First Great Western Franchise

: I shall try to deal with as many issues as I possibly can in the short time available. First, I congratulate the hon. Member for Totnes (Mr. Steen) on securing this debate. He is a real rail enthusiast and has always taken a special interest in railways, particularly in his part of the country. I shall deal quickly with a few points made by other hon. Members and then address some of his concerns. I cannot give the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Foster) a detailed answer on the point that he raised, but I shall write to him about it as soon as possible. My officials are working on the specific issue about service that the hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon (Mr. Cox) mentioned, and I shall get in touch with him as soon as we have a firmer answer on it. The hon. Member for South-West Devon (Mr. Streeter) asked about services at Ivybridge. Obviously, we are considering more options for additional services, but the normal procedure for enhancements such as those to platforms is a business case, and involves talking to Network Rail and so on. I am not sure what stage the matter is at, whether it is just an initial idea or whether there are ongoing discussions. If I hear of anything on that, I shall write to him, but I am not aware of anything at present. I understand that most Members are here today because they are not happy with various things, but we must consider the bigger picture. It is important to remember that these are good times for the railways. A record amount is being spent—£87million each week—and, on average, train performance is above the target of 85 per cent. that we had for March this year. More than 85 per cent. of trains run on time, and many train operating companies are now hitting 90 per cent. and above. There has been a significant improvement in reliability and significant investment in rolling stock, with about one third of it being replaced. It is not the case that people have been put off using the railways. Last year, there were more than 1 billion passenger journeys—a further increase. There are more passengers than there have been since the early 1960s on what is, compared with the pre-Beeching railway, a smaller railway. That is a significant improvement. On the comment of the hon. Member for Totnes about First group, it put in a bid for the franchise because it obviously thinks that it is a good commercial proposition. It believes, as do we, that the number of passengers will continue to grow. It is important to give some background. It was clear from the start that specifying the service to be provided by the new Great Western operator would be an intricate task. We must balance issues of affordability, service, value for money and performance when awarding a franchise. At the same time, this is a truly regional franchise that brings together services of all types: inter-city, inter-urban, commuter, local and rural. By contrast, most previous franchises tended to be of one particular service type. The Great Western franchise is a particularly large and detailed franchise. It also operates across a wide geographical area including, for example, parts of London, the Thames valley, the south midlands, Bath, Bristol, south Wales and the south-west peninsula. That makes it one of the most operationally complex franchises on the network. One of the great benefits of the new franchise is that it allows us to ensure that Network Rail has to deal with just one train operator across most of the network west of Paddington. That should bring real advantages for passengers, too. For example, it will greatly simplify the operation of major stations on the routes for Paddington, Bristol Temple Meads and Reading. The core of the specification is the service level commitment, which typically lays down the minimum number of trains that must run on each route, the time of early morning and late evening services, journey times and calling patterns. However, the Government do not specify every aspect of a service. For example, rolling stock, which hon. Members have mentioned, is largely a matter for bidders, who must ensure that trains can achieve the speeds needed to deliver the service, and that there is enough rolling stock to meet the operator's own forecast of demand. Fares, too, are a matter for the franchisee, provided they comply with the Government's policy on regulated fares. Increases on such fares are limited annually to 1 per cent. above the rate of increase in the retail prices index. I probably ought to mention as well that catering on trains, a subject which is of great interest to the hon. Member for Totnes—he has previously raised it with me—is entirely a matter for bidders to propose. In short, we aim for a specification that is detailed enough to ensure that value for money for the taxpayer is properly balanced against the needs of passengers. At the same time, we recognise that operators, not Ministers or civil servants, are experts in delivering train services. We therefore leave to them as much of the operational detail as is reasonably possible. The point that I would like to stress more than any other before I move on to other issues is that the operator is free to vary train times and to amend calling patterns, provided the minimum standards set out in the service level commitment are met. Crucially, they can also operate extra trains, provided there is sufficient track capacity and no adverse effect on other operators' subsidies or premiums. Tenders for the new franchise were received in September 2005, and, as we all know, the franchise was awarded to First group. It is worth emphasising that First group has committed itself to £220 million investment over the first three years of the franchise in return for the right to run it, and that that will deliver a range of benefits to passengers. There will be a complete redesign of the high-speed train fleet, at a cost of some £140 million, which will increase by 14 per cent. the number of seats on commuter and long-distance trains to and from London in the peak periods. There will be a programme of station improvements, including better customer information systems, 1,700 new car parking places and, crucially, at a time when there is great concern about passenger safety at stations, improvements in passenger security through the upgrading of CCTV at stations across the network. Also, there will be revenue protection measures, including automatic ticket gates at principal stations. That is important for passengers, as detecting fare evasion tends to reduce other crime on the railway. The measures will be backed up by extra staff and the recruitment of more community support officers. New performance and reliability targets will call for nine out of 10 trains to run on time by 2011–12. As the hon. Gentleman knows—he raised the issue with me recently—the sleeper service to Penzance, which many in the media predicted would be withdrawn, has been retained. Once First group had been awarded the new franchise, it embarked on a consultation about the detailed service that it proposed to offer. As hon. Members have said, that attracted a considerable volume of responses, which tended to focus on objections about specific proposals. I hope that the extent to which it has been possible to meet the points that were raised in the consultation demonstrates that it was a genuine and helpful exercise. Inevitably, there will be some preferences that it has not been possible to cater for, but the service that we now expect when the new timetable is introduced will go a long way to satisfying the points that have been made. Of course, it will still be possible at various points during the lifetime of the franchise to offer additional services if the case can be made for them, but they must meet the criteria that I outlined.