Written evidence submitted by Rail Delivery Group

 

Introduction

  1. The Rail Delivery Group (RDG) was established in May 2011. Its purpose is to enable train operators, freight operators, and Network Rail to succeed by delivering better services for their customers. This ultimately benefits taxpayers and the economy.

 

  1. RDG welcomes the opportunity to provide a submission to the Select Committee’s Inquiry on rail safety on behalf of our members, who include passenger and freight operators and Network Rail.

 

Overview

 

  1. Our response focuses particularly on issues relating to rail safety, where the Rail Delivery Group plays a significant role for the industry. Therefore, the majority of our comments relate to crime and security on the railway and to management of infrastructure and train operations to prevent accidents or incidents affecting customers, staff or the public. Other lines of inquiry of the Committee will be reflected in submissions from the Rail Safety and Standards Board and other industry bodies.

 

Responses to specific points

 

 

  1. Network Rail leads for the rail industry on level crossings, and we refer the Committee to its submission on this matter.

 

 

 

  1. We recognise the concerns that the previous Transport Committee had around both safeguarding of vulnerable people and around the detection rate for theft of passenger property.

 

  1. On safeguarding, as an industry, we have been working with Railway Children, the children’s charity, to make our stations safer places. Following the Committee’s recommendation, the British Transport Police set up a Safeguarding Section, which leads on this area.

 

  1. On theft of passenger property, the BTP and industry held a workshop on what actions could be taken to reduce theft and improve detection rates. Subsequently BTP mounted a dedicated operation, Operation Trafalgar, to address this problem, which began on London Underground before being rolled out across the National Rail network. The current year-to-date comparison records that this type of crime is increasing and detection rates are down, but the BTP’s performance on this is better than that of Home Office forces.

 

  1. The Rail Delivery Group co-ordinates the Policing and Security Group for the industry.  It meets quarterly and includes representatives from train companies, Network Rail and the British Transport Police (BTP). We recognise that there are current challenges around BTP delivery compared to targets agreed with the industry and are committed to working with BTP, which we support as a specialist rail police force, to ensure that the needs of the operational railway are met and that customers and staff can use the railway with confidence.

 

  1. Our focus as an industry is on those crimes that have a direct impact on customers and staff; robbery, violent crime (including assaults on staff), serious public disorder and sexual offences. We are working with BTP to focus on these areas, and are discussing with BTP how to address the increases in some of these offences that we are currently seeing.

 

  1. We believe that some of the increases in violent crime, public disorder and sexual offences relate to the squeeze in recent years on the BTP’s budget, as set by the British Transport Police Authority (BTPA). The overspend on last year’s budget is also leading to consequences for activity in this financial year. We welcomed the appointment of Rt Hon Esther McVey as Chair of BTPA in November 2015 and are pleased that she is building on the work started by her predecessor.

 

  1. With the increased focus on counter-terrorism in the wake of terror-related incidents across Europe, a larger portion of the BTP’s business-as-usual budget and staffing is being devoted to counter-terrorism activity, with consequences for other areas of operations. We support the expansion of counter-terrorism activity by the BTP in the current security context, but believe that the organisation’s budget must grow to tackle these new challenges while improving on existing targets. It is not sustainable for increased funding to come from Police Service Agreement holders (train operating companies, freight operating companies and Network Rail) who already make significant financial contributions to the BTP’s budget. We encourage the Committee to explore alternative funding sources from governments.  We acknowledge through Home Office forces activities the industry benefits from the Contest Strategy. 

 

 

  1. We refer the Committee to the submission of the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) on this issue.

 

 

  1. There have been some immediate impacts on rail safety arising from the result of the referendum on 23 June. In particular, the BTP reported a rise in hate crime on the network shortly after the referendum, in line with the experience of Home Office forces, but this increase was temporary in nature.

 

  1. We expect that the majority of impact of the Brexit decision will be felt after Article 50 is triggered and when the UK formally leaves the European Union. Some areas of rail operations with security and safety implications include regulation around rail safety, and compliance with EU laws and regulations; the status of employees, particularly staff from the European Union; liaison with EU bodies for intelligence-sharing and cooperative working and the impact of any national review of security and crime arrangements and measures post-Brexit.

 

  1. One potential impact to be explored in the coming months is the operational relationship around Eurostar and co-operation between Kent Police and their French counterparts.

 

  1. We are continuing to watch out for potential impacts, either positive or negative, as they emerge over the coming months. We believe that the consequences of Brexit relating to railway security can be managed and should not be an area of significant concern. We would welcome and support a review of railway security implications of Brexit once more detail is known about the terms of the negotiations, and would be pleased to work with partners including DfT, BTP and BTPA to deliver this.

 

  1. The industry has, this year published a Safety and Health Strategy built on full engagement of all RDG members, the Rail Supply Group and RSSB.

 

 

 

  1. Over the past decade, industry initiatives have brought about improvements in customer safety, even as the number of customer journeys has increased by almost 50%. Over the past decade as a whole, there has been a reduction of around one-quarter in the rate of harm to customers, normalised by journey, with reductions year-on-year in harm.

 

  1. Some RDG members report anecdotal evidence that crowding on trains and stations may be contributing to the increase in assaults, but insufficient information is available to draw clear conclusions and this may relate to the general increase in violent crime experienced by BTP and Home Office Forces.

 

  1. Over the past decade, the average level of harm to our workforce has been around 30 fatalities or weighted injuries per year.  2015/16 saw a notably lower level of risk than the previous year and marked the first financial year on record where there was no workforce fatality; however, it is too early to ascertain whether this is the start of a trend.

 

  1. There has been a general downward trend in incidents involving members of the public since 2009/10. The majority of harm to the public relates to suicides, trespass on the rail network and incidents around level crossings. There has been an increase in assaults on customers and members of the public in recent years. We provide more information around suicide prevention later in this submission. Network Rail is the industry lead for level crossings and we refer the Transport Committee to its submission on this subject.

 

  1. The industry has reviewed the impact of the investments at London Bridge, Reading and Birmingham New Street stations, comparing injuries per month over ten years including the periods of redevelopment.

 

  1. All three stations saw an increase in the absolute number of injuries during redevelopment work. For London Bridge, there was an increase in the absolute number of injuries during redevelopment work, from 5.6 per month before the work began, to 7.7 during preparation and bus station work and 6.4 during the station redevelopment work.  Reading Station also saw an increase in the absolute number of injuries during redevelopment work, from 4.8 per month before works began to 5.6 during the work. At Birmingham New Street, there was a small increase in the absolute number of injuries during redevelopment work, from 8.2 per month before the work began to 9.3 while it was in progress.

 

  1. However, at both Birmingham New Street and at London Bridge, there were decreases in the rate of injuries during the works. In Birmingham, the rate of injuries decreased from 37.5 per ten million station uses to 30.6 during the works, while at London Bridge the rate of injuries increased from 11.7 per ten million station uses to 15.0 during preparation and bus station work, and then decreased to 14.6 per ten million station uses during the station redevelopment work.

 

  1. It is difficult to conclude from these three case studies alone what the effect of redevelopment could be on the occurrence of injuries to the people that use them. The nature of redevelopment work varied considerably between these three stations, and work is still ongoing at London Bridge, making comparisons imperfect. It is likely that the effects at the local level would differ on a case-by-case basis, and depend on the nature of the work and the parts of the station affected.

 

 

 

Maintaining assets in poor weather conditions 

 

  1. The industry has procedures and policies to maintain assets in poor weather conditions, and TOCs, FOCs and Network Rail routes, in addition to their own monitoring, are required to provide assurance to the industry’s National Task Force - a senior level, RDG-run, cross-industry meeting. The fleet community, which includes TOCs, rolling stock companies (ROSCOs) and third-party maintenance organisations, collects and shares good practices via a guide which is regularly updated. The fleet community also regularly meets via a group called the Fleet Reliability Focus Forum (ReFocus) to share learning.

 

  1. Under these industry arrangements, the fleet community operates a three-stage process to ensure fleet performance for the three key seasons of summer, autumn and winter where weather conditions can affect assets. Prior to each season, the RDG collects information from its members on the seasonal readiness of fleet and any changes that those who maintain the fleet intend to make to their preparations. This also includes any rectifications or improvements that need to be made following the previous season, such as the removal of snow guards after winter. Rail infrastructure is also vulnerable to adverse weather, and Network Rail is improving its analysis of the causes and impact of infrastructure failures to better plan for the impact of weather, and to focus investment on the types and locations of assets which are more vulnerable.

 

  1. Throughout the season, individual maintainers manage fleet performance and maintenance. ReFocus and RDG monitor and collect data. Following the season, members of ReFocus review this data, share best practice and discuss lessons learned. We continue to improve maintenance of assets in poor weather conditions.

 

Rail worker fatigue

 

  1. Fatigue of rail workers is an issue that members take seriously.  Different operators and Network Rail use varying tools to assess fatigue and the fatigue impact of differing work schedules, for example, using the Health and Safety Executive’s fatigue tools and risk models when building rosters. Members continue to develop their models, for example, East Midlands Trains will shortly be rostering every shift using a new model which will automatically factor in rest day working (RDW) and overtime worked, and Network Rail is improving staff training on fatigue, with a particular focus on the impact of road driving on staff.

 

  1. In 2014 the RSSB published a report on measuring and managing fatigue. This gives guidance covering issues like night shifts, where reducing shift duration and numbers of consecutive night shifts can reduce risk of errors through fatigue, and variability of shift start times. The RSSB also hosts annual events around fatigue, with participation from across industry.  The Office of Rail and Road has also published guidance on fatigue.

 

  1. More Network Rail information is provided in its response.

 

 

 

  1. We refer the Committee to the submission of the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) for more detail on this issue. The Rail Delivery Group supports the work of the People on Trains and in Stations Risk Group, which is facilitated by RSSB for the industry.

 

 

  1. We refer the Committee to the submission of the Rail Safety and Standards Board (RSSB) on this issue, and the submission from Network Rail specifically around individuals working on-track and on infrastructure construction.  Within the Industry Safety and Health Strategy, workforce health and wellbeing is identified as a priority for further attention, and there is an industry programme to increase understanding and activity in this area.

 

  1. The RDG and its members support CIRAS – the confidential system that allows any employee, at any level, in a member business to report health or safety concerns that they believe or have cause to believe are not, or not sufficiently, addressed by their employers’ reporting systems.  On receipt of a report, CIRAS follows up with the company concerned.  An oversight committee with an independent chair and non-industry members as well as industry members oversees this work. CIRAS is required to share learning points from its activity with members, while assuring confidentiality for staff reporting concerns.

 

 

  1. We refer the Committee to the submission from Network Rail on this issue more broadly, and confine ourselves to comment around preventing suicides on the railway in this section.

 

  1. In 2015/16 there were 252 suicides or suspected suicides on the rail network, a reduction of 12% from the previous year, and accounting for around 4.5% of all suicides in Great Britain. We believe that suicide on the railway is not inevitable, and interventions from trained rail staff and BTP officers saved lives in over 1100 potential suicides last year.

 

  1. Suicide has a significant impact on the railway, with train drivers, other rail staff and police officers liable to experience trauma after incidents. There is a significant cost to the industry, with each suicide costing £230 000 for repairs, recovery, delay compensation and staff sickness. Suicides can also have a significant emotional impact on rail customers as well as delaying their journeys. Each suicide results in over 2000 minutes of delay on average, although this can range to over 10 000 delay minutes for some incidents.

 

  1. The Rail Delivery Group created the Suicide Prevention Duty Holders Group, which includes representatives from train operators, RDG, Network Rail and the British Transport Police. The industry is committed to working together to reduce the number of suicides and suicide attempts on the National Rail network. Since 2010, when the rail industry launched a national suicide prevention programme, we have worked with third parties including Samaritans, local health and wellbeing boards and local authorities to reduce overall suicide rates in the wider community.

 

  1. Our programme includes identification of at-risk locations and developing appropriate mitigation measures, producing campaign materials to promote available help, such as featuring Samaritans’ helpline number on the back of rail tickets, training frontline staff to intervene in suicide attempts, provision of emotional support to staff and to individuals and communities at risk and to those that may have witnessed a suicide or attempt and managing media reporting to deter ‘copycat’ attempts and working with partners. Bespoke research, such as Middlesex University’s current study around why people choose to attempt and commit suicide on the railway, is used to help shape the future direction of the programme.

 

  1. It is difficult to measure the effectiveness of the railway suicide prevention programme as many factors are involved, but we believe that our approach is helping to tackle fatalities and injuries and to reduce the trauma caused through suicide on the railway. Network Rail has commissioned work from Nottingham University to better understand the impact of suicide mitigation measures on the network. Anecdotal evidence suggests that several mitigation measures are particularly successful at prevention, including erection of fences at high-risk locations, disrupting suicidal ideation through messaging at platform ends and direct staff intervention in suicide attempts.

 

 

19 October 2016