Attended by:

Guests from NORTHERN RAIL: Steve Butcher (Area Director North) and Kathryn O’Brien (Client & Stakeholder Manager)

SENRUG: Ken Allott (Chair), Dennis Fancett (Vice Chair) and 8 further Senrug members

1. Introduction

a) Senrug Chairman Ken Allott opened the meeting and thanked the guests from Northern Rail for coming, and welcomed the other Senrug attendees. It was agreed that the format of the meeting would be that Senrug would raise issues which they wished to discuss with Northern Rail. Other Senrug business would be held over until after the Northern Rail representatives were obliged to leave.

b) Steve Butcher said he welcomed the opportunity to hear issues first hand from Senrug members. He advised his responses would be open and realistic. In other words, where there was no chance something would happen, he would say so. But where it appeared a business case could be made, this would be taken way and investigated.

2. Northern Rail Review.

It was noted that Senrug had mounted a vigorous campaign against the suggestion, rumoured to be part of the Northern Review, that local services north of Newcastle be withdrawn, and Wansbeck MP Denis Murphy had tabled an Early Day Motion on the subject. Steve explained that Northern Rail were not privy to the details of the review, but there is a requirement for them to be consulted once the Review is published. He confirmed the earlier statement (from Northern Stakeholder Conference) – that Northern are seeing passenger growth on all routes – includes specifically the Newcastle – Morpeth – Chathill route (ie statistics did not average this route in with others).

3. Level Access to Northbound Platform at Morpeth station.

a) It was noted this issue affects not just disabled passengers, but also those travelling with prams, pushchairs and luggage on wheels. There was general acknowledgement that Morpeth is an important station now served by 3 TOCs (Train Operating Companies), and that level access to all platforms would be ideal. Steve explained the station is technically owned by Network Rail, though Northern manages it.

b) Steve took away detailed engineering proposals as to how level access could be achieved via ramps to existing subway prepared by one Senrug member. It was noted there are also other options, eg create pedestrian access across dis-used sidings to the side road running parallel to northbound platform, or create pedestrian access from the far end of northbound platform to road at level crossings just outside the station.

c) Steve believed Northumberland County Council had indicated they had some money that could be used to fund this. He agreed to discuss it with NCC and report back to Senrug.

d) Kathryn re-iterated that in the meantime, disabled travellers should book in advance with Northern’s disabled travellers helpline, and suitable arrangements would be made for them (typically, taxi from Newcastle). The informal practice of allowing disabled passengers to travel with the empty stock into the siding and then alight on the southbound platform once the train starts its southbound journey was also noted.

4. Help Point at Cramlington

Senrug reported this was not working and had not been working for over a year. It had previously been reported several times both to Northern and to their predecessor, Arriva, by Senrug members present at the meeting. The fact that it is still not working did not therefore stack up well with Heidi Mottram’s (MD Northern Rail) assertion at the Northern Stakeholder Review Meetings that Help Points were included in the frequent station facilities checks and faults reported and corrected. Steve reported he was very embarrassed to hear about the situation at Cramlington and would investigate.

5. Passenger Information at Morpeth

a) Senrug pointed out that Morpeth, the largest station on the line, had neither Help Point (working or not), nor any form of PA or visual indicators of train running. When the station is staffed (mornings only), the Northern staff member is very helpful and has, on occasions, walked along the platform to ensure all waiting passengers were informed of operational delays. However, this can not cover the northbound station, nor times when the station is not staffed.

b) It was reported the situation could be quite dangerous. For instance, on one occasion, when unknown to waiting passengers all GNER services were running an hour late, passengers mistook the earlier non-stopping GNER service for the train that would stop, and moved forward to board the train, almost causing an accident.

c) It was noted there were a number of ways the situation could be improved:

1. A public address system, with announcements made remotely from a Northern Control Centre, from Newcastle Station, or from the adjacent signal box
   
2. Television screens, with information updated automatically / remotely
   
3. A Help Point telephone connection, for passengers to make enquiries as they needed to. (This could have buttons for the 3 TOCs, Network Rail [eg line obstructed], and British Transport Police)
   
4. A computer terminal in the office of the waiting room (locked when station is unstaffed) but showing through the window, permanently connected to the live train running departure board web-page. A similar system exists at Morpeth bus station. Some software is needed to ensure the system auto-updates every few minutes, and to remove the time default to the screensaver.
   
5. The creation of the “**2” facility to access Northern control free of charge from the public payphone near the station, and promotion of this facility (needs different design of phone box).
   

d) Senrug stressed that whilst the “full” solutions (i) and (ii) were infinitely preferred, options (iii), (iv) and (v) were all considered low cost and that the absence of any of these is really inexcusable.

e) Steve reported that, as with point (2), he believed NCC may have some money to fund a passenger information scheme. He said Northern would look at options and costs and discuss with NCC, then report back to Senrug.

f) Steve also reported a case was currently under consideration to extend the opening hours of Morpeth station, on a trial basis. Senrug responded such a move would be warmly welcomed (providing not just information and ticket sales, but also toilet and waiting room facilities which are currently locked whilst the station is unstaffed). However, it did not in itself overcome the need for passenger information, as even the extended opening hours under discussion would not cover first train to last train 7 days a week.

g) Kathryn reported the facility to obtain train running information via text to a mobile phone. (Footnote: this facility is little known. Could it be advertised please through posters on the platforms, along with costs for making and receiving the text calls?)

6. Morpeth and Cramlington: Station signage

At Morpeth there is insufficient signage, and at Cramlington there is none, showing which platforms are for which direction. This is particularly an issue at Morpeth since the station lies on an east-west plain whereas services run north-south, so it is less obvious to unfamiliar passengers which side of the line they should be on. Northern Rail agreed they would investigate this.

7. Morpeth and Cramlington: Car parking.

a) Senrug reported car-parks at both stations were now regularly full and requested they be extended, using adjacent railway land. Although there was some discussion as to whether car parking charges should be introduced, the consensus was that this would be a retrograde step, for the following reasons:

1. Charges would have to be set high enough to return a margin over and above the cost of operating the scheme, and such charges would be a deterrent.
   
2. Neither stations have bus services pulling in to the station turning circle – nearest bus stops are some distance away. (Footnote: although Senrug will campaign for better bus access to local stations.)
   
3. Neither station is close to the town centre and it was accepted that the cars parked at the station were there on rail business (ie not parking for town centre shopping).
   
4. It was suggested that free parking was a unique selling point for the local train operator. The Northern return fare to Newcastle is currently cheaper than the cost of a day’s parking in the centre of Newcastle. Should this not be the case, passengers would find it more advantageous to drive all the way to Newcastle, losing business to Northern Rail.
   

b) Steve agreed that Northern would look at what scope there is to improve car parking at both stations.

8. Timetable Issues

8.1 Timetable gaps

Senrug asked Northern to investigate whether they could eliminate the gaps in what is otherwise an hourly service on the line, without jeopardising the existing Chathill trains (the gaps have arisen due to the need for the train stock to form the Chathill service). Gaps occur as follows:

• Southbound from Morpeth between the 09.32 and 10.50
  
• Southbound from Morpeth between the 16.50 and 18.32 (partly plugged by the 17.26 Virgin service, but Cramlington has no service between 16.58 and 18.40)
  

8.2 Station gaps

Senrug pointed out that if the 06.00 Newcastle to Chathill stopped at Cramlington., it would create not just an early morning service from Cramlington to Morpeth, but also a connection at Morpeth or Alnmouth from Cramlington to the 06.43 GNER service to Edinburgh and Glasgow.

8.3 All day stopping at Manors

a) Currently, only a handful of trains stop at Manors, mainly morning southbound and evening northbound, to serve commuters. Senrug pointed out:

1. Manors station is situated in an area experiencing significant commercial redevelopment, with increasing white-collar commuting.
   
2. Commuters no longer work regular 9-5 patterns. One Senrug member worked half-days near Manors but could not use the station for her return journey. Call centres etc now have shifts patterns spread throughout the day.
   
3. Manors is closer than Central Station for Quayside area, Millennium Bridge, Baltic and Sage.
   
4. Manors offers a better interchange with Metro for those travelling to the Coast via Wallsend.
   

b) Senrug therefore suggested that all services stop at Manors. Steve responded that Northern did have an incremental charge based on the number of trains using a station, and that the additional station dwell time may not be possible from a timetabling perspective, but he noted the points Senrug had made and agreed to investigate whether there was a case for more trains to stop at Manors.

8.4 Clock-face Departures

a) It was agreed that regular clock-face departures help passengers become aware of train times and potentially increase patronage. Senrug pointed out that following the last timetable revision, Northern had virtually achieved this for departures from Morpeth and Newcastle. There are now only a few exceptions:

• Northbound from Newcastle. Between 10.15 and 17.15 all trains at xx.15 except 13.03
  
• Northbound from Cramlington: As above plus 12.26, 16.28 and 17.28 rather than xx.27
  

b) Outside the core day-time period, issues affecting clock-face departures are covered at point 8.1

8.5 Connections at Newcastle

Senrug asked Northern to consider synchronising departures from Newcastle to be just after arrivals from Carlisle and Hexham (footnote: or even joining the services together).

8.6 Evening Trains

Senrug pointed out that Northern lost the evening out in Newcastle City market, as there are no suitable return services to Northumberland, the last Northern train leaving Newcastle at 18.30. Intercity passengers returning after this time are tempted to drive from Northumberland to Newcastle (resulting in loss of local connection to Northern), since the bus station is a mile from the rail station, making returning to Northumberland by bus a further complication. [There is an evening GNER service at 20.29 and a Friday only service at 22.08 to Morpeth and Alnmouth, but no other evening rail services]

8.7 Sunday Trains

Northern stated there was no possibility of them providing a Sunday service unless they received funding to do so. Senrug acknowledged this, but asked how much it would cost to provide, for instance, a single train service between Morpeth and Metrocentre (ie cost of train and crew) for the whole day. It was felt that with a single train and crew, a service frequency of every 75 minutes, if not every hour, could be achieved. Senrug stated that if they knew the annual funding Northern would need, it would enable them to campaign more intelligently with bodies who might be in a position to make the funding available, eg Northumberland County Council.

9. Operational Issues

Senrug suggested that when the 07.22 southbound service from Chathill (due Morpeth 08.00) is running 30 minutes late or more, the stock to form the 08.30 service from Morpeth, waiting in the siding from about 08.10, should be released to travel to Newcastle early. Thus passengers from Morpeth and stations further south would only have a 10 minute delay, rather than 30 minutes plus. Those passengers arriving for the 08.30 departure would instead join the late-running 08.00 service from Chathill. Northern acknowledged this appeared to make sense and agreed to investigate further.

10. Promotion of Services

Senrug pointed out that despite Heidi Mottram announcing the 2 for 1 travel to Metrocentre offer at the Northern Stakeholder’s Conference, it had not been promoted widely in the Northumberland region and many people were unaware of it. Senrug had requested more details from Northern via email before Christmas but no clarification had been forthcoming. Senrug also said that if they were advised of details of similar offers, they could themselves promote it in their own emails, leaflets, and at libraries etc, in the same way as they had produced a joint GNER-Virgin timetable to promote inter-city services. Steve noted these points and said they would be passed to Northern’s Marketing Director, Joanna Thompson. Kathryn pointed out that the Metrocentre offer had been promoted and funded by Metrocentre, not by Northern, but agreed it was a pity that people living near to stations with a direct and regular train service to Metrocentre had not been made aware. It was noted there was no regular direct bus service from stations along the line to Metrocentre.

11. Station Adoption

In response to a question raised by Senrug, Kathryn confirmed the Station Adoption scheme was still in operation, and agreed to provide Senrug with details. (There had been some confusion as to whether Northern were continuing the scheme, immediately after their take-over of the franchise).

12. Belford

It was noted the Chathill service continues to the siding at the former Belford station in order to turn round. Potential passengers at Belford were pushing for construction of a platform alongside the siding to enable them to board and alight the train, effectively re-opening the station. There was tacit agreement that this made common sense, if the money could be found.

13. Conclusion

a) On behalf of Senrug, Ken Allott warmly thanked Steve Butcher and Kathryn O’Brien for coming, and in particular for agreeing to stay on longer than had been envisaged. He stated he looked forward to a response to those issues Northern had taken away, and hoped they would not simply be lost now the meeting had taken place.

b) As this part of the meeting had extended longer than expected and other Senrug members also had to leave, it was agreed all other Senrug matters would be held over to the next meeting (date to be advised), and Ken formally closed the meeting and thanked everyone for coming.

End

(Minutes Taken By Dennis Fancett)