|
Dr. Richard Beeching was a physicist and
engineer attached to ‘I.C.I.’ when he was appointed the first
Chairman of the new ‘British Railways Board’ on 1st June 1961 by the
then Minister of Transport, Ernest Marples. He was 48 at the time
and had no experience whatsoever of working on the railway. Indeed,
as his future policies were to show, he tended to believe that
railways should be a 'business' and not a public service!
It was true that the railway network was
in dire need of help at the time – it was, indisputably, in
financial crisis. There had been some attempts at modernisation
during the 1950's and certain unprofitable branch lines had been
closed, but nothing on the scale of what was to come...
One of the major problems facing
passenger services was serious competition from increasing ownership
of private cars. In turn, the freight rail element was challenged by
the growth of the road haulage industry. It was widely known that
Ernest Marples believed the future for transport lay on the roads,
with the railways, in his opinion, belonging to the Victorian era -
but then again, he was Director of a large road construction
company! |
|
 |
|
Dr
Richard Beeching with his infamous 1963 report. |
|
|
Dr Beeching’s
'brief' was to reduce the running costs of ‘British Railways’ and to
make it more profitable. On 27th March 1963 and 16th February 1965,
he published his now infamous reports 'The Reshaping of British
Railways'. They did indeed propose new freight services and the
modernisation of main passenger services. However, all this is
overlooked when one thinks of the reports, as these perspectives
were outweighed by their recommendations for the wholesale closure
of little-used and unprofitable lines (as well as some local
stations along the lines that did remain open). It was these aspects
of the 'Beeching Reports' that successive governments opted to
implement. |
|
There was a public outcry
in the wake of the publication of Beeching's reports, led by such
eminent people as the poet Sir John Betjeman, with numerous
petitions and demonstrations - but to no avail. Over the next ten
years, the majority of the proposals contained in the reports were
realized, resulting in approximately a third of the country’s 7000
stations being closed and 5000 miles of track ripped up. The cuts
also entailed the loss of around 70,000 jobs. |
|
No wonder they became known as the
"Beeching Axe"! Moreover, it is little surprise that the reports'
author is still a figure of much hatred, despite having left his
post to return to work for ‘I.C.I.’ in June 1965.
When assessing the results of the
closures, one might ask whether they actually achieved their aim to
make the railway network more profitable? Well no, not really!
Indeed, by the late 1960's, the then Minister of Transport, Barbara
Castle had come to the conclusion that some lines would never be
profitable but, nevertheless, provided a valuable social service
which needed to be subsidised.
There were several further reasons why
the "Beeching Axe" was less than successful, based mainly on false
assumptions which, in retrospect, highlight the ‘short-sightedness’
of many of the closures. |
 |
|
How the network may
have appeared if all Beeching's
proposals had been implemented. |
|
|
In reality, many of the closed lines were
responsible for only a very slight deficit, compared to the busy
main lines with which even Dr Beeching dared not tamper.
Furthermore, the original reports paid little attention to smaller
‘economies’ which might have helped to avoid wholesale closures. For
example, some small stations and signal boxes were fully staffed
around the clock - which was rarely necessary. Would a better
solution have been to ‘sleeve down’ these staffing measures rather
than to shut the stations outright?
It was thought that, when a line closed,
car owners would drive to the nearest main line station and then
transfer to the train. However, in reality, they invariably decided
to make their entire journey by car. Likewise, this was also the
case with the transport of freight, where goods were carried for the
complete distance by lorry rather than being unloaded and reloaded
on to the railway.
|
|
© Patricia Wallis,
OTRBOT |
|
