First published by Rail Business Daily.

As government finalises plans for its highly anticipated Rail Reform Bill, it needs to square the circle of the Department for Transport’s vision of a single ‘directing mind’ across the railway in the form of Great British Railways (GBR), and the devolution proposals outlined by Angela Rayner in the English Devolution White Paper to move decision making closer to local communities.  

The passing of the Passenger Railway Services (Public Ownership) Act at the end of last year cemented government control over Britain’s railways. But all the big decisions about how to organise the railways to get the best for passengers have been left until this second bill, with government expected to consult on it in the coming weeks. 

The Transport Secretary is, in the creation of GBR, pursuing a policy of centralisation through public ownership of the railway. So, it will be interesting to see how she chooses to approach calls from local leaders for further devolution, especially given her own previous direct experience as the Deputy Mayor overseeing Transport for London under Sir Sadiq Khan. Both Khan and the Manchester Mayor, Andy Burnham, have been vocal in their desire for more direct control of transport in their respective regions, and in wanting to bring rail services under their control. How these aspirations can be delivered under a centralised directing mind and single employer, is a significant question that the Rail Reform Bill needs to address.  

Devolving rail services won’t necessarily be straight forward. Detailed operational issues will need to be worked through on a case-by-case basis, funding arrangements will need to be clarified, and the structure of the railway will need to ensure that GBR treats other operators fairly, including freight and open access operators, as well as devolved services. 

However, the size of the prize means that these should be seen as challenges to overcome, rather than blockers which make local control impossible to achieve. Countries across Europe have shown how regional control of rail services can work in practice, as have cities in Britain such as London and Liverpool. 

Devolving ownership and control of rail services to local leaders can have a transformative impact. When integrated into local transport strategies and growth plans, rail services can play a key role in driving economic regeneration and unlocking new housing opportunities. For example, bringing the London Overground under Transport for London (TfL)’s control has transformed areas which had historically been poorly connected. In East London, improvements to the Overground unlocked more convenient travel options from some of the most deprived neighbourhoods to employment centres such as Shoreditch, and helped enable construction of 10,000 homes and a new district centre commercial zone at Barking Riverside. Coupled with bus franchising powers outlined in the English Devolution White Paper, local leaders have a significant opportunity to follow the example set by TfL and build truly integrated public transport systems at the local level, benefitting the communities they serve. 

The Government has committed to developing guidance on how local leaders can request further rail devolution. If government can develop a clear set of principles and criteria about when it will agree to these proposals, that would be a significant step forwards and a key enabler to widening the scope of rail devolution and the potential advantages it brings.  

In developing that guidance, it is important to recognise that one model won’t work everywhere. In Rail Partners’ report, Great Local Railways, we have set out a framework that government could apply to these decisions, with the right model for different areas depending on factors including the overlap between political and railway geographies, the degree of interaction with the wider national rail network, and the appetite and financial capacity of the authority. 

In some areas, the inter-connected nature of the railway means that it is likely to be impractical to separate services out from the national network. For example, in South Yorkshire local leaders could work in partnership with GBR to improve services, using the new powers proposed in the English Devolution White Paper to take on a more influential role in the development of GBR’s plans. 

Where railway and political geographies align more closely however, local leaders may want to take on more direct control. For instance, Andy Burnham has recently set out a step-by-step plan to begin integrating ticketing and branding across eight commuter rail lines into the Bee Network by 2028. But, in the future, he may wish to go further and take those services under direct local control as TfL already does. Indeed, in limited areas of the country such as Merseyside, there may even be an opportunity for Mayors to take on full ownership and control of their local rail networks, as well as train services.  

For devolution to deliver for passengers, Mayors will need the level of control over rail services appropriate to their specific area, as part of an integrated transport system, to deliver meaningful improvements. 

Devolving control of any rail services will take time, but key decisions on the future structure of the railway are being taken now. As government designs GBR, it will need to facilitate devolution in the future. How GBR interacts with local bodies, while running the railway as a national network, will be key to ensuring devolution is a success. Government must use the coming Rail Reform bill consultation to solve the big issues on the railway that passengers and taxpayers care about, including how Angela Rayner’s vision for devolution can exist alongside GBR’s centralised control.

Access our briefing here: Great Local Railways: Models and principles for rail devolution in England under Great British Railways.