Rail devolution… and integration

The English Devolution White Paper and the government’s rail reform consultation are together proposing a major shift of power from central to local government. Peter Plisner explores what it all means for the railways.

In this article:

• The government aims to expand devolution across England, which could give more control over rail services to local leaders.
• The White Paper proposes greater mayoral authority in rail governance, inspired by London's integrated transport model.
• Collaboration between mayors, Great British Railways, and local authorities is key to balancing devolution with national rail operations.

The government has said it wants to see all of England benefit from devolution. It wants to complete the map and oversee the rebalancing of power from central government to local leaders.

The English Devolution White Paper was all about allowing councils, in the words of the government, to “take back control and increase prosperity for local people”.

While some of the biggest metropolitan areas already have mayors and some devolved powers and funding, ministers made it clear that they wanted to fill the gaps, with more places having mayors and greater levels of devolution.

And with major reform under way on the railways, the question many have been asking is: what will train services look like under a more devolved system?

Even before the publication of the White Paper late last year, followed in February by the consultation document A railway fit for Britain’s future, there had been much debate about how the railways could be better managed locally - particularly in the large conurbations where an efficient public transport system is vital.

Back in 2015, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands both benefited from more devolution.

Then, in 2023, there were ‘trailblazing’ devolution deals that went even further.

But there was always still a question of the impact further devolved powers would have on the railways.

Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham has revolutionised bus travel with the new Bee Network of buses. It was an ideal example of how devolved powers could be used to exert further control and help to improve things for commuters and others.

Indeed, the latest Mayor of the West Midlands, Richard Parker, is also going down the route of bringing buses under public control.

But while the powers to introduce bus franchising have been available to metro mayors for some time, the same can’t be said for powers over the rail network.

Now the government wants to be more ambitious. In addition to plans to speed up the process for taking buses back into public control, and for more control over the strategic road network, the White Paper and the consultation made it clear that mayors need to be given a statutory role in governing, managing and developing the rail network.

The White Paper stated: “In addition to partnerships with Great British Railways, mayors of established Mayoral Strategic Authorities will have a clear right to request greater devolution of services, infrastructure and station control where it would support a more integrated network.”

The White Paper suggested that since devolution in 1999, London has been widely seen to have one of the best integrated transport systems in the world.

It also highlighted what it termed the “huge progress” being made across Mayoral areas - including in West Yorkshire and the Liverpool City Region, where there are also plans to take back control of their buses.

While the rail network was privatised, allowing more control over the trains remained in the ‘too difficult to organise’ pile.

But following a change of government, with the prospect of rail reform and more devolution, the door is now wide open to Mayoral authorities to secure far-reaching powers over how their local rail networks are run.

And while the White Paper was light on detail, more was forthcoming in the rail reform consultation document.

It stated that “in its role as the ‘directing mind’, Great British Railways (GBR) will bring track and train back together and plan services on a whole-system basis. But it is also vital that devolved governments and Mayoral Strategic Authorities (MSAs) can integrate local railways with other transport modes. They need the ability to create unified transport networks that serve their cities and regions, much like Transport for London - a model which is now being developed in MSAs across England.”

But there’s more, according to Andrew Scott, Deputy Director, Regional Partnerships at the GBR Transition Team.

He says: “From our perspective, it’s not just the rail stuff, even though that is great. You’ve got the statutory role for Mayors in planning and managing the network, and that’s really positive.

“But I think from a policy perspective, having transport planning nested in wider local growth plans and spatial development plans, you can really start to build a strategic relationship with Mayors based on what we can deliver as a railway, to help deliver housing needs or employment growth needs.”

And GBR is keen to highlight the role that rail can play alongside the other networks.

Scott adds: “Mayors around the country are getting more of the tools they need to run an integrated transport system. In some places, for example, we have seen the growth of bus franchising.”

The consultation document proposed the idea of creating a statutory role for devolved governments and Mayoral Strategic Authorities (MSAs) in governing, managing, planning and developing the rail network.

This, it said, would bring decision-making as close as possible to local communities, while recognising that as a nationally integrated network, the railway’s governance must balance local, commuter, regional, national, international and high-speed services, as well as the role of freight.”

The consultation states: “Much of the detail regarding GBR’s relationships with MSAs can and should sit outside legislation through bespoke agreements.

“Partnerships will mark a change in approach in how the railway engages locally, enabling GBR to better meet the needs of areas and wider communities. The plans also reflect that devolved arrangements vary, so a one-size-fits-all approach would not be appropriate.”

A table contained in the document highlights the different types of partnerships that could evolve, ranging from straightforward collaboration to a fully devolved railway.

Scott says: “In some cases it could be full devolution. But in most cases, it will be the railway working together as a strategic partner with Mayors, making sure rail plays a proper role and in a wider integrated transport system, and ensuring GBR is delivering whole-network benefits.”

But what is ‘full devolution’?

It could be simply having franchising powers similar to London Overground, where an authority has the powers to specify and commission its own services. Or something similar to the Welsh ‘Core Valley Lines,’ where infrastructure devolution has happened, too.

But will full devolution mean taking revenue risk?

Says Scott: “It can mean a range of things, so it can be from a baseline level, making sure that the railway is responding to what mayors are trying to do. Making sure that the rail strategy has a clear line of sight to a mayor’s local transport plan.

“That’s what we see as an absolute baseline for what a partnership looks like in the future. We need to work through what that looks like in terms of commercial exposure, and that’s something that we'll be doing over the coming months.”

The White Paper also suggested that Strategic Authorities could explore how the considerable land value potential in rail-owned land could drive regeneration, commercial and housing opportunities.

For Greater Manchester that means welcoming its rail services and stations into its Bee Network.

Following the publication of the White Paper, Mayor Andy Burnham said: “We are keen to explore ways to fund the impact of our growth, including major investments in infrastructure and public transport. We believe that additional local revenue-raising mechanisms could support these efforts.

“We are developing a ten-year pipeline of investment projects across Greater Manchester that we aim to unlock by utilising all available investment opportunities and sharing the benefits of growth both nationally and locally.”

And Burnham didn’t waste time getting his proposals published. In January, a plan was unveiled to bring rail into the Bee Network by 2028.

It was billed as the next stage of a joined-up ‘London-style’ public transport system, intended to boost passenger numbers, drive growth, and deliver new homes.

Developed in partnership with the rail industry, the Department for Transport and Shadow Great British Railways, the plan is aimed at not only improving transport, but also unlocking major regeneration and housing opportunities on land around the City Region’s stations.

Greater Manchester’s proposition is for eight commuter rail lines, covering 64 stations, to be brought into the Bee Network in three phases, delivering major improvements to the City Region’s train stations, services and passenger experience - including integrated capped fares across bus, tram and train.

While some might view the proposals as a sort of pre-emptive strike ahead of the changes outlined in the White Paper and the consultation, Greater Manchester Transport Commissioner Vernon Everitt is adamant that it’s about delivering on the Mayor’s manifesto commitment to integrate from a passenger perspective within the current rules, and that what was announced has come about as a result of a great deal of collaboration with the rail industry.

“Integration of rail, in our case into the Bee Network by 2028, was written into the Trailblazer Devolution Deals in 2023 for Greater Manchester and West Midlands,” he says.

“What we have announced puts a plan together for the phased execution of that, which has been agreed with Northern Rail and other key players. This has been a very positive collaboration with operators, government and Great British Railways.

“In parallel, we will work together on the form of statutory powers for Mayoral Combined Authorities offered by the Devolution White Paper.

“In the meantime, this plan demonstrates that there is much we can collectively get on with immediately, to deliver better rail services for the people and businesses of Greater Manchester and deliver higher patronage.”

And a move towards wider devolution means more local accountability - and rail has to be part of it.

“If you’re integrating your public transport network, then local rail services have to be part of it - just as they are in London,” says Everitt.

“So, we are making a start. The plan to 2028 is not about Greater Manchester running the services, employing the staff or owning the stations, although we will work with Network Rail on station redevelopment for new housing.

“This is about presenting to existing and potential rail customers a joined-up public transport network that works for them, and which enables economic growth and higher productivity for a rapidly growing City Region.”

The plan also includes a new railway station at Golborne, which is seen as a major milestone as the £32 million station will reconnect Golborne to the railway for the first time in more than 60 years.

With the DfT giving the station the green light, Transport for Greater Manchester and Wigan Council can now develop a full business case and detailed design this year. Subject to approvals, work is expected to begin in 2026 with the first trains hoped to stop there in 2027.

With plans to invest in the local rail infrastructure and improve stations, would Manchester go down the route of sharing the revenue risk or the commercial exposure, as GBRTT’s Andrew Scott suggested might happen?

Everitt replies: “We are certainly prepared to examine future models and are already looking, subject to Combined Authority approval, to put in capital funding to bring stations up to Bee Network standards, to brand them properly, and to make stations more accessible.

“We are also working together on more joined-up customer information and, with GBR, integrating fares and ticketing to provide seamless use of bus, tram and train.

“There could at some point be a joint approach to revenue funding, but the shape that could take remains to be worked through.”

Taking the revenue risk on services would imply a higher level of devolution of the railways to a local area.

But what will happen in places where local trains mix with inter-city, inter-regional and freight services? All have an equal right to be using certain routes, but who will get to make the decision on which services get which slots?

At a recent Transport Select Committee hearing, Rail Minister Lord Hendy attempted to provide an explanation.

He said: “Local authority and Combined Authority boundaries seldom replicate railway geography, which by and large emanates from London.

“But let’s use a practical example of which I have personal knowledge, which is that Transport for London took over parts of the national railway network 15 years ago. And those parts were distributed through various train operators and Network Rail regions.

“We found a way of working together by having an informed client at our end and working with willing railway people at the other end.”

Lord Hendy went on to inform MPs on the committee that: “There will be some Combined Authority areas which happily sit within a natural railway geographical boundary, of which West Midlands is one. And there will be some that don’t.

“And in the cases where they don’t - and in particular in the north of England, where there are several Combined Authorities across the Pennines - then one of the responsibilities of GBR is to find a way of running the railway which both respects its operational boundaries in a way that makes sense for the train service, and also is able to address the absolutely legitimate needs of the Mayors in the furtherance of their local economies.”

Lord Hendy did acknowledge that it might be “a bit messy at the edges”, but suggested that this was nothing new.

He maintained that the important thing was that when GBR sits down with each Mayor, that it would be facing somebody who is actually capable of being responsible for what the Mayor wants to execute in their own area.

At the same hearing, Shadow GBR Chair Laura Shoaf, who is also chief executive of the West Midlands Combined Authority, suggested that the Devolution White Paper was trying to “grapple” with some of those questions.

She said: “It’s been my experience that most Mayors find a very firm voice in and around transport because of how absolutely critical it is to them, to economic success, and to the other things that they want to achieve in terms of enabling infrastructure, alongside energy, digital, and transportation. Those are the things that help build those areas up.”

Shoaf made it clear that a priority for GBR was to meet with Mayors and others at an early stage, to get an understanding of how they can work together.

But she added: “There are always going to be decisions that have to be made about trade-offs. That goes back to the sort of ways of working, the sort of collaboration, and those early conversations, to make sure that everybody’s ambitions are heard and understood, and then the rationale for why decisions are taken is how you get to the best decision-making. So, it's really important.”

But while some of the major conurbations might want to go down the route of full devolution, others probably won’t.

In the Tees Valley, they’re still assessing the potential opportunities for local rail operations.

Alan Weston, Head of Transport at the Tees Valley Combined Authority, says: “Now we have a little more clarity on the government’s rail policy, it allows us to build upon our successes so far and further develop our plans for the next phase of rail infrastructure investments, to improve our network and provide capacity for passenger and freight services to support the economic growth aspirations of our area.”

The Tees Valley CA is looking forward to working with government on the role it can play in the rail network to support an integrated approach.

In the meantime, Weston says: “We will continue to work closely with rail operators, the government, Network Rail and the Great British Railways Transition Team on improving services to meet the demands from passengers across our region.”

Going forward, the key word seems to be ‘collaboration’.

Even before Labour came to power and rail reforms were talked about, many authorities were getting things done through working together.

In the West Midlands, for example, the launch of the ‘Grand Rail Collaboration’ led to a whole host of improvements.

However, with renationalisation on the horizon and a government that’s keen to devolve more power to the regions, collaboration is more important than ever. GBRTT’s partnership working is proof of that.

In a fully devolved world, clearly the authority would be in control of specification of services and the infrastructure.

But there will still need to be agreements about the infrastructure interfaces with the wider network, to make sure that will work. And, of course, GBR will want to have a good relationship with places that do request full devolution.

For those that don’t (and there will be many places), partnerships and collaborative working will be crucial.