The problem is ‘substantial impact’ is a subjective term.
If you think this move is somehow about being nice and pouring money on disabled people, and not actually just a mechanism to get more revenue for our cash strapped railways then I've a bridge to sell you. Have a look at this government and tell me which you think is more likely.
Think about it. A DP railcard is £20 a year. My wife has one. We've just come back from a trip to London where the fares for us in total were c£84 instead of £126. I'm very grateful we had the discount from the railcard, but the saving has more than exceeded the cost of the railcard in one trip. Replicated around the country, it is hard to see how the railcard is revenue-positive.
There are lots of people who would consider that £126 is far too much cost over driving.
Of course railcards are revenue positive. Why do you think the 26-30 and Two Together railcards were recently brought in, for example?
I'm not arguing against the DP railcard. We find it of great benefit. I was responding to @AlterEgo 's claim that it is revenue-generating.
They may be, but has an economic analysis of them been published?
I believe in that claim is that £84 of revenue is more than £0 due to people like myself who wouldn’t have made the journey at £126.
I doubt it has been published anyone the public can read it, but unless you think our impoverished railways are in the business of giving handouts then it naturally follows that they must be. There are more railcards than there have ever been and there is almost certainly a financial reason for that.
You seem to ignore the impact that politics, especially from a government desperate for improved public approval, has on decision-making.
Have the new railcards been instigated by the railway industry or by government? The latter is well known for giving handouts if it will benefit them politically.
The fact they are marketed so heavily suggests they are revenue positive. Some railcards have to be offered by law, but I assume there is nothing stopping this being a hard-to-find page on National Rail Enquiries with a postal application and a 6-8 week turnaround time so only the most dedicated get the card.
The industry has instigated previous railcards from its own market research. Granted, the expansion of the criteria is now much more closely a government decision as they hold all the purse strings now, but they are not a handout or a subsidy and this is a fairly open secret in the industry. As @Sonic1234 mentions, they're aggressively marketed by everyone. They're a product to earn revenue, not a handout.
This is me I feel. I have autism and benefit hugely from rail travel, but also don't claim PIP so wouldn't be eligible at the moment. While I have a driver's licence, I don't own a car as the demands of it risk causing mental burnout (I obtained the licence simply to enhance career prospects), while I only have 2 more years on a 26-30 left before I'm nearly 32. I'd rather not have to apply for PIP solely for the sake of being eligible (although my parents did claim DLA while I was a child, given my early diagnosis).
My mistake, it is indeed an ENCTS pass.
The difficulty is how is that any different in practical effects to many people who are too nervous to be able to learn to drive, but in no way would they be thought appropriate for a DP Railcard?
This entirely - I work full time so have no real reason to claim benefits, but, I also have Crohn’s disease and mental health issues and would benefit from a disabled railcard - if my Crohn’s is bad a flexible ticket is much more preferable to an advance ticket - but is much more expensive so I’m penalised for wanting flexibility to manage a medical condition
That would depend on whether their nervousness was due to a disability or not.
Interesting, but I guess not every disabled person will need a companion, so for some it's more expensive than others.
The 26-30 Railcard can be used for commuting, subject to a £12 minimum discounted fare before 10:00 on weekdays.
I've already referenced my claim that it is revenue generative with an unimpeachable source, so unless you have a better one, I'm not entering into debate. (no doxxing allowed here, so can't tell you who that is as they have not outed themselves. However it is reasonably well known along the fares experts here who that poster is and yes, it is their job to know the answer)
