National Assembly for Wales

David, would you like to start?

Bore da. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today. Well, Transport for Wales took over from a real stagnation period before. The Arriva Trains Wales franchise had been marked, really, with nil investment. So, we really welcome the investment that's happened since then. And passengers tell us that the things that matter most to them are a reliable and frequent service, that they can get a seat, at a value-for-money price. Those are the key things that passengers want to see.

So, to be able to see that investment, it definitely looks different now—you only have to stand at Cardiff Central to notice the huge difference. There is lots of investment in stations, and the new trains are starting to come through. Key stations like Chester, for example, are being remodelled, having the concourse remodelled, upgrades to toilets, et cetera. And there's also been really good innovation since then, such as Delay Repay after 15 minutes, so that, when there's disruption, passengers can get some compensation. That's a really good innovation and something that we pressed for when the franchise came into new hands. But also there are things like the multiflex tickets; Payzones now selling tickets, so that people don't have to necessarily go to a station—they can go to a shop on the high street; and children travelling free, which is a really useful step to bring on the next generation. And now that the new trains are being delivered, people have got a more comfortable journey as well. So, that investment is a real difference from previously.

Yes, we have seen that, over the five years, some of that satisfaction has dipped over the past 12 months. There has been some pain along the way, and there have been some issues in delivering that. But Transport Focus is working very closely with Transport for Wales, and through the research that we do with passengers, we bring that passenger voice directly into the decision making that they are going through.

So, would you share that characterisation, then, in terms of, 'Yes, it's much better than it was previously, but there are still issues ongoing'? 

Well, I would agree that the ambition and vision is of a much higher standard than it was under the previous operator who departed five years ago, but I would also like to take this opportunity to put a bit of context to the whole issue of rail operations in Wales. The note says Transport for Wales Rail took over the franchise five years ago. That isn't the case. What happened five years ago was there was a new franchise, and, of course, it had fallen under the Welsh Government for the first time, and another private company, or two companies in partnership—Keolis Amey; Keolis operate a number of rail services in England—they were awarded the franchise. And most of the ambitious plans that are being rolled out at the moment and will continue to be rolled out in terms of all the new trains, the electrification of the Valleys routes to form the south-east Wales metro and so on—all of that came from Keolis Amey. 

Then, of course, we had COVID two years, or just under two years, after Keolis Amey started to deliver, operate rail services. They withdrew because of the financial pressures following the complete collapse of their income source—the passenger market—with the lockdowns from COVID beginning in March 2020. So, Transport for Wales then set up its own subsidiary to operate the trains, Transport for Wales Rail. So, they were born in a period of great difficulty to deliver something that the rail operator itself hadn't formulated. So, we've had three and a half years now since that company or organisation came into existence, and they've been doing their best. 

In the context of COVID, which we'll talk a bit more about this morning in terms of where passenger numbers are today and delays, COVID-led, to delivering all the new trains, that's the important part of context. So, given that, I think they have faced some considerable challenges. Some of the challenges they've not responded to as well as they might have done, but there's still that ambition there to deliver and provide Wales with a far better rail service than it's had for many, many years.  

Thank you. So, Jools, just building on what Peter said there, obviously there's the five-year timeline of post Arriva, but also have we seen any palpable improvements or worsening of services since the effective nationalisation, then, if you like, a few years ago? 

We're really pleased overall with the commitment that Transport for Wales has shown to engaging effectively with local communities, and, obviously, our members within the community rail movement play a really strong part in that, acting in many ways as a bridge between local communities and the rail industry. There's been really strong support provided by Transport for Wales for community rail, and we've been working very closely with TfW on the development and expansion of community rail into new areas to make sure that communities are able to derive maximum value and benefit from a lot of the investment that's going in, the changes that are taking place. Helping to break down barriers to rail use makes the railway more inclusive and accessible, as well as supporting modal shift goals.

So, there are some really strong foundations being laid for working with Transport for Wales productively going forward to make sure that communities are involved, communities are at the forefront of change and have a voice in the ongoing development taking place. And we're very supportive of the specific improvements that have already been mentioned by colleagues on the panel, such as free tickets for children, other improvements that are being made and that I know the committee is looking at, to do with electrification, the investment going into the Valleys lines—we see all of this as incredibly positive.

But we are conscious too that there have been some significant issues. We gathered feedback from the five existing community rail partnerships across Wales. There’s a sixth being set up for the core Valleys lines. And we were given a lot of positive feedback about the close partnership working with Transport for Wales, the interaction that the CRPs have with TfW, but also a lot of negative perceptions and feedback being fed in through the CRPs in terms of performance issues, and some specific issues on some of the lines: the Heart of Wales line, for example, seeing ongoing issues with reliability and cancellations, which are getting in the way of that CRP delivering its work in some instances, and some issues with capacity along the north Wales coast.

So, there are ongoing issues, and community rail is really keen to keep playing its important part, not only building confidence and positivity towards the railway, but also acting as a voice for local communities. We’re very pleased to do that alongside colleagues, alongside organisations such as Transport Focus and Railfuture, providing a slightly different take on the needs and views of people that are not existing rail passengers. I think it’s really important that, if we’re to achieve modal shift, if we’re to improve the accessibility and inclusivity of Welsh railways, we need to be thinking about and hearing from people who are not using the railways at the moment in order to break down those barriers and bring those people on board. 

Okay. Thank you to the three of you. That's a good scene-setter to kick us off, but I know there are some specifics that have been mentioned that Members will wish to pursue in greater detail as we go on. Delyth.

Diolch, Gadeirydd. Good morning, bore da, to you all. I wanted to ask about new trains, which a number of you have already touched on. There had been a target that, by the end of this year, 95 per cent of journeys would be being undertaken on new trains, and the Deputy Minister has clarified or has moved that now to be the end of 2024. Do you think that that new target is realistic given so many of the issues that have already been touched on about the rolling stock?

Shall I answer that? I don't think the end of 2024 is realistic because, whilst there's been a lot of progress in the last few months—so, the very recent times—in bringing out or getting the new trains that are operating between south Wales, north Wales and Manchester, the so-called Marches line, up and running, for the Cardiff metro, the core Valleys lines, the new trains are to a large extent dependent on the completion of the electrification, and the 95 per cent figure was all the new trains that were envisaged back in 2018 being supplied, delivered and operating satisfactorily. And a good proportion of the new trains, perhaps 40 per cent, 50 per cent, are ones that have been ordered for the Cardiff or south-east Wales metro, and, because of the delays in completing electrification, they can’t operate them even if the manufacturers have delivered them. So, I don’t think that’s going to happen by 12 or 13 months from now. 

Thank you. David, do you agree?

Well, it remains to be seen. Certainly, the new trains are coming on line. The Marches line, with the class 197s—I travelled down on one yesterday, and a lot more comfortable it is than the old 150 class that has been running on there. The passengers want to see that turned around. I think there is a plan in place, but I think what's been handed to Transport for Wales Rail is a situation that they didn't necessarily plan for. So, the 95 per cent was not necessarily their target, but it's one that they've been trying to catch up towards. But I think there is a plan in place that they could deliver, but some of these delivery aspects are out of their hands. So, for example, the new trains coming from CAF—there have been some difficulties that are completely outside of Transport for Wales's remit and ability to do anything about. They have shown some innovative thinking by going direct to CAF for a contract to deliver trains directly, rather than via the rolling stock company, which has given an interim solution that at least has provided some of those new trains. But there's also some work for Network Rail to do. So, at the moment, the Marches line is cleared and so is capable of having the trains run along it up to four cars long. Now, okay, we've only got largely two- or three-car trains running along there at the moment, but the plan is for up to five- or six-car trains eventually. So, Network Rail have got to have that additional gauge clearance from four cars up to six cars, so there's work for them to do, but Network Rail's hands are completely full with things like storms, flooding, diseased trees, vegetation works and all of that sort of thing. So, there's a real pressure on the industry to be able to prepare the tracks for these new trains even when the trains are available and being delivered.

Thank you for that, David. Jools, would your analysis of the situation and the likelihood of that target being met, would that be similar to Peter's and David's?

I don't think we can comment on the likelihood of the target being met; I'd say that that's probably outside of our sphere of expertise. What I would say is that new trains are always welcome, but, for us, the important thing is what the implications are in terms of how new trains are improving reliability, helping to address—. I know that there are hopes, in particular on the Heart of Wales line, that new rolling stock will help to address some of the performance issues that are associated with the rolling stock problems on that line. So, for us, I think perhaps there is maybe a need for looking at the communication with local communities on what the implications are of new rolling stock being introduced, what does it mean in terms of reliability, in terms of service standards, going beyond just having a nice, shiny new train. 

Another point that some of the CRPs have fed in to us is that new trains are not enough, of course. I know that that is, perhaps, an obvious point, but there is a need, of course, to look holistically at how railway lines serve communities and meet local needs and, often, that's about a wide range of improvements, going beyond the trains themselves. 

Thank you, Jools. That's helpful. Could I ask you all what effect you think the delay—already the delay that there has been in introducing the new trains and the potential further delay if that second target is not met—what effect do you think that's likely to have on passengers? I get the train down every week, every day that I come into the Senedd, and I normally come down on one of the old trains on the Abercynon line, but, sometimes, I go from Ystrad Mynach and I have a beautiful, shiny, wonderful new train. It is so much nicer and so much more pleasant. What effect do you think it will have, not just not having the new trains, but the likely effect that that will have on the people who are going to be waiting—because there aren't enough carriages, there will be delays—on passenger morale? What do you think that will do? David, do you want to go first?

Yes. We've already seen, with Transport Focus research, that passengers' overall satisfaction is declining. It's something that Transport for Wales are focusing on and we're helping them to do that, but it does show that that pain that passengers are going through at the moment does have that detrimental effect on their feelings of satisfaction. But what that does overall as well is it detracts from the attractiveness of the network. The Wales transport strategy wants to achieve a real modal shift, encouraging people to use public transport. Now, there are push factors that can push people towards that, and the 20 mph is an example of that, but also you need that pull factor, the attractiveness of the network, that people will want to travel and the positive experience when they do travel that brings them back again in the future. So, anything like overcrowding, trains that are cancelled or anything that delays that attractiveness works against what the transport strategy wants to achieve in terms of the attractiveness and the pull factor to encourage people onto public transport.

Thank you. Is there anything you'd like to add, Peter?

Yes, I'd just briefly say that, as far as the existing passengers are concerned, and as David has said, Transport Focus research consistently shows punctuality and reliability are the main factors in terms of people's willingness to use train for their travel needs. Provided the existing services hit the mark, so to speak, in terms of those factors, I don't think the fact that the better trains are going to be another year or so later in arriving will deter any existing users of the rail system from going elsewhere. But, of course, if the existing services aren't up to the required standard, that would, whereas the new trains are likely to attract new users of rail, and that's the key point, that it's going to deter or make it more difficult to achieve modal shift, persuading those that have got a negative view of rail to potentially give it a go, so to speak. Obviously, in terms of attracting the new users, if the punctuality and reliability aren't up to the required standard, even if your train's been cancelled and you wait an hour for the next train and it's a lovely new train, that's not as satisfactory as having an older train that arrived on time.

Thank you, both, for that. Just before I hand back to the Chair, Jools, was there anything that you wanted to add on that?

Only to build on the modal shift point, perhaps, that I absolutely agree that when people are let down it can be hugely detrimental for people who have got a choice in terms of how they travel, putting people off, sometimes for life if they're badly let down and they have a really negative experience. The negative experiences that we hear about within community rail don't tend to be about somebody getting on an old banger of a train; it tends to be about somebody being stranded, having a cancellation, being very badly delayed. Some of the most negative experiences that we hear about are around being stranded in quite isolated rural locations. I've mentioned the Heart of Wales line already. We've heard about some very negative experiences on that line of late through late-notice cancellations, and uncertainty about whether there will be onward travel provided, and, sometimes, a long wait for that. That can be incredibly off-putting, I agree, for those who have got a choice.

But let's not forget there are many people who don't have a choice. I believe about one in five adults in Wales don't have access to a car; they're entirely reliant therefore on public transport, and so issues with reliability can have a severe effect on their ability to access work and services. But in terms of how we build more positive attitudes towards rail and encourage and support more people to use rail, it's also about breaking down the barriers. It's about the reliability, but let's not forget there are lots of things getting in the way of people accessing rail in the first place, and a lot of people are not familiar and confident using rail at all, hence local engagement being so important.

Okay, thank you. I'm just mindful we're 25 minutes in, we're nearly a third of the way through, and we've covered two out of the nearly 20 areas that we wish to cover. So, maybe Members could be brief and maybe answers could be sharp and to the point. Huw, you wanted to come in, and then we'll come to Joyce.

I'll be really brief, and it'll take out an area I wanted to come back in—

Sorry, as well, don't feel obliged that all of you have to answer all the questions. Clearly, if you've got anything, indicate, but otherwise—

You've covered a lot of the areas that I wanted to pore on later, but there's one specific thing that comes out of the response to Delyth: this issue of replacement services when issues with—. The reason I'm slightly late for the meeting, by the way, is I travel by rail every day. I have a choice of one or two trains, and they're split up by one and a half hours. So, I either get here at 8 in the morning or I get here just in time for Llyr's committee. But I'm here anyway.

But I had a complaint yesterday, and it's a regular complaint: Maesteg rail service finishes regularly now at Ton-du. I mean, these are not exceptional circumstances, and I hear this happening in different parts of Wales—it's the end-of-the-line scenario. They turn it back because they're short of carriages, they're short of guards, they're short of whatever. On that station last night were dumped not only people who could make their own way because they could ring for a car, or ring for a taxi, but there were elderly people, there were mothers with pushchairs who couldn't. What's your take on this? You touched on it now, our colleague on the video camera here. What's the solution to this? Shouldn't there be an expectation, surely, that there are replacement services? Sorry, this sounds as if I'm throwing it at you; it's not for you to solve. But, from your perspective, should there not be anticipation of this and something waiting for passengers to get them home?

Well, I would say—

Sorry, let's ask Jools to answer.

Go on, yes.

Thank you. Yes, absolutely, there should be watertight procedures in place, particularly when we're talking about more isolated areas, where there are fewer opportunities, fewer alternatives for onward travel, and where people may feel more vulnerable, more nervous about being left stranded. These are common stories that we're hearing about and, as I say, they can be really incredibly detrimental to people's perceptions of the railway, people's inclinations to keep using the railway and, indeed, people's mobility. So, the procedures should be watertight. Also, I think there's something around advanced communication where issues are expected. In other parts of the UK, we see really, really strong communications coming from train operators through to community rail partnerships where issues are expected, so that it can be anticipated at least and people can be warned. But there's also the procedures for dealing with these instances when they happen.

But also, I think, looking at where we are seeing repeated issues, it's understanding those root causes and thinking perhaps a little bit more creatively about how we can prevent these issues happening in the first place. I know there are worries on some lines—and apologies, I've mentioned the Heart of Wales line a few times—that those lines may be being given less priority, treated with less priority, because they have less frequent services, lower patronage, whereas we would argue that, actually, those lines are a lifeline for those local communities, and, as I've emphasised, because of the nature of those lines and those services, the implications of things going wrong are more severe.

Thank you. Yes, that's an important point. Peter, briefly, and then we'll come to Joyce.

Yes, very briefly, in terms of the need or appropriateness in providing, say, a replacement bus service, it depends on the frequency of the service and whether you're talking about the last train of the day. So, from Cardiff to Pontypridd, to cut out a train, there's another one in 10 minutes, but on the Heart of Wales line, to go back to that one, there are four or five trains a day, so if one is cut out, it's a four-hour wait, which isn't feasible for most people. So, yes, it depends on where you are and what's happened.

Thank you. Joyce.

Good morning, everybody. I'm just wondering if you've had any discussions, any of you, with Transport for Wales in relation to its December 2023 timetable and the review of longer term commitments.

Yes. Railfuture Wales attends the Transport for Wales liaison group, and we were given an update on the situation at the last meeting back in the summer. The changes that are happening on about 10 December—in other words, next month—are much less ambitious than were planned to happen if you go back a year or two ago. The only major change to the timetable is the welcome addition of an all-day service from Ebbw Vale down the Ebbw valley through Crosskeys to Newport. So, there'll be two trains an hour running on the Ebbw Vale line rather than one an hour just going to Cardiff. But, otherwise, the other improvement, such as a more frequent service out through Newport and across the border to Gloucester and Cheltenham, making that hourly, has been postponed for another year or so.

Anything to add?

I think, alongside this, there need to be clear communications with passengers, because passengers have had the promise of an uplift in the timetable. That's now shifted, so the information needs to be out there to help people understand what journeys they can make and when those timetable changes will take place. We understand as well that, next year—as well as the December timetable 2024, when a lot of these promised timetable improvements, we now understand, will be delivered—there's also a plan for the summer, for the beginning of June, for a large timetable change in the Valleys when a lot of those services will start to come back on line again. And, again, a clear set of communications with passengers, to tell them what services there will be to attract people to those services to help them understand what's going to be on offer, needs to be in place.

Again, we work with Transport for Wales quite closely, but that communication needs to be clearer, and I don't think that's currently as clear as it might be. One of the key barriers is finding out about services, helping people to understand the convenience and making it simple for people to understand how to use them.

Okay, thank you. Janet.

Thank you. I think I've been really patient and have bitten my lip here. I travel regularly from north to south and home again, and I've had some pretty horrendous journeys. Additionally, as an elected Member, we're almost like a barometer for how good the trains are because people use us—they have a moan with us when things go wrong, and I'm hearing so many problems. I myself have experienced a lack of communication when something goes wrong. On the last three journeys, I've been nearly an hour late and just stuck, not being told what's happening or anything, no refreshments, and it was shockingly overcrowded, where you can't get to the toilet. And in the summer, I had some pretty horrendous journeys that are well documented. I was so frustrated, I took to Twitter—

Okay, let's have a question then.

Yes, I will. This is my first interjection. You've talked about passenger numbers declining. Do you get the impression that Transport for Wales are actually taking it that seriously, because only recently they've been bailed out with £125 million and, for me, I'm really concerned that we're offering such a poor transport system, it's affecting tourism, it's affecting people getting to work. And if you're going to have a very unpleasant experience, as you rightly pointed out, and, Jools, you mentioned it, you're putting people off for life.

I am now always rather nervous about getting on a train and, some weeks, I just think, 'I can't. I'll drive down.' But the Deputy Minister is pushing us to use public transport and I want to because if you get a good train service, and I do have some good journeys—

Okay, so, how do you respond?

Hang on. I do have some good journeys, but do you honestly think that TfW are taking the passenger number decline seriously and are trying to improve?

I think what you describe there does undermine passenger trust, and trust can only be built by that positive experience. And it goes back to what passengers tell us are most important, which are punctuality and reliability. And if you undermine that, then people do tend to vote with their feet.

Yes, Transport for Wales are taking it seriously. We wrote to them back in April to ask them to put punctuality and reliability as clear focus priorities. They are putting people in place. They've got specific staff whose job it is to look at that and to bring that focus back in place. It's too early to tell the results from that at the moment, but, yes, they are taking it seriously because they aren't going to undermine the service that they're trying to provide to the public.

But also, there's quite a lot of work going on in terms of the capacity with the new rolling stock. They're trying desperately to get through the issues that there have been. So, all of that works together to try to rebuild trust, but it's that punctuality and reliability that they have to focus on to make sure that that is being delivered. And the issues that you mention are very real, and they are—

And very frequent.

—the clear experience of passengers suffering that detriment. 

Yes, and following on from that, we were promised these new trains, but what's happened is that the 175s seem to have now—. Whereas it was going to be the 175s still in action and the new trains, the 175s seem to be—. Well, there are a lot of them parked up in Crewe. So, really, we might get new trains, but if we haven't got additional trains, because trying to sometimes almost fight to get a seat on a train or scurry—. You see that the passenger numbers on the platform are way too many for the train that arrives, and I really am very concerned about that. 

Moving on to metros, what do you believe about the progress of the three Welsh metro systems and whether the approach to delivery is effective? Do you think that the governance arrangements are sufficiently clear? Because we've got real concerns, again, about the north Wales metro.

I think the three metros are very welcome. What it shows is investment. And, going right back to the beginning of the session today, we were talking about the fact that there has been that real step change in investment. So, the three metros show that there is that ambition for things to be very different in Wales. And I would also say that, from our work across Britain, we know that people are looking in the direction of Wales, because the metro is a different concept. It's something that's being piloted and tried out here, and the transformation of the Valleys, for example, is something that is quite a key project. And a lot of English authorities and train operators are looking in that direction to see how that works. 

And the north Wales metro?

On the north Wales metro, again, we've heard that there's going to be investment in terms of electrification. The way that that's being delivered in terms of the plan for multimodal services working together is the epitome of what a network should be, because one of the key barriers that people see is the convenience of having the network on their doorstep. So, what it wants to achieve is a really useful ambition that will work towards the breaking down of those barriers and the delivery of the strategy for transport in Wales. But what we want to see is passengers experiencing that network that's attractive to them, that provides journeys to places that they want to go that are joined up and that make connections easy at a cost that they can afford.

Are governance arrangements sufficiently clear?

I think that's one for Transport for Wales to answer. They're going through a real restructure at the moment. But also you've got corporate joint committees coming into the fray. We will see a step change in what they're going to deliver, with the prospect of the buses Bill, which I understand is going to go through the Senedd early next year. So, we'll see what the intention for buses is within that, but I think that's part of the fabric that needs to be joined up. 

Jools wants to come in as well.

Thank you. We're hugely supportive of the investment that's going into the metro schemes and, as David has just mentioned, the particular emphasis on modal integration, which is so important for breaking down barriers, enabling more people to access the railway. It isn't just about making the railway a more attractive proposition, a more convenient proposition; it's about enabling people who are otherwise excluded from the railway to make use of it. We see that a lack of modal integration is hugely prevalent and hugely problematic in terms of stopping communities from benefiting from their local transport assets. I would say there is a need for greater attention on modal integration across the piece, though, and it's something that community rail partnerships in other parts of Wales have fed into us—that they would like to see a greater focus on rail-bus integration along their lines. For example, 3 Counties Connected have commented in particular on this. And actually, that can help with reliability worries and give people different options if these networks are better joined up.

But we are conscious too that there has been very significant disruption along the Valleys lines and some lengthy closures, which we understand are causing a significant lack of confidence. As I mentioned earlier, we've been working closely with Transport for Wales to set up a new community rail partnership for the Valleys lines, and, given our evidence of community rail contributing really positively to building local confidence in rail, we hope that that new CRP will play a major role in rebuilding confidence and positivity and further seeking to break down barriers, and giving local communities a voice on the ongoing delivery and development of these lines.

And Peter on this, before we move on to Jenny. 

Just very briefly. I think the distinction needs to be made between the south-east Wales metro and those intended for north Wales and Swansea and south-west Wales. In south-east Wales, obviously, we've got a system that has been in the process of delivery, whereas in Railfuture's view, in north Wales and south-west Wales, it's still just a concept with little meaningful progress in terms of fleshing out exactly what's going to be delivered. But in terms of what I would want to see, I would go back to the point Jools made, and that is better integration between all forms of public transport. So, put that at the heart of the metro, perhaps, in north Wales and south-west Wales.

Thank you for making that useful distinction. I represent Cardiff Central, so, obviously, I'm focused on south-east Wales. The Burns report has the four lines running between Cardiff and Newport and beyond as the spine of the south-east Wales metro. Clearly, we're not in control of this; this is a responsibility of Network Rail. And to date, there is nothing about repurposing two of these four lines as suburban lines, as well as freight, and therefore, this is a huge barrier. Transport for Wales is not operating in a vacuum and yet there's no progress at all on this. And despite the cancellation of HS2, we still have the fiction that it's somehow an England-and-Wales project. What can we do about that?

I was fortunate to attend the open day that was held by Transport for Wales recently for the new Cardiff East station, one of the five new stations, and I raised this topic of the suitability of the tracks—which, as you say, of course, come under Network Rail's remit—for running their freight lines at the moment, but running the two extra trains, perhaps two an hour at least, between Cardiff and Severn Tunnel Junction, and I was told by the people there that this is being fully assessed at the moment, and that Transport for Wales don't see a major problem in getting around it. But as you correctly say, it depends on Network Rail to actually deliver the required changes to signalling and the track work and that, which remains to be seen.

I'll move on to my substantive question, which is about the infrastructure constraints. Obviously, that particular issue is writ large on the south-east Wales metro. James Price told the Welsh Affairs Committee, when being questioned about the metro being over budget,

'I would want us to have done better'

on infrastructure constraints. How much of that is down to the performance of TfW and how much is down to the inaction by the UK Government and its agents?

James was talking about a different part of the south-east Wales metro, which is the upgrade of the core Valleys lines, and that work is actually not being carried out by Network Rail. It's a partnership with a civil engineering company called Amey. Transport for Wales, or even the rail operator, aren't primarily delivering that. So, you have to point the finger, as much as you can point fingers, at Amey, who are the civil engineering contractor, for all the cost increases. But needless to say, and I'm sure you've heard this many times, big railway engineering projects usually end up costing a lot more than the original forecast, regrettably—not all, but many of them do.

See HS2, passim. How much of this new responsibility that TfW took on from KeolisAmey during COVID is down to their inexperience of managing locomotives and rolling stock? Are they planning upgrades in the most efficient manner?

I would say that the staff that were taken on when TfW Rail was set up—the actual people that run the maintenance depots and drive the trains and look after the stations—predominantly were experienced rail professionals. I know one or two of the senior people in TfW had been with Arriva and had gone to Keolis and then on to TfW. It's difficult from the outside to know to what extent the failings that have become evident, in terms of certain levels of management, are the result of people being just inexperienced or being new to the task and having to learn the hard way, so to speak.

Okay, because in your paper you point out that seasoned rail managers know that trains rarely work properly out of the box—you've got to run them in. Surely, somebody could have pointed that out to them. If you're capable of doing it, surely somebody else is too.

I would agree that, in terms of the envisaged timetable for introducing the new trains, they were overoptimistic, and possibly, if they had taken a bit of time to reflect or taken a reality check, they wouldn't have had the timetable for delivery of the new trains, of the start of operating of the new trains, that they have done. But of course, again, you have to mention the 'c' word; COVID, of course, affected the rate at which the trains were being supplied by the manufacturers.

Sorry—we're going to have to move on, I'm afraid. Thank you for that. Huw.

I don't need to go over many of the areas I was going to, because they've been covered already, but could I ask David—? You wrote back, I think it was in April, to TfW, on a range of issues on performance, asking them how they're going to restore performance on information provision, timetabling changes, consistent information, monitoring and improving the experience of rail replacement services—which we touched on earlier—clear information for passengers, greater focus on complaint handling. Were you content with their response? Are you content that they have the plans in place to make the improvements you're seeking?

We've been challenging senior leaders at Transport for Wales and making sure that the voice of the passenger is being heard. So, we are providing that ongoing challenge, but I don't think it's a quick fix. We are ensuring that that focus is particularly on restoring that service performance as a priority. But in terms of some of the issues that Transport for Wales are going through—. For example, going back to what Peter was just saying, the hangover from COVID has put a huge backlog in terms of driver training and the ability to get crews out there. So, crew shortages, because they're doing other things, are taking their toll. There are a number of different dominoes that have fallen over, one after the other, that Transport for Wales are in the process of picking up. Some of that is in terms of better information, for example, for passengers. They've got huge focus on the control centre—the Wales control centre—and also at Cardiff Central, in terms of the information hub that is there, driving the information screens, providing better information to staff on the ground, which, again, is the kind of front line that passengers want to see—not only the right information on screens, but somebody to ask, to be able to hold their hand, particularly when things don't go according to plan. So, we're keeping that focus and that challenge at Transport for Wales, working with them closely to help them understand what that means, and updating the picture of what passengers are saying with them. And at the moment we're talking about commissioning some more in-depth research in Wales, to not only give the views from people that use public transport, but also those that don't, and that Jools has been talking about as well.

I wonder if when you do that—and it's good to see you keeping the challenge on—when you go into that additional research, I wonder if you could focus as well on those areas outside of the core Valleys, outside of the core investment infrastructure ones, which are very welcome, I have to say. As a Valleys person, I really welcome that, amd I welcome the fact that there's a roll-out into north Wales and the Swansea area, and the metro, and the Cardiff stations, and all of that. But outside of that, it's the issue Jools touched on, those non-glitzy investments, the Heart of Wales line, the Maesteg—still known as—community rail line and so on, those ones that fall outside. So, if you could focus on that. 

And I just wonder, Jools, can you just touch on that issue? How much of this is an issue? Is it just because I travel on this sort of line every day, or is there a real perception that we're slightly neglected, forgotten in terms of performance—we are literally at the end of the line?

Yes, I think there is a concern within community rail that lines such as the Heart of Wales line are given less attention, less priority than they should, because of current passenger levels and lower service frequency, which is inviting, I think, a downward spiral of decline when, in our view, the Heart of Wales line could be a wonderful centrepiece for Welsh rail travel, particularly thinking about tourism and leisure, which we've not really touched on in this session. And when we're thinking about modal shift and creating a more sustainable, healthy, inclusive Wales, there is also a need, of course, to think about incoming visitors, and that's a big area of focus for the community rail partnerships in Wales who work together to promote sustainable tourism by rail, but also promoting connections for buses and heritage railways lines and walking routes. But their ability to confidently promote the Welsh rail network is, of course, impacted by performance on those lines. And if the confidence isn't there to promote those lines, then community rail can't play its role in the way that it should, celebrating these lines and their attractions and their pleasures. 

So, I think that that is a concern. We feel like the Heart of Wales line—it could be, as I say, something really special, as famous as the West Highland railway line, as famous as the Settle to Carlisle line, but at the moment it does feel like it's somewhat bottom of the pile. And it impacts on other types of community rail activity as well, not just promoting rail travel for leisure and tourism, but local engagement activities to break down barriers, working with vulnerable groups, excluded groups. It's very difficult to organise train trips and rail-based activities if there's not that confidence.

Jools, that's really helpful. I hadn't meant to come back, but you've made me feel even worse now, because all of the focus in your answer—and I get why—has been on the Heart of Wales line. I suspect I may not be alone. The Maesteg line, which is a commuter line, is still called—and when it was first saved, it was known as a 'community line'. It's not part of the core Valleys investment. It's not part of any fancy metro. We keep—. So, I get what you're saying about the Heart of Wales line, and I agree with you, but I'm just worried, unless somebody can disabuse me, that nobody has any darn focus on a major commuter line that doesn't form part of the core Valleys line. I get the same feeling, by the way, when I have discussions with TfW and Network Rail. But, please, persuade me.

Very, very briefly, I'm afraid.

I think the investment in the Ebbw Vale line, which is a similar status to the Maesteg line, does slightly contradict what you said.

Some at four an hour. What's it going to?

It's going to two an hour.

Two an hour.

Whereas Maesteg’s got one an hour, as Ebbw Vale has. They operate it with similar trains, so there's a comparison. You need to look at those two in comparison.

Okay.

Okay, thank you, all. We'll go on to Janet. I think Janet has a couple of questions she wants to ask, and then we'll break for a short five minutes, if that's okay.

It's really just digging in more about the effect of poor performance on passenger trust and the potential impact on both future revenue growth and the Welsh Government's modal shift targets. The Government can't keep bailing out Transport for Wales as a result of poor passenger numbers as a result of poor passenger experience. How do we sort that problem out?

Well, obviously, the starting point is to deliver a reliable service. Then you improve the service. But we've already confirmed that leisure passengers have returned more to the use of rail than commuter and business passengers. But leisure passengers have more options available to them. So, if there's going to be growth to reduce the operational subsidy requirement, which is what you're seeking, it has to be primarily in the leisure area, and because of the sensitivity of leisure, the poor experience is going to put them off. So, the answer is: make the services more punctual, reliable, plus better quality. But that's the heart of the dilemma—how do you make them more punctual and reliable?

I say that on the back of seeing numerous visitors with suitcases stood up for hours on end. From north to south, it's four hours on a very good day. Five hours recently in the last couple of journeys. So, children not being able to fight through overcrowded trains to get to the toilet, if the toilet's working.

Well, you're right, and people, having that experience—maybe they have a car available for the next time they're making that journey, and if they don't have a car in their household, they'd think about hiring one, regrettably, or looking at what the coach services are like.

I've got lots of hands going up now, so Jenny and Joyce, briefly, and then—

Who’d run a service when you have to repay passengers after a 15-minute delay? Isn't that just a completely unsustainable model, in the sense that—? Some of these things can be down to inefficiency and poor performance, but some of them are due to, unfortunately, somebody taking their life on the railway line or the weather.

So, let's hear from Joyce as well, and then we can address both.

Would David like to comment on—?

In a moment, yes,

We've talked about north-south, but we haven't talked about west, which is where I live, in Pembrokeshire. There is a launch this Friday with a new train on the line. There are increases to train journeys—Carmarthen, down the line. So, if we're talking about accessibility for people, particularly as it's a high-tourist destination in the summer, and we've all seen and heard the stories about the lack of carriages to take people on those journeys, have you assessed—I'm sure you would have—the positive impact, because we want some positivity in this today, that the new train and the additional trains on those lines will have, to give some good news to the tourist operators and the people that want to travel by public transport? As far west as you can go, that is.

Yes, and I think we really welcome the advent of new trains in south-west Wales, which are sorely needed, as you say, and they've seen some of their services reduced recently, because the mark 4 trains only go as far as Cardiff rather than continuing on to Carmarthen and places like that. We did some work fairly recently with the ferry operator as well, to try to get that better linkage between the rail and the ferry services, so that people who are going in both directions will have a much more joined-up journey. Because people aren't just travelling on trains, by and large, for the love of it; they want to go somewhere, they've got somewhere to be. And it's not just about getting there on time, it's the experience along the way. And when you get there, if you've got connections to make, those need to work for people. So, again, it needs to be supported with better information, with staff on the ground, to make sure that they're holding passengers' hands.

But I think in terms of the good news, yes, it's really great to have that ability. My colleague will actually be at the launch that you mention. But I think that what we need to see is that delivered consistently, so that people understand that that reliability is being restored, it's improved. People can see those new trains, and not only are they fast and frequent, but it's also a measure that people can see that's really tangible as to where the investment's going, so that they can see that the money they're paying for their ticket is being wisely invested.

And on the delay repay?

Okay. And what about this argument about it's an unsustainable model?

Well, if passengers suffer inconvenience, aren't they due some compensation?

Okay. But that's money being taken out of investing in new trains. It's—

And there's the incentive to make sure that a punctual and reliable railway is actually being delivered.

Yes, but some of these things are outside the control of the operator, so is this a model that's really going to deliver?

Okay. Right. Jools wants to come in, and then we will have to come back to Janet and then we'll break. Jools.

Thank you. It was just an additional comment on the south-west Wales point. We have—

Okay. Sorry. Let's address the delay repay, then. Was that what you were going to come in on, Peter? Yes.

Yes. I was just going to say I personally don't think 15 minutes is appropriate to start compensating people—for a delay of 15 minutes. In my view, in the wider scheme of a daily timetable, we often lose 15 minutes. Thirty minutes onwards, possibly.

Thank you.

Yes. Okay. Sorry. Right. Jools, on the other point—very, very briefly.

No problem. Sorry. I tried to jump in a little late. We have one of our newest community rail partnerships, South West Wales Connected, who have been established in south-west Wales, through close collaboration between ourselves and Transport for Wales. They have fed back somewhat a mixed bag in terms of local perceptions, but they do say that a lot of people are very positive about the local rail services and the experience that they've had. And certainly, the local engagement work that the community rail partnership is delivering is being very well received. They're working very hard to make sure that communities can benefit from the investment, from the development to services. And it's just a point that we need the local engagement and the effective communications to wrap around the investment and the service development that's going on, so that people understand what's happening, people are able to buy into that and benefit from it, and to break down some of the perceived barriers and practical barriers that people face, in any case, accessing the railway.

Thank you. Okay. I'll come back to Janet for your next question, Janet, and, literally, we have three minutes to ask it and answer it, if that's okay—if you can.

Okay, thanks. How do you believe how effectively TfW manages its rolling stock, given the suggestion from rail user groups that more effective management of assets by TfW could have avoided rolling stock shortages?

Are we moving the deck chairs?

I think a lot of what's been handed to Transport for Wales is outside of their control. Certainly, with the delivery of some of the new trains, they've tried their best to work directly with the train manufacturers, to get at least some being delivered. But when they're handed—. So, for example, the mark 4 coaches that were cascaded from Grand Central, working with electric locomotives on the east coast—when they're over here, they can't work with electric locos because there isn't the electrification, so they have to work with diesel locos, and they need modifying so that they'll actually work with that. It's not just a case of shunting a locomotive on the front and off it goes—all the internal electrics need to be changed. So, they've been handed a real set, a real bag of spanners, if you will.

And whose fault is that?

I think the system of rolling stock cascade in Britain is not working as effectively as it should. The way that different trains—. There are so many different types of trains that just need to work in different areas over their lifespan. And the system just doesn't work for that kind of cascade—the work that Network Rail have to do every time that a new set of trains come into an area, to work on will they go through those particular platforms, signals, overhangs et cetera.

Okay—

Do you think there's a lack of expertise in terms of procurement then? Are they procuring the right product, almost, if you like?

Very briefly.

We've done some real work, for example, with Merseyrail, getting a community of passengers together to work directly with the manufacturers. And the trains that came out of that—you might know the 231s, the Stadler FLIRTs—that are now running through the Valleys, through Cardiff Queen Street, those are a product of that passenger input. So, actually having input into the design from the people that are actually going to be the end users, I think that's very powerful.

I think that's very powerful, yes. That's some good stuff that's come out, yes.

Okay. Thank you. Right. We'll take a short break, then. Thank you for the evidence that you've given us so far. We'll break now for eight minutes, if you like, ready to reconvene at 10:45.

Welcome back to the committee. We will continue with our scrutiny on all matters rail, shall we say, and we'll go straight to Jenny for the next question. 

Thank you. James Price, the head of TfW, says they've got enough staff. Do you agree? 

Whether they've got enough staff, whether they're in the right areas—we know that they're going through a restructure at the moment, moving staff into different areas. What we've asked them to do is concentrate on the things that matter most to passengers, so delivering that reliability and that punctuality as a priority. So, we know that they're putting staff into those sorts of areas. We know also that there's quite a lot of work coming up to expand Transport for Wales's remit. The buses remit will be a big change for them. So, we know that they're putting staff into that, and we are talking to them about what that means. 

Okay. Let's just stick with railways for today. 

But, yes, in terms of railways, I think that—. They are going through a restructure. I think it's too early to tell whether they've got enough staff in the right areas; possibly one for Transport for Wales to answer. 

Okay. Peter Kingsbury. 

Yes, I think in terms of the staff they have available at the present day to operate and provide adequate services, my answer would be 'no'. They haven't got enough staff, because one of the reasons for the cancellation of trains is staff shortages. Now, it takes one year, for example, for a newly-recruited train driver to be ready to be let out on their own, so to speak; maybe they've got enough if you look at those in training, but apparently not for those that can actually deliver services on a daily basis at the current time.

Okay—

So not enough train—

Sorry. Go on. 

I was going to go on to—. Not enough train drivers. What about maintaining the vehicles, the engines, and indeed the carriages so that the rolling stock we've got can be properly used? Have they got enough?

I'll be honest and say I don't know the answer to that one, because it's less obvious from the point of view of users if there are shortages of mechanics in the depot.

Okay. Well, all these stories about trains not having enough carriages, that's down to maintenance of the stock we've got, isn't it? 

Yes. 

Thank you. 

Delyth, you wanted to come in, and then we'll come to Joyce. 

Very quickly. Diolch. I was told recently that when it says that a train is delayed because of signal failures that is due to staff shortages. Is that true?

It can be. Network Rail staff the signal boxes, so it can be that, if somebody isn't on duty at a signal box, those signaling functions are not being covered that day, and that has happened. Now, that could be because of sickness, it could be because there aren't enough staff to cover if somebody goes off at the last minute. But, in terms of the day-to-day things, signal failures don't necessarily mean that there's a person there. It could be that a technical piece of kit has gone down or something like that. There's quite a number of different things underneath that umbrella. 

And that's something I'm sure we can pursue directly with TfW. 

Thank you. 

Joyce, did you want to come in? 

Yes. Moving on to Transport for Wales's five-point plan for the Wrexham to Bidston line, is there any evidence of improvements on the line so far?

I've been in contact with the local rail user group for the line, who are Railfuture members, and they've given me quite a detailed update on the current situation. There's been a limited amount of improvement, but there's more to be done before things return to a satisfactory state is the brief answer to your question. And if it's appropriate, after the meeting's finished, I'd be pleased to e-mail to the committee clerk the—. We were asked for an update on the response to the five-point plan for this route, which was introduced in the summer, and I've got a detailed note here that I'd be more than happy to send to you. This is from the local source of knowledge. 

That would be really useful, because obviously much of this is evidence that we want to present to the Deputy Minister and to TfW as well, so it would be good to have that information. Diolch yn fawr. Huw.

Yes. Can I turn to, looking forward on rail infrastructure and reform, whether you think that Network Rail’s plans for the control period 7 reflect passenger priorities? And perhaps I could start with David on this.

Yes. We did an awful lot of work. Network Rail engaged with us quite early on in terms of putting passenger and stakeholder views together, and we did some direct research—the details were in the paper that I submitted. So, passenger priorities—at the top there you’ve got punctuality and reliability, maintaining and renewing the infrastructure, environment and sustainability, and passenger safety as being in that top tier. So, we engaged with passengers. Yes, passengers don’t necessarily understand who Network Rail are, but, when you’re talking about investment and the upkeep of the lines and so forth, they sort of get to understand, ‘Oh yeah, that’s what that investment’s all about.' So, in terms of 2024 to 2029, those priorities we’ve put back into the plans that Network Rail were putting together.

Whether or not the constraints of the budget and the determination for Network Rail will match up to those priorities is potentially a different question. But, when you’ve got constraints to the budget, the things to focus on are those priorities. So, making sure that that punctuality and reliability are at the very top of that tier is absolutely key.

Okay, thank you. And maybe I could ask others if they have anything to add to that, but particularly as well in light of the Deputy Minister's comments that he anticipates trains will become less reliable as a result of levels of infrastructure funding allocated to the Wales and borders route for that control period 7. He says they represent a real-terms cut. Peter, perhaps if we come to you, and we'll come back to David at the end, then. Peter. 

Yes. I’ve looked at the corporate plan, the lead document for control period 7, in response to that question, and I couldn’t see within it how you could possibly determine what proportion of spending would take place in the Wales and the borders route compared to the other parts of Network Rail’s estate. In the past, many commentators have said—and it’s probably, no doubt, true, in terms of big capital spend by Network Rail—that Wales doesn’t get its fair share of the investment. But most of the control period 7 spend is on maintenance, renewals, that type of thing, and I couldn’t see how you could conclude from that document or control period 7 proposals that Wales and the borders was being treated less favourably in terms of financially than other parts of the Network Rail estate.

So, it's hard to see how that extrapolation was made. Jools or David, any thoughts on that?

Lets go to David first and then we'll come to Jools then.

I think the constraints of the budget do pose a very real risk, and that risk has the potential to undermine the ability to deliver that reliability that we know passengers want. We have to understand that money is tight, but everything that wants to be delivered needs to be there—for example, things like weather resilience. We've seen the increase of storms, particularly in Wales. That needs to have that resilience delivered over the next five years, to make sure that the railway is truly resilient. But if there are going to be constraints on that funding and the ability to provide that investment that's needed, then it will undermine the ability to deliver. 

Jools. 

Similar to Transport Focus, we engaged with Network Rail on the CP7 planning process. I sat on the challenge panel for the Wales and western region, and was really pleased with the engagement exercises that they carried out, and we naturally pushed the point about Network Rail being attentive to the needs of communities as a whole, not just existing passengers, and pointing to policy priorities in Wales in terms of modal shift and in terms of accessibility and inclusion, and the need to think about non-rail users. And we are pleased that they appear to have really taken that on board. And the plan includes very strong commitments for engaging with communities, working with communities to develop further plans and making sure that communities' needs are holistically considered. So, we're pleased with the language and the thrust of the plan, but I would also very much echo the comments that have been made by David and Peter in terms of the constrained funding position and the risk that that, inevitably, poses. As far as we can tell, we're obviously not sure exactly how it's going to play out, that they've been given less money than they wanted at the outset. And surely, there is a risk, and perhaps it links to some of our earlier comments around lesser used lines being given less priority than they perhaps need and deserve, but perhaps that's a particular risk, going forward, in this constrained funding context.

Okay. Thank you for that. Jenny.

We touched on these five new stations on the south Wales main line, but it's pointless having this discussion unless we've got the infrastructure to deliver them. Professor Cole says that that will be between £1.5 billion and £1.8 billion, and all of this is dependent on having a much more whole-of-Britain view of where the money needs to go. I think the whole of the Senedd and the Welsh Affairs Committee in the UK Parliament are unanimous that it's a fiction to have HS2 classified as an England-and-Wales project. So, what glimmer of hope is there that we're going to get this infrastructure investment so that we can make this south Wales mainline use for the metro a reality? 

Peter.

Well, it is the case that not just the infrastructure for the work to the tracks, but the money hasn't been allocated or identified yet to build the stations, to source the rolling stock, the new trains. So, there's a huge financial challenge about delivering this. The work that's been done to date to design the five stations and hold the consultation has resulted from Transport for Wales—and give them a big tick here—working with others, getting money from a fund, which I'd forgotten about. It's the UK connectivity fund, which was something that Westminster created a couple of years ago to improve links between Wales, Scotland, England and, of course, Northern Ireland. So, cleverly, the people in Transport for Wales said, 'Right, let's extend the trains beyond the Severn tunnel to Cheltenham and Bristol and then its connecting Wales and England', and, therefore, they had money from the fund. So, that was a good piece of work to get that money.

But I agree with you, going back to, 'Where is all the rest of the money coming from?', that there's a lot of money required to deliver this project, and I don't know. If the UK Government took the view that, following cancellation of phase 2 of high speed 2—. Certainly, there was a question mark beforehand about whether it was an England-and-Wales project when it was going as far as Crewe, which, obviously, then links on to north Wales. But now that it's stopping at Birmingham, surely—. Well, my view and Railfuture Wales's view is that, to call it an England-and-Wales project—. So, maybe the UK Government will come to a view that it is no longer an England-and-Wales project and that Wales should have a Barnett formula consequential payment relating to transport, which would give money towards the project on Cardiff-Severn tunnel—the Burns report's so-called train service.

All right. Well, that's just—. Fine.

Okay. Janet, do you want to elaborate on the HS2 stuff?

Not really. I know that this money will be coming through, despite many people saying, 'It's just a promise,' or whatever. I believe that the £1 billion investment has to go to ensure that we do have definite improvements in our rail service. We know that the Welsh Government have just provided a lot of money to TfW. Until we're very certain exactly what that figure that comes in is, it's going to be very difficult, isn't it?

Can I ask, then, whether you believe that the £1 billion promise for electrification of the north Wales main line is sufficient, because Jenny mentioned that Stuart Cole has estimated that it's going to be between £1.5 billion and £1.8 billion to realise that.

No, that was for the south Wales line.

Yes.

The south Wales metro.

I don't—

I've confused that, then, have I?

The £1 billion—

Yes, the consequence for Wales would be £1.5 billion—

That's nothing to do with HS2 being an England-and-Wales project. This is a sum of money that was announced at the time that phase 2 of HS2 was cancelled. It's nothing to do with the consequential and Barnett formula. That's further money. But, on the £1 billion, I agree with Professor Stuart Cole, in that I don't think, based on the cost of electrifying routes such as south Wales to London, which is now a decade ago, and, of course, that greatly exceeded the cost—. As far as I'm aware, there's not been a detailed evaluation of the costs of electrifying from Crewe through Chester and all the way along the coast to Holyhead, so this figure was, to use the phrase, plucked out of the air at short notice. It's a nice round figure, but it's probably not going to be sufficient.

Just for clarity, it was a costing for the north Wales main line from Professor Stuart Cole—£1.5 billion to £1.8 billion.

Yes.

It's still not enough, is it? Okay. Jools, do you want to come in on this and your views on HS2 and consequential funding as well?

I can't comment on the likely costs of electrification, unfortunately, but just to say we're very broadly supportive of electrification roll-out within community rail. We do believe a holistic approach is needed, not relying entirely on electrification. But, I think, with regard to the north Wales coast line, new rolling stock is also required. I think I've already mentioned the capacity issues that have been highlighted to us on that line and that wraparound of local communications and engagement. But I don't think I can comment specifically on the amount required for different improvements.

No, that's fine. Okay, thank you. Can I ask, then, about whether you've been involved in any discussions with either Transport for Wales or the Welsh Government or, indeed, the UK Government on the impact of UK Government plans for rail reform in Wales? We're not quite sure, I suppose, what the status of that is at the moment in terms of King's Speeches and various promises on legislation, but can you enlighten us?

Indeed. We understand that there's a draft Bill that was mentioned in the King's Speech, and Great British Railways has yet to be formally instigated. As Transport Focus, we were gearing up for the potential for Great British Railways to want us to do more with passengers, to go even in more depth, so we've been hanging fire with that. We've been marking time on some of that. Thankfully—thankfully?—the ticket offices proposals have kept us busy over the past months.

But what we have seen is people from Wales who have expertise in the rail industry being seconded into setting up the shadow of Great British Railways, so we know that there is Welsh expertise being put at the heart of that. I did notice, overnight, there's been some reshuffle of the Lords appointments, and Baroness Vere in the Lords, who was Under-Secretary at the Department for Transport, is now succeeded by Lord Davies of Gower. Again, a very notable person who knows quite a bit about transport in this area, particularly in south-west Wales. So, again, that expertise is there for the use of putting that policy and that decision making together. But what we want to see is the actual substance of when Great British Railways is going to be put in place and what that means for Wales. I still don't think we understand what that means for devolved nations in terms of how Great British Railways is going to work with that devolution in place, with Transport for Wales, with the Welsh Government as well. I think that's still quite opaque.

Peter.

Yes, well, to quickly respond to the first question, no, Railfuture hasn't been consulted by the UK Government regarding its proposals to reform the rail structure and management in the form of Great British Railways. But I would agree with the comment that David just made that it presents a particular challenge for the devolved nations, where you have operating powers resting with the Welsh Government, Transport for Wales, and, of course, most of the track, apart from the core Cardiff-Valleys, still being with Network Rail, who are accountable to the Department for Transport in Westminster. So, how you square that circle—and it applies to, of course, Scotland as well—remains to be seen, and there has been a suggestion that some sort of Wales rail board would be established to bring the different parties under one umbrella, to link to Great British Railways at a senior level. That may be the answer, but, without having further details about what form that might take, I don't think Railfuture can comment any further.

Fine. And, Jools, the last word to you on this?

Thank you. Similar comments, really, in terms of we haven't been involved in any specific conversations on rail transformation in relation to devolution and how it relates to the devolved nations. We have been feeding in at length to the Great British Railways transition team and other industry partners involved in the process of rail transformation, particularly looking at how the railways can be more responsive to local needs, how the railways can take more of a partnership-based approach to rail development in terms of working with local communities, and, of course, wanting to make sure there's a strong recognised role for community rail in that. We've also been encouraging that greater attention is needed to multimodal travel and the railways working in synergy with other forms of public transport and active travel development.

And some specific advice that we've fed in is around common issues and blockers to community-led projects involving the railways, such as community-led station buildings projects, returning disused station spaces to community use. There's a lot of opportunity for that to happen, and for more of that to happen across Wales. There are a few good examples, but these projects are often fraught and drawn out, and we want to make that easier. That is something that we're hoping that we may be able to progress with industry partners regardless of when and if Great British Railways is stood up, and I think that's now the question: how can we move forward in the meantime and not be stuck in a position of limbo with some of these important ambitions?

And you raise an issue there in terms of community use of buildings that I'm sure we could do a whole session on. Maybe that's something we can look can look at in future. With that, we've come to the end of the time that we'd allocated, so I'll draw this evidence session to a close.