments in the Milford Haven area, we do not believe that there will be an increase in freight train movements in the longer term, once that construction is completed, because most of the products will go out by pipeline, and, to some extent, by road for local distribution. [160] However, we understand that there is commercial interest in developing a roll on/off container port on the northern banks of Milford Haven, on what was the old Ministry of Defence armament site. I understand that there are discussions regarding the transfer of the land to the port authority as part of the process being followed at present. However, the plan is to construct a new rail access off the branch line, which

currently serves the old Gulf refinery at Waterston, down a slow incline onto the foreshore, involving the excavation of cliff and new quays, and so on. That would also have a road access. [161] There is a similar development—

[162] John Marek: I am sorry to stop you again, but the remit of this committee is the infrastructure and improvements in passenger rail services. I apologise for interrupting you. [163] Mr Sandy: I mention this because it has an impact on the Swansea district line. At present, the Swansea district line carries most freight trains around Swansea. As you know, the number of freight trains from west Wales, until recently, has been declining. There is some concern about the cost of maintaining that infrastructure, with two large tunnels and a few river bridges. If these developments take off in the west of the region, we feel that there is a need to ensure that that infrastructure is kept in place so that there is no conflict between passenger train movements and freight train movements on the other line into Swansea. [164] John Marek: Thank you very much. That was very helpful. Again, many points were raised there. 10.10 a.m. [165] Janet Davies: On the last point, about the Swansea district line, this is a long-term look at rail passenger services, going up to 2030, is it not? While it would not be an issue in the immediate future, has any thought been given to a park-and-ride scheme on the Swansea district line, which could serve both Swansea and Neath? It could be something similar to what is done at Bristol Parkway and Bristol Temple Meads. It seems to me that the service going west is very much delayed by going in and out of Neath and in and out of Swansea, and a park-and-ride scheme could perhaps change that. [166] You flag up the service to Fishguard as not being sustainable in its present form. Correct me if I am wrong, but I understand that the trains go there in the summer to meet the two ferries a day, but, for the rest of the year, there is a bus connection from Haverfordwest. I can see that that is not sustainable, so, are there any studies about improving that service and therefore getting more passengers on it? I think that, at the moment, the rail service from Fishguard is not one that most people would want to use. [167] John Marek: I do not think that there is one, really. [168] Mr Sandy: I will start with the first point, which was your suggestion about a park-and-ride scheme on the district line. We have not given serious thought to it. There were proposals that were looked at in outline, but no more than that, by the Welsh Development Agency, in the context of developing the old tinplate works site at Felindre, north of Swansea, which is on the district line, and in conjunction with the Llandarcy urban village. [169] I outline in my report the key statistics from the original rail study, which are on page 4, paragraph 3.5. SWWITCH’s concern is that if one were to run additional services or, indeed, some of the current services, via the Swansea district line, while it would give a faster journey time, and, as you say, perhaps enable the provision of a park-and-ride station, the statistics show that about a quarter, if not more, of the

passengers using the services from south-west Wales wish to go to Swansea, and a fair percentage wishes to go to Neath. We are not convinced that that would be a sustainable option. If we did a business case study, it might show that those services were unsustainable in terms of value for money and would not take people where they wanted to go. [170] Janet Davies: My point is that the present services are so poor that they discourage people from using the rail services. I get letters from people pointing out that people who prefer to go by train will go by car because the service is so bad. I am not looking to the immediate future, but there is such a long timescale to this view that it should be considered, perhaps after things of a higher priority are done. The whole Gowerton-Swansea single-track area is obviously a priority at the moment. [171] Mr Sandy: We are not closing our ears to anything, but looking at this issue is not on our radar at present. We believe that, purely from a pragmatic point of view, if you had a park-and-ride scheme, you would need to make it attractive, and, for one thing, you would need quite a frequent rail service. The cost of operating and leasing, as we have heard, is quite considerable. We do not believe at the moment, subject to further study some years hence, that doing that is a priority, because it would be horrendously expensive. [172] Rosemary Butler: You have two paragraphs on Fishguard, which are paragraphs 11.3 and 12.6. I may not be reading them correctly, but they do not seem to be, if not exactly contradicting each other, saying quite the same thing. Could we have clarification on that, not necessarily now, but in writing? [173] John Marek: That would be useful, and I would find it so. At the moment, there is no service to Fishguard for local people. My simple question would be: is it not worth having a morning service so that you to get out of Fishguard—I am sure that you cannot get here in time for 9 a.m.—and an evening service to get back? Could you let us have a note on that? [174] Mr Sandy: Yes, of course, but to answer the question briefly, what we are saying along with the consultants, and SWWITCH agrees, is that the rail service to Fishguard in its current form is not sustainable. It meets only the ferry services. To take up Janet Davies’s earlier point, the rail services meet the main ferry services throughout the year. That is to say, they are scheduled to do so, but weather plays an important part in this process. It is difficult to delay trains to meet the ferry service if the ferries are late or if they do not run at all because of severe weather. A similar situation would arise if train services met the fast ferries in the summer. No train services meet the fast ferries in the summer. Those fast ferries are even more unpredictable than the main ferry service because of the type of craft used. We are saying that the current service is designed to serve the ferry traffic. [175] So, there are those problems and there are also the problems of the declining numbers of foot passengers, which is what the trains are designed to serve, because of competition from air services, people travelling by car and so on. Therefore, although significant numbers of people are using the train during the summer, at other times of the year, very few people use those trains. So, in its current form, it does not appear to be a sustainable option for the long term without looking at how we can improve the situation or what alternatives there are to serving that transport link. We have to agree through the south-west Wales community rail partnership, using the partnership’s budget, to consider how that service could be made more sustainable or what the alternatives are and what the costs and benefits are. We hope to do that during the forthcoming financial year.

[176] John Marek: You are right in what you said, but it is a service for the ferries, and my question was, what about local people and local travel? [177] Mr Sandy: That would be looked at as part of that study, and I cannot give you more assurances on that until that study is completed. [178] John Marek: But what are your views? [179] Mr Sandy: My view is that it is unlikely to be sustainable, but I do not want to prejudge the findings of the study. [180] John Marek: No, it is useful to know that. Janet, have you finished questioning? [181] Janet Davies: I had one more question. You said that there was no lift in Port Talbot station, so does that mean that disabled access is available in only one direction? [182] Mr Sandy: I believe that there is a problem with getting people from one platform to the other. [183] Janet Davies: It is quite a big station. [184] Eleanor Burnham: Can I ask a question? [185] John Marek: Not unless it is on this point, because Lisa is next. [186] Lisa Francis: I wanted to raise three points. You mentioned in your paper the doubling of the track between Cockett and Duffryn and that that could increase the number of trains west of Swansea. You mentioned that there are five miles of track that would need to be doubled, including over the Loughor viaduct. My question is similar to Carl’s. If you were given a sum of money and had to prioritise it, do you think that spending it on that sort of infrastructure would open up traffic to the west more? Do you think that that would be the answer to facilitating that? [187] Mr Sandy: If we were given a sum of money, we would not necessarily spend it on that unless we were convinced that an enhanced train service gave value for money and we could attract sufficient funding. So the two go together. Just improving the infrastructure without any case for improving the services would not, in my view, be a good use of money. However, it would unlock the potential for doing that in the future. [188] Lisa Francis: How far do you think this Gowerton feasibility study will give you any pointers as to whether that is something— [189] Mr Sandy: It is early days yet but, as I understand it, Network Rail hopes to carry out the infrastructure side of the study, although that has not been confirmed yet. It would do that and it has said that it would be most willing to co-operate with us on the business case study for the extra rail service that we would like to develop between Carmarthen and Swansea, so the whole thing is predicated on a positive, or a good business case for an improved rail service. 10.20 a.m.

[190] Lisa Francis: Okay. And the timescale on that business case is probably difficult to define at the moment, I suppose. [191] Mr Sandy: We would hope to finish the study certainly during the next financial year, but there is a long lead time, and how you actually implement it is another story. [192] Lisa Francis: Thank you. I wondered whether the infrastructure from Pembroke Dock was able to cope with freight. You mentioned Milford Haven and I think that you said that a new terminal was being built on the Waterston side. Is Pembroke Dock similar? [193] Mr Sandy: Pembroke Dock is a problem. It used to be rail-connected in the past. The rail line now ends at the railway station some several hundred yards short of the docks. It would have to penetrate the town centre and cross a number of roads that have been developed since the rail lines closed, and a part of a line has been built over it. I suspect that the width of the line would not meet modern safety standards or environmental standards. It would be very difficult to reconnect the docks with it. [194] Lisa Francis: Finally, you talked about the relationship and management of connections between Arriva Trains Wales and First Great Western and how the interface between the companies was very important, but that it possibly was not working properly at the moment. [195] Mr Sandy: That is our impression, yes. [196] Lisa Francis: How do you think that that could best be improved? [197] Mr Sandy: I would like reassurance in the form of a process or a protocol, although I have not seen one, for dealing with situations when trains were late or cancelled and connections were no longer possible because trains cannot be held or whatever. I would like to see what process exists, what liaison there is between staff and what the priority decision-making process is to address that issue. If we knew that, we might get more reassurance. I am sceptical as to whether it is left to the staff on the day on an ad hoc basis. [198] John Marek: The responsibilities could be a question for the Office of Rail Regulation and his or her competition. Perhaps you could ask it. Lisa, have you finished? If so, Eleanor is next. [199] Eleanor Burnham: Very briefly, on page 6, I notice that you say that, ‘WAG has however suspended Transport Grant (TG) for new schemes and can give no indication as to when this suspension will be lifted’. [200] Perhaps you could expand briefly on this, and if WAG was to lift it, what would you do with the money? I suppose that that is a similar question to what your priority would be.

[201] The other issue is whether you have been in discussions with Taith about ferries, because I believe that it runs successful connections with ferries in Holyhead. It is surely not rocket science. Are there similarities, or do you have more difficult challenges? I go quite regularly to Llanelli, and it is quite fascinating because, once you get out of Swansea, you feel as though you are going to the ends of the earth, so God knows what it is like getting to Fishguard. It is a very pleasant trip, however. [202] Mr Sandy: I mentioned the transport grant because, at the moment, all four authorities in south-west Wales have the continuation of transport grant settlements, which were made some years ago, and most of them, if not all of them, are coming to an end in the forthcoming financial year. Those for Pembrokeshire, for example, came to an end last year, and, as I said at the beginning of my presentation, if we are to do anything to the rail service, we need additional funding. For infrastructure, we obviously need transport grants or some form of capital funding, and we also need revenue support if we are to run the services. So, everything is predicated on attracting funding, provided we can find a reasonable business case for what we want to do. [203] On the question of ferry services, no, we have not had direct discussions, although I speak to a colleague in Taith regularly. We have not specifically looked at the comparison with Holyhead, but I believe that there are more ferry services between Holyhead and Dublin than there are between Fishguard and Rosslare. So, perhaps there is not so much of a problem. I do not know, so I cannot answer categorically. [204] Eleanor Burnham: I apologise if I was being mischievous, Chair. [205] John Marek: Is everyone happy? Okay. That was very useful and a number of points were raised for consideration. I thank you for answering the questions genuinely and for being honest about costs, because one of the things about railways is that everybody wants everything, and, of course, it is not possible. So, I thank you very much.

Gohiriwyd y cyfarfod rhwng 10.26 a.m. a 10.43 a.m. The meeting adjourned between 10.26 a.m. and 10.43 a.m.

Swyddfa Rheoleiddio’r Rheilffyrdd

The Office of Rail Regulation [206] John Marek: Welcome back. We welcome Michael Beswick. A verbatim record will be produced of this meeting. The remit of the committee is only to gather evidence, so it is not in any way confrontational. We want to draw up a list of improvements for railway infrastructure and passenger services, and I am sure that you will be able to help us with that. It is over to you, Mr Beswick. [207] Mr Beswick: Thank you. I thought that I would say a few words about the Office of Rail Regulation. We are the independent regulator of the GB rail industry and, from 1 April, we will also be the health and safety regulator for it, as we are taking that on from the Health and Safety Executive. We are the economic regulator of Network Rail, which means that we set Network Rail’s outputs, funding

requirements and charges. We monitor delivery against those outputs and we monitor Network Rail’s delivery of the reasonable requirements of train operators and funders of the railway. We also set the terms of some of the key relationships that Network Rail has with the train operators, through the track-access contracts. [208] We also have other regulatory functions. We are the competition authority for the GB rail industry, and that is concurrently with the Office of Fair Trading. We set the terms of some other industry relationships and we license operators and monitor their compliance with their licences. We look after some of the industry data publications and things like that. In doing all this, we try to achieve some public interest objectives and these are a balance of things like the use and development of the network, efficiency and economy, and having regard to the funds available. Part of our strategy objective now is to have regard to the National Assembly for Wales’s strategies and its ability to carry out its functions. That was introduced in the Railways Act 2005. [209] I emphasise that we are not a funder of the railway; we do not have any money to fund it but we help funders to get value for money from the railway, particularly from Network Rail. For instance, we put a lot of work into the framework for the investment in and the enhancement of the railway. We do not specify or manage franchises; that is done by the Department for Transport and, in the future, by the National Assembly/Welsh Assembly Government. However, we ensure that Network Rail does its bit on the railway, and, of course, that is a pretty important bit because Network Rail is the owner and operator of the rail infrastructure. [210] John Marek: Thank you. That is very good; we now know what you do. We will ask you questions, and then we will see how it goes. I call on Janet and then Lisa. [211] Janet Davies: I have a very general question, which I hope is not too political. It is quite obvious that Wales, overall, does not have a very good or comprehensive rail system and there are huge problems in parts of England, which we are all aware of, because we read about them in the press, if nothing else. What sympathy do you have with a demand that I think that exists fairly generally in Wales to have not only better services on the routes that we have, but more routes over time? In addition, I specifically refer you to the issue of performance on the Great Western route. I have heard that a lot of work has been done on the West Coast main line in England, which we hope will soon be fairly well sorted out, and that the East Coast main line, Thameslink and, possibly, Crossrail in London will take priority over the Great Western line. [212] Ms Beswick: I will try to answer each of those in turn. On the first point, I think that one of the features of the railway regime following the 2004 White Paper and the Railways Act 2005 is that the specification of what the railway in Wales should be delivering, particularly in terms of improvements to the railway, sit with the National Assembly, but so does the funding. We are very sympathetic to the railway developing, but it is down to the National Assembly/Welsh Assembly Government to work out what they want and how they believe it can be funded. We will facilitate and help that and put a lot of pressure on Network Rail and others to find more efficient solutions and so on, and we will do our bit in that regard. We will certainly put in place things such as the contractual frameworks that we have asked Network Rail to put in place for enhancement to try to make it clearer how they do that. I think that you heard from Network Rail what it is doing in order to be a lot more proactive in terms of enhancing the railway. We can put in place the framework, and we are very sympathetic to that.

[213] We will also ensure that Network Rail recognises that it has to give priority to what people want in Wales and not just prioritise other parts of the network. We have given exactly the same message in Scotland, and I think that that is also working quite well. So, we can help you to get your priorities, but, ultimately, it is down to you to specify them and to work out how you are going to fund them. [214] We are quite concerned about performance on the Great Western route, because it is now lagging quite badly behind a number of other lines, such as the East Coast and West Coast main lines. We have had some discussions with Network Rail and the operators involved and we are still investigating what the root causes of that are. Clearly, part of the issue is to do with the age of the infrastructure assets. A lot of the kit on the Great Western was put in place 30 or 40 years ago with a 30 or 40 year life, so you begin to see what is happening. Network Rail is putting quite a lot of money at the moment into renewing those assets. One of the jobs that ORR does, when it sets Network Rail outputs and funding, is to look at the long-term sustainability of the entire railway, which includes the Great Western line. We will certainly be looking to Network Rail to address the immediate performance issues and its planning to ensure that it is sustaining the line for the long term. There is a clear message that the issues around the assets on the Great Western line need to be addressed. 10.50 a.m. [215] Janet Davies: I have one point to raise. You are taking over the health and safety duties next month, are you not? [216] Mr Beswick: On 1 April. [217] Janet Davies: I am concerned about the slam doors on the Great Western trains, which are out of date. It is difficult for elderly and frail people to deal with these doors. One elderly and frail person told me recently that she always travels at peak times so that she knows that there will be someone there to open the door to let her off the train, because she is petrified of going past her station if she goes at a quiet time. Will you be tackling this problem? I know that it is not included in the refurbishment, and that there is talk of these doors lasting another 15 years, but it does not seem acceptable to me. [218] Mr Beswick: It is difficult to see how you would put modern doors on those trains without having new trains, because I do not think that you could put modern doors in those carriages in their current form. The issue is more about what you do in the short term with regard to staff at stations, and what happens in the longer term with regard to replacing the fleet, when I think they will be replaced with sliding doors. It is not ideal, but the trains are now 30 years old, and experience suggests that when you try to do anything as major as that, you will not succeed. Due to the position of the doors and the way that the coaches are built, it is unlikely that you would be able to do anything in terms of more modern doors. [219] John Marek: Is that okay, Janet?

[220] Janet Davies: It is not very good. [221] John Marek: That poured a bit of cold water on that one. [222] Lisa Francis: My question leads on from Janet’s point, because the last presenter we had was Mr David Sandy from SWWITCH, who said that he was concerned about the relationship between Arriva Trains Wales and First Great Western insofar as the interface between the companies was not working properly. He said that he would like to see a process or a protocol of dealing with cancellations and liaison between staff concerning priorities. He felt that it was often left to staff to deal with issues on an ad hoc basis; that staff had to cope on the day if a train was cancelled or late. From the evidence that we have heard from various people and the hundreds of letters that I have received from train travellers, there seems to be a huge absence of a service culture in this industry. [223] With regard to the point that Janet made about the doors, if you cannot change the doors, my answer would be that there should be someone from the rail company to assist people in that sort of situation. As the rail regulator, how do you anticipate improving the relationship between train companies or train operators in that particular respect? That is my first question, and I am sorry if it gives you a broad canvas on which to answer. [224] Mr Beswick: I entirely agree with you, and we strongly encourage train operators and Network Rail to work together to improve the service to passengers. If there are areas where that is failing, then the operators are failing. Some important things are happening on the railway that will help this, particularly the integrated control centres that are being developed. As I understand it, there is an integrated control centre for Great Western in Swindon and a satellite in Cardiff, which should give greater clarity regarding who is running the railway on the day. We should be able to have a set of rules around things like holding connections and so on. [225] As far as the doors of the Intercity 125 are concerned, if you cannot change the doors, then it is a question of looking at whether the station staffing is adequate and so on. To be fair, I think that the operators recognise that. [226] Lisa Francis: As you will be in charge of the health and safety aspect, which is associated with that, and as you license the operators, you are presumably in a position to revoke those licences if they do not comply. How far will a company have to be misdemeanant in that respect, before it would have its licence taken away? [227] Mr Beswick: A company has to do pretty badly to have its licence taken away. That is how the licences work. Clearly, we have options in terms of taking action under the licences requiring companies to do better in certain areas. At present, there is not a great deal in terms of customer service, but it is an area that we keep under review. [228] Lisa Francis: I do not know, Chair, whether it might be useful to have more

details about exactly what a company has to do, or not do, before its licence is revoked. I do not know whether other Members agree, but it seems to me, from the evidence that we have been receiving, that this service provision has to be the way in which a lot of this will move forwards. [229] John Marek: It happened with Connex South East, I think—the Government had to take it over. [230] Mr Beswick: That was not a licence. As I say, the way that licences are structured, and they were originally issued by the Secretary of State 10 years ago, is that, essentially, licence revocation is a nuclear remedy that you just do not take. You tend to deal with customer service issues through the franchise agreement. With Connex, particularly as a result of failings in its finances and its financial management, the Strategic Rail Authority decided that it would revoke the franchise. It took the franchise back and returned control, which it was entitled to do under the franchise agreement. [231] John Marek: Thank you. Lisa, is there anything else? [232] Lisa Francis: Yes. [233] John Marek: Is there anything useful that could be said to us in a note on this? It is a nuclear option. [234] Lisa Francis: I understand that it is a nuclear option. It was interesting to hear what you said about these things needing to be dealt with through franchise agreements, but I think that it is something that we need to look at in this report. Some time needs to be devoted to that in the report. [235] Mr Beswick: I can send you a note on licensing and how that works. [236] John Marek: Could you? That would be good. There is just one thing. For example, Arriva Trains has now lengthened a lot of the journey times, with lots of recovery time built in, so that its trains are very rarely late. Therefore, the company does not have to pay penalty payments and it can boast about its time-keeping record. Would you have any kind of influence over that if the delays at each station, in order to take up recovery time, got so long that the service became inefficient? [237] Mr Beswick: The timetable is planned, essentially, by Network Rail on the basis of the bids by the operators. We are very interested in making sure that they make the best of the network. It is always quite difficult to get a balance between the amount of slack that you have in a timetable and the performance. Given that Arriva Trains Wales’s performance in the last 12 months was something like 81.2 per cent on the public performance measure, which I think that we would all find unacceptable, then the fact that it has a timetable in place that is running at somewhat higher levels—it has been around 87 or 89 per cent over the past couple of months—is, I think, good news. The issue now is for Arriva, with Network Rail, to work on identifying tweaks to that timetable, including changes if some of the journey times are wrong. We will encourage them to do that. To be fair, that was the message when we saw Arriva. We raised the issue of the timetable with the company in October. It did say that once it had the basic timetable in place, it would be looking for opportunities to improve it. [238] John Marek: Okay. Sorry, Lisa, please go on.

[239] Lisa Francis: Thank you, John. I have a couple more points. In terms of the relationship that you have with Network Rail, you mention in point 14 of your paper that you are looking to develop improvements to stations with it and other industry parties. Janet raised a point earlier this morning about disabled access or access for people with mobility problems at stations in Wales. How much clout do you have to make sure that Network Rail and other parties improve things such as platform heights and so forth, or railway station facilities, especially when a lot of those stations are now leased out to the operators? There seems to be some kind of nebulousness about who is responsible for improvements to such infrastructure. 11.00 a.m. [240] How far can you push them to ensure that those improvements are made? Similarly, this morning, we heard about moving freight. The Conwy valley system was mentioned, and particularly the Conwy valley project. That project has been slowed because Network Rail has been dragging its feet in coming back with costs. As the regulator, are you in a position to lean on it to say that if it is serious about providing freight, it needs to come back with the costs in the next 12 months or six months? Are you in a position to give it a time limit and to make it do such things? [241] Mr Beswick: As far as accessibility is concerned, as I said earlier, we are not the funder of the railway. The National Assembly and the Secretary of State are the funders. Therefore, we cannot make money available for accessibility measures. However, we can ensure that a framework is in place. We are conscious that there is quite a lot of confusion about who is responsible for what at stations, which is why we drew up the new stations’ code. That makes the situation much clearer. Essentially, the customer-facing assets belong to the train operator, and the infrastructure assets belong to Network Rail. We can facilitate that, and we can press the industry to produce value-for-money solutions. However, it is down to the funders—whether the National Assembly or the Secretary of State—to specify what they want in terms of accessibility. It is our job to ensure that the industry is geared up to deliver that, and that it looks for efficient solutions. [242] On freight, in a nutshell, we can and do put pressure on Network Rail to develop plans to meet the reasonable requirements of freight operators. For instance, we have been very concerned that Network Rail—in several places; not particularly in Wales, but in England and Scotland—did not really know the network’s capability for freight. It did not have it accurately documented. We have now received a recovery plan from Network Rail, because we found it to be in breach of its licence. We encourage Network Rail—and we will be harder than that if necessary—to come up with cost-effective schemes for addressing freight needs. Having said that, we must always recognise that, sometimes, it will be very expensive to do things on the railway for objectively good reasons. However, let us at least get the facts.

[243] Lisa Francis: Thank you for that reply.

[244] Eleanor Burnham: There are so many questions, but I must be brief. There has been such a lot of worry about Network Rail. It has been described, even during the break, as a very difficult organisation to move forward. So, how can we be assured by you that you can make it a much more responsive, can-do organisation, or is that now down to the Welsh Assembly Government, and is it for us to prod the Welsh Assembly Government? It is surprising and perplexing for the general public to note that your key role, as you rightly remind us, does not involve railway franchise enforcement. That is down to us, because the Welsh Assembly Government now becomes the rail funding authority. However, as a regular traveller on the train, I feel that Wales has been severely underfunded for a long time. Do you believe that we are now capable of improving our railways? In your role as rail regulator, have you costed all sorts of improvements? The equation of who is who in the railway system has become so complex that it is mind-boggling. That is one issue. [245] Mr Beswick: Shall I have a go at answering that first? [246] Eleanor Burnham: Okay. [247] Mr Beswick: On Network Rail, let us think back a bit to the time that Network Rail was created three and a half years ago. Expenditure on the railway was out of control and the performance was dreadful. All credit to it, Network Rail has got the railway under control in that time. That was very important; that had to be done and GB-wide performance is quite a lot better than it was. Expenditure is under control and it has a handle on the engineering work, which Railtrack never had. That is good. [248] It now has to develop. This is the point that we are making with Network Rail, and we will press this on its board—it now has to become a much more proactive and responsive company. In some ways, we are beginning to see that happening. The sorts of things that Paul Plummer and Robbie Burns were saying to you about route enhancement managers and so on are a positive step forward, as Network Rail is recognising that it has a wider role. [249] Following the rail review, Network Rail has a much wider role in terms of industry planning and performance. It will have to become a much more responsive and innovative company. That is now the challenge for the leadership of Network Rail, to move on from being a company that was about getting the railway under control, to being a company that is about developing the railway. Our board is keen to press Network Rail on that. We will be doing that and, if necessary, we will use our regulatory functions. [250] Eleanor Burnham: Just to press you a bit further, it is rather unfortunate and bad timing for the court case involving—I forget the person’s name—a contractor who caused the death of some people, but can you assure us that Network Rail will not oversee as fatal an incident, because that is the worst element of how Network Rail has operated? [251] John Marek: Was it not at Tebay? I think Network Rail took over; I am not sure. Does anyone know? [252] Eleanor Burnham: I am only alluding to it in general. I have not mentioned anyone’s name. This is the point that I am coming to: when something so tragic

happens because such a vital area of work is sub-contracted out, we want to be assured that you, as the rail regulator, are going to ensure that it does not happen again. [253] Mr Beswick: The safety regulator, whose responsibilities we are taking over in 10 days’ time, was involved in the prosecution of the Tebay case. I know that the chief inspector has essentially described the behaviour of the contractor at Tebay as ‘wicked’, and I think that that is, essentially, what the jury found. That was completely unacceptable. What we are doing, and will continue to do, is to press Network Rail on the issues around the management of contractors. It has taken a huge amount of contract work in-house; it now manages all its own maintenance because it concluded that it needed control of that. However, it still contracts out a lot of renewal work and, tragically, the work at Tebay had been contracted out to someone whose behaviour was unacceptable. It is about Network Rail managing its contractors effectively. [254] Eleanor Burnham: I have a few more questions. There might be implications for Wales from the application from Grand Central Train Services. Do you have any thoughts on that? [255] Mr Beswick: I cannot comment on its application because we are still in the process of making our decision, which we hope to announce shortly. I chaired the hearing on that. There will always need to be a balance between franchised services, specified by Government, and the options for the private sector to introduce innovative new services. It is the Office of Rail Regulation’s job to strike that balance. I can point, for instance, to the success of the services from Hull, which we approved four years ago. We had all the Members of Parliament for Hull in, saying just how good those services are and how important they are to Hull. It is about filling the niches in the market in the most effective way. [256] Eleanor Burnham: Are you confident that the proposal for Wrexham to Marylebone, because it would be in a similar context, is going to come good, as the expression goes? [257] Mr Beswick: We would have to look at that one in detail, because we know that Wrexham does not have particularly good direct links, but, on the other hand, we have to recognise that Wrexham probably is not as big a market as Hull. It is going to be something that we will have to balance. Essentially, our test is whether it adds any value in terms of the passenger or whether it is primarily obstructive, and that is what we would have to look at. At the moment, the key thing is for the people to develop the proposition and work with Network Rail to see whether they can make it work, and they must then come to us for approval and we will have to look at it. 11.10 a.m. [258] Eleanor Burnham: I have a final question, Chair, with your indulgence. On page 3, you mention that stations are a particular area of concern. Are you confident that you will be able to disentangle the mystery that surrounds who is in charge or supposed to be funding railway stations?

[259] Mr Beswick: What we have been doing—it may sound rather boring, but it is important—is developing the stations code that tries to make clearer who is responsible for what. We are now in the business of encouraging the industry to build on that and on what we have done on enhancement to look at the way in which we can make stations better and come up with some innovative solutions to doing that. It

is very much in line with the sorts of things that you and the Secretary of State in England are looking for. [260] Leighton Andrews: I have two questions. The first is to do with your role in assessing the costings of Network Rail and the charges paid by Arriva and the other train operators for which you have responsibility. The Welsh Assembly Government is funding additional projects and services in some cases through Arriva. One of my concerns is that we should not be facing a situation of double charging for things that may already be provided for. Could you explain your role in relation to any of the schemes in which the Welsh Assembly Government becomes involved?

[261] My second question goes back to stations. There seems to be a perpetual difficulty between train operators and Network Rail in relation to environmental improvements at or around stations. I refer to where Network Rail takes over responsibility for the area beyond the station, which causes immense concern among communities, particularly in Wales, that want to believe that the station is often the gateway into their town or village. They want that to represent their location as tidily as possible, so there must be someone who forces these parties together sometimes to ensure properly that these things are dealt with. [262] Mr Beswick: On your first point, as far as Network Rail is concerned, the key thing is that we are setting Network Rail’s outputs—and it is quite a long, but very important, process—and, essentially, the funding that it will have available to it, to run what we call a periodic review from 2009 to 2014. To do that, we need a specification from Government of what it wants from the railway and how much money it has. As I understand it, the Secretary of State will produce what he calls a high-level output service specification for England and Wales, but he will have to consult with the National Assembly before he does so. It will then be for us to identify what Network Rail has to deliver and how much money it will receive in access charges. We are doing a lot of work with Network Rail at the moment to understand exactly where the costs are, and part of that is to understand what it is doing in different parts of Wales, and so on. There is a lot of work going on in terms of understanding what the costs are, because that will help to inform decisions. In particular, it will help to inform decisions by the Welsh Assembly Government on what it wants to specify in addition to what is being funded by the Secretary of State, and, hopefully, it will get out of this whole set of issues around double charging. [263] We would like to get out clarity of this process, in a Network Rail business plan, as to what is being funded by the periodic review process through access charges. We then want to be able to say to you that there are opportunities here to spend a bit more. You begin to see that, for instance, the periodic review process will no doubt fund the continued work on the south Wales re-signalling. However, it may well be that you will want to add things to it in terms of extra services. However, it is all about getting a much better understanding of the cost baseline in Network Rail and a better understanding of the output baseline. Therefore, that is what we have to do. [264] I agree with you on the second point. We are aware of this, and, interestingly, Passenger Focus—the rail passengers’ council—raised this with us in the consultation on our corporate strategy. The railway is not very good at presenting its face to the community, and that is quite a challenge for it. As I said earlier, the railway is now much more under control than it was. It has had a period of stability, and it needs to start getting better at this again, because it may have lost the plot a little on that. I know of one or two specific cases that we have raised with Network Rail, but I will bear that point in mind.

[265] Carl Sargeant: Moving on from Leighton’s question, we have raised subsidised transport and subsidised fares again this morning. In order to regulate a service that we have total control or knowledge of, we must have an understanding of funding. From your office, would you say that you have a handle on how subsidised fares are distributed through Wales? [266] Mr Beswick: We would have a handle on Network Rail; we do not really have a handle on franchise costs, and I think that you would need to speak to Robin Shaw’s people about that. I think that they are the ones who would take the overview. We are keen to ensure that you and Robin’s people have a much better understanding of Network Rail’s contribution to the cost of the railway. One thing that was lost in the immediate post-privatisation period was that understanding of the cost of the railway at a local level. For example, Railtrack lost all understanding of its maintenance costs. I believe that that is now being restored by Network Rail. We have put a lot of pressure on Network Rail to do that, and it is now developing a much better understanding of local infrastructure costs. That is the area in which we can help, but I do not think that we can take the whole picture on the fares and subsidy issues, because that is much more in the Assembly’s hands. [267] Carl Sargeant: Thank you for that. My second point is related to your new powers. In 10 days’ time you will take over health and safety issues relating to rail services and rail infrastructure. I am concerned about station and platform heights, which we have touched on, and Janet mentioned the difficulty of door access. However, I want to talk about disabled access to stations and trains. While there does not seem to be any breach in health and safety, there must be a measurement of when it is breached or when there is lack of compliance. As the new regulator, do you see yourself having different views on that? On the basis that this committee is designed to establish improved services for passengers and the rail infrastructure, do you have any views on that and on its enforcement? [268] Dr Marek will be aware that, in Wrexham, you have to go to Chester to get off a train at certain times of the day because you cannot gain access to another platform. That is clearly a breach of service delivery or a service that is not accessible to all. Do you have any views on that? 11.20 a.m. [269] Mr Beswick: I have views on that, but I would emphasise that that is really an issue for the Department for Transport in terms of the rail accessibility regulations and travel for disabled passengers. My experience is that you need to have a clear strategy as to what you want to do in terms of ensuring accessibility to the network and starting to fund it. Safety and accessibility improvements can be funded either through tickets or through extra Government funding. By and large, they are not self-funding through tickets, so they tend to require extra Government funding. The danger is that if you try to do it incrementally, you will never get anywhere. You need to have a coherent strategy over a reasonably long period as to what you want to improve and where you want to improve it. [270] John Marek: Do you want to come in on this point, Eleanor? [271] Eleanor Burnham: Yes, on this very point. [272] John Marek: I will come back to you, Carl.

[273] Eleanor Burnham: I do not mind waiting until Carl has finished. [274] Carl Sargeant: On that point, Chair, I accept it, but there must be a stage at which it becomes, or can be identified as, dangerous or unacceptable. We have talked this morning about a 16 inch gap between the train doors and the platform. If that were not an issue, why would we want to look at it, anyway? However, you, as the regulator, must have a view on health and safety and when this becomes a problem. [275] Mr Beswick: If we take the view that it is generating an intolerable and unacceptable risk, then we clearly have to take appropriate action. The required action could be for the regulator to do something about it or to stop the activity. We would have to take the appropriate action, whatever it was, but, first of all, we would have to identify the safety hazard. Safety hazards that are intolerable have to be addressed. There is, however, a wider picture, which is about having a coherent strategy for accessibility at stations, because, otherwise, what will tend to happen is that you will get into a situation where the only way of getting from A to B is via Chester and so on. You must have a coherent strategy for that, but it is not really a general safety issue. Occasionally, there are safety issues and they have to be addressed. [276] Eleanor Burnham: It is totally intolerable, because the difficulty that you face is that you are not in control of the franchises; we will be in control of the franchises. As I understand it, the issue with accessibility in certain stations is one of staffing, because, when the staff are not on duty, the lifts are not operable and, therefore, disabled people or people with large amounts of luggage, older people or people with prams and so on, cannot use the services. Beyond the point about gaps between doors and platforms, these are issues that must surely be for the funding operator primarily, which will be us. Do you, as the rail regulator with an overarching health and safety role, have any figures that you have worked on in the past? Or is this something new, because the health and safety authority— [277] John Marek: The Office of Rail Regulation is not taking over the health and safety responsibility until next month. [278] Eleanor Burnham: Yes, but what I am saying is that the health and safety authority must have looked at these issues. Does it have figures that it will bring to you? [279] Mr Beswick: I do not think that it would have figures on that. [280] Eleanor Burnham: Why not? This has obviously been an ongoing problem for many people throughout the UK. [281] Mr Beswick: I emphasised the point that you have to distinguish between stuff that is essentially unsafe, which the safety regulator has to address, and stations that are just not accessible for people with mobility impairments and so on. It is an issue of what you want to specify from the railway and what you are prepared to pay. You are right to identify that much of the latter is really an issue for franchise management and franchise funding. There are choices for you. If you want to improve the accessibility of the railway materially, then we are in the business of ensuring that that railway does not then try to gold-plate it and give you completely unacceptable bills, but you should look at what you want to achieve and engage with the industry as to how much it might cost.

[282] Rosemary Butler: There is some very strong language in this report. For example, in your corporate strategy, you say that you will pursue ‘relentless improvements’ and there is also talk of ‘efficiency’. I used to work for an American company, where managers would say that you can be very efficient, but you must also be effective. So, you can ensure that you are effective, efficient and that improvements are pursued, but how will you monitor that on the ground? I am interested in that. [283] My other point is on stations. We have talked about infrastructure, but stations are vital and it has already been mentioned by some Members. You talk about innovative solutions. An innovative solution for improving stations would include staffing and staff training. I know that it is probably way down the bottom of your list, but you have mentioned it here, so how will you ensure that the culture is changed? You can have a good station, but if the staff are not helpful, or if there are no staff, then you lose credibility with the public. It is important that, when people get to the station, there are front-line service staff present to help them to get on or off the train, or just to say, ‘Good morning’ or, ‘The platform is over there’. It is as simple as that. [284] Mr Beswick: To take those points in turn, I agree with you entirely about effectiveness and efficiency. The last time we reviewed Network Rail’s charges, in 2003, we reckoned that it could take 31 per cent out in terms of unit costs over five years, because costs have been allowed to get completely out of control, particularly during the period of our administration. We are monitoring that carefully. The current indications are that Network Rail will meet those, but we are monitoring that carefully. [285] One issue that fits into the role of this committee and is very important is that the industry seems to have lost the art of the cost-effective enhancement over the past few years—you know, just looking for simple and cheap ways of bolting improvements onto renewals and such things. I am very pleased that Network Rail is beginning to look at that again. For example, you know of the debates going on now about things like the south Wales re-signalling; that only happens every 30 years or so. So, that is the time to get the railway right. [286] You are right about efficiency and effectiveness. One of the challenges that we will face for setting the charges in 2009 is precisely what we say about efficiency. Do we just get another 30 per cent out of the unit costs or should we be looking for some more sophisticated measures? [287] On stations, we have to recognise that we are not the funder, so there is a limit to what we can do. However, we can strongly encourage the industry to look for better ways of levering-in funding. For example, your colleague said that several local authorities were concerned about what messy stations do for their local environment and they may, therefore, be interested in facilitating improvement, perhaps even putting some funding into improvements or that sort of thing. If not, maybe other groups could do so, such as local businesses. Let us try to find some innovative ways of getting some money into stations and of delivering improvements at stations. That is the sort of thing that we are looking at. [288] Staffing at stations is more to do with how you want to manage the franchise agreement going forward. [289] Rosemary Butler: I am interested in the monitoring and how you will monitor it, because I assume that you are based in London. We are more than 100 miles away from London, so I do not understand how that will happen.

11.30 a.m. [290] Mr Beswick: We do a great deal of monitoring of the data that we get from Network Rail, including disaggregate cost data and things like that, and that will get better. We have independent reporters who can go out and look at the track on our behalf and things like that, so we do a lot of that. One of the interesting things is that, after 1 April, we will have health and safety inspectors out-based, including in Cardiff, so we will be looking at how we can use them to give us a better understanding of what is going on with the railways. I was talking to the principal inspector in Glasgow yesterday about how she would do that in Scotland for us for instance, so we will be looking to do precisely that. We want to get a better understanding of what is going on in the real railway. [291] Lisa Francis: Leading on from the question about platform heights and the 16-inch differential, that obviously impacts on people with mobility problems, but actually anybody would have difficulty in accessing a train like that. In the past, Arriva Trains has said that it carries platforms and steps to enable people to access trains, but it has asked people to give advance notice of requiring them before making their journeys, and that is just not practical. You mentioned that you will have people based in Cardiff for health and safety inspections, and I just wonder whether you envisage having any kind of mystery shopper in future, or a mystery train traveller, someone who travels up and down Wales on the trains looking at all the gaps in service provision. It seems to me that that could be a way to forge ahead on this. [292] Mr Beswick: Our inspectors and staff get about quite a lot but, more importantly, there are passenger representatives. You are going to have a passenger committee in Wales, and we would very much welcome a dialogue with it, for instance, on what the issues are for the passenger. We have a very good dialogue with Passenger Focus in London on some of the issues in England, for instance, and that will continue. [293] Lisa Francis: Do you envisage talking to the consortia, such as those that have given presentations today? [294] Mr Beswick: Yes. Robin Shaw facilitated a meeting, three or four weeks ago, and a number of the consortia were also represented. We talked through a lot of the issues around how they wanted to achieve their objectives. [295] John Marek: I think that is it. Thank you very much. Again, it is very helpful. I suspect that a lot of us, including myself, did not know too much about how you saw your job, but we have a much better idea now. Thank you very much for coming all the way from London—we appreciate it. [296] Eleanor Burnham: I hope you have a good train journey back. [297] Mr Beswick: I had a good train journey down. [298] Eleanor Burnham: Good. You should pop up to north Wales; it might open your eyes a bit. [299] Mr Beswick: My dad lives in Cardiff, so I am a regular on Great Western. [300] John Marek: Thank you very much.

11.34 a.m.

Taith—Consortiwm Trafnidiaeth Gogledd Cymru Taith—North Wales Transport Consortium

[301] John Marek: We now move to item 6 to hear what Taith, the north Wales transport consortium, has to say. You may recognise the gentleman on my right, Councillor Trevor Roberts. Welcome again, Trevor. We also have David Blainey, the acting executive officer of Taith, and Bob Saxby. I have only your name, Mr Saxby. Are you an officer with Taith? [302] Mr Saxby: I am with Conwy County Borough Council. [303] John Marek: Thank you very much. We have 40 minutes, so off you go. [304] Mr T. Roberts: I will certainly not take as much time as I took before, but I will make a short statement, which the Taith officers have asked me to put forward. The Taith joint transport board is responsible for strategic public transport issues in the six counties across north Wales. In December 2005, members instructed the officers to produce a bus strategy and a rail strategy to expand on our regional public transport strategy. The work of the rail strategy has been accelerated to meet the timescales of this committee. It is currently in draft form and will be considered by the Taith board at its annual general meeting on 27 April. [305] There are still some gaps, particularly in the costs of schemes, where information is to be provided by Network Rail and Arriva Trains. The draft strategy will be summarised by Bob Saxby, a public transport officer from Conwy County Borough Council, and David, who is sitting to my right. [306] Before I hand over, Chair, there are a couple of matters that I think you will all be interested in—and I know that we raised some eyebrows in the earlier presentation on concessionary travel. I understand that Bob will also be able to expand on concessionary travel. I have to say that it is a minefield for me, and I have to listen to it probably twice a week, and I still do not grasp it, so there may be difficulties. [307] On behalf of Taith, I just want to thank you again; we are grateful for this opportunity. Perhaps this is said a little bit tongue in cheek, but we know that you have only a short time left and that you will come to an end shortly, but perhaps, at some time in the future, you could consider continuing this committee, as it would be beneficial to the people of Wales to have a rail committee to deal with rail matters. [308] John Marek: I knew that you would say that. [309] Mr T. Roberts: That is just my personal view. [310] John Marek: I have said this to others, and you have heard it before, but this committee is gathering evidence. The committee’s remit is to draw up a list—which we may or may not order in priority later on—of railway infrastructure improvements and passenger rail improvements, so you are not under scrutiny or anything. I was just trying to get from you your ideas. [311] Secondly, there is a verbatim record so, if people do not appear to be paying attention, it does not matter, as it will be printed out for us.

[312] Thirdly, we have all read the paper so, if I may, I gently suggest that you please bring out the important parts of it. That is probably the best way of proceeding. [313] Mr Blainey: Thank you. I would just repeat what Councillor Roberts said about thanking you for this opportunity. In just a few minutes, as you said, we intend to summarise the draft regional rail strategy. We have written the strategy to recognise the vital role that the north Wales rail network has to play in addressing the social inclusion, environmental sustainability and the economic development of the region. We intend it to be an action plan to improve infrastructure and services over the next five years, and I stress the fact that we see it as something realistic that can be achieved. We have not gone for some of the more extreme aspirations that some people hold; we have tried to concentrate on things that can be achieved and are realistic. [314] Bob will begin by looking at levels of passenger service. [315] Mr Saxby: The first section sets out the levels of passenger services that we consider to be required to meet our strategy of providing a real alternative to the car and attracting business and tourism to the area. Between north Wales and London, we currently have a service of five trains a day, which, to a certain extent, have benefited from the enormous investment in the West Coast main line, although, on some of them, you have to change locomotives at Crewe and lose the 20 minutes that you have just gained. We consider the five services a day to be the minimum level of service that will attract people to north Wales. Visitors just will not come if there is not a through-service, and there is a very large population in the south east that comes to visit north Wales. In considering whether to locate to north Wales, businesses will look at whether there is a convenient business service. Speed is of particular importance to them, and you can now get to Llandudno Junction from London Euston in two hours and 53 minutes, which is just about within the realms of what business people will accept. [316] The strategy looks at more frequent through-services, with a clock-face timetable that links in with the Arriva Trains Wales standard pattern timetable, so that we have hourly services to Crewe, half of which will go through to Euston—more at peak times. The current arrangement of changing trains is not really sustainable if we want to provide a frequent service, so we need more Voyager trains on the line. [317] As far as coming to Cardiff is concerned, we welcome the improved service since the standard pattern timetable came in. Having a train every two hours has proved quite attractive to leisure users in particular. I am sure that it has generated quite a bit of extra travel by train between north and south Wales. It is not particularly convenient for business use, however, as I proved this morning by getting up at 4 a.m. to catch the 4.58 a.m. train from Bangor. I was in the House of Commons yesterday and could not get home until 9.30 p.m., so if I fall asleep, you will know why. So, we are looking for a business train that is faster than the others, which gets us to Cardiff between 9.30 a.m. and 10.30 a.m. and leaves again, going north, at 4.20 p.m., in between the two-hour pattern. 11.40 a.m. [318] For inter-urban services, our links to Manchester, Crewe and Birmingham are particularly important to us. Much as we like coming to Cardiff, and a lot of our business is here, we are close to Manchester. That is where our nearest airport is,

and where we have a lot of business trips. Similarly, many of our visitors come from Birmingham. We would like to work more closely with English authorities to develop those services, particularly through-services to Liverpool, which we have not had before. There is a piece of line called the Halton curve, which is not used at the moment and which could give us a through-service to Liverpool. [319] The most important thing to us at present is the frequency of trains along the north Wales coast because, west of Llandudno Junction, they are hourly only. Before rail privatisation, British Rail was telling us that there was a good business case for running half-hourly trains as far as Bangor. We believe that that is still the case. I know that the situation has changed with track excess charges and train-leasing costs and so on, but a lot of that is just a circular movement of money within the system, so we still believe that there is a good business case for a half-hourly service to Bangor. [320] The Conwy valley line is a very important north-south link in the middle of Wales. We believe that there is a case for an hourly service on that. It is not achievable purely by rail in the short term because there are not enough passing loops; it is a single-track line and there may also be demands for freight paths. So, initially, we would like to provide some of that by bus, which would provide a step change in the frequency. Together with the step change in the frequency along the north Wales coast, that would make the line an attractive alternative to the car.

[321] Mr Blainey: The second of the local lines in north Wales is the line from Wrexham to Bidston. That line has been the subject of a recent study and the summary of the findings of that study were included in the papers that were sent to you. The recommendations of that report are to have an increase in the frequency and also to electrify the line so that trains from north-east Wales can run direct to Liverpool. That is seen as essential to the future economic development of the sub-region, and it was widely supported by the politicians who were able to attend the launch of that report last week. [322] Briefly on freight, the strategy supports the development of rail freight services and, in particular, wishes to see further feasibility work done on the potential for using rail to get slate waste out of Blaenau Ffestiniog on the Conwy valley line. There has been a lot of adverse publicity in the press over recent years about the standard of stations in north Wales. We accept that there is an urgent need to improve station facilities across the region. In the strategy, we have produced a series of categories of stations, with a standard of service that meets the demand at each station. We have then divided all the stations into each category and have come up with a programme of work that would be completed by 2012. In addition, the Wrexham/Bidston study recommends a new station at Deeside park to improve access to employment, and a study is also under way on the Chester to Shrewsbury line. Part of the brief of that study is looking at the possibility of having new stations on that line, and we will add any recommendations that that study makes to our document. [323] We also highlight several places where very simple and, in railway terms, cheap work could be done that could have an impact on the level of service that can be provided. [324] Mr Saxby: Much of north Wales will never be on the rail network; it will be served by buses. So, we have done a lot of work on integrating bus and rail services, both in terms of physical interchanges and ticketing—a ticket called Tocyn Taith has been introduced, which covers bus and rail services. The strategy outlines the

actions that we are taking forward on that. We believe that the Taith strategy is realistic and achievable. We have not put anything in there that is just a pipe dream; they are all things that can be done fairly quickly and economically. There are lots of gaps in our figures because we have not had much time to work things out. We have costs from Arriva Trains, but we do not have figures on revenue generation and so on, and that needs to be taken into account when we do further work on it. So, we look forward to further discussions with the Assembly on how we can move forward together to develop a sustainable integrated transport network for Wales, with a modern, reliable and extensive rail network at its heart. [325] John Marek: Before I call in Eleanor, Carl and Leighton, for elucidation only, you talked about getting trains into Liverpool; are you thinking of constructing any curves between Shotton high level and Shotton low level? [326] Mr T. Roberts: No. [327] John Marek: Do you rule out passengers changing at Chester and then going to Rock Ferry and Liverpool that way, as well? Do you want to use the Halton curve? [328] Mr T. Roberts: Yes. [329] John Marek: Okay. That is fine. On the new fast train, I welcome what you said. One change that was made between the formulation of the draft budget this last year by the Assembly and the final budget was a realisation that we needed such a train. I think that Arriva is now doing a business case for it. So, I think that the money is available from the Welsh Assembly Government; it is simply a question of ensuring that it happens. There is still some way to go, but I wanted to pass that on. [330] Eleanor Burnham: I was pleased to be at the Taith presentation. It was very heartening to hear about electrification, and it is a shame that we cannot electrify any more lines. I love your map, because it shows the arc of the old Ruabon-to-Barmouth line, which was the subject of my first Assembly short debate. That is part of my blue-sky vision beyond what we have here. I know about Taith because I have been associated with it, and north Wales is my main remit. I think that you work very well together, because you have a can-do mentality about what is going to happen, which I think is wonderful. Given what is going on here, even if we do not have all the money, surely we will be able to go on in a constructive way. I think that your paper shows that, because you have actual dates. I have asked some of the other people who presented this morning about this, and there have not been concrete dates and matters being put into operation. [331] John Marek: I agree with you. It is quite useful to have costings. [332] Eleanor Burnham: Yes. I would like to commend you for that, because I think that it is brilliant. [333] The north-to-south service bothers me, and we should all do whatever we can to help in that regard. I quite agree with you; why on earth would you want to get up at 4 a.m.? This committee started at 9 a.m. today, and you could not be here by 9 a.m.. It is the same for us when we have committee meetings starting at 9 a.m.. It is pathetic, and I feel that we need to come together to push that. Anything that you can do, we will do it. Let us be honest, the report in 1999 asserted the east-west axis, but you probably have figures showing how many people have to come on a regular basis from the north to the south. Quite frankly, had I been leading the Government

in 1999, one of my first political priorities would have been to link the north and south very effectively. As a north Wales regional Member, I feel very strongly about this. I can say here that it will be one of the big no-nos in terms of what the Assembly has done for north Wales when we face the electorate this year. At least we have an improved rail service every two hours going through Wrexham. My only concern is that, as far as I understand— [334] John Marek: Order. You are being rude, Eleanor. [335] Eleanor Burnham: Do not worry about it; I will say want I want to say. [336] John Marek: You need to ask for information. [337] Eleanor Burnham: I am concerned about the fact that, apparently, what we have done in Wales has had a direct negative impact on Arriva’s services to Birmingham. I sit on the train, as you can imagine, and it is a long journey, and, on many occasions, people who get on at Shrewsbury to come up north tell me, ‘Oh, it is okay for you lot in the Assembly because you got what you wanted’. That is very sad. How can you impact on Arriva to ensure that all the services are seamless and that our pluses are not their negatives? 11.50 a.m. [338] The graded station standard scheme looks very good, and is commendable. With your indulgence, Chair, I wanted to ask a question relating to the Conwy valley line. I am pleased about the freight possibilities. Lisa has been working on it at her end and I have certainly been in on it. If you have all that freight, do you feel that that would preclude a possible light railway being used on the Conwy valley line? [339] Mr Saxby: It may in that there are different standards, although the community rail initiative is changing things in the rail industry. I think that there may be problems in the other types of vehicle that can go on that line if there is freight on it. [340] John Marek: Do you want to address the other issue? [341] Mr Blainey: We always held, in north Wales, that the standard pattern timetable had a number of disbenefits as well as benefits, including links to Birmingham and Crewe. Connections, particularly at Crewe, are now very poor. They are probably as bad as they could be, because you get off a London train and you see the north Wales train moving out of the station. We are continuing to talk to Arriva Trains, and we have come up with a timetable, negative of cost, which would solve a lot of that. [342] Eleanor Burnham: There are two points that I completely forgot about. What are you doing about the linkage to Manchester and Liverpool airports, or what can we do about that? While we do not want to encourage too much flying—in case I am thought of as not being green—the reality of the situation is that people need to get there, even if their journey is not for business purposes.

[343] Mr Saxby: We mentioned the Halton curve, which is an existing curve that would enable us to provide through-services via Chester to Liverpool, calling close to Liverpool John Lennon Airport. That would give us a through-service to an airport. I do not know whether there is much prospect of us getting through-trains to Manchester airport, because we are then competing with everything else in the north west. We did not achieve that with British Rail. [344] Eleanor Burnham: Finally, there used to be a service to Manchester airport, which was a long-winded affair—and I used it a couple of times—but that was cut completely, so you cannot use that anymore. I think that it went through Wilmslow or somewhere. [345] Mr Saxby: There are good links from Manchester Piccadilly and Crewe to Manchester airport. At one time, the quickest way to get there was to go to Crewe and then up from there. I believe that, over the past year or two, there has been so much engineering work on that line that there have been times when there has been no service. [346] John Marek: On that point, are there any possibilities of extending the spur at the airports through to Altrincham to join up with the loop line from Chester? That is not really a runner at the moment. [347] Mr Blainey: That was an aspiration, which Cheshire County Council was working on, but I have not heard it mentioned for some time. [348] John Marek: I thought so. Thank you. [349] Carl Sargeant: Welcome to the committee. I am excited about the Wrexham-to-Bidston line. It runs through much of my patch in particular. I am very interested in the economic benefits that it brings to the region, and I think that it is accepted that, with Airbus, Toyota and Deeside Industrial Park, there are huge opportunities for the north Wales region. However, we have to get the infrastructure right. You are right to develop a bus and rail strategy that links together; that is the way forward. What can we do, as a committee and as an Assembly, to enhance the Wrexham-to-Bidston project and get it moving? We had evidence this morning from other consortia regarding the interactive working across Wales. Can you give us your take on working with Cheshire and Merseyside as consortia, and the role that you see for the Assembly in that interaction? [350] We touched on fare subsidies earlier this morning, and I would be quite excited about pilot projects, particularly on the Borderlands line, as I am sure my colleagues in other areas would be. I think that it is feasible to do it on that line, but I would like to know your thoughts on the structures behind the provision of subsidised free travel—basically, the use of a bus pass on the train. [351] Mr Blainey: I will deal with the Borderlands electrification issue first and then Bob will deal with the concessionary travel. [352] We have a very close relationship with Mersey Travel and with Cheshire. The

study was funded jointly by the three parties. We have a meeting next week to decide the best way to take it forward. It will involve funding bids through local transport plans in England and, presumably, through transport grants to the Assembly. Therefore, it is looking to Members for support when those bids are put in. There are very close links with our neighbours. [353] Carl Sargeant: Just on that point, Chair— [354] John Marek: Of course, carry on. [355] Carl Sargeant: You obviously have a costing already, in preparation for your meeting. I would ask—if that is not confidential—that that be submitted to this committee. I think that that would be helpful, as a priority. [356] Mr Blainey: The capital cost of the whole scheme is £59 million, but that would be split. It should be in the paperwork that you have, but, if not, I can provide that. [357] John Marek: That would be useful. [358] Janet Davies: Could I come in? [359] John Marek: Is it on this point? [360] Janet Davies: Yes. Thank you, Chair. As you probably know, the rules are changing somewhat for Objective 1 funding. I know that not all of your area is in the Objective 1 area but have you thought of trying to tap into any European funding from 2007 onwards? There seems to be more of a scope for spending on infrastructure in the next round than there has been in the present round. [361] Mr Blainey: That is one of the avenues that we will be looking at, because I think that Merseyside is also an Objective 1 area. [362] John Marek: Have you finished, Carl? [363] Carl Sargeant: Yes, but I asked about concessionary fares. [364] John Marek: Of course, sorry. [365] Mr Saxby: As far as concessionary travel is concerned, I was on the working group that set up the scheme for bus travel in Wales, of which I think that we can all be very proud. It has worked extremely well. I have also been invited to the working group that is setting up the English scheme. The group has not listened to me when I said that it needs to ring-fence the funding, which is why it is going to be a bit of a mess when it starts on 1 April. As far as the Conwy valley and the Wrexham-to-Bidston lines are concerned, those lines are used by people very much for local travel. In some cases, that is the only way that they can get about. With villages such as Dolwyddelan on the Conwy valley line, during the daytime, mostly, the only way that you can get out of the place is by train. Therefore, it is a little unfair to some of the people on those lines if they cannot use their concessionary bus pass on the line. We are very keen that they should be able to do so. It also makes those lines a little vulnerable, where they overlap with bus services, to losing out to the bus. There has been some consultant work on that. We have included in the document a price for concessionary travel on those lines. However, you need to bear in mind that, again, it is a bit of a circular argument: if you pay that to the train operator, it may mean that

there is less need for subsidy in the end for the train operator, and also less need for us to pay bus companies for some of those journeys. Therefore, there are savings to set against the cost. [366] Carl Sargeant: Okay. Again, is it possible for you to provide a detailed paper on what the proposals would be for a concessionary fare system? [367] Mr Saxby: Yes, I believe that TraCC has undertaken to provide some details, so we will work together on that. [368] Carl Sargeant: That is fine. [369] Mr T. Roberts: We do work closely together on that. [370] Carl Sargeant: Okay. I have one final point. This follows up on my first question. You recognise Deeside as being probably the hub of north Wales for economic development. Janet made a very valuable point about using European funding to bring people in. You are not going to move industry out to areas, but you are going to bring people into areas with industry. I think that it is a huge opportunity that we and the consortium should be looking at. I am particularly interested in the Shotton hub—and I would be, because that, again, is local to me, but I know that Taith is involved in that. Do you have any updates on how we could progress a Shotton interchange or a development whereby we could have integrated rail and bus transport for Deeside industrial park? [371] Mr Blainey: We have transport grant funding for the next financial year that is earmarked to improve the interchange at Shotton. There is an issue in that not all of the trains along the north Wales coast stop at Shotton. Arriva has a view that you can have too many stops, because it puts people off travelling long distances. However, we see a need for more trains to call at Shotton, because of its importance as an interchange and the number of people who work there. We have the Deeside shuttle, which links with trains at Shotton and also at Flint. It provides a good link between the rail network and places of work in Deeside. We hope that funding for that will also be continued. 12.00 p.m. [372] Leighton Andrews: I am interested in the study that you carried out on the Wrexham-to-Bidston line. I want to get a sense of the proportion of the costs of the different options that would fall to the National Assembly on the basis of your proposals. If you cannot answer that today, perhaps you can provide us with a note. Presumably, it would not all fall to us. [373] Mr Saxby: We can provide that. [374] Leighton Andrews: Thank you. Secondly, I would like to understand better the passenger transport distribution that you are responsible for. In other words, where are people travelling to in north Wales? I lived in Bangor for four years, and I spent an inordinate amount of my life in Crewe station, as anyone who lives in that part of north Wales does. Clearly, people are travelling to north-west England, London and south Wales for meetings, holidays and so on. However, do you have figures that would show us where people in north Wales are travelling to—what their ultimate destinations are? It would be useful to know what numbers of people are travelling to which

places. [375] Mr Blainey: We had some work done, as part of our discussions on the standard pattern timetable, on where people were travelling to. We can give you a copy of that. It showed that most people were heading for Manchester, Crewe and places beyond. [376] Leighton Andrews: That is what I would have expected. I would like to see that work. [377] John Marek: I think that Bob Saxby said earlier that there had been an increase in north-south traffic. [378] Mr Saxby: That is certainly what Arriva Trains has told us since the standard pattern timetable was introduced. It is very encouraged by the extra traffic that that seems to have generated. Whether those trips have been generated purely by that or whether people are transferring from cars, we do not know. [379] Leighton Andrews: In that case, Chair, in addition to the existing research, perhaps we could have a note from Arriva on what has happened since the SPT was introduced. [380] John Marek: Whether we can do this within the time that we have is the problem. Let us try, and we shall see what happens. In any case, we are not in a position to make up any ordering, should we decide to do so, until the beginning of May, so we may be able to get something from Arriva. [381] Mr T. Roberts: You will also have the information that you requested from us within seven days. [382] John Marek: Excellent. Thank you. [383] Janet Davies: The questions that I was going to ask have been asked. One was on the border lines and the other was a clarification on concessionary fares, so that is fine. Thank you. [384] John Marek: Yes, it is always like that. [385] Carl Sargeant: On the north-south train, which is very important, as I hope that the figures will show, since the standard pattern timetable was introduced, people are calling it the ‘fast train’ to Cardiff. It probably takes 15 minutes less than the slow train to Cardiff, so I am not convinced that it is a fast train. I travel down on a Monday evening, and I wonder why we stop at all these stations the other side of Wrexham when the purpose of the train is to get people quickly from north to south or vice versa. Do you have any thoughts on that? Do you have any intentions to make representations on the timetable that would address that? [386] Mr T. Roberts: I shall ask David to speak on this. In the old days,

when you changed at Crewe, the overall journey time was shorter because the Manchester to Cardiff trains were faster. You need the semi-express that we had in the old days, which missed out many of the stops. From Shrewsbury, the train stops all the way down. Perhaps it could stop only at Hereford, Abergavenny, Newport and Cardiff. When you are on a four-hour train journey, there is nothing worse than the train stopping every 10 minutes. [387] John Marek: That special train, which I did not go on because I was here, went from Holyhead all the way to Cardiff in three hours. [388] Mr T. Roberts: That is right. It does not stop at all those stations. [389] John Marek: Important time savings can be made if you find the right path. [390] Lisa Francis: I want to go back to the Conwy valley line and the proposal to move slate aggregate. The figures that I have show that over 1 million tonnes a year of slate aggregate could be moved out of Blaenau Ffestiniog and passenger services could work alongside that, with the correct infrastructure. It seems that Network Rail is the organisation that has been dragging its feet on this, but is that your take on it? I know that a group met to discuss this, including Welsh Assembly Government officials and Network Rail, and I just wondered whether you had more information on that than what is getting passed back to me. I know that Conwy council was represented on that group as well, and I just wondered which organisation you saw as being reluctant to push this forward. [391] Mr Saxby: There have been times when it has appeared that Network Rail was not very enthusiastic about it, or was putting obstacles in our way. It has co-operated in coming up with revised figures and so on, but some of them have been very cautious figures, allowing for all sorts of things that will, hopefully, never need to be done, such as completely replacing embankments and so on, which is unrealistic. Network Rail has been more realistic recently, and we are waiting for a report on its latest estimates so that we can move forward. [392] Mr T. Roberts: The ballpark figure from the early days was £200 million and we are well down on that now, probably to about 20 per cent of that. [393] John Marek: That is very useful. Are there any other quick points? I see that there are not. Thank you very much. We appreciate your coming to this meeting. Did you come from north Wales this morning? You did—and you got here, so well done. [394] Mr T. Roberts: I had to come the night before and experienced the delights of Cardiff. [395] John Marek: The first train does not get here until 9.20 a.m.—it is as simple as that. Thank you very much to you and your team for coming. [396] I have a suggestion from the clerk. I know that we are meeting in public at the moment, but I do not think that that is a problem. We are very tight for time and we have to present the report by the end of the month, which is in eight days’ time. We cease to exist on 19 May. I suspect that it will be impossible to present a report that we feel is ours, and is considered, if we have to do it in eight days’ time. The clerk’s suggestion, which I support, is that he will present an interim report—he has almost

done it, if it finds favour. That will satisfy the remit that the National Assembly has given us. The interim report will not contain any politics or Politics, it will simply be an analysis of the evidence that we have received and of the suggestions that have been made, perhaps with an introductory paragraph. [397] We could then meet again, perhaps in the first week of May, having had all of April to think about the report, to decide whether we wish to include an ordering system or whatever. That extra meeting in May would meet in private, because, obviously, we would be arguing the merits of different suggestions. I have one final point: the interim report, if it is to be laid, can be laid out of committee. The clerk could send the interim report to us—he has told me that he could do it this week—and although there will no doubt be some bits and pieces that will have been left out, they could be put back in and then another e-mail could be sent on Monday or Tuesday. It requires a bit of goodwill, but we would then have a document that could be a report, and that could be laid at the end of next week, or even the week after that. When is 1 April? No, it could not be laid next week; it has to be before then, because it also has to be translated. The clerk thinks that this is a runner, and it is probably the only runner. [398] Janet Davies: I would agree with that approach. Taith has produced priorities for stations, presumably according to their usage. Is it possible to get figures for the usage of the different stations, because I think that that will be quite relevant to what we will want to say about prioritising stations? That would be in May. The figures do not have to be produced before the end of this month. [399] John Marek: That is a good point. We could probably write to Arriva on that. However, I do not think that Cardiff station is managed by Arriva, is it? [400] Janet Davies: All stations are managed by Arriva. [401] John Marek: Yes, sorry, it is only the mainline stations in London, and Crewe, I think, that are managed by Network Rail. Let us try that. 12.10 p.m. [402] Lisa Francis: I am inclined to agree with this interim report. Will you confirm when that will be circulated? [403] Mr Reading: We will try to do it by the end of this week. [404] Lisa Francis: Okay. There are various points. I agree with Janet’s point that it would be useful to get that kind of breakdown of figures for stations in every region. I expect that this is true of all members of the committee, but I have sent a lot of information, which I hope has been circulated to everyone. The most recent piece I have received—although it is not that recent—is from North Pembrokeshire Transport Forum, which wanted to make an addendum to the SWWITCH presentation today. That is quite significant in relation to services relating to Fishguard. [405] John Marek: I think that I have received that one, but please send it on to the clerk.

[406] Lisa Francis: It is important that all of these addenda are taken into account, because they may significantly alter the picture of the presentations that we have received. We should not think, just because these people have been at the table, that

there are no other groups out there. I mentioned that I had done a bit of research into the Conwy valley line. Would it be permissible for me to circulate this to Members for information and for possible inclusion in the report, depending on what Members think?

[407] John Marek: We need to be a bit careful before we include any values in the report, otherwise we will not agree. It needs to be based on pure information if we are to agree.

[408] Lisa Francis: I can say where the information has come from. [409] John Marek: If it is suggestions, you can include it.

[410] Leighton Andrews: I would be against including anything that has not come to the committee at this point. Subsequently, it might well form something that is appropriate for the final report but, in relation to the interim report, we have not discussed it at committee and its inclusion would therefore be inappropriate.

[411] On the point raised by Janet in relation to the usage of stations, it is useful information, but it would also be useful to look at future projections in relation to stations. That is not an easy thing to do, because Arriva tells me that, given certain variables, there is almost a limitless number of people who might use the Valleys line, for example. So, it is useful to have that data, but projections would also be valuable, as would some understanding of the variables that would condition the projections. [412] Rosemary Butler: It would be useful to have an interim report because we already have a huge amount of information. Could we then consider whether we need to take more evidence or whether we need more detail?

[413] Mr Reading: Effectively, today’s session is the last evidence-gathering session. [414] Rosemary Butler: Okay. I have received many observations from people, which I have forwarded to the clerk. What will happen to those? Other Members have not seen them, and it would be useful for them to have the information. [415] John Marek: What does Leighton think about this? I would not want to lose them, and perhaps you could put them in sections A and B if they are observations or suggestions.

[416] Mr Reading: At the moment, they are physically in a folder called ‘late responses’. [417] Rosemary Butler: There have been a couple of late ones, but all the other ones that I sent to you were within the timescale. [418] Mr Reading: If they were within the timescale, they have been included. [419] Rosemary Butler: So, any observations that come in now will go into the other folder. [420] Mr Reading: Yes. May I say something about that? [421] John Marek: Yes, but before you do, let me ask Leighton whether he is

happy with that. [422] Leighton Andrews: Is this about Lisa’s suggestion and the research that she has done?

[423] John Marek: Yes, I am a bit concerned about Lisa’s suggestion. Perhaps we should cut her work down to ‘suggested improvements’. [424] Lisa Francis: Perhaps I did not specify it, but it was work for the committee to look at and decide whether it thinks that it is something that should be included or not. [425] John Marek: We will circulate it, but we will not put it in the report unless it is something specific about a loop north of Blaenau Ffestiniog. [426] Lisa Francis: I would not presume that it should go into a report without every Member’s scrutiny and permission. [427] Mr Reading: With regard to the responses, the consultation ran until 3 March and, inevitably, some responses came in a week or so later. So, we have taken account of all the responses we received up to the week after, around 10 March, and they will be summarised and go into the interim report, which you will see when I circulate it. I will try to produce a table of them all. Those received after 10 March could certainly be circulated to Members; I have just kept them in a folder called ‘late responses’, and it is up to you what you want to do with them. [428] John Marek: Could that be section B, or something? [429] Mr Reading: Yes, section B—just to simply list them. [430] John Marek: I would have thought that we would want the information before us. [431] Rosemary Butler: If people have taken the trouble to write, then we should include that. [432] Mr Reading: It may be that we cannot get those in the interim report, but we could certainly add them to the final report, if you like. I will try to get them in the interim report. [433] John Marek: If you cannot, you cannot—there are logistics to be considered. However, if you can get them in as section B in the interim report, that would be useful. We would then have a complete document. We would go away for a three-week recess in April, having all the information before us, and that would be better for us. [434] Mr Reading: Okay. [435] John Marek: I believe that Members are generally happy on this. Therefore, just to sum up, Chris will produce this interim report—as you can, Chris; let us know. There will then be feedback—bits and pieces if you do not like them, and suggestions if you do like something. Chris and I will then meet almost immediately, or will telephone each other, and we will send out a second draft interim report, which will hopefully meet with Members’ approval, and a bit of goodwill. We will then have it translated and tabled. We will then have an extra meeting in closed session; we will

try for the first week of May when we are back. We are away until Tuesday, 2 May. However, if we cannot have the meeting in that week, it will have to be the week after. Do we want some sort of ordering scheme? If so, how do we want to do it? Any suggestions that Members may have in April—are you working here in April, Chris? [436] Mr Reading: Yes, I will be here. [437] John Marek: Therefore, Members should pass on suggestions to Chris, so that he has some idea of how to play this; he needs a steer. If necessary, we will decide at the meeting in May what, if anything, we do. [438] Are Members content with that? I see that they are. I do not believe that there is any other business. Thank you very much. That brings the meeting to a close.

Daeth y cyfarfod i ben am 12.17 p.m. The meeting ended at 12.17 p.m.

Annex 3 – Consultation Letter Pwyllgor ar Seilwaith y Rheilffyrdd a Gwella Gwasanaethau i Deithwyr

Committee on Rail Infrastructure and Improved Passenger Services

Eich cyf / Your ref: Ein cyf / Our ref: RIPS Pol Rev 1 06

February 2006

Dear Sir or Madam, Consultation on Rail Infrastructure and Improved Passenger Services The National Assembly for Wales has recently established the Committee on Rail Infrastructure and Improved Passenger Services, under Standing Order 8.1. Its terms of reference are:

• To formulate a programme of costed, achievable improvements in rail infrastructure and improved passenger services affecting Wales; and

• To make recommendations to the Assembly on the improvements identified.

The Committee is undertaking a public consultation and wants to know:

1. What improvements you would like to see to rail infrastructure; in particular, new routes or enhancements to existing routes.

2. What improvements you would like to see to rail passenger services; including comfort, reliability, safety, frequency or any other feature you consider to be important.

3. If you have any other comments or suggestions relevant to this inquiry.

Please submit your responses, preferably by e-mail or otherwise in hard copy, to:

Leanne Hatcher, Committee on Rail Infrastructure and Improved Passenger Services, Committee Service, National Assembly for Wales, Cardiff Bay CF99 1NA.

The e-mail address is economic.comm@wales.gsi.gov.uk. If submitting your response by e-mail, please use title - Public Consultation

Submissions should be sent to arrive by 3rd March 2006.

It may not be possible to take into account responses received after this date.

Please note:

Your response should be brief and to the point; please reference your response with the relevant question number.

It is normal practice for the National Assembly to publish evidence either within a report, or as supplementary evidence to a report. We will not publish information which we consider to be personal data, such as name and contact details, unless consent has been provided or these are details relating to an organisation.

The National Assembly operates within the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

If any information, other than personal data, is being submitted that is regarded by the provider not to be suitable for public disclosure, it is up to the provider to stipulate what part(s) of the information should not be published and provide a reasoned argument to support this. The National Assembly will take this into account when publishing evidence in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

In the event of a request for information, it may be necessary for information which has been provided either as evidence, communication or any other written information, to be disclosed. This may include information which has previously been removed by the National Assembly for publication purposes.

Please indicate whether you are responding on behalf of an organisation, or as an individual.

We look forward to hearing your views. Yours faithfully,

Chris Reading Committee Clerk

Annex 4 - Schedule of Organisations Consulted Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council Neath Port Talbot Council Flintshire County Council Powys County Council Brecon Beacons National Park The Pembrokeshire Coast National Park Authority Snowdonia National Park Wales Tourist Board Welsh Development Agency Countryside Council for Wales Commission for Integrated Transport DPTAC Institute of Welsh Affairs National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport WorkersASLEF TSSA RoSPA TUC Wales PTI Cymru Freight Transport Association Association of Train Operating Companies C/o Regional Development Rail Passengers Council/Passenger Focus Railfuture Heart of Wales Line Travellers Association Conwy Rail Forum North Pembrokeshire Rail Forum Campaign for the Protection of Rural Wales Wales Environment Link Friends of the Earth Cymru Association of Transport Co-ordinating Officers Disability Wales/Anabledd Cymru Heart of Wales Line Forum Heart of Wales line Travallers Association Shropshire and Mid Wales First Chester & North Wales Rail users & Welsh Bus Users Age Concern Cymru Arriva Cymru Ltd Arriva Trains Wales

Arriva Trains Wales Central Trains Chester & North Wales Rail Users' Association Chester Area Rail Travellers' Federation Chester/Shewsbury Rail Partnership Church Stretton & District Rail Users' Association Commission for Racial Equality Wales Craven Arms Rail Users' Association Crewe & Shrewsbury Passengers' Association Department for Transport Disability Rights Commission Disability Wales EASTERN DOCKS FERRY TERMINAL Equal Opportunities Commission EWS Freightliner Great Western Trains Company Ltd Heart of Wales Line Travellers's Association Irish Ferries Ludlow Rail Users' Group Merched Y Wawr Milford Haven Rail Passengers Association National Assembly for Wales National Federation of Women's Institutes-Wales Network Rail Network Rail North Cheshire Rail Users' Group Pembrokeshire Rail Travellers Association Port of FISHGUARD Port of Holyhead Port of Mostyn Port of Pembroke Dock Port of Swansea Railfuture (Midlands branch) RNIB Cymru RNID Cymru RPCW Shrewsbury-Aberystwyth Rail Passengers Assoc Shrewsbury-Chester Rail Users' Association Shrewsbury-Wolverhampton Rail Users' Association Stena Line Limited

The Office of Rail Regulation Townswomen's Guilds Virgin Trains Customer Relations Wales Council for Voluntary Action Wales Pensioners Wales Trades Union Congress Wessex Trains Wrexham to Birkenhead Rail Users Association CBI Wales Confederation of Passenger Transport (Wales) Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee Freight Transport Association Friends of the Earth Cymru Investment Delivery National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport WorkersRail Passengers Council Transport 2000 Wales Transport Research Centre Welsh Transport Strategy Group WLGA Cardiff County Council Carmarthenshire County Council Ceredigion County Council City and County of Swansea Conwy County Borough Council Denbighshire County Council Flintshire County Council Gwynedd County Council Isle of Anglesey County Council Merthyr Tydfil CBC Monmouthshire County Council Neath Port Talbot CBC Newport City Council Pembrokeshire County Council Powys County Council Rhondda Cynon Taff CBC Torfaen County Council Vale of Glamorgan Council Wrexham CBC Bus Users UK SEWTA

SWWitch TAITH TraCC Church Stretton & District Rail Users' Association Commission for Racial Equality Wales Craven Arms Rail Users' Association Crewe & Shrewsbury Passengers' Association Department for Transport Disability Rights Commission Disability Wales Eastern Docks Ferry Terminal Equal Opportunities Commission EWS Freightliner Great Western Trains Company Ltd Irish Ferries Ludlow Rail Users' Group Merched Y Wawr Milford Haven Rail Passengers Association National Assembly for Wales National Federation of Women's Institutes-Wales Network Rail North Cheshire Rail Users' Group Pembrokeshire Rail Travellers Association Port of FISHGUARD Port of Holyhead Port of Mostyn Port of Pembroke Dock Port of Swansea Railfuture (Midlands branch) RNID Cymru RPCW Shrewsbury-Aberystwyth Rail Passengers Assoc Shrewsbury-Chester Rail Users' Association Shrewsbury-Wolverhampton Rail Users' Association Stena Line Limited The Office of Rail Regulation Townswomen's Guilds Virgin Trains Customer Relations Wales Council for Voluntary Action Wales Pensioners

Wales Trades Union Congress Wessex Trains Wrexham to Birkenhead Rail Users Association

Annex 5 – Summary of Consultation Responses 1 Improvements to Rail Infrastructure

• Run two lines between Porth and Ystrad – get rid of the loop line. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Run trains on time. • Run four carriages at peak periods. • Create a new timetable as the existing one was devised to provide

more trains in certain areas and that is only possible by taking trains from other areas.

2 Improvements to Rail Infrastructure

• Retain the Halton Curve as this provides a vital rail link for residents of North Wales wanting to use rail services to reach Liverpool John Lennon Airport.

3 Improvements to Rail Infrastructure

• Join up the line from Coryton to Radyr to complete the circle. • The Coryton or Radyr service could be improved if a line were taken in

the University Hospital of Wales. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Simplify the information provided at rail stations – only provide the times of the trains going in each direction and enlarge the font size.

• Provide this information on an electronic sign on the bridge over the road and/or on the platform in a similar way to that used by Cardiff Bus.

4 National Slate Museum, Gwynedd Improvements to Rail Infrastructure

• Reduce the journey times. This can easily be achieved by reducing the time through services spend awaiting connections and platforms.

• Reduce the many station stops. • If this is not possible, introduce two daily services in both directions

(with Holyhead and Cardiff departure times of 05.30 and 16.30) which operate to tighter timetables and could be promoted as high profile, identifiable links between the north and south of Wales.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Use the high profile services mentioned above to promote quality

leisure time in parts of Wales. • Reliable, promoted, express bus service connections at other key

points: Bangor, Rhyl, Wrexham, Craven Arms, Abergavenny. • Plenty of secure, well-lit car parking facilities at all stations. • Car hire facilities at all key stations.

5 Improvements to Rail Infrastructure

• Split platform 6 at Cardiff Central Queen Street (?) into two signalling sections. This would allow a subsequent train into the platform instead of holding it at Canton depot.

• At peak times, particularly Millennium Stadium match days, run fast ‘shuttle’ services to locations where many people park. Closing Cardiff Queen Street and redirecting people to Central does not work as strangers to Cardiff often get lost. The Cardiff Bay branch could be used to turn units for this purpose.

• Reintroduce a ‘platform 4’ at Cardiff Queen Street for use by the Bay shuttle train. This would give two southbound platforms and reduce delays outside the station at peak times.

• Evening northbound capacity could be increased by running 4-car trains to Caerphilly (and possibly similar locations on other lines) then splitting, with 2-cars running back empty to the city centre and the other two cars continuing up the valley.

6 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reopen Cefn Mawr station. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Chester station has no waiting room and is very cold. • Ruabon station would benefit from CCTV cameras to deter vandalism.

7 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reopen St Clears station. Improvements to Passenger Services

• More early morning trains from Carmarthen on Sundays. • More afternoon trains from Swansea to Carmarthen. • More trains to Fishguard. • A better service from Cardiff to Carmarthen is needed. • Door rails on the Heart of Wales line could be wider to accommodate a

bike with panniers.

8 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Improve the service between Swansea and Milford Haven by increasing regularity of trains and running two carriages, particularly on weekday afternoons.

• Operate a 6.00am rail service Monday to Saturday from Milford Haven to Swansea.

• Operate a Sunday morning service from Milford Haven to Swansea. 9 Improvements to Infrastructure

• National Assembly should take control of the rail company, the Welsh network and the infrastructure – renationalise the railways.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Provide computerised displays at all stations, not just main ones. • Provide shelters. • New trains are needed, particularly on the Valleys lines. • Ticket barriers are impractical for many stations in Wales, not only

because of the geography of the station but because they would be prone to vandalism.

• Late night services should be increased, particularly at the weekend (but this would need additional security both on trains and at stations).

• Increase number of carriages at peak commuter times and match days. 10 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Introduce a rail service from Swansea direct to Rhoose Cardiff Airport. 11 Pembrokeshire Rail Travellers Association Improvements to Passenger Services

• Trains every hour to Milford and Pembroke Dock. • Six trains a day to Fishguard. • Reopen Goodwick station. • Better Sunday services all round. • Through trains from Pembrokeshire to a variety of destinations beyond

Cardiff.

12 Rail Future Improvements to Infrastructure

• Open the section of existing railway, known as the Swansea District Line, which runs from Briton Ferry to near Llanelli to passenger trains.

13 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Reduce the journey time from Carmarthen to Cardiff. • Reduce the wait at Swansea for connections. • Ticket collectors should take action against people who behave

disruptively. • More carriages should be put on between Carmarthen and Swansea to

reduce overcrowding. • Train companies should do more to promote themselves to encourage

tourism in Wales.

14 Wrexham Railway Society Improvements to Infrastructure

• The single line section of track between Wrexham and Saltney Junction should be returned to double track, either in the whole length or by means of a long loop in the Rossett area.

• In the section south of Wrexham, from Croes Newydd the constraints of line speed and long block sections also place a restriction on line capacity which needs to be addressed if additional trains are to be accommodated.

• At Chirk a reversing facility to allow access in and out of Kronospan sidings without the need to run forward to Gobowen would provide for improved flexibility.

• The proposal to run trains from Wrexham General to Marylebone via Shrewsbury raises the question as to how trains terminating at Wrexham are to be serviced and stored within the existing track layout. A layover siding with appropriate facilities would seem desirable to accommodate these trains.

• The often spoken of ambition to extend the Merseyrail third rail electrification from Bidston to Heswall/Neston on the Wirral is seen as a prelude to further extension of the system to Wrexham Central. It would be useful to cost such an exercise and determine whether or not it is feasible.

• Similarly there are ambitions by Mersey Docks & Harbour Co. plus Wirral Borough Council to take Irish Sea trade containers out of Birkenhead Docks to route via Bidston to Wrexham for onward delivery. If realised such an ambition would add to the traffic routing to either Chester or Shrewsbury which would require the line improvements referred to above, or the building of a curve at Shotton on to the North Wales Coast line.

Improvements to Passenger Services

• With a now hourly service at Wrexham General the long awaited aspiration has been achieved between Chester and Shrewsbury and we must wait to see how the travelling public responds to this. If additional stations were opened at Rossett and for the Chester Business Park an intermediate train service between Wrexham General & Chester would be needed to cater for this local commuter traffic, provided the line was restored to double track.

• The oft requested facilities are for public toilets at stations. At Wrexham General the sole disabled toilet is over used by the non-disabled for the want of anything else and something better is required.

• At Ruabon station the isolated down platform is served only by a footbridge. Access by wheel chairs is impossible. At Gobowen access to the other platform is via a busy road level crossing with no particular facility for pedestrians. Reinstatement of the footbridge here is a desirable option.

• The current class 158 two coach units are barely adequate in terms of passenger comfort and facilities, even though ATW plan some upgrades. Allocation of the entire fleet of class 175s to ATW is necessary sooner rather than later. Beyond that a fleet of modern trains is needed.

• The use of the class 153 single car unit on the Wrexham to Bidston line provides a basic service but with a unit which cannot cope with the hilly sections in bad weather or the leaf fall season. A two car unit with adequate power is needed here – and rather not the class 142 Pacers.

• In 2005 a trial of movement of timber from Aberystwyth to Chirk was undertaken using MPVs as the motive power. Supposedly the trial was successful, but implementation on a regular basis required the acquisition of dedicated vehicles. All has gone quiet on that front and the lack of progress in implementing a regular service casts doubt on the ambition to move freight off the road on to rail. Inquiries into the future of this option should be made by the committee.

Any Other Comments • All the ideas you seek to record will only be possible if adequate

funding and political support is received. If the spread of improvements is to be believed they must also be seen to be even handed throughout all of Wales and not just concentrated in the South.

• As a final comment the recently reported desire by central government to bring an AXE to parts of the railway system must be recognised in your deliberations and steps taken to combat the further destruction of the existing rail system in Wales. The public perception was to anticipated an expanded railway not the further reduction of what is in use.

15 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Trains should run according to the timetable. • Improve maintenance and organisation. • Change timetables less frequently.

16 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Swansea to Milford Haven line – trains should be split at Whitland with two carriages travelling on to Milford Haven and Pembroke Dock.

• People should be able to reserve seats. • A single carriage is not sufficient to accommodate the number of

people travelling. • There was no ticket inspector on the train. • There were no toilet facilities on the train.

17 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Introduce an All Wales railcard for £10 a year to enable rail travellers to get discounts on rail travel.

• Run trains from Pembroke Dock and Milford Haven every two hours so they can join up at Carmarthen and create a longer train for people travelling further east.

• Use the 20 ex-British Rail MK II D carriages soon to be bought by Arriva for excursions on bank holidays or summer weekends to encourage people not to use cars.

• In the winter, an earlier Sunday service from Pembroke Dock is needed.

• The Fishguard line needs an earlier morning service. • Goodwick station should be re-opened. • The 125 service from Milford Haven to Paddington should be

reintroduced. 18 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Introduce a Sunday service from Pencoed to Cardiff. 19 Wrexham Shropshire & Marylebone Railway (WSMR) Improvements to Infrastructure

• WSMR plan to introduce a service operating between Wrexham, Shropshire and London’s Marylebone station.

20 Network Rail

See analysis of oral evidence.

21 Shropshire County Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• Chester to Shrewsbury Line – the stretch of single line between Saltney Junction and Wrexham North Junction should be re-doubled either partially or wholly, so as to make the best use of the capacity of the line and encourage and enable additional passenger and freight services.

• Cambrian Lines – the long stretches of single line are a block to achieving the goal of an hourly interval service between Aberystwyth and Shrewsbury. Additional loops are required at possibly two locations along the line. It may also be possible to use a new loop location to provide an extra station, if appropriate. Additional rolling stock will be needed to operate an hourly interval service.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Chester to Shrewsbury Line – through services from this route towards

Birmingham need to be better co-ordinated, particularly for morning commuters.

• Cambrian Lines – an hourly service from Aberystwyth to Shrewsbury is a necessity.

• Heart of Wales Line – service pattern on this line must be improved to better meet the needs of the community and tourists.

• A minimum service for five trains each way, preferably six (with four on Sundays) should be a requirement for this line.

• Services must be timed so as to encourage commuting to and from the major population centres along the line, allow tourists greater flexibility to use the line for their needs and to allow local users to travel distances off the line (e.g. London, Manchester) effectively.

• It may be necessary to consider a working base at some point along the line with stabling and crewing, so as to remove needless running at extreme ends of the day.

Other Comments • Some of the rolling stock used by Arriva on the above routes is

extremely tired and shabby. • Single car Cl.153 units are generally in very poor condition internally,

have poor visibility from low seats and limited capacity for luggage, and with only 72 seats can become overcrowded at times. Use of these units on the Heart of Wales line should be avoided.

• Cl.158 units are also shabby internally. There is limited luggage capacity and cycle capacity is extremely restrictive. Extra capacity for cycles should be introduced during the refurbishment process.

• Visibility on the Cl.150 is restricted due to the sliding doors. • Consideration should be given to providing stock more suitable for the

routes on which they were intended to be used.

22 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Improve and/or upgrade the whole of the signalling network north of Cardiff Queen Street station to improve headway and allow more trains to run on the network.

• Improve and/or upgrade the signalling installations at both Cardiff Queen Street and Cardiff Central stations to remove the current blockage to traffic flow and allow 24 trains per hour through both stations.

• Bring the original platform 1 at Cardiff Queen Street back into use and reinstate the third track over Newport Road, to allow simultaneous departures northwards on both the Taff Vale and Rhymney lines.

• Start the service to Ebbw Vale but evaluate via a local survey whether Newport or Cardiff would be the preferred final destination of this service. This would require the remodelling and resignalling of Park Junction.

• Reversal at Newport is also a possibility and providing passing loops on the branch would improve the service to half hourly intervals with perhaps Cardiff and Newport being the destination on an alternate basis.

• The value of services to Beddau from Llantrisant and Bedlinog from Ystrad Mynach could be examined subject to housing developments in the respective catchment areas.

Improvements to Passenger Services • All trains running into and out of Cardiff in the morning and evening

peak commuter periods from Aberdare, Merthyr, Treherbert, Rhymney, Barry and Penarth should be at least four car sets of either classes 142, 143 or 150 or mixed as appropriate.

• Improved security is needed at the more isolated stations, particularly those in the valleys.

• All new diesel multiple units would be too long for the valley suburban network so a brand new class of stock would be required.

23 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Peak time services to Birmingham New Street only operate two carriages which means by the time they get to Newtown there is standing room only.

24 Improvements to Passenger Services

All comments refer to the Vale line: • More carriages at peak times. • More frequent service to CIA Rhoose and Llantwit Major (half hourly

rather than hourly and hourly on Sundays). • Cleaner shelters. • Lower fares and re-branding the regions. • If trains need to miss stops to keep to the timetable they should miss

the more frequently serviced stops. • The ‘Customer Charter’ and what people are entitled to should be

posted on the platforms. • More order on platforms. Staff seem confused and harassed and

where there are delays or changes, announcements are not always clear.

• More advanced warning if stops are going to be omitted. • Late night or midnight services on festival days or New Year. • Better customer training for staff. • On-board computers which have prices that correspond to the zones

and the central office. • More police presence at stations late at night. • Dispersing large mobs of youths who are congregating at stations. • Fixing the signals at Cardiff Central or adjusting the timetable to make

up for the 10 minute daily delay. • Announcement service at Rhoose and Llantwit platforms so people

know when and why trains are delayed/skipped. • Improved disability access at Bridgend station.

25 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Restore the Pwllheli junction link to Caernarfon and Bangor. • Divert some Holyhead to London services at Chester, bringing them

down to Shrewsbury via Wrexham/Chirk and Gobowen and then on to Wolverhampton. They could even split at Shrewsbury for Cardiff.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Better integration of bus timetabling with the trains, in particular the

Wrexham to Barmouth service.

26 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Cardiff City Council and Arriva should look at shuttle trains from Taffs Well to Cardiff Bay on a regular basis. This would enable car drivers on the A470 and M4 to park and ride into the city.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Digital information boards could be installed on bridges on the A470

and M4 informing drivers of the next train departures. This could be put into operation with the purchase of a few new trains and extra safe car parking. If the trains were purchased and not leased from ROSCOS this would save on leasing costs and keep fare costs at an economic level.

• Introduce a train or tram link to the new sports village. 27 Improvements to Passenger Services

• A reliable service. Trains that are punctual and depart and arrive on time.

• Enough carriages for the number of people using the service. • Compensation should be provided to passengers when the train

company does not fulfil its responsibilities. 28 Improvements to Passenger Services All comments relate to journey between Caersws and University Station, Birmingham

• Frequency of service – if a train is cancelled you are stranded for two hours, usually with a complete absence of information.

• Punctuality – this normally affects the Birmingham end of the service. 15 minutes late arriving in New Street is normal.

• Condition of the rolling stock – there is often no heating. The carriages are old and uncomfortable and the toilets are disgusting.

• Bus/train links – better timetabling and co-ordination with connecting bus services.

• Overcrowding – often people are standing shoulder to shoulder. • Customer information/service standards – when services are cancelled

there is often no information provided to passengers.

29 Improvements to Infrastructure

• The implications of a new station at Llanharan. There is already overcrowding on this service at peak times which will get worse when more people are getting on to the trains.

Improvements to Passenger Services All comments relate to Pontyclun to Cardiff rail services

• More space on trains. Trains are cramped, hot and stuffy and the hourly service is unreliable. Extra carriages could solve the overcrowding issue.

• A Sunday service. There are currently no trains stopping at Pontyclun on a Sunday.

• More frequent trains at peak times. 30 Improvements to Passenger Services All comments relate to journeys between Barry and Cogan

• Almost every day trains are delayed or cancelled which leads to overcrowded trains. If it is not possible to provide a regular service every 15 minutes cut it to every 30 minutes which will hopefully result in less cancellations and delays.

31 All comments relate to the Cambrian Coast line Improvements to Infrastructure

• Restore the loop at Dovey Junction to provide a reasonable service from the coast line to Aberystwyth and back.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Trains are dirty, late, cancelled and substituted by buses. • There is no liaison between trains and buses and no information is

offered where a bus is available and train tickets acceptable thereon. • The pocket timetable is ill-designed, with tiny print, wasted space and

no explanation of abbreviations. • Booking tickets is a lottery – too late and you pay double, too early and

its not in the system. 32 Improvements to Infrastructure

• A request stop should be introduced at Clarbeston Road.

33 Improvements to Infrastructure

• The Virgin cross-country routes need to be restored. • The Southwest of England is poorly served. Links to holiday resorts

such as Torquay and Cornwall from this area are very poor. • The passenger service between Ebbw Vale and Cardiff does not

include Newport. • There are no direct services to Worcester. Consideration should be

given to extending the Gloucester service. 34 Improvements to Infrastructure

• The best single improvement that could be made in North Wales would be the restoration of double track to most of the single line sections.

35 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Lose the in and out stations at Carmarthen and Swansea and create linklines on the lines to cut out the detours, with new halt stations in line to save valuable time, like that at Bristol Parkway.

• In the long term, an economical Motorail type solution, enabling freight and passenger traffic to travel entirely off-road to the Irish ports.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Services from Pembrokeshire to London are poor and recent timetable

changes mean that not all peripheral services link with London connections.

• There are very few through services • Often the train is cancelled and replaced with a slow bus service that

calls at every village. • Great Western and Arriva should work co-operatively with common

rolling stock to avoid inconvenience to passengers. • If there are too few passengers on the trains to travel the last leg, take

part of the train and don’t make everyone change trains repeatedly. • Arrangements should be made for short journey shuttle type linking

trains to enable passengers to meet connections to long-distance onward services without unrealistic waits.

• Create a secure, patrolled car park at a nodal point in the service to West Wales. This could also facilitate a better ticket purchasing facility.

36 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reinstate the through service between Haverfordwest and Birmingham.

37 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reinstate the midday Wales & Borders service to Waterloo from Carmarthen, via Bristol Temple Meads and Clapham Junction.

38 Sue Miles, Carmarthenshire County Council

The regional transport consortium SWWITCH will be responding on behalf of its four constituent authorities.

39 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Trains are so overcrowded people are unable to travel on most of them.

• Four carriages are needed on every train, irrespective of where it is going. This will provide a better service to passengers and ensure safer journeys.

40 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reopen the line for passenger services between Ebbw Vale and Cardiff and between Ebbw Vale and Newport.

• Restore direct services between Cardiff and Waterloo and between stations on the Welsh borderland and Waterloo.

• Reopen the Maindy Loop (Newport Gwent) and reinstate the direct service between stations on the Welsh borderland to South West England.

• Wales needs an integrated transport system. Many stations in Wales are situated too far from any other means of public transport.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Better connections are needed between services to reduce waiting

times. • There are too many cancellations. • Use of unmanned stations is restricted where there are no facilities for

elderly or disabled passengers. • Improved car parking facilities are needed. • Elderly passengers receive free transport on buses. This should be

extended to train journeys in Wales. • Provision for passengers with disabilities is still not adequate.

41 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reopen the Afon Wen Caernarfon Bangor line. • There is a six mile gap between Llandecwyn station on the Cambrian

Line and the Trawsfynnydd Power Station spur at the end of the Conwy Valley Line. Linking the two lines at this point would transform the North and Mid Wales rail network by providing a link from Aberystwyth to Wrexham, Chester and Llandudno. This would also open up new possibilities for freight.

42 Monmouthshire County Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• A station is needed at Magor and Undy. • Rebuilding the Wye Valley railway would be a massive boost to the

area. • Portskewett Halt should be reopened. This would provide transport for

workers and is also a place of great historic importance. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Caldicot Halt – there are no toilets or disabled toilets; heated waiting room; luggage lockers; washroom or baby changing facilities and no car parking. The platforms are dirty and litter strewn and are not gritted in the winter. Some areas are covered in graffiti. There is no pavement to station access, the lighting is poor, and there is no public telephone or link to town bus/taxi service.

• Timetables are non-existent and the services are not frequent enough and delivered at the wrong times.

• The rail network in Wales should be used to promote tourism. • Extra trains and carriages should be put on for major sporting and

cultural events. • Severn Tunnel Junction – a bigger car park is needed. • There are very few facilities, particularly disabled. No telephone, taxi

service and poor lighting. • The car park is run by NCP at a cost of £1.50 per day, which does not

promote use of the transport system. • Chepstow – there is poor linkage with bus services. • A more frequent service to Caldicot Severn Tunnel would improve

worker accessibility. • Newport – the station does not link up well with the bus station and

needs improvement.

43 Improvements to Passenger Services Comments relate to journeys between Milford Haven and Swansea

• One carriage is not enough and people often have to stand. • Trains are dirty. • Windows leak onto passengers when it rains. • More stations should be manned.

44 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Through services from Tywyn-Aberdyfi to Aberystwyth. • Extra rail connections as follows:

o Abergynolwyn to Corris via Tal-y-Llyn o Corris to Machynlleth o Arthog to Dolgellau, Bala, Llangollen and Wrexham o Aberystwyth to Carmarthen and Fishguard o Newtown to Abergavenny (via Llandrindod) o Porthmadog to Carnarfon and Bangor o Barry-Rhoose-Llantwit Major-Bridgend with a branch for

Southerndown beach Other Comments

• Station buildings should be opened up to relevant businesses, shops or travel-related businesses and local information centres and services.

• The station adoption programme should be expanded to include stretches of line and yards.

• Use of rail for freight should be encouraged by imposing size/weight restrictions on road delivery vehicles.

45 Improvements to Infrastructure

• More services are needed at Fishguard to connect with the ferry service.

• A motorail should be introduced. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Stock is often old. • At Haverfordwest and Fishguard there are never any staff on the

platform to answer questions/provide assistance, and the booking office closes at 1.00pm.

• Carriages are overcrowded. 46 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Re-establish a line between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen which could then link up Cardiff.

47 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Re-establish the rail link between the Radyr/Llandaff section of line and the line that terminates at Coryton.

48 Improvements to Infrastructure

• More trains should be laid on between South and North and especially for special events.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Rolling stock is old, very uncomfortable and an embarrassment to

Wales. • Carriages are overcrowded.

49 North Pembrokeshire Transport Forum Improvements to Infrastructure

• Remove the capacity and infrastructure constraints caused by the 4½ mile single track section through Gowerton and across Loughor Viaduct.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Increase the frequency of passenger services to Fishguard. • Provision of improved rolling stock on West Wales passenger services

should be given high priority consideration. More carriages and better/cleaner facilities are needed.

50 Church Stretton Rail Users’ Association Improvements to Infrastructure

• Signalling and track improvements at Shrewsbury. • Additional passing loops on Shrewsbury-Aberystwyth line to allow

hourly interval service. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Better connections at all interchange stations. • Reliable rolling stock. • Improved timekeeping. • 2 car units strengthened to 3 car units – one of these being a ‘quiet’

coach. • Fit all stock with GPS and automatic radio transmitter so ATW control

knows where every train is and can pass on accurate information on delays to passengers.

51 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Better co-ordination between connecting bus and train services. 52 Saundersfoot Community Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• Refurbishment of Saundersfoot railway station.

53 Cardiff County Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• Fully committed to the recently published Sewta Rail Strategy. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Fully committed to the recently published Sewta Rail Strategy. 54 Improvements to Infrastructure

• New passing loop at Caersws station, roughly half-way between Talerddig and Newtown, on the Mid Wales route between Machynlleth and Newtown.

55 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Increased frequency on Sundays for rail services in Gwynedd. • More connections at Machynlleth for services to Aberystwyth, for

passengers travelling from the north. • Improvements to evening services between Pwllheli and Machynlleth. • Improved connections between bus and rail services at Blaenau

Ffestiniog. 56 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Increase capacity (more trains) in the system, to allow flexibility in dealing with breakdowns, whilst minimising disruption to other services.

57 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Provide a new ‘halt’ at Caerleon. • Upgrade the Western Valley Line, to Ebbw Vale, for passenger

transport, as well as freight. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Additional provision for bicycles on trains. • Improve comfort and cleanliness of rolling stock. • Additional shelter and toilet facilities – e.g. at Pontypool.

58 Improvements to Passenger Services

• More station staff to answer routine queries. • Improve cleanliness of stations, including waiting rooms and toilets. • Improved passenger information and avoid sudden change of

platforms, where messages are mixed and confused. • Harmonize and simplify the number of fare options from different

providers. • Improve training for staff providing telephone information on rail

services. 59 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Provide the Newport link from the Ebbw Vale line at the same time as the Cardiff link.

60 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Lengthen all new stations on the South Wales Valley lines, so that four to six coaches can be used.

61 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Build a westward link from Heathrow airport to the Great Western line, to make Wales more attractive to international businesses.

• Bangor to Caernarfon • Ebbw Vale to Newport / Cardiff • Aberdare to Hirwaun • Par-and-ride link from the M4 to Cardiff

Improvements to Passenger Services • Reduce journey times on the London to Cardiff Great Western line • Improve reliability of existing services.

Other Comments • Build an econometric model, to enable a full understanding of the costs

of building and operating railways. 62 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Extend the terminus of the Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth service to Wrexham, to link up with the Central Wales service timetable.

• Re-route the Crewe to Chester service to depart from Manchester airport and run through Crewe to Wrexham.

• Re-open or establish a new station, where there is an existing railway route through highly populated areas, such as; Johnstown, Gresford, Rossett and Saltney.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Current seating arrangement, with seats facing each other, encourages

anti-social behaviour. • Increase twin seating arrangement, with drop-down table. • Provide more space for luggage in the middle of trains, as well as at

the corridor entrance. 63 Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth Rail Passenger Association Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reinstall passing loops at a number of locations; at least two between Newtown and Aberystwyth and one on the coast line, possibly at Caersws, Borth or Llwyngwril.

• Redoubling of Saltney Junction to Wrexham section of Shrewsbury to Chester line.

• Reinstating of platforms at Rexham General Station. • Reducing section lengths on Shrewsbury to Chester line. • Making all through platforms at Shrewsbury fully operational and fully

bidirectional (platforms 3, 4 and 7). • Reinstatement of bay platform at Shrewsbury station (platform 2). • Reducing section lengths on Shrewsbury to Crewe line. • Reducing section lengths on Shrewsbury to Hereford line.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Prime objective; an hourly service from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth. • Provide additional rolling stock to facilitate this objective.

64 Llangollen Railway Improvements to Infrastructure

• Redoubling of Saltney Junction to Wrexham section of Shrewsbury to Chester line.

• Improvement of section from Wrexham to Shrewsbury to the line capacity, to facilitate increased frequency beyond the current hourly service.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Improved disabled access facilities at Ruabon station. • Provide information notice at Ruabon Station advising ‘Ruabon for

Llangollen’. • Improve integration of bus and train arrivals/departures at Ruabon

station, to reduce passenger delays. • Improve the frequency of the Sunday service, to facilitate leisure and

tourist access to the Dee Valley. • The proposal for a new direct service from Wrexham to London,

proposed by the Wrexham Shropshire and Marylebone Railway consortium, is welcomed.

Other Comments

• There is popular demand for the reinstatement of the former branch line from Ruabon to Llangollen, via Trevor. However, as the Llangollen Railway is fully occupied with the need to extend its existing line to a new terminus at Corwen, it is up to some other organisation to contemplate the provision of connecting train services from a station to the east of Llangollen with the mainline.

65 Other Comments

• Provide a free train pass to pensioners, similar to that available for bus travel.

66 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Restore second track between Wrexham and Chester. • Provide a transport interchange at Shotton, to minimise passenger

delays. • Extend platform at Conwy station to accommodate three-car trains. • Extend footbridge at Llandudno Junction station to car park in adjacent

leisure complex. • Restore railway from Gaerwen to Llangefni. • Restore railway from Bangor to Caernarfon. • Restore railway from Llangollen to Ruabon. • Provide new stations at Connah’s Quay, Rhosllanerchrugog, Rossett

and Greenfield with Holywell. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Provide direct services from North Wales to large cities and regional airports in England – e.g. Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham.

• Improve frequency of trains in North East Wales. • Improve condition and staffing of stations in North Wales. • Improve frequency of services to Betws-y-Coed at weekends and Bank

Holidays, to facilitate access to Snowdonia National Park. • Provide a local service between Tywyn and Aberystwyth.

Other Comments • Reduce rail fares in North Wales to compare with South Wales. • Create a rail-freight terminal at Holyhead, to be planned in an

international context, to facilitate transfer of freight traffic from road (A55) to rail.

67 Environment Agency Wales Other Comments

• Would welcome any improvement in Rail Services that would contribute to reductions road traffic, which in turn would lead to improved air quality and reduction in emissions of greenhouse gasses.

68 Renaissance Trains, on behalf of the Wrexham, Shropshire and

Marylebone Railway Improvements to Passenger Services

• Provide a new service from Wrexham to London calling at Ruabon, Chirk, Gobowen, Shrewsbury, Telford, Cosford, Wolverhampton and Marylebone stations.

Other Comments • Before this new service can operate, several key elements need to be

put in place: • A track access agreement with Network Rail, enabling the company to

operate a timetable. • Acquisition of appropriate rolling stock, either by ownership or lease. • An approved safety case. • An operator’s licence from the Office of the Rail Regulator. • A business case to make the operations worthwhile. • Work on these various elements is in hand and negotiations with

Network Rail are progressing amicably. • The operator will run either five trains a day between Shrewsbury and

London, or four trains a day between Wrexham and London. • The final decision will rest on the costs and revenues that can be

attracted to either service option. 69 Magor with Undy Community Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• Provide a new station at Magor / Undy. Other Comments

• Many residents of this community commute to Newport, Cardiff and Bristol. This station would help solve traffic problems on the B4245.

70 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Various improvements to the North Wales Coast Line; including electrification, upgraded signalling and full reinstatement of the Halton Curve.

• Various improvements to the Blaenau Ffestiniog Branch; including a new freight depot and signal box.

• Reopen railway from Menai Bridge to Caernarfon and Afonwen. • Reinstate the second line from Wrexham to Saltney Junction. • Various improvements to the Cambrian Line; including construction of

the Dyfi Junction Loop and higher line speeds where practical. • Electrification of the Marches Line, the Great Western Main Line and

the Valley Lines. • Provision of a North-South High Speed Line.

Improvements to Passenger Services • New services from North and Mid Wales to Liverpool, stopping at Hunts

Cross for Liverpool Airport. • Clock-face train times. • New services from Abermaw to Manchester/Crewe/London. • Institute hourly service from Aberystwyth to Birmingham. • Incorporate steam specials into normal timetable on the Cambrian Line,

with a special supplement, and investigate the use of heritage diesel trains.

• Investigate the possibility of freight services using the slate waste trains at Blaenau Ffestiniog, and also a service from Porthmadog for Tesco Stores to supply Porthmadog and Caernarfon.

71 Other Comments

• The Valley Lines rolling stock is of a very poor quality, far below that which should be expected of an affluent nation. This is a critical service to the main urban hubs in South Wales and these old trains do nothing to attract anyone but customers who have no other choice.

72 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Provide a new station at Magor / Undy. Other Comments

• The villages have expanded hugely in recent years and now more closely resemble a small town. Also, the proposed Quay Point development and Magor Science Park would be far more likely to succeed and generate local employment, if a station were introduced.

73 Wales Council for Deaf People Other Comments

• All trains and stations should be equipped with digital indicator equipment capable of informing passengers of any information, which may be broadcast over a tannoy system, or may be of interest to such passengers.

74 Other Comments

• Generally critical of the level of service provided by Arriva Trains Wales on the Chepstow to Gloucester line; mainly due to unacceptable delays and the poor condition of the rolling stock.

75 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Refurbish Saundersfoot Station. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Provide more late services on the Whitland to Pembroke Dock Line. 76 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Welcome plans for new the Ebbw Vale to Newport line. Other Comments

• Improve quality and cleanliness of rolling stock, particularly the toilets. • Fast ticket machines frequently break down; need to improve

maintenance of equipment. • A comprehensive protocol for communication with customers and

associated organisations needs to be consulted on, published and incorporated into training etc.

• Consideration needs to be given to an annual statement by train operators of ways in which they value their staff and support and recognise the work they do.

77 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Welcome plans for new the Ebbw Vale to Newport line. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Need to identify travel to work routes on this new rail link and existing services and ensure appropriate frequency of services, reliability and competitive price in order to encourage people out of cars and onto public transport.

• When special events are held in Cardiff (e.g. concerts and sporting events), the operator should put on extra services and later services on the Valley Lines, particularly when these events are on a Sunday.

78 Newport City Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• The Council is an active member of the South East Wales Transport Alliance (Sewta) and fully supports its recently published rail strategy.

• Keen to see the timetable for Phase 2 of the Ebbw Vale Line Project maintained, so that the service will reach Newport no later than 2009.

• Need to upgrade the South Wales Main Line has been identified in the past but there does not seem to be a timetable for this work.

Improvements to Passenger Services • The Council’s concerns are covered by Sewta; a particular issue is the

poor quality of the rolling stock allocated to and operated by Arriva Trains Wales under their franchise.

79 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reopen Caerleon Station. 80 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Include an additional service on the Aberystwyth to Birmingham line between 7:30 and 9:30 in the morning.

Other Comments • The comfort and cleanliness of the rolling stock are very poor. • Reliability has improved since the introduction of the new standard

pattern timetable, except on Fridays. • Offer a discount on this line for young persons, senior rail or Cambrian

card holders on season, weekly or monthly tickets. • Suggest that Arriva Trains Wales run their trains on Biodiesel. • Provide re-cycle bins on for plastic bottles, cans etc. • It would be useful if train tickets were valid on the Arriva bus service. • It would be more useful if the bus service ran at different times to the

trains between Machynlleth and Aberystwyth. 81 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Provide an additional passing place on the Aberystwyth to Shrewsbury line.

• Re-instate the line between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen. Improvements to Passenger Services

• Provide more services on Sundays on the Aberystwyth the Shrewsbury line.

Other Comments • Provide re-cycle bins on for plastic bottles, cans etc. • Improve facilities for bicycles on trains; this would help local people and

tourists. • Promote increased energy efficiency on railways, including the use of

Biodiesel. 82 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Express rail link to Cardiff International Airport. 83 Snowdonia National Park Improvements to Passenger Services

• Provide an early morning train from Blaenau Ffestiniog to London. • Better integration of rail and bus services for the Snowdonia Sherpa

network at Llandudno Junction and Bangor. • Increase train speeds on the North Wales Coast Line.

Other Comments • Provide regular, clean, reliable trains with buffet service that allow

meetings to be attended at a reasonable time (10:00am) in London, Cardiff and Birmingham.

84 Ludlow Rail Users Improvements to Passenger Services

• Provide one through train a day between Manchester and Devon. • Better integration of services from Manchester to Newport and onward

connections to Reading and London. • Provide extra Sunday services to alleviate overcrowding and improve

connections at Hereford and Newport. Other Comments

• Delighted with present half hourly services all day on Mondays – Fridays between London and Cardiff.

• Would like Saver/Super Saver fares on intercity services to continue. Reliability of rolling stock on the Marches line has improved recently. 85 Improvements to Infrastructure

• New track and signalling to facilitate the services proposed below; including possible passing loops at Dyfi Junction, Borth, Caersws and Forden.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Provide an hourly shuttle between Shrewsbury and Newtown. • Provide an hourly service between Shrewsbury and Machynlleth.

Other Comments • Travellers using public transport, particularly rail, are regarded as

second class citizens and get a poor deal in the overall transport picture.

86 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Provide a rail link from Whitland or Carmarthen to Cardigan and Aberystwyth.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Increase the frequency of rail services between Swansea and West

Wales. • There should be a greater frequency of services to and from

Haverfordwest, and to and from Fishguard. Other Comments

• Reliability is the most important feature. 87 Improvements to Passenger Services

• More visual information on platforms. • Clearer announcements. • More deaf awareness training for staff.

88 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Upgrade railway in Blaenau Ffestiniog for freight and passenger services.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Extend free passes for the elderly, beyond the current three mile limit. • Make stations more secure and employ more staff. • Provide more reliable information about services. • Run summer steam services on the Blaenau Ffestiniog line, as they do

on the Cambrian coast line to Porthmadog. • Advertise special days for mountain bikers, with a special carriage

adapted to transport bikes. • Upgrade rolling stock.

89 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Develop a light rail system for Cardiff. • Convert the City and Coryton lines to a circle line, and extend both

eastward and westward. • Review provision of a Cardiff Bay branch line and/or remove existing

Bute Avenue line and replace with light rail. • Provide a rail service to the University Hospital of Wales from the

nearest rail lines; Rhymney line at Wedal Road or the Pontypridd line at Gabalfa.

• Upgrade South Wales Main Line to allow a 90 minute service from Cardiff to London.

• Provide a direct rail link to Heathrow Airport from the west. Other Comments

• Seek funding for Cardiff the light rail (tram) scheme from UK Government; as for schemes in Manchester, Nottingham and Croydon.

90 Amman Valley Railway Society Improvements to Infrastructure

• Reinstate passenger trains on Amman Valley line, to provide links via Heart of Wales line directly to Llanelli, Swansea and Llandeilo, for tourism and commuting traffic.

• Introduce passenger trains to Swansea District Line (Briton Ferry to Llanelli) bypassing Swansea to improve services to/from West Wales

• New stations at Llandarcy Enterprise Park, Morriston Parkway and Grovesend Parkway

• Rebuild former railway from Pontarddulais to Gowerton (via Gorseinon) to allow Heart of Wales services more direct route to Swansea

Improvements to Passenger Services • Some direct services to Cardiff International Airport using Swansea

District Line • Heart of Wales line: increase frequency form 4-hourly to 2-hourly

91 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Swansea to Llanelli: remove single line section • Heart of Wales: redirect along Swansea District line to connect at Port

Talbot • Swansea District line: passenger services and new parkway stations

(eg: Llandarcy, Morriston) • Pembroke Dock line: update level crossings • Refurbish Ferryside station

Improvements to Passenger Services

• Heart of Wales line: more trains • Redirect west wales services to Cardiff International Airport • Review standard pattern timetable for West Wales (trains no longer

stopping at smaller request stops) • Impact of long-distance trains on local services • Additional First Great Western services west beyond Swansea

Other Comments • Dirty, old trains • Better facilities for bicycles on trains • Delays, cancellations

92 Chester-Shrewsbury Rail Partnership Improvements to Infrastructure

• Double track from Saltney Junction (Chester) to Wrexham or passing loops

• Line speed improvements to 90mph • Potential for new stations on Chester to Shrewsbury line

Improvements to Passenger Services • Direct service from Wrexham to Ruabon/Chirk

Other Comments • Potential for freight on Chester to Shrewsbury line • Improved access to stations (DDA) • More use of CCTV

93 Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• Llanharan new station • Infrastructure improvements to allow half-hourly service Merthyr to

Pontypridd • Abercynon station remodelling/park & ride • Cardiff to Treherbert: longer platforms • Infrastructure improvements to allow full half-hourly service on

Aberdare line • South Wales mainline: west of Cardiff – remove capacity constraints • Cogan Junction/Queen Street – remove capacity constraints • Cardiff area resignalling: maximise opportunities • Station improvements at Aberdare, Porth, Taffs Wells and Treherbert • Park & Ride expansion at Aberdare, Pontyclun, Taffs Well and

Treforest • Upper Boat: possible future development as Park & Ride station • Additional hourly services Cardiff to Pontypridd • Pontyclun to Beddau (Tynant): evaluate reopening of line • Pontyclun to Llantrisant/Beddau (Tynant): additional rail-bus links • Rail-bus links (Maerdy to Ystrad Rhondda and Rhigos to Aberdare):

incorporate into rail franchise and increase funding Other Comments

• Support for SEWTA strategy • Long term strategic approach required

94 Chester and North Wales Rail Users’ Association Improvements to Infrastructure

• Double track from Saltney Junction (Chester) to Wrexham • Upgrade line speeds on North Wales Mainline (110mph Crewe to

Bangor, 90/100mph Bangor to Holyhead) • Upgrade line speeds Chester to Shrewsbury (100mph) • Electrification of line Holyhead to Crewe/Manchester • Llandudno station modernise and improve • Gaerwen-Amlwch line: reopen for passenger use (as far as Llangefni) • Bangor to Caernarfon: evaluate possible reopening • Chester/Shrewbury station; modernisation

Improvements to Passenger Services • Upgrade rolling stock (better maintenance, refurbishment) • North Wales: review of capacity (students to/from Bangor) • Through service to Manchester airport • Crewe to North Wales: hourly through train • Holyhead to Birmingham: more through trains • Holyhead/Bangor/Llandudno to London: more through trains • Train/bus integrated ticketing • Free travel for pensioners (especially on Conwy Line) • Conwy Valley: improved services

Other Comments • Conwy Valley line – upgrade for heavy freight use • Support for community rail partnerships

95 Heart of Wales Line Travellers’ Association Improvements to Infrastructure

• Swansea to Llanelli redoubling of the track • Ensure HOW line is fit for Class 158s and modern multiple units • Operating base on HOW line (g: Llandrindod or Llandovery) • Additional passing loop on HOW line

Improvements to Passenger Services • 2-hourly service on HOW line (including evenings, Sundays) • More modern trains • Use of HOW line for tourism • Space for luggage, prams and bicycles • Provision of refreshments on HOW line • Heated waiting rooms • Real time, reliable train time information

Other Comments • Free rail travel for over 60’s (extend All-Wales Bus Pass) • Integration with bus services (eg: at Llandrindod) • HOW line designation as a community railway, but no down-grading of

infrastructure. 96 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Circular Cardiff line. Connect Coryton and Radyr. Double track between Health Halt and Coryton.

• Extend Cardiff Bay line to Assembly/Wales Millennium Centre Improvements to Passenger Services

• CCTV on trains • One-man trains as a solution to staff abuse • Rail/Bus integrated ticketing • Free travel for pensioners/disabled • Longer trains to avoid overcrowding • Railway to promote tourism

Other Comments • Reintroduce steam trains

97 Amman Valley Railway Society (same as 90)

98 Wirral Transport Users Association Improvements to Infrastructure

• Rail electrification from Bidston (Birkenhead) to Heswall/Neston on the Wirral should extend to Wrexham General/Central

• New railway station to serve Deeside Industrial Park • New railway stations at Beechwood Estate, railway bridge, Woodchurch

Road, Prenton, Birkenhead (A552) • Interchange station to Arrowe Park Hospital • New railway station to serve Little Neston/Ness Botanic Gardens • Double track installation into Wrexham station and lengthening of

platform • Urgent improvement of conditions for height signs, and clearance

around and under rail bridges • Integrate Bidston-Wrexham Line with Merseyrail electric system • Installation of new railway station to serve Airbus factory at Broughton,

Broughton shopping centre, Hawarden Airport and Flintshire • Double track between Saltney Junction and Wrexham

Improvements to Passenger Services

• Improve staircase and shelter at Shotton station • Improve disable access to Flint platform • Install disable access to Chester platform (ramps/lifts) • Need litter bins at Wrexham Central Station • Install car parks at every railway station on the Borderlands line for park

and ride • Install tannoy service and CCTV in all Borderlands Line stations (Wales-

Merseyside) • Improve passenger shelters and internal lighting • Ensure public availability records of ATW train cancellations • Direct service to Birkenhead/Liverpool • Improve connecting train and availability services to and from Shotton

high level (Bidston-Wrexham Line) to Shotton low level services to Holyhead, Bangor, Llandudno, Crewe, Manchester

• Better connecting train services at Wrexham General to Shrewsbury, Birmingham, London and mid-Wales

• Increase train frequency (1/2 hourly/15 minutes and Sunday service) on Bidston-Wrexham Line

• Increase train frequency during Open Golf Tournament in Hoylake • Upgrade 153 single engine units to increase train arrival reliability,

reduce breakdowns and cancellations, ensure toilet water availability, and provide space for bicycles and disabled chairs

• Two newer car units required on Wrexham Central-Bidston (Birkenhead) line

• Ensure 153 units are cleaned after each service and seating area is checked for litter

• Control and monitor fare collection • Revert back to stop on request stops at Hawarden Bridge Station • Allow walkers and cyclists of the sustrans walk to request stops to travel

on trains on Sundays

Other Comments

• Promote tourist attractions and rail links along Bidston to Wrexham line and local attractions (e.g. Deeside Ice Rink) in railway stations

• Promote Arriva Trains Wales Sunday services • Encourage Deeside companies to move products by rail • If electrification on Bidston-Wrexham line occurs replacement needed

for an old closed branch line between Shotton-Mickle Trafford. Potential for current sustrans track to become an electrified line to Chester General, serving R.A.F. Sealand/Garden City-Saughall-Blacon-Chester General

• Research into building a new railway station to serve Lache and the Chester Business Park needed

• Equal standards along Bidston-Wrexham line should occur • 24hour/seven day a week bus and train public services required from

North Wales, Shrewsbury/Shropshire, mid-Wales, Merseyside and Cheshire to John Lennon Airport and Mancester

99 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Development of the Dyfi link near Machynlleth to provide direct trains between Pwllheli and Aberystwyth

• Re-instatement of the rail link between Aberystwyth and Carmarthen • Increase connections from Chester/Shrewsbury on Central Wales or

Aberystwyth route • Re-route Crewe Chester to depart from Manchester Airport through

Crewe Chester and terminate at Wrexham (linking Aberystwyth service and timed connection with the Central Wales at Shrewsbury)

• Integrate service in north and west Wales, and also with an airport link Improvements to Passenger Services

• Integration of rail/bus services and ticketing scheme Other Comments 100 Conwy Valley Rail Initiative Improvements to Infrastructure

• Railway line route from Llandudno to Blenau Ffestiniog via Llanrwst and Betwsycoed awaits consultation report by the WAG and decision to carry out slate waste traffic out of Blenau Ffestiniog

• Awaiting evaluation study of the potential forestry/wood traffic from Blenau Ffestiniog to Trawsfynnydd Lake Siding

Improvements to Passenger Services

• Installation of ‘real time information’ points and CCTV at all stations, especially at Blenau Ffestiniog, Betwsyocoed and Llanrwst Town

• Extend over 60 free bus concession to Conwy Valley railway line (perform pilot scheme)

• Develop fleet of trains to cater specifically for walkers, ramblers and cyclists

Other Comments • Increase funding allocation to Arriva Train Wales to facilitate

Partnership funding with key stakeholders (e.g. tourism organisations) 101 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Circular Cardiff line. Connect Coryton and Radyr. • New stations in Eastern Cardiff • Extend Cardiff Bay line to Mermaid Quay

102 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Double Chester/Wrexham line • Install single line onto Chester/Holyhead mainline for Corus works at

Shotton 103 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Inter-connecting buses from Welshpool to train station • More car parking space/better system to prevent nearby workers using

free railway car park (e.g. refundable car park charges when purchasing rail ticket)

• Increase the number of carriages to ensure seating space • Improve Arriva Trains Wales train service reliability from Birmingham

and availability of connections for the Cambrian line • Hourly service from Aberystwyth to Shrewsbury, alternate trains going

to/from Birmingham and Manchester • Alternate trains to/from Manchester and Chester/Holyhead • Earlier train services (in summer) from Shrewsbury, Welshpool and

Newton connecting to coast line to Pwllheli

104 Passenger Focus Improvements to Infrastructure

• Development work to Cardiff Queen Street station needed to increase capacity (i.e. opening of an fourth platform and associated re-signalling work)

• Endorses SEWTA recommendations • Improvements to Swansea and West Wales stations to meet expected

growth in demand • Capitalise upon route west of Swansea • Develop capacity of the Cambrian line in mid-Wales, increase carriage

capacity • Enhance services around Wrexham to Bidston line

Improvements to Passenger Services • Quality of journey, services, and connections need to be improved • Improvements needed in punctuality/reliability; stations; personal

security; and on-train environment • Improve car parking facilities • Adequate light and shelter • Physical station improvements (i.e. increase access for people with

disabilities, elderly passengers and passengers with young children) • Upgrade all stations, not just major stations • Improvements to the provision of information, increasing the points

where tickets can be purchased and increasing the number of visible staff at medium and large stations in Wales

• Additional action to tackle anti-social behaviour and improving the fabric of stations (i.e. better lighting, regular cleaning and help points)

• CCTV on trains • ATW is encouraged to complete train refurbishment ASAP

Other Comments • Undertake a programme to ensure that all stations in Wales meet the

recommended standards set out in the rail classification scheme • Any rail/public transport strategy for Wales need to consider key issues

within the wider rail network (e.g. developments in Swindon, Reading, London Paddington and Birmingham New Street)

105 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Double the track between Saltney Junction and Wrexham • New station on the Chester/Wrexham line serving Chester Business

Park 106 Carmarthenshire County Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• Endorses the SWWITCH recommendations to remove bottlenecks at Swansea East junction and between DuffrYn West to Cockett

• Increase rolling stock resources available to Arriva Trains Wales

Improvements to Passenger Services

• Fast hourly service between Carmarthen, Swansea and Cardiff • Train every two hours to Tenby and Pembroke Dock, and Milford

Haven Other Comments

• Comprehensive analysis of rail service to North Pembrokeshire and consultation with local residents is needed

107 Wrexham-Birkenhead Rail Users’ Association Improvements to Infrastructure

• Shunt-free rail access from Chester to Wrexham Central station • A direct pedestrian route at Wrexham Central Station to and from

buses on Bradley Road • Rail crossover reinstalled at Shotton High Level to allow trains from

Bidston and beyond to terminate • Additional signalling on the Borderlands Line, especially at Shotton and

north Dee Marsh • West to south chord at Shotton on part of the former trackbed which

once linked the wharf at Connah’s Quay with Shotton High Level • Measures to ease congestion of the line between Wrexham and

Chester, redoubling of the Wrexham to Chester line, west to south chord at Shotton, direct connection for freight from Dee Marsh through Chester

Improvements to Passenger Services

• All trains on the North Wales main line stop at Shotton (except Virgin’s Holyhead services)

• Extension of the existing evening and Sunday Borderlands line trains from Bidston to Birkenhead North

• An earlier first train into and a later last train out of Wrexham on the Borderlands Line, enable by stabling the evening and Sunday unit overnight at Birkenhead North depot

• Partnership between train operating companies and Network Rail to improve the dependability of Liverpool-Wales connections at Bidston or Birkenhead North

• Possibility self-financing: a third unit for reliable operation of the hourly Borderlands Line service, fully restored to Birkenhead North

• Subject to additional revenue support: a half-hourly service from Wrexham to Birkenhead North

• An hourly service between Rhyl and Wrexham • Some shorter Hoyhead-Cardiff journeys • Faster journeys from Shotton to Bidston and beyond prior electrification

Other Comments

• Creation of a transport body for Merseyside, West Cheshire and North Wales

• Legislation to ensure that any development on former railway land preserves at least a single-track corridor for future segregated public transport use

108 Caerphilly County Borough Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• Platform lengthening works on Rhymney Line to address current capacity constraints

• Support reliability and capacity improvements through the development of network infrastructure to reduce delays and improve performance (i.e. at Cardiff Central and Cardiff Queen Street)

• Frequency enhancements on Rhymney line • Expansion of park and ride facilities, particularly south of Bargoed

Improvements to Passenger Services

• New rolling stock to replace ageing and unreliable Class 14x (Pacer) train

• Quality, security and provision of information on Rhymney line • CCTV to be installed at all stations • Improve accessibility for the mobility impaired people and cyclists

109 Heart of Wales Line Forum Improvements to Infrastructure

• Single track section of the line between Swansea Loop West and Llandeilo Junction to be redoubled;

• Capacity and timetable flexibility of the Heart of Wales Line to be improved by installation of at least one extra passing loop and a number of sidings;

• Closure of under-used accommodation crossings, plus other low budget track improvements to enable shorter end to end journey times;

• Establishment of an operating base on the line.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Enhancement of services:

- the frequency and timing of trains does not meet passenger needs

- rolling stock improvements • Creation of a new initiative – the Welsh Tourist Train.

Other Comments

• Work to reduce the underlying cost base of the provision of Welsh rural rail services;

• Support lines designated as Community Railways; • Concessionary rail travel for the over 60s and disabled; • Better integration between transport modes, especially bus and rail.

110 Improvements to Infrastructure

• EU funding should be sought to electrify North Wales mainline route thus allowing Virgin West Coast ‘Pendolinos’ to operate under the wires from Holyhead to London Euston, via Chester and Crewe;

• Line from Chester to Manchester Piccadilly via Warrington Bank Quay should be electrified. Conversion of Crewe-Holyhead and Manc. Picc – Llandudno services to EMU working would enable Arriva to cascade their Class 175 and Class 158 to other services on the network;

• Services between Cardiff and Holyhead/Manc.Picc. should be operated solely by Class 175 ‘Coradia’ units. Class 180 would be a useful addition to the fleet;

• More passing loops on single line sections of Cambrian Line and strengthening of services with extra 158 units;

• New stations at Brackla, Llanharan, Magor etc.; • Valleys Lines: would be better served by electric trains or Metro trains

(as operate in Tyne and Wear). Metro trains could serve stations north of Caerphilly and Pontypridd and services could run fast to Cathays and Cardiff Queen Street respectively, saving travel time;

• Development of Cardiff area light rail network /supertram, on-street running to Bay and across city (as in Manchester).

Improvements to Passenger Services

• Improvements to service frequency and reliability on Cambrian Line; • Vast improvement to local services on South Wales Mainline would take pressure off M4; • Consideration to be given to re-opening of mineral line to Beddau to provide passenger services to Talbot Green/Llantrisant;

Other Comments • Better to spend a lot on improvements than to have a ‘value for money’

approach which wouldn’t be effective.

111 All comments for Wrexham (Central) – Birkenhead line Improvements to Infrastructure

• Through running to Liverpool (electric diesel); • Junction at Shotton to allow through running, Holyhead, Shotton,

Wrexham, Shrewsbury, Mid and South Wales; • Through running/improved connections to Crewe and Manchester

airport (rail connected) and Liverpool airport (not currently rail connected);

• Electrification of whole line – North Wales coast line electrification to extend London-Crewe electrification, electric sub-station at Shotton would serve two lines for the price of one;

• Park and ride and car pooling at Dobshill (where A55 and line cross).

Improvements to Passenger Services • Increase frequency to half-hourly; • Rolling stock:

- more power required (steep inclines) - faster acceleration – frequent stops - faster door operation “ “ - more comfort, legroom, capacity, space for prams/bicycles - more space for wheelchair users - thorough cleaning of exterior of rolling stock

• Timetabled connections at Shotton and Wrexham General; • Re-instatement of Hawarden Bridge Station as a request stop on all services.

Other Comments

• Arriva run trains and buses – scope to co-ordinate services (e.g. alternate);

• Shared ticketing; • Over 60 bus pass to be valid on local trains; • Communication on stations to notify re delays not routine running

announcements; • Encourage young people onto trains by offering reduced travel to

college or work, times to coincide with school hours, sports facilities etc, easy carriage of mountain bikes etc.

112 Wales Transport Strategy Group Improvements to Infrastructure Valley Lines:

• Additional capacity at Queen Street by using disused northbound platform; • Adding ‘bay’ platform at south end, town side of Caerphilly station, with minor signalling, track and platform works; • Rhondda Valley: upgrading signalling to ‘controlled’ status and creating a dynamic loop extending from Ystrad Rhondda to Llwynypia.

South Wales main line: Severn Tunnel to West Wales • Additional signals in Severn Tunnel • Raising max. speed on lines and upgrading relief lines between Severn Tunnel Junction and Cardiff to full passenger speeds/standards/designation; • Track and layout changes, improving fluidity of operation at Newport and Cardiff Central; facilitate faster entry onto platforms; • Upgrading freight loops between Cardiff and Port Talbot to passenger standard; • Return at least part of single section between Swansea and Llanelli to double line (up to five miles of additional track and signalling).

Marches line: Newport to Crewe • New intermediate signals reducing section between Abergavenny and Pontrilas.

Cambrian Lines: Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth and Pwllheli • Additional passing loop at Dovey Junction; • Conversion of Welshpool to ‘dynamic loop’, extending one mile west; • Additional signalling at Machynlleth to permit two-way working through westbound platform; • Improved signalling at Aberystwyth: allow two trains to use station at one time; • Line speed improvements between Tywyn and Porthmadog.

North Marches Line: Shrewsbury to Chester • Restoration of whole or part of double track between Wrexham and Chester; • Line speed improvements on Wrexham-Chester (from 60/70 up to 90/100mph) –line is mostly straight and used by100mph rolling stock.

North Wales main line: Crewe to Llandudno and Holyhead • Provide intermediate signals to reduce running sections, around Shotton and Flint, and Ynys Mon; • Signalling alterations and track upgrades for 90/100mph operation throughout Saltney Junction to Prestatyn – line is flat and straight most of the way; • Rationalisation of track, signalling and platforms at Llandudno.

Improvements to Passenger Services

Key Station Improvements • Improvements to parking provision at key nodal stations: Newport, Cardiff Central, Bridgend, Swansea, Carmarthen, Cwmbran, Abergavenny, Newtown, Machynlleth, Aberystwyth, Wrexham, Prestatyn, Rhyl, Colwyn Bay, Bangor; • Major improvements for bus interchange at Newport, Cardiff Central South Side, Bridgend, Swansea, Carmarthen, Machynlleth, Aberystwyth, Bangor.

113 Improvements to Infrastructure

• A new park and ride station to east of Newport, with links to Cardiff, Newport City Centre, Bristol etc. • New park and ride station by Junction 2 of M48 adjacent to Newhouse Farm Industrial Estate south of Chepstow; • Feasibility study should be commissioned looking at developing a new rail station at Newport Road/Pengam by Rover Way, Cardiff – with good pedestrian links, bus feeders and some parking provision; • New park and ride station at Coryton Interchange as an extension of line from existing Coryton station – a passing loop and extra platform would be required at Whitchurch or Coryton for a more frequent service to operate on the branch, coupled with improvement works at Cardiff Queen Street; • Feasibility study should be commissioned into extending the Cardiff Bay branch some 200 metres to a new station site on Bute Place, immediately opposite Bute Crescent, Roald Dahl Plass and the Millennium Centre. • Simple new station half way between Queen Street and Cardiff Bay to serve Butetown/Lloyd George Avenue.

Improvements to Passenger Services

• Develop seamless local public transport system with proper Travelcard ticketing and seamless branding. South Wales Metro – frequent services in Newport and Cardiff and extending to many valleys. • Develop ‘Ticket Stops’ in post offices/newsagents – on trial basis to start.

114 Improvements to Infrastructure

• Could a service ever be reopened at Caerleon Station?

115 Duplicated with Number 76 116 North Pembrokeshire Transport Forum

Other Comments NPTF response to SWWITCH Addendum:

- additional rail services needed for Fishguard; - transport infrastructure at Fishguard Harbour Station Complex

should be developed to achieve its full potential as the main transport hub for the area;

- bus links from Fishguard to rail services at Haverfordwest should not be expanded as an alternative to the provision of additional rail services to Fishguard.

NPTF includes copies of responses from Fishguard Rotary Club, the Soroptomists, the Chamber of Trade and Tourism, the Civic Society, the Senior Citizens’ Welfare Committee, the Women’s Institute and Fishguard and Goodwick Town Council that describe the value the community places on local rail services.

117 Milford Haven Rail Passengers Association Improvements to Infrastructure

• Pontyclun (Beddau) to Pontypridd: reopen this line, possibly as light rail • Barry to Tonteg, Ely to Common line: rebuild to provide direct route to

Cardiff, again as light rail scheme. Also provide access to Llantrisant • Swansea to Bangor direct route (by rebuilding Carmarthen to

Aberystwyth and Bangor to Caernarfon to Afon Wen lines) – trains at 2 hour intervals on this route

• Cockett to Llanelli relay double track • Milford Haven: move station platform to improve accessibility • Pembroke Dock line: upgrade level crossings • Pembroke Dock line: passing loop at Templeton-Narberth and possibly

at Manorbier • Reopen Fishguard and Goodwick station – nearer the town, good

accessibility and parking • New halt at Scolton (Fishguard line)

Improvements to Passenger Services • Overcrowding in summer, dirty trains, toilets not working • Milford Line: hourly service needed • Fishguard line: more trains needed • Bus connections with all stations • Pembroke Dock station – develop as transport hub • Through ticketing bus/rail • Integrate timetable for Swansea-Pembroke and Cardiff-Swansea local

services • Half-hourly local service Cardiff-Swansea needed • Improve timetable for connections to Vale of Glamorgan line

Other Comments • Use of European money to support West Wales routes • Send information on timetables/fares to all households

118 Wrexham County Borough Council Improvements to Infrastructure

• Electrification of Wrexham to Bidston line • Enhancements to the Chester-Wrexham-Shrewsbury line (study

commissioned)

119 Improvements to Passenger Services

• Restore flexible service on Cardiff/Valleys Lines (old timetable) – standard pattern timetable has removed many through trains

• Too many delays caused by lack of time allowed at stations when trains are busy and by infrastructure/vandalism problems

• Trains do not stop at stations to make up time or are terminated before the end stop (not reflected in the statistics)

• Overcrowding Other Comments

• Renegotiate franchise with Arriva – subsidy was set too low 120 Wrexham Railway Society Improvements to Infrastructure

• Direct services linking all major towns in Wales • North Wales to Manchester or Liverpool airports • Dyfi link at Machynlleth to provide direct service Pwllheli to Aberystwyth • Re-establish rail link from Aberystwyth to Carmarthen • Reopen/establish stations in highly populated areas.

Improvements to Passenger Services • Concessionary rail travel for senior citizens • Joint travel bus/rail

121 Light Rail (UK) Ltd. Improvements to Infrastructure

• Seatram proposal: light rail/tramways for Towyn & Kimmell Bay

Section B (Late Responses) L1 Improvements to Infrastructure • New stations at Caerleon, east Newport • New Ebbw Vale line – new station at Coedcerknew/Duffryn • Branch lines/local services within Newport • Newport station refurbishment/disabled access/improved parking Improvements to Passenger Services • Newport station to Bristol: additional services • New port to Cardiff: more later evening services/more direct services L2 Fishguard & Goodwick Town Council Improvements to Passenger Services • Better service from Fishguard connecting to London Other Comments • Poor standard/condition of ATW coaches • Overcrowding on Haverfordwest to Hereford service • Insufficient storage for luggage • Dirty toilets • Lack of refreshments • No heating L3 Improvements to Infrastructure • Park & Ride station to serve East Newport • New station at Magor/Undy • South Chepstow: new Park & Ride station • Cardiff Bay line: extension to Mermaid Quay Improvements to Passenger Services • First Great Western timetable changes from December 2006: impact on

stops at Severn Tunnel Junction • Rail/Bus integrated ticketing – Travelcard, branded as South Wales Metro Other Comments • Support for SEWTA 2009-2018 strategy • Sale of tickets in post offices/newsagents L4 Improvements to Infrastructure • Reopen Cwm Colliery branch to Beddau for passengers • Cambrian Line: passing loops to allow an hourly service • Wrexham to Bidston electrification Improvements to Passenger Services • New/upgraded rolling stock

Other Comments • Aberdare to Hirwaun (for freight) • Ystrad Mynach to Bedlinog (for freight) • Anglesey (Amlwch) (for freight) L5 Improvements to Infrastructure • Tenby station: refurbish • Additional passing loop: increase frequency on Tenby line Improvements to Passenger Services • Tenby to London: improved journey times • Tenby to Swansea: dirty, cold, overcrowded trains • Restore through train to Waterloo • Upgrade/replace rolling stock L6 Other Comments • Concern about a change to the availability of Rover tickets on the

Cambrian Line L7 Pullman Group Improvements to Passenger Services • Refurbish interiors of trains used in Wales (especially 158 and 153 trains)

L8 Improvements to Infrastructure • Reopen old lines across the UK including the following parts of routes in

Wales: • Porthcawl to Hay-on-Wye • Neath to Brecon • Pembroke Dock to Wrexham (via Carmarthen, Lampeter,

Machynlleth) • Pwllheli to Llandudno • Cardiff Airport to Aberaeron • Abergavenny to Llandudno/Amlwch • Fishguard to Newport (via Neath) • Aberaeron to Hay-on-Wye • Barmouth to Welshpool • Glamorgan circular railway (Brynmawr, Merthyr, Hirwaun, Neath,

Pyle, Llandow, Barry, Marshfield, Caerleon and Crumlin) • Welsh Highland line • Narrow guage railway (for tourism) North/South Wales

(Caernarfon to Merthyr via Builth Wells)

Improvements to Passenger Services • Tenby to Fishguard direct service L9 Improvements to Infrastructure • Wrexham to Bidston electrification L10 Improvements to Infrastructure • Improvements to Passenger Services • West Wales problems of cancellations, particularly at weekends • Deteriorating quality of rolling stock L11 Improvements to Passenger Services • Valleys lines: delays and cancellations, service is deteriorating

L12 Improvements to Infrastructure • Double track on Wrexham to Chester line • Double track on Wrexham to Bidston line

Improvements to Passenger Services • Integration of timetables for Wrexham/Chester and Wrexham/Bidston lines

and with connections to Cardiff • Improved bus/rail connections at Shotton, Hawarden, Buckley and

Penyffordd L13 Improvements to Passenger Services • Improve Sunday services from Milford Haven

Annex 6

The structure of the rail passenger industry in Wales Memorandum of Understanding

Welsh Assembly Government (WAG) Department for Transport (DfT)

Co-Signatories to the

W&TB Franchise Regional Transport Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) Consortia

England only services Network Rail (NR)

Wales & the Borders Franchise (W&TB) Other Franchises providing “Welsh” services Arriva Trains Wales (ATW) Other Train Operating Companies (TOCs)

Rolling Stock Leasing Companies (ROSCOs)

DfT and WAG set strategy. Regional Consortia contribute to strategy and deliver DfT decides what NR will deliver in terms of performance and capacity, for a price set by ORR NR manages the network and works with TOCs WAG funds and manages W&TB franchise (apart from England-only services) ATW operates W&TB franchise TOCs lease rolling stock from ROSCOs

Annex 7