Pay attention Mr Hammond!

Some interesting research by Ipsos MORI.

The research was undertaken across 28 countries in September.

Key findings for the UK railway and ahem… anyone planning a Budget!

Ipsos MORI found 46% of Britons choosing tracks and stations from a list as priorities for investment, ahead of new housing supply (43%) and flood defences (38%). These were last year’s top three, but rail was in third place a year ago.

Along with new housing supply, rail infrastructure is given higher priority in Britain relative to other G8 countries. In Britain, 38% rate the quality of rail as very/fairly good, compared to 51% in France and 60% in Japan (it is, though, 29% in Italy).

The higher priority given to investing in rail infrastructure compared to other countries does not reflect experience. Seven in ten (69%) rate the experience on their last journey positively, higher than the global average of six in ten (62%). However, British rail users are significantly more negative about the value for money of their last journey.

Details here.

More tracks a greater priority than new homes!

This ought to give one or two people pause for thought.

PAC unconvinced by DfT grip on project costs

Meg Hillier taking no prisoners at Monday's Public Accounts Committee hearing into TramTrain…

Chair: I have to say that whatever you take from Mr Carne’s comments about the regulator—we as a Committee have been critical about the role of the regulator in the past—it is staggering that the Department did not challenge the costs more. We cannot quite believe that that happened.

Bernadette Kelly: Without question, we would provide much greater challenge and seek far greater assurance on these project costs now than we may have done back in 2012.

Chair: Can I make you an offer, Ms Kelly? The next time you are looking at a project, this Committee would love to look at it prior to the point at which it is agreed, just to have a good rummage through the numbers. I would be very happy to do that.

Bernadette Kelly: I hope that what you would see now is that there is a really rigorous process. If it would be helpful to the Committee to provide some further information on exactly the process that Mr Carne and I have outlined, we would be delighted to do so.

Chair: We would be interested to see that. As I said, the offer stands: if you have a future project that you would like us to look through in detail before it spends taxpayers’ money, we would be very happy to do that. Thank you very much.

Ouch!

Air Quality and bi-modes...

Notwithstanding accusations about this MP's behaviour...

This is a good question and one that Eye suspects will be the first of many in similar vein:

MIDLAND MAIN RAILWAY LINE: CARBON EMISSIONS

Jared O’Mara (Sheffield Hallam): To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate his Department has made of the level of carbon emissions that will be caused by diesel bi-mode trains compared to electric trains on the Midland Mainline.

Paul Maynard (Blackpool and North Cleveleys): Passengers expect high quality rail services and we are committed to electrification where it delivers passenger benefits and good value for money for taxpayers, but we will also take advantage of state of the art new technology to improve journeys.

In line with the Department for Transport’s processes for appraising transport investments, an economic appraisal including the environmental impacts has been carried out using the DfT’s Transport Analysis Guidance, incorporating DEFRA guidance on transport related environmental impacts.

Using this methodology, benefits from reduced greenhouse gas emissions are assessed over a 60 year appraisal period. We expect the new bi-mode trains to deliver an overall better environmental performance than the existing diesel trains on this route and so contribute to further improving this record.

With air quality of increasing concern, particularly in urban areas, many passenger and freight operators will need to be ready to answer similar questions.