Rail takes
wrong turning

The new Network Rail Chief Executive Richard Bowker has got it wrong.  I sympathise with him, because of the problems he faces.  But he is wrong to attempt to solve them by reducing the number of trains on the network.  Train services must be expanded, even if "punctuality" has to be abandoned...

Rail is in a mess, wherever it has been retained as a mode of transport.  In France and Germany, state railways generate excessive burdens upon their respective national exchequers.  Even in the United States, the public purse has to fund one-third of all rail costs, and nobody envisages a break-even outcome. And in the UK, there are no prospects of significant improvements to the network, given present budgets.  Many readers of this Weblog will be familiar with my scepticism about our national love-affair with rail - see my Letter to John Birt, posted just one year ago.

But I am also a realist, and a "property man" by business occupation.  I recognise that Richard Bowker has to do something, however hopeless his situation seems.  But he is nevertheless taking the wrong turning.  This is what he should do.

• He should cut railway lines, but maximise the use of those that remain. He must make the assets sweat.  If a line has no prospect whatever of breaking-even, it should be axed, and the traffic ruthlessly transferred to road - indeed, the railway track-beds themselves should be made available for conversion to dedicated public transportation use - for  buses, coaches, taxis.
• For the remaining lines, he should abandon the idea of punctuality, and re-align all services on a "turn-up and travel" basis, without seat reservations, issuing controlled numbers of tickets for each train on the spot, to avoid overcrowding (just like the ticket queuing system widely used, though without assigning numerical order).  Passengers can (I believe) be persuaded that reliability of arrival, in the greater comfort of rail, is more important than timing precision.  Those wanting to assure a specific timely arrival should simply travel earlier (as they do, in practice, already...)  Trains should be relabelled as "numbers", without assuming that they will depart or arrive at any particular time.  No other mode of transport adheres to a precise timetable - why should the railways be crucified in this way?
• Extensive waiting, newsagents and refreshment facilities should be reintroduced onto every platform (reversing the present ridiculous trend for their removal) - "waiting for a train" should become a normal and pleasant feature of rail travel - good business opportunities there...

Richard Bowker must accelerate, not slow down - he must get rid of a large part of the network altogether, reduce his maintenance overhead drastically, and then maximise the use of the remaining system.   But ditch punctuality!  As a regular rail-traveller, I am convinced that the punctuality game is not worth the candle - have a cuppa' tea, and take the next train.