PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES - United Kingdom Parliament

1489 Rail Franchising
26 MARCH 2013
Rail Franchising
1490
Railways has reinvested all of its £40 million profit in
the east coast service on top of the £640 million paid to
Government, with every pound of profit going back in
for the benefit of passengers? That profit will, under the
Secretary of State’s new plans, be shared with shareholders
in future. Instead of talking down the current operator
of the east coast, will he join me in praising the team
there for the work they have done, and think again
about his plans?
Will the Secretary of State update the House on the
latest cost of the franchising fiasco, not least since his
Department appears to be facing legal action from
several more train operating companies? Will he correct
the claim in his Department’s press notice today that
this is the first time that a full franchise timetable has
been published? I have with me the previous full timetable
that was inherited from the previous Government and
republished by his Government. Does he accept that
what has changed is simply the fact that all the competitions
have now been delayed?
The Secretary of State has also changed the proposed
order of the competitions, leading in some cases to very
long extensions to existing contracts. What is his thinking
behind that decision? Will he clarify the role of the
new franchising advisory board that Richard Brown
recommended in his review and is now to chair? The
first version of the written ministerial statement this
morning stated that it would be a cross-industry body
and that it would support bidders, but the corrected
version appears to have dropped those claims. What,
then, is it to do exactly?
What has happened to the Government’s previous
enthusiasm for devolution? Will the right hon. Gentleman
update the House on discussions with transport authorities
covering the Northern and TransPennine franchises
and services in the midlands? Does he still anticipate
devolving responsibility at the revised start date for
these franchises? Have the Government given further
consideration to the calls from the Mayor of London
and Transport for London for devolution of the remaining
former Network SouthEast services?
For the sake of passengers, taxpayers and those working
across the rail industry, the whole House wants to see us
get beyond the problems of the past year. I wish the
Secretary of State well in doing that, but I urge him to
focus his efforts on getting back on track the bits of the
system that need fixing, rather than those that do not.
Mr McLoughlin: I thank the hon. Lady for her response
to my statement. It was not quite as warm as that of
the CBI, Passenger Focus or the British Chambers
of Commerce,whichweremuchfullerintheiracknowledgement
of our putting the future for the rail industry so clearly.
The hon. Lady has obviously forgotten what the last
Labour Secretary of State, the noble Lord Adonis, said
on 9 February 2010:
“The Government believe that the ability of private sector
operators to attract more passengers, grow the market, improve
the service and receive revenue benefits of such actions is a key
element in the current franchise model and one of the reasons for
the significant growth delivered in recent years.”—[Official Report,
House of Lords, 9 February 2010; Vol. 717, c. WA122.]
It is certainly true that we are talking about a huge
growth in rail traffic and rail transportation, with people
relying on the railways. I could go on to quote—but I
know you prefer shorter answers, Mr Speaker—the
right hon. Member for Tooting (Sadiq Khan) who
occupied my position before the last general election, as
he praised the role of franchising.
I believe that the east coast line should be the first
under the new system. I pay tribute to the work done by
Directly Operated Railways, which has operated it, but
when the hon. Lady talks about figures, she should look
at the track access charges paid in control period 3 by
National Express when it ran the east coast line. It paid
£210 million in track access charges, whereas DOR now
has to pay its track access charges of £92 million.
[Interruption.] I can tell the shadow Leader of the
House that that was paid in the year to which I referred.
That explains why we have set out a very clear set of
proposals about where we are going, notifying the industry
about the future, which I think is a bright one, and
setting out the huge investment that we—and, indeed,
Network Rail—are putting into the rail industry.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr Speaker: Order. A great many hon. and right hon.
Members are seeking to catch my eye, but I remind the
House that a further statement is to follow and then no
fewer than three Back-Bench-inspired debates to which
48 Members wish to contribute. There is therefore a
premium on brevity for Back and Front-Bench Members
alike.
Mrs Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham) (Con):
It is evident from today’s announcements that the Secretary
of State’s Department will be under a great deal of
pressure to deliver a vast programme of infrastructure
projects. That pressure has obviously been intensified
by the west coast main line franchise failure and of
course the recent judicial review failure on the consultation
process for HS2. Given those failures, what reassurances
can the Secretary of State give us that his Department is
still not overstretched and under-resourced?
Mr McLoughlin: I am grateful to my right hon.
Friend for what I think was support at least for what I
am doing on franchising. She talks about judicial reviews,
but it is fair to say that of the 10 judicial reviews on
HS2, the Department was found not to be wanting in
nine cases. Only one judicial review went against us, and
I am fully prepared to accept it. I wish the protesters,
too, would accept the decisions made by the courts.
I can assure my right hon. Friend that my Department
has the resources, and I am mindful of what Sam
Laidlaw said in his report about what needed to be put
into operation, and we have done that. I think that the
Government’s setting up of the franchising advisory
board was important—I am sorry that I failed to respond
to the hon. Lady’s point about it earlier. It will report
directly to the Government and to my advisory board
on how the franchises are doing. I am sorry that a
mistake was put out in one of the earlier press notices.
Thomas Docherty (Dunfermline and West Fife) (Lab):
I am disappointed that there has been no mention of
the word “fares” in any of the statements so far. Will the
Secretary of State clarify what he will do to bring down
fares, and what he will do about staffed ticket offices?