home » northern ireland »

Submission to the Railway Review Group (RRG Report)

From the Labour Party (Northern Ireland Labour Forum)

1 Introduction

1.1 The Labour Party in Northern Ireland: The Labour Party has, since 2002, allowed for Northern Ireland based people to join it. The Northern Ireland Labour Forum was brought into formal existence in December 2003 to organise those members. The Northern Ireland Labour Forum is not electoral in nature, but acts in most other respects as a Branch of the Labour Party.

1.2 Railway Review welcomed: Labour welcomes the opportunity to make a submission to the Railway Review Group. However, Labour considers that the RRG Report is unbalanced.

2.0 Northern Ireland issues

2.1 Balance: The Review Report highlights and, in some cases, exaggerates the cost of retaining and developing the Larne, Portrush and Londonderry lines. It then ignores the large resultant step-change in the speed, reliability and comfort of rail travel, and the consequential improvements in passenger numbers, financial revenue, and environmental and safety benefits which such investment would generate.

2.2 Increased investment = increased passenger numbers: It should be noted that following investment in the infrastructure and trains on the Belfast-Dublin line there was a huge increased in passenger numbers, in the region of 200% since the mid 1990s.
Meaningful investment in railways, with good marketing, leads to increased passenger numbers. Labour believes that a greatly enhanced service on the Portrush/Londonderry or Larne lines will lead to many more passengers, and that the additional income from fares will pay for most of the investment over the 25 year life-span of the assets.

2.3 Inappropriate Comparison: Inappropriate and irrelevant comparisons are made between the numbers of road journey throughout Northern Ireland as a whole, most of which are short local trips (Indeed Transport 2000 and the Sustrans cycling initiative estimate that over 20% of all car journeys undertaken in Northern Ireland are "school runs") A more realistic comparison would be with the much longer rail passenger journeys on the specific rail corridors which are still available.

2.4 Under estimation:On rail-served routes the proportion of total travel by rail is very much higher than implied.

There are anomalies and apparent errors in the passenger figures quoted for the "lesser-used" lines, which are significantly below the levels which have been carefully checked and reported by local passengers and railway staff. The Northern Ireland Transport Holding Co. have indicated to the railway lobby group Rail 21, at their annual public meeting in June 2004, that the figures were incomplete and merely the best available, and the company was unable to display any passenger figures for NIR for 2003/04.
The passenger figures in the Railway Review Group report are artificially low and should not be used as arguments against investment in the Portrush/Londonderrry or Larne lines.

2.5 Road costs understated: Comparative construction costs for new dual-carriageway roads are grossly understated, and the mileage of such which could be financed by closure or nearly half of the province's railway system would be negligible.
Independent transport experts have advised that £40m would only buy 3 or 4 miles of dual carriageway, and much less once the cost of railway closures is consider.

2.6 Closure not cheap: The report gives three cost options, plus the costs for a "discontinued services" option (closure). The closure costs are underestimated and do not allow for removal of track and ballast and other environmental liabilities.

Closure is not a cheap option and is likely to be much more than the minimum figure required to keep the lines open.

2.7 Track renewal: The report assumes that 20% of the track will be need to be relaid by 2009 whilst the Minister's letter claim that all such track will need to be renewed within 10 years. Labour contends that this is not the case. All of this track was renewed between 1972 and 2002 and has carried for below its designed cumulative traffic levels. It does require substantial remedial work in certain areas, and proper ongoing maintenance, but the scope of the work, and corresponding cost, would be far less than the figures stated in the report.

Renewal with continuous welded rail may be desirable but is not essential; complete renewal of the track on the Ballymena - Portrush/Londonderry line and Whitehead - Larne line is not required in the short-term and can be carried out over a much longer timescale than that envisaged in the report.

2.8 Safety Issues: The report states that substantial investment is needed in provision of safety equipment, such as the Train Protection and Warning System, and most notably the need to renew the signalling installation at Castlerock, the present system can be overhauled and TPWS installed, as at many location in Great Britain, at reduced cost. The report gives no indication of the saving which may result from Translink's review.

2.9 Bus substitution: There is an assumption that all rail passengers will transfer to substitute buses. However, experience elsewhere shows that only around 20% or passengers will switch to bus. Most others will use car and a small percentage will not travel.
Closure will lead to many more cars on the road, greater pollution and the potential for many more road traffic accidents (the Booz Allen Hamilton report highlights the reductions in traffic, accidents and pollution which would result from investment in and enhancement of the Northern Ireland Railways network). These can all be costed and would contribute towards the cost of retaining the railway. Social exclusion will also result from closure.

3.0 Cross Border Issues

3.1 Wider context required: Labour is concerned that the cross border and Trans European issues have not been considered. The Railway Review Report requires a wider context.

3.1 Derry to Dublin: The existing track, if properly repaired, would permit the
new trains arriving on NIR to operate express services from
Londonderry to Belfast in around 1 hour 35 minutes, as
opposed to the present journey time of around 2 hours.
This express service, if extended to Dublin, could permit a
through Derry - Dublin express journey time of around 3 hours
15 mins.

3.2 A North West Corridor: As the north-west of Ireland is not well served by railways, or public transport generally, there is the potential for the
Derry terminus to serve a wide catchment area, including Co
Donegal with feeder bus services from Letterkenny and North West Donegall.

3.3 Letterkenny link: One issue not considered is the longer term desire that the line should be extended to Letterkenny. This possibility, although not immediate, should be borne in mind.

3.4 Derry freight head: Derry used to be the rail freight head for Co Donegal for goods from the Republic of Ireland. This has not been the case for some years but, again, the potential for freight traffic should not be discounted.

4.0 Recommendations

4.1 That the RRG reconsiders the cost estimates of developing the Larne, Portrush and Londonderry lines.
4.2 That the RRG note the concerns of the Labour Party on inappropriate methodology and comparison in respect of post investment passenger numbers, and road journey comparisons, underestimation of rail journey travel, under-estimation of road building costs underestimation of closure costs

5.0 Next Steps

5.1 The Labour Party looks forward to the outcome of the Railway Review and asks to be notified of any public meetings, consultations or publication of further drafts of the RRG Report.