Alan Weston poses a question being asked more frequently

THE railways have been dogged by crisis and upheaval since the first steps to privatisation more than a decade ago.

Last week, Merseytravel chairman Mark Dowd said he feared a "Beeching Mark II" attack on rail links between Liverpool and other key parts of the North West, referring to the original Beeching Report which brought in the biggest-ever cuts in Britain's rail network in the 1960s.

The Government is already planning to take more direct control of the national rail system as part of a major shake-up outlined last year, but has stopped short of full-scale re-nationalisation, which the rail unions have demanded.

Instead, the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) is being scrapped and most of its powers are moving to Transport Secretary Alistair Darling. Under the new proposals, Network Rail will assume responsibility for the network, while responsibility for safety on the railways will move from the Health and Safety Executive to the Office of Rail Regulation.

The railways were auctioned off by the Tories in 1993 in the hope that private cash and new management would transform it.

Instead, passengers were confused by a bewildering array of bodies, with no-one taking overall control and each putting the blame on the others when things went wrong.

The complicated structure, and demands for more Government subsidies, sparked calls from some politicians and many unions for renationalisation.

Dissatisfaction with the set-up was compounded by a string of fatal accidents on the railway network.

Is it now time to renationalise the railways?

alanweston@dailypost.co.uk

YES SAYS Gerry Doherty, General secretary of Transport Salaried Staffs' Association (TSSA)
NO SAYS Patrick Verwer, managing director at Merseyrail >>>

It's absurd they may want to split up infrastructure

YES SAYS Gerry Doherty, General secretary of Transport Salaried Staffs' Association (TSSA)

DISCUSSIONS have been ongoing for some time over the vertical integration of train services - that is,, matching up the running of the train and the track in the North-west.

This proposal effectively means responsibility for the infrastructure of the railway would be transferred from the publicly-owned Network Rail to private company Merseyrail. This would mean bringing Network Rail operations and maintenance organisations under the same management as Merseyrail.

There are still a number of big issues to be resolved, but this is likely to take the form of an infrastructure company - or "infraco" - to maintain the tracks,, which will be separate from Merseyrail, but will have the same owners.

While TSSA favours an integrated public transport network, this proposal appears to further splinter the running of the railway. It would divorce track maintenance in the Liverpool area from the rest of the country. To make matters worse, the creation of an 'infraco' would potentially involve a new company to provide the maintenance.

TSSA members who work for Network Rail in the area overwhelmingly object to being transferred from Network Rail to Merseyrail, Merseytravel or any new infraco. Many were transferred last year and are tired of being shunted from pillar to post.

This situation is symptomatic of the fragmentation of the railways and neglect under successive Governments. At a time when Government policy is to reduce the number of train operating companies, it's inconceivable why they would want to split up the infrastructure. That is why TSSA is calling for a publicly-owned and accountable, integrated railway.

Labour must be commended for the record levels of investment they have ploughed into rail and for undertaking a fundamental review of the industry which led to the White Paper last July.

But these plans just don't go far enough in making sure we get real value for money out of trains. At the heart of the problem lies the private train operating companies, which rely on Government subsidy.

Together, the 28 franchises received more than £2bn from the public purse last year. Only seven contributed anything back to the Exchequer, and a paltry £117m at that. This means the Government makes a 95% loss on letting private firms run passenger services.

Even British Rail was better value for money. Last year, train operating firms received a subsidy of £2bn from the taxpayer; in 1989-90, British Rail got less than £1bn at today's prices.

Our own independent research has revealed that only one in 10 of the public thinks that passenger services should be run by the private sector as they are now.

Public ownership for rail would be a practical, popular and prudent policy for Labour and should be at the heart of their election manifesto.

We put our priorities where passengers want them

NO SAYS Patrick Verwer, managing director at Merseyrail

THERE are many improvements to the railway system here on Merseyside that would never have happened in pre-privatisation days.

When we decided to start bidding for Merseyrail in April, 2002, it was a well-considered choice on our part because it was a 25-year concession and was about to become a local Merseyside responsibility, rather than part of the overall Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) franchise.

However, it is not just a guaranteed option for 25 years, as Merseytravel can take away the concession if we don't deliver. The length of this concession is unique, as most of them run for around seven to eight years.

Merseytravel, as the local passenger transport authority, is committed to delivering good public transport for this area. I was convinced that having them both as a client and as a partner would help us to run the operation we had in mind.

Since taking over in July, 2003, we have been named as the best-performing train operating company in the UK. Our punctuality rate is 94.5% on average, we have better information systems and station announcements, while

Merseytravel has initiated a £32.6m programme to refurbish the train units.

We have also invested in increasing security for passengers and vetting anti-social behaviour, with penalty fares for travelling without a ticket. While this was aimed at reducing fare evasion, these are also the same people that vandalise trains and assault passengers.

With Merseytravel taking over control from the SRA, this enables us to run Merseyrail as a local company, rather than being part of a nationally privatised system. We liaise and consult with shareholders and passengers, for example with our "meet the manager" sessions we get out and speak to passengers and ask them how they perceive our service. If they tell us to improve on cleanliness and security, we will invest in those two areas.

That would not have happened pre-privatisation with British Rail, partly because of its larger, national scale. We always put our priorities where the passenger wants them to be put.

Under the incentive scheme, if we exceed our targets, the company gets a bonus, whereas if we don't, we pay penalties.

We also use the information from the other companies we run to improve our services here on Merseyside. Serco, which runs Merseyrail as a 50-50 joint venture scheme with NedRailways, also operates the Docklands Light Railway in London, the Copenhagen Metro, Metrolink in Manchester, and Northern Rail, which is the largest franchise in the UK.

The most important thing is the partnership with Merseytravel, which is the basis for our success. In the 18 months since we took over, we have been able to turn what used to be called "Miseryrail" into a very successful company.