The UK Government has to deliver £4bn of rail investment in Wales
Transport expert Professor Mark Barry of Cardiff University makes the case for UK rail enhancement investment in Wales to help address years of under investment out to 2040
The UK Government needs to get serious on rail investment in Wales says Prof Barry.
(Image: John Myers )
Chancellor Rachel Reeves will next week present the UK Government's next three year spending commitments in the comprehensive spending review (CSR).
That should, if London is listening, see some major pledges for rail enhancement investment in Wales.
Instead of focusing on the case for rail devolution, the failings of the Barnett formula and decades of relative underspend on Wales's rail network by various UK governments, I want to focus on looking ahead and arguing for £4bn rail investment to 2040.
As I set out in a letter to Secretary of State for Transport Heidi Alexander last December, this is based on rail enhancement commitments likely in England of approximately £80bn over the same period.
These commitments include to complete HS2, TransPennine upgrade, East West Rail, and some new schemes in England - some of which have been announced ahead of the CSR including more trams in Manchester, Leeds-Bradford tram, Liverpool, Bristol and the West of England.
Some £4bn for Wales would be a commensurate and a fair Barnett allocation and can be directed at schemes in Wales already subject to significant business case and scheme development.
Article continues below
To be clear, Wales needs this investment not just because its fair or right, but because of the benefits, especially economic, that can be realised.
These include mode shift and reduced carbon emissions, economic agglomeration and development benefits, more transit oriented development , reduced road traffic accidents, improved air quality, more financially efficient public transport operations, reduced road congestion (freeing up road space for those that need to use them) and less wear and tear of our roads.
Bus reform in Wales and how it could play out
READ MORE:
As I set out in my book How to build a Metro, in Wales via Transport for Wales, Welsh Government, the regions and local authorities, we have already developed a range of rail enhancement schemes to at least outline business case, commensurate with that scale of investment and which will deliver these wider benefits to 2040.
In summary they are:
South Wales Main Line (SWML) upgrade £1bn)
We need to see the five Burns stations (pretty much along the lines of the proposals in the 2013 Metro Impact Study and later presented in the Western Gateway 2050 Rail Vision).
This would see new stations at Cardiff East, Parkway, Newport West, Maindy, Llanwern and Magor and the complementary relief lines upgrade.
We also need:
More electrification heading west to Swansea and Carmarthen.
New services including Bristol Temple Meads to Cardiff, with some continuing west from Cardiff to Swansea and Carmarthen. I would also explore whether we could route one via the Vale of Glamorgan Line and Cardiff Airport.
The new open access Lumo (part of FirstGroup) fast Carmarthen-Cardiff-London service which will skip Swansea High Street and Neath (but stopping at Gowerton) enabling Carmarthen to function as a Parkway for West Wales.
I would also like to see the GWR services into South Wales mapped into the Transport for Wales franchise or GBR Cymru arrangements post the establishment of Great British Railways.
Swansea Bay and West Wales £500m
There is very good initial phase of a Metro in Swansea/Neath/Llanelli which has been subject to significant scheme and business case development. The first key phases of this urban area rail Metro include two new key routes and services with:
Bury Port to Swansea High Street with a new station at Cockett.
Pontardulais-Llandarcy-Neath-Swansea service using the Swansea District Line (SDL) and a new chord connection to the South Wales Mainline at Britton Ferry to allow direct services to Swansea High Street from the SDL. This can support new local Metro stations at Morriston, Llandarcy, Pontlliw. Felindre, etc.
We also need enhanced local rail services west of Swansea all the way to Milford Haven aligned to a range of tactical infrastructure enhancement – these complement some of the South Wales Mainline service measures set out above
This work needs to be combined with a focus on more and greater transit-oriented development at primary stations like Llandarcy, Neath, Llanelli and in/around Swansea High Street stations.
North Wales £1bn
Transport Secretary Ken Skates set out a big vision for North Wales at a transport conference in Wrexham last month.
This vision needs to see some early measures and focused delivery with an initial £1bn programme that includes:
Upgrade of borderlands and integration with Merseyrail and use of their new 777s electric stock; early measures to deliver capacity for freight at Padeswood.
North Wales Main Line (NWML) line speed and capacity upgrades to allow more services – both local all stopper with increased frequency, and long-distance express.
A rolling electrification programme.
New stations and key station upgrade for example, Shotton (as an interchange), Deeside Industrial Estate and especially Chester to allow more capacity through the station.
Longer term the application of tram-train in both north east and north west Wales.
Cardiff Capital Region Metro £500m
Now there are good cases to be made for at least a further £2bn of rail and metro investment in the Cardiff Capital Region. This includes the full Cardiff Crossrail, Aberdare-Hirwaun, Cross Valley, Caerphilly-Newport and an extension in Merthyr. However, the initial and pragmatic focus has to be:
Deliver a Metro in Cardiff (which is not really delivered as part of the current South Wales Metro programme. This means Cardiff Crossrail phase two.
At its core this needs to see the City and Coryton lines operate with at least 4 trains per hour (tph) instead of the 2tph planed, this needs work at Cardiff West junction, and a Coryton loop.
Station Link at Central to connect Crossrail Phase 1a (to the Bay) to the west, electrification to Penarth and tram-trains on Penarth – Coryton via the Bay.
Then further Metro stations, including Roath Park, Ely Mill, Gabalfa, Treforest Industrial Estate, Pontypridd North and a new platform at Cogan on a Penarth branch served by tram-trains.
Some further double tracking to the Core Valley Lines to improve capacity and reliability.
New Ebbw Valley line services planned (to get 4tph south of Llanhilleth) routing to the Marches line and Abergavenny with a new stop at Caerleon and perhaps Sebastopol (this a better investment than the short extension to Abertillery).
Maesteg line measure to deliver at least 2tph.
Then perhaps, the Coryton-Radyr link (in whatever form is appropriate) as this connection helps build our connected public transport grid. It will also make the new Velindre hospital more accessible from the north of Cardiff.
Marches Line £500m
This line supports what is perhaps Transport for Wales' most profitable service. It needs to be upgraded so we can offer a reliable sub three hour Cardiff-Manchester journey time. This will require:
Some passing sections upgraded track and signalling and some electrification.
In some places new local services in NE and SE Wales so that local stations (eg Pontypool, Caerleon (new), Ruabon, Chirk, etc can be taken off long distance services and served instead by new local Metro services. Further measures may be required at Crewe.
Finally
To conclude giving the tens of billions committed in England (which I welcome outside London) we need to see a forward commitment of at least £4bn to 2040 in Wales, anything less is just not acceptable, and would be politically toxic. And for my perspective we still need full rail devolution to Wales.
In addition to this core rail investment, we need to integrate these interventions with our new post bus reform redesigned bus networks (which will also need more investment.
Article continues below
The Welsh Government and the regional joint corporate committees also need to find the further infrastructure investment needed to deliver more bus priority and bus lanes, especially in our urban areas. This will improve both the attractiveness of bus services and the financial efficiency of bus operations.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Should we be preparing for World War Three? Shock poll reveals 86% of Brits don't have enough supplies to last ONE DAY in a crisis as government urges citizens to stockpile tinned food, batteries and torches
The Government has urged Brits to stock up on basic supplies as a shock poll has revealed 86 per cent of us don't have enough to last us even one day in a crisis. Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster Pat McFadden has advised people to stockpile tinned food, batteries and torches in case of an emergency. However, the poll by Savanta found only 14 per cent of Brits have enough supplies in their homes to get them through just one day of a crisis. It also found 48 per cent of Brits do not have reserves of bottled water to use in the event of a power cut that cuts off gas and water supply. Just 24 per cent of us have an FM radio, only 55 per cent own a torch and 66 per cent have enough non-perishable food to last three days. Whilst giving The Mirror's political editor a tour of The National Situation Centre - the government's top-secret crisis control room - Mr McFadden said there needs to be a 'more candid' conversation about the potential risks Britain is facing. 'It's sensible to have a couple of torches, a battery or a wind-up radio, perhaps some spare batteries, a couple of bottles of water. 'We saw what happened to Spain and Portugal earlier this year, when power went out for about 24 hours. 'If something like that happens it does make sense to have that kind of thing at home.' He said this advice was 'proportionate' and reassured people that they do not need to start constructing nuclear bunkers in their gardens. The National Situation Centre, also known as SitCen, was set up in 2021 after the Covid pandemic highlighted how under-prepared the UK is for coping in an emergency situation. It was modelled on the Situation Room inside the White House, where President Donald Trump was recently pictured conducting talks over Iran. SitCen was built in a classified location near Cobra - where the Prime Minister holds emergency meetings. Inside, analysts pour over data and make meticulous calculations to help ministers respond to a range of potential crises - from future pandemics to terror attacks. This autumn, SitCen will be used as a hub for a drill which will prepare the country for another pandemic. It will see a trial for emergency alerts sent to people's phones warning them of a risk to human life - the second time the technology has been tested. Millions of Brits will receive the practice alert at around 3pm on September 7. Mr McFadden said 'hopefully' we will never find ourselves in a situation where they would need to deploy a real emergency alert, but it is 'useful to have' just in case.
Times
3 hours ago
- Times
Times letters: ‘Working class' internships for civil service
Sir, Your editorial rightly ridicules the plan for civil service internships to be restricted to 'working-class students' to make Whitehall more representative ('Normal People', Aug 2). We seem to be going full circle through ideological, inverted snobbery. More than 40 years ago, when applying to join the army, I was asked by every prospective regiment what my father did for a living (it was assumed my mother did not work). Later, when I applied to leading firms of surveyors, I faced the same question, but at least usually about both parents. It was wrong then and is even more so now, as society has moved on. In my professional career I have recruited graduates, interns, placement students and apprentices for more than 30 years. I have always selected the best people for the job, regardless of perceived 'class' or any other characteristic such as ethnicity, gender, religion or sexual orientation. That should be the case in every walk of life. Diversity has been proven to produce more successful teams, and should emerge naturally from a genuinely open recruitment process. Our government can do better than taking us back to the 1980s. Richard Petty East Molesey, Surrey
Times
3 hours ago
- Times
Tuition fee rise would be better than a stealth tax
Saddling a generation of young earners with a sharp tax by stealth is a cowardly political trick that harms universities too ALAMY B ritain's universities are an uneasy mix of contradictions. Many are operating near the brink of financial insolvency, despite the fact that, Luxembourg and America aside, UK universities bring in more money per student than anywhere. A number are among the world's most esteemed institutions; yet, there is a growing perception that the labour-market premium of even elite British undergraduate degrees has declined in recent years. In 2025 a record number of domestic 18-year-olds applied for places at college but despite this robust internal demand, higher education has become hooked on a supply of lucrative overseas students. In fact, so many universities are negligently allowing their degree courses to be used by foreign nationals as a back door into the UK asylum system that the government is now cracking down. Universities will be penalised if more than 5 per cent of their international students, many of whom take advantage of taxpayer-funded accommodation and loans, drop out of study having secured their student visa. That is an appropriate step but it will not fix the underlying financial precarity that makes universities desperate for foreign students in the first place. That is the fault of the ill-conceived student loan system, which seems no longer fit for purpose. It is an irony that when MPs voted in 2010 to increase tuition fees to £9,000, a key concern of the ensuing debate was that poorer students would be put off studying by the prospect of acquiring vast debts. In fact, the reverse happened. The number of young people pursuing higher education boomed. And the proportion of university-bound students from disadvantaged groups, for instance those eligible for free school meals, has risen robustly in parallel with their peer group. Still, although the present student loan system has thankfully not deterred poorer students from entering education, it has had other, less foreseeable, but clearly damaging effects. Chief among them is that the student loan system has become a graduate tax in all but name. While back in 2010, it was taken for granted that a large proportion of debt held by low-earning graduates would inevitably be forgiven by the state, changes to the repayment scheme effective from 2023 have fundamentally altered that model. Graduates in England now begin paying off their loans on any earnings over £25,000. The interest on these loans, calculated by reference to the unorthodox RPI measure of inflation, is eye-watering: it stood at 8 per cent in August 2024. The time-frame over which repayment takes place has also been extended, from 30 years to 40. The result is that the average student in England, who leaves university £53,000 in debt, faces a steep additional tax on most of their earnings over their working lives. Because of the steep interest rates, low earners are most likely to be shackled with repayments that never even make a dent in the debt's principal sum. These graduates will find it comparatively difficult to buy a house, become economically mobile, save into pensions and start families. Saddling a generation of young earners with a sharp tax by stealth is a cowardly political trick that harms universities too. Instead of trying to recover the true cost of education, there is a strong case that headline tuition fees should simply be allowed to rise. That they have been kept artificially low, at close to their 2010 level for over a decade, is one reason many universities now face financial ruin. As well as increasing internal competition and making the sector more dynamic, uncapping tuition fees would help to make students more immediately sensitive to the financial trade-offs involved in pursuing further education. At 18, students are young, their whole adult lives still ahead of them: all the more reason to inform them honestly of the costs and benefits of the first truly consequential financial choice they will make.
