In 1963, Dr Richard Beeching, fresh from the chemical industry, took an axe to Britain's railway network - 2,000 stations were to close, and 250 train services withdrawn. Dr Beeching's shadow has loomed over the rail industry since.
The chairman of the government's Strategic Rail Authority (SRA), Richard Bowker, insists he is no Dr Beeching. But in drawing up this set of proposals, he has taken a similar approach.
 Rural branch lines face cutbacks |
Dr Beeching said half the railway network was not carrying sufficient traffic to cover its maintenance costs. In 2003, Mr Bowker has come to the same conclusion about regional routes, rural branch lines and track used by freight trains.
He is not going to close these lines, but he is going to make cuts.
First, the health warning. These are proposals published as part of a consultation.
Rail regulator Tom Winsor will have his say later in the year. But a lot of consultants' time has gone into drawing up this plan, which will in effect, push money and effort less where its wanted and more where its needed.
The priority will be given to these lines:
- intercity routes carrying high speed trains
- other important strategic lines
- the London commuter network
- lines serving ports
- transpennine lines - and those linking up York, Leeds, Huddersfield, Manchester, Sheffield and Liverpool
- important lines in Scotland
But there could be up to 50% less work done on:
- all other regional railways
- rural branch lines
- freight lines
On these quieter stretches of track, where trains services are "infrequent", the proposals suggest "structures would be maintained to manage safety risks but there would be substantially reduced track renewal volumes". This could mean the number of speed restrictions on the track increase, resulting in more delays.
In contrast money would be poured into the more "important" lines. Track replacement and signal modernization would be accelerated.
More effort would be expended doing work on busy lines at night, and during the weekends, when it will not disrupt passengers. But that might well mean work on quieter routes has to be done in what would amount to "downtime" for the maintenance teams - midweek and during the day.
Mr Bowker says these are tough decisions that need to be taken.
Controversially he says: "Will anyone mind if three to four minutes are added to a rural journey? No, I don't think so. That time is much better saved on routes where time is the deciding factor."
The problem is rural travellers - and their vociferous representatives - will mind. And they will not mind saying so.
When the SRA cut more than 100 train services on quieter rail routes early this year, when it has talked in the past of replacing trains with buses, it has been confronted by anger from country travellers.
Friends of the Earth was quick to describe this plan as "bonkers" because traffic levels on rural roads are rising and railways provide an alternative.
Danger ahead
But Mr Bowker, like Mr Beeching before him, has other masters to serve. He has to convince the government the growing billions being shovelled into the railways are being spent wisely.
As far as the government is concerned, that means being spent where they will generate improvements passengers will actually notice.
That raises an obvious danger for the SRA and the government, should this plan be adopted.
If rural services start to suffer from the cutbacks, but the service on the main line does not improve, there will be trouble.
One-Minute World News 
News services
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
Will anyone mind if three to four minutes are added to a rural journey? No, I don't think so 
