Procrastination

With the industry desperately hoping for a tangible commitment to electrification and additional capacity what did the Secretary of State actually have to say for herself this morning?

"So Labour will develop options for a rolling programme of electrification of our railways - potentially the largest programme of electrification in our history. I have asked Network Rail to consider the case for new lines if passenger numbers continue to grow in the future.

"And if we need new lines, of course we should be asking whether they should be high speed. We all know that in the current climate, with high food and fuel prices, getting good value for money is more important than ever.

So the promise of jam tomorrow but no 'bread'!

Pan up, breakers in

From our man at 222 Marylebone Road
Wednesday morning sees the brothers and sisters debate Transport at t'Conference.

Expect Saint Ruth of the Catenary, the Apostle of the Pantograph, to say something positive about electrification.

No doubt short of any financial commitment.

Peter - we need you!

The Fact Compiler has an apology to make. He has in the past accused DafT of being clueless. He accepts that this is not true.

They are in fact completely clueless.

Railway Eye readers may recollect an amusing Parliamentary exchange on the 19th June when Tom Harris 'fessed-up that his civil servants have no idea how much rolling stock there is on the network and are reliant upon a Roger Ford crib.

Now of course this could not possibly be true because in January of this year DafT published a Rolling Stock Plan which said where new trains should go. So they must know where the existing trains are.

To help clear the matter up Shadow Transport Minister Stephen Hammond MP tabled a further question along the same lines asking the Secretary of State "on what date her Department ceased to hold and collate this information?"

Yesterday Tom Harris gave the written answer: "I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 19 June. This information has never been routinely collected in the Department."

The Fact Compiler hopes that the MoD doesn't allocate new rifles on the same basis that DafT allocates new trains.

Meanwhile an urgent message to Peter Fox: A case of your finest "Platform 5 Combi" spotter books to Marsham Street please!

Clueless!

Rail Minister Tom Harris had a difficult end to his week on Friday when there was quite a media brouhaha over his blog question demanding why Britons are "so bloody miserable".

The Fact Compiler fears that he must add to his woes by drawing attention to an extraordinary written reply he gave last Thursday to a Parliamentary question on rolling stock.

Railway Eye readers will recollect the hoots of derision that greeted DafT's Rolling Stock Plan (RSP), published on the 30th January this year.

In this fantabulous document DafT identified the need for an additional 1,300 vehicles for the network and even presumed to guess where these should be allocated (the three vehicles the RSP assigned to East Midlands Trains prompted a senior executive's exasperated response that he hoped they wouldn't all arrive at once!).

Despite considerable concerns within the industry about the paucity of the RSP there was at least a belief that the decisions it contained were based on a degree of knowledge about current rolling stock allocation.

Alas - this is not the case!

Last Thursday DafT released an answer from Tom Harris to the following question from his Tory Shadow:

Stephen Hammond (Shadow Minister, Transport; Wimbledon, Conservative): To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many (a) locomotives, (b) multiple units, (c) freight wagons and (d)carriages were in use on the rail network in the most recent period for which figures are available, broken down by (i) train operating company and (ii) class.

Tom Harris (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Transport; Glasgow South, Labour): This information is not held by the Department for Transport, but is widely available in the specialist press.

Frankly this is an extraordinary admission and must call into question the whole basis upon which the Department for Transport has drawn up its Rolling Stock Plan.

The Fact Compiler was so shocked by this admission that he sought clarification from wiser heads,

It emerges that at a media briefing with Tom Harris in May the Minister was told that his Department officials were reliant on an Informed Sources table from Modern Railways as their rolling stock crib!

"Is this true?" demanded the Minister. "Yes Minister" replied the Minister's minder.

So at least it is now official - the Department for Transport really hasn't got a clue what is going on.

Que bono?

Who stands to benefit from today's leak that Network Rail is to undertake a review into the construction of five new main lines?

Not Network Rail which is struggling with its obligations to maintain and renew the existing network. Were NR to conclude that more lines are required then it is unlikely it would be able to undertake such labour and capital intensive projects itself.

Nor the TOCs who would much rather the infrastructure owner addressed current capacity constraints through incremental upgrades (additional junctions and doubling of track) or infill electrification to allow better utilisation of scarce rolling stock.

Perhaps the greatest surprise of all is that this major review isn't being led by the Department for Transport which, after all, is responsible for transport strategy. More importantly it would fall to the DfT to steer any resulting schemes through Parliament and secure funding from a reluctant Treasury (which still hasn't stumped up for Crossrail yet).

The story emerged on Friday, not from within the notoriously leaky railway community, but via political sources in the Westminster village. Industry commentators, even the very well informed, were caught completely unawares.

The timing of the leak was telling, it followed the damning speech made by Chris Bolt on Thursday, in which he lambasted the industry for a lack of strategic vision and declared that the Office of Rail Regulation would now produce its own long term strategy to fill the gap.

By getting Network Rail to undertake this White Elephant of an exercise Ministers will achieve a number of aims.

Firstly they can spike ORR's guns by pretending that work on a long term strategy is just about to begin.

Secondly they can suppress calls for incremental capacity increases and infill electrification by making these subordinate to the results of this massive study.

Finally, it will effectively bury High Speed 2 - the proposed high speed route that will link London to the West Midlands and which has broad industry support. With todays announcement that five high speed lines are to be evaluated the industry consensus on HS2 will dissolve in a frenzy of self destructive self interest.

As if proof were needed of the cynicism of this exercise today's leak claimed that NR will review two options to Birmingham one alongside the West Coast Main Line the other alongside the Chiltern route. Thus setting even local supporters of HS2 against one another.

Sir Humphrey and his masters must be very pleased with the way yesterday's fag packet idea has been portrayed by the media today as a major development in railway policy !

A victim of the WCRM?

Tom Harris provides an update on fans of his blog

"Today, as I was driving home up the M6, I received two calls from journalists. Apparently Philip Hammond, the Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury, is a fan of my blog and has decided my comments about people being miserable are worthy of exploiting for party political reasons. So read the Mail tomorrow."

Driving Minister?

IEP RIP?

It's almost July and the DafT boys and girls are looking forward to their summer holidays. And if there is a particular spring in their step it is almost certainly because they won't have to wade through IEP bid submissions on their return.

The original programme envisaged Civil Servants reviewing bid submissions in "Summer 2008" but it is becoming increasingly apparent that this timescale will not be met.

The IEP is already know as a Frankenstein Train having been beset by problems ever since the specification was drawn up and issued by Whitehall Mandarins. As befits the Masters of Compromise the train was to be both electric and diesel powered.

To their credit Network Rail quickly spotted that DafT was 'Talking Bollocks' and called at the end of last year for the diesel option to be abandoned.

Then Alstom, one of only three IEP bidders, abandoned the competition in February leaving just Hitachi and Express Rail Alliance (a Bombardier/Siemens JV) in the running.

Such is Hitachi's unhappiness with the IEP specification that it has had to issue constant denials that it was planning to give up on the competition. Meanwhile Express Rail Alliance, which was backed by RBS and Babcock & Brown, is suddenly looking very wobbly after last week's exit from the rail market by RBS (which sold Angel Trains to IEP partner Babcock & Brown).

Despite a collective raspberry from the market DafT continued to maintain that IEP was on track.

So it probably came as a shock to Mike Mitchell and his DafT chums when Ruth Kelly, in Rosa Klebb mode, stuck the stilleto into the project on the 9th June by recanting her previous faith in diesel traction and becoming a born again evangelist for electrification.

With Rosa having stiffed her own Department and thoroughly confused the supply chain it can't be long before the InterCity Express Programme derails

Meanwhile The Fact Compiler is keen to know exactly how much this barren process has cost the taxpayer to date?

LibDems support HS2

***LibDems launch transport plan***

Main proposals include:

* Cutting fuel duty and abolishing VED over the next 10 years and introducing a cost-neutral road user pricing scheme on motorways and trunk roads

* Building a high speed rail network paid for by introducing emissions-linked charges on road freight and internal flights

* Introducing rolling contracts for train operating companies to increase long-term investment and improve services

* Give power to control local bus services back to local authorities

* Introducing a new fund for rural transport

* Giving passengers a stronger voice to improve local transport services through a new passenger watchdog

The Fact Compiler says shame they'll never get the chance to implement them,