Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <ta8muf$lom1$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:38:55 on Fri, 8 Jul
> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>> trains are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>
>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>
>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>
>> Surely timetabling was already done by NR? Why would that change?
>
> Timetabling is "done" (whatever that means) by NR, but as a result of
> lobbying by the TOCs for paths.

It's not lobbying. They submit their proposed schedules to NR, which
reconciles them with the available paths. That will continue, though
cost-cutting will probably mean they ask for fewer paths.

>
> The whole point of the Fat Controller (aka GBR) which you have
> apparently stunningly missed, is that the lobbying ceases because
> the ambitions of the former-TOCs is also within the remit of the FC,
> and not the former bus operators who now only have to do day to day
> operational tasks like find sufficient drivers, and on-train
> litter-pickers.

They'll still be submitting their requested schedules to GBR's timetabling
group, which will go through multiple iterations, just like today. But the
task might be easier if the TOCs are running fewer services on smaller
route networks.

>
> Rather than worry about which stations to serve, and how frequently,
> with what-length what-class trains, and quite likely no longer have to
> run balkanised ticketing/marketing websites.

That's a different issue.

In message <ta8q0u$m2at$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:31:26 on Fri, 8 Jul
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ta8n6e$lpgv$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:43:10 on Fri, 8 Jul
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>>>> one of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>>>> necessarily have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>>>> whoever) rather than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>>>> political will to have a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>
>>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>>>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>>>> franchises?
>>>
>>> I don't think the new PM will be acting as Transport secretary as well. And
>>> whoever the new transport secretary is, classic franchises have gone for
>>> good.
>>
>> I agree with you, and hence disagree that GBR is a transitory
>> Boris-fantasy.
>>
>>>> In a sense I'd like Liz Truss to win, just because as a nearby
>>>> constituency MP she's been a vigorous campaigner for the Ely North
>>>> improvements. But the leaks the last couple of weeks have been that
>>>> Network Rail gold-plating the project to an estimated £450m has caused
>>>> the Treasury to veto it.
>>>>
>>>> As PM, which way would she go?
>>>
>>> She'd keep out of it. PMs have lots of much bigger things to worry about.
>>
>> This is an important local issue she has campaigned about since becoming
>> an MP, and recently even as a Cabinet Minister. It would be noticed if
>> she suddenly said "sorry, it's a delusion I used to have, and isn't
>> going to happen, even though I'm now the one person who could make it
>> happen".
>
>As PM, she would keep out decisions about minor local projects, whether in
>her constituency or not. It's *because* she could make it happen that she
>wouldn't interfere.

The issue here being it's no longer minor project, but has become a
major one due to NR's gold plating. Mindful that one of the significant
outcomes is more paths from the ports for container trains, which plays
into a wider multi-modal low-carbon strategy.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ta8qhi$m403$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:40:18 on Fri, 8 Jul
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>I think one area of vulnerability is the whole Green agenda. This was
>imposed on Boris (who never previously showed any interest in it) by
>Carrie, and a more right-wing new PM might want to see less spent on
>projects like electrification.

And as failing Grayling once said "who needs to get to Sheffield one
minute sooner".
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <ta8q0u$m2at$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:31:26 on Fri, 8 Jul
> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ta8n6e$lpgv$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:43:10 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>>>>> one of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>>>>> necessarily have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>>>>> whoever) rather than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>>>>> political will to have a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>
>>>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>>>>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>>>>> franchises?
>>>>
>>>> I don't think the new PM will be acting as Transport secretary as well. And
>>>> whoever the new transport secretary is, classic franchises have gone for
>>>> good.
>>>
>>> I agree with you, and hence disagree that GBR is a transitory
>>> Boris-fantasy.
>>>
>>>>> In a sense I'd like Liz Truss to win, just because as a nearby
>>>>> constituency MP she's been a vigorous campaigner for the Ely North
>>>>> improvements. But the leaks the last couple of weeks have been that
>>>>> Network Rail gold-plating the project to an estimated £450m has caused
>>>>> the Treasury to veto it.
>>>>>
>>>>> As PM, which way would she go?
>>>>
>>>> She'd keep out of it. PMs have lots of much bigger things to worry about.
>>>
>>> This is an important local issue she has campaigned about since becoming
>>> an MP, and recently even as a Cabinet Minister. It would be noticed if
>>> she suddenly said "sorry, it's a delusion I used to have, and isn't
>>> going to happen, even though I'm now the one person who could make it
>>> happen".
>>
>> As PM, she would keep out decisions about minor local projects, whether in
>> her constituency or not. It's *because* she could make it happen that she
>> wouldn't interfere.
>
> The issue here being it's no longer minor project, but has become a
> major one due to NR's gold plating. Mindful that one of the significant
> outcomes is more paths from the ports for container trains, which plays
> into a wider multi-modal low-carbon strategy.

Will there still be a 'multi-modal low-carbon strategy' with a right-wing
new PM?

On 08/07/2022 08:42, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <j4nfch90f4fgi6letoj280jue4cjnt0e11@4ax.com>, at 08:30:31 on
> Fri, 8 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:29:44 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <m75dcht963sjhfeeehbrri543ib0cc2145@4ax.com>, at 09:11:28 on
>>> Thu, 7 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>>> ....... Or anywhere at all in Scotland or Wales.
>>>
>>> Scotland would be rather odd, considering Scotrail is separately
>>> governed from Holyrood. And Wales almost as much from Cardiff.
>>>
>>> If the objective is to have something near the "centre of gravity" of
>>> the railway system, I hate to say it but Milton Keynes isn't that far
>>> off.
>>
>> Indeed yes, although that calls into question the accuracy of the name
>> "Great *British* Railways".
>>
>> It should be Great English Railways.
>
> It has to be a derivative of "British Rail", just to channel the
> nostalgia for a golden past which never existed.

No. It is part of Johnson's plan to keep the UK together. Or at least
Great Britain. His outrageous behavour has done exactly the opposite!

<martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
> On 08/07/2022 08:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <j4nfch90f4fgi6letoj280jue4cjnt0e11@4ax.com>, at 08:30:31 on
>> Fri, 8 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:29:44 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In message <m75dcht963sjhfeeehbrri543ib0cc2145@4ax.com>, at 09:11:28 on
>>>> Thu, 7 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> ....... Or anywhere at all in Scotland or Wales.
>>>>
>>>> Scotland would be rather odd, considering Scotrail is separately
>>>> governed from Holyrood. And Wales almost as much from Cardiff.
>>>>
>>>> If the objective is to have something near the "centre of gravity" of
>>>> the railway system, I hate to say it but Milton Keynes isn't that far
>>>> off.
>>>
>>> Indeed yes, although that calls into question the accuracy of the name
>>> "Great *British* Railways".
>>>
>>> It should be Great English Railways.
>>
>> It has to be a derivative of "British Rail", just to channel the
>> nostalgia for a golden past which never existed.
>
> No. It is part of Johnson's plan to keep the UK together. Or at least
> Great Britain. His outrageous behavour has done exactly the opposite!
>

Do we have any evidence of interest in GBR, ever, by Johnson? I don't
recall him ever showing any real interest in railway projects, other than
promising that NPR and HS2 would be built in full after the decision had
already been taken (and leaked, but not yet announced) to cut them back. He
much prefers travelling around in his Union flag-decorated Airbuses. In a
previous life, he was a motoring correspondent (who, notoriously, reviewed
some cars without driving a single mile in them).

On 08/07/2022 10:19, Recliner wrote:
> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>> On 08/07/2022 08:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <j4nfch90f4fgi6letoj280jue4cjnt0e11@4ax.com>, at 08:30:31 on
>>> Fri, 8 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:29:44 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In message <m75dcht963sjhfeeehbrri543ib0cc2145@4ax.com>, at 09:11:28 on
>>>>> Thu, 7 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> ....... Or anywhere at all in Scotland or Wales.
>>>>>
>>>>> Scotland would be rather odd, considering Scotrail is separately
>>>>> governed from Holyrood. And Wales almost as much from Cardiff.
>>>>>
>>>>> If the objective is to have something near the "centre of gravity" of
>>>>> the railway system, I hate to say it but Milton Keynes isn't that far
>>>>> off.
>>>>
>>>> Indeed yes, although that calls into question the accuracy of the name
>>>> "Great *British* Railways".
>>>>
>>>> It should be Great English Railways.
>>>
>>> It has to be a derivative of "British Rail", just to channel the
>>> nostalgia for a golden past which never existed.
>>
>> No. It is part of Johnson's plan to keep the UK together. Or at least
>> Great Britain. His outrageous behavour has done exactly the opposite!
>>
>
> Do we have any evidence of interest in GBR, ever, by Johnson? I don't
> recall him ever showing any real interest in railway projects, other than
> promising that NPR and HS2 would be built in full after the decision had
> already been taken (and leaked, but not yet announced) to cut them back. He
> much prefers travelling around in his Union flag-decorated Airbuses. In a
> previous life, he was a motoring correspondent (who, notoriously, reviewed
> some cars without driving a single mile in them).
>

His interest was that it was perceived as a populist move to nationalise
the railways, meant he didn't have to put any effort into actually
sorting the problems. Calling them GBR was another chance to wrap
himself in the Union Jack in a burst of pseudo-patriotic fervour.

NB, does his going mean we won't be getting a tunnel to Norn Ironland?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On 2022-07-08 08:27:06 +0000, Graeme Wall said:

> On 08/07/2022 09:20, Bob wrote:
>> On 2022-07-08 07:33:04 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>>
>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>>> one  of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>>> necessarily  have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>>> whoever) rather  than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>>> political will to have  a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>
>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>
>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>>> franchises?
>>
>> Is that even possible anymore?  The whole point of the GBR stuff was
>> that with the high risks and low rewards for running classic
>> franchises, they ran out of companies that actually had any interest in
>> bidding. When was the last classic franchise successfully let after
>> competitive bidding?
>>
>
> I suspect they will be looking at a London Bus style operation, which
> is what they effectively have now. Expensive rebranding and relocating
> exercises can safely be ditched as an easy way of demonstrating how
> they are saving money.

Right, that's the essence of what the GBR proposal is. A new
organisation to take over things like ticketing, timetable planning,
branding etc, with the provision of services being let as concessions,
in the same way as London Overground and Elizabeth line are.

But to scrap the GBR plans and go back to classic franchising would
require an approach to franchising by HMG that would actually be able
to attract bidders, which the system we have today fails at.

Robin

On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 10:54:44 +0100, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>On 08/07/2022 10:19, Recliner wrote:
>> <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2022 08:42, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <j4nfch90f4fgi6letoj280jue4cjnt0e11@4ax.com>, at 08:30:31 on
>>>> Fri, 8 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:29:44 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In message <m75dcht963sjhfeeehbrri543ib0cc2145@4ax.com>, at 09:11:28 on
>>>>>> Thu, 7 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> ....... Or anywhere at all in Scotland or Wales.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Scotland would be rather odd, considering Scotrail is separately
>>>>>> governed from Holyrood. And Wales almost as much from Cardiff.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If the objective is to have something near the "centre of gravity" of
>>>>>> the railway system, I hate to say it but Milton Keynes isn't that far
>>>>>> off.
>>>>>
>>>>> Indeed yes, although that calls into question the accuracy of the name
>>>>> "Great *British* Railways".
>>>>>
>>>>> It should be Great English Railways.
>>>>
>>>> It has to be a derivative of "British Rail", just to channel the
>>>> nostalgia for a golden past which never existed.
>>>
>>> No. It is part of Johnson's plan to keep the UK together. Or at least
>>> Great Britain. His outrageous behavour has done exactly the opposite!
>>>
>>
>> Do we have any evidence of interest in GBR, ever, by Johnson? I don't
>> recall him ever showing any real interest in railway projects, other than
>> promising that NPR and HS2 would be built in full after the decision had
>> already been taken (and leaked, but not yet announced) to cut them back. He
>> much prefers travelling around in his Union flag-decorated Airbuses. In a
>> previous life, he was a motoring correspondent (who, notoriously, reviewed
>> some cars without driving a single mile in them).
>>
>
>His interest was that it was perceived as a populist move to nationalise
>the railways, meant he didn't have to put any effort into actually
>sorting the problems. Calling them GBR was another chance to wrap
>himself in the Union Jack in a burst of pseudo-patriotic fervour.
>
>NB, does his going mean we won't be getting a tunnel to Norn Ironland?

That idea was quietly dropped last November. I love this finding:

"A study by technical advisers Professor Douglas Oakervee CBE and Professor Gordon Masterton OBE gave indicative cost
estimates for the full route of £335bn for a bridge crossing and £209bn for a tunnel crossing.

Two years ago, the prime minister estimated a cost of around £15bn for a bridge crossing."

<https://www.transport-network.co.uk/Hendy-lets-PM-down-easy-on-335bn-Northern-Ireland-bridge/17497>

I suppose we got off lightly: the completely unnecessary study into BoJo's crazy brainwave cost a mere £900k. He managed
to waste a rather more impressive £53m on his unbuilt Garden Bridge.

<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/report-on-infeasible-northern-ireland-tunnel-cost-900-000-s5d8fstxd>

<https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/who-got-what-how-was-53m-squandered-on-the-doomed-garden-bridge>

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
> remarked:
>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>> trains are run by son-of OLR.
>>
>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>> still be contracted out.
>
> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.

What makes you think that timetables have ever been compiled by consultants
on £2k/day??

They're compiled by staff employed by the TOCs and NR, and will presumably
continue to be compiled by staff employed by TOCs and NR.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:29:44 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> In message <m75dcht963sjhfeeehbrri543ib0cc2145@4ax.com>, at 09:11:28 on
>> Thu, 7 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>
>>> ....... Or anywhere at all in Scotland or Wales.
>>
>> Scotland would be rather odd, considering Scotrail is separately
>> governed from Holyrood. And Wales almost as much from Cardiff.
>>
>> If the objective is to have something near the "centre of gravity" of
>> the railway system, I hate to say it but Milton Keynes isn't that far
>> off.
>
> Indeed yes, although that calls into question the accuracy of the name
> "Great *British* Railways".
>
> It should be Great English Railways.
>

Though it will, of course, still operate cross-border services into Wales
and Scotland, and TfW will continue to operate cross-border services into
England.

TfW might be now responsible for the infrastructure on the Cardiff Valleys,
but for now NR is still responsible for the rest of the infrastructure in
Wales, and presumably that also will remain the case.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2022-07-08 07:33:04 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>
>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>
>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>> one of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>> necessarily have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>> whoever) rather than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>> political will to have a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>
>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>> the next right wing leader.
>>
>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>> franchises?
>
> Is that even possible anymore? The whole point of the GBR stuff was
> that with the high risks and low rewards for running classic
> franchises, they ran out of companies that actually had any interest in
> bidding. When was the last classic franchise successfully let after
> competitive bidding?
>

Avanti, December 2019.
EMR, August 2019
SWR August 2017
West Midlands, December 2017
Greater Anglia, October 2016
Transpennine, April 2016

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <ta8muf$lom1$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:38:55 on Fri, 8 Jul
> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>> remarked:
>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>> trains are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>
>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>
>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>
>> Surely timetabling was already done by NR? Why would that change?
>
> Timetabling is "done" (whatever that means) by NR, but as a result of
> lobbying by the TOCs for paths.
>
> The whole point of the Fat Controller (aka GBR) which you have
> apparently stunningly missed, is that the lobbying ceases because
> the ambitions of the former-TOCs is also within the remit of the FC,
> and not the former bus operators who now only have to do day to day
> operational tasks like find sufficient drivers, and on-train
> litter-pickers.
>
> Rather than worry about which stations to serve, and how frequently,
> with what-length what-class trains, and quite likely no longer have to
> run balkanised ticketing/marketing websites.

I think that'll cause some PR dramas.

Customers complaint "why is the service at X station so bad", TOC shrugs
and points at GBR.

TOC discovers that one particular train is always overcrowded because it's
formed of only one unit and there's a gap in the service; TOC is unable to
do anything about it (add an extra unit, add an additional service) without
being instructed to do so by GBR.

GBR decides to double the service on a particular line, without first
checking that the TOC has enough crews to operate that (TOCs would usually
plan recruitment for something like that around two years in advance, but
will GBR be so cooperative/understanding?). Two years later GBR decides to
reduce the set again, leaving the TOC with too many crew.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ta8q0u$m2at$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:31:26 on Fri, 8 Jul
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ta8n6e$lpgv$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:43:10 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>>>>>> one of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>>>>>> necessarily have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>>>>>> whoever) rather than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>>>>>> political will to have a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>>>>>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>>>>>> franchises?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think the new PM will be acting as Transport secretary as well. And
>>>>> whoever the new transport secretary is, classic franchises have gone for
>>>>> good.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with you, and hence disagree that GBR is a transitory
>>>> Boris-fantasy.
>>>>
>>>>>> In a sense I'd like Liz Truss to win, just because as a nearby
>>>>>> constituency MP she's been a vigorous campaigner for the Ely North
>>>>>> improvements. But the leaks the last couple of weeks have been that
>>>>>> Network Rail gold-plating the project to an estimated £450m has caused
>>>>>> the Treasury to veto it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As PM, which way would she go?
>>>>>
>>>>> She'd keep out of it. PMs have lots of much bigger things to worry about.
>>>>
>>>> This is an important local issue she has campaigned about since becoming
>>>> an MP, and recently even as a Cabinet Minister. It would be noticed if
>>>> she suddenly said "sorry, it's a delusion I used to have, and isn't
>>>> going to happen, even though I'm now the one person who could make it
>>>> happen".
>>>
>>> As PM, she would keep out decisions about minor local projects, whether in
>>> her constituency or not. It's *because* she could make it happen that she
>>> wouldn't interfere.
>>
>> The issue here being it's no longer minor project, but has become a
>> major one due to NR's gold plating. Mindful that one of the significant
>> outcomes is more paths from the ports for container trains, which plays
>> into a wider multi-modal low-carbon strategy.
>
> Will there still be a 'multi-modal low-carbon strategy' with a right-wing
> new PM?
>
>

Well, the government of whatever flavour has a commitment to reduce
emissions by 2035
<https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-enshrines-new-target-in-law-to-slash-emissions-by-78-by-2035>

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:23:29 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <ta8mug$lom1$3@dont-email.me>, at 07:38:56 on Fri, 8 Jul
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>
>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>
>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>
>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>> the next right wing leader.
>>
>>What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether,
>
>The sunk cost is already so large that cancelling it would be a brave
>decision. I suppose they could rent out the tunnels under the Chilterns
>as wedding reception venues?
>
>>or cut it back further.
>
>I could see it being simply a London-Birmingham shuttle. And can they
>deliver on their promise that it wouldn't be a premium fare (like they
>introduced on HS1).

I think it'll get to Crewe, but probably no further. The truncated eastern link to Ratcliffe might be quietly deferred.

The fares won't be decided in the next parliament.

On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 10:16:33 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ta8q0u$m2at$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:31:26 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ta8n6e$lpgv$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:43:10 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>>>>>>> one of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>>>>>>> necessarily have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>>>>>>> whoever) rather than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>>>>>>> political will to have a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>>>>>>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>>>>>>> franchises?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think the new PM will be acting as Transport secretary as well. And
>>>>>> whoever the new transport secretary is, classic franchises have gone for
>>>>>> good.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with you, and hence disagree that GBR is a transitory
>>>>> Boris-fantasy.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> In a sense I'd like Liz Truss to win, just because as a nearby
>>>>>>> constituency MP she's been a vigorous campaigner for the Ely North
>>>>>>> improvements. But the leaks the last couple of weeks have been that
>>>>>>> Network Rail gold-plating the project to an estimated £450m has caused
>>>>>>> the Treasury to veto it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As PM, which way would she go?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> She'd keep out of it. PMs have lots of much bigger things to worry about.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is an important local issue she has campaigned about since becoming
>>>>> an MP, and recently even as a Cabinet Minister. It would be noticed if
>>>>> she suddenly said "sorry, it's a delusion I used to have, and isn't
>>>>> going to happen, even though I'm now the one person who could make it
>>>>> happen".
>>>>
>>>> As PM, she would keep out decisions about minor local projects, whether in
>>>> her constituency or not. It's *because* she could make it happen that she
>>>> wouldn't interfere.
>>>
>>> The issue here being it's no longer minor project, but has become a
>>> major one due to NR's gold plating. Mindful that one of the significant
>>> outcomes is more paths from the ports for container trains, which plays
>>> into a wider multi-modal low-carbon strategy.
>>
>> Will there still be a 'multi-modal low-carbon strategy' with a right-wing
>> new PM?
>>
>>
>
>Well, the government of whatever flavour has a commitment to reduce
>emissions by 2035
><https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-enshrines-new-target-in-law-to-slash-emissions-by-78-by-2035>

Who will be enforcing that law? What will be the penalties if it's broken?

On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 10:16:31 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> On Thu, 7 Jul 2022 09:29:44 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> In message <m75dcht963sjhfeeehbrri543ib0cc2145@4ax.com>, at 09:11:28 on
>>> Thu, 7 Jul 2022, John Armstrong <jja@blueyonder.co.uk> remarked:
>>
>>>> ....... Or anywhere at all in Scotland or Wales.
>>>
>>> Scotland would be rather odd, considering Scotrail is separately
>>> governed from Holyrood. And Wales almost as much from Cardiff.
>>>
>>> If the objective is to have something near the "centre of gravity" of
>>> the railway system, I hate to say it but Milton Keynes isn't that far
>>> off.
>>
>> Indeed yes, although that calls into question the accuracy of the name
>> "Great *British* Railways".
>>
>> It should be Great English Railways.
>>
>
>Though it will, of course, still operate cross-border services into Wales
>and Scotland, and TfW will continue to operate cross-border services into
>England.
>
>TfW might be now responsible for the infrastructure on the Cardiff Valleys,
>but for now NR is still responsible for the rest of the infrastructure in
>Wales, and presumably that also will remain the case.

And NR Scotland will become part of GBR.

On 08/07/2022 11:09, Bob wrote:
> On 2022-07-08 08:27:06 +0000, Graeme Wall said:
>
>> On 08/07/2022 09:20, Bob wrote:
>>> On 2022-07-08 07:33:04 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>>>
>>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis
>>>>>> <afiggis@example.invalid> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost
>>>>>>>> all trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least -
>>>>>>> would still be contracted out.
>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can
>>>>>> still contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm
>>>>>> (and refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors,
>>>>>> not even Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the
>>>>>> timetables- which was one  of the main triggers for this change in
>>>>>> policy - doesn't necessarily  have to be done by £2k/day
>>>>>> consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather  than people you hire
>>>>>> permanently now there's the political will to have  a Fat
>>>>>> Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be
>>>>> ditched by the next right wing leader.
>>>>
>>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending
>>>> reshuffle, you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart
>>>> issuing classic franchises?
>>>
>>> Is that even possible anymore?  The whole point of the GBR stuff was
>>> that with the high risks and low rewards for running classic
>>> franchises, they ran out of companies that actually had any interest
>>> in bidding.  When was the last classic franchise successfully let
>>> after competitive bidding?
>>>
>>
>> I suspect they will be looking at a London Bus style operation, which
>> is what they effectively have now. Expensive rebranding and relocating
>> exercises can safely be ditched as an easy way of demonstrating how
>> they are saving money.
>
> Right, that's the essence of what the GBR proposal is. A new
> organisation to take over things like ticketing, timetable planning,
> branding etc, with the provision of services being let as concessions,
> in the same way as London Overground and Elizabeth line are.
>
> But to scrap the GBR plans and go back to classic franchising would
> require an approach to franchising by HMG that would actually be able to
> attract bidders, which the system we have today fails at.
>

But will they be keen to push the GBR brand?

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 10:16:32 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:

>Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-07-08 07:33:04 +0000, Roland Perry said:
>>
>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>>> one of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>>> necessarily have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>>> whoever) rather than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>>> political will to have a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>
>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>
>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>>> franchises?
>>
>> Is that even possible anymore? The whole point of the GBR stuff was
>> that with the high risks and low rewards for running classic
>> franchises, they ran out of companies that actually had any interest in
>> bidding. When was the last classic franchise successfully let after
>> competitive bidding?
>>
>
>Avanti, December 2019.
>EMR, August 2019
>SWR August 2017
>West Midlands, December 2017
>Greater Anglia, October 2016
>Transpennine, April 2016

It might be worth drilling down to the companies behind those TOCs:

Abellio
FirstGroup
JR East
MTR
Mitsui
Trenitalia

Of those, only one is British, and even that is subject to an unwelcome takeover bid by a US private equity firm. Of the
five foreign owners, two are European public sector railways, and three are Asian.

In message <ta8s16$m8ni$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:05:42 on Fri, 8 Jul
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ta8q0u$m2at$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:31:26 on Fri, 8 Jul
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ta8n6e$lpgv$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:43:10 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>>>>>> one of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>>>>>> necessarily have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>>>>>> whoever) rather than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>>>>>> political will to have a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>>>>>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>>>>>> franchises?
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think the new PM will be acting as Transport secretary as
>>>>>well. And
>>>>> whoever the new transport secretary is, classic franchises have gone for
>>>>> good.
>>>>
>>>> I agree with you, and hence disagree that GBR is a transitory
>>>> Boris-fantasy.
>>>>
>>>>>> In a sense I'd like Liz Truss to win, just because as a nearby
>>>>>> constituency MP she's been a vigorous campaigner for the Ely North
>>>>>> improvements. But the leaks the last couple of weeks have been that
>>>>>> Network Rail gold-plating the project to an estimated £450m has caused
>>>>>> the Treasury to veto it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As PM, which way would she go?
>>>>>
>>>>> She'd keep out of it. PMs have lots of much bigger things to worry about.
>>>>
>>>> This is an important local issue she has campaigned about since becoming
>>>> an MP, and recently even as a Cabinet Minister. It would be noticed if
>>>> she suddenly said "sorry, it's a delusion I used to have, and isn't
>>>> going to happen, even though I'm now the one person who could make it
>>>> happen".
>>>
>>> As PM, she would keep out decisions about minor local projects, whether in
>>> her constituency or not. It's *because* she could make it happen that she
>>> wouldn't interfere.
>>
>> The issue here being it's no longer minor project, but has become a
>> major one due to NR's gold plating. Mindful that one of the significant
>> outcomes is more paths from the ports for container trains, which plays
>> into a wider multi-modal low-carbon strategy.
>
>Will there still be a 'multi-modal low-carbon strategy' with a right-wing
>new PM?

International agreements to go carbon-neutral. Or can we just tear them
up like the GFA and NI Protocol?
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 11:54:27 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <ta8s16$m8ni$2@dont-email.me>, at 09:05:42 on Fri, 8 Jul
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ta8q0u$m2at$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:31:26 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ta8n6e$lpgv$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:43:10 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ta8li2$lk1f$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:15:14 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>>>>> 2022, Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was
>>>>>>>>> one of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't
>>>>>>>>> necessarily have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or
>>>>>>>>> whoever) rather than people you hire permanently now there's the
>>>>>>>>> political will to have a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While it's likely Shapps will lose his job in the impending reshuffle,
>>>>>>> you think the next PM will do a U-turn and restart issuing classic
>>>>>>> franchises?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think the new PM will be acting as Transport secretary as
>>>>>>well. And
>>>>>> whoever the new transport secretary is, classic franchises have gone for
>>>>>> good.
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with you, and hence disagree that GBR is a transitory
>>>>> Boris-fantasy.
>>>>>
>>>>>>> In a sense I'd like Liz Truss to win, just because as a nearby
>>>>>>> constituency MP she's been a vigorous campaigner for the Ely North
>>>>>>> improvements. But the leaks the last couple of weeks have been that
>>>>>>> Network Rail gold-plating the project to an estimated £450m has caused
>>>>>>> the Treasury to veto it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As PM, which way would she go?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> She'd keep out of it. PMs have lots of much bigger things to worry about.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is an important local issue she has campaigned about since becoming
>>>>> an MP, and recently even as a Cabinet Minister. It would be noticed if
>>>>> she suddenly said "sorry, it's a delusion I used to have, and isn't
>>>>> going to happen, even though I'm now the one person who could make it
>>>>> happen".
>>>>
>>>> As PM, she would keep out decisions about minor local projects, whether in
>>>> her constituency or not. It's *because* she could make it happen that she
>>>> wouldn't interfere.
>>>
>>> The issue here being it's no longer minor project, but has become a
>>> major one due to NR's gold plating. Mindful that one of the significant
>>> outcomes is more paths from the ports for container trains, which plays
>>> into a wider multi-modal low-carbon strategy.
>>
>>Will there still be a 'multi-modal low-carbon strategy' with a right-wing
>>new PM?
>
>International agreements to go carbon-neutral. Or can we just tear them
>up like the GFA and NI Protocol?

The GFA and NIP are part of international treaties. What international treaty requires a 'multi-modal low-carbon
strategy'? Which other countries have signed the treaty? Has China? The US? Japan? Germany?

In message <ta8r3n$m5jg$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:49:59 on Fri, 8 Jul
2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ta8muf$lom1$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:38:55 on Fri, 8 Jul
>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>> remarked:
>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>> trains are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>
>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>
>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>
>>> Surely timetabling was already done by NR? Why would that change?
>>
>> Timetabling is "done" (whatever that means) by NR, but as a result of
>> lobbying by the TOCs for paths.
>
>It's not lobbying. They submit their proposed schedules to NR, which
>reconciles them with the available paths.

It's absolutely lobbying, because they need the paths to satisfy
their passenger demand. Much if the "Meltdown Monday" issues were
because the TOC invested too much in trying to deliver what their
public consultations with customers had forced them the argue for.

....

>> Rather than worry about which stations to serve, and how frequently,
>> with what-length what-class trains, and quite likely no longer have to
>> run balkanised ticketing/marketing websites.
>
>That's a different issue.

But nevertheless a big GBR deliverable.
--
Roland Perry

In message <pv0gchpsmj4u0qqu2v5c8p31h07ijdpmmu@4ax.com>, at 11:19:20 on
Fri, 8 Jul 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:23:29 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <ta8mug$lom1$3@dont-email.me>, at 07:38:56 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>
>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>
>>>What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>>projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>>successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether,
>>
>>The sunk cost is already so large that cancelling it would be a brave
>>decision. I suppose they could rent out the tunnels under the Chilterns
>>as wedding reception venues?
>>
>>>or cut it back further.
>>
>>I could see it being simply a London-Birmingham shuttle. And can they
>>deliver on their promise that it wouldn't be a premium fare (like they
>>introduced on HS1).
>
>I think it'll get to Crewe,

That's Phase 2a, which has been approved, but are there any spades in
the ground yet?

> but probably no further. The truncated eastern link to Ratcliffe might
>be quietly deferred.

And be another tombstone in the rapidly evaporating levelling-up agenda.

>The fares won't be decided in the next parliament.

But promises were made.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 11:59:05 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <pv0gchpsmj4u0qqu2v5c8p31h07ijdpmmu@4ax.com>, at 11:19:20 on
>Fri, 8 Jul 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:23:29 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>In message <ta8mug$lom1$3@dont-email.me>, at 07:38:56 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 08/07/2022 05:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>>> trains  are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is there still? GBR is anther Boris fantasy that may well be ditched by
>>>>> the next right wing leader.
>>>>
>>>>What's in danger is HS2. Johnson loves big, expensive infrastructure
>>>>projects, but most right-wing Tories don't. I bet several of his potential
>>>>successors would happily either cancel HS2 altogether,
>>>
>>>The sunk cost is already so large that cancelling it would be a brave
>>>decision. I suppose they could rent out the tunnels under the Chilterns
>>>as wedding reception venues?
>>>
>>>>or cut it back further.
>>>
>>>I could see it being simply a London-Birmingham shuttle. And can they
>>>deliver on their promise that it wouldn't be a premium fare (like they
>>>introduced on HS1).
>>
>>I think it'll get to Crewe,
>
>That's Phase 2a, which has been approved, but are there any spades in
>the ground yet?

Not yet, but I think property acquisition has started.

>
>> but probably no further. The truncated eastern link to Ratcliffe might
>>be quietly deferred.
>
>And be another tombstone in the rapidly evaporating levelling-up agenda.

That was BoJo's meaningless slogan that will probably be quietly dropped.

>
>>The fares won't be decided in the next parliament.
>
>But promises were made.

By a previous government. The actual fares decisions will be years in the future.

On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 12:03:40 +0100, Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <ta8r3n$m5jg$2@dont-email.me>, at 08:49:59 on Fri, 8 Jul
>2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ta8muf$lom1$2@dont-email.me>, at 07:38:55 on Fri, 8 Jul
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <QdOdnRW-O-1qiVr_nZ2dnUU7-c2dnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>, at
>>>>> 18:16:39 on Thu, 7 Jul 2022, Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid>
>>>>> remarked:
>>>>>> On 07/07/2022 11:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Would make sense to bring them in-house if eventually almost all
>>>>>>> trains are run by son-of OLR.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The (current) plan is that operations - in England at least - would
>>>>>> still be contracted out.
>>>>>
>>>>> It's the strategy I'm more concerned about. Obviously you can still
>>>>> contract out cleaning the station toilets to a local firm (and
>>>>> refurbishing my local station is being done by contractors, not even
>>>>> Network Rail themselves) but co-ordinating the timetables- which was one
>>>>> of the main triggers for this change in policy - doesn't necessarily
>>>>> have to be done by £2k/day consultants from Atkins (or whoever) rather
>>>>> than people you hire permanently now there's the political will to have
>>>>> a Fat Controller (and his entourage) in post.
>>>>
>>>> Surely timetabling was already done by NR? Why would that change?
>>>
>>> Timetabling is "done" (whatever that means) by NR, but as a result of
>>> lobbying by the TOCs for paths.
>>
>>It's not lobbying. They submit their proposed schedules to NR, which
>>reconciles them with the available paths.
>
>It's absolutely lobbying, because they need the paths to satisfy
>their passenger demand. Much if the "Meltdown Monday" issues were
>because the TOC invested too much in trying to deliver what their
>public consultations with customers had forced them the argue for.

Services will be cut on routes/times where demand has fallen (eg, peak M-F commuter routes). For one thing, that makes
them more reliable.

>
>...
>
>>> Rather than worry about which stations to serve, and how frequently,
>>> with what-length what-class trains, and quite likely no longer have to
>>> run balkanised ticketing/marketing websites.
>>
>>That's a different issue.
>
>But nevertheless a big GBR deliverable.

Yes, but stick to one topic at a time.