Leap of thinking
It’s an interesting time in railway politics. The establishment of the new state-owned entity – Great British Railways (GBR)– is gathering momentum, but don’t expect it to happen before 2027. However, several train operators have already gone into the state sector, now trading as “Department for Transport Operations” (DFTO). More will enter the state sector next year. The infrastructure body which owns and manages the rail network, Network Rail, has been publicly-owned for several years. GBR will bring infrastructure and operations together, though the details of how that will happen are still unclear.
The establishment of Great British Railways should be an opportunity for some creative thinking on the left about how a state-owned rail operator should work. Instead of assuming “job done, it’s all back in state ownership” GBR should be used as an opportunity to learn a few lessons from the last 30 years – and there are some – for how a truly publicly-owned railway could operate. Some operators, for example, Merseyrail and Chiltern, have developed strong regional identities and truly become a part of the fabric of their communities.
It goes back to the classic quandary of how big a rail operator should be. Switzerland is a brilliant example of a state operator (SBB) working together with over fifty smaller regional operators, mostly owned by their local authorities. I remember chatting to the manager of a regional operator in Berne many years ago. He said, “Small is beautiful, but too small can be ugly”. He had a point. He might have added that “too big” can be ugly as well, and that could be a risk for GBR if it doesn’t allow a degree of regional autonomy. That is already working with Merseyrail, and the West Midlands and Greater Manchester are moving in a similar direction. There is scope for more developments in the established mayoral authorities, such as West and South Yorkshire and the North-East.
There is also scope for a more creative approach in areas not currently covered by the existing strategic mayoral authorities, which can learn some lessons from the community rail movement, which has promoted a strong degree of local involvement combined with effective marketing. Cumbria offers an opportunity to try out a fresh approach, which could work well within the umbrella of GBR. The Furness Railway was an example of Victorian regional enterprise, developing a network around what is perhaps best described as “The South Lakes” today. It was admired by forward-thinking socialists like Bram Longstaffe, Labour mayor of Barrow, who regretted its merger into the giant LMSR (London, Midland and Scottish Railway) in 1923, with consequent loss of local input. Longstaffe was a good friend of the general manager of the Furness from 1895, Alfred Aslett, who was a Radical Liberal.
A modern-day “Furness and Lakes Railway”, serving the regional lines north of Lancaster to Barrow, Windermere and round the coast to Whitehaven, Workington and Carlisle, would be big enough to work in operational terms but small enough to be close to a large market for both tourists and local people. It could be a test bed for a unified regional operation, with operations and infrastructure coming under a single manager, part of GBR but with substantial devolved responsibilities. It could have a strong regional brand identity and build strong links with the local business community, particularly tourism, but also with major employers such as Sellafield and BAE in Barrow. By being ultimately part of the national GBR structure, it could pull in major resources for infrastructure repair and development whilst focusing on the day-to-day infrastructure management.
This “Furness and Lakes Railway” could have a management board involving the local authorities, trade unions and community/business interests, bringing real local control to bear. As the railway expanded its business, it would bring good quality jobs to an area which offers few opportunities apart from Sellafield and BAE. The proposed establishment of a mayoral authority for Cumbria would offer further potential and long-term scope to promote re-openings of routes such as Penrith to Keswick. The new Cumbria authority is likely to have responsibilities for the bus network, offering opportunities for improved integration between rail and bus – not just in the “honeypots” like Windermere, Penrith and Carlisle, but also at places such as Barrow, Workington, Maryport and Whitehaven.
None of this involves a huge investment – but it does involve a leap in thinking.