Interviews

The role of community rail

Network Rail’s new ‘Alternative Solutions’ RUS, which is out for consultation, includes a major section on community rail. RTM discusses the current state of affairs – and ideas for the future – with Neil Buxton, general manager of the Association of Community Rail Partnerships (ACoRP).

Community rail is becoming ‘mainstream’ and a key consideration for the TOCs, according to ACoRP general manager Neil Buxton.

He told RTM: “2012 has been very good as far as we’re concerned: the key success for me is the fact that when the new franchises have come out, there’s an element in each franchise that requires each bidder to pay due regard to the needs of community rail. In the past, it’s usually been me who’s been chasing the bidders – this time, it’s been the bidders coming directly to me. They’ve been coming with their own ideas, which has been really exciting.

“There’s a sense we’ve become ‘mainstream’ and the industry is really buying into what we’re offering.”

Although the potential growth of community rail partnerships (CRPs) is finite, for obvious reasons – there are only so many viable lines and routes out there – there have still been some good developments this year, he said, including the launch on October 12 at March station of the Hereward CRP, covering the Peterborough-Ely line.

Both Network Rail and the Department for Transport have units dedicated to community rail, and Buxton had nothing but praise, saying: “We get on really well with the DfT and with Network Rail. They are enormously helpful, and I’d say we’re now friends, not just work colleagues.”

He added: “It’s exciting that ACoRP is able to influence policy decisions: we’re not a lobbying organisation, but we are offering the industry and the Government something they all want to buy into, because we are delivering.”

Efficiency agenda

The 2011 McNulty value for money study identified community rail as a potential way of aiding the efficiency agenda, primarily through boosting ridership and revenue generation.

Now Network Rail is seriously examining how community rail can add value to railway operations and meet other objectives, such as value for money.

In its new Alternative Solutions RUS, put out for consultation in September, it highlights the many successes of community rail, but also says: “There were expectations from the Strategic Rail Authority Community Rail Development Strategy (2004) that community rail would be able to reduce whole life whole industry costs. However, there is little evidence of cost savings being achieved.”

It goes on: “…because of the low yield per passenger and high subsidy requirements on many of these lines, it can be hard to demonstrate a good business case for investment to increase capacity. Geographical RUSs have not always been able to find viable options to address the gaps raised. Alternative, lower cost solutions to conventional rail, in these circumstances, would be desirable. Community rail has the potential to allow greater flexibility to incorporate local priorities and develop a service offering which meets the needs of the local community, suggesting service pattern and frequency changes.”

We asked Buxton whether members of CRPs were really interested in efficiency and helping the railway save money – aren’t they really more interested in improving the quality and frequency of train services?

Buxton said: “No, they would like to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the railways. As it points out in the RUS, there are many situations where it’s just not possible for us to do that – because of the industry’s structure, because it’s safety-critical.

“One example where we were involved was the Harrington hump: that was a direct link between the CRP and Network Rail, which has proved to be enormously successful.”

He said his own CRP at Esk Valley has been working on running steam services through to Whitby, noting that there are serious economic regeneration and modal shift reasons for doing so – it is not just train-lovers trying to get their way.

From volunteers to paid-for service providers

Buxton continued: “There are one or two things I think we could do better: there are opportunities for CRPs and others to be given non safety-critical work to do at railway stations for money.”

At Whitby, a major cleaning and catering company services the station, and he said: “They have no personal interest in the stations – I’m not saying they do a bad job, but wouldn’t it be better for Northern to pay the same amount or possibly even less to local people who will care for the station, look after it, and report problems immediately?

“In a way, we do do that already: we’ve got a contract with Nexus, who do the station quality regime: the CRP goes out once a week and checks the stations and reports back to Nexus.”

RTM suggested it would require a shift of mindset for some TOCs to embrace this idea of seeing CRPs as paid-for service providers, rather than volunteers.

He said: “A very small mindset shift. The TOCs do understand that the volunteers are an incredibly valuable resource, and they are very respectful of them, by and large. But it would need a bit of a new mindset for them to understand they’d have local people there rather than one big company.”

Suitable rolling stock

One of ACoRP’s longest-standing concerns is over the type and quality of rolling stock used on many rural lines, which Buxton notes is “just not appropriate” – “it’s designed for highthroughput, high-volume traffic; we could really do with rolling stock with better window views, suitcase room, room for bicycles…”

He said he understands the rolling stock procurement process and why such things are likely to remain on the wishlist for now, but hinted that since ACoRP has been doing such a fantastic job of boosting ridership and revenues on rural lines, perhaps it is time train users got a better deal too.

He explained: “Some of the trains, particularly in Devon and Cornwall, are reaching capacity – there’s nowhere else for people to go. The logical step is to put more trains on.

“The success in the South West has been phenomenal, and it’s been because of the community rail approach: look at Falmouth to Truro, for example. They put a passing loop in and it’s now got a half-hourly service that’s completely over-subscribed.

“On some lines the summer period peak is now the same every year, because they physically can’t get more people on.”

Micro-franchising

One option discussed in the RUS, as consulted on by the DfT, is using micro-franchising to boost local control over small parts of the network. ACoRP has been consulted on that, and is consulting on it itself.

But Buxton said: “We support the concept, but we’re not of the opinion that micro-franchising will run at the moment. Most of the CRPs aren’t big enough to get the economies of scale, and they don’t have those skills. Most of the CRP officers have been recruited because they have regeneration or community involvement skills, not running railways. Let’s leave running railways to other people.”

He expressed some concerns over the Government’s idea of devolving franchising decisions to the regions, as discussed in detail in the June/July 2012 edition of RTM on p16-17. How affected those plans will be by the current review of franchising after the West Coast fiasco is still a matter of speculation.

But Buxton said that the basic concept could see rural lines in the shire counties miss out, as conglomerations of PTEs prioritise urban areas. He said: “If I’m asking for an extra 153, say, to deal with extra holiday traffic in the Esk Valley, I can quite easily see Manchester or Leeds refusing, saying they need it urgently for the 7am to wherever.

“A more positive idea could be sub-franchising, such as Tees Valley, or at the very least for management sectors within the franchise, of which CRPs are part – so they can have an input into train diagrams and timetables and marketing, but won’t actually be running the service. I think that’s probably the most useful place we could be.”

ACoRP Community Rail Awards 2012

The 2012 awards were presented at a gala dinner on Friday 28 September at STEAM, The Great Western Museum in Swindon, by FGW managing director Mark Hopwood.

Involving Young People: Cambrian Railways Partnership for the ‘First Class Safety’Schools DVD

Community Art Schemes: Friends of Heaton Chapel Station for the ‘Running Man’ Art Project

Local Transport Integration: Southern – Station Travel Plan Initiatives

Best Station Garden or Floral Display: Friends of Dronfield Station for Dronfield Station Garden (pictured above)

Best Station or Train Retail Outlet: Signal Box Café – Bodmin Parkway

Station Development: Northern Rail, Network Rail, High Peak and Hope Valley Community Rail Partnership, Friends of Glossop Station and the Railway Heritage Trust for Glossop Station Development

Small Projects Award: Derwent Valley Line CRP for ‘Get on track for great school trips’ project

Best Community Rail Image: Simon Clarke for Schoolchildren at launch of the ‘My Mill Hill’ artwork project

Best Marketing Publication: Cambrian Railways Partnership and Good Journey for ‘Wales on Rails for families’ leaflet

Best Community Rail Event: Marston Vale CRP for the Marston Vale Easter Eggspress

‘Passengers Matter’ Award: Southern for ‘Eyewitness on the Arun Valley’

Best Station Adoption Group: The Acorn Centre for their ‘multi station – adoption project’

Outstanding Volunteer Contribution: Cllr June Player, The On Board Group, Oldfield Park

Outstanding Railway Staff Contribution: Jason Townsend, Northern Rail

Outstanding Teamwork Award: Mid Cheshire CRP, Volunteers & Partners for the North West in Bloom project

The Overall Winner: Northern

Full details on runners-up and sponsors at www.acorp.com/uk

Tell us what you think – have your say below or email us directly at [email protected]