Agenda item

(To receive a report from Jayne Wingad, Rail Policy Officer,& Jason Copper, Transport and Growth Manager, which provides an update on the changes to the rail industry, forward strategy and the Department for Transport and Transport for East Midlands rail collaborative agreement)

Consideration was given to a report from the Rail Policy Officer which provided an update on the changes to the rail industry, forward strategy and the Department for Transport and Transport for East Midlands rail collaborative agreement. The Chairman invited Andy Thexton, Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail, to present to the Committee.

The Committee were given an overview of Network Rail’s strategic advice process, advised of the geographical scope for the existing rail transport study and Restoring Your Railways proposals in Lincolnshire. The study aimed to understand the current rail offerings in Lincolnshire through an evidence-based process, use of SPEED principles, understand opportunities for improved connectivity, understand the impact of level crossings and, finally, make evidence-based recommendations to funders, including the Department for Transport (DfT) and third parties. The methodology used would undertake both a medium-term assessment, looking at rail usage in 2030s, and long-term assessment, looking at rail use in 2050s. As a result of the Covid-19 Pandemic, predictions for usage in the medium term would be generally more conservative than the longer-term predictions. Assessment would be taken through a five-stage process beginning with an evidence review, indicative train service specifications, capacity analysis, over analysis and finally, development of options. Further activity included basic economy analysis, capacity analysis, station capacity analysis, level crossing analysis and, if appropriate, development of infrastructure intervention with an order of magnitude cost. The study current sat within its early phase, seeking to identify a question lead before stakeholder engagement commenced in 2022. Following stakeholder engagement, the programme was expected to take approximately five months to complete.

The Chairman invited Craig Leaper, Head of Train Planning and Access – East Midlands Railway (EMR) to present to the Committee.

The Committee were given an overview of EMR’s recovery from the Covid-19 Pandemic, which was beginning to progress with the leisure market generally recovering quicker than the commuter market. Consideration was being given to filling to revenue deficient seen from reduced fares. Although it was stressed, leisure loading, on occasion, had exceeded comparable pre Covid-19 periods. EMR was currently in dispute with the Rail Maritime and Transport Union (RMT Union) resulting in industrial action coinciding with the Lincoln Christmas Market. This resulted in significantly reduced operation in order to allocation sufficient capacity to Lincoln. The RMT Union ultimately decided to call off any intended action, however, this was too short notice to resume standard service. Significant changes were made to EMR’s timetable in May 2021, unfortunately, these changes did not represent an improvement with several short notice delays and cancellations. As a result, a Regional Resilience timetable was adopted in June 2021 running alongside an Operational Delivery Improvement Plan considering fleet, customer service operations, performance, Nottingham operations and regional resilience. The plan was making good progress to date; however, it was recognised that the service offered may have been too ambitious in practice. A summary of timetable changes made in December 2021 was given, with detail of four cancelled routes between Nottingham and Skegness. An overview of the updates to the Barton Line was offered, detailing the in-house operation aiming to provide a more accessible and reliable service. The Committee were given an overview of future timetable plans, specifically the TSR2, Doncaster – Peterborough, line and the Skegness summer scheduled for 2022.

The Chairman invited Kyle Butterworth, Head of Rail Improvement – East Midlands Councils to present to the Committee.

The Committee were provided with an introduction to the Transport for the East Midlands (TfEM) Board and its Strategic Statement for Rail. Previously TfEM worked closely with the DfT during the East Midlands Rail Franchise Competition, this engagement was extended through a multiyear collaboration agreement. Further underlined by the co-funding of a new officer resource, supporting both parties while being protected by a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA). A summary of the wider collaborative network was offered, including detail on the benefit of Midlands Connect. Members were advised that the Rail Network Enhancement Pipeline, was going to shape choreography planning. An overview of the core proposals for the Integrated Rail Plan (IRP) were shared and Members were advised that previously planned regional enhancement were now under review to enable HS2 integration. TfEM were in early discussions with Midlands Connect to scope early technical work to understand some of the results from the IRP. It was stressed that a piece of work was to be commissioned to identify why rail in the East Middlands was important in order to contextualise improvement works. TfEM had established contacts that the Great British Railways (GBR) Transition Team to explore the wider 30-year plan and reforms led by the DfT.

With the permission of the Chairman, Councillor T Ashton was invited to ask questions with the Committee to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

• While appreciating the infrastructure proposals for the coastal area, Members noted that some areas, further in land, would also benefit from rail investments included new platforms. Washingborough Village being used as an example.The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail explained that a Generalised Journey Times activity would be undertaken to identify areas that weren’t properly connected to the network. Members were asked to raise areas they felt may be wanting of connectivity.
• Noting the use of analysis in the Network Rail process, Members asked if pervious analysis and data was taken into account. An example was a level crossing bridge in Sleaford, which was previously considered a priority for Network Rail, however no progression had been apparent. The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail advised that level crossing risks were assessed on a short-term basis by Network Rail’s Level Crossing Team, however, a county wide analysis of level crossings was within the scope of the process. Where appropriate, recommendations would be made.
• Members asked what value Network Rail identified in network centers which benefitted from plentiful parking spaces. The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail started that multimodal transport formed part of the scope of this review.
• Valuing the importance of connectivity to towns and cities outside of the County, Members asked what work was being done to improve those journeys, particularly towards Nottingham. The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail advised explained that the current connectivity opportunities would form part of the review and once completed, recommendations would be made. The Lincolnshire to Nottingham journey suffered from a flat crossing in Newark but too directly address was without of the scope of this review.
• Members felt that, while the county benefitted from good east to west rail connectivity, north to south connectivity was more challenging. They asked if this review would offer opportunities to assess areas of improvement for north to south rail travel. A suggestion was made that the first and last London North Eastern Railway (LNER) was run through the joint line in Sleaford and Spalding. The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail explained that, through the stakeholder process, LNER would be consulted to assess viable improvements to their service
• Reference was made to a number of stations which had minimal passenger interest, Members asked how these would be addressed in future. Furthermore, suggestions of locations which would benefit from the introduction of stations to serve new or growing population centers. The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail appreciated the local detail offered by Members, adding that local comments would be best directed to Jason Copper, who would feed it into the working groups.
• Members queried if the ultimate recommendations resulting from this review would be supported by any resources to encourage development. The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail explained that studies weren’t typically commenced if there was a reasonably probable chance of funding to be offered. Upon the review’s completion, priorities were made for nearer term improvements before a submission to the Rail Network Enhancement Pipeline.
• Members were advised that the final report resulting from the review would likely be available for public examination upon completion.
• As part of the review, Members asked if local groups would be consulted such as forums or community groups. Furthermore, Members suggested that the wider membership of Lincolnshire County Council should be asked to identify in community groups within their division that may be able to contribute to this review. The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail noted that community groups may be missing from stakeholder lists currently, but if Members wanted to contact him, they could be included.
• Members relayed concerns that passengers in Boston and Skegness struggled to get it Lincoln without a long wait in Sleaford, they asked if this could be taken into consideration. The Senior Strategic Planner – Network Rail reiterated that improving connectivity was a key outcome for this review.
• Referencing some of the scheduled improvements identified by EMR, some Members noted that, in their experience, the current rolling stock needed these improvements to bring them up to acceptable standard. Members added their approval at class 170 rolling stock being used in Lincolnshire. The Head of Train Planning and Access (EMR) explained that EMR had limited controls to maintain the standard of carriages with available resources. However, EMR did have a small quantity of cascaded carriages deployed and would endeavor wherever possible to achieve enhanced service.
• While understanding that 153 units were not access compatible, Members sought detail on the efficiencies gained when moving from 153 to 156 units.The Head of Train Planning and Access (EMR) explained that 153 units suffered from accessibility limitations in addition to flushing effluent on rail tracks. As a result, 153 units couldn’t be including in rolling circulation any longer.
• Members registered their disquiet at the lack of a passenger line between Lincoln and Peterborough on Sundays, particularly as Spalding would be without a passenger line.The Head of Train Planning and Access (EMR) explained that discussions were underway to compile a business case in order to facilitate the journey.
• Referencing the industrial action which EMR was subject to, Members asked for further detail on the root cause of the dissatisfaction. The Head of Train Planning and Access (EMR) noted a number of issues were raised by the RMT Union including remuneration, work hours and methods of operation. Industrial action had taken place in the form of strikes on Sundays. A further offer had been submitted to the RMT Union.

Members noted that the electrification of the joint line between Peterborough and Doncaster should be explored when considering decarbonisation.

RESOLVED

That the report and comments be noted.