Tom Richmond: We need to start a new railway age... with the public put in the driving seat

Yet this is not a time for complacency. The reason, in many cases, is that car travel is no longer financially feasible on congested roads.

And what will passengers receive in return for this month’s fare increases that seem to vary between six and 10 per cent in a railway equivalent of the NHS postcode lottery?

More overcrowding, no improvements to reliability, a lack of transparency over executive pay – and a railway industry that does not understand the concept of “customer relations”.

As a Northern Rail ticket inspector put it so contemptuously over the festive period: “A few minutes here and there won’t hurt anyone.”

Sorry sir, it does – especially if one misses a crucial connection as a consequence of a slight delay. And then there’s Rail Minister Theresa Villiers defending the ticket increases, saying passengers and not taxpayers should foot a greater bill.

Fine, but with fares going up eight per cent on my local Wharfedale Line from Ilkley to Leeds, can we expect to see an eight per cent improvement in reliability and customer care? No chance.

With Rotherham-born Justine Greening, the Transport Secretary, giving the green light this week to a new high-speed rail network, what should she be doing in the interim to improve suburban services?

Given that the Government is clearly in need of some inspiration, here are five suggestions:

1. Forget about competition, rail privatisation has not worked. Split the country into three public-private rail partnerships – one for the South, Midlands and the North, the latter encompassing an electrified TransPennine Express running from east coast to west via Leeds and Manchester.

This would enable local authorities to have a greater say in service planning and tackling overcrowding – while using the expertise of current operators to run the trains.

2. Have one company responsible for long-distance services and maintenance. Why? Current operators regularly find themselves at the mercy of Network Rail – and when it chooses to carry out engineering work.

Put the two together and you begin to make the railway industry work together rather than in isolation. One body for long-distance services also lessens the uncertainty when franchises become unviable, and which has happened twice in recent years on the East Coast Main Line.

3. Accountability over salaries. Why should executive pay in the transport sector be unchecked, with bosses of rail operators enjoying large bonuses at the expense of those passengers who have endured so much inconvenience?

This all needs to bringing into the public domain – Northern Rail, which recorded a 34 per cent profits increase in its last accounts, has not revealed its remunerations for directors, even though it received a £339m subsidy from the Department for Transport.

By bringing these firms into the public fold, or finding other consortia if they declined, there would be the potential to revise salary structures – and ensure that up to 40 per cent was dependent on rigorous performance targets being met. That will concentrate minds...

4. A fairer – and simpler – ticketing structure. It does not matter whether you pay at the station or online, it is a lottery, with the widely-held belief that train firms makes the rules up as they go along to suit their own convenience / financial bottom line (delete as appropriate).

There must be a single, and clearer, definition of “peak and off-peak” – to prevent unwitting passengers being given additional charges for having the “wrong” ticket, or train operators stretching “peak time” simply to increase profits.

It is also wrong that operators can amend ticket price anomalies, or alter the terms of off-peak fares, once the repercussions of the January increase have become clear – that is their fault for not getting it right in the first place.

5. Unrivalled customer service. At present, most people only apply for a refund if they have been delayed by an hour or more. In short, they have no comeback for minor delays.

I’d change this. If you’re held up for more than 30 minutes, then you’re entitled to half your fare back. If you’re delayed for in excess of an hour, then you get a full refund. End of story.

And how about an end to this ludicrous situation whereby trains which arrive up to 10 minutes late may still be classed as “on time” by the rail company concerned?

Furthermore, there should be a requirement that all customer complaints are responded to within seven days – or the traveller receives financial recompense.

Why? The current complaints procedure is too elongated, allowing many working on the railways to work under the misapprehension that the paying public do not matter. They do.

Allied to this must be a renewed attempt to improve passenger information. It is indicative of the contemptuous treatment of travellers that they’re regularly kept in the dark about delays or cancellations – a simple word from a guard, or the prompt updating of display screens at stations, should not be too much to expect.

This is not an exhaustive list, but it is a start – just like the moment when your train finally pulls out of the station.

The Government’s response will, inevitably, be along the lines of cost – and affordability.

Yet my point is can the coalition afford not to act and allow the status quo to persist while it advances a high-speed rail network that, despite the welcome economic benefits to Yorkshire, will take upwards of 25 years to build?

And with Chinese led-consortia, and also global pension funds, looking for investment opportunities that could help to fund track improvements and new rolling stock, surely this is the time for Ministers to launch a new railway age – one with the passengers, and the public interest, in the driving seat?

HAVE YoUr SAY

How would you improve the railways? Write to: The Editor, Yorkshire Post, Wellington Street, Leeds LS1 1RF. Fax: 0113 238 8537. Email: [email protected]