Could a Monthly Subscription ticket work in the UK?

[RT4038]

Can a bus service be said to be "commercially" run if its being subsidised by the £2 scheme ? Don't get me wrong, it's a good idea, but it's still a subsidy.

With regard to fares fare, I'm sure even true blue Bromley has bus services.

The Government is subsidising the passenger, rather than taking financial responsibility for the service. If there aren't enough passengers paying £2 (+ receiving the 'make-up') then the bus company can withdraw or amend at their commercial will. Not quite the same.

The immediate issue for Bromley was that the supplementary rate demand was the same whether the Borough had Underground service or not - all of the Boroughs had buses with cheaper fares but only some had Underground with cheaper fares. [Main Line rail fares were unchanged] . Therefore there was a perception that this was unfair (it being a long ride by bus from Bromley to Central London] . There was also ulterior political motive too, but this flaw was open to exploitation, and it is difficult not to have some sympathy with the argument.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With regard to fares fare, I'm sure even true blue Bromley has bus services.

It was mostly Tube, wasn't it? And obviously nothing on the dense network of heavy rail services sarf ov da Rivva.

Imagine if it had heralded true, German-model integration before the Germans had even thought about it? The outcome may have been very different.

 

[A0]

A season Travelcard, even an annual one, is seldom worth it if you are only using it for commute, due to how the day cap is priced. It only provides minimal saving or even none at all compared to paying by PAYG for a standard 5-day commute.

For example, if you take the tube for your commute between zones 1-2 in peak hours for 232 days a year, the total PAYG fare is £1577.60, which is less than an annual Travelcard. If you plan to take a long annual leave, or have days where some of your commute is off peak, it will tip against the favour of a Travelcard. Only if you add in substantial weekend travel and the Gold Card discount (which is my case) then it will be worth it.

However, many employers offer employees an 'interest free loan' for the purchase of a season ticket - which if you're travelling from outside the London area, makes it more convenient.

I suspect most people who are only travelling inside London do so on Oyster or PAYG for the reasons you've outlined.

 

[AlbertBeale]

For younger viewers, the reason why a few councils, such as Bromley and Croydon objected to 'fares fair' is because it took money from them in the form of supplementary rate demands to subsidise bus and tube services, but as it only reduced fares on the underground it meant they saw no benefit from that element.

It was a nakedly populist policy by Livingstone in his first incarnation where he was shovelling money to the inner London areas which voted for him, at the expense of the outer London boroughs who didn't.

Yes, it cut bus and tube fares, but the GLC had no power to cut local rail fares. And some outer boroughs - esp Bromley, which brought the legal case - had rail but not tube services, hence didn't think they'd got a fair share of "the goodies". To call it populist sounds pejorative; it was actually wildly popular, including amongst lots of people in the suburbs too (at least where my family lived). The reason Livingstone's GLC was so popular was because of policies like this, it wasn't - as implied - that he did things like this to "reward" those amongst whom he was already popular.

My original point - relevant to this thread - being that subsidising public transport is politically possible (as well as socially and environmentally essential of course); and cheap monthly use-any-transport-in-your-area tickets could well be part of this.

 

[A0]

Yes, it cut bus and tube fares, but the GLC had no power to cut local rail fares. And some outer boroughs - esp Bromley, which brought the legal case - had rail but not tube services, hence didn't think they'd got a fair share of "the goodies". To call it populist sounds pejorative; it was actually wildly popular, including amongst lots of people in the suburbs too (at least where my family lived). The reason Livingstone's GLC was so popular was because of policies like this, it wasn't - as implied - that he did things like this to "reward" those amongst whom he was already popular.

My original point - relevant to this thread - being that subsidising public transport is politically possible (as well as socially and environmentally essential of course); and cheap monthly use-any-transport-in-your-area tickets could well be part of this.

It was a populist move - definition of populist https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionar...t=/ˈpɑːpjəlɪst/,and wishes of ordinary people)

a type of politics that claims to represent the opinions and wishes of ordinary people

The problem was it was unfair in that in several areas they were hit with much higher rate demands yet didn't see the benefit of the lower fares. So even the poorer people in places like Bromley or Croydon were hit with the rate supplement, but they didn't have direct access to the tube network as it didn't serve their areas. And if you believe that Livingstone's GLC didn't recognise that their policy would adversely affect Tory areas like Croydon or Bromley then you'd better DM me your bank details, because apparantly a distant relative of mine has just died in Africa and has left me $1m to disburse to good causes and I think you can help me with that.

 

[miklcct]

Yes, it cut bus and tube fares, but the GLC had no power to cut local rail fares. And some outer boroughs - esp Bromley, which brought the legal case - had rail but not tube services, hence didn't think they'd got a fair share of "the goodies". To call it populist sounds pejorative; it was actually wildly popular, including amongst lots of people in the suburbs too (at least where my family lived). The reason Livingstone's GLC was so popular was because of policies like this, it wasn't - as implied - that he did things like this to "reward" those amongst whom he was already popular.

My original point - relevant to this thread - being that subsidising public transport is politically possible (as well as socially and environmentally essential of course); and cheap monthly use-any-transport-in-your-area tickets could well be part of this.

So that's a great idea but unfortunately poorly executed to the extent that a legal challenge was successful.

If the Mayor didn't make such mistake we might already have affordable (using European standard) tube fares across London now. He could, theoretically, increased the rate according to how much of the tube network actually ran in that borough, such that boroughs receiving no tube service would not have the rate increased, and if London Overground already existed in that era and took over all the BR suburban services, the whole of Greater London would have already got all the goodies and we would not have a north-south divide now, with the north enjoying the Underground services and the south enjoying the Overground services.

 

[RT4038]

Imagine if it had heralded true, German-model integration before the Germans had even thought about it? The outcome may have been very different.

I think the Germans had thought of it well before that - the MVV scheme in Munich dates at least back to the 72 Olympics.

 

[Gaelan]

or free for people on the electoral register

Why the electoral register? This would exclude non-Commonwealth/EU citizens living in England and NI, who of course pay taxes and contribute to the economy just as much as anyone else. (Scotland and Wales allow citizens of any country to register and vote in local elections.)

 

[RT4038]

Yes, it cut bus and tube fares, but the GLC had no power to cut local rail fares.

The main line railways dodged LPTB control of their suburban services in 1933, and so sewed the seeds of this dispute nearly 50 years later.

 

[yorksrob]

The Government is subsidising the passenger, rather than taking financial responsibility for the service. If there aren't enough passengers paying £2 (+ receiving the 'make-up') then the bus company can withdraw or amend at their commercial will. Not quite the same.

The immediate issue for Bromley was that the supplementary rate demand was the same whether the Borough had Underground service or not - all of the Boroughs had buses with cheaper fares but only some had Underground with cheaper fares. [Main Line rail fares were unchanged] . Therefore there was a perception that this was unfair (it being a long ride by bus from Bromley to Central London] . There was also ulterior political motive too, but this flaw was open to exploitation, and it is difficult not to have some sympathy with the argument.

Yes, it could have done with including suburban rail.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Sep 2023 ==

It was mostly Tube, wasn't it? And obviously nothing on the dense network of heavy rail services sarf ov da Rivva.

Imagine if it had heralded true, German-model integration before the Germans had even thought about it? The outcome may have been very different.

Indeed, as above.

 

[aavm]

A national daily travel card. (idea #2)
Integrated so valid on all buses tubes trams ferry, etc, and some trains as follow.

Off peak
Nationwide buses trams tubes
+ trains within 20km - £5
+ trains within 200km - £10
+ trains within 200k.plus all non intercity trains £20
+ all trains £40

It's where you tap out, not the route....

So colliers wood (tfl tube, train, train, local bus) to storrington would be £10 return.
Off peak could be after 900 on weekdays
200km Offr peak card is free for bus pass holders

(previous idea didn't work cos of difficulty in splitting trains into local and regional)

 

[A S Leib]

+ trains within 20km - £5

There's a case to be made for simplicity, but if you're in, say, Knighton things you might need / 'need' at least semi-regularly might be in Shrewsbury 40+ km away or further; should those fares be at a higher rate than those from e.g. Birmingham International to Wolverhampton instead of rural journeys to the nearest large town being at a lower rate?

 

[aavm]

Could make the band's 30/300 km etc but there has to be one simple rule

 

[zwk500]

A national daily travel card. (idea #2)
Integrated so valid on all buses tubes trams ferry, etc, and some trains as follow.

Off peak
Nationwide buses trams tubes
+ trains within 20km - £5
+ trains within 200km - £10
+ non intercity trains £20
+ trains £40

It's where you tap out, not the route....

What would this card charge for York to Doncaster, which is only available by travelling on intercity trains but is only one stop and is something like 70-80km, unless you change in Leeds (where you wouldn't tap).

 

[aavm]

Trains less than 200km band, so £10 off peak day pass

 

[zwk500]

Trains less than 200km band, so £10 off peak day pass

So what are the +non IC and £40 options for then?
200km is quite a long distance, would easily London to Birmingham, might well get you to Bristol.

 

[Starmill]

The Government is subsidising the passenger, rather than taking financial responsibility for the service. If there aren't enough passengers paying £2 (+ receiving the 'make-up') then the bus company can withdraw or amend at their commercial will. Not quite the same.

Indeed. The funding is so ungenerous compared to the post-covid grant funds from 1 November onwards, and the additional revenue from the 50p increase so meagre, that many are expecting much more retrenchment or withdrawal from the £2.50 capped rates. The subsidy on offer is effectively being paid for through future service cuts.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Sep 2023 ==

Imagine if it had heralded true, German-model integration before the Germans had even thought about it? The outcome may have been very different.

And yet if it had been a bit less ambitious, it would probably have been more effective. For example if it had included evenly-distributed spend in all districts for the bus fare cut, and some capital spending on targeted bus priority, the current network would be immeasurably stronger.

 

[aavm]

To try and separate long lines

So what are the +non IC and £40 options for then?
200km is quite a long distance, would easily London to Birmingham, might well get you to Bristol.

In Network Southeast areas between city routes, peak capacity is high, so extra demand can be handled.
On intercity, eg London Edinburgh, it's not, so needs higher prices.
Rural routes, a few extra carriages would be enough
That's kind of the idea

 

[zwk500]

To try and separate long lines

In Network Southeast areas between city routes, peak capacity is high, so extra demand can be handled.
On intercity, eg London Edinburgh, it's not, so needs higher prices.
Rural routes, a few extra carriages would be enough
That's kind of the idea

So this ticket would be the same price to travel via Avanti, Chiltern or LNWR between London and Birmingham? That's not going to manage capacity on the Avanti services terribly well.

 

[aavm]

Absolutely. A daily travelcard. The extra intercity price is for capacity-strained routes.
But trying to be fare as some close towns are IC only

 

[zwk500]

Absolutely. A daily travelcard. The extra intercity price is for capacity-strained routes.
But trying to be fare as some close towns are IC only

London to Birmingham famously being awash with too much passenger capacity. 200km would also cover London to Derby or Nottingham.

It's the inevitable problem with trying to produce a single national fare - there are so many exceptions to the general rules that you end up needing complicated fare levels and exceptions in any event.

 

[yorksrob]

I think that trying to unpick this service from that is going to be too difficult, given IC trains typically serve other journey types.

Whatever happens needs to be Nationwide.

 

[aavm]

Maybe a "premium route" supplement for IC routes just around London, so beyond Exeter/Bristol/Birmingham/Crew/Leeds are all not premium
So, bus tube tram
+ train ( excl....) to 200km £10
+ all train (excl premium IC) £20
+ all train £40

 

[zwk500]

Maybe a "premium route" supplement for IC routes just around London, so beyond Exeter/Bristol/Birmingham/Crew/Leeds are all not premium
So, bus tube tram
+ train ( excl....) to 200km £10
+ all train (excl premium IC) £20
+ all train £40

I think you'll do far better to have 'local travel zones' along the lines of the London Travelcard idea. Could make them zonal if needed. The basic infrastructure is already in place in the biggest cities with combined authorities and zonal pricing on some local routes. The big shift it would need is integration of national rail lines into that. But pretty much any urban area with commuter trains would benefit from a scheme like this. In places like Yorkshire you could have the boundaries overlapping/abutting if necessary such that people living between Sheffield, Leeds and Doncaster would only need to purchase one travelcard per day.

 

[Starmill]

So this ticket would be the same price to travel via Avanti, Chiltern or LNWR between London and Birmingham? That's not going to manage capacity on the Avanti services terribly well.

To be fair it would probably be OK capacity-wise because Avanti West Coast services have more available currently than LNR ones in and out of London Euston. But the obvious other side of the coin there is that if the subscription cost more, loads of people would drop out of the rail market and go back to using their cars or one of the coach companies, who price comparably with LNR.

Of course, this goes right back to the original point here that an unlimited subscription service at any reduced price from today would lead to more serious capacity problems, something which more subsidy simply wouldn't help with at all in most cases because there's no way to provide extra capacity until HS2.

 

[aavm]

Most Austrians don't use green public transport 'Klimaticket'. Why?

The government wants Austrians to ditch their cars and take to public transport as vehicle emissions remain persistently high.

www.euronews.com

Austrian national pass has v low uptake, maybe as £1000/yr rather than £3/day (I think)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Most Austrians don't use green public transport 'Klimaticket'. Why?

The government wants Austrians to ditch their cars and take to public transport as vehicle emissions remain persistently high.

www.euronews.com

Austrian national pass has v low uptake, maybe as £1000/yr rather than £3/day (I think)

Monthly direct debit is probably the best structure for such a ticket, even if it has a minimum 12 month contract (say).

 

[30907]

Austrian national pass has v low uptake, maybe as £1000/yr rather than £3/day (I think)

I suspect the 365EUR/year regional tickets are more widely used?

 

[yorksrob]

I think you'll do far better to have 'local travel zones' along the lines of the London Travelcard idea. Could make them zonal if needed. The basic infrastructure is already in place in the biggest cities with combined authorities and zonal pricing on some local routes. The big shift it would need is integration of national rail lines into that. But pretty much any urban area with commuter trains would benefit from a scheme like this. In places like Yorkshire you could have the boundaries overlapping/abutting if necessary such that people living between Sheffield, Leeds and Doncaster would only need to purchase one travelcard per day.

This is neglecting the whole benefit of rail as a national transport network. Large urban districts already have some good offers.

What is needed is some form of initiative to make rail transport as a whole (including the middle distance bits that get neither PTE subsidy, nor are suitable for AP) economically attractive to households.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Sep 2023 ==

Most Austrians don't use green public transport 'Klimaticket'. Why?

The government wants Austrians to ditch their cars and take to public transport as vehicle emissions remain persistently high.

www.euronews.com

Austrian national pass has v low uptake, maybe as £1000/yr rather than £3/day (I think)

So maybe the sky won't fall in, in terms of capacity if we were to offer decent value train travel in the UK.

 

[Bartsimho]

Question is, can anything be done about it short of banning split ticketing (which would be undesirable and impossible to do anyway). One wonders if Dft actually knew the statistics, maybe we would see destinations like Liverpool or the WCML returned to the XC franchise map....

I've always thought about a National Travelcard system which works for Local and Regional journeys with long distance services needing an extra supplement (Also the £100 contactless limit preventing them being in the system). Should have the ability to stitch regionals together for cheaper fares but you have to actually get off and tap a reader. Of course this would be slightly complicated but also abstracted away from the user directly.

Something like all local journeys £6, all regional journeys £15, Intercity journeys determined by the pairs.
Would need a database to define the local and regional journeys for each station with any not present being classified as intercity