GET A GRIP ON THE DRIFT into more spending!
WMCA Full Franchising Assessment Report (Draft) - Confidential
I thought that Richard Parker started well with his introductory speech. He spoke of a Day of Reckoning because of serious financial difficulties. I'm not surprised!
However, he said he wanted "full public control of bus services" when for years, under the effective Enhanced Bus Partnership, money has always talked with TfWM giving the bus operators the funds to operate the routes and fares that TfWM/WMCA wanted. Therefore, TfWM/WMCA already has full public control.
Neither Richard nor any other member of the Board mentioned the Climate Emergency which must be their top priority and not the Full Financial Assessment which is another unfortunate diversion. And, must already be costing millions of pounds in price and in weight of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in meetings, writing and paper.
Richard spoke of seven railway stations and three Metro routes. What are these? After months of delay, only one station (the now, truly gigantic University station) was rebuilt. Darlaston, Willenhall, Pineapple Road, Moseley and Kings Heath are still years behind their opening dates. Aldridge station, too is waiting as is the whole Sutton railway line still not in use for passenger trains.
Putting LR trams, a VLR test track and pedal cycles on the Black Country Railway between London and Edinburgh is also truly bizarre. For 40 years, your policy of "Light rail investment provides the basis for restoring heavy rail services at the appropriate time" has remained unchallenged by everyone except me! Such transport derangement is unheard of anywhere else in the world!
MY NOTES from the meeting - scrawled in longhand so do correct:
"The Camp Hill line has seen a 67% rise in costs and is delayed for another 12 months!" and "must have a greater focus on delivery" said Richard.
Agenda Item 7:
Ian Courts assumed that bus franchising is right (it is NOT!) but numbers change, mentioned a 500 pages report but still wanted more detail.
The second man (who was he?) to speak after Ian supports franchising "to compete and to help the poor." (The main aim of highly expensive Metro is to help the poor, according to Item 8, 16.6, page 50!!)
Steve Simkins spoke of failing train operators and "transport is an economic driver."
Bob Sleigh accepted that consultants said bus franchising was the right way forward but was concerned about the cost of franchising and raised the size of the report to 508 pages! He also made clear that the Enhanced Bus Partnership has worked well for years to the benefit of both operators and passengers. (YES!)
Was it Bob who mentioned a "staggering 464 pages" or did I mishear?
He said that the cost of the Enhanced Partnership was £637,000 (per year?) but that Full Franchising would be £35 m and that buying the garages would be over £100 m. Please correct.
Bob is "not convinced that franchising is the right way."
Sharon Thompson, Deputy Mayor supports franchising.
Ian Courts said that Manchester has done eight years of work on franchising and we've only just begun.
Tim Huxtable said that cost is the greatest barrier to franchising and our bus fares are cheaper than Gt Manchester thanks to the Enhanced Bus Partnership.
Richard Parker said that value for money is at the heart of it.
George Duggins said something about an audit to lose 30% of the bus network. (What was all that about - please correct)
Ian Courts abstained over the decision to move the process to the next stage but, this was not an endorsement or acceptance of franchising.
Agenda Item 8:
Anne Shaw talked of affordability issues with the WBHE aka Dudley Tram but it is in a growth corridor. (Clearly, growth in ever more expense with trams instead of trains that were so successful for 100 years.)
Patrick Harley said he supported the recommendation but some part of it went from £45 m in October '23 to £60 m in July. Then, an £8.7 m increase in costs over design flaws in the Dudley Transport Interchange was it? Please correct/clarify.
Richard Parker said his independent report would improve accountability.
Jim Boyle wanted the tram scheme to be at the centre of the independent review. £100s millions he said (for a few Kms on a mainline railway!)
Steve Simkins thought "governance was shot to pieces" over this project.
Tim Huxtable commented that they were using a disused railway and it was Network Rail that caused the rises in cost and the delays. He mentioned Parkhead Viaduct strengthening. (Why didn't Network Fail take responsibility for THEIR infrastructure? Way OTT with all the support rods through it but nothing for in use Stambermill Viaduct!)
Patrick Harley: "Compliance has failed in the CA."
Corrections, clarifications, comments, feedback welcomed, please.
Tim Weller
No comments:
Post a Comment