Written Evidence submitted by the Department for Transport (RLS0010)
- The Department for Transport (DfT, “The Department”) welcomes the opportunity to contribute to this inquiry by the Transport Select Committee. We are committed to working with the rail industry, statutory authorities and stakeholders to make the UK rail network the safest in the world.
- In many areas our railways are the safest they have ever been. As a result, the UK has one of the best safety records in Europe and compares very favourably against railways across the world. This overall trend towards improved safety performance has been achieved against a significant rise in the numbers of passengers and rail kilometres travelled.
- Railway businesses, as duty holders, must manage safety risk effectively using their own safety management systems. We look to the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), as the independent railway safety regulator, to ensure the industry is meeting its safety duties and that it responds appropriately to any new issues or risks which are identified. The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) and the Rail Safety and Standard Board (RSSB) also have a role to play in improving industry standards, by sharing lessons learnt and good practice. The Department’s role is to empower all parties to be able to undertake their roles effectively, providing funding to bodies such as Network Rail (NR), ensuring accountability and amending legislation where necessary. It does not have a role in the day to day management of safety.
- Whilst the UK has an enviable safety record, we are clear that the rail industry should not be complacent in maintaining this and we work hard with our delivery partners to ensure this is the case.
- The following responses to the Committee’s questions provide more detail on the approach to rail safety by the DfT, including updates on the recommendations addressed to the Department following the previous Transport Committee’s inquiry in 2013-14 on level crossings.
Q1. The Department and Network Rail's progress in implementing recommendations made by the previous Transport Committee on level crossings, and further actions which could be taken to reduce harm at level crossings
- The Committee’s Eleventh Report of Session 2013-14: Safety at level crossings, contained 26 recommendations. Of these, 9 in whole, or in part, fell within the purview of DfT.
- The UK has one of the best level crossing safety records in Europe. Nonetheless, level crossings remain the largest source of risk of a catastrophic train accident on the network. In the majority of accidents and near-misses at level crossings, user behaviour has been identified as a contributory factor. This ‘human factor’ is sometimes difficult to predict or protect against. A priority for Network Rail in recent years has been on risk reduction measures at level crossings across the network, such as putting temporary speed restrictions in place, and it has closed over 1,000 level crossings since 2009. The Government has supported NR by providing £109million in Control Period 5 (2014-19) for continued risk reduction at level crossings.
- A summary of action taken on recommendations from the previous Committee can be found at Annex A.
Q2. The Department, BTP and BTPA’s progress in implementing recommendations made by the previous Transport Committee on security on the railways, the effectiveness of current measures to reduce violent crime, and the appropriateness of the BTP’s current priorities
- The likelihood of being the victim of violent crime on the railway has generally reduced over the past ten years, with the incidence of serious violent offences being 0.7 per million passenger journeys. Crimes per million passengers have fallen by 41% during the last five years. However, 2015-16 saw an increase of violence recorded by national police forces of 27%, with BTP experiencing an 11% increase. The increase on rail is therefore reflective of a national trend, rather than being specific to rail.
- Progress has been made on a number of the Select Committee’s recommendations on security on the railways, such as a refresh of the Secure Stations Scheme[1] which is currently taking place. This will be supported by a working group consisting of members from the British Transport Police (BTP), DfT’s Rail Group, Network Rail (NR), the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) and TfL/LU. The first meeting is due to take place on 10 November 2016. A working paper of proposals made by the BTP’s Crime Reduction Unit forms the basis for these discussions.
- DfT is reviewing with other Government Departments how policing is delivered across all of our national infrastructure sectors, including the transport networks, following the commitment in the Strategic Defence and Security Review of autumn 2015. This work is still under development, but in the meantime DfT continues to commit expert counter terrorism resource to build resilience.
- BTP has also taken steps to make it easier for passengers to report crime. For example, ‘Text 61016’ and ‘Report it to stop it’ (designed to focus attention on sexual assault through improved reporting) were two campaigns conducted in 2015/16, which resulted in thousands of additional reports of crimes and incidents.
- Policing priorities are determined by the British Transport Police Authority, which is charged with ensuring the effective and efficient policing of the railway, in conjunction with the Chief Constable.
Q3. The effectiveness of the current system of rail safety management, investigation, regulation, enforcement and policing, including the ability of industry and government bodies to coordinate effectively
- The framework for the management and regulation of health and safety on the UK’s railways has been in place for a decade. Its principles are tried and tested and are well understood by the industry. Responsibility for the safe operation of the railway rests with the operators of trains and managers of infrastructure. DfT is responsible for setting the overall strategy for the railways and for developing and reviewing railway safety legislation. ORR, in its role as safety regulator, is responsible for ensuring compliance with legislation and for taking enforcement action where necessary. An independent accident investigation body, with a specific role in investigating the causes of accidents and making recommendations, exists to ensure that any lessons learnt are fed back to the industry. The Railway Safety & Standards Board (RSSB) provides the forum for the rail industry to collaborate in developing and agreeing common safety standards and practices and manages the industry-wide Safety Management Information system (SMIS).
- The British Transport Police (BTP) also has an important role to play in ensuring safety of those travelling on the railways. The Government remains convinced of the need for a dedicated rail police service (the British Transport Police) and the specialism it provides. DfT is responsible for sponsoring the British Transport Police Authority and works closely with the Home Office in order to ensure that key operational requirements are met and relations are maintained with other police forces.
Q4. The effect of the result of the EU referendum on the current framework for rail safety and security
- Until exit negotiations are concluded, the UK remains a full member of the European Union and all the rights and obligations of EU membership remain in force. During this period the Government will continue to negotiate, implement and apply EU legislation. The domestic legislation that implements the EU railway safety regime will stay in place while we remain bound by EU law.
- The Prime Minister has stated that Article 50 will be triggered by the end of March next year. Through the “Great Repeal Bill”, introduced in the next Parliamentary session, all EU law will be converted into domestic law, wherever practical. The Bill will also include powers for ministers to make changes to the EU-derived law by secondary legislation. DfT is working closely with the Department for Exiting the EU to consider the implications and opportunities arising from the UK’s exit from the EU, including for rail safety and security.
Q5. The extent to which growing passenger numbers, infrastructure upgrades, and major infrastructure projects may impact on the safety of passengers, workers, and the public
- The Department wants to ensure the sector continues to foster safety as it develops and grows and that the industry improves its management of the safety risks associated with growth, in particular around station safety and at platform edges. We are pleased that the ORR’s Annual Safety Report has identified this as a priority for its work during 2016-17. We are also encouraged that the ORR is working with the industry to improve safety by design[2] and recently entered into a new agreement with HSE, which allows the ORR to enforce health and safety law at the design stage of new-build railway infrastructure projects. DfT sponsors the research and development of new technologies and the novel application of existing technology by the rail industry, all of which can offer opportunities to reduce health and safety risk, including at the planning and design stages of projects.
- As the network develops and modernises, some disruption for the travelling public is inevitable and we look to Network Rail to manage this in a safe way. Network Rail has been working with the train operating companies to improve their understanding of the risks and to establish contingency arrangements to mitigate the effects of overcrowding in stations as a result of infrastructure upgrade works.
- More frequent trains resulting from greater public demand can also restrict access for maintenance activity. Network Rail has recently introduced a fleet of mobile maintenance trains that enable work to take place in a protected environment, safe from trains passing on adjacent lines. This helps protect workers if work has to take place while the network is still running, due to the increased demands of a busier network.
- Large scale infrastructure projects also bring their own challenges. However, we have been working with the industry to ensure that safety for passengers, workers and the public is ‘designed in’ from the outset. Major projects, including HS2, aim to prevent accidents by preventing risks in the first place. To achieve this, proven standards and practices will be used for both infrastructure and trains.
Q6. The scope for further improving the management of infrastructure and train operation, including strategies for maintaining assets in poor weather conditions and minimising accidents and near misses caused by rail worker fatigue
- The Department looks to the ORR and Network Rail to ensure that safety is embedded within the management of infrastructure and train operation.
- Passenger safety performance is at an all-time high. It is now approaching 10 years since a passenger was killed in a train collision and there has also been a significant reduction in accident precursors over that time. Network Rail has undertaken substantial work to improve its understanding of infrastructure failures and their contribution to train accident risk, and this has enabled it to target its investment in improvements that will provide the greatest reduction in risk per pound spent. In this control period, this has led to a further 19% reduction in assessed train accident risk.
- The Department agrees these areas should remain under constant review and opportunities identified and acted upon. Network Rail is currently considering the case for further measures to address worker fatigue, including those arising from the extended distances some infrastructure workers drive to maintain, renew or enhance the network. We support Network Rail’s 10 year strategy for addressing worker fatigue, including the steps it is taking to ensure that none of its staff are routinely working more than 60 hours per week.
Q7. The adequacy of measures to protect persons at the platform-train interface
- The platform edge still remains a place where around 1,500 incidents take place every year. Sadly, six people died in incidents associated with moving trains at the platform edge last year.
- Any death on the network is unacceptable and we see this as a priority area for action by the rail industry. We welcome the steps being taken by the industry to address this issue, such as changes in the Rule Book in June 2013 governing the dispatch of trains. Initiatives are also being taken by train and station operators to help staff manage their interactions with intoxicated passengers and to influence passenger behaviour to reduce the risk of passengers becoming trapped and dragged away as powered doors are closing. New technology, including CCTV screens located on the platform and in the train cab, is being adopted to enable drivers to ensure nothing is caught in the doors before departure.
- RSSB encourages sharing of incident data on the passenger train interface (PTI). Safety performance data about PTI accidents are published in the Annual Safety Performance Report[3]. Industry's shared learning from PTI accidents is reviewed in the Learning from Operational Experience Annual Report[4]. Good Practice documents and other resources are also published on RSSB’s website, such as a guide to platform safety for station staff. The rail industry has launched a strategy for reducing the PTI risk, which is sponsored jointly by train operators and Network Rail.
- The Government welcomes and supports these initiatives by the rail industry. For example, the Under Secretary of State for Transport recently wrote to train operating companies asking for them to raise awareness among their staff of a newly developed web-based PTI assessment tool, which allows train operating companies to share information in real time.
Q8. Progress on current initiatives to improve railway worker safety and further actions which could be taken to improve the safety of railway workers, including those individuals working on infrastructure construction and on the tracks, and those exposed to occupational hazards
- All rail industry duty holders have responsibilities in law for ensuring safety and this provides the means to prosecute where necessary. For instance, in September 2013 Network Rail was fined £125,000 for an incident in June 2008, when three employees were injured and one subsequently died.
- In 2015-6 there were no worker fatalities on the railway and there have been measurable improvements in occupational health across the industry, particularly in terms of engagement and commitment. Nonetheless, the ORR has identified increases in harm from manual handling injuries (up 17% in 2015-6). We look to the relevant duty holders to ensure further improvement in this area.
- The Department welcomes initiatives by the rail industry, including the publication by RSSB in March 2016 of the first rail industry-wide health and safety strategy. “Leading Health and Safety on Britain’s Railways” identifies a number of areas where health and safety management and performance can be improved through increased collaboration.
- The Department has made additional funding available in 2014-2019 to enable Network Rail to make electrical isolations safer and faster, to improve on-track plant and to develop better equipment for protecting workers from trains. This supports the campaign run by Network Rail since 2012, ‘Everyone [to go] Home Safe Every Day’, part of a 10-year strategy to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries among its workforce and contractors.
Q9. The effectiveness of measures to prevent trespass and fatalities on the railways and other approaches which could reduce the numbers of fatalities and injuries
- Trespass accounts for around 32% of the risk to passengers and public on the railway (excluding events related to suicide). For this reason, the Department places specific legal requirements on the industry to provide fencing and prevent unauthorised access. The revised and consolidated Railway Safety Regulations 1999 and Miscellaneous Provisions Regulations 1997 will ensure this is maintained when they are laid before Parliament later this year.
- The Department welcomes initiatives being taken by Network Rail to educate the public about the dangers of trespassing on the railway and the suicide prevention schemes run by BTP.
October 2016
Annex A
The Department’s progress in implementing recommendations made by the previous Transport Committee on level crossings, and further actions which could be taken to reduce harm at level crossings
The following section addresses those recommendations falling to DfT from the last Transport Select Committee.
Making level crossings safer
- There are around 6,100 level crossings on Network Rail-managed infrastructure and around 2,000 on heritage and other networks. The protective equipment in place at each site is determined by risk assessments. Duty holders (such as Network Rail) are required to reduce risks “so far as reasonably practicable” under the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (HSWA), which applies to all railway operations.
- While level crossings remain the largest risk of a catastrophic train accident on the network only a small proportion of that risk is the result of industry failures with the majority (over 90 per cent) arising from user behaviour. This is difficult to predict or protect against and can only be mitigated entirely by closure. However, we are clear that more can be done to ensure greater risk reduction at level crossings and this has been a key priority for Network Rail in recent years, and has resulted in the closure of nearly 1,000 level crossings since 2009. The Department recognises the importance of this work and has provided £109million in Control Period 5 (2014-19) for continued risk reduction at level crossings.
- At the Department’s request the English and Welsh and Scottish Law Commissions reviewed the legislative framework for level crossings. Their report, published in 2013, included 86 recommendations to create a largely new and bespoke legislative framework covering safety, closure and rights of way. The Law Commissions recognised that the number of incidents at level crossings in Great Britain is low by comparison with other industrialised countries and that high standards of safety are maintained. However they found that the legislative regime is unclear and there are too many sources of regulation that are complex and archaic in nature.
- The Government’s formal response, published in October 2014, indicated that it intended to accept 47 (64 %), reject 9 (12%) and modify 18 (24 %) of its recommendations. Whilst the Department was able to accept the majority of the recommendations made by the Law Commissions, it considered that further policy and legal investigation was necessary before we could agree with the Law Commissions’ conclusions or come forward with alternative proposals.
- The Department produced an action plan in December 2014, outlining its proposed next steps and the outcome it wished to achieve. The main proposals, which require primary legislation, cover:
- Level crossing orders: repealing the current bureaucratic and prescriptive order-making process in favour of a regime solely governed by HSWA which will simplify the existing legislative framework by removing a level of regulation and align the assessment and management of risk at level crossings with the regime in place for the management of risk on the rest of the network;
- Convenience: replacing consideration of convenience in level crossing orders with a reliance on risk assessments under HSWA and a new obligation on bodies involved to consider convenience and co-operate with each other; and
- Closure: introducing a new level crossing closure process to supplement existing mechanisms and facilitate further closures to further reduce risk across the network.
- The changes are intended to bring about a more streamlined level crossing regime. Key aims include making the process more efficient, transparent and fair to users and communities. The changes will also enable the Office for Rail and Road and Network Rail to focus time and resources on tackling level crossings identified as highest risk.
- We are currently seeking an appropriate legislative vehicle to deliver these proposals. However, due to a combination of factors, including an intensive period of negotiations in Europe on the Fourth Railway Package since 2013, the Department has been unable to make significant further progress in this area.
Closure of level crossings
7. We welcome the public interest tests for closure procedures. We see merit in applying a public safety test to any diversionary routes that may result from a level crossing closure and we recommend that the DfT consider this option as part of its consideration of the Law Commission’s proposals.
- We note the Committee’s recommendation and are currently considering how this would work in practice.
8. We are concerned that the proposed appeal mechanism for closure orders, using judicial review, will be out of reach for ordinary people and, increasingly, local authorities. We recommend that the DfT consider using alternative dispute resolution, such as mediation by the Office of Rail Regulation, to supplement judicial review.
- We note the Committee’s concerns and are currently considering how the appeals process should be operated and whether there may be a role for the Office of Rail and Road (ORR), or another body, in the process. We are clear that any appeals process must be independent and transparent, that there can be no conflicts of interest, and that any appeal process must be proportionate and not compromise Network Rail’s ability to exercise its safety responsibilities.
Co-operation between railway operators, highway authorities and planning authorities
9. We welcome the duty of co-operation on railway operators, traffic authorities and highways authorities in respect of level crossings but recommend that it should also encompass planning authorities so that the impact of additional numbers of people using level crossings can be considered.
- As we noted in our original response, both the relevant network operator and the Secretary of State are already statutory consultees in instances where a planned development might materially change the character of traffic using a level crossing under the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2010. We will consider how we can increase co-operation with organisations that have statutory functions, including local planning authorities, as we develop our reforms, but we do not want to increase duplication or confusion about responsibilities or processes.
Impact on heritage railways
10. We are concerned that the extension of the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974 to volunteer-run railways, could threaten the viability of the heritage sector. We recommend that any changes to the regulation of level crossings should include transitional arrangements aimed at protecting the viability of heritage railways.
- We recognise the significant differences between the heritage sector and main line operations. While it remains of paramount importance that passengers, employees and the wider public remain adequately protected from the risks associated with the services they offer, we will work with the Heritage Railway Association to ensure that any new legislation will not place undue regulatory burdens or costs on the sector.
Highway Code and other road regulations
14. The DfT has not been proactive in assessing how it could make level crossings safer, for example by improving road signage. We recommend that, as part of the forthcoming overhaul of the Traffic Signs and General Directions 2002, DfT revise its guidance on signage and road layouts based on the latest research findings from TRL and RSSB.
- We agree with the Committee that there is scope to improve traffic signs in respect of level crossings. The Department has discussed this with ORR and Network Rail. ORR is currently assessing the results of recent Transport Research Laboratory and RSSB research to identify opportunities for improvements in this area. The Department has made clear that it is willing to support on-street trials through the traffic sign authorisation process, and to assist ORR in making any necessary legislative changes.
Motorists’ education
15. We note the strong evidence base for the hazard perception test and encourage its further development. The Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA) should incorporate level crossings into the next version of the hazard perception test. As well as identification of the hazard, the DVSA should consider ways of ensuring that the test assesses actions to be taken in response to level crossings.
- We accept the Committee’s recommendations and proposals for implementing these are currently being trialled. In particular, new Hazard Perception Test (HPT) clips for poor weather and darkness, which include level crossings, are currently being developed by DVSA. DVSA aims to include these into the HPT from September 2017 onwards.
Senior accountability
20. Given that Network Rail has recently been held responsible for the serious accident at Beccles in July 2010 we would be very concerned if the Remuneration Committee awarded bonuses to executive directors this year. We recommend that Network Rail clarify the definition of “catastrophic” in its Management Incentive Plan so that it includes life-changing injuries. We call on Ministers to address this issue in discussions about Network Rail’s status.
- Network Rail’s incentive arrangements are clear. If there were a serious safety incident which Network Rail was responsible for, no incentive would normally be payable to any Executive Director for that year. Responsibility for determining this, and the award of executive director bonuses in general, rests with Network Rail’s Remuneration Committee.
- Network Rail’s incentive arrangements were redesigned for Control Period 5, and awards for Executive Directors were capped at 20 per cent of salary. Unlike the legacy Long-term Incentive Plan (LTIP), the new Annual Incentive Plan (AIP) does not include the term “catastrophic.” Instead, safety performance is incorporated into the AIP both as a scorecard performance measure and through a deferral mechanism. Awards can lapse during the three year deferral period where the Remuneration Committee considers that safety or sustainability obligations have not been met.
Duty of candour
21. We recommend that the Government consider whether Network Rail should be subject to a statutory duty of openness, transparency and candour, analogous to the recommendations of the Francis Inquiry into Mid Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust. The Office of Rail Regulation should consider whether such a duty can be imposed as a licence condition. Network Rail should amend its internal code of conduct to reflect an expectation that the railway workforce should act with openness, transparency and candour.
- When Network Rail was reclassified to the public sector on 1 September 2014, its new arrangements were published at the same time in a Framework Agreement. These included that the company would be subject to the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and this took effect on 24 March 2015. Network Rail has expanded its own transparency programme since it changed status, and is now subject to the normal transparency requirements of any public body.
- The government is satisfied that these measures are sufficient to ensure that Network Rail acts with openness, transparency and candour, and does not consider that a separate statutory duty is necessary to require this.
Media, communications and use of language
26. We recommend that the rail industry, government and Office of Rail Regulation stop using the term “misuse” in relation to accidents at level crossings and instead adopt “deliberate misuse” where the evidence supports this and “accident” where it does not.
- Since the last Select Committee, the ORR has agreed with NR and RSSB the appropriate terminology that should be used in relation to accidents, including avoiding the use of the term “misuse”, and this has been implemented following agreement at the industry’s Level Crossing Strategy Group.