What’s wrong with South West Trains (SWT)? It would take more than one column to answer that! But their latest trick is to try to dodge any public scrutiny over their role in the outbreak of train strikes.

Last week, the London Assembly held a special meeting to question both SWT and the unions over the threatened rail strikes. London is sick of strikes. Over the past couple of years they seem to be on the agenda again – both on the Tube and on the railways. Is it Ken? Does he make unions feel striking is OK again? Or is it having a Labour government, which prefers spinning to substance?

Either way, strikes are the last thing us poor long-suffering travelling public need to add to our transport woes. The Assembly rightly decided it should invite both parties in and we should question them in public on behalf of Londoners.

Well! It was a good idea but as I said at the beginning, SWT didn’t want to come and play. And that’s a shame, because it was a good session. The RMT turned up in the form of Vernon Hince to present their side of the argument. I felt we got to the bottom of the RMT’s position. We heard the scale of the problems they feel they face, with the pay for drivers approaching treble the amount for guards, with a serious skills shortage and with twenty odd different train companies offering different rates and creating a ‘market’ of pay rates which simply leapfrogged all over the place. All problems that need tackling. It all sounded very reasonable.

I’m sure this is not a view SWT would share. But sadly they wouldn’t share any views with us. SWT may also have had extremely good reasons for their position – but we will never know as they refused to turn up. Even worse in a way, they actually said they were happy to come and talk to us in private, but not in public session. Sally Hamwee, Chair of the Assembly, rightly told them where to go with that offer. SWT is meant to run a public service, for the benefit of Londoners. They should be willing to stand up in public and defend their record – not creep around in private meetings.

SWT only exist because they have been given a franchise to run a public service, but they seem reluctant to acknowledge this and the responsibilities that go with this. The offer SWT was given was a good one – not to exchange a series of soundbites with the RMT but for an hour-long session with both parties able to rebut or agree the other.

This is part of a general malaise in public life, with companies flinching away from public exposure. How many times have we heard the tired old excuse about "commercial confidentiality" be used to hide away the details of contracts? There is a role for genuine commercial confidentiality – just as there is a role for private talks in resolving strikes – but the overwhelming presumption must be in favour of openness and accountability, not comfortable secrecy.

The good news in the end is that the imminent strike was cancelled but two more are in train. At least they have agreed to go to arbitration – but will it be binding?

My own preferred solution would be to bang both parties heads together, then put them in a room together with a TV camera in on them, and broadcast those ‘discussions’ live to London. And if one of them doesn’t turn up? Well, we could borrow a trick from Have I Got News For You and replace them with a tub of lard. How about it SWT?