For over 25 years, Open Access has been a successful component of UK Rail. It has delivered substantial benefits to passengers in underserved parts of the country. Along with cost-saving and environmental benefits, Open Access has driven innovation, delivered choice and also grown the overall market for rail. It is a model that works and will continue to deliver for passengers and taxpayers alike.
This successful model of 25 years has seen open access operators connect underserved or poorly-connected towns and cities across the country. A good example of this is the east coast main line, where open access has established and grown the rail market. Today, three privately owned open access inter-city operators compete with the Government-run LNER. Passengers in York, Hull, Wakefield, Bradford, Doncaster, Sunderland, Newcastle and Edinburgh all now enjoy the three competing high-speed train services to London.
It was because of the success of Open Access that I recently led a Parliamentary debate on the topic. During the debate, I called on the Chancellor and the new Transport Secretary to take note of the east coast operating model, in order to potentially avoid a future of soaring subsidies and flatlining passenger numbers. I urged the government to recognise the success of Open Access and ensure that open access operators can continue serving customers and growing the overall market for rail.
Moreover, this debate was timely since the government will introduce a new Railways Bill later this year to establish the nationalised Great British Railways (GBR). This will represent the biggest change in the way we run the railways since privatisation, thirty years ago. Ahead of the consultation on GBR, my debate was an opportunity to raise with the government my early concerns and observations so that we keep and improve what clearly works and don’t weaken or undermine key roles, such as the Rail Regulator. This will ensure that GBR is fit for purpose and will, alongside open access, deliver the best services for passengers across the country.
As I asked during my debate, why would the Government not want more unsubsidised, direct and fast rail connections across the country? Why would they not want to secure hundreds of millions of pounds of investment in forward orders for new trains to be built in Britain? Why would they not want GBR to face robust and innovative competition on key routes, which would inevitably see standards rise, and fares and subsidies decline?
Replicating the east coast model could help to prevent any risk of GBR sliding into financial and sector decline – a potential concern for the Treasury. Open access is also a key component for British train building. Last year, the Government announced a huge £500 million investment in new train building at Hitachi’s Newton Aycliffe plant. It is important to note that this private sector order was for new trains to serve existing and new open access routes. I understand that an option on a follow-up order worth a further £500 million will depend on more open access routes being awarded by the regulator.
To recap, Open Access has many benefits. It improves rail services and connectivity for underserved markets. Through a modal shift to rail, Open Access brings about environmental benefits through the lowering of emissions and the improvement of air quality. It encourages private investment since Open Access operators take on the full commercial risk of running rail services and invest into the rail sector at no expense to the UK taxpayer. Moreover, Open Access grows the market, including for existing operators, brings about economic benefits through local regeneration and the creation of new local jobs, and also leads to innovation and increased customer focus.
Nobody would disagree that we need better trains serving more places, with more reliability and competitive fares. However, this depends on Ministers choosing to copy the east coast operating model, which, as I mentioned, has proven a great success and the evidence shows that.
The Open Access model has proven successful over the last 25 years and will continue to do so should we recognise the successes of the east coast main line. Could it do the same for the West Coast?
An ‘Open Access’ rail system massively benefited the East Coast main line, it could it do the same for the West Coast
