Memorandum submitted by the

National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers (CBPS 61)

The National Union of Rail Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) welcomes the opportunity to contribute to the Welsh Affairs Committee's inquiry into Cross-border public services in Wales. The RMT is Britain's largest specialist transport union representing 76,000 members in the UK including over 4,000 people in Wales.

Summary

The proper organisation and funding of cross-border transport is essential for the social, economic and environmental well-being of Wales and Borders. It is our view it is to the great regret of the people of Wales that this cannot materialise under a privatised railway. This is because passenger needs will never be at the heart of planning of services under the current system and the problems stem from two sources.

Firstly, for private companies passenger interests will always be of secondary importance as they naturally look to secure maximum return for their shareholders. This has been manifest in rising fares, cuts to staffing levels at Arriva Trains Wales and the depression of wages of vulnerable railway workers. Train operating companies do not have a public-service ethos and co-ordination of services is frustrated due to the fragmentation of the industry and competition between rival operators.

Secondly, the Government's policy in attempting to control the spiralling rail costs caused by privatisation, has led to service reductions to Wales and this runs contrary to its aspirations of reducing carbon emissions.

In the course of this paper attention is given to the following:

· The abject performance of First Great Western

· The withdrawal of an important evening service through-train from London Paddington to Swansea

· Reductions in the number of Guards and Station staff at Arriva Trains Wales

· Concern over the diversion of trains from North Wales away from Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Victoria

· New cross-border rail services

With regard to the rates of pay of rail workers on cross-border services, the Committee should be made aware of the existence of very low wages amongst cleaning and catering staff and the negative impact this has upon the families and communities in which our members live.

Only the return of the railway to the public sector can allow for a co-ordinated, affordable railway run in the best interests of passengers and for the benefit of the cross-border economy and the environment.

The importance of the transport network

Transport impacts on virtually every facet of life from economic growth and regeneration, to creating a sustainable environment, promoting tourism, tackling social exclusion and encouraging inward investment. Additionally, transport plays a key role in supporting Wales's own integration by linking urban centres with more isolated communities which are heavily dependent on rail and other public transport links.

A quarter of Welsh households do not have access to a car. A reasonably priced and accessible public transport system is therefore a necessity if these households are not to suffer social exclusion. Further, we firmly believe that it is in the public interest for the Wales Assembly Government to take a strong lead in the control of fare and ticketing structures. Private companies determine fares based primarily on commercial considerations.[1] Instead, the Assembly should ensure that they are geared to combat social exclusion and encourage modal shift from road to rail.

Performance of First Great Western

Since rail privatisation the private sector has taken millions of pounds from the industry, yet even with a public subsidy three times the level British Rail received, performance is worse, fares exceed inflation and overcrowding is rife.

Of all the privatised train operators, the performance of First Great Western, which includes the prestige service from London to South Wales, is most open to criticism. Complaint can be levelled against its punctuality, franchise cuts, inferior rolling stock replacement and, particularly the withdrawal of a key evening service to Swansea. The latter, justified by FGW solely on economic grounds has meant a crucial loss of service to communities across West Wales. These are just some of the powerful reasons why the RMT has called for the Government to return these services back to the public sector.

The Company's performance is wretched; the latest figures on punctuality show just 65% of peak trains arriving on time, a full 12% below the figure of next poorest performing company.[2] The Committee should be made aware that the classification of a train arriving 'on time' allows up to five minutes latitude after the given timetable for regional operators and up to ten minutes for long distance operators. In January 2008, FGW passengers were so angry at overcrowded, unreliable trains and rising fares, that they held a 'fares strike' in protest. They embarrassed the Company by boarding trains wearing cattle masks and substituting normal tickets for those carrying the firm's name as 'Worst Late Western'.

The Government announcement that FGW was in serious breach of its franchise agreement by exceeding cancellation limits, further showed that the franchising process cannot deliver the railway Britain needs. MPs such as Transport Select Committee member, Graham Stringer, were left to wonder "what does FGW need to do to lose its franchise?" and the Rail Minister Tom Harris was moved to say it had "let down their customers very badly".[3] That First Great Western was able to announce the £29m remedial programme ordered by Government, as a pro-active investment for passengers is a scandal. The level of private capital injected is minimal when compared with the public subsidy.

Incredibly, in spite of poor performance, train operators such as the First Group continue to make handsome profits and the public are entitled to ask why operators are permitted to take money out of the industry, when it should clearly be re-invested to fund much-needed improvements.

Cuts in FGW services

It is a feature of the mindset created by rail privatisation that prior to the start of the FGW franchise the Government had identified a series of service reductions in the franchise consultation. Although many of these were rescinded following protest, it is astonishing that such cuts were even being proposed when we know more people are using the railway. One cross-border reduction introduced concerned the Cardiff to Portsmouth line where 3 and 4 car trains were cut to 2 car trains.

FGW must pay the DfT over £1bn in premium payments over the course of the franchise and it is therefore hardly surprising that FGW would try to minimise outlay and maximise revenue by raising fares and carrying the maximum number of passengers in the lowest number of carriages with reduced services.

In a classic example of business economics taking precedence over social provision and passenger need, on 11^th December 2007, FGW decided to cease running the 15.15 from London Paddington through to Swansea, terminating instead, at Cardiff. The withdrawal of the onward Cardiff/Swansea portion of the service (which previously left Cardiff at 17.15) is expected to save FGW over £1m per year, according to the testimony of the Company's Commercial Director Tom Stables to Welsh Assembly Members. He put the cost of leasing a train and paying the Driver and Conductor at £1.2m per year against a loss of passenger revenue of £112,000 a year. The social worth of the route was absent from the comments of Mr Stables who said:

"Maintaining a full service that was commercially viable meant, unfortunately, holding back the 5.15pm from going through to Swansea." [4] (RMT emphasis added).

Passengers on the Inter-city London Paddington service wishing to continue their journeys must now detrain and wait for a local train at peak commuting time, leading to significant overcrowding. The next available train for passengers from Paddington travelling onwards to Swansea and beyond is the 17.21 to Maestag and Arriva Trains figures show that standing is an every-day feature on this rush-hour commute. Early analysis showed that in the first two months after the withdrawal of the through-train, the 118-seat Maestag service did not leave Cardiff with fewer than 130 passengers and it is recorded that at the highest level, 180 were cramped into the carriages.[5]

Arriva Trains Wales attempted to alleviate problems by increasing capacity by one coach on the earlier, 17.02 service from Cardiff to Swansea, yet on one occasion, there has been nearly twice as many passengers onboard as seats.[6] Addressing the chronic overcrowding created by the withdrawal of the service from Cardiff to Swansea, John Davies the former Manager of British Rail in Wales said that he was "concerned to see such wanton disregard of passengers' needs." The South-East Wales Transport Alliance accused the Government of ignoring the many voices against the reduction from South and South-West Wales during its consultation to examine service levels.

Such experiences will not attract people to regularly use rail services and achieve the modal shift that is so critical for the UK carbon reduction targets to succeed. Swansea is the second largest city in Wales and is seen as the gateway to West Wales, it is difficult not to take the reduction in service provision as a slight against the region.

Astonishingly, Tom Stables also said in his evidence that the UK Government had asked prospective bidders for the new FGW franchise to consider withdrawing the hourly Cardiff-London trains (which run in between the Swansea-Cardiff-London trains, also hourly).

FGW Inferior Rolling Stock Replacement

Another operational decision concerning First Great Western similarly defies the logic of attracting more people onto trains. The RMT and others such as David Drew MP have led the chorus of protest at FGW's inferior rolling stock replacement, which threatens to make journey times longer and more uncomfortable. The December 2007 timetable replaced 10 faster, higher capacity and more comfortable Class 158 two-car units, with 12 Class 142 two-car units.[7]

Reductions in staff at Arriva Trains Wales

Last year Arriva Trains Wales reduced the number of Guards on its services and rumours of a further cutback persist. The Company has also reduced the complement of Station Staff positions across its North Wales stations along the Holyhead-Manchester Piccadilly route. These decisions reveal a complete lack of desire to improve the service to the public and the RMT has repeatedly asked for a careful evaluation of adequate staffing levels throughout the Company to ensure good customer service, basic safety on trains and personal safety at stations for passengers and staff alike. Train stations can often be unwelcoming, inaccessible places, particularly after dark and during winter months, therefore it is essential these should be properly staffed. Research has shown that measures to improve personal safety would result in 11% more journeys by public transport.[8]

Diversion of North Wales services running to Manchester

Network Rail's North West Route Utilisation Strategy in January 2007 proposed to divert North Wales train services running to Manchester away from Piccadilly and into Manchester Victoria. The RMT's comment that this would be detrimental to passengers travelling from Wrexham and other towns in North Wales was reported in the Passenger Focus response to the Strategy. Concern stemmed from the fact that Manchester Piccadilly is a strategic hub which facilitates onward connections to other destinations including Manchester International Airport, Scotland, the Midlands and Southern England and as a result Welsh passengers could be severely hampered if they were intending to travel beyond Manchester. Recent data shows that over 10,000 passengers travelled by rail to Manchester Airport from five stations in North Wales alone (Bangor, Rhyl, Llandudno Junction, Llandudno and Flint).[9]

In addition, the loss of direct access to Manchester Oxford Road and Piccadilly stations would potentially impact upon students living in North Wales studying at Manchester's universities and colleges.

New cross-border rail services

In terms of the direct link provided from North Wales to London, the embryonic service of the Wrexham, Shropshire & Marylebone Railway Company Limited, is to be broadly welcomed. Although frequency of service and journey duration require improvement, we note that as an open access operator the firm is at a disadvantage in terms of the 'pathing' of booked trains and during its application to the Office of Rail Regulation, existing companies objected to the concept of 'open access'. A unified, public-sector railway with passenger interests foremost, would be better placed to carefully and fairly plan service needs for the whole Country, freed from the obligation to consider if one company's revenue would be adversely affected by an open access operator (and contrary to the original franchise agreement).

Secondly, if modal shift is to be promoted (including from road freight transport to rail freight), it is essential that there are significant capacity improvements. As the RMT stated in response to the September 2006 Wales Transport Strategy - Connecting Wales, we hope that the Welsh Assembly Government is pressing the case for capacity enhancements on the rail network in Wales with the Department for Transport and the Treasury. Any future introduction of road-user charging will make the need for cross-border capacity enhancements even more urgent.

One key case where an enhanced capacity need has already been identified is the single line between Wrexham and Chester. The increase in services in the last three years from Holyhead to Cardiff via Wrexham and Chester to Birmingham services has placed great pressure on the line and delays are inevitable unless funding is made to provide for passing loops as recommended in a March 2007 Scott Wilson Report The Chester - Wrexham - Shrewsbury Line Study, produced for the Welsh Assembly and various Borough and County Councils in the area.

Vulnerability of rail catering and cleaning staff

One of the most unwelcome facets of rail privatisation is the exploitation of vulnerable employees predominantly in rail catering and cleaning grades. As train operators strive to maximise profits, they have looked to outsource cleaning and catering work to contractors offering the lowest bid. This has resulted in a depression of wages at the subcontractors. Rates of pay hover around the National Minimum Wage and whereas under British Rail, these grades received the associated benefits of service common to all BR employees, these have now been eroded or reduced. There is now a huge gulf between their wages and conditions of service and those of directly employed rail workers. Free travel facilities have disappeared and frequently working hours are longer, Annual Leave shorter and sick pay inferior, to directly employed colleagues at the train operators. Some firms even refuse an annual increase in pay and an unsocial hours supplement for night or weekend work. Pension provision is largely non-existent. There is little or no career progression today, when under British Rail it was possible for a Cleaner to secure promotion to station or on-train grades.

This is the harsh reality for subcontracted catering and cleaning staff working for First Great Western, Arriva Trains Wales and Arriva Cross Country. We are quite clear that train operators are complicit in the exploitation of these hardworking members of staff living in Wales and the Borders regions.

Arriva Trains Wales wholly owns its catering division, At Seat Catering, yet the 'long-arm management' allows it to offer superior conditions of service to directly employed staff than are provided to those colleagues working alongside offering passengers refreshment. Endemic low pay in the rail industry is damaging for Welsh families and local communities. As an important first step, we have called for every train operator to bring any outsourced cleaning and catering services back in-house.

Conclusion

Throughout this paper, the RMT has shown that the many ills of privatisation prohibit the creation of a properly funded and co-ordinated cross-border railway. Public-service is not the foremost concern to the competing business interests of train companies.

This is so devastating because the rail network plays such a crucial role in Welsh and UK life. The performance of First Great Western, reductions in key train services at FGW and in front-line railway staff at Arriva Trains Wales, inferior rolling stock replacement and the exploitation of vulnerable rail employees, highlight beyond doubt that the privatised railway is failing badly.

A publicly-owned railway by contrast, would be freed from the ridiculous and harmful commercial considerations that have wrought so much damage. It could begin to plan in the interests of cross-border passengers, encourage modal shift, enhance the region's rail infrastructure and ensure no Welsh railway worker is living in poverty.

The RMT urges the Welsh Affairs Select Committee to take a robust view of the negative impact of privatisation on cross-border rail services.

March 2008

[1] This was also the conclusion of the House of Commons Transport Committee report How fair are the fares: Train fares and ticketing, May 2006

[2] Public Performance Measure of percentage of trains arriving on time 2007/8 Quarter 2 for peak services

[3] Both MPs' quotes as reported by the Oxford Mail, Wednesday 19^th March 2008

[4] As reported by the Western Mail 27^th January 2008

[5] ATW figures reported by the Western Mail, 27^th January 2007

[6] On 16^th January 2007 there were 340 people onboard leaving Cardiff and only 186 seats, ATW figures reported as above

[7] Class 158s are 90mph, while 142s are 75mph stock. Class 158s are 'bogied' vehicles whilst 142s are fixed-wheelbase units which means they are unsuitable for certain branch lines with tight curvature of the track, they make an enormous amount of noise screeching round bends and the jarring, juddering ride (due to the absence of bogie suspension), gives passengers and staff a rough ride and causes damage to the track and points making them unpopular with Network Rail. Class 158 two-car sets have a seating capacity of 132, against between 106 and 121 for Class 142s.

Early Day Motion 546 First Great Western Rail Services was tabled by David Drew MP:

That this House notes with continuing concern the performance of First Great Western rail services; is alarmed that the new December 2007 timetable will see the replacement of existing rolling stock with inferior rolling stock which could result in slower, less comfortable and more crowded conditions for passengers; and calls on the Government to intervene urgently to protect the interests of passengers and to conduct an urgent and public review to determine whether the interests of passengers would be better served by bringing the franchise back into public ownership.

[8] National Audit Office report Maintaining and improving Britain's railway stations, July 2005, "Research by Crime Concern for the Department in 1996 and 2002 found that measures to improve personal safety would result in 11% more journeys by public transport..."

[9] Passenger Focus quoting Lennon data to and from Manchester Airport from P09/2006 - P08/2007