Open access operator FirstGroup is considering running trains elsewhere in Europe, where more routes are being opened up to competition, but it signalled last night that it is still planning to stay on the rails in Britain, in spite of nationalisation.

First has published a report which emphasises the benefits of open access, and this was already being prepared when transport secretary Heidi Alexander sent a letter to the Office of Rail and Road on 6 January, in which she raised the problem of limited capacity and also implied that open access operators are not paying their fair share of track access charges.

Several applications are being considered by the ORR at the moment, including some from First. These include a new route from London to Bristol, Taunton and Torbay, and First already possesses open access licences to run from London to Carmarthen and Stirling.

First Rail managing director Steve Montgomery told Railnews: ‘We are here to work with government, we are here to work with the regulator, who has a role to play which is naturally important, to act as an independent authority. So anything we bring forward has to be robust. We accept that and we understand that, and those are the rules you play within.

‘We don’t believe there needs to be legislation to curtail open access – we should encourage it. The success of Hull Trains is a classic example of where we have operated since 2000, and we have grown that service, and look at how the community of Hull has prospered since we brought in those trains.’

Comments
___________

FirstGroup and the transport secretary need to recognise the other’s position. FirstGroup already estimates the abstraction from public sector services caused by their open access application. Those financial consequences should be regarded as the public sector contribution to the open access application. The regulator should accept the rest of the costs incurred as FirstGroup’s contribution and require profits above actual costs to be allocated in proportion to those “contributions”. Open book transparency should be required to facilitate regular reviews.
                                                                                                                                John Porter, Leeds

Would you like to comment on this story? Please click here to send an email to Platform at Railnews.

Moderated comments will be published on this site as usual, and may also be used in the next print edition RN336, published 13 February.