ELECTRIFICATION will go ahead under a Labour government, rolling stock plans will be progressed and development of High Speed rail will continue, the transport secretary Andrew Adonis has told Railnews. But Network Rail can expect to be under continuing pressure to achieve the efficiency targets which have been set for it by the Office of Rail Regulation.

In an exclusive interview, Lord Adonis set out his vision of rail policy after the forthcoming general election. He said one problem with proposals for domestic High Speed rail was just how to connect Heathrow Airport with the route. “The issue is precisely how that is to be done.” However, there has been no shortage of suggestions. The Conservative Bow Group has set out plans for a Heathrow Hub, claiming that ‘the Government risks choosing the wrong route’. Arup, too, has suggested a Heathrow hub near Hayes, which could serve the existing Great Western Main Line as well as a new High Speed line. Lord Adonis believes that serving Heathrow properly is a challenge. “Where is Heathrow after all? It has five terminals. There are a lot of issues surrounding a possible link from a future High Speed network.”

He is promising that the High Speed Rail White Paper will appear later this month, and until it does, he will not be drawn further. Should Scotland be the ultimate aim? “There are various options, which we will be setting out. There are a lot more decisions to be made about routes north of Birmingham.”

But although there are few details so far of a High Speed plan, that's not the case with electrification. Lord Adonis has already announced the scheme for the Great Western Main Line, to Swansea, Oxford and Newbury, and also for several lines in the north west of England. Are those schemes secure? “If Labour is re-elected, yes. But the Conservatives have made it clear that they are not prepared to make a similar commitment, because they are actually planning major cuts to rail projects.”

Although he believes that “we have done fairly well on electrification,” he is of course under pressure to go further. “The plans we have announced will form a huge project over the next ten years. The ideal is a rolling programme, but I can't give a commitment to more yet. However, I agree that the next route to follow should be the Midland Main Line.” He also agrees with the policy of the Liberal Democrats, which is that most of the network should be electrified by 2050.

The Intercity Express Programme has now been put officially on hold until after the election, but other rolling stock plans also seem to have slipped behind schedule. However, Lord Adonis says the 1300 promised new vehicles are still on course. “I can reiterate our commitment, and it's possible that we will be able to make a further announcement before the election.” The new fleet for Thameslink is, however, still a ‘challenge’, with no confirmation expected before the autumn. “There are very detailed negotiations going on, and of course last year's recession has caused funding issues. In particular, it's now harder to involve the private sector in helping to provide finance.”

Jeremy Candfield of the Railway Industry Association is warning that the uncertainties associated with a general election are placing unwelcome pressure on his members, but Lord Adonis is sanguine. “A general election takes about a month. It's not a very long time to wait,” he believes.

Meanwhile Crossrail will proceed under Labour, says Lord Adonis. “Integration is a priority. We should plan both Crossrail and HS2 so that they are linked. That might seem revolutionary in a transport project, but it's the way we need to go. There are important benefits in integrated planning, and we can also cut costs by creating and then using dedicated planning and engineering teams for successive projects. First Crossrail, and then HS2. It's the failure to maintain this kind of continuity over the past 20 or 30 years which has added to the costs of railways. We don't want any more of this stop/start approach.”

Network Rail will naturally be at the heart of major infrastructure projects, but the company is under instructions from the ORR to cut its costs. “A 20 percent reduction is required during the present Control Period, which runs until 2014. The targets set by the ORR are demanding, but they must be achieved. I'm not looking at changing the structure of Network Rail, though. I think the present system of members works, so I'm not proposing to reduce their numbers or change their role. Network Rail has been reinvigorating its Board recently, with various appointments of new non-executive directors. Now the company must focus relentlessly on efficiency and cost control. I‘ve made that quite clear, and I shall be continuing to monitor this closely.”

Network Rail is also being urged to reduce the level of disruption associated with engineering work. “A lot of people in the railway industry talk about the seven-day railway, and it must happen, considering how much taxpayers contribute to the industry. Both they and farepayers should have a better service. But I think too many people in the industry are mouthing the seven-day railway slogan without really understanding the implications or how it can be achieved. It's going to take many years. At the moment we are simply not there – not remotely near it, even. Network Rail is still far too ready to close the railway. We are still only in the foothills of the changes which are essential. I will be keeping up the pressure on this, too.”

On the day that the transport secretary talked to Railnews the unions had been lobbying his Department over Network Rail's reductions, which involve the loss of some 1,500 maintenance jobs. Was Lord Adonis sympathetic?

“The ORR absolutely requires Network Rail's Business Plan to be compatible with safety, and I have asked the ORR to communicate directly with people like Bob Crow of the RMT on this matter. There are no safety issues, and changes do have to be made, because costs must be contained, as I have already said.”

Lord Adonis, of course, inherited a railway in which the private sector plays a substantial role. Just the night before giving this interview, he had told an audience at the centenary dinner of the Railway Study Association that the privatisation process in the 1990s had been ‘outlandish’.

Would he reverse privatisation if he could? Should it be on the agenda, as the unions are urging?

“I wouldn't have done it like that, but that's not to say we should turn back the clock now. Since we were elected in 1997 we have changed a lot of the detail. We now have not-for-profit Network Rail rather than Railtrack, we have tightened regulation, we agree that future franchises should be longer. The railway doesn’t need another revolution – which would mean more upheaval. It actually needs a period of stability, so that it can concentrate on improving service quality. Anything else would not be in the public interest.”

© Railnews Ltd 2010