“I think we need to be careful. I do take issue a little bit with the word ‘shambles’ with the enhancement programme.”
OK - but given the “pausing” of the MML scheme and the terrible problems with the GW scheme, it’s not seen as a paragon of good management, is it? In a recent two-track weekend possession between Didcot and Reading, two worksites were all laid out with marker boards at Morton and Tilehurst, and yet no high-vis was seen on either site, while all the overhead line equipment remained locked away in compounds. At a third possession, a single lineside mast was erected. That’s a shambles, surely?
“Lots of their projects run very well, and there are examples like Norton Bridge where they’re ahead of schedule. So we need to be careful of a couple of issues with two or three possessions, in light that they do hundreds of these.”
If it was only a couple of issues, the Secretary of State for Transport would hardly have taken his recent decisions and actions about NR, surely?
“I’m just trying to make a point, Nigel. It’s not broken.”
Enhancement looks like it is?
Prosser counters: “I think first of all, it’s very important to realise that neither Network Rail nor other parts of the industry are broken. We wouldn’t be carrying the numbers of people we are carrying, and we wouldn’t be successfully investing in some areas as well as we are.
“I think there are specific issues with electrification that you can look at independently. It comes back to maturity. One of the other areas, while we’re on this topic of enhancements and projects, that we do see that could be improved is safety by design.
“We absolutely must start getting the ‘front end’ of projects right. And where we see problems with projects, from a safety perspective and from a performance perspective, is where there’s not enough work done up front.
“This is a cultural issue on the railways. I did not see this in my previous career with ICI, where we’d spend an awful lot of time on optioneering… engineering… design review… getting the scope of the project really nailed down right at the beginning. This is particularly important when you’re dealing with major upgrades.
“There has been too much silo thinking, whereas it’s crucial that you have an integrated programme. We have to get this upfront thinking right, and then the plans and costs are all right. It’s really important, and there are certainly weaknesses in this area that have been exposed.”
Indeed. Hence my use of the word ‘shambles’! So where do the really detailed problems lie? Is it the sheer scale of the task? Understanding of the issues? Competence and skills shortages?
“I think there’s a bandwidth issue in terms of not having the right number of people with the experience to put this sort of process in place and deliver it. We may be stretching our industry to a point where we do have to just pull back a little bit on some of the work.”
Is it just too big a job for the team that they have?
“Honestly? I don’t know - but that’s one of the things ORR is looking at in its investigation into enhancements. Does NR have the capability, not just in individuals but in totality, and (in particular) in certain areas? Our investigation, I think, will help.”
So NR is misunderstood, not incompetent?
“It’s difficult to use the word incompetent, but there are definitely areas where there can be big improvement. Our investigation is under way, plus NR is doing its own work under the leadership of one of its non-executive directors to really get to the bottom of all the issues it needs to address. I think we have had famine and feast in this industry as well, which hasn’t helped.”
Is Prosser talking about Government? For example, the Midland Main Line electrification only went into the High Level Output Specification in 2012 - and now it’s effectively out again. Electrification was completely off the Government’s agenda until then NR Chief Executive Iain Coucher and Chiltern Managing Director Adrian Shooter wrote to the DfT a few years ago, whereupon it was back in the mix once again.
This is hardly long-term strategic thinking, is it? Does Government share responsibility for failing to come up with a consistent plan that NR and its contractors can then gear up for and deliver against?
“I think collectively - the industry, government - could all work better if we had the one thing that I always feel is missing, and that’s a strategic plan.”
Does that mean a guiding mind?
“Whoever wants to do it - but they need to have a strategic long-term plan.”
So do we need a guiding mind…?
“We need a collective that gets together to ensure we actually have a strategic plan - because going from no electrification for 30 years or so, to expecting them to do the largest ever electrification project the country has ever attempted, is not strategic thinking.
“We could take some lessons from London Underground, which does perform (in our view) better than the main line railway.”
In terms of safety management, you mean?
“Yes - probably because its management maturity is stronger,” he replies.
“That said, LU still has some way to go, because we have had some issues this year around some of their construction safety managers. But their workforce safety is very good and is continuing to improve.”
That’s legacy and strategy covered, but what about the passengers? And how is maintaining and further improving passenger safety being managed? In part two of RAIL’s exclusive interview, Prosser discusses platform train interfaces, station design, level crossings and the value (or otherwise) of passenger announcements (RAIL 782).
- This feature was published in RAIL 781 on August 19 2015
Comment as guest
Comments
No comments have been made yet.