Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee

Meeting date: Wednesday, November 8, 2017

Official Report 550KB pdf

---

Rail Services

Item 3 is the latest in our regular update sessions on rail services and rail network issues in Scotland. With us from the ScotRail Alliance we have Alex Hynes, David Dickson and Angus Thom.

Before we take evidence, I invite committee members to declare any relevant interests.

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am the honorary president of the Scottish Association for Public Transport and honorary vice-president of Railfuture UK.

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. I am an honorary vice-president of the Friends of the Far North Line.

I co-convene the cross-party group on rail.

I refer members to my entry in the register of members’ interests. Like Rhoda Grant, I am an honorary vice-president of the Friends of the Far North Line.

I am a member of the cross-party group on rail and a member of the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers parliamentary group.

Stewart Stevenson will ask the first question.

Can you give us an update on how the Edinburgh to Glasgow rail improvement programme is going and say, in particular, how the apparent delays in the delivery of the class 385 rolling stock might impact on progress?

Good morning. I am pleased to say that the electrification of the Edinburgh to Glasgow line is now complete, and that that infrastructure is now in use. We have the brand-new Hitachi state-of-the-art class 385 trains on test between Edinburgh and Glasgow. That testing is going well. In fact, just last night, a test run delivered a journey time of 42 minutes with four stops, which was pleasing to see.

As we know—the committee is well-versed on this—the electrification of the line is being delivered 10 months late. Clearly, we are not going to allow the delivery of the new trains to customers to be 10 months late, which is why we are working with Hitachi, the operator, the infrastructure manager and the Office of Rail and Road to ensure that we can introduce the 385s into traffic as early as we can in the new year. I am pleased to say that we will be introducing our modern class 380s on two passenger services at the December timetable change, so customers can begin to benefit from faster, greener and longer trains.

At the risk of moving away from the subject of EGIP, where do the 380s come from? Presumably they are being used somewhere at the moment.

A big cascade of the fleet is happening across the network—it is like a three-dimensional jigsaw puzzle. We have some spare 380s that we can deploy on to the electrified route, which enables us to free up diesels, and that, in turn, enables us to deliver service introductions starting in December between, for example, Dumfries and Carlisle. From December, on that route, we will operate a near-hourly service, which involves an extra 1,500 seats a day. That benefit to customers in that part of Scotland is being delivered because of electrification and the subsequent cascade of diesel rolling stock.

I have a question on the changes that we expect to see in December. You have partially answered it, but perhaps you can expand on what you have said. Are there any other benefits or changes that passengers between Glasgow and Edinburgh might see after the December 2017 timetable change? Do you have any estimates or guarantees in relation to when we might see eight-car trains and 42-minute journeys on that line?

As you know, we are in the process of building the best railway that Scotland has ever had. Every bit of the network will benefit from brand-new trains, refurbished trains, faster journeys, more seats and more services. That process starts next month, and there will be a gradual introduction of those benefits to customers across the country’s rail network between now and December 2019. I have highlighted some of the benefits that customers will see this December. Next May, we begin the reintroduction of a genuine inter-city network for Scotland, connecting the seven cities using high-speed rail, which involves replacing three-car diesel trains with four and five-car inter-city trains.

We hope to operate the brand-new eight-car Hitachi trains between Edinburgh and Glasgow with the 42-minute journey time in December next year. There has been a lot of focus on the electrification of the Edinburgh to Glasgow line, but we are actually electrifying pretty much the whole central belt. We are electrifying the route via Falkirk Grahamston up to Stirling, Dunblane and Alloa and the combination of that electrification with the core Edinburgh to Glasgow route enables us to move slower diesel services out of the way so that we can deliver the 42-minute journey time.

An eight-car electric train has 44 per cent more seats than the six-car diesel trains that we operate in the peak today, and we are slashing the journey times. There are lots of benefits for customers in the pipeline and they will start to see them in December.

Thank you for that update. To clarify, am I correct that we should expect to see the eight-car 42-minute service on the Glasgow to Edinburgh line in December 2018?

That is correct.

At one point, before my time in the Parliament and perhaps before your time at ScotRail, there was talk about a non-stop 30-minute journey between our two cities. Has any further exploratory work been done on that and could it be a realistic prospect for some point in the future?

No—to the best of my knowledge, that has not been done. Obviously, if the trains do not stop, we can deliver a journey time that is rather better than 42 minutes. However, that route provides a vital commuter service into Glasgow and Edinburgh at both ends in both directions. In relation to the movement of customers, the current balance between capacity and journey time is probably right for the route, but we keep that under review.

Have you done any exploratory work on the percentage of passengers who get on at Glasgow and off at Edinburgh or vice versa? I am talking not about reducing services that are currently provided on the multiple stops but about the potential to provide additional services for which there could be non-stop capability.

One of the challenges of operating the Edinburgh to Glasgow route is that it is not a traditional rail route, for which one would expect there to be a peak direction. On the Edinburgh to Glasgow route, there is no peak direction because customers travel both ways, which makes our job slightly harder than it would ordinarily be. The eight-car electric trains that we will deliver in December next year with the 42-minute journey time will provide the right balance for customers going into Edinburgh and Glasgow—either commuters into those locations or people who are making the city-to-city connection.

You said that there is a delay with the 385s. We know about and understand that. When will they be delivered?

Some of them will be delivered today. The trains are on test between Edinburgh and Glasgow.

Okay, but those are the test ones. Once they have gone through testing and you are happy that they provide what you want, when will the rest be delivered and rolled out?

That will be after they finish their testing programme, of which I am not in total control. Those trains each need to be accepted on to the network and tested. They need what is called type approval and they have to do a number of fault-free miles before we can reliably introduce them into traffic. We expect 21 trains to be with us and available for service for February.

For February?

Yes.

So you hope that they will be here in February ready to go and delivering a service.

We already have trains on test in Scotland.

Do you mean 385s?

Yes. We expect further deliveries this month, but it is not only a question of having them built and in Scotland, as we have to test and accept them.

Do you test and accept each one individually?

We type accept the class 385, as it has to be accepted on to the United Kingdom rail network, but we test each train individually to ensure that it is correctly built and reliable. Each unit has to do a number of fault-free miles before we are prepared to introduce it into traffic.

The service between Edinburgh and Glasgow is very good. I commute on it every day. It is a reliable service and the last thing that our customers would want is for us to rush those trains into traffic and for there to be a dip in reliability. I have decided that I would rather have a more gradual phased introduction to service to maintain our punctuality standards on the route.

11:45  

I do not think that I got the terminology right before, so I will see whether I can get it right this time. The 385s will be introduced into traffic in February. Is that your plan?

I cannot guarantee that, because—

That is your plan.

No. I cannot guarantee that. The service introduction programme will deliver the 385s into traffic early next year, we hope, but I am not wholly in control of that process. Hitachi, the rail regulator, the operator and Network Rail all need to work together to make sure that the train is accepted and tested before we can introduce it into traffic. As it stands, I am not yet prepared to make a commitment on when that will happen, because of the complexity of what we are trying to achieve.

I think that I have got that. I will bring Rhoda Grant in and perhaps come back to that when I have thought it through.

My question is on exactly the same issue, as I want to drill down to find out when we can expect people to be using those trains. You initially said that that would be at the beginning of the year, but then you said that you would have them for testing in February, if I am correct. When do you expect them to be in service and carrying passengers?

Customers will benefit from faster, greener, longer trains from December this year, which is next month.

The answer to your question with regard to the 385s is that I expect them to be in service as soon as possible in the new year. I cannot give you a cast-iron guarantee, because I am not wholly responsible for that process. We will introduce those services into passenger traffic as soon as we possibly can, as long as it is sensible to do so.

I am really keen to know—

I will try to be helpful. In December, class 380 electric trains will run the service until we can get the 385s on.

Exactly.

The class 380 trains are roughly four or five years old.

They are quite modern.

What is your ambition for getting the 385s on?

Given a fair wind.

I accept that you have given us caveats.

Yes. My ambition is not to make promises that I cannot keep. [Laughter.] My ambition is also to keep the customer at the heart of the decision making, which is why we will introduce the 380s into traffic in December. We will operate seven-car electric trains with faster journey times next month. The introduction of 385s will be as soon as possible in the new year, but I cannot give a cast-iron guarantee, because what we are doing is complicated. We are talking about brand new trains and a brand new type of train on brand new infrastructure, so we need to make sure that we get it right.

It is quite simple. I was talking to an operator in Mossend in my area and I was told that the trains come up from England and run about on our track all night, a bit like with a train set. It is like when we used to get new cars, we had to run them in—

No, we do not.

Let me finish. We do not have to do that now with cars, but the trains that we are now getting have to be run in to make sure that they work and that everything is okay before we put them out for people to play on. Is that right?

Exactly. We have to do it at night, because there is not enough track capacity in the day due to the services that we provide.

They come to Scotland because there is plenty of track to run about on. It is mainly in the central belt. Is that correct?

Because the electrification between Edinburgh and Glasgow has only recently been delivered, we have been doing a testing programme on the east coast main line, as well as some testing in Germany, in order to short circuit the testing so that we can operate the trains into service as soon as possible. Obviously, the infrastructure has been delivered 10 months late and we do not want the service introduction to be 10 months late, too. We have therefore been working around the issue to see what testing we can do where, in this country and abroad, to get the trains into traffic as soon as we can.

Hitachi complained that it could not get access to the system, and said that that is why there was a delay. Is that true? Whose fault was it that there has been a delay—Hitachi’s or yours?

That has been a factor. As well as testing the infrastructure and testing the train, we also have to test the compatibility of the train with the infrastructure. Obviously, that element of the testing cannot be done until the infrastructure is available. It is true that the late delivery of electrification has contributed to the delays with Hitachi.

It is simple, when you think about it. It is nice to get it right. I will now move on to the questions that were allocated to me.

The Holytown junction is behind where I stay—I am 100 yards away from the station. How are you doing on the electrification of the line between the Holytown junction and the Midcalder junction? Can you give us an update on the Shotts line electrification project? I know that a couple of bridges had to be raised over the past couple of years.

The whole investment programme across Scotland’s railway network, including the electrification of the Stirling-Dunblane-Alloa line and the Shotts line upgrade is all proceeding to time and within the overall funding envelope. We expect to deliver an electrified Shotts line and an electrified Stirling-Dunblane-Alloa line next year. The work is proceeding to programme and within the overall borrowing headroom. David Dickson might want to add to that.

The programme is actually marginally ahead of target just now. It is being delivered extremely well, as is the rest of the electrification programme. As Alex Hynes has said, the work is proceeding to programme and is on budget, and we do not anticipate that changing. It is progressing extremely well.

I look forward to the completion of the project. It seems to me that electric trains have more carriages than diesel trains.

You touched on the Stirling-Dunblane-Alloa line. Can you give us an update on that? I noticed that the ORR commissioned an independent report from Nichols to review whether Network Rail was doing everything reasonably practical to deliver the milestones for the project. I am very impressed with Network Rail. My colleague Fulton MacGregor and I were at the Cutty Sark bridge last Friday, and it is amazing what is being done there. However, why has that report not been made public?

Before we address the Stirling-Dunblane-Alloa line, let me talk about the issue of train carriages that you mentioned. The number of train carriages at our disposal will go from 800 to 1,000 between now and December 2019. That is a 25 per cent increase in the number of carriages that are available, and we will operate them more intensively, which means that the actual number of seat miles will rise by 45 per cent in that period. That is an extraordinary increase in the quality and capacity of Scotland’s railway.

So you are going to guarantee me a seat every time I go on a train.

Sadly not, but that expansion will address crowding levels and will create room for growth. We have seen extraordinary growth in the use of Scotland’s railway, which we should be proud of. By increasing the quality and capacity of Scotland’s rail network, we will be able to do more to provide jobs and growth for the people who work and live here.

David Dickson can talk about the Nichols report on the SDA line.

I cannot tell you anything about its publication or otherwise, but I can say that the SDA programme is going extremely well. Our first major milestone—section A—is scheduled for next May. It accommodates an awful lot of the stuff that is to happen in relation to the Edinburgh to Glasgow line. It is wrong to look at that work entirely in isolation. In many ways, the work on the SDA line facilitates a lot of the things that will need to happen for the main Edinburgh to Glasgow electrification. Section A is on target for May 2018. It is progressing well as a project; everything is to programme and pretty well to budget. It takes us just short of but not into Stirling station. That will facilitate some of the things that we want to see for the May timetable.

The key after that is going up to Dunblane, but not across to Alloa. Dunblane is for delivery in December 2018, and then we go through to the Alloa branch for March 2019. All of that is progressing well. There are some issues around Stirling station and the approaches to Stirling. We have had protracted planning issues, but we are making our way through them. We have planning permissions for Kerse Road, which looked to be an issue that might hold up the project, but we are making good progress on that. A lot of the potential obstacles are moving out of the way, and we are progressing well.

We have learnt a lot of lessons from what went on with EGIP, and the delivery programme for getting the wires in the air is going exceptionally well. With SDA, we are confident about where we are going and we are managing the programme to budget as well as to the timescales that we have been set. There is good progress on SDA, which we are very happy with.

It ties very much into the Edinburgh to Glasgow electrification. For instance, to facilitate the 42-minute journey time, we need to deliver the programme up to Dunblane for December 2018. That will facilitate getting everything out of the way and allowing fast enough train interactions to facilitate the steady 42-minute service in December 2018.

I want to talk about some of the other projects, if I may. My colleague Richard Lyle mentioned the Cutty Sark bridge, which is another high-profile piece of good work. The Findhorn viaduct, which I have visited, is tremendous, and I commend the work by everyone involved—the contractors and all of your people. Forres, which saw its station open in October, is a really good example of community engagement in all sorts of ways.

However, I am afraid that I must come to a negative. The ORR’s annual efficiency and financial assessment of Network Rail for 2016-17 says:

“There was a £83m deferral on the Highland Mainline project for the three years to the end of 2016-17, due to re-profiling work to later years and delays in awarding contracts.”

Can you give us an update on that and outline the key milestones for that project and the ultimate delivery date?

The Highland main line has been quite an evolving project. It started off looking very much like an infrastructure programme, but Transport Scotland was keen to see whether, as part of the franchise bidding project, there were any alternative solutions instead of solutions that just followed the traditional mindset of putting more things in the ground and making changes there. For example, might a solution to improving journey times lie with, say, rolling stock?

An awful lot can be achieved with the high-speed trains that are being referred to. What actually started off as a big infrastructure programme on the Highland main line is now 90 per cent a signalling scheme. That will facilitate greater capacity on that line and further benefits in journey time. It will benefit freight, too, through the things that are being done to increase standage, speeds through stations and so on.

The project has reduced in scope; it started with us as a project of about £117 million, and it is now about £51 million. It represents very good value for money for the taxpayer, because what started as an infrastructure-focused scheme to achieve journey-time improvements on the Highland main line has actually become a better industry solution that achieves the same outcomes.

As for the issue of deferment, the project’s scope has very much changed. However, I would call it a success for the overall industry in that it is resulting in better value for money for the taxpayer.

Solutions that do not require money or infrastructure are good. Can you comment on the key milestones and how they will impact on the proposed hourly service?

I think that we will achieve them. I must admit, though, that I am not entirely sure what the ORR assessment is referring to in that regard, so it is hard for me to comment.

12:00  

Will there be an hourly service between Inverness and the central belt and between Inverness and Perth?

Yes.

I believe so, yes.

And that journey time will be unaffected by the different route that is being taken, which I presume is due to the passing loop improvements that are being undertaken at Aviemore and elsewhere.

It is important to recognise that the timetable that we offer to customers is a function of the rolling stock and the infrastructure. If we can deliver a customer benefit more efficiently in alliance with one another—that is, through the operator and those responsible for infrastructure working together—we would be foolish not to take that opportunity, because we could spend the money on other things. The creation of the intercity network between Scotland’s seven cities will improve journey times, frequency, capacity and comfort, and it will revolutionise the service that we offer our customers on the longer-distance routes.

Although I believe that the overall aspiration will be met, a finalised timetable is still being developed, and there will be much greater clarity in the first quarter of next year as we work through the timetabling. At that point, we will know what services will be able to run on the Highland main line.

What about the view that the line is at capacity? Will the proposed changes increase capacity?

Yes. The signalling will facilitate more capacity and more trains will be able to arrive at the same time at stations where that is not possible at the moment. The loop extensions will also give greater capacity for trains to pass one another; indeed, that is the real function of those lines.

I want to focus on the north-east. We have had previous discussions on this issue but, for the benefit of the committee, can you provide an update on the delivery of the Aberdeen to Inverness project? When do you expect key milestones such as enhanced commuting into Aberdeen, particularly from Inverurie, and Inverness to be delivered? Finally, when might Kintore station be delivered?

In big-picture terms, we are spending £330 million on upgrading the railway between Aberdeen and Inverness. Earlier on, we heard about the brand-new, fully accessible station at Forres, which I was very pleased to open last month. That work is clearly at the west end of the route; we are now moving to the east end of the route, where we will increase track capacity, and that will enable us not only to improve journey times between Aberdeen and Inverness but to introduce more commuter-type services into those cities. The work is due for completion in December 2019, but there will be a progressive introduction of service enhancements as we deliver the infrastructure and have the trains to exploit it.

David Dickson might have some more detail to share.

A lot of work has been done on the west end of the route. People tend to focus on the station, but we have also upgraded to modern state-of-the-art signalling, have shut and upgraded level crossings and have carried out extensions through loop capacity work. The benefit for the customer—the hourly service enhancement to Inverness—will come when the rolling stock is cascaded from the central belt.

At the other end of the route, there will be, by December 2019, a half-hourly peak service between Inverurie and Aberdeen, which will make a significant difference. At that point, there will also be an hourly service between Aberdeen and Inverness. That will be transformational compared with the services that people are seeing in the area at the moment.

Some of the timing is infrastructure-related. As I have said, the limiting factor to exploiting the west-end benefits that we have built in is the fleet cascade, but those benefits will be released once the developments in the central belt are completed and the new fleet comes in.

I am sure that the half-hourly service in two years’ time in and out of Aberdeen will be very welcome to commuters. When will the Kintore station stop be ready?

There are two new stations—Dalcross and Kintore. Both lie outside the scope of the project, but we expect both to be built in early control period 6—in other words, going into 2020. That is probably the best estimate. We have recently been instructed by TS with regard to Dalcross, and a compulsory purchase order has just gone through for the Kintore land, so we expect instruction on that, too. I cannot advise members of the exact timescale, but everything is lining up for that to take place.

I have some questions about the performance figures. The public performance measure for period 7 was 88.3 per cent, which was lower than the figure for the same period last year. Why was that, and what steps are being taken to improve performance?

It is clear that punctuality and reliability lie at the top of our agenda. When I last appeared in front of the committee, our moving annual average for performance was 90.6 per cent; at the end of the last period, it was 91.1 per cent. Therefore, we are continuing to move in the right direction, and it is clear that the performance improvement plan is working. We are now the UK’s most punctual large operator, and other operators are seeing the benefits of improved reliability. For example, the Caledonian sleeper is delivering some of the best punctuality on record.

We had an early autumn; it came about a month earlier than normal, so we saw more autumn impact over the period. Autumn is, of course, a hugely challenging period for us operationally, which is why we are spending £3 million on ensuring that we can operate the trains safely and reliably during it.

We also had a little bit of bad luck. The single biggest incident that we experienced in Scotland was also the single biggest incident anywhere across the UK network: another operator’s service went through a red light in the Haymarket area, damaging a set of points and resulting in a loss of service for an entire day in the Edinburgh area. The main line was also affected by cable thefts on a disused branch line in the Fife area. We guarded that site in the short term, and we have just signed off infrastructure changes that will insulate the signalling system between the disused freight branch and the main line.

Therefore, there was a combination of external factors and an earlier autumn. However, because we came into autumn a month early, we will exit it quicker. As of today, 80 per cent of the leaves are down, and we are looking forward to seeing the end of autumn so that we can get back to the performance levels that customers enjoyed earlier in the year.

So you hope that, as we go forward, performance will be better than it was last year.

A lot of it is to do with the timing of autumn. Clearly, the purpose of the performance improvement plan—which has delivered improvement—is to ensure that we continually improve performance and that performance is better than it was in the same period last year. Because we entered autumn earlier, we expect to leave it earlier and therefore get back to the higher level of performance. However, improving on last year’s period is always the name of the game—that is what we try to do in every single period.

My question is relevant to PPMs and your approach to hitting those targets. I do not know about other members, but my inbox is full of complaints about continuous skip-stopping. It particularly affects a number of stations in my part of the world such as Cardross, those in East Dunbartonshire and busy hubs around Glasgow. I understand the reasons for it, and we have heard evidence on it in committee, but it is a real concern for some of my constituents, particularly when two consecutive services skip stations. Can you give us some reassurance on that?

We measure every incidence of skip-stopping. We look at that closely every day—there are twice-daily performance calls across the ScotRail Alliance to manage performance. Contrary to popular belief, we do not use skip-stopping to massage the PPM figures; if we skip-stop, it is a PPM failure. We only use skip-stopping in circumstances where trains would run later if we did not use it; we do it to reset the delivery of the timetable, and we do it on those bits of the network where the service pattern is so intensive that we do not have enough turnaround time at location. We use it sparingly and our aspiration is to use it as little as possible.

Skip-stopping will be used on any railway in the world as a mechanism for resetting the timetable for the greater good. In the past, it might have been overused or used at the wrong time, so we try to avoid using it at peak times and in the peak direction. However, it is an inevitable action that we have to take on those intensive parts of the network where the headway between trains is often two and a half minutes.

We are doing all we can to reduce skip-stopping. It remains a bugbear of our customers, which is why we are working so hard to fix it.

Can you give us any reassurances with regard to the particular bugbear of two consecutive services skip-stopping?

That is clearly unwelcome. We use skip-stopping on the more frequent bits of the network, so there will be a service close behind. Using skip-stopping on two consecutive trains defeats the object; indeed, for customers at the skipped stop, it is equivalent to a cancellation, which is absolutely not what we aspire to deliver. As I have said, we are managing down the use of the technique, and we are using it for the overall delivery of a punctual and reliable service on Scotland’s railway.

I have a supplementary to Rhoda Grant’s line of questioning. There was a serious cable theft somewhere between my constituency and that of John Mason—I am not sure exactly where on the line it happened. You started to talk about the response to cable theft, so can you explain to the committee how you responded to an incident that was serious—and which could have been even worse—in order to keep people safe?

I look forward to hearing your answer, Mr Hynes, but I must remind everyone that we are quite tight for time, so I must ask you to make your comments full but concise.

I know that it was not a question from our papers, convener, but given that the topic had been raised and that we are talking about a serious incident that might explain why the line was closed on a particular day, I wanted to bring it up.

In the last period, we had three days that were affected by cable theft. The rail industry has been extraordinarily successful at tackling such theft; for example, we secured a change in the law to reduce the trading of scrap metal using cash, and we have also deployed additional security measures including innovative ones such as smart water, where we mark cable so that we can trace it after it has been stolen. As a result, delays to trains through cable theft have come right down.

We saw a spike in incidents in the period in question. When David Dickson and I discussed the first incident, we thought it likely that the thieves would come back—and they did. We are guarding the site, and making permanent changes to the signalling system in the area to reduce the likelihood of its happening again is at the top of our agenda. However, when we operate a network as large as Scotland’s railway, it is inevitable that criminals will target some bits of our operation for personal gain. Tackling cable theft is one of the things that we must do as part of ensuring that we provide a reliable service to customers.

Are you responding to the incident that took place between Coatbridge and Baillieston a couple of months back?

I do not recall the incident—I am thinking more of the three incidents that we suffered during the previous period. David Dickson might recall the details.

Perhaps you can respond to the committee in writing, so that we can consider how the incident was dealt with. Rhoda Grant has a few more questions before we move on to the next section.

12:15  

My questions are on the moving annual average for right-time arrivals. It is now 52.3 per cent, which is a little at odds with what you said earlier. It is 7.5 per cent below the United Kingdom average. Why is that, and what are we doing to increase right-time arrivals?

Right-time performance in Scotland is beneath the national average for the UK because we are not targeting having a right-time railway. The contract that we have with the Scottish Government targets the PPM, which is the primary driver of train service performance. It records whether the train ran and whether it arrived within four minutes and 59 seconds of its timetabled arrival. One of the reasons why the Scottish Government is not particularly prioritising on-time performance, timed to the nearest minute, is that it still has ambitions around improving journey time. Clearly, if we were to target on-time arrival on its own, we could be tempted to extend journey times, but we do not want to extend journey times; we want to reduce them to make rail travel more competitive.

The other thing about a railway that does not target on-time arrival as much as it targets PPM is that that gives us, as the operator, a little bit more wriggle room to hold up connections for customers, where that makes sense, and to help on and off trains customers who need a little bit more help. That is easier to do when we have a PPM target rather than an on-time target. The on-time rate is lower in Scotland than it is across the UK because that is not the focus of our activity.

I said at the beginning of the meeting that I am honorary vice-president of Friends of the Far North Line. That line has seen journey times increase and performance decrease, which is an issue of concern. Going by what you have said in answer to my previous question, I take it that we cannot expect improved performance on right-time arrivals, because you are not focused on that.

Customers can expect to see improvements in the public performance measure. Did the train run, and did it arrive within four minutes and 59 seconds of its scheduled arrival time? The overall company performance has improved in recent times, which we should celebrate, but we are also seeing a rise in the agenda of what I call line-of-route issues. Some routes are more challenging to operate—those that have large lengths of single line, for example. Performance on them is lower than the company average, so we need to attack those just as hard as we have attacked the overall company performance.

Network Rail is responsible for more than half of ScotRail delays. What is happening to reduce delay, and how much of it is attributable to infrastructure investment, or to incidences of theft of cable, to which you referred earlier?

In any railway in the world, infrastructure will be the primary cause of delay because it impacts on all services, unlike a train failure, which impacts just on that service and subsequent services. It is pleasing to see that the infrastructure of Scotland’s railway is becoming more reliable. We have an asset improvement programme and we are investing millions of pounds to make the performance-impacting infrastructure more reliable. David Dickson oversees that investment programme. Compared with this time last year, the infrastructure of Scotland’s railway is now more reliable.

To put that in context, if we go back 10 years to 2006-07, we would be looking at there being more than 5,000 asset incidents on Scotland’s railway every year. In 2016-17, there were fewer than 3,000. That the number has gone down from more than 5,000 to fewer than 3,000 over 10 years illustrates the scale of improvement in asset performance. Between last year and this year, we have seen improvement, with a reduction of more than 8 per cent in the number of incidents. That has largely fed through from investment in the asset aimprovement plan, which we have talked about before and which was drawn up specifically to address the poorer-performing times that we saw more than a year ago. Investment is going in.

Outside of the asset improvement plan, we are looking to invest quite significant amounts more in the next year. We will ramp up investment on some of the line-side stuff, including drainage and devegetation work—which have traditionally been issues in Scotland—our fencing and so on. The plan is focused not only on worn-out assets, but on finding better alternatives that might be more reliable. We had set aside £24 million over three years for the asset improvement plan, and we are looking to invest even more to supplement it.

Rhoda Grant is right that Network Rail is responsible for just over 50 per cent of delays. Some of that is about issues with Network Rail south of the border that impact on trains coming up to Scotland. Network Rail Scotland is responsible for about 44 per cent of PPM failures in Scotland, and what happens south of the border is responsible for about 5 per cent of that. That gives you an idea of scale.

We are absolutely committed to improving our asset performance and are seeing that coming through in the figures. I expect that to continue for the rest of the control period and into control period 6.

Can you provide an update on preparations for the introduction of high-speed trains on routes from the central belt to Aberdeen and Inverness?

We have our first driver-training unit in place in Aberdeen, and we have taken on 20 per cent more drivers at that depot, so benefits are already being provided to the local economy. In May, we will introduce the first intercity service between Aberdeen and the central belt, which will mark the start of the transformation of the intercity network in Scotland. An enormous amount of work is being done behind the scenes. Angus Thom and his colleagues are overseeing that; he can give you an update.

The introduction of the high-speed trains is going well. As Alex Hynes said, the first driver-training train is operating between Aberdeen and Inverness. That is going exceptionally well. Our power cars and the rolling stock—the coaches that the passengers will sit in—are in refurbishment, as per the plan, and more high-speed trains will be delivered from February next year, with the aim of having a timetable change that puts the first four high-speed trains in service in May next year.

It is all looking good. I am looking forward to the trains coming on to the ScotRail network. They are going to be fabulous, and I think that our customers will really value them.

What will happen to journey times on their routes?

Journey times will improve: you heard earlier about the hourly service between Inverness and Perth, which will have an improved journey time. The driver-training train is going about in the far north at the moment, as I explained, and we are seeing some good figures for the performance of that train with regard to how it is accelerating, how it is handling the infrastructure and so on. That allows us to come to a more informed view on how best we can use the investment to improve further our timetabling and what we offer our customers.

I am conscious of time, but I will ask about bikes on trains. I have engaged with Mr Hynes outwith the committee on the issue, and will continue to do so. I saw a slide presentation that said that

“The Class 125s will have a capacity of at least 20 cycles.”

I appreciate that there are different types of trains—I have lots of information about toilets, tanks, braking systems and so on—but I would like Mr Hynes or Mr Thom to comment in general terms about cycle capacity. We talk about integrated transport. If we want to encourage it, we must maximise cycle capacity on our trains.

We recognise that there is a strong customer appetite for taking bikes on trains. Obviously, in an environment in which we do not have enough trains, we inevitably end up compromising on the service that we provide to all our customers, including those with bicycles. Our charter says that we guarantee carriage of two bikes on each train, but we acknowledge that, in some cases, we can deliver more. We do not promise that, because even if we get the person with the bike to where they are going, there might be a different type of train on the return journey, so we might struggle.

Do you still promise that there will be 20 bike spaces on the class 125s?

I will come to that in a minute. All the trains that we operate will be fully accessible by December 2019, which means that they will have easy-access areas. The use of tip-up seats creates more space for bikes, as well as for buggies and wheelchairs, which will be an improvement for customers. At the moment, we are seeing what is feasible on the HSTs.

We are having a conversation with the Scottish Government to find out how we can utilise guard’s vans on the HSTs for carriage of bikes. There are a number of practical issues that we need to address. For example, because those trains will be longer, the power car might sometimes be off the end of the platform. We need to find a way round that. In addition, the guard’s vans have big heavy doors that are difficult for staff and customers to operate. We are seeing what is possible, and we are in active discussions with Transport Scotland to determine how we can meet that particular demand. My view is that, on the intercity services in particular, passenger numbers will grow very significantly once we improve the service, starting in May. Given the demands, we will need to establish whether we can accommodate such provision.

Thank you.

There are a couple of questions that Fulton MacGregor was going to ask, which we will submit as written questions after the meeting, because of time constraints. I ask you to respond to them promptly, if possible, and I will circulate them to members. I apologise to Mr MacGregor for that.

We will move on to John Mason’s questions.

Some time ago, it was suggested that huge profits were flowing from Scotland to the Netherlands. More recently, we had press reports that funds were moving in the opposite direction and that Abellio ScotRail was having to be bailed out—lent money or whatever—from the other end. Could you clarify the financial position?

Abellio ScotRail is in a strong financial position: it made a profit in the first nine months of its operation. I hasten to say that Abellio ScotRail has never paid a dividend to its parent company, so any reports that the committee has read about large profits being made and repatriated to the parent company are just not true.

Recently, trading has not been as strong as we would like, which is one reason why the finances have been weaker. One of my jobs is to get the business back into the black. The improvements that we will deliver for customers next year will grow revenue significantly. The fact that we are trading less well than we expected is a revenue issue rather than a cost issue. I am looking forward to delivering those enhancements to customers next year—not just to create happy customers, but to drive revenue. Ultimately, taxpayers benefit from that, because the Scottish Government owns the franchise—we are just its short-term stewards. If we can get higher revenue, that will result in lower subsidy by the Scottish taxpayer.

You have already said that there will be some dramatic increases in your capacity—I think that you said that there will be 20 per cent more drivers, 25 per cent more coaches and 45 per cent more seat journeys. It is clear that if people do not use that extra capacity, your revenue will be under pressure. How confident are you that people will use it?

Where we have added new services and more capacity, we have seen growth. Many of the issues that we face are problems that are caused by growth: the trains are crowded because people want to use them. That is why we are investing in 25 per cent more carriages. I am absolutely convinced that the market exists for us once we get right the capacity and the quality of the product. Having provided 45 per cent more seats, it is for us to make sure that they are filled, so we have some great offers for customers so that we can make sure that that is the case.

Are you expecting a big jump in the number of passengers when you bring out the new trains, or do you think that numbers will build up gradually? Do you have a plan for that?

There is always a ramping-up of numbers. We assume that there will be a ramping-up, but it is our job to use marketing to accelerate it, so we have a really exciting launch campaign planned for next year for the new trains on the Edinburgh to Glasgow route and for the intercity network, in order to stimulate demand. People need to know that the product is there and that it is great. We want existing rail customers to use rail more frequently, but there is also a big untapped market of people who do not currently use rail. We want them on Scotland’s railway, as well.

12:30  

In the interests of time, I will keep my questions very specific and brief. It is important that we look at the new rail funding in ScotRail, which has been extensively covered in the media in the past few weeks. Mr Hynes, can you give me your numerical understanding of the funding for control period 6 and how it compares to that for control period 5?

The Scottish Government has published its high-level output specification, so we know what the Scottish Government wants to buy. However, we do not yet know what funds will be available from the Scottish Government, because there is a live negotiation between Westminster and Holyrood. I do not think that it would be appropriate for me to comment on that live negotiation. However, we are looking forward to being in receipt as soon as possible of the statement of funds that will be available from the Scottish Government.

Secondly, there seems to be an anomaly in the figures for how much money is required for the next control period. The ORR has given a figure of £1.9 billion and the Scottish Government has given a figure of £4.2 billion: there is a huge disparity between the numbers. Do you have a view on how much money will be required over the next control period to ensure the continued safety performance of Scottish railways?

The rail network is funded by a split between operations, maintenance and renewal of the network, and enhancements of the network. Obviously, there is more network to maintain and renew and more rail traffic on the infrastructure, so Network Rail has successfully argued that in order to maintain high levels of safety performance, we need to spend more money on operations, maintenance and renewal. As I understand it, the issue at debate is how much money is available for enhancements; that is what is currently being discussed between the UK and Scottish Governments. We have more than enough money to maintain a safe and reliable network; the issue is how much is available for the next control period—2019 to 2024—for enhancements, which is what the live negotiation is about.

Is it your understanding that the proposal is that there will be enough money for the required maintenance of Scotland’s tracks and that the argument is around how much additional money will be given for additional upgrades?

Yes.

Thank you. The third and final quick question, convener, is—

I am sorry, but you have had your three questions. Because of time, I am going to have to move to the final question, which—

Can I ask for a response in writing?

Yes. You may pose the question, which I ask Mr Hynes to respond to in writing.

It would be helpful if Mr Hynes will confirm how much funding is made available per passenger in Scotland.

The final question will be from me.

Money was taken out of the service quality incentive regime fund this year to subsidise rail travel. Can you give me an indication of how much money is in the SQUIRE fund? As you are the person who will present ideas on how it will be spent, have you submitted ideas to the Government? If not, will you submit them by the end of February?

We continually propose ideas to the Government because there is always money available in that fund. In September, we launched our free-ticket giveaway: within 24 hours, we gave away 40,000 return tickets, to the value of more than £1 million. We propose to launch a similar type of promotion for customers early in the new year.

Meanwhile, given the existence of the SQUIRE fund, we are also seeing what we can do to improve, for example, the station experience on routes that will get new trains. I am keen not just to introduce new trains; I want to relaunch the product, and that includes the station experience. We are currently talking to Transport Scotland about how we use some of that SQUIRE fund for station enhancements on the bits of the network that will benefit from new trains.

My understanding is that the SQUIRE fund should be used not necessarily for ticket giveaways but for improving access to, and experience and use of, stations. Is that how you propose to use the fund now that you are the person who influences how it is spent?

We are keen to invest the money in capital projects that will improve the customer experience for a sustained period of time. That is our preference.

Just to conclude, I ask you to let the committee have a list of ideas that you have come up with and submitted to Transport Scotland for use of the SQUIRE fund.

I am afraid that we have run out of time. I thank all the witnesses for attending the committee and giving evidence. You have undertaken to respond to the committee in writing on one or two matters. Unfortunately, there are some questions that we were unable to ask you, but the clerks will ensure that they are sent to you in writing, shortly.

12:35 Meeting continued in private until 12:54.