Dear Amber
A few months ago, you were kind enough to give me some of your valuable time to discuss a few Rye-specific topics that would have been of interest to our readers.
One of these was Southern Rail, its performance as a railway company, and the problem of strike action. At the time (August) there were negotiations with the RMT union and you were cautiously optimistic that these would be successful and normality would return to the service.
Unfortunately, as we now know, that was not to be and industrial action has escalated to a point where it is far beyond inconvenience to passengers, and is starting to affect jobs and livelihoods. This, surely, cannot be condoned by any government. It seems, however, that Southern are as incapable of extracting themselves from this mess as they were of running an efficient service even before the strikes started.
In your recent newsletter you stated quite clearly that the strike was politically motivated, that safety was not an issue with driver-operated doors and that a significant proportion of trains elsewhere were already running using the system that the RMT, and now ASLEF, are striking over. In addition we are told that guards will still be on the trains to assist passengers when required, so jobs will not be lost.
This being the case, a politically-motivated strike can surely only be settled by politicians getting involved, and to hear the Minister for Transport repeating day after day that there is nothing he can do and it is a matter between the unions and the company is simply no longer a sustainable argument.
It is, of course possible that the current round of talks at ACAS may produce an answer that will satisfy both sides - and that would be excellent - but on the basis of the antagonists respective positions at the moment there would seem to be only very small cause for optimism over that.
I was also interested to learn recently - although others have doubtless known for some time - that, unlike other franchises, Southern are paid a fee to manage the railway while the Government collects the income from the fares. This, I assume, means that the Country, through the Government of the day, owns the railway with Southern effectively being the managing agents. This is probably a vast over-simplification of the position, but nevertheless it does mean that the Government, as well as Southern, has a responsibility towards the rail users to ensure that what they are paying for through fares and taxes, is available for their use.
Are you able to assure our readers, and rail users generally, that if the current round of negotiations brings no result, then the Government will finally step in. Whether this means taking over the negotiations, the railway, appointing another agent to run it or even finally siding with the unions, I don't think the long-suffering rail users really care. All they want is a properly run railway that will take them to their destination and bring them home again efficiently and safely and surely they are entitled to expect a Government that claims to work for all, to ensure that that is exactly what they get.
Yours sincerely
John Minter
Editor, Rye News
