We are working together for a brighter West Yorkshire. We want to make our region the best place to live, to work, to learn, to start a business and raise a family. Alongside the five West Yorkshire local authorities - Bradford, Calderdale, Kirklees, Leeds and Wakefield - we work in partnership to deliver services and investments that directly benefit the people in our region: transforming lives, boosting opportunity, connecting people and communities.
Our work is focused on five key objectives:
This is a bold, long-term vision which will take a sustained effort to achieve over many years. You can find out more about our activities and priorities for 2024-25 in our Corporate Plan.
West Yorkshire needs significant investment in its rail network to support economic growth, improve accessibility and deliver against our decarbonisation targets. Our region is at the heart of the North's rail network, so investment here unlocks reliability, and capacity benefits and enables our region to contribute to a stronger and faster growing national economy and the reason why we have submitted a response.
What have been the barriers to establishing stable and transparent long-term investment pipelines in the past and how can they be overcome?
Lack of Long-term Vision and integration with Local Growth Plans
The current approach to planning for major railway enhancements is fundamentally flawed, and this leads to difficulties establishing a stable and transparent long-term investment pipeline. The current, scheme by scheme approach is driven by the lack of a long-term vision or defined outcomes against which the industry can determine the most suitable interventions.
With no single vision, the industry is stuck in a cycle of developing and delivering the solution to the next problem, with no way to assess whether the investment being made now is the correct solution for the long-term. The programmes are also working independent of one another, with a lack of ownership for the integration required with each other, and the wider network and a rolling stock strategy.
The fragmented nature of the industry and competing priorities create confusion over roles and responsibilities. This hampers coordination between local stakeholders, train operating companies and Network Rail and there is often a tension between profit driven motives and customer experience which makes it difficult to align interests for long term investment and is further hampered by the lack of a long-term strategic vision and clear agreed objectives for the rail network.
Even when a long-term vision for the network is set out by the Government it often changes. For example, in the past five years, we experienced the cancellation of HS2, the published Integrated Rail Plan in 2021 was never implemented, with a substantial reduced scope of Northern Powerhouse Rail (NPR) as part of Network North leaving the eastern authorities in limbo without a solution to better connect West Yorkshire with Sheffield and the Midlands.
In the meantime, land still remains safeguarded for HS2, hampering housing and employment allocations and supressing economic growth in Leeds. While we might want some land to be released for development, some land is still required and should be safeguarded for Leeds capacity and onward travel requirements. There is currently no identified solution to resolve the capacity issue at Leeds (which is a known bottleneck on the rail network in the North). Delivery funding for a Bradford new rail station and improved connectivity from the city to Manchester is still uncertain.
Where funding appears to be committed, such as electrification of the Calder Valley line between Leeds and Bradford, the project is limited with no effort is made to deliver something better to maximise the benefits. It would make more sense to electrify the entire Calder Valley route towards Halifax, Huddersfield, Rochdale and Manchester Victoria, which would provide a second electrified Trans-Pennine link on one of train operator Northern’s busiest routes and an alternative electrified route for TransPennine and freight services.
This would be the logical next step but what is currently proposed will still mean most Calder Valley services will be operated with diesel or bi-mode stock for the foreseeable future as they operate across Bradford to/from Leeds. Electrification of the rest of the Calder Valley route could benefit with development and construction costs reduced by building on the specialist knowledge, supply chains and teams pulled together to deliver the TransPennine and Leeds – Bradford route upgrade with a long term committed pipeline. Based on the feedback we received from supply chain, the “feast and famine” cycle of investment is not helpful to the cost and skill retention of the supply chain.
This requires a change in approach, and a long-term vision would help with this. Often, infrastructure options are identified and costed, and then a service proposition is developed. By developing a vision, working with regional authorities such as the Combined Authority, we can be clear what service is required to deliver the economic, social and environmental outcomes informed by data, and then task the industry with identifying the solution which achieves this.
Transport Scotland has provided long-term stability in the management of the railways and has delivered significant amounts of electrification through a widespread programme, achieving much lower cost per Km, with a target of decarbonising the whole network by 2035.
The future planned model under Great British Railways (GBR) should allow a return to long-term planning and strong local partnerships working closely with the mayors and will enable the development of a clear long-term pipeline.
Rail also continues to be planned largely in isolation from other modes across most of England. In West Yorkshire we have a clear vision for integrated transport, as part of our Local Growth Plan to deliver growth in our region starting with bus franchising, delivering a mass transit system and a new transport brand/customer proposition for travel, across ticketing, information, waiting environments and fleet. Rail investment needs to take a different approach cognisant of regional aspirations and allow development of local rail networks to deliver economic, social and environmental outcomes to support local transport plans, growth plans and fully integrated with other modes.
Franchise model
Whilst the franchise system arguably drove investment in rolling stock, stations and technology, the short-term nature of the model incentivised operators to front load investment and then do very little in later years. This drove unsustainable outcomes and unnecessary complexity which undermined operational delivery, such as on TransPennine Express, where multiple fleet types were introduced simultaneously where the supply of new vehicles could not be achieved quickly enough by a single rolling stock manufacturer, or within the timescales needed by an operator to support their business case.
The franchise model also made it difficult for operators to justify significant investment in assets, e.g. larger-scale station redevelopments, as the payback period was insufficient to make a business case.
Under the franchise model, the railway has also managed the sources of major costs and revenues separately through the vertical separation of track and train. This has inhibited joined-up planning of cost-effective investment such as line-speed improvements to growing markets, as costs and benefits of such investment would be borne by separate entities. It is essential that any future model under rail reform allows the railway’s costs and revenues to be considered together at the local level.
In West Yorkshire, we encounter significant issues in promoting new rail stations, with revenue going to the Treasury while operators ask the Combined Authority to underwrite the additional operating costs. This is a typical example of not considering the cost and revenue of investment in totality.
Funding
Railway investment is constrainted by specific funding pots and the uncertain, stop-start nature of funding. The Minimum Viable Product (MVP) approach is now commonplace with the scope of schemes being tailored to hit Treasury metrics including Benefit Cost Ratio targets, while underplaying the wider economic benefits (which are difficult to capture in financial terms) or other benefits including performance improvements.
This ‘bare minimum’ approach means that in future years, there will be a need to return to previous schemes to rework which will result in higher overall costs.
Leeds existing station is at capacity and located on a constrained site. Funding has been identified to improve internal circulation to deal with forecast increased passenger numbers but nothing to improve onward travel requirements including interchange with public transport, parking and pick up drop off. Originally this would have been delivered by HS2, but following cancellation, it does not fall within the scope for Rail Network Enhancement Pipeline (RNEP) funding and there is no alternative funding. This is causing serious congestion problems now on the adjacent highway network at Leeds station and will only worsen at the station as passenger numbers grow as a result of NPR and the TransPennine route upgrade.
In terms of funding, it is important to move away from a BCR driven approach and recognise that a different approach to appraisal can strengthen investment cases for the North. Currently transport projects are appraised where land values and time savings are disproportionately weighted towards London and the South East which undermines transformational projects that could significantly improve connectivity across the North and support regeneration and decarbonisation.
What funding sources need to be drawn on to plan such pipelines and is an appropriate framework in place for the allocation of funding to different projects?
To plan stable and long-term investment in the future of rail, a broad range of sources is needed to support both the maintenance and development of the railways. This needs to ensure there are sufficient resources to deliver against both local and national aspirations delivering economic growth to areas that most need it. This could be delivered in a number of ways including the following:
National Investment Programme
Enabling a GBR-led programme of investment which is targeted at outcomes aligned to wider government objectives for example decarbonisation which would require a rolling programme of electrification and investment in new rolling stock. This national programme requires long-term cross-party Government commitment to avoid the current costly cycle of a frequent start-stop approach to delivering national infrastructure.
Devolved Funding
In West Yorkshire we have invested £200m in our local rail network over the past decade using a mixture of devolved funding including CRSTS, Transforming Cities Funding and the West Yorkshire Transport fund to deliver new stations, accessibility improvements and rail park and ride.
We recognise that Strategic Mayoral Authorities like us will be eligible for the Integrated Settlement from 2026. With additional allocation, we could use the funding within the integrated settlement to support a range of activities such as business case development and scheme delivery. This would support the region to align rail investment to priorities to achieve the region’s economic, social and environmental objectives.
This also requires the railway to review its contractual relationship with the Strategic Authorities instead of treating them as third parties. There should be a single investment pipeline for the region whether it is delivered by the railway or by Strategic Authorities.
Private Sector Funding
It is possible that private developers could benefit from major rail enhancements. These funding opportunities could be captured with greater confidence in government investment which would boost private investors’ appetite to invest. Mechanisms such as developer contributions, currently managed through Section 106 agreements, and Land Value Capture should be used to maximum effect to support this.
In West Yorkshire, we have a track record in attracting private investment in rail enhancements. With an agreed pipeline for investment established, working to a shared industry vision, schemes could be more effectively developed and delivered without disruption. This approach would also allow schemes to be developed and prioritised not just by railway need, but in the wider context, synchronising investment in the railway with surrounding developments including housing, education, and other transport modes, leading to much stronger outcomes for the region.
How could a potential pipeline provide transparency and certainty for industry?
A long-term vision is needed as a target for any pipeline to ultimately achieve. Currently, the industry is working to 5 to 10 years, driven by Control Periods.
Our West Yorkshire Rail strategy sets out our priorities, next steps and interventions required to meet the challenges of boosting productivity, enabling inclusive growth, tacking the climate emergency and delivering 21st century transport. This aligns with Transport for the North’s (TfN) strategic transport plan (STP) which also provides a rail vision for 2050.
It would be sensible for any pipeline to cover the same period, so that it can be fully understood what needs to happen when over that period to achieve the outcomes set out. This should be split as follows:
High level: A 30-year funding envelope
Indicative: 10-year funding allocation
Firm: 5-year funding allocation
Project assurance should be aligned to timescales with those being delivered in the 0-to-5 year window having a high degree of confidence and certainty, with scope locked down, and a clear plan for delivery. Those at 5 to 10 would be expected to have less certainty but be actively targeting development to Network Rail Engineering Stage 4 (single option design) to inform the firm allocation for the following five years.
Supporting this approach, simplification of the design and development process including business case appraisal for schemes would deliver efficiencies and enable outcomes to be achieved earlier, particularly where Programme Business Cases are used with the ability for the industry and supply chain to then manage individual scheme costs within a programme budget against deliverable outcomes.
A smooth programme of delivery will support the industry to achieve the vision, especially for electrification and signalling, where resources can remain active to retain skills and expertise, helping to reduce overall costs, as demonstrated in Scotland, and across Europe.
For a pipeline approach to be effective, a commitment is required from Government not to significantly change the scope or status of a programme or scheme once it has progressed beyond a given point of development, and where possible, a cross-party political consensus should be gained for the long-term plan, avoiding any disruption to the pipeline resulting from a change in Government.
By locking down the near-term, and having greater certainty of the future pipeline, confidence can be given to the private sector (both investors and supply chain) making the industry an attractive proposition for investment. Government funding should be targeted at development, narrowing down options and driving assurance, with the opportunity for private sector investment to be secured where they are best placed to take the risk. This should also be supported by a clearer industry framework which reduces the number of interfaces which private investors need to interact with.
What role should the industry play in the development of this pipeline and how should Government engage with industry in its delivery?
With parts of the rail industry returning to public ownership and an integrated structure, this approach must change, with operators taking much more of delivery role, and local leaders partnering with Great British Railways, acting in the capacity of regional specifiers for rail services to inform the scope and remit of investment, aligned to local needs and opportunities supporting local growth plans and informed by data and insights.
The easiest way to do this is through the development and agreement of future network configuration states with an outcome-led approach agreeing service levels covering frequency, capacity and speed - determined and informed by publications such as the TfN Strategic Transport Plan and Local Transport Plans.
What role would a long-term rail investment pipeline play in developing the railway supply workforce?
A key challenge with the current stop/start approach to investment across disparate programmes is the inability to effectively deploy and retain resource. For example, the resources brought in by Network Rail to support the development of NPR have been stood down due to a re-focusing of priorities ahead of the forthcoming Comprehensive Spending Review).
An effective pipeline alongside with the adoption of rolling programme will be able to give a long-term certainty to the supply chain, making it easier for them to recruit, to invest in equipment, training and skills, and have a clear picture of what is needed to allow their business model run more effectively.
This should see the industry deliver more efficiently as skills and knowledge are retained and grown, and the costs associated with startup and close down of schemes, worksites etc. is vastly reduced.
These benefits do not only apply to the supply chain, but also to operational staff including drivers, traincrew etc. By having a clear programme of development, punctuated by service changes, a long-term industry resource plan can be formed aligned to rolling stock changes, and could support a review of which operator serves which route to maximise efficiency and resilience.
The Rail Delivery Group has highlighted concerns about the demographic challenges within the rail industry and it is expected that between 30-40% of the workforce could retire by 2030.
A key focus of industry engagement could be on identifying the future skills requirements that will be required. Combined Authorities such as West Yorkshire could then work with organisations across public and private sectors to stimulate growth and support businesses by developing a skilled workforce, increasing energy efficiency and improving the region’s infrastructure. They can support partnerships between the rail industry and educational institutions such as rail colleges and vocational providers. This will create employment and upskilling opportunities whilst addressing the gaps in skills present within the rail industry.
A long-term investment plan is also key to attracting the next generation of workforce to the rail industry. By giving the sector more certainty, the industry can inspire a diverse range of individuals to pursue careers in rail. This can be achieved by fostering stronger connections with educational providers, offering apprenticeships and promoting rail's innovative and inclusive industry future. Rail industry has the potential to address the gender imbalance in the sector making real a more diverse and welcoming environment for people of all backgrounds.
How should a pipeline interact with the Government’s development of a wider long term rail strategy, rolling stock strategy, infrastructure strategy, and the Invest 35 industrial strategy?
Government needs to build its long-term rail strategy and infrastructure plan, ensuring it is grounded in evidence, data and insights, and that it clearly articulates what is needed in the North to unlock the potential of the regions.
The Strategy must set the ambition and have a clear target state which the industry must collectively deliver to achieve the aspired levels of economic growth, social inclusion and decarbonisation.
The pipeline then answers the question of how to achieve this within a given timeframe. As part of this, the Government must recognise that investment must be prioritised and protected if the long-term aspiration is to be achieved.
Complementary and consistent strategies will be needed, such as for the power grid, recognising the aspiration for route electrification which is dependent upon additional grid connections, but which currently take many years to programme and deliver, hampering the efforts of the rail industry to operate additional electric trains or transition from diesel to bi-mode and electric fleets in a bid to decarbonise the network. Increasingly, an alignment across these industries is becoming critical to delivering against Government priorities.
February 2025