Green Signals are becoming a model for innovative, industry insider dissemination, that connects the reality within corporate with the consumer. De-fogging normality, creating visibility.

When Andrew told the PM that this would be easier in a simplified structure, was the reply “That would be an ecumenical matter…”

Network Rail is very lucky to have a leader like Andrew Haines.

Good to see the Boss on Green Signals giving a much more coherent explanation of the draft RRB than any politician so far. I was encouraged by his desire to remove barriers and to empower staff to make decisions and take positive actions but I’m a little sceptical how this squares with the continuing emphasis on contracts and the inevitable conflicts of interest.

Andrew was my Station Manager back in the late 80's when I was working at Sevenoaks ticket office!

Brilliant. Good to hear some positive proposals and ideas and let's hope that political dogma doesn't scupper it.

That was a fantastic guest to have on. I feel stoked by what Andrew said in his interview. It feels that the industry has its guiding light and that future is positive for railways. Thanks to both you gents for asking some probing questions.

Another excellent episode. Although I think ultimately we do need a unified railway organisation, it would be a shame to lose the Network Rail brand, even just for the sake of public appearance. Network Rail PR and social media has improved a lot recently and it would be a shame to lose that, with all the media departments lumped in together.

When Andrew said there are some very clever people in the DfT I could of sworn it was 1st April not the 1st March. Because if this is the best they can do (and let’s face it the Railways are a total embarrassment - awful new, expensive trains, East West rail that will be diesel, HS2 which has to be the most expensive bit of track from some place in West London to Birmingham, total inability to electrify without bankrupting the Country, total breakdown in industrial relations, a ticket system that no one can reform or comprehend) there is hope for us all!

Yet another brilliant episode. Lots to digest. Passing thought: An optimist might take 'Open Access provision' + 'Private sector involvement' --> more flexible opportunities for freight on rail (Varamis Rail hopefully as a trail blazing example).

Only just had chance to catch up on this. Another coup for the Green Signals team! It really is refreshing to hear a candid and clear explanation of what the score is - no messing about, just straight to the point. Well done all!

The concern is surely that GBR becomes the franchising authority rather than DfT. And nothing changes. The comparison with London buses doesn't work; they are contracts not franchises and the services are regulated. The contrast for those of us out in the sticks with no regulation is obvious.

This was an excellent interview and I was surprised at the very candid responses from Andrew. Well done guys. These sorts of podcasts are really important digging into the detail and getting passed to headlines.

Really interesting and thought provoking episode. Thank you Greensignals continues (in my mind), to go from strength to strength.

Just catching up with this. I think Andrew's points are generally valid and excellent. However, where I took an inward breath(!) was the comparison between national rail and London Buses regards, as I took it, that contracts and the multiplicity of them would be simpler/reduced. If we continue with the franchise/private sector model surely there will have to be track access contracts, station access contracts, depot access contracts etc. etc.? This matrix absorbs a considerable amount of money in drafting, approval and administration of these agreements. This is public money or fare paying revenue going into what is, basically delivering little value as it goes into the legal profession! I fully accept that even under BR we would have the costs of administering the relationship between operations, infrastructure etc. However, for the essential railway (e.g. old NSE) the continued separation by private sector involvement and the requirement for costly contracts is not going to enable the drastic reduction of costs which will be essential if the railway is going to move forward.

Tremendous interview by all sides. I have my doubts about NR's leadership over many years and those doubts persist when measured against NR's seemingly deteriorating operating performance used by so many TOC's to excuse train cancellations which is all rail users care about. That said, AH outlined the dysfunctional political spectrum he has had to route the industry through when much of that deterioration has manifested. I doubt many could have done better. What was very pleasing to hear was the clarity of thought AH imparted on where he sees the rail industry going under the Government's draft proposals. AH may not be putting much money on them passing into law but a pathway which maps out a structure of how the railway should be managed as a whole in future is welcome, particularly a pathway which is adaptable enough to be moulded to the political public / private ideology of either of the main parties. Short term that's another 'elephant' which must be acknowledged until post election. I wholly agree with RB on the likelihood of friction points remaining in a contract based structure outlined in the draft legislation and wasn't entirely convinced by AH's response. I feel AH skilfully dodged a direct answer by deflecting to 'metro mayors' who currently have little / no say in mainline train operation (TfL excepting). A contract based carve up of 'franchises' with flex in the contracts to incentivise is always going to create the same commercial conflicts of interest (from the rail users perspective) as exist today. A different regime may change where those conflicts arise, but arise they will until the number of commercial interfaces is reduced and those remaining are harmonised. AH didn't offer much in the way of salvation I'm afraid. But the question which wasn't asked (maybe too early) was whether under the new 'joined up railway' would the utter nonsense of rail users with a ticket from point A-B being restricted from using the next available train to their destination based on the 'brand' operating it. i.e. will it be a joined up 'network' or persist in the fragmented customer unfriendly mess they're now faced with? All said, I admired the positive 'can do', 'must do' sentiments expressed by AH. It's the only hope someone can make sense of it all. I doubt the politicians ever will - which is why the industry is in the mess it's in.

An impressive guy. It would be interesting to discuss what he thinks of the Scottish arrangements... My pet wish is to eliminate the boundary between IC and XC. The Scotland to Birmingham services should run to Bristol (possibly further ) not to Euston.

Great stuff! Thanks for another great show.

Excellent conversation with the man who knows. Indeed a huge change of culture will be necessary; there must be a sense of 'leadership atrophy' in the 30 years since there was last a vertically-integrated railway. As a well-respected rail journalist has often written: get the industry structure right first, THEN decide on public vs private for each part. The prospect of DfT civil servants transferring across to GBR - albeit putting them at one remove from flipflopping political masters - isn't a good one given the department's track record of about-turns and frankly bonkers contracts it drew up over the years. On the other hand, GBR is a golden opportunity to reduce drastically the number of consultants and rebuild a large body of railway knowledge on the permanent payroll(?) Inevitable that new primary legislation won't reach the Statute Book during the present parliament, which is a pity.

I also have been thinking about the “too little, too late” approach. Andrew’s responses were, without doubt, interesting. Earlier today I was reminded that today, in 1974 (the first time I got to vote!) we returned a Labour Government. Later that year we got rid of Labour and brought the Conservatives back. BUT, that Conservative Government brought forward onto the statue books the Health & Safety at Work Act which the outgoing Labour Government had brought forward. Maybe it is just possible the new government will bring the Rail Reform Bill into being?

A very useful show.

Another interesting episode and interview. Very valid and interesting point made....there are hardly any members of staff who worked under British Rail. I never thought of that, and how easier it was to get things done.On the other hand Andrew in my opinion disappointingly in one answer advised of his best job at South West Trains where they were "making loads of money and keeping shareholders happy". No mention of an attempt to make passenger satisfaction a top priority ! And that's always my worry of the private interest in the railways.

Excellent podcast Green Signals. Just returned from a return rail journey between Royston (Herts) and Largs in Scotland. Good value for advanced ticket of £80 rtn with rail card, Thameslink/Avanti/Scotrail. All on time apart from return Avanti leg from Glasgow Central to Euston, 30 mins late due to we were told, tilting mechanism wasn't working which meant lower speeds. How often does this happen ? I guess the rolling stock is now 20 years old ? Great if you could do a portion of your Weekly podcast on feedback of journey experiences, tips on best routes to travel, how to go find best value fares, progress on upgrade work. Many thanks Mike from Royston.

Great show - loved the reference to Peter Wilkinson. Read into the response what you like!

It will be interesting to see how the creation of GBR will impact on the operational planning parts of TOCs. Most of the timetabling, rostering and diagramming experience and expertise sit in the TOCs and it is difficult to see how this will be integrated - although if it can be done I am sure it would lead to efficiencies in coordinated timetabling

So is Network Rail up for a rebranding, or will Network Rail remain as a "sub brand" of GBR? Otherwise there's going to be the claims of "paying for new paint and signs" yet again. There's lots of things that need fixing on the railway, but what is written on wagons and depot signs probably shouldn't be terribly high on that list.

Consistency of intercity branding would be good, regional then yes it needs to be more local but how does that work with huge area that Northern covers with multiple metro mayors, county and unitary authorities.

Very interesting interview and Andrew clearly knows the issues with the current system. However not convinced how its going to work due to the emphasis on contracts remaining in the industry. Slightly shocked about his comments on the hitchin signalling considering its just a short stretch. Interactions need to be simplified to avoid incurring delays to schemes. Another classic GS big interview. Remember there is no HS2 money yet!

I’ve said this in a few places, hopefully Andrew would agree. The railways need a public face, someone people can point to. Branson was good at that with Virgin, putting a public face and facing the scrutiny, publicly. The current TOCs and Network Rail feel like corporate faceless bodies you can’t connect with.

There are a number of morals to the story. Old school British Rail management needs to come back into force where there is a Can-Do attitude. The rail reform needs to improve Communities that have limited or poor services, so that rich don't get richer and the poor don't get poorer. Accessibility on the railways given to a board made up of charities who who know what is needed, and we don't have a despicable situation like at Pilning or Brigg. An independent board who is in charge of rolling stock, and we'll make sure that they can forward plan, and there isn't this fear factor of to many trains available, each line should have a minimum carriage level, cross country minimum of 7 coaches long etc etc. Let's red tape and nonsense and more productivity to benefit the customer whoever they are small or large.

Perhaps the new GBR platform staff will do more than just grunt and refuse to get items off the tracks.

why would anyone want staff from DfT rail in the future railway?

Can't even cut down a dead tree.

Sadly Gilbert and Sullivan are gone. They could have done so well with the HS2 cancellation. 😎

Maybe not unfortunate for the animals. Many people consider halal cruel.

Great British Railways is an awful name - just call it British Rail.