Some links for you :

Freedom Of Information section.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/

Greater Western Franchise FOI incuding Jacobs Reports.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/2006/september06/swindonwestburytrainsservice/

Central Railway FOI.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/2006/october06/centralrailwayreports/

Chiltern Railway FOI.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/foi/responses/2007/january07/secfoichilrail06/

Railways section.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/?view=Filter&h=m&m=4552&pg=1

Rail Freight section.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/freight/railfreight/

Regional & Local Transport section.
http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/

The DfT Chiltern Railways document - some of the text has been blacked out, but if you 'Select All' and Copy/paste it into Microsoft Word or other, you can read the text that has been blacked out.

The document reads (removed text in document is in red)


 

 

 
I am writing to confirm that the Department for Transport does hold the information you

 

 


• Copies of all correspondence (letters and emails) between the Department for Transport and Chiltern Railways concerning the December 2006 Timetable. A list of attached documents is attached to this letter as Appendix A
• December 2006 Stopping Pattern Analysis;
• Passenger Count information and
• Chiltern 4th Supplemental Track Access Agreement; (this can be obtain by accessing the following link: http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/upload/pdf/consoldtagreechiltern150306.pdf. or, by making a request to: Office of Rail Regulation, One Kemble Street, London WC2B 4AN).
 
xxxx

Contract Manager, Chiltern
Department for Transport
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DR
Direct Line: 0207 944 xxxx
 
xxxx@dft.gsi.gov.uk"">xxxx@dft.gsi.gov.uk
 
The information being withheld falls under the exemption in Section 43(2) of the Act. The information is commercially sensitive as train operators are private companies whooperate in competition with coach and bus operators, airlines and sometimes each other.
[/LEFT]
 
Disclosure of the information could adversely affect their competitive positions if detailedrevenue and passenger data at an individual flow level were made available to theircompetitors. You should also note that most of the information withheld is not relevant tothe December 2006 Timetable which is the subject of your request. The attachedAppendix C to this letter sets out the Section 43 exemption in full.
 
Section 43 is a qualified exemption. This means that the Department for Transporthaving identified the exemptions has to consider in relation to each exemption whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption (and not disclosing the Information) outweighs the public interest in disclosing the Information. In determining the competing public interest exemptions, the Department for Transport has evaluated the nature of the prejudice that might result from disclosure against the need for public bodies to exercise their statutory functions in a visible way. Weighing the issues up, it is the opinion of the Department for Transport that the public interest in maintaining the exemption, and therefore not disclosing the information, is overriding.
 
If you are unhappy with the way the Department has handled your request or with the decisions made in relation to your request, you may complain by writing to me at the above address. Please see attached details of Department for Transport’s complaints procedure and your right to complain to the Information Commissioner at Appendix D to this letter.
 
If you have any queries about this letter, please contact me. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.
 
Yours sincerely
 
xxxx
 
 
 
Appendix A
 
• Emails between DfT and Chiltern re February 2006 timetable bid conference dated 8 June 2006
• Chiltern's email to DfT re priority Date Notification dated 7 June 2006
• DfT's letter to Chiltern dated 7 June 2006
• DfT's letter to Chiltern re proposal timetable dated 22 June 2006
• DfT's letter to Chiltern re. consultation of timetable dated 28 June 2006
• Chiltern's reply to DfT's letter of 28 June 2006 re. consultation of timetable dated 12 July 2006
• DfT's letter to Chiltern re. timetable development dated 28 June 2006
• Chiltern's reply to DfT's letter of 28 June 2006 re. timetable development dated 12 July 2006.
• Chiltern's letter to DfT dated 18 July 2006
• Chiltern's email to DfT dated 26 July 2006
• Chiltern's letter to DfT dated 23 August 2006
• DfT's letter to Chiltern dated 25 August 2006
• DfT's letter to Chiltern dated 22 September 2006
 
Appendix B
 
Extract of Minutes of Monthly and Quarterly review meetings between
DfT and Chiltern.
 
Monthly Meeting of 13 April 2006
 
"GC provided an update on the Evergreen 2 timetable and said that measures were in place to avoid the recent events of the FGW timetable. GC said that services to Claverdon and Bearly would be significantly reduced and warned that this may stir public and stakeholder opinion.
 
Pre-consultation with DfT and major stakeholders would take place shortly after Easter and general consultation on 25 April. GC said that elements of the timetable were non-compliant with the PSR and would also not meet the requirements of additional services in the Output Plan. Negotiations would have to take place. PG stated that he had briefed the Access and Operations team on this forthcoming piece of work".
 
Monthly Meeting of 3 August 2006
 
"PG explained that DfT was analysing Chiltern’s derogation requests. A paper would be completed for discussion and a decision would be made by the end of next week. GC would like to see DfT’s conclusion earlier as the proposed response time would coincide with the absolute deadline for the implementation of any changes. PG to contact Guy Horstmann with any queries in GC’s absence. GC believed that Chiltern proposal was balanced and also had the support of the London TravelWatch. PG said that DfT would look at the effect of the changes on PSR and any cost saving would be the subject of further discussions".
 
Chiltern presented the revised timetable and consultation matrix to the Passenger Board. Generally the meeting went well, however Warwickshire Council was opposed to the proposal".
 
Chiltern Railways Monthly Meeting of 31 August 2006
 

"Now that the derogation discussions had come to a close GC said that the next step was to contractulise the derogations, which would need to include a table of the changes to the Output Plan. PG said that GC would also have to provide a breakdown of the cost savings for each service. PG requested that this was provided within the next month.
 
" Timetable Review: CP said that Chiltern was planning a fundamental review of the timetable to match capacity to where there was demand from passengers, and leave sufficient margins for error to underpin robust performance. CP said that Evergreen 2 offered an opportunity to analyse Chiltern’s requirements and obligations, and design the timetable accordingly.
 
PR advised Chiltern to involve DfT operations advisors at an early stage of the review. He asked how Chiltern was going to sell the changes to stakeholders and stressed the importance of getting their backing for such a fundamental review. Whilst DfT could accommodate minor PSR change derogations, a consultation exercise would be needed for major changes. PR cast his doubts over Chiltern’s ability to carry out the review before February 2006 timetable conference. GC said that Mark Beckett would lead on the consultation".
 
Chiltern Railways Quarterly Review Meeting on 12 December 2005
 
" December 2006 Timetable: MB said that CR was reviewing its current timetable to drive improvement for the December 2006 timetable. The work would be led by MB and GC. PR invited CR to share the outcome with DfT".
 
Quarterly Review Meeting on 28 March 2006
 
"December 2006 timetable progress: MB gave a presentation on Evergreen 2 timetable. A copy of the presentation is attached to these minutes.
 
MB explained that the December timetable planning was well underway and that it offered a significant opportunity to critically review the efficiency and resource burden of the whole timetable.
 
PR said that the DfT Access and Operations Team would need to be briefed on this piece of work and the schedule for their contribution negotiated so that resource could be allocated to it.
 
Action 280306/05: PG to discuss resource planning with DfT team"
 
Quarterly Review Meeting on 12 July 2006
 
"Recovery Project Update:
 
(i) December 2006 Timetable Proposals
 
MB confirmed that Chiltern would implement the Evergreen 2 timetable as advised by DfT. They would also request some derogations against it. PP urged Chiltern to send these requests to DfT urgently.
 
MB said that Evergreen 2 timetable would be presented to stakeholders as a revised version of the Recovery timetable. He explained that it was important that Chiltern were seen to have listened to their concerns.
 
Action (120706/05): Chiltern to provide DfT with a matrix of the stakeholders’ responses to the consultation exercise.
 
PR asked whether Chiltern had shelved the Recovery Timetable or whether the issue would be reopened later. MB said that there was a link between the Recovery Timetable and the derogations that Chiltern would be seeking from DfT. He explained that Chiltern seeking the re-opening of the Recovery Timetable was a possibility particularly if Chiltern’s revenues did not improve with the implementation of the Evergreen 2 timetable. PR stressed the importance of introducing any future proposals for the Recovery timetable in a controlled fashion, and would allow full consultation.
 
(ii) Capital Spend
This was discussed under item 5 above.
 
(iii) Fuel Levy on Fares
Chiltern confirmed that they would submit a proposal to increase fares tocover the rise in fuel costs (see above)".
 
Quarterly Review Meeting on 22 September 2006
 
"Recovery Project Update:
 
(i) December 2006 Timetable Proposals:
 
PG said that DfT was about to send to Chiltern a letter confirming DfT’s decision on the December 2006 timetable derogation requests. GC explained that Chiltern was in the process of seeking the relevant access agreement to coincide with the derogation and would start the complex task of aligning their access rights to the timetable. Because the DfT’s derogations last for one year, they would only make changes to the access agreement for one year, after which the originally granted suite of rights would again take effect unless extensions were agreed.
 
Action (210906/05): DfT to inform Chiltern of their decision on the derogation requests".
 
Appendix C
 
Section 43 Commercial Interests
 
1 Information is exempt information if it constitutes a trade secret
2 Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or wouldbe likely to, prejudice the commercial interests of any person (including thepublic authority holding it)
3 The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with section 1 (1)(a) would, or would be likely to, prejudice the interests mentioned in subsection (2)
 
Appendix D
 
Your right to complain to DfT and the Information Commissioner
 
You have the right to complain about the way in which your request for information washandled and/or about the decision not to disclose all or part of the information requested. In addition a complaint can be made that Department for Transport has not complied with its FOI publication scheme.
 
Your complaint will be acknowledged and you will be advised of a target date by which to expect a response. Initially your complaint will be re-considered by the official who dealt with your request for information. If, after careful consideration, that official decides that her decision was correct, your complaint will automatically be referred to a senior independent official who will conduct a further review. You will be advised of the outcome of your complaint and if a decision is taken to disclose information originally withheld this will be done as soon as possible.
 
If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:
 
Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
 
[/LEFT]

So...
1) the DfT are meddling in all TOCs, not just the new franchises where the DfT specify every detail
2) the DfT are incompetent
3) they do not want us to know about RECOVERY timetables (as it looks bad)
4) they do not want the people of Claverdon and Bearly to hear about their reduced service
5) They do not want the public to know they are cost-cutting
6) They do not want us to know that they plan to boost their income by raising fares based on rising fuel costs.