Search Results

Unfortunately, I have little positive to say from today’s meeting to discuss progress on step-free access at Biggleswade station. Unless things change and change quickly, there is a very real possibility that Biggleswade could become another ‘Luton’ and face endless delays while each party waits for everyone else to act – a reminder that Luton station was due to have been step-free in Control Period 5 between 2014-19. Attendees at the meeting included, Network Rail, Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR), Central Bedfordshire Council (CBC), Biggleswade Town Council, Richard Fuller MP – and Fiona and me from the Bedfordshire Rail Access Network. It became clear very quickly that to there has been very little, if any  communication between Network Rail and Central Bedfordshire Council regarding the upgrade of Biggleswade station, as only one of the five options shown to us contained any reference to the proposed Transport Interchange. It seems that not only are the two biggest stakeholders in the project (Network Rail and CBC) not on the same page, they seem to be on different trains, heading in opposite directions! Network Rail advised us that they had only been made aware of the Interchange plans in the last two or three months. As plans for an Interchange have been circulating since 2011 something has gone very badly wrong here! CBC representatives then showed us a basic plan of the bus interchange, but advised us that it was at the very early stages and would rely on money from the Housing Infrastructure Fund, with no firm date given for receipt of the money, other than by 2024. Having been shown four previous options at a meeting that took place over a year ago, it’s clear two options have been ruled out – those being bridges and lifts at the extreme North or South ends of the platforms. Another option to just add on lifts to the current footbridge presents a number of problems due to the lack of space, both in terms of platform width and the size of lifts that could be installed in that area. The option that seems the most favoured by the Network Rail design team seems to be lifts to both island platforms a little to the South of the current buildings on the Southbound platform. There are three variants to how the new footbridge and lifts would be accessed – two starting from a right turn immediately after the ticket machines at the station entrance and the third with an entrance where the current bike storage is located. The favoured location of the new bridge is just to the South of the building on Platforms 1/2 However, all of these options involve the use of ramps, with either a 1 in 17 or 1 in 20 gradient which is far from ideal. Further, there is no access to the lifts to or from the Eastern side of the station. This will result in a long detour for mobility impaired passengers coming from the East of Biggleswade. We only have one chance of getting this right and to ‘future proof’ the station – and it strikes us as penny pinching that only two lifts are being considered. Further, there seems to be no direct access to or from the proposed bus interchange. On behalf of the Bedfordshire Rail Access Network team I made it very clear that none of the current options on the table were satisfactory and that were extremely disappointed at the lack of progress and joined up thinking between Network Rail and Central Bedfordshire Council. Richard Fuller MP also set out how disappointed he was with the lack of detail in any of the options, lack of detail of any costings, lack of any sign of liaison between Central Bedfordshire Council, GTR and Network Rail and no detail on what definitively can and can’t happen with the current infrastructure. It seems we have moved forward very little in the last year, in technical terms the project has moved from ‘GRIP 2’ to the beginning of ‘GRIP 3’ (GRIP stands for ‘Governance for Railway Investment Projects’ – there are eight stages). GTR stated that the budget from the ‘Access for All’ funding is based on only two lifts. We believe that three lifts are required as a minimum with potentially in addition a shallow ramped access from the Eastern side of the station. GTR stated at the meeting that additional revenue sources should be looked at, such as developer S106 funding or matched funding. These issues all risk delaying an already slow moving project. I asked the question lots of people will no doubt be asking and that is; “when will we have step-free access at Biggleswade?” Both Central Bedfordshire Council and Network Rail would not give any guarantee that it would be any earlier than 2024, although they hoped it would be sooner. At their current rate of progress and lack of co-operation there is little cause for optimism. In summary what we heard today was simply not good enough and both Richard Fuller and I are in agreement. This can’t be allowed to drift any longer and Richard has set up another meeting in a months time with the same attendees – with an expectation that real progress will have been made. On a brighter note we did meet GTR’s new Head of Accessibility and we will be updating her on a number of issues around the GTR network in terms of the accuracy of the station access information currently provided. It was also nice to find out that I’m not the only person that researches the ‘Access Map’/National Rail Enquiries/ ‘Google Earth’ at the same time to check out accessibility issues!! Fiona also raised the ongoing issues with ‘booked assistance’ and frequent delays waiting to alight trains, although we lacked the time to go into these any other issues in any great detail. As always, happy to work with people from across the political spectrum, where we can and do find common ground. There is still much work to do. The Bedfordshire Rail Access Network’ team have insisted we continue to be at the table for all future meetings and we will be keeping a very close eye on progress, or lack of it. Julian Vaughan Chair Bedfordshire Rail Access Network email us at: bedsrailaccessnetwork@gmail.com follow us on twitter at: @BedsRailAccess #stepfreeaccess #biggleswade #Bedfordshire #railways #Politics

Below is a compilation of a number of email exchanges with Central Bedfordshire Council on the subject of bus provision across Central Bedfordshire (CBC). I’ve not edited any questions or answers, but have added words in brackets where necessary to make the meaning clear. My five questions are in bold and follow ups in italics, CBC answers are in red. I hope the exchanges will be of interest to those concerned with public transport across Bedfordshire and beyond. The responses do invite further questions which I will follow up elsewhere. 1. Can you advise if CBC are looking change how they administer bus services in the area – such as through ‘Advanced Quality Partnerships’ or ‘Enhanced Partnerships’ (recent example from Herts CC attached) as set out in the 2017 Bus Service Act? CBC Response: As a relatively small authority, Central Bedfordshire Council does not currently propose to adopt an advanced quality partnership or an enhanced partnership with local bus operators. JV follow up: Local Authorities are permitted to enter into AQP’s or EP’s with neighbouring local authorities. CBC would also be permitted to enter into a ‘voluntary bus partnership’ which have been successful in other areas. As CBC Councillors have gone on record stating “they don’t believe buses are the answer in Central Bedfordshire” I am not confident there is the political will at CBC to improve bus services – and to date no alternatives have been put forward by the Council to reduce the reliance on the car. 2. Can you confirm what changes if any will be made to bus times North of Biggleswade on the 188/190 route and how this service will integrate with services South of Biggleswade? Can you confirm that there will be no reductions (or advise us of any increases) to the current service levels or changes to the first/last services on the 188/190 route South of Biggleswade? * for info route North of Biggleswade is subsidised, route South of Biggleswade is run on commercial basis. CBC Response: The 188 and 190 services to the north of Biggleswade are operated by Centrebus under contract to Central Bedfordshire Council and are not affected by the changes to the service south of Biggleswade. The 188 and 190 services between Biggleswade, Sandy & Potton will therefore continue to operate to the same timetable as they currently run. With regard to the comments you make about the current timetable for services to the north of Biggleswade, it may be possible to make some changes and the public transport team will look at these possibilities in due course. Where possible, we will aim to connect with rail services but this cannot always be guaranteed. (With regard to…) the issues you’ve raised about integration and provision of first and last services may be possible, however, I must re-iterate that the service (South of Biggleswade) will operate on a commercial basis and so this is at the discretion of the operator. JV follow up: Having now checked both timetables I can see that there is no integration between the services and therefore passengers wishing to travel through Biggleswade to villages North and South will often have a lengthy wait of up to an hour to carry on their journey. It has already been brought to our attention that this affects children going to school in Biggleswade. Further, looking at the timetable I believe that Centrebus will be running the route North of Biggleswade with two buses rather than the three they needed to run the full route. Will the subsidy to Centrebus be reduced accordingly as their financial outlay will be reduced? Integration of services should be a priority where you have control over them (as is the case with subsidised services). Again, I understand that you will be cautious of over-promising, but a timeline of when you intend to take a look at this would be very welcome. I do understand that commercial routes are solely at the discretion of the operator (we can ‘thank’ the 1985 Transport Act for that) however I’m sure that Central Bedfordshire Council could bring some pressure to bear on the bus operators to better integrate services. On this issue you would have my full support. I note you say, ‘may be possible’. I understand you will be cautious of over-promising, but can you advise if you are prepared to formally raise the issue with Grant Palmer? CBC further response: • The amended 74 and the amended 188/190 are totally separate services so it is difficult to ensure that there is integration between them. For this to happen the timetable of one or other of the services may need to be significantly revised which would of course disadvantage current users of that particular service. We may however be able to look at this point further as we review the timetables for services to the north of Biggleswade (as mentioned below). • We have carried out monitoring of the current service from Langford into Biggleswade and there do not appear to be any schoolchildren travelling on the route. Centrebus have confirmed that they have not sold any season tickets to schoolchildren for use on the current service. • We currently fund Centrebus to provide services between Biggleswade and Sandy/Potton only: as the timetable for these services is not changing there is no justification for reviewing the subsidy. The same subsidy also covers the 85/85A Biggleswade town services which are not affected by the changes to the 188/190. We will be reviewing these services over the coming weeks as we consider how best to use the Better Bus funding that has recently been announced. • We have already raised with Grant Palmer the issue of the timings of the buses in the light of matters that have been raised but the company do not have any plans to amend the timetable at present. 3. ~ It is four years since CBC published their Passenger Transport Strategy (identified as the Public Transport Strategy in some of your literature). This pre-dates the Bus Services Act. When do you intend to review the strategy? CBC Response: The Council’s Passenger Transport Strategy was adopted in November 2016 and will be considered by the Overview & Scrutiny Committee later this year. This review may result in changes to the current strategy and could include consideration of the air quality issues you have raised. JV follow up: Will there be any public consultation as part of this review? CBC further response: It is too early to say what form the review will take but it is likely that it will involve further public consultation. 4. ~ You will be aware that the Department for Transport have provisionally awarded CBC £154,358 to improve buses in the area across 2020/21. However, this award may be withheld in part or full if the ‘statement of intent’ form does not contain sufficient evidence, including that of consultation with local bus users and residents. Can you set out how CBC have attempted to advertise this potential funding, and how it has consulted with local bus users and residents? CBC Response: On 6th February, the DfT advised us of additional support for bus services in 2020/2021 announced by DfT on 6th February. We are now consulting with local MPs, town and parish councils and our own Central Bedfordshire Council elected members about how this funding should be used. As democratically elected representatives and community leaders, we believe these individuals and organisations are very well placed to give us good feedback, which will of course be carefully considered. JV follow up: This approach does not appear to strictly meet the requirements of the Department for Transport’s ‘Funding for Supported Bus Services in 2020-21’ criteria. CBC further response: You will be aware that the background guidance for the Better Buses funding application process says that local authorities should demonstrate that their proposals reflect the needs of local residents and that all local MPs should be consulted. We have taken this further by also consulting with elected members of Central Bedfordshire Council and with town and parish councils. Many of these consultees have shared the information widely with those they represent. The guidance also says authorities should demonstrate engagement with the public: as you will know the funding was announced on 6th February with the funding to be available from April so these timescales did not permit a full public consultation so in addition to the discussions with elected representatives mentioned above we have also consulted with public transport user groups that we are aware of: you would of course be welcome to make any comments and suggestions on behalf of Bedfordshire Public Transport Watch, should you wish to do so. 5. ~ In CBC’s ‘Air Quality Action Plan 2018-2023’ it states that the Council recognise the importance of improving and promoting public transport. Can you advise how CBC have both improved and promoted public transport across Central Bedfordshire since 2018? CBC Response: We have invested significant amounts in the provision of infrastructure such as bus stops and shelters, with real time information screens provided at key stops. We work hard to ensure that up to date timetable information is provided at all bus stops with display cases across Central Bedfordshire, and to install additional timetable cases in appropriate locations. We do not produce printed publicity material as this can go out of date very quickly after publication but we do publicise details of bus service changes on our website where we also show maps of bus services across Central Bedfordshire which are regularly updated. We ensure that details of bus services are passed to the National Travel Line to facilitate online and app-based journey planners and to ensure the correct operation of real time information systems. We have a budget for supported bus services which we use to provide services that aren’t operated commercially as outlined in our published Passenger Transport Strategy, we identify and secure section 106 funds to enhance and improve services around new developments and we liaise regularly with bus operators to ensure services continue to meet the needs of local communities. Follow up reading Hertfordshire County Council Enhanced Partnership https://www.hertfordshire.gov.uk/about-the-council/consultations/transport-and-highways/intalink-enhanced-partnership-public-consultation.aspx Julian Vaughan Bedfordshire Public Transport Watch twitter @bedspuplictrans1 #buses #centralbedfordshire #publictransport #Transport

While the Prime Minister heralds the dawn of a new age of bus travel across the UK the current situation, particularly in Bedfordshire, is somewhat less bright and breezy. Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Transport, when asked by Andrew Marr how many of the 3,000 routes cut by the ‘old Tory Government’ would be restored by the ‘new Tory Government’, was vague on details – and admitted that he didn’t know yet how it will all work. It’s clear there is no actual plan at this stage and what transport desperately needs in the UK is a guiding mind to oversee an integrated and accessible transport network which puts people first, not profits. I look forward to the government’s National Bus Strategy, due to released later this year. However, when they announce with great fanfare just 250 miles of additional cycle routes, which works out at around 0.6 of a mile per local authority, please allow me to be a little cynical about the scale of their ambition or interest in creating a transport system that will meet the urgent needs created by the looming climate emergency. 188/190 Bus Stop between Langford and Henlow Meanwhile back in Central Bedfordshire it has inadvertently slipped out, through the comms of a neighbouring Council (shout out to Hertfordshire County Council!) that Centrebus are handing in the keys to the 188/190 route between Hitchin and Biggleswade. This part of the route (the whole route is Hitchin to Sandy) was run on a commercial basis with no funding from the Council. While it’s likely that another company will take over the route it’s not clear what the service levels will be and doesn’t bode well for future service provision across Bedfordshire. Bedfordshire has one of the lowest passenger journey rates per head of population     (13.7 in 2018/19) in England. This is not surprising when the Council are openly luke-warm about buses believing that, while they may work elsewhere, they are not the answer across Central Bedfordshire. While Central Bedfordshire Council has a passive, if not comatose, approach to bus services if you slip across the border to Hertfordshire it seems you will find a far more progressive attitude. Here, the County Council are spending an additional £8 million on bus services in 2020/21 and have just announce a £1m Enhanced Partnership scheme to work more closely with bus companies and improve services. It’s clear in Bedfordshire that there is no ‘guiding mind’ to press the case for greater integration of different transport modes and there seems to be little interest. This has resulted in bus and rail companies scheduling services as if the other doesn’t exist. This results in journeys taking far longer than need be the case and encourages the drift of even the most conscientious traveller back to the car. As Central Bedfordshire will not subsidise services before 08.00 or after 18.30, buses are not a viable alternative for commuters. Bus services are non-existent on Sundays and this increases social isolation among the vulnerable and least well off in our community. I’ve written to Central Bedfordshire Council, asking them the questions set out below. ~ Can you advise if CBC are looking change how they administer bus services in the area – such as through ‘Advanced Quality Partnerships’ or ‘Enhanced Partnerships’ (recent example from Herts CC attached) as set out in the 2017 Bus Service Act? ~ It is four years since CBC published their Passenger Transport Strategy (identified as the Public Transport Strategy in some of your literature). This pre-dates the Bus Services Act. When do you intend to review the strategy? ~ You will be aware that the Department for Transport have provisionally awarded CBC £154,358 to improve buses in the area across 2020/21. However, this award may be withheld in part or full if the ‘statement of intent’ form does not contain sufficient evidence, including that of consultation with local bus users and residents. Can you set out how CBC have attempted to advertise this potential funding, and how it has consulted with local bus users and residents? ~ In CBC’s ‘Air Quality Action Plan 2018-2023’ it states that the Council recognise the importance of improving and promoting public transport. Can you advise how CBC have both improved and promoted public transport across Central Bedfordshire since 2018. Of course buses are only part of the solution to provide a greener transport network, but they will play a vital role in our attempt to meet carbon reduction targets, lower traffic congestion and air pollution levels by reducing our reliance on the car. Whether buses will play a role to achieve this remains to be seen as the political will for them to do so is clearly absent at this time. Julian Vaughan twitter: @juliman66 email: bedsptransportwatch@gmail.com Sources & further reading: Bus Use Statistics: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/bus01-local-bus-passenger-journeys Three steps to better bus services – by Campaign for Better Transport https://bettertransport.org.uk/sites/default/files/pdfs/bus-services-act-guidance.pdf Government Press Release ‘Major Boost for Bus services’ – 10th February 2020 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/major-boost-for-bus-services-as-pm-outlines-new-vision-for-local-transport #Bedfordshire #buses #publictransport

While the Prime Minister heralds the dawn of a new age of bus travel across the UK the current situation, particularly in Bedfordshire, is somewhat less bright and breezy. Grant Shapps, the Secretary of State for Transport, when asked by Andrew Marr how many of the 3,000 routes cut by the ‘old Tory Government’ would be restored by the ‘new Tory Government’, was vague on details – and admitted that he didn’t know yet how it will all work. It’s clear there is no actual plan at this stage and what transport desperately needs in the UK is a guiding mind to oversee an integrated and accessible transport network which puts people first, not profits. I look forward to the government’s National Bus Strategy, due to released later this year. However, when they announce with great fanfare just 250 miles of additional cycle routes, which works out at around 0.6 of a mile per local authority, please allow me to be a little cynical about the scale of their ambition or interest in creating a transport system that will meet the urgent needs created by the looming climate emergency. 188/190 Bus Stop between Langford and Henlow Meanwhile back in Central Bedfordshire it has inadvertently slipped out, through the comms of a neighbouring Council (shout out to Hertfordshire County Council!) that Centrebus are handing in the keys to the 188/190 route between Hitchin and Biggleswade. This part of the route (the whole route is Hitchin to Sandy) was run on a commercial basis with no funding from the Council. While it’s likely that another company will take over the route it’s not clear what the service levels will be and doesn’t bode well for future service provision across Bedfordshire. Bedfordshire has one of the lowest passenger journey rates per head of population     (13.7 in 2018/19) in England. This is not surprising when the Council are openly luke-warm about buses believing that, while they may work elsewhere, they are not the answer across Central Bedfordshire. While Central Bedfordshire Council has a passive, if not comatose, approach to bus services if you slip across the border to Hertfordshire it seems you will find a far more progressive attitude. Here, the County Council are spending an additional £8 million on bus services in 2020/21 and have just announce a £1m Enhanced Partnership scheme to work more closely with bus companies and improve services. It’s clear in Bedfordshire that there is no ‘guiding mind’ to press the case for greater integration of different transport modes and there seems to be little interest. This has resulted in bus and rail companies scheduling services as if the other doesn’t exist. This results in journeys taking far longer than need be the case and encourages the drift of even the most conscientious traveller back to the car. As Central Bedfordshire will not subsidise services before 08.00 or after 18.30, buses are not a viable alternative for commuters. Bus services are non-existent on Sundays and this increases social isolation among the vulnerable and least well off in our community. I’ve written to Central Bedfordshire Council, asking them the questions set out below. ~ Can you advise if CBC are looking change how they administer bus services in the area – such as through ‘Advanced Quality Partnerships’ or ‘Enhanced Partnerships’ (recent example from Herts CC attached) as set out in the 2017 Bus Service Act? ~ It is four years since CBC published their Passenger Transport Strategy (identified as the Public Transport Strategy in some of your literature). This pre-dates the Bus Services Act. When do you intend to review the strategy? ~ You will be aware that the Department for Transport have provisionally awarded CBC £154,358 to improve buses in the area across 2020/21. However, this award may be withheld in part or full if the ‘statement of intent’ form does not contain sufficient evidence, including that of consultation with local bus users and residents. Can you set out how CBC have attempted to advertise this potential funding, and how it has consulted with local bus users and residents? ~ In CBC’s ‘Air Quality Action Plan 2018-2023’ it states that the Council recognise the importance of improving and promoting public transport. Can you advise how CBC have both improved and promoted public transport across Central Bedfordshire since 2018. Of course buses are only part of the solution to provide a greener transport network, but they will play a vital role in our attempt to meet carbon reduction targets, lower traffic congestion and air pollution levels by reducing our reliance on the car. Whether buses will play a role to achieve this remains to be seen as the political will for them to do so is clearly absent at this time. Julian Vaughan twitter: @juliman66 email: bedsptransportwatch@gmail.com Sources & further reading: Bus Use Statistics: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/bus01-local-bus-passenger-journeys Three steps to better bus services – by Campaign for Better Transport https://bettertransport.org.uk/sites/default/files/pdfs/bus-services-act-guidance.pdf Government Press Release ‘Major Boost for Bus services’ – 10th February 2020 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/major-boost-for-bus-services-as-pm-outlines-new-vision-for-local-transport #Bedfordshire #buses #publictransport

In April 2019 the UK rail industry, through the Rail Delivery Group, proudly announced the launch of its new interactive accessibility map. The aim of this map is to improve accessibility information for passengers – and increase the confidence of passengers with disabilities to travel by train. The map can be found here http://accessmap.nationalrail.co.uk/ Unfortunately, and probably not a surprise to many people with disabilities, a close look at this map reveals an alarming number of errors. These errors, rather than ‘boost confidence’ could lead to very unpleasant travel experiences and at worst potentially hazardous situations. Zoomed out view of the Access Map As Chair of the ‘Bedfordshire Rail Access Network’ I first took a look at stations across Bedfordshire and noticed that Arlesey station was highlighted with a green pin – which by the logic of their traffic light system denotes ‘full step-free access’ ( yellow is ‘partial access’ and red is ‘no access’). Below is a screenshot of how it was originally described. Arlesey station original description Most people agree (apart from the Rail Delivery Group or the Train Operating Companies it seems) that a train with no cross platform step-free access must not be described (as Arlesey station is) step-free. As you’ll see in the written description it does (correctly) state that there is no step-free access between platforms. What it neglects to mention is that the route between the platforms (if you can find it as there is no map) involves a journey of around 1,400 metres along an unlit main road and involving significant gradients. Fair play to Great Northern that when this was raised with them, they immediately changed the pin to yellow, but there is still no indication of the journey between the platforms. Taking a look round other stations it became clear that this was not just a one off and that there were more serious errors and misinformation. As I’m originally from Northumberland I thought I’d take a look at Hexham station on the Carlisle – Newcastle route, managed by Northern Rail. Below is the original map description: Access Map info for Hexham Station 03/01/20. A green pin, but no cross-platform access Again it had the green pin, although clearly there is no level cross platform access – the description indicated the barrow crossing had permanently closed. Again I queried this via social media and while not receiving any response checked a few weeks later and information had been updated to that shown below: Hexham station – updated description 03/02/20 Northern had breezily added to the description: “it is quite a long walk from one side of the station to the other, but it is accessible at all times”. Now I know this station quite well as I lived in Hexham until I was around 18 years old, but I did do a ‘street view’ check on Google Maps to refresh my memory. Below is the route of the ‘accessible’ journey. Hexham station cross platform route In summary this journey (note there is no map at the station to describe it) is 660 metres long, crosses three main roads, lacks dropped kerbs and has a stretch with no pavement. This is not a feasible or safe option for people with disabilities. Rather than acknowledge the error, Northern Rail have doubled-down on it and resolutely declined to change the green pin to yellow. Other examples are Riding Mill, two stations down the line towards Newcastle. Again the green pin denoting full step-free access with the cheery description of a ’10 minute walk’ between platforms (it’s 760 metres with an unlit section and a steep gradient in one part) and Stocksfield station which doesn’t actually provide any indication of the distance between platforms (540 metres with an unlit section and no dropped kerbs). Riding Mill cross platform route – 760 metres Stocksfield cross platform route – 540 metres Having taken a deeper look at other station managed by Northern, similar issues come up. Having looked at 75 stations to date around 20% have incorrect descriptions. Another glaring issue, for another blog, is the high number of unstaffed stations and low number of stations with toilets, both strong disincentives for many to travel by rail. It’s not all bad, the map itself is a work of art, if at times a work of fiction, and sometimes you can be gently surprised when a station such as Godalming with its shiny new lifts shyly neglects to even mention their existence on the ‘stations made easy’ map. However, what is clear is that there needs to be a ‘guiding mind’ when dealing with accessibility on the railways. The current division of the task between the Rail Delivery Group, the relevant Train Operating Company, the Department for Transport and the Office of Road and Rail is clearly not working. All parties are looking at each other to complete the tasks and their seems to be no oversight as to what is published is actually correct. This really is the easy stuff, if we can’t get this right how are we going to cope with the far more substantial challenges of achieving equal access on the UK railways. I would suggest the following as priorities in terms of the provision of accessibility information. This is not intended to be an exhaustive list and I welcome any comments/additions. At stations with no cross platform step-free access, any route/s between platforms that involves leaving the station must be clearly displayed on maps at each exit and made available online in both map and video run through formats The length of the route and the steepest gradient encountered on the route must be displayed at each exit to the station and made available online The route must be clearly signposted throughout its length Hazards such as the absence of street lighting or drop kerbs must be mentioned in the description of the route – with the installation of dropped kerbs, lighting etc. requested as a priority with the relevant local authority When station information is updated the date of the update must be displayed on the map and this information must be checked on a regular basis – and the date of this inspection displayed The external route must checked for any potential issues on a regular basis A standalone body dealing with the provision of accessibility on the railways – a souped up version of the Disabled Persons Transport Advisory Committee A comprehensive and independent review of the information contained within ‘Knowledgebase’ – the database that contains station information. A comprehensive and independent review of the ‘Access Map’ discussed above. The Rail Delivery Group and the Train Operating Companies have clearly failed in both their supply of accurate information and management of it. They shouldn’t be allowed to mark their own homework If level crossings are part of the external route inspections to take place in relation to the suitability of the route for a wheelchair, particularly in relation to the flangeway gaps (the gap between the rail and the crossing surface) which have been the cause of a number of fatal and less serious incidents involving wheelchair users across the world There is hope on the horizon with the Office of Rail and Road’s new guidance on Train Operating Companies Accessible Travel Policies, although I can already see some issues with their station accessibility guidance and it seems to be very weak in terms of enforcement and penalties for non-compliance. The Office of Rail and Road’s new station accessibility classification – July 2019 Accessible Travel Policy Guidance It strikes me as very odd that while the ORR insist that the above classification of the station as either A, B or C is mandatory, the provision of the sub-sections (set out below)  which actually get to the nitty gritty of the access issues is purely voluntary, or as they state ‘good practice’. Many stations will actually fall into the B2 category as they only have lifts for part of the traffic day as they are only staffed part time. The optional extra station classification available to train Operating Companies In conclusion one issue is crystal clear – the rail industry must do far better as people with disabilities continue to be let down on a daily basis. It’s time for actions, not good intentions. Julian Vaughan follow me on twitter at: @juliman66 Sources and further reading ORR July 2019 Accessible Travel Policy Guidance https://orr.gov.uk/rail/licensing/licensing-the-railway/accessible-travel-policy ORR November 2017 Economic Enforcement Policy and Penalties Statement https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/4716/economic-enforcement-statement.pdf Rail Delivery Group’s Press Release re Access Map 17th April 2019 https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2019/469775648-2019-04-17.html #accessibilityinformation #railways #Transport

Laurence Fox’s appearance on BBC Question Time certainly set off a social media debate on ‘white privilege’ and what it does or doesn’t mean. As users of social media will be aware this rarely ends up with measured argument, where opinions are respectfully countered and true to form it didn’t let us down in this case. The original question put by the audience member was innocuous: Should the Sussex’s profit from their Royal status? Having listened to the full recording a number of times Fox’s comments on the question were initially pretty measured. (For the purpose of this blog I’ll ignore his flippant comment he made on the climate crisis in reaction to a previous question on flying – and he did at least partly redeem himself by pointing out the hypocrisy of actors who lecture us on climate change). “Let’s be really clear about what this is, let’s call it by its name, it’s racism.” “We’re the most tolerant lovely country in Europe, it’s not racism” This audience member clashes with actor @LozzaFox over the treatment of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. #bbcqt pic.twitter.com/ZwANAlCBbA — BBC Question Time (@bbcquestiontime) January 16, 2020 The crucial exchange was when the question was opened up to the audience and the exchange between Rachel Boyle and Laurence Fox shown in the tweet above occurred. The audience member believed that the treatment of Meghan Markle was racist (my personal view is I agree in relation to the press coverage it is) and Fox responded that it wasn’t. Of course the main issue here wasn’t whether the press were being racist towards Meghan Markle, but surrounded the accusations of ‘white privilege’. I believe it’s clear from the exchange that Fox doesn’t understand what white privilege actually means. He did, correctly obviously, state that he was a white male and he couldn’t change that, but in the next breath stated that it’s racist to be described as such. Importantly a few minutes later in the programme Fox stated “that you should be careful and not call some racist just because they don’t agree with you” a clear reference to the earlier conversation and an indication that he believed (incorrectly) he was being called a racist by the audience member, who he in turn accused (again incorrectly) of being racist towards him. Before we get into the rights and wrongs it’s worth setting out the definition of what white privilege is as, trawling through social media it’s clear there is a lot of ignorance on this. “White privilege is the societal privilege that benefits people whom society identifies as white, beyond what is commonly experienced by non-white people under the same social, political, or economic circumstances. White privilege does not mean you are racist. White privilege does not mean your life has been easy. White privilege does not mean you don’t face struggles too. White privilege simply means your life isn’t made harder by your skin colour”. I am a white middle aged man and I most certainly have white privilege. This doesn’t mean that I’ve had things handed to me on a plate, and I’ve set out in earlier blogs some of the issues that I have faced, but none of these issues were due to the colour of my skin and I haven’t faced the relentless overt and far more subtle forms of racism still present in today’s society. If you are white you have white privilege, you can’t not have it. It doesn’t mean that there aren’t other forms of privilege to do with class and gender, but the experiences of people of colour, from slavery to segregation to apartheid to Windrush to name just a few examples surely places it at the top of the pile. I read a number of social media posts (often with Caps Lock stuck on) from people who said they’d struggled all their lives, faced this, that and other issues – and how dare they be accused of white privilege. I had a more measured reply to one of my tweets asking if the troops who fought in the Somme have white privilege. In both cases they have misunderstood what white privilege actually is. While I don’t believe he was being racist, Fox lost a great deal of credibility when he stated we are the most tolerant, lovely country in Europe and it (the treatment of Meghan Markle) wasn’t racism, even the Daily Telegraph journalist said “there’s no doubt there’s been a great deal of racism”. For the record I’m incredibly proud to be British, proud of its people, its history (well most of it) and its many institutions such as the BBC and our armed forces. I believe that British people have a deep sense of fair play, but we can’t deny that racism is still present across society, particularly in areas such as the press and also government, as evidenced by the Windrush scandal. Further, there is no doubt that the comments of certain politicians and relentless scapegoating of migrants by sections of the media has stirred up hatred where there was previously none and made some people far more comfortable in expressing their latent racism. My most popular tweet – 6 words and a picture! While of course Fox is entitled to his view, we should be very cautious when we arrogantly dismiss other people’s views when we have no experience of life from their point of view and in this case the experience of being a person of colour. Yes we can’t help being white and we won’t be able to experience it or fully understand it, but we are capable of empathising – if we listen. Obviously Twitter isn’t necessarily the best medium for listening, with its polarised views, but you can find some gems of information if you look carefully and filter out the noise. Talking of Twitter, I probably received the most vitriol I’ve ever received on social media (and as a two time General Election candidate I’ve received a fair bit!) following my posts on this issue. The greatest upset was my response to Fox’s tweet below: Which was this tweet: Again I don’t believe Fox was being judged on the colour of his skin, but rather by the views he expressed on whether something is racist or not. He can and should be allowed to have a view on it, but he can’t claim to be an authority on it, as he is not in a position to do so. It is not racist of the audience member to point this out, it is in the same words as Fox used in the programme ‘an immutable fact’. Of course no reasonable person would disagree with Martin Luther King’s quote above, but it was, in my view, Fox’s clear misunderstanding of the content of the discussion he had on the programme that made the use of the quote inappropriate in this instance. At the same time it does not mean he doesn’t genuinely hold this view. When sending out a draft of this blog it was highlighted that quoting a black civil rights activist held in such high regard to justify a flawed argument is as a key disarming tactic to cheapen the views of people of colour who have called out his stance. While writing this, Fox’s comments have come to light about the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in the WW1 film ‘1917’. Fox commented that it was a great film “apart from the gratuitous Sikh” further stating “it’s just incongruous with the story”. In the same conversation talking more generally about people of colour in films Fox states “there is something institutionally racist about forcing diversity on people in that way”. Fox was seemingly unaware of the huge contribution and sacrifice made by Sikh soldiers and others from the Indian sub-continent. Sikhs made up 20% of the volunteer force and 74,187 Indian soldiers died fighting for the British in WW1. While I’m always happy to give people the benefit of the doubt, there is a stack of evidence mounting up… Whatever your views on Brexit, let’s not go there, it’s indisputable that it has caused a huge rift in our society and once again made it more acceptable for racist opinions to be freely voiced. The polarisation of our society is entrenched and a solution is unlikely to be found in the battleground of social media and in 280 characters, but a solution must be found. Politicians and others in positions of influence have a responsibility to set the tone. However, we all have a part to play and we must challenge racism wherever we find it, but as naïve as it may sound we have much to gain by talking a little less and listening a little more. Julian Vaughan #inequality #socialmedia #UKpolitics

There is quite rightly, a great deal of anger about the failure of the rail industry to meet the 1st January 2020 deadline for all UK passenger trains to be fully accessible. Some of the extensions have been granted years into the future, despite more than a decade to either refurbish or replace non-compliant rolling stock. Looking through the explanatory notes of the exemption orders for the non-compliant stock I see the familiar lack of understanding of the experience on the railways of people with disabilities. It is crucial that we place people with disabilities at the heart of decision making – not as an afterthought for the sake of ticking a box, or to navigate the hoops of consultation requirements. However, for many people with disabilities the above is a moot point, as there still remain thousands of railway platforms across the UK where it would be impossible to actually get down to platform and access compliant carriages, never mind those that remain uncompliant. Since ‘Access for All’ funding was introduced in 2006 it’s tricky to get an exact figure on what has been spent on accessibility improvements, as there have been various movements of the goal posts, but roughly £500 million has been spent since 2006. This has led to step-free routes at around 200 stations and smaller scale improvements at a further 1,100 stations. The budget for accessibility improvements in Control Period 6 between 2019-24, (spending on the railways is split into five year chunks) has been set at £300 million, including £50 million carried over from Control Period 5. This will ensure step-free routes at a further 73 stations, 24 which were originally planned to be completed before 2019. On a personal level having campaigned hard for its inclusion I’m delighted that Biggleswade station is one of the 73, but this is tempered by the fact that other stations in Bedfordshire, such as Flitwick and Arlesey lost out in bun-fight that takes place prior to each five year Control Period. Those in the rail industry happy to pat themselves on the back often quote the figure that 73% of journeys take place from stations that are step-free. This ignores the fact this figure is skewed by the vast number of people without disabilities using these accessible stations. According to Department for Transport figures (November 2017) out of the UK 2,500 or so stations only around 460 have step-free access to all and between all platforms, this is only 18% of the UK rail network. Steps at Flitwick station, which missed out on CP6 funding Another issue around accessibility is the quality of information provided by the train companies and how it is managed by the custodians of that information, which as far as I can gather is the Rail Delivery Group. The Office of Rail and Road seem to be having the same problem as they state in their submission to the Williams Rail Review: “Quantifying the precise number of mainline stations that are accessible to optimal build standards is difficult because it is difficult to ascertain due to issues with the accuracy of some station data”. The % figures for step-free access don’t include cross platform access A prime example of this is the interactive ‘Fab Map’ launched in April 2019 which aims to make it easier to find out about accessibility at stations and boost passenger confidence about travelling by train. However, closer examination of this map reveals significant flaws which are likely to have the opposite effect on map users. These flaws include: describing stations with step-free access to each platform, but no cross-platform access as having ‘full step-free access’ – indicated with a green pin on the map describing stations where level access between the platforms involves a journey outside the station across a level crossing as having ‘full step-free access’, these journeys can involve sharing space with road vehicles lack of any details of the distance of the detour between platforms (in the case of Arlesey station in Bedfordshire 0.90 miles) unlit areas at night or other potential hazards describing a station (Riding Mill in Northumberland) as fully accessible, but one which requires a 10 minute walk between platforms – with no indications as to any potential gradients or hazards on the way. As I personally know the route, I’m aware of significant and long gradients. For a person with restricted mobility, describing the journey as a ten minute walk is not helpful apart from ruling it out as an option, so why the green pin which indicates fully accessible? The rail industry describing these partially accessible stations as fully accessible on what is seen as the cutting edge of interactive information technology seems to sum up the lack of understanding about accessibility. While it may only be seen as the colour of a pin on a map I believe it is a symptom of the barriers that remain to equal access. If we can’t get the easy things right, how will we deal with the significant, but not unsurmountable challenges that lie ahead. I’m pleased that Great Northern have taken this on board and adjusted their descriptions, but as you can see below Northern Rail continue to describe partially accessible stations with a green rather than a yellow pin. I recently asked who is actually responsible for the ‘Fab Map’. The answer is the individual Train Operating Companies are responsible for the information, which is then managed by the Rail Delivery Group (RDG). ‘Stations Made Easy’ (web based maps, pictures of each station) and reached by a clickable link in the Fab Map is governed by the same structure. While researching this blog I found that ‘Stations Made Easy’ used to be managed by the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) and audits of the information was undertaken by a private company, until the contract ran out in 2016. Since ATOC was absorbed into the RDG in 2017 it’s not clear what auditing of the information supplied takes place. The not so ‘Fab Map’ for Hexham Station. Green pin, but no cross-platform access. There a people within and outside the industry who work tirelessly to highlight the issues, but it does seem that they are banging their heads against a brick wall. I’m not sure whether the decision makers actually ‘get’ accessibility, or if they do by the time their good intentions have passed their way through multiple layers of management, when it comes to taking action the message has been lost. It’s clear we need more people with disabilities as decision makers, or as someone tweeted recently make it compulsory that every CEO of a train company board and alight every train they travel on using a ramp and then see what happens! I’ve yet to meet anyone in the rail industry who doesn’t say safety is their top priority and at the same time no-one in the industry that says step-free access is not extremely important. Why is it then that it seems to be treated almost as a favour and that people with disabilities should be grateful for what is provided rather than it be seen as a fundamental right? I also have concerns about how stations are selected to receive funding for step-free improvements. Currently this is based on the following criteria, in no particular order: footfall (from Office of Rail and Road data) incidence of disability in the area (from Census info) proximity to for example hospitals or school for disabled children (within 800m) stations with a high number of interchange passengers availability of third party ‘matched’ funding stations that would fill ‘gaps’ in accessibility on the rail network – with info on nearest fully accessible station and the journey time to that station and frequency of services DfT category of station – all UK stations are categorised from A to F (eg Kings X is category A, Bishop Auckland is category F) number of passenger assists at a station current level of access progress of any development work and what stage any Governance for Railway Investment Projects (GRIP) the development work is at – there are nine GRIP stages including project feasibility and option selection other renewals/developments at the station new land ‘housing’ developments near station (within 800m) support of Train Operating Company support of local disability group support of local council support of local MP support of local community While on one hand I can see the benefits of the requirements of a particular bid to fulfil a wide range of criteria to ensure maximum benefit, the whole process ends up being very opaque. As far as I’m aware the DfT don’t release any details of how the stations are prioritised by the Train Operating Companies. Although as Chair of the ‘Bedfordshire Rail Access Network’ team I was involved in the bid for Biggleswade station, we were not provided with details of other areas of the bid (such as priority ranking or matched funding ) other than what was already available in the public domain. The process is also arbitrary in that it seems that the stations that shout the loudest (we were very loud) and have the support of the local MP (we did) have better outcomes. Other stations such as nearby Flitwick, although having greater footfall than Biggleswade, did not have the same level of support and this was no doubt a significant factor in the station failing to receive funding for access improvements. I believe a far more transparent and simpler process of selection should be created which will give the communities served by the stations a clear timeline as to when improvements will take place. Although it may appear simplistic, passenger numbers and proximity to alternatives should be the only consideration. This will be easy to communicate, easy to understand, won’t rely on the whims of how well or badly a bid was put together and won’t keep people in the dark about how long their local station will remain inaccessible. Governments should set out a clear timeline as to when UK stations placed in bands and priority order according to footfall will be made step-free, both to each individual platform and between platforms. For example priority should be given to all those stations with 1 million plus passengers per year that don’t currently have step-free access, the next band could be stations with between 750,000 and 1 million passengers and so on. The actual composition of the bands doesn’t really matter, the transparency and clarity that they will provide to the public really does. The current government’s ambition as set out in their Inclusive Transport Strategy is: “for disabled people to have the same access to transport as everyone else and for them to travel confidently, easily and without extra cost. By 2030, we envisage equal access for disabled people using the transport system, with assistance if physical infrastructure remains a barrier”. The ‘Equality 2025’ target has quietly been dropped and there is the obvious get out clause “with assistance if physical infrastructure remains a barrier” which can readily be applied to just about any scenario! Many people with disabilities don’t want help, they just want to be able to travel independently. From the ORR’s submission to the Williams Rail Review. Even the ORR lack confidence in the accuracy of the above figures. No matter how it is spun it’s clear that at the current rate of progress the 2030 target will be missed. There are all sorts of issues with this, not least because we need to be encouraging increased use of public transport to reduce the UK’s carbon emissions. Step-free access is not just morally the right thing to do, but it will also bring wider benefits to society, reducing social isolation and improving social and employment opportunities for people with restricted mobility. It also makes economic sense to do so as for very £1 spent on access improvements an estimated £2.90 is returned to the wider economy. Access issues, and indeed the railways, shouldn’t be seen in isolation and accessibility improvements must be seen as part of an integrated, fully accessible and fully staffed transport network, with seamless transfer between different transport modes. Unfortunately, I’ve yet to get a sense of a genuine commitment from government and that includes financial commitment to achieve their stated aim of equal access on the railways so I’m somewhat pessimistic at this stage. In fact I’m still not entirely sure exactly what their aims are. What does give me cause for optimism are the many campaigners across the UK who are pushing so relentlessly for improvements. It really shouldn’t have to be so difficult… Julian Vaughan twitter: @juliman66 Sources and Information Inclusive Transport Strategy https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/inclusive-transport-strategy-achieving-equal-access-for-disabled-people ORR’s advice re step-free access to the Williams Rail Review https://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/41428/orr-advice-to-the-williams-rail-review-july-2019-annex-d.pdf UK Fab Map http://accessmap.nationalrail.co.uk/ Press Release re ‘Fab Map’ https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/media-centre/press-releases/2019/469775648-2019-04-17.html Access for All funding announcement – April 2019 https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/access-for-all-73-stations-set-to-benefit-from-additional-funding Station Passenger Numbers https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/station-usage DfT National Implementation Plan for the Accessibility of the UK Rail System for Persons with Disabilities and Persons with Reduced Mobility – November 2017 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/668821/tsi-uk-prm-implementation-plan.pdf Roadmap 2025 https://www.bl.uk/britishlibrary/~/media/bl/global/social-welfare/pdfs/non-secure/r/o/a/roadmap-2025-achieving-disability-equality-by-2025.pdf

I remember tentatively walking into my first ever local Labour Party meeting in October 2016. Little did I know then that in three years I’d have been a candidate in not one, but two General Elections, that certainly wasn’t the plan! The result was shockingly bad for the Labour Party and a new leader will take over. I voted for Jeremy Corbyn in both leadership elections and believe he is a principled person with empathy for people and a deep-seated drive to fight injustice and inequality in our society. I and many others share those values. Unlike Johnson who feels he was born to lead, leadership was thrust upon Corbyn and it didn’t always sit comfortably on his shoulders. We still await the first train driver to be elected to parliament for over 50 years, however there was one bit of good news with Mohammad Yasin being re-elected as MP for Bedford, well done to the brilliant campaign that took place in the constituency. One out of two isn’t bad! With Mohammad Yasin MP for Bedford Looking forwards rather than looking back, I’m not going to go into too much detail about the rights and wrongs of the campaign, but perhaps our manifesto was too much, too quickly and it lost credibility among an electorate who had (incorrectly) laid the blame on the 2008 Global Crash at Labour’s feet. This argument was lost by the Labour Party in the years after the crash and I believe it was a major error on Labour’s part not to contest this more vigorously at the time. Therefore, each additional announcement was seen as an additional financial burden rather than an enlightened policy of investment which would reduce inequality across the UK. Of course most people aren’t interested in politics and just want clear simple messages and there’s no denying that ‘Get Brexit Done’ was a clear message, in fact it was pretty much the only message coming from the Conservatives. After years of paralysis it was an easy one to sell to a fatigued electorate. After being up all night I’m too tired to go into the rights and wrongs of this choice, how it will be done and the effect on the UK – and besides the choice has been made so it’s a moot point. New leader? I think it’s time for a woman to lead the Labour Party and at this time I believe Angela Rayner would be an excellent choice, passionate, has personal experience of the harsher side of life and would have appeal among a wide range of the electorate. On a personal level I’m proud of how we conducted the campaign locally. I couldn’t be prouder of my team; the campaign committee including Andy, Sam, Conny, Martyn, Nick, Connell, Paul, Helen and Sarah who met every week and our army of leafleters coordinated by Sarah, who did such a sterling job getting out our message across the huge expanse of North East Bedfordshire. Thanks to the film crew and editors, a tough job with the material I gave them, our printers who met every deadline, our print designer Jenni and my ASLEF union colleagues who gave so much support. A special mention must go to Fiona my agent. Every candidate needs someone who can tell you exactly how it is and not tell you what they think you want to hear. Fiona excelled in this department! Fiona has immense integrity a no-nonsense approach and her advice was considered, direct and invaluable, I could not have received better counsel. I knew she would be good, she was brilliant. Since I first walked through the door of the Labour Hall in 2016 my life has changed immeasurably and I’m privileged to have met so many people who do such excellent work in the community and were prepared to endorse me for this General Election campaign. I’m acutely aware that when people endorse me they were putting a part of their reputation on the line, I hope I didn’t let them down. Thank you to: Kathy Lewis, Director of the Preen food bank who does such amazing work for the most vulnerable in our community; Mark Lee, Chair of Bedfordshire Fire Brigades Union whose firefighters keep us all safe; Emily Yates, co-founder of the Association of British Commuters, who is an incredible campaigner for commuter rights and Jacob Hawley, comedian and now presenter on BBC Sounds, who I know will go far as someone who thinks deeply about issues affecting young people in our society. I was humbled to receive endorsements from these people. I had hoped that I could champion these people as an MP, but I can assure them that I’ll continue to do all I can to help them. I’d also like to thank the other candidates who took part in the NE Bedfordshire election which, in contrast to an often toxic atmosphere nationally, was conducted in good spirit and humour at our local level. I thoroughly enjoyed the three hustings that took place and a special thanks to Martyn for once again organising the hustings at Riseley. I know like with Alistair, Richard Fuller and I will disagree on most things politically, but I hope and trust we’ll be able to work together as I did with Alistair on issues that benefit the community. Richard has indicated the door will always be open and I’ll hold him to that. I must also thank my wife Juliette and my daughter Natasha. Your family doesn’t choose to enter politics, but they suffer the consequences of you making that decision. I met Juliette at one of the lowest points of my life and I wouldn’t have blamed her if she’d given up on me those 23 years ago. Whatever I have achieved I could not have done it without her. I look forward to spending some time with them both over the Xmas period and Juliette will look forward to not having papers everywhere and me being at home more than one evening a week. I always try and be upbeat, but I have to talk about Boris Johnson. I believe he ran an absolutely shocking campaign, talking about ‘one nation’ Toryism, while at the same time playing to the hard right with his disgraceful views on minorities in this country. Politicians should be accountable and his avoidance of the Andrew Neil interview, among others, was spineless and not befitting of a leader of the United Kingdom. I believe the majority of politicians from all parties enter politics for the right reasons, to help people, but I don’t see this with Johnson, for whom it just seems to be a game without the need for any complications such as principles. While he may think he’s Winston Churchill, I believe his ‘sunlit uplands’ are an illusion and I have grave concerns for the vulnerable in our society. I believe he is a fraud lacks any moral compass or empathy and will be found out in the years to come as the inevitable challenges and, as Harold MacMillan said, “events” occur. Many Labour members and supporters will be despondent. This is the time to step up not down. When Priti Patel states poverty is not down to government it’s clear where their priorities are and what lies ahead. It’s now up to us to help protect the most vulnerable. How can we do this? Support your local food bank, volunteer for local charities, even if it’s just a couple of hours a week, call out injustice wherever you see it, not just by sticking it on social media and forgetting about it, but organise to fight it. Write to your local councillor, your MP, your local paper and get others to do the same, be a thorn in their side. Many people see ‘politics’ as a separate entity that is not related to their everyday lives – everything is political. Talk to people about how politics can and does change things and how it relates to our day to day living, tell them how they can get involved, ask them to join the Labour Party. Always a supporter, I joined the Labour Party in 2010, not to bask in the glory of a victory, but to help out at a low ebb after an election defeat. Don’t mourn, organise. You can join the Labour Party here: https://join.labour.org.uk/ After the Count – still smiling! What lies ahead for me? I’m not done, whatever drives me is still there, I can’t switch it off. Politics is a funny old world, let’s see what happens! Finally, a thank you to our NHS staff, our emergency services, our teachers, our carers, all our public sector workers and our food bank volunteers. A special thank you to all the immigrants to the UK who contribute so much to our society. I hope you all get some time with your families over the Xmas period. Julian

I believe we should judge our society by how we treat the most vulnerable within it. I am founder of the Bedfordshire Rail Access Network which campaigns for step-free access for train stations across Bedfordshire. We were successful in campaign for funding for Biggleswade train station and we will push for this work to be completed as soon as possible. As part of our campaign we: • ensured disabled people have a place at the table when improvements are discussed. • made the lack of access at Biggleswade station a high profile issue with mentions, both in the House of Commons and the European Parliament. • obtained 11,000 signatures supporting step-free access in Bedfordshire which was forwarded to the Dept for Transport • took part in radio and TV interviews to highlight the issues • organised the visit of two shadow transport Ministers in 2018 to highlight the issues at Biggleswade station • ensured that the recently enlarged car park at Biggleswade had wider bays that met UK guidance requirements • worked with politicians across the political spectrum for the benefit of the community and even our ex Tory MP has in Parliament formally recognised my work for the community I continue to pressure the rail industry to improve their information and facilities for disabled people and have highlighted a number of areas where it is failing badly. I also campaign for commuter rights and since the May 2018 timetable debacle have pushed for improved services and facilities on our line. As a train driver myself I have many contacts within the rail industry and this enables me to cut through the rail companies spin. I co-founded the Biggleswade Rail User Group and also assist the Arlesey Rail User Group in their fight for better services and to address the issue of station skipping. I am also in contact with commuter activists across the country as we push for a railway that puts people first. We have achieved a lot, but there is so much more to do. I have worked tirelessly on the above issues and will continue to do so should I be elected as your MP and the first train driver elected to Parliament for over 50 years.

My name is Julian Vaughan and I am standing as your Labour candidate in North East Bedfordshire. A train driver on London Underground, I have lived in Langford since 2006 and am married with a teenage daughter. I am proud to be British, with our sense of fair play, our tolerance and our willingness to support the underdog. However, this current government has created a hostile environment for the most vulnerable in our society and we have become a more divided nation, particularly since the Brexit referendum. I believe our community is enriched when we care for everyone within it. If elected as your MP, I promise you that I will do all I can to support the most vulnerable in our constituency. I will be a champion, not just for the people that shout the loudest, but particularly for the people who have no voice at all. I will work across political divides for the benefit of all. Of all the issues we face, none is more important than the climate emergency. We must take urgent action, and I will fully support policies to reduce our carbon emissions. Everyone has a right to be safe day to day. I will prioritise a return of effective community policing across NE Bedfordshire so you, your family and your property are protected. NE Bedfordshire has a badly fragmented transport network. I will campaign for a linked-up transport system, with seamless connections between different modes of travel. I will fight both for a safe cycle network and for bus services that will reduce social isolation in our villages and be a viable alternative for commuters. I will also prioritise genuinely affordable housing and ensure that developers do not dodge their affordable housing obligations and infrastructure commitments – good homes with good infrastructure. Many of you will want to know my stance on Brexit. I voted remain and am in favour of a second referendum. I believe that Parliament is un-representative of the people it represents and because of this it can struggle to understand the lives of those their policies affect. Very few MP’s have come from a manual labour background, with a significant number being privately educated and coming from a business or a legal background. For example, I am a train driver, it is over 50 years since a train driver has been elected to the House of Commons. I have a track record of effective campaigning – I founded the Bedfordshire Rail Access Network which was successful in obtaining funding for step-free access at Biggleswade station, which I’ll push to be installed as soon as possible. As co-founder of the Biggleswade Rail Users group I have also championed commuter rights to improve services in our constituency. I also work to improve information and services for disabled people on the railways – we should judge our society by how we treat the most vulnerable within it. People with disabilities don’t want ‘help’ they want to be able to travel independently and if elected I will prioritise access improvements. If we raise the bar for disabled people we raise it for everyone. Nationally, Labour will: Introduce Free personal care for people over 65 cut rail season tickets by 33% provide free bus travel for people under 25 restore the 3,000 bus services cut since 2010 stop the Tories taking free TV licences away from over-75’s Install free full fibre broadband for everyone by 2030 Install solar panels on 1.7 m homes Introduce a new Clean Air Act adequately fund our education system and return unaccountable academies back to local authority control and give teachers and parents a say scrap Key Stage 1 and 2 SAT’s assessments Introduce an Arts Pupil Premium protect private renters through rent controls, open ended tenancies, binding             minimum standards and stopping ‘no fault’ evictions provide free dental checks abolish prescription charges abolish hospital car parking charges for patients and staff introduce a minimum wage of £10 for all ages bring the railways back into public ownership as the franchises expire restore community policing after years of cuts under the Tories support small and medium business by creating regional investment banks, scrap quarterly reporting for small business and crack down on late payers borrow for investments that pay for themselves, but not borrow for day to day spending After years of Tory cuts Labour will invest in Britain and put people first. You can read more about how we will transform Britain for the many not the few here: https://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Real-Change-Labour-Manifesto-2019.pdf If you vote for me, you will be voting for the strongest advocate for NE Bedfordshire, backed up by a party that will protect our NHS and restore our public services. Only a vote for Labour can ensure this. The above is just a brief outline of my values and priorities, if you have any questions please feel free to contact me at vaughan4nebeds@gmail.com You can also follow my campaign on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/jpvaughan66/ Julian Promoted by Dr Fiona Factor on behalf of Julian Vaughan, both at the Labour Hall, Crab Lane, Biggleswade, Bedfordshire SG18 0LN

With time running out to deal with the looming climate emergency, it is vital that we create an integrated, accessible and affordable transport network to encourage and incentivise a shift away from reliance on the car. A ‘fit for purpose’ cycling network is just one example of the infrastructure required to enable this, but like many other areas of the UK, Bedfordshire has failed miserably to make any progress at the level required. Cycle Route Bedfordshire style….. In 2011 Central Bedfordshire Council published their ‘Central Bedfordshire Cycling Strategy’ which set out their vision and objectives for the next 15 years. In it the Council describes the importance of cycling and the benefits it brings to society and the community including: improved physical and mental health improvements to the environment reducing CO2 emissions and reliance on the car a reduction in social exclusion and increased employment opportunities. Link to the full document here: Central Beds Council 2011 Cycling Strategy The document sets out their vision for cycling across Central Bedfordshire: “Encourage more people to cycle, to cycle safely and to cycle more often”. Cycling in Central Bedfordshire was starting from a very low base as can be seen in the statistics below taken from the 2011 Census with only 0.7% of people cycling to work: Unfortunately looking at more recent data set out below (and I promise the last box of statistics!) the situation hasn’t improved with the 0.7% figure remaining unchanged: So why is this happening? This week I tweeted Central Bedfordshire Council asking for information about how many miles of dedicated (separate from road traffic) they had installed since the publication of their report in 2011. Their full response was “We do not have dedicated cycle routes, all our routes are also for pedestrian use. We are unable to calculate how many miles of these routes have been installed since 2011 as we do not track this number”. The recently ‘upgraded’ Bridleway 40 on the outskirts of Biggleswade This is at odds with their statement contained in ‘Actions and Interventions’ within the Cycling Strategy document which states: “The provision of new infrastructure to form a comprehensive and coherent set of routes………it is important that the infrastructure is in place which provides a dedicated, comprehensive and coherent cycle network”. Leaving aside the perhaps cynical view that the number may be zero, although no evidence has been provided to dispel it, it’s extraordinary that a Council doesn’t have such a basic level of detail that they could be parading as evidence of their green credentials. One reason why cycle paths need to be dedicated is that there is the perception,  founded or otherwise, that cycling is currently unsafe. A National Transport Attitudes Survey conducted by the Department for Transport in 2019 showed that 61% of respondents believed it was too dangerous for them to cycle on the roads. Statistics would seem to show that cyclists are the second most at risk road users, with motorcyclists unsurprisingly most at risk. Only dedicated cycle lanes will both reduce the risk and alter the perception of cycling being a dangerous activity. The condition of cycle tracks is also critical in encouraging a shift from the car. A muddy track may be brilliant for a weekend of ‘off-road’ trail blazing, it certainly isn’t for the commuter looking forward to a train journey and full day at the office. ‘Cycle Route’ between Biggleswade and Langford Central Bedfordshire Council stated that they would use the current National Cycle Network (NCN) as a central spine on which the local cycle networks can be formed. The ‘Sustrans’ charity is the custodian of the NCN. Although they do fine work promoting the network it currently is a patchwork of broken routes across the UK, often ending in muddy tracks or confusing urban route layouts. In one such example in Biggleswade in Bedfordshire the cycle route runs the wrong way up a one way street, with no protection from cars other than painted white cycles on the road. As the Council are using a broken spine on which to attach their skeleton cycle network it’s not really any surprise that they  have fallen so short in providing an adequate network. The East Coast Mainline Railway – another barrier to NCN12 in Bedfordshire It’s not even clear what some of the routes are and there seems to be little if any effort made by central Bedfordshire Council to promote the routes, with a lot of guesswork about filling in the gaps between the NCN routes. Central Bedfordshire Council have stated publicly in September 2019 that as it is predominantly a rural area they don’t see the bus as an alternative to the car in Central Bedfordshire. Many believe they are completely wrong on this and certainly public transport systems in other countries such as Switzerland indicate they are a viable option for areas far more ‘rural’ than Central Bedfordshire. As their version of a cycle route seems to be a muddy track and have given no indication that they will invest in a dedicated cycle network it’s not clear what they are doing within their transport policies to address the climate emergency. There have been some discussions about ‘Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plans’. I understand that Central Bedfordshire Council are drawing up its own plan – I note that they were unsuccessful in obtaining funding to provide technical support for this plan, if indeed they applied for it. The Council have yet to consult the public on these plans. Dedicated cycle paths must be a major part of an integrated and seamless public transport network. These routes must be: safe separated from road traffic adequately surfaced and maintained. We are well off the mark in Central Bedfordshire. Is there a vision and determination to change? On current evidence, the answer would have to be a resounding no! Let’s start involving the communities affected, let’s start prioritising the cyclist, not the car and let’s start now! Julian Vaughan Twitter: @julian_vaughan_ #Bedfordshire #cycling #Transport

Below is the response that I finally received from Cllr Jamieson, leader of Central Bedfordshire Council on 9th September regarding the bus cuts to the 85/85A and 188/190 bus services due to take place from 30th September. I’d like to say it was a personal letter, but the reality is that as other people have received exactly the same letter it is little more than a press release. ~ Cllr Jamieson states that they have retained the majority of the town service. This is not the case as they have now made the service every two hours rather than hourly in each direction and also drastically cut the early and late bus services. The 85A is reduced from 16 services a day to only 6 services. The 85 is reduced from 14 services a day to only 6. You can check the numbers by following the links below, type in a weekday before/after the 30th September and see the difference for yourself: https://bustimes.org/services/85-biggleswade-town-service-clockwise-direction? https://bustimes.org/services/85a-biggleswade-town-service-anti-clockwise-direct ~ It is then suggested that passenger numbers on the early morning services between Sandy, Potton and Biggleswade mean it is uneconomic. Well yes that is what happens when you cut the evening services, which central beds Council did in the last set of cuts. Commuters therefore cannot get home from the station so are forced to drive both ways. ~ The letter goes on to say that bus services will continue to operate from the villages before 09.00 on a daily basis. This is certainly not the case for Blunham village where the first bus will now be 10.12 rather than 08.12. Also the later start up will mean that the first bus for Dunton and Eyeworth commuters into London will now be the 08.41 rather than the 07.45 and this will mean the earliest they will be able to get into London is around 10.14. In reality of course passengers will be forced to use their cars. You can check the 188/190 bus times below, again type in a weekday before/after the 30th September to see the difference: https://bustimes.org/services/188-hitchin-biggleswade-wrestlingworth-potton-sand https://bustimes.org/services/190-hitchin-biggleswade-potton-gamlingay-sandy?date=2019-09-02 ~ The letter talks about a £200 million fund for sustainable buses which is of course welcomed. However, this is a national programme, which Bedfordshire will probably see very little of once divided among all the other councils across the country. By the time we get the money to ‘green’ the buses there may not be many of them left the way the Council are cutting our public transport. ~ These cuts come on top of previous cuts made by this council to Sunday bus services as well as cutting early and late buses. I’ve already had correspondence from people who will lose their bus. The population of this area is expanding rapidly and we need more buses not more cuts. ~ Central Bedfordshire Council must play their part in dealing with the Climate Emergency, but it’s clear from their transport policies that they are unwilling or unable to do so. We must make buses a viable option for commuters across our area. ~ I’m pleased to see that others have know joined me in demanding a full and proper consultation to take place and a postponement of the proposed cuts. It is very important that as many people as possible do the same – people pressure does work! ~ Please let me know the effects the cuts will have on you or your family. What can you do? Follow our new Facebook page ‘Bedfordshire Bus Cuts’ You can email Cllr Jamieson (the leader of the council) at: james.jamieson@centralbedfordshire.gov.uk and/or Central Bedfordshire’s Public Transport Manager Adrian Hardy at: adrian.hardy@centralbedfordshire.gov.uk (both these email addresses are available publicly) #morebusesnotmorecuts There is an alternative…. A Labour government will support our local bus services and see treat them as vital assets to our communities and a means of reducing our reliance on the car. You can read about Labour’s bus policy here: Labour announces new funding to reverse Tory cuts to 3,000 bus routes and here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48044016 Only a Labour government will support your public transport.