www.rmt.org.uk

WHY THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD REJECT THE MCNULTY REPORT

SAVE OUR RAILWAYS TRADE UNION BRIEFING

McNulty proposes:

• the loss of tens of thousands offrontline workers such as trainguards, station and ticket office staff,as well as safety criticalinfrastructure and operationalworkers

• even greater commercial freedom fortrain operators, higher fares, cuts inservices, and more crowded trains

• the breakup of Network Rail and anend to its ‘not-for-dividend’ status,which will make the railway morefragmented and inefficient and willput profit before safety.

McNulty ignores lessons from railwaysin Europe which have achieved lowercosts and fares through a more unifiedstructure than Britain’s fragmentedrailways. And of course it has been theunco-ordinated short termism of ourrailways that has put the UK’s last trainmanufacturer in Derby on the brink ofclosure.

Will the goverNMeNt support

the McNulty report?

In November the government willproduce a rail policy White Paper (alsobeing called a “Command” paper) whichmay reflect some or all of the McNultyreport.

Rail workers are urging the governmentto reject the McNulty report and insteaddeliver an expanding railway, withaffordable fares and proper staffinglevels – a railway which is operated as apublic service, and one which puts theneeds of passengers, the economy,manufacturing and the environmentbefore commercial considerations.

What Will be the iMpact of

staff cuts for passeNgers?

• Passengers will suffer a fall inservice and safety standards. Some35 per cent of McNulty’s totalproposed savings are to be achievedthrough reducing staff costs. This is

despite the facts that rail workers’productivity has increased at agreater rate than labour costs, andthat rail workers in Britain areamongst the most productive inEurope.

• To help achieve these savingsMcNulty proposes to remove guardsfrom all trains by 2013. At the sametime there will be widespread cuts tostation staff and the number ofticket offices will be halved, leavingthree-quarters of the entire networkwithout any ticket offices.

• Cuts in staff will be a false economywhich could result in fewer peopleusing the railway. The cuts fly in theface of research by Passenger Focusand the government thatdemonstrates that station and trainstaff are important for passengers forticket sales, journey advice andgeneral assistance and reassurance.

WHAT IS THE MCNULTY The McNulty report was commissioned by thegovernment to “improve value for money topassengers and the taxpayer.”But the report’s recommendations are a false economywhich will worsen services to passengers and shortchange the taxpayer.

Why Will there be higher

fares?

• Former Transport Secretary PhilipHammond has admitted that therailways are a ‘rich man’s toy’, yetMcNulty calls for a reduction incoverage of off-peak and saverfares. Combined with thegovernment’s decision to introduceRPI-plus-three-per-cent fareincreases over the next three years,even more people will no longer beable to afford to travel on ourrailways. Passengers will be furthersqueezed by privatised trainoperators using greater commercialfreedom to raise fares.

• In the last ten years the real costof motoring has declined by eightper cent and the cost of flights hasdeclined by 34 per cent, but railfares have increased by 15 per centin real terms. These furtherincreases will make the ‘plane andcar more attractive than rail, andmake a mockery of DavidCameron’s claim that this would bethe greenest government ever.

but WoN’t higher fares MeaN

services are protected?

• No, the opposite. McNulty wants toincrease train utilisation massively(more passengers per train). Byruling out cuts in fares the onlyway that McNulty can achieve thisincrease in train utilisation will beto pack even more passengers onovercrowded peak trains or cutless-used services.

• Train-operating companies will begiven greater commercial freedomto operate less prescriptive, lessregulated franchises. Regionalrailways in particular are lined upfor significant cuts by beingcriticised for being more expensiveto fund than long-distance andLondon / South East services. Rail

experts have warned of a secondBeeching on the railway, repeatingthe massive cuts made in the1960s

What about the rail

iNfrastructure aNd safety?

• McNulty calls for the furtherfragmentation and privatisation ofthe railway by arguing for thebreakup of Network Rail and thesale or leasing of its assets to theprivate train-operating companies.These proposals will increase costsand reduce efficiency leading topoorer services and higher fares.

• Further fragmentation will alsohave an adverse impact on theability of the railways tocontribute to strategic objectivessuch as helping economic growth,moving freight to rail and reducingcarbon emissions.

• The breakup of Network Rail willbe accompanied by massivereductions in safety criticaloperational, maintenance andrenewals staff, resulting in the lossof even more skilled rail jobs.

• Re-introducing the profit motive,coupled with fragmenting signaland track maintenance andsignalling operations, will create aRailtrack Mark II and isinexplicable given the woefulsafety record of Railtrack. In thewake of the fatal events atSouthall, Labroke Grove, PottersBar and Hatfield, that companywas condemned by the public, thecourts, the unions and thepassengers for having accountantsdetermine its safety standards. As aresult track maintenance andsignalling operations was rightlyreintegrated and passed to a not-for-dividend company. To reversethis now is an insult to all whodied in those tragedies.

REPORT?

This leaflet has been compiled and originated by National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers, Unity House, 39 Chalton Street, London NW1 1JD. Tel: 020 7387 4771. Fax: 020 7529 8808. Web: www.rmt.org.uk

QUANTIFIABLECOSTS OF

PRIVATISATIONAND

FRAGMENTATION

Where caN i fiNd out More?

Please visit the trade union websites formore information

www.aslef.org.uk

www.rmt.org.uk

www.tssa.org.uk

www.unitetheunion.org

ASLEF • RMT • TUC • TSSA •

UN

ITE

but What is the alterNative

to McNulty?

• The McNulty report states hisreforms would save between £700million and £1 billion a year by2019 but, as we have shown, thiswill come at a heavy cost topassengers and rail workers.

• McNulty has chosen to ignore thefact that railways in Europe arecheaper for the taxpayer and fare-payer because in the main they arein public ownership and lessfragmented.

• Research for the rail unions by theTransport for Quality of Life think-

tank has shown that over £11billion has been lost from the railindustry as a result offragmentation and payments toshareholders since privatisation.(see table below).

• The research has also found thatby simply having one organisationoperating passenger services andinfrastructure would save £290million per annum; bringing railrenewals in house a further £200million and running TOCs on anot-for-profit basis another £300million. In total at least £1.2billion a year could be savedthrough reintegrating our railways

and scrapping dividend paymentsto shareholders. The benefits ofreturning our railways to publicownership are clear.

• A publicly owned railway run inthe public interests would alsobring wider economic, social andenvironmental benefits. Researchfor RMT by the Just Economicsthink-tank has found Britain’sprivatised railway is failing torealise benefits worth £13 billion ayear when compared to moreintegrated and publicly ownedrailways in France, Germany, Italyand Spain.