The final item of business today is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-15202, in the name of Alex Rowley, on the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers strike over Caledonian sleeper concerns. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes that RMT members working on the Caledonian Sleeper service are in dispute with the new operator, Serco, and have voted by nine to one for both strike action and action short of a strike; understands that Serco has failed to address numerous defects with the Caledonian Sleeper rolling stock despite lengthy talks between RMT negotiators and Serco management and that this failure has led to the resounding vote for action by RMT members; acknowledges that RMT’s health and welfare concerns surrounding the Caledonian Sleeper rolling stock include smoke detectors being disconnected, toilets being inoperable, lighting and heating systems not working, air conditioning problems throughout the summer, no hot water in some coaches for hand washing purposes, water boilers not working, which means that staff must carry boiling water through coaches while the train is moving, pungent smells from toilets, an issue with batteries under some coaches also releasing a strong smell, loss of power in coaches during journeys, which means staff have to find alternative accommodation during the night for irate passengers and serious problems with a number of wheel flats, which has led to some services being completely cancelled and passengers being bussed from Scotland to London, and believes that RMT has identified over 200 defects with the Caledonian Sleeper rolling stock and that Serco’s failure to resolve these issues demonstrates that a below acceptable standard of service is being provided to members of the public across Scotland, including those from the Cowdenbeath constituency.
17:08
When I read that the RMT members who work on the Caledonian sleeper were going on strike, I was interested to see what the problem was. As someone who has worked and lived in London and used the sleeper fairly regularly, I am aware of the importance of the sleeper service to people in Scotland who go to and from London, and indeed to the Scottish economy. I wanted to find out exactly what was going on.
To the credit of the workers on the sleeper, they raised issues that astonished me. I was astounded to see that such a major means of transport and vital artery of Scottish infrastructure has been left to operate with numerous defects that the new operator, Serco, has failed to address. Looking into it further, I found that the working conditions for RMT workers on the Caledonian sleeper were of serious concern. The health and welfare of workers should be the utmost priority of every employer, and there is never a justifiable excuse for letting such concerns take a back seat.
The RMT has identified more than 200 faults with the rolling stock that is being operated by Serco, including smoke detectors that have been disconnected, toilets that are inoperable, lighting and heating systems that are not working, a lack of hot water in some coaches, air conditioning problems throughout the summer and a multitude of other serious defects. The result of those faults is difficult working conditions and a failure by the rail operator to provide acceptable levels of service for passengers.
The total Scottish Government expenditure on tendering the sleeper and ScotRail contracts was more than £13.5 million—money that could have been reinvested in reducing passenger fares and providing services. I echo the sentiments of the RMT’s general secretary, Mick Cash, who said:
“This is yet another example of Serco winning public sector contracts and failing to deliver for the tax payer, passengers and staff.”
If the Scottish Government is committed to the process, serious consideration must be given to addressing the issues that arise from it. It would be extremely useful for the Scottish Government to commit to raising the RMT’s safety concerns at its next franchise performance meeting with Serco Caledonian Sleepers, which will take place later this month.
In a spirit of helpfulness, I ask whether Mr Rowley is aware that, through the Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, there were constructive talks yesterday between the RMT and Serco that have progressed a number of matters that will, I am sure, feature in his speech.
I was aware that discussions were due to take place again yesterday, through ACAS, and I hope that a further strike can be avoided. As I said, all credit is due to the workers on these services who are losing money by taking strike action to highlight what should be a concern for the public right across Scotland as well as a major concern for the Government. It is important that the talks continue. I have not been made aware of the outcome of the latest talks, but I welcome it if those talks are making progress. It is important to have this debate so that the company knows that the Parliament is concerned about the problems that have arisen.
It is also important to raise the concerns that the RMT has repeatedly expressed over the inclusion of an indemnity clause in rail franchising agreements. It claims that that merely serves to undermine industrial relations. The Scottish Government should be committed to addressing the concerns of a recognised trade union and the negative impacts that the terms of a public franchise agreement are having on its members. The means by which the franchise agreement currently operates do not give rise to meaningful negotiation when matters of dispute arise. If the Scottish Government insists on awarding public contracts to private train operating companies, more must be done to alleviate the tensions that are being caused through poor terms and conditions, which allow operators to benefit through not engaging fully in the industrial relations process.
At this stage, I feel that it is absolutely necessary for the Scottish Government to meet RMT officials to fully examine the serious concerns that they have raised and to work together to find a way forward. Even given the progress that has been made, a meeting between the Scottish Government and RMT representatives of the workers on the Caledonian sleeper is important. A crucial public service—the Caledonia sleeper—is suffering through poor operation, and the Scottish Government should feel obliged to do all that it can to find a resolution to the issues and work with the RMT and Serco to alleviate the industrial relations problems.
The sleeper is an historic asset to the United Kingdom that has operated since the 1870s to connect London and Scotland, and it is shameful to read about the faults and insufficiencies that are being experienced today in such a service. We should be proud of our history of rail invention and development. The first ever railway journey took place in the UK, and our design and technological advancement was exported all over the world. The steam engine was invented in Scotland and the steam locomotive invented in England, so we have a shared history of globally recognised success in the field of rail transportation.
The Caledonian sleeper service embodies that shared connection—a rail service joining London and Scotland. It is important that we take seriously the concerns that have been raised. It is also important that, as parliamentarians we call for the very best service. I am aware that investment is planned to take place over the next 18 months to two years, but it is absolutely clear that the state in which the carriages are being run is not acceptable. Furthermore, given the workers’ conditions and, indeed, the service on offer, we cannot wait that time. I hope that we will hear from the minister that he also takes those matters seriously, and that he will take action to address them.
17:15
I welcome Alex Rowley’s debate. My overriding interest is not just our customers but the employees, the company and, importantly, our reputation for national efficiency, service and transport.
If the Presiding Officer will indulge me, I will look at where we have been, where we are and, as important, where we are going. There was no doubt that the sleeper service had to be upgraded. As far back as October 2012, in its sixth report of that year, the cross-party Infrastructure and Capital Investment Committee emphasised that the renewal of the passenger rail franchise was essential. Of course, the sleeper service was a part of that and we welcomed the commitment of both the UK and Scottish Governments to upgrade it.
In 2012, the Scottish Government announced that the service would be franchised, as we know, to run for 15 years from mid-2015. Importantly, it was stated that a total of £100 million would be invested in new and additional rolling stock. Part of the franchise was that the franchisee had to commit to replacing the mark 2 and mark 3 rolling stock by 2018. As we know, that will take time, but we cannot gainsay that it was absolutely right for staff to highlight concerns of guests facing defects, whether there were 200 or 160 of them.
Those two aspects—the replacement of the rolling stock and the current situation—coincide to suggest that there has been a lack of investment. New capital investment and regular maintenance should have been a feature earlier on, hence the need for an upgrade. Although the defects have been raised, I believe that no health and safety rules have been infringed. Of course, due diligence of the vehicles’ condition was required and, indeed, improvement was a condition of the invitation to tender.
That said, the question is what the company’s response to the problems was. In my many years of management, I always tried to be responsive to employee issues favourably raised, rather than enduring action that ultimately affects the employees, the company and its customers.
It is better for both employee and employer representatives to sit down together—separately or, as we heard, with ACAS, which they did yesterday. I hope that that will lead to an amicable solution being achieved or, at the least, a process on how to move forward not just to itemise the issues but to agree a programme of resolution. I understand that that is happening, or that it certainly will happen due to employee involvement and management openness.
Carriages will be released for reliability improvement work, 12 additional Alstom employees will be in post to support fleet maintenance, fitters will be deployed to cover train departures at key stations and there will be additional folk on the old mark 2 lounge cars, the oldest vehicles in the fleet. I am also advised that the replacement of higher-end vehicles for the mark 2 has been covered to ensure resilience.
On that basis, I am sure that, until the new vehicles are in place—I am sure that we all wish that that could be tomorrow—by working on the issues together, resolving them and focusing on issues such as air conditioning and fire alarms, we can build on the public performance measure and right-time marginal improved performance, as there was an improvement in performance in period 8 in 2015 on a year-on-year comparison, and induce greater sleeper performance in the interests of increased passenger traffic, which Alex Rowley indicated he wishes to see.
17:20
I congratulate Alex Rowley on lodging an important motion, and I want to make two declarations. First, I declare my membership of the RMT parliamentary group, which I am very privileged to be part of. Secondly, my office is based in the iconically named Highland rail house and our immediate neighbour bar one is the Caledonian sleeper service. Indeed, I relatively frequently meet the managing director of that service, Mr Peter Strachan. I am happy to go on the record as saying that he is a very straight-talking and engaging guy, who certainly resolved a couple of issues that I took to him. I know that there was a conscious decision to base the service in the Highlands, and I absolutely commend its procurement policy.
Peter Strachan has told me that he is a railwayman through and through. He formerly worked for British Rail, and he has said on the internet that he is
“Leading the Serco team responsible for transforming the Sleeper service into an outstanding hospitality service that is emblematic of the best of Scotland.”
The managing director knows the transformation that I want. I want the entire rail network to be viewed as a public asset that serves the public, and I understand that the majority of the public want that, too.
We know, for instance, that the east coast service has failed twice under private franchise. It was a success when it was run by the state. We might have seen that as a model to be rolled out across the various franchises, but Mr Cameron saw that as an opportunity to make further profit for his friends, of course. There are break clauses in all those contracts, and I hope that they are utilised at some point. In the meantime, I want the service to be a success. Like many, I have no regard for Serco or its working practices, but I certainly want the service to be a success. That will be a challenge because of the rolling stock.
I am grateful for the RMT’s briefing, as I am sure other members are. That briefing highlights the public money that is connected to private rail.
Due to rail works in my native Lochaber in the very near future, the sleeper will go to Oban. That is not just an opportunity to provide a service to the west Highlands; it is perhaps an opportunity to apply a different service. It is a great opportunity for Argyll and the isles. As many have said, the journey is iconic. However, I am trying to envisage that iconic journey
“that is emblematic of the best of Scotland”
if I cannot go to the toilet, if the air quality is poor—air quality is a very important issue—and if there are staff going about carrying boiling water. What assessment is being done of that? I am trying to envisage the journey if there is a pungent smell from the toilets. The catalogue of faults should be addressed as a matter of urgency.
Serco is certainly to be commended for engaging in talks some months ago, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I am delighted that ACAS is involved.
The issues seem to be fundamental, and I would not have thought that anyone would take issue with their resolution. They seem to be fundamental to any public service, let alone one that we put forward as “emblematic”.
There is some substance to the suggestion that the inclusion of indemnity clauses encourages the train operating companies not to engage meaningfully. People may very well be concerned about the role that that plays in industrial relations.
I commend the role of the RMT. Health and safety, the safety of workers at their work and the safety of the public who are served should absolutely be at the front and centre of everything that we do. I hope that Serco will recognise the importance of health and safety in train operations, that it will engage meaningfully in talks, and that the Scottish Government will play its part in the process, as public money is connected with this. I am sure that the minister would want that to be properly disbursed.
I hope that the matters are fully addressed. It is important to say that the concerns have been legitimately raised, and they should be legitimately addressed.
17:24
I thank Alex Rowley for bringing this matter before Parliament. The Caledonian sleeper service is perhaps seen by some who think that they live in the jet age as a relic of a bygone time. The fact is that many people—especially those in the north of Scotland—rely on it to give them a service that will take them to London overnight and bring them home in the same way. For that reason, regardless of how traditional its appearance is, the service is vital in the peripheral areas of Scotland.
It is therefore important that we recognise that the service must be preserved—that should be one of our priorities. To that end, the UK Government pre-emptively offered £50 million for refurbishing the service, with the condition that the Scottish Government would match that funding. As a result, £100 million is waiting to be spent on refurbishing the trains and replacing some rolling stock. That money needs to be spent as soon as possible, and the schedule allows us to do that in reasonable time. However, it is important that the quality of the service is increased.
The nature of the service is such that it is important to many, but the problems that Alex Rowley outlined in his motion and during his speech tell us that the service is not operating as it should. For that reason, we should all be concerned. However, I am concerned that the problems have resulted in industrial action, because that indicates a failure somewhere in the process.
The franchise agreement makes it squarely the Scottish Government’s responsibility to ensure that enforcement takes place and that the standards that were discussed when the franchise was eventually agreed are held to. If those standards are not being maintained, it is the Scottish Government’s responsibility to properly police the agreement. If that option has been exhausted, industrial action can from my standpoint be understood, if perhaps not justified.
We heard in the intervention from the Minister for Transport and Islands that discussions have taken place and that progress has been made. I look forward to hearing more about that, perhaps in the minister’s closing speech. However, I still believe that it is the job of the Government, not the trade union, to ensure that enforcement takes place.
Another thing that worries me about strike action is the effect that it might have on the service. The service will always be marginal, which is why so much Government support goes into ensuring that it continues. Over the years, rumours have often circulated that the service will be terminated, but that has never happened, because Government understands the service’s significance and importance.
The problems that we have heard about tonight will inevitably discourage passengers from using the service, but I suggest that strike action, which is perhaps unnecessary—
Will the member take an intervention?
Yes, briefly.
I am grateful that the member mentioned the problems. Does he agree that it is failure to resolve the fundamental issues—such as toilets not working and problems with the air conditioning—that will dissuade people, rather than discussion about the resolution of those problems?
Indeed, but the Government should have the whip hand in ensuring that the work is done and done quickly. Surely it is within the terms of the franchise agreement—perhaps the minister will tell us—that financial penalties can be imposed on the franchisee for failure to maintain the standards.
To complete the remark that I was making when I took the intervention, I am concerned, given the effect that the problems might have on people’s willingness to use the service, that strike action—resulting in delays or the removal of services on certain days—might have a similar on-going effect.
I want the service to survive. I want it to be of high quality, and I do not want passengers to be standing on the platform without a train for any reason. That is why I want the matter resolved, but I do not think that strike action is the way ahead.
17:29
I congratulate Alex Rowley on introducing the debate, on shining a spotlight on the gross failures of Serco and on giving us an opportunity to express solidarity with the employees and, indeed, the travelling public, given that some of the defects on board the trains are potentially dangerous for the public as well as for the staff.
As we have heard, the franchise was awarded in 2014, with a commitment to replace rolling stock by 2018. However, with two years to go until that deadline is met, relations have deteriorated and conditions for employees and customers have got worse. In response to media questioning on 22 December, which was the day of the strike action, Peter Strachan, managing director of Serco Caledonian Sleepers, said:
“Both Serco, and more importantly over 1,000 of our paying passengers, are being hugely inconvenienced by this wholly unnecessary action by the RMT in the run-up to Christmas.”
I suggest that perhaps a greater inconvenience to the paying passenger is to travel in below-par accommodation where their safety is potentially put at risk and where the staff who serve them are intensely unhappy about the situation. RMT representatives have expressed frustration at the apparent resistance to addressing the key issues, which are highlighted in the motion and which are significant for Serco’s long-term ability to provide a value-for-money service. It is for that reason that RMT members backed industrial action by nine to one in the ballot.
The decision to award the contract to Serco was clearly unfortunate, given that management of the service thus far has been poor. Mike Cash, the general secretary of the RMT, pointed out:
“Our members have been unhappy with Serco’s management of the iconic service from Scotland to London since the very early days of them taking on this 15-year franchise. This is yet another example of Serco winning public sector contracts and failing to deliver for the tax payer, passengers and staff.”
I used to use the London to Edinburgh bit of the service when I was an MP. The extended route into the Highlands is perhaps one of the most iconic routes that exist in the country, and it is certainly a service that we can be proud of. For it to be operated by a controversial outsourcing giant and for the standards to have slipped so early in its tenure is a serious problem that speaks volumes.
Apart from the Serco issue, there are other issues. For example, in April last year, the general secretary of the Transport Salaried Staffs Association, Manuel Cortes, described the separate tenders for ScotRail and Caledonian sleepers as
“market fundamentalism of the highest order.”
He stated that
“every knowledgeable commentator argues that the biggest problem facing our industry is fragmentation.”
That leads on to consideration of wider problems in the railways, which I accept is more within the province of the UK Government than the Scottish Government. However, Christian Wolmar, who is acknowledged as one of the UK’s leading commentators on transport matters, has said that
“Fragmentation is the problem, not the solution”
and that there is
“only one way back to a rational cheap railway”,
which is to
“Bring all the disparate parts together under unified control ... that cannot be done without reintegrating the track and the trains.”
Fragmentation leads to inefficiency and, ultimately, higher costs for people and the kind of lower standards attested to by the RMT. Action for rail, which is the campaign for a railway that puts people before profit, argues that the privatisation of railways has led to a fragmented and dysfunctional system. I am glad that the Labour Party at UK level has policies to address that issue.
I hope that in the future Serco representatives will approach discussions with workers more constructively than they have done in the past and will do so with a mind to restoring and maintaining standards. My second hope is that the lessons that have been provided in this and previous contracts will serve as cautionary tales for future procurement decisions.
Having no choice should not be a viable reason for awarding a franchise. I hope that in the future the Government will provide evidence that all alternatives have been fully and properly explored and that it will consider other factors above immediate costs. Let us learn lessons for the future, but let us also do everything that we can to hasten resolution of the immediate problems.
17:34
I congratulate Alex Rowley on raising this debate, which has allowed discussion on an important and significant subject.
Members are certainly entitled to expect me to have interrogated a number of the points that we have heard. I have had a close look at the concerns that Alex Rowley and others have raised, and there is a degree of satisfaction in the reports that I have had back. The discussions at ACAS between the RMT and Serco have been reported to me as making progress on issues in dispute, and members have welcomed that, but it will be for the RMT and indeed Serco to say what their perspectives are on that progress.
Chic Brodie helpfully described the nature of the franchise that the Scottish Government has concluded to show how that can progress some of the issues. Fundamentally, the new rolling stock will make a big difference to a number of the issues under discussion if we are to take the concerns at face value, which of course we do.
John Finnie carried out a careful balancing act between a degree of respect for some of the management that he has close relations with, if for no other reason than proximity to the head office, and respect for the RMT. His fundamental belief in a socialist green utopia with publicly run transport services is not in the current remit for how we can award contracts, but changes to the legislation are coming. We might not have thought that they would happen in a time of a Conservative UK Government, but if that legislative change happens there will be more options for how rail franchises can be awarded.
On the indemnity issues, there are conditions attached in the franchise agreement. It is not simply a question of substitute cash. To cover Alex Johnstone’s point, I note that there are also conditions attached to performance and, where there are breaches, penalties are triggered.
The indemnity issue that I raised is not unique to the case that we are discussing. The RMT has long had an understandable concern that the issue has made train operating companies less inclined to engage.
Let me make it perfectly clear that, if there are any disputes, I expect operators to engage fully and comprehensively, to have proper dialogue and to arrive at a resolution. Ministers have to be convinced in relation to some of the conditions around franchisees’ non-performance, conditions being met and efforts being made to resolve matters, and there is much to this issue by way of conditions—it is not taken as read.
I say to Malcolm Chisholm that we should be careful in talking about issues putting public safety at risk. If there were health and safety issues, the Office of Rail and Road would have something to say about it. We recognise that there are concerns, but there is a programme to address much of that, and we should be careful with the language that we use about the Caledonian sleeper service.
I respect the fact that there has been an impact on the travelling public at a critical time over the winter period, and I want to cover some of the issues of performance and improvement. No one takes the matter lightly and we all want to avoid any future strike action. However, the reality is that the vehicles that are being used are up to 40 years old and some of the faults are not new given the ageing nature of the rolling stock. Investment is long overdue, but the way we have conducted the franchise will allow that investment to be made. That will benefit the staff and the travelling public, and it has to be welcomed.
Other benefits in the franchise include improvements to the produce that is used and the bedding and linen, and some other branding opportunities. There will be greater local benefit and benefit to Scotland as a consequence of the franchise. However, I recognise that faults are frustrating for passengers and staff, who have to manage the conditions. We want to have the best possible service and to reduce any sense of employees feeling aggrieved. The maintenance plan has been reviewed, and I believe that it is credible and achievable. It is a plan for rectifying a number of the faults that have been identified, but the big solution is the new rolling stock that will be delivered.
The disturbances on Christmas day and boxing day caused great inconvenience. I hope that we will avoid that in future and that the work at ACAS will bring the parties closer together. I encourage people to continue talking.
In responding to a recent parliamentary question, I specifically compared performance and cancellation rates against those of the previous year. There has been a lot of negativity about the Caledonian sleeper service, but, in the last full rail period before the strike, the public performance measure and right-time arrival rates were marginally better than they were in the corresponding period of the previous year. There were also fewer service cancellations, pro rata, than there were in the previous reporting year. In addition, patronage grew compared with the previous year.
It is important that we state those facts when we talk about the Caledonian sleeper service. In some respects, the service has performed better in the winter period than some people might have expected it to do, considering the weather issues that we have faced this year.
Since March, staff have benefited from a 3 per cent pay rise, new uniforms and a new focus on training and development. Their attitude and approach to customer service have been highly praised across a range of media by their guests among the travelling public. I know that Serco will reflect on that and recognise that people appreciate the value and quality that the staff add to the service. The staff are ambassadors for what is an iconic Scottish service.
I have talked about the benefits of the Scottish food and drink menus and new bedding that are part of the overhaul of the service.
I think that the new rolling stock will make the difference—that new fleet of 75 dedicated sleeper carriages, which will be delivered by 2018, and construction of which has started. The offering of a new, bespoke, high-quality train fleet, in preference to continued reliance on the older stock, was unique to the Serco bid for the franchise. The new trains will make a big difference to the quality of the service.
I am not resting on my laurels. As I said, I have interrogated the concerns that have been raised with me, so that I could be assured that a maintenance plan is in place, that there are commitments to addressing the trade union’s concerns, and that the quality of staff is appreciated. I continue to urge the union and the operator to work in partnership to continue to address those matters, so that they avert future strike action and improve the quality of the service that is paid for by the public and subsidised by taxpayers, to ensure that we get the best service.
I think that the arrival of the new trains will make the difference. Until then, we must work together, in the spirit in which members have approached this debate, to ensure that progress is made.
Meeting closed at 17:42.Previous
Decision Time