UKPOL.CO.UK

Tag: Speeches

  • Alastair Morton – 2001 Speech on the Future of UK Rail

    Alastair Morton – 2001 Speech on the Future of UK Rail

    The speech made by Alastair Morton, the then Chair of the Strategic Rail Authority, on 26 June 2001.

    Coming out of the Shadow – the SRA at the heart of the UK rail industry
    An IEA conference at the Liberal Club just after a minor political thunderstorm around the Labour Prime Minister’s declaration that he wants more private enterprise provision of public services is all very ecumenical. Getting a safer, better and bigger railway system in Britain will be the largest Public Private Partnership seen in Europe – if we do it – and there is no doubt cross-party support will greatly facilitate that massive PPP.

    The support was without question available until the latter part of last year. The SRA had made a good start in Shadow form and as at September 2000 had not yet irritated people by deferring publication of a Strategic Plan to tell everyone what to do.

    The Government had published a 10 Year Plan in July which seemed to contain a lot of good news for rail – £63 billion to be expended on capital and on supplementing farebox revenue over ten years.

    And then in mid-October came Hatfield; and as I said at the time the rail industry had “a nervous breakdown”. As I saw it, people inside the industry realised within hours and with horror the awful implications of the rupture between operators and maintenance signalled at Hatfield.

    But in truth our hopes for a PPP-driven new dawn for Britain’s more or less privatised railways were in trouble before Hatfield … at least three months before.

    In physical, everyday terms the advent of trouble was signalled by the deterioration in operating performance against the summer 2000 timetable. Demand and traffic had been rising for six years and now we were running out of room for growth. From June 2000 the ageing pint pot that is Britain’s railway system began to creak and leak under the steadily rising pressure of more trains on the timetable, carrying more passengers and freight per train, where possible at higher speeds. Trouble was developing, resilience was declining, infrastructure and service were deteriorating. At working level trouble showed through in the third quarter of last year.

    At the strategic level the timing was the same: trouble began in July, within days of the publication of the 10 Year Plan. Somehow the Whitehall machine made a serious mess of translating to the Treasury what the SSRA and the Rail Regulator were – very separately – telling them needed to be in that Plan for rail. It was a case of “a billion here, a billion there and soon you’re talking about real money” as Eurotunnel used to say to bankers.

    There was, however, a very important difference. The Regulator is independent: if he says Railtrack needs the money, the Treasury either provides more, or deducts the sum from what the SRA has got for other parts of its Plan, or someone persuades Railtrack to wait for it. The £29 billion earmarked for the SRA over 10 years, modestly supplemented by ministerial contingency or “back pocket” funds, was asked to take the strain – a strain that will not be supportable by any arithmetic if Railtrack does persuade Tom Winsor next year to add another couple of billion over the next five years to the £3.7 billion handed over since the 10 Year Plan in his announcements in late July and late October last year, and in early April this year.

    But Hatfield and its monstrous consequences made all that seem tomorrow’s problem, not last November’s priority. And let’s face it, any Strategic Plan handed down from the lofty heights of the SSRA before Hatfield would have been thrown into confusion by the events at and after Hatfield. Better to come back to those longer-term issues tomorrow, or after.

    Through the winter, the weather and Railtrack’s risk-averse management of risk dominated the railways. The formal establishment of the SRA arrived on 1 February, and we published a Strategic Agenda to launch the run-up to an autumn Plan – knowing that it meant confronting the longer-term issues pushed off to “tomorrow” by Hatfield.

    Well, tomorrow has arrived. You will recall that, like birdsong in the predawn in May, I heralded the dawn a few weeks before the election, in response to questioning from Gwyneth Dunwoody’s Select Committee on the House of Commons. I said the SRA’s funding must be “re-thought and re-shaped to fit the new circumstances.” Asked to clarify that, I said “We must have the money. The emperor has no clothes without money.” Reflect on that, Cap Gemini, as you tell us to provide robust strategic leadership.

    Since the third quarter of last year, since Hatfield, the issues have grown. I believe we must:

    • first, convince ourselves Britain’s rail industry is structured right and in a correctly balanced partnership with the public purse;
    • second, settle down to a generally accepted strategy for achieving the safer, better and bigger public service we want from rail; and
    • third, assure ourselves that it is reasonably possible to fund that strategy in all its phases from concepts to commissioning into service over the coming decade, and beyond.

    After more than two years’ hard labour at the SRA, I am better placed than most to know just how tall an order I have just placed before you and before the parties to that “biggest PPP in Europe”.

    There are voices in the industry saying we should restructure, whether geographically or vertically, because the present structure – built around Railtrack – cannot deliver. Offering us a choice of evils, they feel it will be more painful to struggle on with an under-performing Railtrack than to reorganise into smaller units. That is strong medicine. Conversely, some say change will bring more uncertainty than we can tolerate. I believe the SRA’s task, which is to provide strategic leadership, requires us to assess these choices for the longer term and also to guide Her Majesty’s Government towards a stable balance between the public purse and global capital markets which, together, will fund future improvement. The industry seeking our guidance – as Cap Gemini assures us it does – must work with us to consider solutions either confirming or modifying the existing structure of relationships. Yesterday the Rail Industry Group, the forum which brings the industry’s leading representatives together with the SRA, met to discuss just that. It was a sombre but positive discussion.

    Of course, in the short term there is no choice. Railtrack, its maintenance contractors and the train operators must climb out of the swamps of recent months and deliver a recovery.

    We need to settle our way forward but that is, I am afraid, complicated by the tendency for the public sector side of the proposed partnership to splinter into three streams of activity. Those three streams are:

    • substance, i.e. what the industry needs to do and pay for if it is to provide a safer, better and bigger public service;
    • process, which is the sequence and procedure under which officials in Whitehall are willing to examine propositions; and
    • presentation, which is what our political masters stress, hoping it accords better with public aspirations than the facts do.

    To illustrate this splintering via the saga of our funding: “Presentation” was Gus Macdonald reacting fiercely to my truthful response to the Select Committee that we need more funds. The facts are, of the £63 billion in his 10 year Plan the SRA’s £29 billion is now over-committed without any noteworthy enhancement programme and the private sector’s £34 billion sits under big question marks as the main player, Railtrack, shrinks.

    “Process” on our funding means being told to wait until June 2002 for the outcome of the next Spending Round negotiations between the Treasury and all the government departments. The Treasury’s attitude is understandable, it cannot make ad hoc deals, but ……

    That brings us to “Substance”, the need to fund the public sector side of the big rail partnership adequately to lever in very large sums from global capital markets to get on with improving Britain’s railways via a prioritised approach to a long list of franchises, studies and projects waiting to go ahead. Is it realistic to sit on our hands until next June?

    As I have said, the time until then can be spent by the train operators, Railtrack and their contractors in recovering to a pre-Hatfield level of performance, carrying more passengers and freight. But is that enough?

    The SRA is pretty well on top of listing what needs to be done on the ground:

    • We have published a freight strategy, building on my Strategic Agenda of March.
    • We have published in Birmingham, and then in Manchester, the conclusions of capacity studies undertaken by co-operative working groups, defining what needs to be done in those key hubs, both bottlenecks.
    • We will shortly publish the key elements of a strategy for London and the South East, timed to link up with Transport for London’s presentation.
    • We have taken two key franchises, for the East Coast and TransPennine routes, to a selection of preferred bidders, putting us in a position to design developments over two crucially important segments of the network.

    And so on. We can write a Strategic Plan in physical terms: but, without the funding we would just have to sit on it – unable to upgrade either franchised services or infrastructure.

    The central issues are first resources, of skills, management and funds, and – just as important – structure. A last word about the latter.

    I know two things from experience:

    • if we do not structure and fund things right from the outset, we shall fail; and
    • we must move forward steadily, with adequate funding over a period of years, realising that this is a long-term, costly and slow-moving programme that will serve Britain for decades.

    There is no quick fix. And, since our railways are in trouble, we shall not get it right by putting too much pressure on a structure already in trouble. I always preached that the faulty initial structuring between the parties to the Channel Tunnel project caused huge aggravation and cost over the life of that grand investment programme. We are in danger of doing that here.

    I have reflected on all this in the period since Hatfield, and particularly during March and April, as we put a further deal in place to ease the strain on Railtrack, the cracked principal structure supporting our industry. I concluded, very simply, that at 63 1/2 – as I am now – I cannot hope to see the necessary investment programme through.

    If that is the case, my successor should ideally be in place to “take ownership”, as the saying goes, of the structure of the industry, the balance of the PPP, the long-term funding agreed and thus the SRA’s Strategic Plan, once complete. And he or she should be young, fit, wily and ambitious enough to weld together the three streams of presentation, process and substance to serve the purpose of that Plan, appropriately funded. He or she must be here well before next June.

    Thus I told John Prescott before the election that I would discuss all this with the incoming Secretary of State responsible for Transport, but I planned to go at an appropriate time, no later than the end of my contract next March. In short, I will neither seek nor accept an extension of my contract.

    Meanwhile, I shall bend all my efforts to clarifying the component parts of the SRA’s strategy for passengers and freight at and around the strategic hubs of London, Birmingham and Manchester and in between them (and also the ports) on or near the strategic main routes. I will press forward the definition of the resources of skills and money needed and the structure preferred. I am first and last in the “substance” camp, which puts me sometimes at odds with the process and presentation chaps.

  • Keir Starmer – 2023 Keynote New Year’s Speech

    Keir Starmer – 2023 Keynote New Year’s Speech

    The speech made by Keir Starmer, the Leader of the Opposition, on 5 January 2023.

    2023 marks a new chapter for Britain, with a new King to be crowned in May. We must look forward with hope. But for hope to flourish, Britain needs change.

    I don’t think anyone seriously disputes that. It’s the story of the country right now.

    Amidst all the chaos, is a growing impatience for change, for real change, lasting change, national renewal.

    And yes – as they’ve done throughout our history, the British people are turning to Labour to provide that change.

    In 2022 they looked at us again and I felt, for the first time in a while, we could return their gaze with confidence.

    That the changes we’ve made – on antisemitism, on national security and NATO, on making economic stability the platform for everything we do – has restored a degree of trust. Laid a foundation. This year, we’ve got to build on that.

    People know we care – they always know the Labour Party cares. And they can now see a party that is both competent and compassionate. A party that understands what it means to put service to the country first.

    But our task for 2023 is not to rest on our laurels. We need to push forward and rise to the moment, prove we can be a bold, reforming government.

    Show not just what the Tories have done to Britain but the Britain that Labour can build. A fairer, greener, more dynamic country with an economy that works for everyone, not just those at the top. And a politics which trusts communities with the power to control their destiny.

    A new government and a new way of governing. Britain needs both. And with Labour Britain will get both.

    That’s my message of hope for the New Year. We’re going to roll up our sleeves, fix the problems and improve our country. We can’t keep expecting the British people to just suck it up. Not without the hope – the possibility – of something better.

    Don’t get me wrong – I’m under no illusions about the scale of the challenges we face.

    Houses that get burgled countless times yet the police never come. Hospitals putting out messages begging patients to stay away from A&E. Children going to school hungry. And it’s not just the poorest who are struggling.

    Millions of families, pensioners, working people – people who’ve always kept their heads above water – are going without decent food and heating. Cutting back on their holidays, their meals out, Christmas presents – all the little things that make life more enjoyable.

    Now, sometimes people say to me – we’ll get through this, Britain’s been through worse. And they’re right.

    I grew up working class in the 1970s, I know what a cost of living crisis feels like. The anxiety and shame of not being able to pay bills that only months ago were affordable. Our phone was cut off like this. And that was it.

    We got through it. Britain will get through it. The problem is that’s exactly what the Tories are banking on. They’re going to turn round in 2024 and try to claim some kind of political credit for the sacrifices working people are making now, as if it’s not their mistakes people are paying for – again.

    But at the heart of this cynical politics is the cost to people of just getting through.

    The burden of living without the real hope of a better future. Not the sort of hope that fires grandiose, utopian visions – I don’t mean that. I mean the basic, ordinary hope we used to take for granted. The sort of hope you can build your future around.

    That aspirations are made of and which can hold a country together when times are tough.

    That’s why showing how we can change the country is so important this year – Labour can lift that burden. Give people a sense of possibility again. Light at the end of the tunnel.

    Instead of asking how the British people get through it, we need to show them what we can achieve together. Because for all the challenges we face – I remain optimistic about our future.

    I believe in our country, I believe in our businesses, I believe in our people and I believe in our spirit.

    It was there in the coming together for the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II. In the thousands of people who welcomed refugees into their homes, from Ukraine and elsewhere. In the resilience of our retailers, our pubs and venues, the creative industries fighting back from the pandemic. The brilliance of key workers, nurses, doctors, volunteers and carers who got us to that point.

    It’s in our love of sport – and our excellence at it. The double world champion cricketers, the Commonwealth games that were a beacon of diversity, the Lionesses who brought football home.

    It’s our universities, our young people, the researchers in this building and those like it. Our manufacturing genius, our superpower services, our start-ups and innovators. The green entrepreneurs, the builders and retrofitters, insulators and engineers, who will bring us energy independence and cheaper bills. The scientists making healthcare more responsive – saving more lives.

    And it’s in our communities. In towns and cities like Burnley, Wolverhampton, Grimsby and Swindon where the people will tell you, in no uncertain terms, that they do have ambition for themselves and their community.

    What they lack is a government that shares their ambition. Because all those achievements, all that possibility, is a testament to our untapped potential. So this Year, lets imagine instead, what we could achieve if we match the ambition of the British people.

    Unlock their pride and their purpose. Give them an economy and a politics they deserve.

    This is crucial – economic change must go hand-in-hand with political change. We have an economy that hoards potential and a politics that hoards power. And it’s no coincidence – no accident – that this leaves us with more regional inequality than anywhere else in Europe.

    They feed off each other. That’s why I say Britain needs a completely new way of governing. Yes, we need to use the power of dynamic government, harness technology to drive through reform, convene a real industrial partnership between business and unions. But all of that must be done in service of a politics which trusts communities.

    I’m utterly convinced about this – the Westminster system is part of the problem.

    I came to politics late in my career. I’ve run large organisations, institutions that had to serve our country, and I’ve changed them all – including the Labour Party. That’s why I came into politics eight years ago. A new way to serve. A new way to get things done. More opportunities to change our country for the better.

    But I have to say – I haven’t found much of that in Westminster.

    Yes, there are good people of course – many MPs share my determination to tackle Britain’s problems quickly. But as a system – it doesn’t work.

    You know, sometimes I hear talk about a “huge day in Westminster”, but all that’s happened is someone has passionately described a problem, and then that’s it.

    Nothing has changed, but the circus moves on. Rinse and repeat. Honestly – you can’t overstate how much a short-term mind-set dominates Westminster. And from there, how it infects all the institutions which try and fail to run Britain from the centre.

    I call it ‘sticking plaster politics’. And in a kind of last minute frenzy, it sometimes delivers relief. But the long-term cure – that always eludes us. And it’s at the heart of all the problems we see across our country right now.

    I’ll give you an example – energy and the cost of living crisis. Now – thank heavens we have a price freeze this winter. That Labour’s campaigning in the summer eventually brought the Government to our position and its senses.

    But truth be told, the price freeze is the perfect example of ‘sticking plaster politics’. Necessary of course. But none the less, an expensive, last-minute fix, papering over cracks in our energy security that have been on display for years.

    Don’t get me wrong, nobody criticises the Government for the effects of the war in Ukraine. But the war didn’t scrap home insulation. The war didn’t ban onshore wind.
    The war didn’t stall British nuclear energy.

    The Tory Government did that.

    The story is the same with the NHS and care, with all our public services. The workforce and morale crisis has been an ice-berg on the horizon for years. Low pay,
    housing, childcare, immigration, planning, skills, investing in technology – time and again it’s the same pattern.

    You saw it yesterday from the Prime Minister. Commentary without solution. More promises, more platitudes. No ambition to take us forward. No sense of what the country needs. Thirteen years of nothing but sticking plaster politics.

    It’s why every crisis hits Britain harder than our competitors. The only country in the G7 still poorer than it was before the pandemic. The worst decade for growth in two centuries. Seven million on waiting lists and rising. That hasn’t happened elsewhere.

    You know – one of the greatest privileges of being born in Britain – certainly for all of my life, is knowing that if you get ill, if you have a serious accident, you’ll get decent healthcare. Whatever your circumstances. Not every country has that – and the anxiety it causes is huge.

    It’s why, eleven years ago, in the Olympic stadium a few hundred yards away, we put the NHS on display to the world. It’s who we are. We can’t let sticking plaster politics destroy it. I won’t stand for that and Labour won’t stand for that.

    It’s why we’ve got a fully costed plan for the biggest NHS training programme in its history. We’ll tackle the capacity crisis with more doctors, more nurses, more health visitors. And we’ll broker a fair pay agreement that will transform the pay and conditions for every carer in the country.

    Give care workers the respect and the status they deserve and help them drive up standards in our care system. That’s a massive part of the NHS crisis.

    I heard the Prime Minister yesterday – and he’s still in denial about how we got here. Still too weak to challenge the vested interests in his party that hold Britain back. Don’t expect that to change.

    On planning, on onshore wind, on the NHS. Not now. Not for the past thirteen years. Not ever.

    Fundamentally, the Tories don’t accept that to help working people succeed you need dynamic government, government driven by a strategic purpose. They don’t see that the challenges we face on climate change, artificial intelligence, caring for an ageing society mean a hands-off approach to our economy and public services just won’t wash anymore. And this is a real political divide.

    But it’s not just Tory ideology that drives “sticking plaster politics”, it’s the whole Westminster system. No similar country puts so much decision-making in the hands of so few people. So it’s no wonder the problems of communities up and down this country don’t get the attention they deserve.

    Just think about it practically for a minute. Imagine Britain is a work place. Now, the boss and the senior management, yes, of course they have to take some of the big decisions, the strategic ones. But you wouldn’t have them taking every decision, would you? Standing over your shoulder telling you exactly how to use a robot arm? Getting them to write the code for computer aided manufacturing? Of course not – nothing would get done.

    Big decisions would get put off, because you wouldn’t be able to see the wood for the trees while other decisions – taken by the wrong people, not close enough to the action – would get botched.

    Yet this is exactly how we try to run Britain. It’s why for all the talk of levelling-up, nothing ever happens. It’s just that old game of passionately identifying a problem. Rather than facing the real solution and accepting Westminster must give power away.

    Well – no more. No more sticking plaster politics. No more Westminster hoarding power. No more holding back this country’s economic potential.

    This year we’re going to show how real change comes from unlocking the pride and purpose of British communities.

    There are two steps to this.

    First – we will modernise central government so it becomes, dynamic, agile, strong and, above all, focused. Driven by clear, measurable objectives. National missions.

    A new approach to the power of government. More strategic, more relaxed about bringing in the expertise of public and private, business and union, town and city, and using that partnership to drive our country forward.

    We will announce these missions in the coming weeks – our manifesto will be built around them. And they will be the driving force of the next Labour Government.

    They will pushing us on to a better future and a decade of national renewal.

    But let me be clear – none of this should be taken as code for Labour getting its big government cheque-book out. Of course investment is required – I can see the damage the Tories have done to our public services as plainly as anyone else.

    But we won’t be able to spend our way out of their mess – it’s not as simple as that.

    Let me give you an example of our different approach. You start with a mission –
    a plan for 100 percent clean power generation by 2030.

    That mission builds on an opportunity – that clean British energy is nine times cheaper than imported fossil fuels. It’s backed by investment – public and private – in wind, solar, nuclear, hydrogen, green steel and carbon capture.

    It’s galvanised by reform: by Great British Energy, a new publicly owned company that will take this opportunity and turn it into good, secure, well-paid British jobs.

    And it’s driven by speed, and a long-term vision, that doesn’t back down when the going gets tough, when vested interests take you on over planning or trying to hold on to fossil fuels.

    Because if you take action early, if we did this now, then businesses and working people get cheaper bills forever. Our country gets energy independence from tyrants like Putin forever. And we can give every community a shot at the green jobs of the future.

    That’s just one example, one mission. But it shows our recipe for taking on Sticking Plaster Politics. It’s new technology, unleashed by public investment and private enterprise, tackling a huge social challenge, that then provides a new foundation for long-term prosperity. Which – crucially – communities can then build on themselves.

    And this is the second of our two steps.

    Giving communities the chance to control their economic destiny. The argument is devastatingly simple. The decisions which create wealth in our communities should be taken by local people with skin in the game.

    And a huge power shift out of Westminster can transform our economy, our politics and our democracy.

    I go back to Brexit. Yes, a whole host of issues were on that ballot paper. But as I went around the country, campaigning for Remain, I couldn’t disagree with the basic case so many Leave voters made to me.

    People who wanted public services they could rely on. High streets they could be proud of. Opportunities for the next generation. And all of this in their town or city.

    It was the same in the Scottish referendum in 2014 – many of those who voted ‘yes’ did so for similar reasons. And it’s not an unreasonable demand.

    It’s not unreasonable for us to recognise the desire for communities to stand on their own feet. It’s what Take Back Control meant. The control people want is control over their lives and their community.

    So we will embrace the Take Back Control message. But we’ll turn it from a slogan to a solution. From a catchphrase into change. We will spread control out of Westminster. Devolve new powers over employment support, transport, energy, climate change, housing, culture, childcare provision and how councils run their finances.

    And we’ll give communities a new right to request powers which go beyond this.

    All this will be in a new “Take Back Control” Bill – a centrepiece of our first King’s speech. A Bill that will deliver on the demand for a new Britain. A new approach to politics and democracy. A new approach to growth and our economy.

    2022 killed the Tory idea that it’s only those at the top who grow our economy. 2023 will be the year Labour shows a new path for growth. The year when we accept that if the South East races ahead, ‘redistribution’ can’t be the one-word plan for the rest of Britain.

    This was part of the Brexit moment as well. Working people want their town or city to prosper by standing on their own feet. They want growth from the grassroots. To create wealth on their terms and in their way.

    So let me spell it out – no more short-cuts. Strong, dynamic government is necessary but it’s not sufficient. Communities need strong public services, but that’s not enough on its own. For national renewal, there is no substitute for a robust private sector, creating wealth in every community.

    You can see this in the precision engineers and life scientists of Glasgow. The video game visionaries in Dundee. The cyber security firms of the Valleys and South Wales. The Hydrogen Corridor in Teesside. Nano-manufacturing in Northern Ireland. Ceramics in North Staffordshire. Fuel cells in the West Midlands. Robotics in Manchester.

    We need to turbo-charge this potential, but Westminster can’t do that on its own, it can only do it with communities. That’s why Labour will give them the trust. The power. And the control.

    We won’t accept decline. Won’t write our country off. Won’t leave Britain in a brace position, buffeted from crisis to crisis. Holding on. Trying to make it through. It’s no way to live and it’s no way to run a country.

    So this year, in place of sticking plaster politics, we’ll set out the case for change. The case for a new Britain. The case for hope. That the country will get better. That politics can be a force for good. That Britain can be run in the interests of working people.

    We can feel the public looking at us again – and we won’t let up. We’ll work every day to earn their trust. Show them a new way of governing. And lead them to the fairer, greener, more dynamic Britain. Where aspiration is rewarded. Working people succeed. Communities control their own destiny.

    And where politics doesn’t hide from the big challenges that face our children.

    Thank you.

  • Richard Bowker – 2001 Speech to CFIT Conference

    Richard Bowker – 2001 Speech to CFIT Conference

    The speech made by Richard Bowker, the then Chair of the Strategic Rail Authority, at the Millennium Gloucester Hotel in London on 3 December 2001.

    [Chaired by Sir Bob Reid]

    Good morning and thank you Bob for those kind words of introduction.

    David very kindly invited me to speak at this conference and suggested that I give a few practical and inspiring words! Well, you can all be the judge of that soon enough; I don’t intend to say a huge amount this morning but I did want to tell you a bit about my background, the issues we face as an industry and the personal perspective I intend to bring to solving them. In particular, I wanted to answer the most repeated questions asked of me over the past few weeks; Why? and What? Why did I agree to become executive chairman of the SRA and What am I going to do to get the railway working properly again? .

    So first of all, Why? Why leave a rather good job working with an exciting bunch of people, for one of the most iconoclastic brands and singular business leaders of the last 25 years? The answer is because I have a real vocation for Britain’s railways and for this job leading the Strategic Rail Authority. It’s based on an unshakeable belief that we can find our way back together as professionals to deliver once again a railway service of which we can be proud. So where does this belief come from?

    My father was and still is a senior figure in the bus industry having worked in it for over 40 years and through him I came to have a strong appreciation of the role integrated public transport can play in our lives. My grandfather was a master joiner with the London Midland and Scottish Railway in the 30s and 40s. Transport and the provision of a public service is in my blood and like many professional railwaymen and railwaywomen before me, the sense of being part of a living, breathing organism called the railway runs very deep. We forget sometimes, and certainly Railtrack forgot in a most spectacular way, that the railway exists to deliver one primary mission. That is, the provision of passenger and freight services for its customers, safely and reliably, day in, day out. I, like many of you, have watched with a mixture of sadness and disbelief as this once proud and competent railway organism has lost both its sense of purpose and raison d’etre as well as its self confidence and innate professionalism.

    To find the reason why this has happened, there are those who would urge upon us a re-examination of the underlying structural principles of privatisation and in particular at the number of different companies involved. Do all those in the industry, trying to make it work each day, share this view? What many will recall is the pain of the five years that the privatisation restructuring took. Five years that its architects now describe as “breakneck speed”. So to do it ‘properly’ might be, what, six or seven years?

    Whatever the strength of the argument, this is a prospect to consider with great care. Many more years of the current carry-on and there may not be a railway network surviving in the form we now know it. Some radical organisational changes I would not rule out, indeed some simplification initiatives I would definitely rule in, but as the primary focus of attention, no thank you.

    I am not saying that the industry relationships should escape careful forensic examination to see what works well and what doesn’t, and then make changes as necessary. Indeed the administration of Railtrack facilitates that very well. But to understand why we have a problem – and believe me we do – I believe we need to concentrate effort elsewhere.

    Where we need to focus first is on people and in particular, on management. People make businesses work and work well. Its not contracts, it’s not regulation and it’s not the complexity and detail of financing agreements that determine performance, it’s people. This is where we must start.

    It was Railtrack’s senior management that failed it for example. They didn’t focus on understanding their assets nor on looking after their customers, two fundamental maxims for success. Instead they focused on inflating the value of the Regulated Asset Base with no real incentive to deliver projects to a reasonable cost as a consequence, thereby increasing their rate of growth in shareholder value. They forgot that this needed to be done whilst also delivering their public law duty as the licence holder and therefore steward, not unassailable owner in perpetuity, of a very precious national asset. They outsourced maintenance, nailing suppliers to thin margin contracts and then failed to manage them effectively. In setting up this chain of command they failed to understand what it was that actually delivered a reliable railway; supervisors, line managers, the ‘black macs‘ and ‘sergeant majors‘ as Chris Green and others have called them. Railtrack today is still full of dedicated men and women, hugely professional in all they do, but the management of the company let them down and badly.

    But it doesn’t have to be like this. There is no need why we should put up any longer with this inadequate leadership in our industry.

    Stability day to day

    First we must restore a sense of stability and belief back into the running of the day-to- day railway. Rediscover our self-confidence, our pride in the job, our pursuit of excellence in all we day. To do this, we need to bring in new blood into the senior ranks of some of the key players in the industry. In Railtrack’s successor for example we need people who understand engineering, asset management, production and industrial processes, quality assurance, supply chain management and logistics technology. They exist in other industries; the oil and gas extraction sector, the hi-tech industrial processes sector and in the motor industry to name a few.

    Let me give you an example. Twenty five years ago it was still possible to buy a truly terrible motor car, frequently (unfortunately) made in Britain! But now, whilst you can buy a cheap car, an economical car, a sports car and any one of hundreds of people carriers, you cannot really buy a bad car. The motor industry as a whole has raised its game, got its act together, sorted the processes and put engineering quality at the heart of everything. It is no surprise to me that Ian McAllister has been asked to put together the CLG bid for the successor to Railtrack. Ford is a company that rediscovered the need to allow its engineers to design cars such as the Mondeo and Focus, not its accountants, with the consequence that they have built good quality cars that sell well. And yes, they’ve succeeded with the prestige brands too, Jaguar and Land Rover. We need more Ian McAllisters and fast. They exist and they will cost money but the payback will be both immediate and long lasting. At the same time we must look after the railway knowledge that still exists in Railtrack and other companies. We need to nurture it, empower it, allow managers to manage and railway people to do what they do best but within a framework set by a competent and focused leadership.

    The Strategic Rail Authority will play a full and active part in this process. In general terms, I shall use every opportunity made available to me to encourage and cajole anyone and everyone who has a part to play in delivering a safe, reliable day to day railway. Specifically, I intend to release the creative talent that exists in the SRA so that we have a proactive organisation, one which energises, and helps establish a common sense of customer focus. We will win the respect of the travelling public and of the freight/logistics operators. The SRA has substantial powers and I shall not hesitate to use them to ensure the public interest is served. We have to offer value for money. I am determined to build constructive partnerships with Train Operating and Freight Operating Companies to achieve this. The door is open and the phones are manned. Please come and see us, talk to us, engage with us. We can all do so much simply by focusing on the job in hand, acting decisively and implementing professionally.

    Over the coming weeks and months there will be progress on a number of fronts. I know there has been frustration, and I am determined to resolve blockages. We will demonstrate that we are an action oriented Authority, not afraid to ask tough questions, set tough agendas and make tough decisions when required.

    Rediscovering Planning

    The second thing we must do is to rediscover the practice of planning. This is not just for the long term. Its absence is what so often undermines what has to be done on a day by day and week by week basis and we need to get better at it. The first step will be to launch the Strategic Plan in January. I’m sorry David that this conference was designed to coincide with the launch of the Plan. I took the decision to delay its release but the decision was taken for good reasons. A huge amount of work has gone into the Strategic Plan which, once funded and committed to by Government, and we’re nearly there, will enable the rail industry for the first time to plan the future with a degree of confidence and clarity from the operational companies through to the infrastructure businesses and the supply sector. I delayed it because I felt it needed to set a clearer vision for the future and this it will now do. It will be launched on January 14th 2002 (please put the date in your diary) and will I believe be a huge step forward in restoring a sense of direction to the industry. However, planning is not a static exercise, it’s a way of working. While it is the SRA’s plan, of course it is for the whole industry to use And yes it is challenging to develop plans which can provide direction for a large and complex industry, but don’t think that we’re alone, as an industry sector with such a challenge. We will review it and update it to ensure we remain on track to deliver the bigger, better and safer railway outlined in the Ten Year Transport Plan.

    I know there has been a worry about the amount of taxpayers’ money set aside in the 10 year transport plan for railways, a worry that this isn’t enough. Well, let me say this. Continuing Treasury and tax-payer support depends on this industry performing. Before arguing we haven’t enough (and it may well turn out that’s correct), let’s acknowledge that we have the kind of long term financial support from this Government that (say) previous BR chairmen could only dream about. What we don’t have is the performance to match. So it’s clear where the real emphasis must lie. We have to deliver a better performing railway to stand a chance. You can count on me to argue the case for funding increases, but you the railway industry will have to create a stronger bargaining hand.

    One of the problems is that no-one has in my opinion yet sat down and produced an irrefutable, soundly argued, analytically robust and tested integrated plan that demonstrates the point. So we need a planning framework that takes all the inputs and then examines all the possible relationships to ensure that the outputs are optimised for a given level of input. The key relationships between renewals, upgrades and enhancements compared to management and optimisation of the service plans of train and freight operating companies has never been properly understood because the SRA and ORR have never sat down together with that single objective in mind. That is about to change forever. Tom Winsor and I have agreed to bring our two senior teams together to create a process designed to model these relationships in a transparent manner so that we can see a true holistic model of the investment need of the railway.

    A wise procurement chum of mine once said ‘Fail to prepare, prepare to fail’. So has it been with investment planning on the railway. The SRA will play a full part in the forthcoming Spending Review and we will champion the railway cause to the fullest extent. But we shall do it armed with proper and robust analysis. We stand far more chance of winning if we are properly prepared.

    I’ve mentioned Tom Winsor and the ORR so perhaps a little more on relationships is useful. One of the most unedifying sights of the last few years (and ultimately one of the most destructive) has been the continual bickering and backstabbing process carried out by many sectors of the industry on a regular and very public basis. That must also be consigned to history. This conference has been organised by the Commission for Integrated Transport. What hope do we have for that if we can’t even behave as integrated industry ourselves. I have known Tom for some years and whilst we do not always agree, we have professional and mutual respect for each other, have our debates in private, and then get on with the job. I expect everyone else in the railway industry to do the same.

    Conclusion

    In summary therefore we must do these two things. First, restore stability to the railway and confidence that we can do the job. Everyone must play their full part and the SRA will lead where required and play its full and proactive part. Second, put in place a planning framework which will for the first time enable us to have complete transparency of the costs, benefits, risks and funding opportunities for the railway.

    My vision is of a railway for which people are proud to work, in which customers can have confidence is professionally managed and can deliver a safe, reliable and value for money service and in which investors, including Government, wish to invest. We do have a Government which for the first time I can remember has a bigger and better railway as a stated and quantified policy objective. Lets not let the chance pass us by. We can do this; we have the people and the tools, if we have the vision and desire, we can achieve anything. Lets go for it.

    Thank you.

  • Richard Bowker – 2001 Speech to the RPC Network

    Richard Bowker – 2001 Speech to the RPC Network

    The speech made by Richard Bowker, the then Chair of the Strategic Rail Authority, on 5 December 2001.

    Introduction

    ….thank you Stewart for those kind remarks. Congratulations too on organising this conference at the start of my third day in the job. As the date was set some two months before I accepted the post, you get a high score for strategic planning!

    As you can see from the title of this session, I believe it is time that the SRA rose up to the challenge facing the industry in general. Specifically, it is time to lead.

    So, first of all, why did I take on this huge and challenging task, and leave behind a good job in order to do it? The answer is because I have a real vocation for Britain’s railways and for this job leading the Strategic Rail Authority. It’s based on an unshakeable belief that the industry can find its way back together as professionals to deliver once again a railway service of which we can be proud.

    I reckon many of you in this room this morning share something of the same belief. Why else would you devote such a huge amount of time to the work of the Committees, well beyond the hours expected in many cases? The railway generates strong views and attachments and this is as much for the users as well as the railwaymen and women who serve them.

    So, let me start by talking about the state and future of the railway, and then move on to the key role of the RPC network in delivering the strategy.

    The Railway

    Looking at the ‘doom and gloom’ headlines of the press day by day, it is easy to lose sight of the fact that the railway is delivering each day, carrying a third more passengers than five years ago, and 40% more freight.

    Everyday 18,600 trains are run (21% more than five years ago). Every day 2.8 million passengers are carried, and 480,000 people are safely delivered to Central London between 07.00 and 10.00.

    The results of the last five year’s planning are starting to be delivered. New trains are arriving. The c2c fleet has been transformed. As of today, nearly 30 Voyagers are operating, bringing new standards of quality to cross country services… and last week, the first of the Pendolino trains were delivered for use on the West Coast Main line. They begin driver training very soon. The freight fleet has been transformed with over 300 new locomotives and 2,500 new wagons – the first major investment in a generation.

    Yesterday, I was in Edinburgh, to mark the start of work on the Crossrail project – part funded by the SRA with an RPP grant. Tomorrow, with Stephen Byers and Ken Livingstone we start work on the East London line extension. On Friday, I will be announcing extension of the RPP fund, together with new guidance for users, and we will soon be able to set out details of the refranchising programme.

    And in January, on the 14th to be precise, we launch the Strategic Plan, the first blueprint for a generation on how we are going to plan and deliver a better railway in line with the Government’s Ten Transport Plan.

    I find it frustrating that we have not got these messages across. I am not suggesting everything in the garden is rosy. It is not and I shall return to that in due course. But there are some great things to celebrate. Privatisation has brought some tremendous benefits in new equipment and services, new technology and new investment. I say this because it is all too easy to lose sight of this amongst the tremendous issues and challenges that we face both in the short and longer term.

    So what of the future?

    In my view, the latent demand for rail services will continue to drive rail usage towards the growth targets the Government set out in their Ten Year Plan. Economic growth brings with it an increasing demand for transport. Trunk road and motorway congestion is not likely to reduce. Parking constraints are not going to get easier. Indeed, a number of cities – including London – plan to introduce congestion charging, which if it goes ahead will increase pressure on rail demand.

    Can the railway cope?

    It has to. We have to find ways of making it capable of meeting the demand. The road system cannot handle the growth in demand nor should it be have to do so. Apart from this, any significant new road building could take ten years or more to achieve. We have to equip the railway to play a bigger role in meeting Britain’s transport needs. But that is a defensive position to take in isolation. I do not want to see a railway simply doing its best to play “catch up”. The railway is moving a third more passengers than at privatisation and I think that’s fantastic! Remember all the statistics of the 1980s? Ridership down, freight down, investment down. That’s been turned on its head. What we have to do now is stimulate more demand by making rail the mode of choice where it can be, and make it so attractive and welcoming a transport proposition, that people actually positively switch to rail and feel good about doing so.

    Things are not good enough at the moment. Performance is very ragged, and the combined effects of September 11 and the collapse of Railtrack have left uncertainty for passengers, for train operators and for rail staff, who also feel the brunt of the daily onslaught in the media. We can’t just issue vague platitudes about ‘things will get better’. We need to get on with practical things and now.

    So, where do we start?

    First we must restore a sense of stability and belief back into the running of the day-to- day railway. The tremendous railwaymen and women that are the bedrock of this industry have to rediscover self-confidence, pride in the job, pursuit of excellence in all they do. To do this, we need to bring in new blood into the senior ranks of some of the key players in the industry to lead. In Railtrack’s successor for example we need people who understand engineering, asset management, production and industrial processes, quality assurance, supply chain management and logistics technology. They exist in other industries And we should be actively seeking to attract them to the railways.

    We need to nurture our staff, empower them, allow managers to manage and railway people to do what they do best but within a framework set by a competent and focused leadership.

    The Strategic Rail Authority will play a full and active part in this process and take a lead. In general terms, I shall use every opportunity made available to me to encourage and cajole anyone and everyone who has a part to play in delivering a safe, reliable day to day railway. Specifically, I intend to develop the potential of the SRA, to energise it and help establish a common sense of customer focus. We will win the respect of the travelling public and of the freight/logistics operators and I am determined to build constructive partnerships with Rail Companies and their users to achieve this.

    The RPC network has a key role to play here – particularly on restoring confidence. You can help us identify the problem areas from your local knowledge and your discussions with TOCs. You can help rebuild public confidence in the comments you make to the local media – particularly as performance starts to turn the corner – and you are uniquely placed to highlight best practice and to encourage its spread around the network.

    So what are we going to do to rebuild confidence? Prioritisation has had a terrible press as a word. Most people jump to the conclusion that it means ‘cutback to what can be afforded’. It does not. It means focusing on the things that maximise benefits for users within all the relevant constraints. In the railway industry, this means skills and technical resources as much as money. For example, the next two years will see Railtrack completing full implementation of TPWS, essential signalling renewals and the signalling for the West Coast upgrade. It is a period during which some key signalling resources are going to be in limited supply.

    Focusing on delivery means some hard choices in the short term – replacing the “wish list” with the priority list for passengers but, I am adamant the longer term is not forgotten, indeed, quite the opposite. I am determined that the projects that will define our future – many of which may not come to fruition until long after my term as Chairman of the SRA is over – are developed and planned now. This is a long lead time industry and many of the problems we face today are a direct consequence of short term investment thinking in the past. We will not repeat that mistake.

    I am also committed to making sure we do not lose sight of smaller things that can be done quite quickly to really improve the quality of the overall travel experience. Stewart and I discussed recently the need to really look at our station infrastructure. Stations are the gateway to the service, the first point of interaction between the passenger and the railway network. And let’s face it, some of them are truly dire. That is why we are so keen to develop the RPP programme and make it easier and quicker to access. Many schemes have been successfully implemented but I am keen to see them happen more quickly in the future.

    In summary, you will see how all of this fits together when we publish the Strategic Plan.

    The team at the SRA has done a very thorough job in analysing the issues and producing a plan which deals with them, notwithstanding the uncertainties that face our industry today. Whilst assumptions have to be made – they do in all Strategic Plans – it will set a clearer vision for the future than has existed before. However, planning is not a static exercise, it’s a way of working. While it is the SRA’s plan, of course it is for the whole industry to use. I know the Council has been involved as a partner in the preparation of the plan, and I am grateful for the input from Stewart and his team.

    I said on Monday, (my first day) that the popular belief is that we need more money than was contemplated in the Ten Year Plan in order to deliver a long term sustainable railway network. The problem is, no-one has yet sat down and produced an irrefutable, soundly argued, analytically robust and tested integrated plan that demonstrates the point. So we need a planning framework that takes all the inputs and then examines all the possible relationships to ensure that the outputs are optimised for a given level of input. The key relationships between renewals, upgrades and enhancements compared to management and optimisation of the service plans of train and freight operating companies has never been properly understood because the SRA and ORR have never sat down together with that single objective in mind. That, however, is about to change. Tom Winsor and I have agreed to bring our two senior teams together to create a process designed to model these relationships in a transparent manner so that we can see a true holistic model of the investment need of the railway. We may be separate organisations but we will show by example that we can really deliver when we work together. This will revolutionise the way in which we undertake investment planning in the future.

    The RPC Network

    I have seen how the RPC network has been transformed over the last eighteen months, with a bigger remit and bigger responsibilities – matched by a bigger budget! The working relationship with the SRA and the rest of the rail industry has become more proactive, with more practical suggestions for improvement, rather than acting simply as a complaints forum.

    This is an important role for the network, as is the strong regional focus of the Committees. For us as an organisation based in London, strong, regional imput is essential. Links between the Committees and regional and local Government are important, and I would like to see this virtuous circle completed, building on the strong links already established between the SRA and Scotland, Wales and the English Regions.

    Consultation is a word that is often used but abused. My concept is simpler – let’s talk to each other. If a week goes by and you haven’t talked to or heard from the Rail Development Manager or one of Chris Austin’s team, then pick up the phone and ask “What’s new”? I know Stewart and Anthony will do the same to me! Formal consultation may be needed for things like PSR changes, but it should be no substitute for regular dialogue. I can promise you, there will be plenty to talk about over the next few months!

    Given that our goals are the same – providing a better service for passengers (and freight customers) and encouraging development of the railway, this relationship needs to evolve into a partnership.

    Conclusion

    My vision is of a railway for which people are proud to work, in which customers can have confidence, is professionally managed and can deliver a safe, reliable and value for money service and in which investors, including Government, wish to invest. We do have a Government which for the first time I can remember has a bigger and better railway as a stated and quantified policy objective. Lets not let the chance pass us by. I believe we can do this; we have the people and the tools, if we have the vision and desire, and we work together, we can achieve anything.

  • Richard Bowker – 2001 Speech to Rail Freight Group

    Richard Bowker – 2001 Speech to Rail Freight Group

    The speech made by Richard Bowker, the Chair of the Strategic Rail Authority, on 11 December 2001.

    Introductory Remarks

    It’s a great pleasure to be here on my 7th working day as Chairman of the SRA. I was keen to get stuck in to freight early on but I never imagined I would meet so many of you so quickly. This is a truly impressive turnout.

    You all know where I’ve come from and so you will not be surprised that I have a steep learning curve to climb when it comes to freight. I am told that the rail freight industry is a hard nosed and commercial – that’s fine – that’s what I’m used to. I don’t expect you to base your businesses and investments on promises; you want to see results and will judge the SRA on delivery. I intend to deliver for freight.

    Industry Wide Issues

    Right now there are huge issues to address for the whole railway. We must get this right for the whole railway – Freight operators as well as the infrastructure provider and passenger TOCs. If we don’t there’s no future for any of us.

    Everyone is worried about what the successor to Railtrack should look like and how we should get there. But we must not be distracted. We must concentrate in these next few months on making what we have today work better, providing a period of stability focussing on the people who make the industry work and working better together. I see it as a key part of my role to ensure this happens and I’ve already started by seeking a better relationship between the SRA and the rest of Government. The SRA and the ORR senior teams are about to sit down together for the first time with the objective of understanding the key relationships between renewals, upgrades and enhancements and the management and optimisation of the service plans of passenger and freight operating companies.

    The Strategic Rail Authority is ready to play a full and active part and take a lead. I shall use every opportunity available to me to encourage and cajole anyone and everyone who has a part to play in delivering a safe reliable day to day railway. I intend to develop the potential of the SRA, to energise it and help establish a common sense of customer focus. We will win the respect of the travelling public and the freight and logistics operators and I am determined to build constructive relationships with Rail Companies and their users to achieve this.

    Freight issues

    I want to build a productive partnership with you in the Rail Freight industry. For starters you can rest assured that I have heard and understand your fears about ‘vertical integration’. All I ask of you is that you recognise we must not ignore the debate on vertical integration but must engage in it – you have a crucial role to play.

    I know that freight flows change more frequently than the passenger timetable sometimes on a week-by-week basis, I know that freight moves across the network in an entirely different way from the main passenger movements often crossing several ‘zones’. I know that 40% of all rail freight today uses the West Coast Main Line for part of its journey. And I know that not all rail freight is the same. Different markets have different needs – coal is different from aggregates, is different from automotive, is different from deep-sea containers, is different from mail. Together we must serve them all if we are to achieve our target 80% growth.

    This means a network fit for purpose as well as the targeted support for the development of new services and facilities set out in our Freight Strategy. I know we must invest government money in capacity for freight and a higher loading gauge for the new generation of containers as well as supporting improvements in efficiency by reducing journey times and increasing train lengths. Getting the Railtrack question right is key to this – whatever organisation succeeds Railtrack must facilitate not block enhancement and we must be able to develop the network at reasonable cost. The SRA will take a lead in the future on this all-important upgrade enhancement work.

    It is two and a half years since the first appointment was made to the SRA freight team. A lot has been achieved in that time from a standing start but we have yet to see any actual work start on the network. I expect to put this right next year and, building on the development and appraisal work undertaken by the team already, make a start on one of our major projects and I hope more than one of our smaller schemes.

    Other Priorities for the next 12 months

    So what are our other priorities for the next 12 months for freight?

    Top of the list has to be the issue of would-be immigrants and the disruption of Channel Tunnel freight services. This was top of my agenda even before I formally took up my post and I have already discussed it a number of times with Ministers. We are doing everything we can to put pressure on at home and in France to resolve the issue through physical security measures, additional security staff or operational solutions. We are exploring whether or not we can provide a financial contribution towards ensuring that the fence around Frethun Yard is adequate. Further meetings are planned this side of Christmas and early in the New Year with SNCF and others. It would be a desperately depressing start to my time as Chairman of the SRA if in the first month some of the dire consequences that are threatened as a result of this situation were to come to pass. I sincerely hope that a resolution early in the New Year will be soon enough.

    On a more positive note I hope the Freight Industry will be pleased when the Strategic Plan is published on 14 January to see that the Freight Strategy as previously set out remains a key part of it and that we expect to provide sufficient money for its implementation out of our resources. You will, I am sure, be looking for an update on our progress with the Freight Strategy and I expect the team to produce this around the anniversary of the publication of the Strategy in May.

    As well as reporting on the timetable for improvements to the network we should be in a position to announce the timetable for introduction of the ‘Company neutral revenue support scheme’ we have been working on and new grant rates for the removal of heavy lorries from our congested roads.

    Next year will see the publication for consultation of the first of our Regional Freight Strategies pulling together freight flows, network improvements, interchange requirements and land resources into a clear framework to support the Regional planning process. We will work jointly with TfL on a rail freight strategy for London.

    For me personally the main imperative is to get to know you and understand your businesses and to this end I am asking the team to set up a number of visits for me during the next year to see rail freight working at first hand and to provide an opportunity to hear about your concerns. I want to ride a mail train and see the Princess Royal Distribution Centre, I want to visit the port of Felixstowe, I want to visit EWS’s Doncaster Customer service Centre and ride the heavily used Doncaster – Immingham route. I also need to see quarries and depots, intermodal terminals, and meet with the Freightliner, DRS and GB Railfreight. I must get to know freight customers and would-be customers and understand them as well as rail passengers.

    Closing remarks

    I still have a lot to learn about freight but I already know how important it is and that I want to achieve that target. I recognise and respect the fact that the vast majority of freight runs without subsidy, I understand that in the absence of a franchise structure we must become willing partners in our joint endeavour, I admire the way the freight industry has been prepared to invest – close to a billion pounds since privatisation – and to argue its case in front of the Regulator for lower access charges. I relish the prospect of working together and getting to know you better.

    My vision is of a railway for which people are proud to work, in which customers can have confidence, is professionally managed and can deliver a safe, reliable and value for money service and in which investors, including Government, wish to invest. We do have a Government which for the first time I can remember has a bigger and better railway as a stated and quantified policy objective. Lets not let the chance pass us by. I believe we can do this; we have the people and the tools, if we have the vision and desire, and we work together, we can achieve anything.

    Thank you for inviting me – the new boy – to join you for your annual Christmas lunch, I wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year.

  • Rishi Sunak – 2023 Keynote Speech on Building the Future

    Rishi Sunak – 2023 Keynote Speech on Building the Future

    The speech made by Rishi Sunak, the Prime Minister, on 4 January 2023.

    New Year should be a time of optimism and excitement. Yet I know many of you look ahead to 2023 with apprehension.

    I want you to know that as your Prime Minister, I will work night and day to change that, and quickly.

    Not just by providing relief and peace of mind for the months to come – although we will.

    But also by changing our country…and building a better future for our children and grandchildren.

    A future that restores optimism, hope, and pride in Britain.

    Let me first address two issues that I know are at the forefront of everyone’s minds:

    I know there are challenges in A&E – people are understandably anxious when they see ambulances queuing outside hospitals.

    You should know we’re taking urgent action:

    Increasing bed capacity by 7,000 more hospital beds and more people cared for at home.

    Providing new funding to discharge people into social care and the community, freeing up beds.

    And the NHS are working urgently on further plans for A&E and ambulances.

    And, on strikes.

    There’s a lot of misinformation out there.

    So I want people to clearly understand the government’s position.

    We hugely value public sector workers like nurses.

    They do incredibly important work.

    That’s why we want a reasonable dialogue with the unions about what’s responsible and fair for our country.

    And in the coming days we will update you on the government’s next steps.

    Today, I want to make a simple commitment: this government will always reflect the people’s priorities.

    People don’t want politicians who promise the earth and then fail to deliver.

    They want government to focus less on politics and more on the things they care about.

    The cost of living, too high.

    Waiting times in the NHS, too long.

    Illegal migration, far too much.

    I think people do accept that many of these challenges are at least in part, the legacy of Covid and impacted by the war in Ukraine.

    But that’s not an excuse; we need to address these problems, not just talk about them.

    Since I became Prime Minister, we’ve made progress:

    Stabilised the economy and people’s mortgage rates.

    Provided £26 billion of support for the cost of living.

    Invested billions more in schools, the NHS and social care.

    Deepened ties with allies around the world on everything from Ukraine to our collective economic security…

    Continued our unwavering support for the armed forces in their efforts to keep us safe.

    And set out a concrete plan to stop the boats and tackle the unfairness of illegal migration.

    But of course, we need to do more.

    So I want to make five promises to you today.

    Five pledges to deliver peace of mind.

    Five foundations, on which to build a better future for our children and grandchildren.

    First, we will halve inflation this year to ease the cost of living and give people financial security.

    Second, we will grow the economy, creating better-paid jobs and opportunity right across the country.

    Third, we will make sure our national debt is falling so that we can secure the future of public services.

    Fourth, NHS waiting lists will fall and people will get the care they need more quickly.

    Fifth, we will pass new laws to stop small boats, making sure that if you come to this country illegally, you are detained and swiftly removed.

    So, five promises – we will:

    Halve inflation.

    Grow the economy.

    Reduce debt.

    Cut waiting lists.

    And stop the boats.

    Those are the people’s priorities.

    They are your government’s priorities.

    And we will either have achieved them or not.

    No tricks… no ambiguity… we’re either delivering for you or we’re not…

    We will rebuild trust in politics through action, or not at all…

    So, I ask you to judge us on the effort we put in and the results we achieve.

    These five promises are the people’s priorities. So, they’re my immediate priorities, too.

    But they’re not the limit of my ambitions for our country.

    They’re the foundation.

    My aim is to build a better future for our children and grandchildren.

    A future where they feel optimism, hope, and pride.

    To realise that vision, we need to change our mindset.

    Politicians talk a lot about change…

    But the truth is, no government, no Prime Minister, can change a country by force of will or diktat alone…

    Real change isn’t provided – it’s created.

    It’s not given – it’s demanded.

    Not granted – but invented.

    The choices we make as individuals…as workers…business owners… parents…all add up to something far greater.

    And if we are honest, change also requires sacrifice…and hard work.

    It’s a big risk for a politician to say that.

    But the stakes are too high…and the rewards too great…not to level with you.

    So, change is hard. It takes time. But it is possible.

    And we know that because we’ve done it before.

    During Covid, we protected millions of people’s jobs and businesses – a record I’m proud of.

    And we know it’s possible because you can see change happening, you can feel it.

    Just look at our state schools, empowered by reform, in some of the most deprived parts of our country, producing some of the best results.

    Those teachers and pupils work hard and make sacrifices because they know that what they are doing is bigger than themselves.

    They demand, inspire, and deliver excellence.

    And their ethos of excellence can become the animating spirit of our nation.

    Inspired by them, together we can change our country’s character.

    We can reverse the creeping acceptance of a narrative of decline.

    Reject pessimism and fatalism.

    Refuse limits on our aspirations.

    To do that, we need to have the imagination and confidence to do things differently and better.

    The vision to do today what is needed for tomorrow.

    In other words, we need to change the way our country works.

    That requires a change in mindset.

    What does that mean in practice?

    It means:

    A more innovative economy…

    Stronger communities and safer streets…

    A world class education system…

    An NHS built around patients…

    And a society that truly values the family.

    In all these areas and more we must have the courage to change.

    To think bigger, strive for excellence, not give up when things get tough.

    And if we can do that…

    …then we really can build a better future.

    In the coming months I will set out our plans in each of these areas.

    But let me set the direction, today.

    A better future is one where our economy is growing faster so that everybody, everywhere across our Union, has new opportunities for better paying, good jobs.

    And the change we need is to put innovation at the heart of everything we do.

    An ethos embodied by so many of the fantastic businesses here at Plexal.

    Some people think innovation is about gadgets and geekery – a nice to have, peripheral to growth compared to the traditional levers of tax and spend.

    That’s exactly the mindset we need to change.

    Let me tell you why innovation is so important.

    Over the last 50 years, it was responsible for around half of the UK’s productivity increase.

    New jobs are created by innovation.

    People’s wages increased by innovation.

    The cost of goods and services reduced by innovation.

    And major challenges like energy security and net zero will be solved by innovation.

    The more we innovate, the more we grow.

    And the world is seeing an incredible wave of scientific and technological change…

    …so right now, the most powerful way to achieve higher growth is to make sure the UK the most innovative economy in the world.

    That’s why we are:

    Increasing public funding in R&D to £20bn to enhance our world leading strengths in AI, life sciences, quantum, fintech, and green technology.

    Seizing the opportunities of Brexit to ensure our regulatory system is agile and pro-innovation.

    Making sure entrepreneurial and fast-growing companies get the finance they need to expand.

    Spreading a culture of creative thinking and doing things differently across every part of the UK.

    If we’re going to deliver this better future, people will have to work hard.

    But I believe good, well-paid jobs are about more than just financial security.

    They give people purpose, confidence, dignity – the chance to build a better life for themselves.

    But I also believe that if you work hard and play by the rules – you should be rewarded.

    Which is why as soon as we can, the Government will reduce the burden of taxation on working people.

    And it is staggering that at a time when businesses are crying out for workers, a quarter of our labour force is inactive.

    So our growth plan will look at how we can support those who can, to move back into work – including through the welfare system.

    Now all of this will make this country a beacon of science, technology, and enterprise and lift our productivity, raise our growth rate, create jobs in the decades to come.

    Good jobs give people pride in their own lives.

    But a better future also means reinforcing people’s pride in the places they call home.

    And the change we need is to do away with the idea that it’s inevitable that some communities and some places can never and will never get better.

    I love my local community and it’s not right that too many for far too long have not felt that same sense of meaning and belonging.

    Government can’t create it – it’s something we build together.

    But the state does provide the foundations.

    So we will deliver on our promise to level up – with greater investment in local areas, to boost growth, create jobs…

    …and reinvigorate our High Streets and Town Centres.

    But all the regeneration in the world won’t mean anything unless people feel safe in their communities.

    By this Spring, we will have an extra 20,000 police officers, patrolling the streets, answering the call for help, and catching criminals.

    We’ve got to stop violence against women and girls – and let’s be frank…

    …that means men taking responsibility for creating a culture and society where women are safe in their communities and at home.

    We’ve got to reduce reoffending – because a small number of career criminals account for disproportionate amounts of crime.

    And we’ve got to beat addiction – because heroin and crack addicts account for almost half of all robberies.

    Strong communities are also built on values, on the golden rule: treat others as you would like to be treated yourself.

    But too often, a small minority break that golden rule.

    They spray graffiti on war memorials.

    Discard needles and Nitrous Oxide cannisters in children’s playgrounds.

    Gang together and cause disorder and disruption.

    Anti-social behaviour isn’t inevitable or a minor crime.

    It makes life miserable for so many and it can be a gateway to more extreme crimes.

    So, this government will work tirelessly to crack down on anti-social behaviour, giving police forces, mayors, and local authorities the tools they need…

    …and giving communities confidence that these crimes will be quickly and visibly punished.

    Wherever you live in our United Kingdom, you should be able to feel proud of your community.

    And that’s what we’ll work together to achieve.

    So, we will create a better future by changing our economy and strengthening our communities.

    We also need greater social justice.

    And the way we achieve that – is education.

    This is personal for me.

    Every opportunity I’ve had in life began with the education I was so fortunate to receive.

    And it’s the single most important reason why I came into politics: to give every child the highest possible standard of education.

    Thanks to the reforms we’ve introduced since 2010, and the hard work of so many excellent teachers, we’ve made incredible progress.

    But with the right plan – the right commitment to excellence – I cannot see any reason why we can’t rival the best education systems in the world.

    To do that, yes – we’ll need to fix the damage of Covid, especially for our youngest pupils.

    And yes – it’ll require more investment, which is why just weeks ago in the Autumn Statement we provided £2bn of extra funding for schools.

    But that’s not the limit of our ambitions. We’re not content with just catching up.

    First, we need to support good teaching and spread best practice with a plan to improve attainment in primary schools.

    Next, we need to stop seeing education as something that ends aged 18 – or that sees university as the only option.

    With more technical education, lifelong learning, and apprenticeships.

    And one of the biggest changes in mindset we need in education today is to reimagine our approach to numeracy.

    As Chancellor, I introduced Multiply, a new programme to give hundreds of thousands of adults the opportunity to get the basic numerical skills they need.

    But we’re one of the few countries not to require our children to study some form of maths up to the age of 18.

    Right now, just half of all 16–19-year-olds study any maths at all.

    Yet in a world where data is everywhere and statistics underpin every job, letting our children out into that world without those skills, is letting our children down.

    So we need to go further.

    I am now making numeracy a central objective of the education system.

    That doesn’t have to mean compulsory A level in maths for everyone.

    But we will work with the sector to move towards all children studying some form of maths to 18.

    Just imagine what greater numeracy will unlock for people:

    The skills to feel confident with your finances, to find the best mortgage deal or savings rate;

    The ability to do your job better and get paid more;

    And greater self-confidence to navigate a changing world.

    Improving education is the closest thing to a silver bullet there is.

    It is the best economic policy, the best social policy, the best moral policy.

    And that’s why it’s this government’s policy.

    As we build this better future for our children and grandchildren…

    …I feel a deep responsibility to pass on a health service that will be there for them…

    …just as it was there for our parents and grandparents.

    When I talk about the NHS, I’m not just talking about a prized public service.

    I’m talking about my family’s life calling.

    My Dad was a Doctor. I grew up working in my Mum’s pharmacy.

    I saw day in day out the devotion they gave to their patients.

    And my record demonstrates how important those memories are to me.

    We’ve significantly increased funding for health and social care.

    Recruited thousands more doctors and nurses.

    Upgraded more hospitals with cutting-edge technology.

    But Covid has imposed massive new pressures and people are waiting too long for the care they need.

    We’re fixing that.

    But we need to do more.

    At a time when we’re putting record sums into the NHS…

    And recruiting record numbers of Doctors and Nurses…

    Healthcare professionals are still unable to deliver the care they want…

    And patients aren’t receiving the care they deserve.

    So we need to recognise that something has to change.

    That doesn’t mean structural reforms to the NHS.

    We will always protect the founding principle of an NHS free at the point of use.

    But what it does mean is an NHS where patients are in control, with as much choice as possible.

    Where we’re comfortable with the NHS using more independent capacity – if that’s what it takes to get patients quicker and better care.

    Where patients can access more information and data, allowing them to make more informed choices and hold services to account.

    And where we will no longer accept unwarranted variation in performance between trusts.

    Because high quality healthcare should be there for you wherever you live.

    And as the NHS works with professions to develop a workforce strategy early this year, I’ve asked them to consider how we can best support Doctors, Nurses, and other healthcare professionals, like pharmacists, to work more flexibly.

    We all share the same objective when it comes to the NHS: to continue providing high quality, responsive healthcare for generations to come. And that’s what we are going to deliver.

    Our vision of change will revitalise every aspect of our lives – better jobs, stronger communities, world-class education, an NHS built around patients.

    But family is something politicians struggle to talk about because you can all too readily be pilloried for being out of touch or worse, hostile to those who don’t conform to some idealised form.

    We live in a world today where family can and does take many forms.

    But whatever your family looks like, it doesn’t matter as long as the common bond is love.

    We shouldn’t be shy about it: We cannot not talk about the thing that is most important in most of our lives.

    Not when the evidence is clear that strong, supportive families make for more stable communities and happier individuals.

    I wouldn’t be where I am today without the love of my family, the kindness they gave me, the sacrifices they made for me, and the values they taught me.

    I learnt from them the virtues of hard work and self-improvement…

    …the importance of treating others with respect and the value of service…

    …of how a community relies on people going above and beyond what they are required to do.

    Today, it is the love of my wife and children that sustains me in the most difficult moments in this job.

    Family matters.

    We need to support parents to manage the demands of modern workplaces without weakening the irreplaceable bonds of family life.

    And we’re going to roll out Family Hubs to offer parents the support they need to raise a child.

    Because I believe deeply that family – not just government – can help us answer the profound questions we face as a country.

    When it comes to health, family cares for us when we are sick and old; family teaches us values in education; when it comes to community – family guides us in right and wrong.

    That’s why family runs right through our vision of a better future.

    When I first spoke to you as Prime Minister, I stressed that trust was not given but earned.

    I hope that in these first few weeks in the job I have begun to earn your trust.

    And I’ve made five promises today to deliver peace of mind. We will:

    Halve inflation.

    Grow the economy.

    Reduce debt.

    Cut waiting times.

    And stop the boats.

    But I know this is just the start of what we need to do to build a better Britain together.

    As well as peace of mind today, this afternoon I’ve also set out a vision for a better future for our children and grandchildren.

    We’re not going to get there overnight.

    Or even in this Parliament.

    But this is the journey we are on.

    And despite all the challenges we face, all the anxieties that people feel, I know we can get there.

    Others may talk about change, I will deliver it. I won’t offer you false hope or quick fixes, but meaningful, lasting change.

    I want people to feel something that they do not always feel today:

    A belief that public services work for them;

    A knowledge that if you work hard in the good times, the state will be there for you during the bad;

    A hope that the world will be better for their children than it was for them;

    A sense of belonging in the place they call home.

    I guarantee that your priorities will be my priorities.

    I pledge that I will be honest about the challenges we face.

    And I will take the tough but necessary decisions to ensure our great country achieves its enormous potential.

    I will only promise what I can deliver. And I will deliver what I promise.

  • Richard Bowker – 2002 Speech to the Railway Forum Conference

    Richard Bowker – 2002 Speech to the Railway Forum Conference

    The speech made by Richard Bowker, the then Chairman and Chief Executive of the Strategic Rail Authority, on 2 July 2002.

    It is some seven months since I stepped up to the footplate as Chairman of the SRA. In that time, the SRA has published its Strategic Plan, secured some additional Government funding, appointed a new team to lead it, let the first 20 year franchise, (more deals are under development) and we have negotiated the basis of a stable future for the network operator to replace Railtrack.

    During this time too, we have taken stock, consulted extensively with the rail industry and stakeholders. We have listened and learned and shall shortly be launching consultation on a number of critical policy issues.

    But, time is not on our side. As an industry, we are in danger of losing the goodwill that is willing us to deliver. There is no value to anyone in us failing and the world is intrinsically on our side but we have to deliver some of the improvements that have been promised. That’s why this conference title is so appropriate and why Alistair also focused on getting on with the job in hand. Now, I know we know we have begun and we do have to get better about talking about it. There are many new trains on order or delivered. We have CTRL, TPWS and a whole raft of other projects and I know there is a vast amount going on behind the scenes that we can talk about shortly. But even some of these have not been without problems and we need to raise the game consistently and show what the railway can do when it puts its considerable collective skill and effort to delivery.

    Leadership

    I am determined we shall deliver the Government’s objectives for the railway, and to do this, I want first to look at one task that is set out very clearly in the Directions & Guidance to the SRA:

    2.1″The Authority is to provide leadership for the rail industry and ensure that the industry works co-operatively towards common goals.”

    This morning I shall be setting out some of the detail of the direction in which I intend to lead. But beware, it comes with a health warning attached. The destination is set, the route will be marked out and we shall not, repeat not be deflected from it and will not wait to pick up stragglers or argue with those who don’t agree with where we’re going.

    Role of the Public Sector

    When the railway was privatised, there was a view that over time subsidies would decline to be replaced by premia, centralised control of policy would be very limited, the innovative and entrepreneurial flair of the new private companies would create a dynamic and self sustaining market and what little interference did remain would be confined to ensuring that socially necessary service provisioning would be looked after. Admittedly, this was against a backdrop of a railway no-one expected to grow fast, if at all, but even so, isn’t it incredible how wrong we could have been? Looking back now I believe that the issue was not primarily structure. It was not even fragmentation (although both of these have clearly impacted) but rather a total lack of leadership and proper planning.

    The laissez faire model of the market is no more likely to work now than it did in 1996, indeed, I believe it is less likely to work now. The railway has in those intervening 6 or 7 years become more complex and constraints that did not apply then certainly do so now, perhaps most clearly in terms of capacity utilisation. Incentive regimes have not driven the expected behaviours and those who were brave enough to become involved in seeking to expand the capacity and capability of the network have found it an uphill struggle to secure the delivery of their contracts.

    Transport planning does not just “happen” – it requires a lead from the Public Sector, which has a special role in relation to railways, which I believe is now very clear. It is:

    (i) leadership – saying and then following through with the things that will never be universally popular for popularity is not synonymous with true leadership

    (ii) strategy – setting the strategy and a framework against which the industry can plan and develop. Strategy does not always mean long term – a strategy is defined as a plan and plans can be short, medium and long term

    (iii) specification – it is for the public sector to specify the outputs it wishes to buy and it is the SRA who fulfil this role in the railway industry

    (iv) funding – Public sector funding, slightly less than 50% of the annual total, comes from the SRA, either directly or indirectly

    Leadership does not mean popularity. I did not take this job to be popular. I took it to make a difference, a lasting difference. So we will consult when necessary and then, in consultation with the policy makers in Government if appropriate, make decisions, tough decisions. According to one paper at the weekend I am simply spouting ‘robot management speak’. Well judge for yourselves at the end of this.

    The Growing Railway

    Back in February, I talked about the need for a new radicalism. By that, I did not mean a fundamental restructuring of the industry, but a change in the way we approach its management. Is that still a realistic view? Can we make what we have work or do we have to think radically to make any headway? Well, one of the most consistent messages I have received in the last 6 months is please, let us have stability. Stability of policy, stability of funding, stability of structure, stability of objective.

    Well I agree but the railway is growing, and growing strongly. Compared with six years ago, it has 20% more trains, a third more passengers and almost half as much freight again, despite the problems of Sangatte. But it is also six years older, and in too many areas too little has been spent on renewing and expanding it. You’ve heard all that but it is also true that this underlying strong growth potential is inevitably going to continue. Hatfield caused a shock, but the trends are upwards and are actually more marked on freight than passenger. Not only did rail freight grow by 8.8% last year – above the trend needed to meet the 80% target by 2010/11 – but market share has also grown, so that it now stands at almost 12%, compared with 8.5% seven years ago.

    The Prophets of Doom – and we have no shortage of them will always urge caution on the basis that growth will fall away, but such an approach is flawed and will mean that we will always be condemned to struggling with inadequate capacity. This is something I feel passionately about as it is clear that a number of factors are now combining to drive up demand for rail services, quite apart from the marketing efforts of the industry.

    • The road system cannot cope with the growth in demand – either for passenger travel or freight transport
    • Town and cities are looking to the railway to help solve their congestion problems and some are prepared to back this with congestion charging or funding park and ride schemes.
    • The logistics industry is increasingly looking to rail for trunk haul movements to combat road congestion and the impact of the EU Working Time Directive
    • The South East’s airports are at capacity, certainly in the medium term, and the marginal cost of extra domestic flights to London will be high.
    • All of this is set against a Government Ten Year Transport Plan with growth as a key factor.

    So, OK for stability, but growth will come. And it has proved incredibly difficult to progress major upgrade schemes, partly through the institutional inertia that comes with a leaderless and fragmented structure, partly through escalating costs, and partly through the time taken to plan, secure consents and build new infrastructure.

    That is starting to change. Leeds First has provided more capacity, and the doubling of Chiltern’s main line north of Bicester is almost complete, albeit at a cost to bring tears to ours eyes, more of which later, but we have to recognise that, even with leadership and funding from the SRA, and with greater industry cooperation, there are no “quick fixes” when it comes to big capacity increases. If anyone was in any doubt on this, the history of the West Coast upgrade will convince them!

    Capacity

    Returning therefore to the theme of planning, the conclusion from this is that in the short to medium term, we have to be much better at making use of the capacity we have, while we are planning to increase it in the longer term.

    This gives added impetus to the Capacity Utilisation Policy that we are developing, and on which we will start consultation next month. From this we will develop individual route strategies which will also involve revisiting the Passenger Service Requirement as necessary.

    Over the last five years, timetables have grown piecemeal, with additional services being slotted in as individual promoters perceive a benefit, irrespective of whether it is abstractive overall, and the result is sub-optimal use of the available route capacity. It is now time to take a strategic look at the whole structure to see how we can make best use of the capacity that exists to provide a more reliable service, and in some cases, perhaps, a more frequent one.

    It also means some compromise in order to make the most of what we have got. On some routes, we may have to accept some variation in clock face departures of local trains to accommodate less frequent long distance or freight services. In other cases, we may have to look at a slightly slower long distance service to fit in with peak period stopping services and vice versa. We should not be afraid to question a few cherished principles to produce a solution that works for passengers or freight customers, and works reliably.

    This policy has to be driven by good railway operating and engineering principles – robust, practical and safe. It needs to align the railway’s priorities with those of its customers – freight as well as passenger. We know how to measure the benefits of train service provision at the margin, and we will apply a consistent methodology to underpin our choices.

    Capacity is linked to the other policy on which we will shortly start consultation – on fares. The structure and level of fares affect demand and the capacity requirement. Fares also provide income for investment. We need to make sure that the fares policy supports the Government objectives through a degree of direction and regulation, but leaves some commercial freedom for train operators to do what they are good at – filling empty seats.

    There are a whole series of other areas where our new approach to planning will be profoundly felt and welcomed and although I haven’t gone through them in detail here they include our relationships with Devolved Government, Regional and Local Development Agencies and Authorities and PTAs and PTEs,

    Costs

    But whilst we can have the most sophisticated and joined up planning in the world, we have to be able to afford what we want to buy. One thing which we have to tackle together is the steady rise in the real cost of operating the railway. Not just on capital projects, but on running costs as well. These costs are racing ahead and have to be curbed. There are many contributing factors.

    • Wage costs – particularly when coupled with a 35 hour week – are racing ahead of inflation.
    • Safety standards are ratcheting up, and these have to be paid for. So does meeting the requirements of Disability Discrimination Act, and the EU directives on interoperability.
    • Project Costs – Does it really cost the kind of £ per mile figures we are currently seeing for major projects. I leave you to answer that yourself
    • Investment has to be paid for through access or leasing charges. Transaction costs and consultancy costs are high.
    • Reliability – in terms of extra trains or staff – has to be paid for.

    Now many of these headings have some justification but taken together, they add to a considerable burden. Over the next few months and years we have to address these spiralling upward costs, or we risk making the full development of the railway unaffordable.

    Some of these costs are a “pass-through” to the SRA which on the face of it might seem alright – but its not! Our budget is limited and we have to manage it at an aggregate level. So unless we can get a grip on them, rising costs could choke off investment at the margin, and restrict our ability to respond to local plans. For all its faults, BR did apply relentless downward pressure on costs which led to some innovative ideas like radio signalling, or which, like the HST, generated big increases in revenue. We must do the same.

    There must be cheaper ways of running the rural railway than meeting the same stringent standards as on high speed lines. Maybe some suburban routes around the country could be better run as light rail than as they are now. Manchester Metrolink now carries as many passengers as the whole of the rest of the Greater Manchester suburban network. There must be better ways of carrying out engineering work than the present hopelessly inefficient possessions regime. Productive driving time still occupies, on average, less than half a shift for train drivers.

    Network Review

    Pulling all this together –

    • Capacity Utilisation Policy
    • Route utilisation strategies
    • PSR review
    • Fares Policy
    • Planning in general, and
    • The need to get a grip on costs,

    amounts to a pretty fundamental review to enable us to be very clear about what we want to buy. We will be setting this out progressively over the coming months and longer and the conclusions will not please everyone.

    There will be many commercial deals to be done which do not call on SRA support, and these will be welcome, but here too we need to be involved when it comes to the effect on network capacity utilization and on other operators.

    The SRA Team

    I recognize that to deliver this leadership and work programme requires a resource at the SRA of the highest calibre and I am delighted to say that the team is now complete and in place bar one which I shall come back to shortly. Chief Operating Officer (Nick Newton), Managing Director (Strategic Planning) (Jim Steer) and Managing Director (Finance & Commercial) (Doug Sutherland) are now all in place. Together with Julia Clarke (Freight), Chris Austin (Corporate Affairs) and Ceri Evans (Media), we are very much open for business and, with the major milestone reached last week on Network Rail, we can begin to move forward on all aspects of our work programme.

    That just leaves one key vacancy, for a Technical Director. I have recently taken the view that such is the scale of the agenda with respect to ERTMS, standards, European matters (notably Interoperability) and so on, that someone at the SRA must take an industry lead on this. We will shortly be starting the recruitment process.

    Conclusion

    I would like to rewind to that extract from the Directions and Guidance again. The second part of it referred to working co-operatively towards common goals. Working together is essential if we are to deliver the railway we truly need and we are capable of doing it, of that I have no doubt. Over the last few months in particular, there has been clear evidence that it is happening, not least of all when we have been dealing with difficult issues.

    We are now moving to a clearer position in the railway industry where responsibility and accountability can start to be clearly understood. It is certainly the case that the role of providing leadership, of setting the strategy, of specifying the outputs and determining the value for money case for injecting public money rests with the SRA. It’s a challenge we’re up for. But it is nothing without a strong and vibrant private sector, willing to take risk because the opportunities, the strategy and the risks and rewards are clear. The SRA and the ORR with our separate but complementary jurisdictions are creating that framework. Together with all of you, we need to “Get on With It”.

    Thank you.

  • Strategic Rail Authority – 2002 Franchising Policy Statement

    Strategic Rail Authority – 2002 Franchising Policy Statement

    The policy statement document issued by the Strategic Rail Authority on 1 November 2002.

    Text of document (in .pdf format)

  • Peter Hain – 2000 Speech on Angola and the Responsibilities of Wealth

    Peter Hain – 2000 Speech on Angola and the Responsibilities of Wealth

    The speech made by Peter Hain, the then Minister of State at the Foreign Office, on 6 July 2000.

    I was born in Africa, and grew up in Pretoria where my parents were first jailed, then banned, then forced into exile in London where I continued their struggle as a leader of the British Anti-Apartheid movement.

    And now my job as British Minister for Africa gives me again the chance to make a difference. I am determined to do so. Our goal is a proud, safe, democratic, prosperous Africa. A self-confident Africa in which the views and aspirations of all Africans can be clearly heard, and fully taken into account.

    I have been to Angola before, in 1995. As now, it was strangled by war. Images of Huambo stay in my mind: Limbless, starving people. Every shop, office, and house gutted. Hopelessness and despair on peoples’ faces. The misery of the displaced. Thirty-five years of fighting fuelled first by the Cold War ideological clash between communism and capitalism, then by the pure greed of oil versus diamonds.

    During that visit I met the Government in Luanda. Then I flew deep into the bush to Bailundo, to meet Jonas Savimbi. He promised he would honour the United Nations peace agreement he had signed in Lusaka. But at the same time as he lied to me, he was re-arming, and the war started all over again. And still there is no end: the Angolan people deserve so much better.

    I am particularly pleased that so many members of Angola’s civil society are here. We usually hear talk only of the Government, of UNITA, of the United Nations. But civil society as a whole – press, NGOs, the churches, trade unions – all have a vital, perhaps a central, role to play in Angola’s future.

    Angola has suffered from slavery, from colonisation, from the geo political rivalries of the Cold War. But the past cannot continue to be used as an excuse. Angolans cannot allow themselves to be trapped by their history. Angolans must take responsibility for their future.

    In the past, foreign interests in the USA, South Africa and Europe supported UNITA and Savimbi to prolong the war for their own interests. Today I can assure you that this is not true for Britain. I hope it is no longer true for any other country. Some foreign individuals do profit from war in Angola by buying blood diamonds from Savimbi and selling arms and fuel. But there is no reason why Angolans should allow these evil people to control your destiny. If Angolans can find a just peace, no outsider should come between them and a secure and prosperous future. Your economy could develop. Your roads and hospitals could be rebuilt. Your children could be educated. You could travel freely throughout your beautiful country.

    The rest of us would benefit too. Britain would spend less on humanitarian aid and save money on the UN. British businesses would have new opportunities for investment and trade. Angola would become a dynamic force for stability and progress in Southern Africa, instead of a dark threat to the peace and prosperity of its neighbours.

    SANCTIONS

    But for this vision to become a reality, the war has to end. What can you do? What can we do to bring peace closer? The British Government’s view is that there are two major issues to be addressed. I will describe them here:

    First, Savimbi’s power to wage war has to be blocked by sanctions, vigorously enforced. We want to stop him selling his diamonds and block his supplies of fuel and munitions, until he is forced to lay down his arms as he promised in the Lusaka Protocol in 1994.

    I have been in the forefront of the international efforts to make sanctions effective. For as long as the fighting continues the British Government will seek to tighten the sanctions against UNITA, to cut off the outward flow of diamonds and inward flow of arms and fuel that sustains the misery of the Angolan people. And we will continue to expose those involved, however high or low: from African Presidents, to European arms and diamond dealers, to African based air companies – whatever their nationality. Their dirty trade deserves international condemnation. It is also illegal, so each of these individuals should be tracked down, publicly exposed and prosecuted. The diamond dealer in Belgium receiving UNITA’s blood diamonds helps to landmine children. The arms company in Bulgaria or Ukraine helps Savimbi to kill and maim. The European or South African pilot is just as culpable. Without these guilty people, the war would be over.

    Savimbi has repeatedly broken the United Nations peace agreements he has signed. So how can we trust his word again? Could he change? Could he contribute to the search for peace? I very much doubt it. Attacking convoys taking food and shelter to the displaced, planting mines to maim those who try to raise a crop, mutilating and killing unarmed villagers – these are not the actions of a leader with a cause who wants a better Angola for his people. They are the actions of a bloodthirsty tyrant who wants personal power at all costs.

    But UNITA needs to be part of a political debate about the future of Angola. It needs to have a new policy for peace. It must lay down its arms and play an active part in a dialogue about Angola’s future. Britain is willing to help achieve this. Too much is at stake. UNITA represents an important constituency in the country, politically, rurally and ethnically. Its voice deserves to be heard – but through ballot box not through the barrel of a gun.

    The world will not tolerate any more of Savimbi’s lies and obstructions. UNITA must be part of a political process and it must naturally honour any commitments it makes. To end such a long and bitter war everyone has to compromise. It will take courage on all sides. Agreements must be honoured in full. And I promise this: Britain along with other European Union countries will back such an agreement. We will support the Angolan people in their right to peace, to live a decent life, to begin farming properly again, to begin rebuilding their shattered country.

    GOOD GOVERNANCE, DEMOCRACY AND HUMAN RIGHTS

    The second issue is good governance, democracy and human rights. These have to be made a reality for all Angolans so that they can peacefully share in Angola’s prosperity.

    There must be space for the exchange of ideas, which is fundamental to democracy. Having different ideas about the best way forward does not mean disloyalty to the state. But the debate is not just between the MPLA and UNITA. There are other political parties. As important, there is civil society.

    A strong, independent civil society is very important to sustain a healthy democracy. In every society there are groups of people who come together because of their profession, their beliefs, their interests, their ideals.

    These formal and informal groups – churches, trades unions, humanitarian societies, human rights groups and many more – are each entitled to have their voices heard when they argue for what their members believe in. The more they are seen to live up to their own ideals, the more likely they are to gain the support of their fellow citizens. Although political parties are vital in a healthy democracy, civil society groups help connect government to the people. Open debate is good for our democracies.

    Of course, those of us in Government do not enjoy being criticised. As a Minister I know only too well what it feels like to see my name in the press or hear it on the television followed by critical or ill-informed comment. But that criticism is one of the guarantors of our democracy. I urge the Government to be bold in recognising the same in Angola. In any democracy there will be protest marches. (I used to organise marches myself years ago against apartheid!). And it is a rare journalist who thinks that the Government has got it absolutely right. Open discussion in an open society: that is the way forward to success.

    I have condemned the broken promises and murderous activities of Jonas Savimbi. But I have also felt able to speak honestly to President dos Santos and his Ministers and advisers about the evils of corruption. Angola is rich country made poor by corruption and dishonesty. Her wealth must benefit all her people not just a few. The money from oil and diamonds must go to new hospitals, schools, universities and technical institutes. It must build new roads, bridges and railways. It must be used to lift ordinary Angolans out of poverty, fear and dependency. And used to ensure that they can develop both themselves and their country to their full potential.

    In five years time oil export revenues could be as much as eight billion US dollars (depending on oil prices) per annum. This compares with government expenditure in 1999 equivalent to around three billion US dollars.

    Ending corruption and making government accountable will boost international business confidence and create greater prosperity and jobs.

    Angola’s huge resources – its natural wealth and its people – must not be squandered on War. The Government’s recent offensive against UNITA has been more successful than many expected. But I do not believe that there is a purely military solution to this war. Angola has become a war economy. Huge riches from oil and diamonds are just being wasted away as lives are lost or brutalised and the country devastated almost beyond belief. We have to make a fresh start. And Britain is ready to help.

    Ending the war is not enough. We must rule out the chance of future wars. Angolans deserve open and transparent administration. No bribes. No favours. Just good, clean government. Angolans deserve to see their economy being transformed into an open market functioning within the rule of law and delivering benefits to all.

    I welcomed the news that the Government has agreed to an IMF Staff Monitored Programme. A vital first step. You need the IMF, we need the IMF. We all live in an interconnected world. I urge the Government to publish the programme soon so that civil society can play an active part in achieving its targets. The Government has demonstrated its commitment to working for economic reform. They can be justly proud of that. Let’s make it happen through open discussion and open policy making. That is the way to win popular support from the people. That is the way to increasing investor confidence and economic advancement for all.

    In the anti-apartheid struggle I remember campaigning alongside MPLA comrades during the 1960s and 1970s. In Government the MPLA made sacrifices to support the struggle of the African National Congress for freedom in South Africa. The MPLA has an honourable history as a liberation movement. It faced almost impossible odds when it took over a country ruined first by colonialists, and later by UNITA’s foreign-backed subversion, invasion and brutal war. Despite this the MPLA government managed to implement new and bold health and education policies from which so many Angolans benefited. But somewhere along the way, something went badly wrong.

    We must build a new future. And look at what the result could be. Not a country bled dry by war and poverty and corruption. But one of the great African states. You have the oil, the diamonds. You have the agricultural potential. Luanda could be as big in the international trading market as Pretoria, Lagos or Nairobi. It is long past time that you took your place with them.

    CONCLUSION

    I speak today as a friend of Angola. And it is the duty of a true friend to speak honestly. I am determined to make a difference. I care about Angola because when I see the future of peace, I see a country, which could be the breadbasket of Southern Africa, feeding not just its own people but many millions of others. I see a country of great beauty with a people of great ability and potential. I see a country of enormous wealth that could be a powerhouse in Africa. An African Lion that could help make Africa roar with success. Instead of an Angola of war and poverty and corruption, I have a vision of an Angola in which human rights, social justice, democracy and prosperity for all flourish.

    Let us pledge ourselves to realise that vision.

    Let us all join together – you, I, your African brothers and sisters, the international community – in a rising chorus demanding peace and a new beginning.

  • Keith Vaz – 2000 Speech on the Europeanisation of South East Europe

    Keith Vaz – 2000 Speech on the Europeanisation of South East Europe

    The speech made by Keith Vaz, the then Minister for Europe, on 7 July 2000.

    Your Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, good morning.

    This conference comes at a key moment for South East Europe. One year after the Kosovo crisis democracy is spreading throughout the region. People have exercised their right to vote in free and fair elections in Croatia, many parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Montenegro. There will be elections this autumn in Kosovo, Albania and Bosnia and we hope that Serbian local elections and FRY state-level elections later this year will allow democracy to flourish there too.

    We want to see a new EU Balkan agenda to encourage this trend, one which will show the practical benefits of living up to European standards and ideals which will strengthen support amongst ordinary people in the region for what Chris Patten has described as the road to Europe. As President Clinton said during his visit to Europe in June, our goal must be to de-Balkanise the Balkans. Relations with the European Union are already growing stronger.

    EU ENLARGEMENT

    Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania and Slovenia are negotiating to join the European Union. Macedonia and Croatia are well on the way to EU Stabilisation and Association Agreements. The European Union has set a clear path for Albania and Bosnia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is also eligible once they meet the European Union’s conditions.

    The prospect of closer EU relations and eventually EU membership is an important incentive for change. We welcome the growing evidence of commitments to European ideals and standards and to genuine intra-regional co-operation and I look forward to the summit hosted by the French Presidency in Croatia this autumn, which will be an opportunity to reinforce that message. The Stability Pact is reinforcing this process of Europeanisation, encouraging the countries of South East Europe to work together for shared goals. It has provided 2.4 billion euros for a variety of projects starting in the next twelve months. Britain has particularly supported the pact’s investment compact of which several of you must have attended yesterday’s meeting.

    OVERCOMING LEGACIES OF THE PAST

    Nevertheless there are significant challenges ahead for the region, including for Serbia. The West can and should help, but the real work has to be done by the people of South East Europe themselves. Overcoming the legacy of nationalism, extremism and war is a huge task, but South Africa, Northern Ireland and the Middle East show how old enemies can set aside their quarrels and work together for everyone’s benefit. France and Germany were at war for much of the first half of the last century, yet a common European destiny has made them and the rest of Western Europe firm allies and friends.

    Constructive leadership is crucial. Look at the example of Croatia. The Croatian Government and people have witnessed a dramatic turnaround in their relationship with Europe since the beginning of the year. The same path, the same opportunities, are open to the people of Serbia, but not while they are held back from their rightful place in the European family by a selfish corrupt regime whose leaders refuse to be held responsible for their past actions. Milosevic has presided over the ruin of his country. The cost of Milosevic may have been as much as a hundred billion dollars, the difference between actual national income since 1991 and what that income might have been if Serbia too had embraced economic and democratic reform. Only when Milosevic has gone to The Hague can Serbia’s reconstruction begin in earnest and there should be no doubt of our willingness to help when that happens.

    TRADE AND INVESTMENT

    I hope the conference today will build links between us and the region in the areas where the European Union can really make a difference. Trade and investment, it is time for the EU to be bold, imaginative and generous. We should open its markets to South East Europe’s products and South Eastern Europe in return needs to attract investors by creating a favourable climate for investment. That is why I am so delighted to see here today so many leading members of the private sector. The private sector’s involvement of the reconstruction of the Balkans is absolutely crucial. We shall hear more from Sir David Wright on this point later. Secondly, civil society, people to people links between NGO’s, universities, towns, cities and other civic groups will help spread awareness of Europe.

    The Lisbon Economic Council highlighted the importance of the information society for the EU. We want South East Europe too to exploit the opportunities of e-commerce and the Internet in increasing economic growth, breaking down ethnic barriers and facilitating freedom of information.

    CONCLUSION

    Finally, the European Union has committed over fifteen billion euros to South East Europe over the last decade, but Europeanisation is not just about a transfer of resources, but a transfer of vision, including the people of this corner of our continent and in our common European destiny. The European Union has just such a vision for the people of Central Europe and over the last decade tremendous change has already happened there. I hope for the same for South East Europe. Following this seminar we shall be establishing a UK-Balkans Task Force to build on what we have achieved here and to monitor progress. I shall be calling on some of you to take part in that Task Force.