Proceeding contribution from Norman Baker (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 2 February 2010. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Thameslink.
Thameslink
I congratulate the hon. Member for Bedford (Patrick Hall) on his speech and on the work that he has done with the all-party Thameslink Route group. I checked this morning, and I am a member of that group; I am happy to be so. My remarks are predominantly about the long-term plans—not too long-term, I hope—for the improvement of the railway line, but I want first to make one or two brief comments about First Capital Connect, because that is relevant to the Thameslink project. It is clear that First Capital Connect has let passengers down badly. There are serious issues about the rostering of train drivers and whether they will be expected to work overtime as a matter of course, which effectively creates vulnerability to working to rule. There is also the serious issue of whether more money should have been spent on training more train drivers. That is relevant to the parliamentary question, tabled by the hon. Member for Bedford, about the number of extra train drivers who would be required to operate the enhanced Thameslink service. The Minister gave a figure of 80, but I should be interested to know whether that assumes the existing working pattern for drivers or, as I hope, a more sensible approach to working pattern and arrangements for drivers. In passing, I should say that the consequences for the south of London have not perhaps been as bad as those for the north of London, partly because Southern has coped well with the unexpected problems that it has had to deal with because of First Capital Connect's inadequacies. The Minister will be aware that there is a considerable movement under way in the House in favour of First Capital Connect's having its franchise removed. I refer to the early-day motion tabled by my hon. Friend the Member for Sutton and Cheam (Mr. Burstow), which many hon. Members—of all parties, I think—have signed. Because the debate relates to the timetable and the 2015 dates and stages set out by the hon. Member for Bedford, it would be useful if the Minister said something about his intentions for the First Capital Connect franchise. It can end naturally in 2012, or be extended to 2015. It is, I think, clear that the Minister and the Department wanted to extend it to 2015, because of the coterminosity with the end of the Southern franchise, which was clearly in their minds. Many of my constituents, and those of other hon. Members present for the debate, might be unhappy to be told that there will be another five years with that company in charge, given how abysmally it has performed so far. A third option, of course, would be for the Minister to remove the franchise early, as happened with the Great North Eastern Railway and National Express. Some early clarification on that point would be helpful. If the Minister cannot give an answer today, can he say at what point the Government intend to make a statement of intention about the First Capital Connect franchise?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 505 c40-1WH
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Construction Railways Passengers Overcrowding First Capital Connect Bombardier Transportation Thameslink line
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-02-23 10:07:32 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_618293
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_618293
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_618293