Executive Summary
National Audit Office Value for Money Report
- Passenger rail services are provided by train operating
companies under franchise agreements which generally run for 7–10
years. Responsibility for the operation and condition of the track
rests with Network Rail. Strategic decisions on major investment,
which also affect service to passengers, are the responsibility of
the Department for Transport (the Department). Under the Railways
Act 2005, the Department also took over responsibility for the
oversight of passenger rail franchising following the abolition of
the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA).
- The Department’s rail franchising objectives have broadly been
to provide a safe, reliable and efficient service for passengers
that is affordable and value for money. In under three years, since
taking over from the SRA, the Department has re-let eight of the
sixteen rail franchises that it manages (see Figure
1). Rail passengers have experienced a change of train
operator on six out of the eight franchises, along with changes to
fares and services. The report examines the:
• franchise competitions (Part 1);
• impact on the taxpayer (Part 2);
• impact on the passenger (Part 3); and
• approach to managing rail franchises (Part 4).
Figure 1 ("Rail Franchises
and Concessions in England and Wales in June 2008") is
unavailable in this version of the executive
summary.
Key findings
On the franchise competitions
- Throughout planning, procurement and operation the
Department has set specific objectives which reflect its overall
priorities to control costs, live within the public funding
available and improve railway performance. Although the
Department’s wider objective of improving the environmental impact
of transport was not explicitly stated as an objective in any of
the franchises examined,
the Department has begun to include environmental issues in its
assessment criteria and has added an explicit objective for the
South Central franchise (to be let in 2009).
- The Department’s service specifications are generally well
thought through, reflecting the objectives set. The Department
assesses changes from the previously specified level of service in
consultation with stakeholders. These changes are clearly linked to
the specific objectives for each franchise and alterations are
subject to cost benefit and affordability analysis.
- Local bodies are consulted on specification but are not
involved in bid evaluation and negotiation. The Department
asks relevant local bodies, such as Passenger Transport Executives
(PTE), for their views on the service specifications for each
franchise. PTEs are not, however, closely involved during
subsequent bid evaluation and negotiation.
- The Department has been successful in stimulating keen
competition for franchises. There were three or more
bidders on seven out of the eight franchises awarded by the
Department and two on the West Midlands franchise. All the winners
of the franchises were established UK companies and there was
limited interest from overseas companies. There is no sign that
incumbency bestows any clear advantage when bidding for
franchises.
- The Department has been successful in letting
franchises to the timescales initially established. The
Department did not incur any delays, and all four franchises
awarded in 2007 were procured by the dates initially
envisaged.
On the impact on the taxpayer
- The eight franchise agreements reduce the burden on
taxpayers, replacing a direct subsidy of £811 million in 2006-07
with a projected £326 million payment to the Department in
2011-12 (Figure 2). Six franchises out of the eight
received subsidies in 2006-07 averaging £130 million. The number
subsidised falls to three franchises with an average subsidy of
£128 million in 2011-12. The other five franchises potentially pay
over £142 million of revenue premium, on average, with the highest
premium being £229 million for the Inter City East Coast franchise.
These savings help to fund the Department’s proposed investment in
passenger services.

- Indirect grant support, to cover Network Rail’s
maintenance and renewal of infrastructure in these franchise areas,
means that there will still be an overall taxpayer
subsidy. The future amount of network grant to be set by
the Office of Rail Regulation for the period 2009-2014 is not yet
known. Assuming continuation of the current level of grant, this
overall subsidy would be £926 million for these eight franchises in
2011-2012 (a reduction of 55 per cent).
- The reduction in subsidy is dependent on a continued
strong increase in the number of passenger journeys. If
past trends continue, two thirds of the increase in revenue for all
franchises in the period to 2013-14 will come from this source. The
balance includes revenue from a variety of other sources such as
reduced fare evasion, changes in the mix of fares paid by rail
passengers and higher fares in real terms to the extent permitted
by the Department’s regulation of fares.
- After the first four years of the franchises, the taxpayer
shares demand risk with the train operators. Until then each train
operating company bears nearly all financial risks associated with
revenue and thereafter still bears the financial consequences if
revenue falls two per cent below its projection. Beyond this point,
the Department shares the financial consequences with the train
operator, by varying the amount of subsidy paid or premium received
by the Department. From the outset the taxpayer is also entitled to
share in any extra revenue (see Figure 9 on page 17).
Reducing the train operators’ risk in this way has resulted
in better bids, based on higher revenues, with a firm financial
commitment for four years.
On the impact on the passenger
- Many commuters face increased crowding at peak periods
until planned investment delivers more carrying capacity.
For example in the worst affected area, passengers being carried to
and from London at peak times in 2006 (the latest date for which
information is available) were on average 3.5 per cent in excess of
the planned capacity required (up from 2.7 per cent in 2004). The
morning peak had reached 4.8 per cent in excess of such capacity.
In the short term, most train operators seek to respond to
fast-growing passenger demand mainly through making better use of
existing rolling stock (such as changing interior layouts and
better train plans) and using ticket pricing to try to spread out
peak demand. In addition six out of the eight new franchises have
an obligation to introduce additional carriages quickly.
The franchises we examined provided for an average seven per cent
increase in fleet capacity.
- The Department also plans to increase capacity in most
franchise areas by negotiating changes in franchises to introduce
1,300 more carriages (see Figure 11 in main report). This
will involve commercial negotiations between the Department and
most train operators before the end of each franchise period. These
negotiations will focus on the impact on the train operator’s
revenues after allowing for increased costs they incur for leasing
extra carriages.
- The Department has negotiated commitments to improve
the quality, reliability, accessibility and security of passenger
services, for example through station refurbishment and investment
in rolling stock. Crowding and fare increases may offset
some of the impact of these commitments on passenger satisfaction.
There is to date, however, no established trend in passenger
satisfaction on the recent franchises that are already in service
and it is too early to assess those let in 2007. There have,
however, been difficulties for one train operator (First Great
Western) in meeting its first year plans and the Department has
issued a formal notice requiring remedial action to reduce train
cancellations.
- Since June 2003, most commuter and other regulated
fares have risen at one per cent above the retail price index,
although some increases in non regulated fares have been
substantially higher. Some fare increases have been
significant. For example, Stagecoach South West Trains raised some
unregulated fares by 20 per cent in 2007. Incentives to travel
outside peak and shoulder peak periods, however, have been
maintained, or increased by special low fare offers, to ease
crowding for commuters paying increased fares.
On the approach to managing rail franchises
- The Department’s arrangements for identifying and
managing risks, including handling the failure of a train operator,
are well planned and follow good practice. Appendix 3 sets
out the key risks we have identified and the main mitigants. The
right to impose a remedial plan was invoked, for example, when
First Great Western breached its franchise agreement (see Figure
16, case example on page 23). A key risk for the Department is
maintaining sufficient numbers of staff with relevant industry
knowledge and commercial skills to manage delivery and negotiate
mid-term changes to franchise contracts. The risk of reduced
revenues following an economic downturn is partly mitigated by the
Department using more conservative budgeting assumptions, regular
updates of budgets and train operator contingency plans to reduce
costs and adjust discretionary services. In an extreme case, the
Department also has contingency plans ready to step in as operator
of last resort.
- The cost of managing franchises decreased from £7.3
million in 2004-05 to £5.7 million in 2007-08. The main
reason was the reduction in the number of staff involved in
franchise management. The relevant Department Directorate, Rail
Service Delivery, had
72 staff in post in June 2008 whereas the equivalent parts of the
SRA had over 100 staff in post in early 2004. The Department can
operate with fewer staff as a result of an approach that allows
train operators to ‘self certify’ that low risk obligations have
been delivered. After reviewing experience with this approach in
early 2007, the Department has strengthened its compliance activity
by requiring more data checks.
Value for Money Assessment
- The Department’s approach to rail franchising produces
generally well thought through service specifications and generates
keen bidding competition. This approach has resulted in better
value for money for the taxpayer on the eight franchises let since
the Department took over from the SRA. The Department has been able
to gain a commitment to some improvements in quality, reliability,
accessibility, security and capacity at the same time as
negotiating a sharp fall in subsidy. The combined contracted
subsidy of £811 million in 2006-07 should turn into a payment to
the Department of £326 million by 2011-12. The Department does,
however, bear up to 80 per cent of shortfalls from contracted
target revenues after four years and the bids assume continued high
passenger growth. Slower growth would lead to subsidies falling by
less than projected. Although there will be some service
improvements passengers overall will pay more. Crowding will
increase for many commuters until expected investment delivers more
carrying capacity.
Recommendations
On letting franchises
Involving regional decision making bodies
- Local decision making bodies (such as Passenger Transport
Executives (PTEs)) have plans for other transport modes that need
to be integrated into the long term planning of the rail network.
Consultation generally works well at the specification stage, with
options for increases or reductions in services. Local bodies,
however, are not closely involved in bid evaluation and subsequent
negotiations.
The Department should include additional local expertise
when negotiating franchises, for example, by making use of short
term secondments from relevant PTEs. These secondees would provide
local knowledge to support the Department’s evaluation of bid
options.
Evaluating alternative options in bids
- When interviewed, most companies admitted that they do not put
as much effort into working up requested options as they do on
meeting the base level specification. As a result, the alternative
options are priced on a ‘take it or leave it’ basis and may not be
fully specified.
In the technical evaluation, the Department should consider taking
into account the value for money and affordability of options. This
approach would provide bidders with greater incentives to develop
options competitively. The number of such options should be limited
to avoid an excessive increase in bid costs.
The impact on the taxpayer and the passenger
Transparency on financial support for franchises
- Information on the extent to which fares cover the overall
costs of passenger rail services, taking into account grant support
to Network Rail, is not available. Increased visibility of the
overall Government support to the railways would lead to better
informed debate.
Information on the overall support, e.g. per passenger
mile, that franchise services receive from the taxpayer should be
made available. It should take into account additional support
including grants paid directly to Network Rail.
Transparency on service quality standards
- The Department seeks to achieve improvements in service quality
(covering such aspects as train and station cleanliness, the
provision of information and the attitude and helpfulness of staff)
through agreeing measurable standards and setting targets to
achieve year-by-year improvements on a baseline measured in the
handover period. The targets and scores are not publicly
available.
Service quality standards and the results of the train
operator’s quality audits should be more transparent. In
particular, the Department should develop scores, based on existing
franchise terms and conditions. The targets and scores should be
made publicly available and more intelligible for passengers. To
strengthen scrutiny by passenger groups, Passenger Focus should
commission and make public the results of periodic “mystery
shopping” (see Glossary) surveys.
The approach to managing franchises
Negotiating for extra capacity
- The Department plans to provide additional passenger capacity
through investing public funds itself or through Network Rail. The
Government’s July 2007 plans provide for 1,300 additional train
carriages. Investment is also planned, for example, in lengthening
railway station platforms. Securing this investment involves
commercial negotiations about the cost of the additional rolling
stock to train operators compared to the extra revenue they
generate. If the Department does not adjust the contract revenue
target, train operating companies may enjoy a windfall of extra
revenue.
The Department should calculate the net incremental
revenues that it expects the extra carriages to generate. It should
then use this as a target in its commercial negotiations with train
operators about contract revenues.
- Adequate staffing is important given the strategic importance
of rail franchising and the potential to reduce direct subsidies.
The Department has difficulty in recruiting and retaining
experienced and skilled staff particularly in its Rail Service
Delivery Directorate. So there is a risk of insufficient capacity,
or the wrong mix of skills, to operate effectively in future.
The Department should staff the National Networks Group
adequately and not rely unduly on agency staff. This may require
flexible recruitment practices to attract and retain staff of the
right calibre with railway industry knowledge and commercial
skills.
Background
The public and private bodies involved in rail franchising
- The Department for Transport (the Department) sets the overall
framework and strategy for railways and provides public funding in
England and Wales.1 In Scotland, Transport Scotland has similar
responsibilities. In Wales, the Welsh Assembly Government
specifies, funds and manages the majority of the Arriva Trains
Wales franchise. The Department took over these responsibilities
from the Strategic Rail Authority (SRA) in October 2005, which was
abolished by the Railways Act 2005. The Department’s National
Networks Group (NN Group) specifies, procures and oversees private
Train Operating Companies’ (TOCs) delivery of franchises. The
Department has responsibility for 16 rail franchises in England and
Wales but not for two rail concessions. The Merseyrail concession
was awarded by Merseytravel PTE and the London Overground was
specified and procured by Transport for London, which has rail
responsibilities within London (Figure 1) In some cases the
Department specifies and procures additional rolling stock,
generally provided by rolling stock leasing companies and made
available to TOCs.
- Network Rail, a company limited by guarantee, owns and operates
Britain’s fixed rail infrastructure, including rail stations, which
it mainly leases to train operators. It is responsible for the
reliability of the network and leads on performance and industry
planning. The Department provides grant funding and train operators
pay Network Rail station access and track access charges.
- The Office of Rail Regulation (ORR), is an independent
statutory body led by a Board. ORR regulates Network Rail’s
stewardship of the network; secures compliance with relevant health
and safety law; licenses operators of railway assets; and enforces
competition law in the rail sector.
- Train Operating Companies (TOCs) are special purpose companies,
owned by one or more of eleven parent organisations (see Figure 1),
which hold each rail franchise.
- Rolling Stock Leasing Companies (ROSCOs) own the majority of
rolling stock that is then leased by the Train Operating
Companies.
- Passenger Focus is a statutory body funded by the Department to
protect passengers’ interests by ensuring that passengers’ views
are represented whenever decisions are taken that affect the rail
network. It is responsible for the National Passenger Survey.
- Passenger Transport Executives plan and develop public
transport in six of England’s major conurbations, receiving funding
directly from the Department or indirectly via local Passenger
Transport Authorities. They are consulted on franchise
specifications.
The place of passenger rail franchising within the rail industry
structure
- Rail privatisation in the early 1990s separated the operation
of rail services into two broad elements. The first consisted of
the national fixed rail network, i.e the tracks, signalling,
tunnels, bridges, stations and depots. The second was train
operations. Passenger and freight train operating companies run
trains on the tracks though, in most cases, they do not actually
own the trains but lease them instead from one of three rolling
stock leasing companies.
- Responsibility for maintenance and renewal of the rail network
lies with Network Rail though most stations are leased to the
principal train operating company using them.
- Rail franchises confer the right to run, subject to the ORR’s
approval of access to the network, passenger services for a
specified period on a specified part of the network. Train
companies bid for franchises on the basis of the quality of service
they intend to offer and the amount of funding they require
(subsidy) or the premium they would be prepared to pay to run these
services. Passenger service provision generally requires a net
subsidy from government. Train operators can generate more revenue
through attracting more passengers, raising unregulated fares and
other commercial income.
The funding of passenger rail services
- It is Government policy that passenger rail services are
publicly specified, procured and, where necessary, funded, but are
privately delivered by train operators.
- In 2006-07, the passenger railway in England and Wales cost
nearly £9 billion, with £4.8 billion funded from passenger revenues
received by train operators, £0.8 billion from the Department’s net
subsidy support to train operators, £3.1 billion from Department
grants to Network Rail (part of which meets train operators’ track
access charges), and £0.3 billion from Department grants to
Passenger Transport Executives.