So what are we to make of this act of lèse-majesté?
This is the ORR's official logo:
This from the Office of Rail Regulation...
Network Rail commits to plans for Britain’s railways 2014-19
Network Rail has committed to deliver plans for a safer, higher performing and more efficient railway between 2014 and 2019, the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) confirmed today.
As part of the multi-billion pound plan for Britain’s railways, initially published in October 2013, Network Rail will bring down the costs of running the railways by 20%, while delivering nine out of ten trains on time on regional, London and South East and Scottish routes, and improved reliability for long distance passenger services. Network Rail will also improve standards of infrastructure management, network resilience, and safety for passengers and railway workers. Over the next five years Network Rail will spend more than £38bn on maintaining, renewing and improving the rail network, which includes the delivery of a programme of enhancements worth more than £12bn.
These are challenges for the whole rail industry, not just Network Rail. Stretching targets and new incentives will get the industry working closer together for the communities they serve. The plans will be delivered from April 2014.
ORR Chief Executive Richard Price said:
“Network Rail has committed to the challenge of delivering exciting plans for Britain’s railways between 2014 and 2019. This new phase will see Network Rail enhance safety, increase capacity, and improve the performance and resilience of the rail network. Service standards will get better, as stations up and down the country are modernised and lines are electrified. Alongside this work, the company will also deliver more, pound-for-pound, than ever before, as it utilises new technology and better ways of working.
“We welcome Network Rail’s recognition that it will need to do things differently to fully deliver. This is a fresh start for the company and an opportunity - supported by significant levels of funding by governments and passengers, and working with the rest of the industry - to learn lessons and build on successes from the past. Meeting these challenges will be tough, particularly in the early years for punctuality in England and Wales because of recent performance levels. We will focus on ensuring the company, working with governments and the rest of the sector, delivers its plans to achieve long-term and sustainable improvements for customers and taxpayers.”
ENDS
Encouraging signs of pragmatism at the ORR on performance.
Now if DfT could take up the same tune...
Good news for fans of the bleedin' obvious!
This searing insight from an ORR press release issued today:
Richard Price, Chief Executive of the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR), today gave a keynote speech at the Future of Rail Conference in London.
He said: “Spending the right amount of money, in the right place, at the right time, will reduce delays, bring down costs and secure a safe and sustainable railway now, and for the future.”
Who'd have thunk it?
This from the ORR...
ORR decision on West Coast track access application
The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) has decided at this stage not to grant access for additional services to Blackpool and Shrewsbury on the West Coast Main Line (WCML).
Extensive analysis of Virgin Trains' recent application for new passenger services on the WCML showed that there is not currently sufficient space on the line to run all of the additional services. The proposals would have also caused further deterioration in punctuality by adding traffic to what is already a very busy route, on which Network Rail is currently not meeting the punctuality targets it has been funded to deliver. The proposals would have a detrimental impact on the journeys of millions of passengers travelling on the route.
Note. This announcement has been made in advance of the adjudication of the Access Disputes Committee, which was due to give its view on Friday...
UPDATE: This from Messrs Dot & Tittle...
Presumably NR will, under the terms of the Access and Management Regs 2005, now have to declare the West Coast to be congested infrastructure
23.—(1) Where, after the co-ordination of requests for capacity and consultation with the applicants in accordance with regulation 20(4), it is not possible for the infrastructure manager to satisfy requests for infrastructure adequately, the infrastructure manager must declare that element of the infrastructure on which such requests cannot be satisfied to be congested.
This then triggers a series of actions, including,
(3) In seeking to determine measures to alleviate congestion the infrastructure manager must consider, in particular—
(a) re-routing of services;
(b) re-timing of services;
(c) alterations to the line-speed; and
(d) infrastructure improvements.
Sadly there doesn’t appear to be a clause in the Regs which allows them to do nothing for 13 years in the hopeful expectation that HS2 will solve everything!
Bring on PUG3!
Good news for fans of an holistic understanding of the railway!
This from the ORR's Long-Term Regulatory Statement, published today...
4.37 ORR will work more closely with the freight industry in CP5 to develop a long-term strategy for freight in approach to CP6, including through the whole-industry Rail Delivery Group that brings together the freight operators with Network Rail, ATOC and passenger operators.
Quite so.
But an interesting definition of 'whole industry', excluding as it does rolling stock manufacturers, equipment suppliers, maintainers, contractors, customers, ports, terminals, investors, ROSCOs, consultants, PTE’s, etc... etc....
Clearly ephemeral groups like customers and the supply chain have no role to play in developing the industry's 'long-term strategy for freight'.
That will go well then.
Good news for fans of Independent Economic Regulation!
This charming picture appeared in Thursday's Blackpool Gazette...
Exciting news from those masters of railway finances - the ORR!
Here is the feedback form from yesterday's ORR industry periodic review 2013 bash in London.
This from Captain Deltic...
The Office of Rail Regulation's Draft Determination under Periodic Review 13 (PR13) published today occupies a staggering 813 pages.
The PR08 Draft Determination required just 372 pages.
So that is an 118% increase in five years.
The draft conclusions for the PR03 interim review required a mere 211 pages - and that in the aftermath of the collapse of Railtrack.
So Richard Price, running a well established process for a relatively stable industry, needs four times the space of Tom Winsor whose interim review was written at a time of near anarchy when the government maintained radio silence on its requirements.
As Flanders and Swann nearly wrote: "It all makes work for the Regulatory man to do".
Perhaps time for an efficiency review of ORR?
This from Orrville...
Good news from the Office of Rail Regulation!
The department within ORR tasked with man marking Passenger Focus, and justifying its own existence, has issued the following press release...
Rail passengers' complaints data shows focus on train punctuality
New statistics published today on the regulator's data portal show that passengers' complaints continue to focus on train punctuality.
Updated rail complaints data highlights that, between 1 October 2012 and 31 December 2012, rail passengers' complaints concentrated on train punctuality (42%), followed by complaints about the quality of facilities on-board the train (14%), and fares (14%).
Data also shows that the overall number of complaints has been steadily decreasing over the past decade – dropping from a high of 128 complaints per 100,000 journeys recorded at the end of 2002-03, to latest levels which stand at 33 complaints per 100,000 journeys in the last 12 months.
Quite so.
But equally this would also have been a factually correct headline:
‘Rail Passengers’ data shows 74% reduction in Passenger Complaints in a decade’
Heaven forfend that ORR should suggest that things are actually improving!
Good news for fans of needless duplication on the railway!
This from the ORR and DfT:
ORR and DfT recognise that more can be done to improve the way performance of the rail industry as a whole is monitored and to promote stronger incentives for train operating companies to reduce costs and collaborate effectively with Network Rail. To facilitate this, ORR will do more to highlight whole industry performance and cost issues, and ensure they are addressed. These changes will help Government, the Regulator and the industry to improve performance, tackle waste and inefficiency and improve services for passengers.
Quite so.
So pray tell what is the role of the RDG in today's new, exciting, streamlined and post McNulty railway?
UPDATE: This from the Horseferry Inquisition...
In answer to Eye’s question of what RDG is for, I refer you to the published responses to the TSC Rail 2020 report, from DfT and ORR, as below:
Recommendation 7. We recommend that the DfT and ORR keep a close eye on the work of the RDG to ensure that it acts in the best interests of the farepayer and taxpayer, rather than of established rail interests. (Paragraph 38)
DfT response:
The Department agrees with this recommendation. The Government welcomed the establishment of the Rail Delivery Group (RDG). The establishment of an authoritative and effective voice, able to lead for the rail industry, is crucial if the industry is to meet the challenge of reducing the cost of running the railway. The formalisation of the RDG puts the organisation in the best place to take forward whole industry leadership.
ORR response:
We support the formation of the RDG which was established in response to the McNulty report's view that many of the barriers to improving efficiency across the railway could be addressed by a high-level cross-industry leadership body charged with driving forward change. To facilitate formation of the RDG we implemented a new licence condition obliging Network Rail, and passenger and freight operators that use the mainline network, to actively support and participate in the work of the group. We have made clear that, to be effective, RDG will need to engage with wider industry stakeholders (including funders, suppliers, and employees).
We believe that in order to deliver change across the railway, and therefore meet McNulty's aspirations, the industry should take responsibility for developing policies and strategies to improve its effectiveness and efficiency. It is for this reason that, along with industry funders, we are not members of the group and have no direct interaction in the workings or decision making of RDG. Our role is limited to keeping the overall arrangements under review, approving changes to the RDG articles of association, ensuring licence holder compliance with them and considering changes proposed by RDG to the existing industry change implementation processes (including the Network Code and track access contracts). We do however engage with the work of the RDG along with other stakeholders and are active members of the asset management/project management working group.
See, perfectly clear.
And good to see that such high levels of trust exist between Whitehall and the railway.
This from the ORR...
From: Data Portal
Sent: 26 February 2013
11:19
To: Data Portal
Subject: Average age of Rolling Stock
by TOC report - correction
This from the Office of Rail Regulation...
ORR appoints Alan Price as Director of Railway Performance
The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) today announced that Alan Price has been appointed as its Director of Railway Performance.
Alan is currently Rail Division Infrastructure Director at FirstGroup. He will bring to ORR a wealth of railway engineering and operational experience both from his role at FirstGroup and from former appointments at London Underground, Metronet, and Bechtel. Additionally,
Alan has recently played a significant role supporting the work of the Rail Delivery Group.
With Price D'Off already ensconced in Kemble Street another Price joining the ORR risks causing confusion.
Therefore, as a service to the industry and for the sake of clarity, Eye welcomes 'Price Check' to the ORR.
As is well known the dead statist hands of mandarins at Marsham Street are doing their level best to kill off competition on the railways.
This of course comes as no surprise, as the control-freaks of Great Minster House have zero control over Open Access Operators, preferring to see paths granted to their own nationalised Directly Operated Railways or indeed the running dog Owner Groups bidding for franchises.
So bad news for Open Access Operators and of course passengers, who regularly score companies like Grand Central or Hull Trains much more highly in satisfaction surveys then their franchised peers.
But what's this?
Despite Rutman and La Greening having issued new directions and guidance telling ORR to squish Open Access aspirations (Eye passim) the plucky ORR issued the following on the 21st September in respect of Grand Central's desire to run additional services to the North East:
69. Clearly, the introduction of the proposed services would have a number of benefits for existing passengers, would promote the use of the network and would promote competition. It would also allow Grand Central to make more efficient use of its existing rolling stock, and plan its business accordingly. However, it would run contrary to the general guidance issued by the Secretary of State and would impact on the funds available to the Secretary of State, and would be unlikely to improve railway performance.
70. Where, as in this case, our duties do not all point in the same direction we are required to balance them. In particular, where the benefits to passengers of new competing services on the one hand are offset on the other by a negative impact on the funds available to the Secretary of State, we use the NPA test in order to help us strike the appropriate balance. As indicated above, this application passes the test. We therefore have decided to approve the application.
This from the Office of Rail Regulation...
Grayrigg statement
Please find below Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) statement issued following today’s first hearing of the ORR prosecution against Network Rail for breaches of health and safety law which caused a train to derail near Grayrigg in February 2007, killing one person and injuring 86 people.
A spokesperson for the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) said:
"The Office of Rail Regulation's prosecution of Network Rail for breaches of health and safety law which caused a train to derail near Grayrigg in February 2007, killing one person and injuring 86 people, had its first hearing today at Lancaster Magistrates’ Court.
"Network Rail pleaded guilty to one charge under section 3(1) of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. The court has committed Network Rail to Preston Crown Court where a sentencing hearing will take place on 2 April 2012.
"Our thoughts are with the family of Mrs Margaret Masson and all those involved in this incident. ORR will do everything it can to ensure that the prosecution proceeds as quickly as possible."
For further information on the prosecution, please see the press notice issued at the start of the criminal proceedings against Network Rail on 13 January 2012.
ENDS
This from Our Man at 222 Marylebone Road...
It is of course quite understandable that the ORR's new publication 'GB rail industry financial information 2010-11' doesn't provide figures for individual TOCs on grounds of commercial sensitivity.
However...
Photoshopping out the painted numbers of the DMU on the publication's cover is perhaps going a little bit far?
Telegrammed by 221b Baker Street
'I say, Holmes, what do you make of the strange case of Network Rail's abandoned Management Incentive Plan?
'Watson, you will of course have noted the significance of the strongly worded statement on this matter from the Chair and CEO of the Office of Rail Regulation?'
'But Holmes, they have said nothing!'
'That, Watson, is the significance.'
Posts
All Comments
