40% increased fares by 2015?

[WatcherZero]

Channel 4 has done a piece picked up on by the Telegraph and several local papers with reportedly inside information that the government will change the fares formula to RPI +3% or RPI +4% leading to 40% higher regulated fares within 4 years. However the money wont be going to the operators, C4 believes the government is going to claw it all back and use it to finance the subsidies rather than reducing them directly.

Meanwhile according to the Express Hammands been caught out buying a peak ticket from Southampton to London when he could have bought an offpeak, hes vowed to force the operators to publish full fare tables so passengers can always work out the cheapest ticket.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Meanwhile according to the Express Hammands been caught out buying a peak ticket from Southampton to London when he could have bought an offpeak, hes vowed to force the operators to publish full fare tables so passengers can always work out the cheapest ticket.

Awww, does Mr Hammond feel ripped off for buying the wrong fare? He can find a list of rail fares on the NationalRail web site.

 

[northwichcat]

I hope they don't mean non-PTE subsided fares could increase by 40%. If it's 15% for Northern fares but up to 40% on some PTE fares, especially West Yorks ones then it would be fairly consistent pricing even if it's a big increase for some people. However, if it's 40% for everyone then they may as well shut down Horwich Parkway-Blackpool as everyone will be priced off rail and go by National Express or Stagecoach instead.

 

[WatcherZero]

Hammond did make a good point that in some regions peak means any ticket before a certain time whereas in others it means arriving at a particular destination before a certain time. A layman wont know what it means where.

 

[northwichcat]

Then you get tickets like Knutsford-Liverpool which are peak all day, so you could think the ticket seller has overcharged you.

 

[rail-britain]

Over 5 years the fares would increase by at least 20% anyway, so a doubling in that seems quite reasonable given the regulation of fares are to be removed

 

[tony_mac]

Hammond did make a good point that in some regions peak means any ticket before a certain time whereas in others it means arriving at a particular destination before a certain time. A layman wont know what it means where.

On some routes (e.g. Liverpool - Manchester - Leeds), off-peak day returns mean leaving before a certain time, yet off-peak returns mean arriving before a certain time.

 

[WatcherZero]

Times today reporting the new RPI cap will be between 3% and 6% above inflation, and their will be many red liberal faces for their manifesto pledge of -1%.

 

[shinkansen1966]

Hammond did make a good point that in some regions peak means any ticket before a certain time whereas in others it means arriving at a particular destination before a certain time. A layman wont know what it means where.

But Mr Hammond is an expert. And that's why he's the transport secretary.

Are you suggesting he doesn't know his brief and for that matter doesn't care either. Viewing the transport portfolio as something for politicians who are either on their way up or their way out of government ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

...and their will be many red liberal faces for their manifesto pledge...

Again. If the Liberals Democrats had to eat humble pie at the moment, they'd be as fat as Eric Pickles.

 

[swt_passenger]

Over 5 years the fares would increase by at least 20% anyway, so a doubling in that seems quite reasonable given the regulation of fares are to be removed

or, is likely to be removed
or, is possibly to be removed
or, is definitely to be removed

You don't actually know yet, do you...

 

[12CSVT]

I think I've sussed what they're up to.

Increase fares by 40% in the hope that demand for rail travel drops (making the roads even more congested).

Then they can say that expenditure on route upgrades isn't necessary any more.

They must think we were born yesterday.

 

[northwichcat]

They should go for a EMT or FGW franchise approach in all areas as they both have profitable long distance services mixed with local not profitable services.

 

[mikeg]

According to the Torygraph's 'sources', the cap is going to be changed to RPI+4%

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...nt-annual-fare-rises-for-next-four-years.html

Still it's better than the deregulation idea that was floated on BBC News about a week ago.

I agree about mixing profitable and unprofitable routes btw, it seems the 'integrated' routes are much more reasonable and also they will probably have fewer conflicting movements with other operators, as a sectorised split will tend to mean two operators at least on a lot of lines.

One Whitehall source confirmed the fare cap was likely to be relaxed, but insisted it would not be abandoned altogether

I wonder if by relaxed the source means that the cap will merely be increased or if fewer fares will be regulated? Or perhaps a 'fares basket' approach will be reintroduced?

 

[yorksrob]

They should go for a EMT or FGW franchise approach in all areas as they both have profitable long distance services mixed with local not profitable services.

Indeed, this would seem to me to be the only sensible way to run the railway. Of course, IMO whilst the TOC should take the overall responsibility for local non-profitable services as well as longer distance profitable ones, it should ideally be large enough to allow the longer distance profitable routes to be branded and marketed in their own right as a distinct service, whilst the local routes could be managed and developed with offers more suited to shorter distance local journeys

With regard to the proposed increases I also agree with your earlier point as to whether large increases in the North outside of PTE areas might start to eat into passenger usage. I was recently looking to do a medium distance return journey between Leeds and Cumbria and the price was around £30. In this instance I had to decide against it. The railway has an important part to play in the economic recovery in allowing beople to go about their business generating economic activity. If lots of people are forced by higher prices to make the same decision as I did, it could seriously impede the railway in doing this.

 

[northwichcat]

with offers more suited to shorter distance local journeys

My idea of that would be not to have the Duo tickets like Northern have currently, which wouldn't encourage a lone traveller to take the train instead of the car/bus. Instead offer overnight returns on short distances - taking the train is unattractive if you have to buy two singles at £5 each when an Off Peak DR is £5.40. Also offer very cheap Advance fares on some of the quieter trains - this is an approach which works with NX coaches - they know on some services they'll sell out if the cheapest ticket is £10 but others will always have some empty seats so they offer £1 tickets if you're one of the first to book.

 

[Deerfold]

My idea of that would be not to have the Duo tickets like Northern have currently, which wouldn't encourage a lone traveller to take the train instead of the car/bus. Instead offer overnight returns on short distances - taking the train is unattractive if you have to buy two singles at £5 each when an Off Peak DR is £5.40. Also offer very cheap Advance fares on some of the quieter trains - this is an approach which works with NX coaches - they know on some services they'll sell out if the cheapest ticket is £10 but others will always have some empty seats so they offer £1 tickets if you're one of the first to book.

And you could call it, ooh, how about megatrain?

 

[yorksrob]

I'm sure some of the routes could take advanced fares, restricting people to a particular train but without seat reservations. I definately agree that weekend returns over a 2 - 3 day period would definately be a good idea on distances where TOC's are naturally reluctant to offer month returns.

 

[Flamingo]

They should go for a EMT or FGW franchise approach in all areas as they both have profitable long distance services mixed with local not profitable services.

I can never understand why it is considered acceptable that the long-distance travellers be expected to subsidise the local travellers.

 

[mikeg]

I can never understand why it is considered acceptable that the long-distance travellers be expected to subsidise the local travellers.

Because local services 'feed' the intercity services? We don't all live in big cities with direct Intercity rail links. Therefore it makes sense to subsidise loss-making local services so that these passengers can change onto an intercity service and make the TOC some money, whereas otherwise if the local service were too expensive or didn't exist (and likely wouldn't exist were there not some local only traffic) they'd just get in the car.

 

[Flamingo]

Well, in my part of the world (South Wales), the services that "feed" the Intercity are run by a different TOC. If the ticket prices need subsidy to keep local commuters out of the car, I'd say that this was a job for Government to take on. But as the thread is about the loss of subsidy, I guess that the local fares will be going up to reflect the real cost of running the service.

 

[Failed Unit]

I can never understand why it is considered acceptable that the long-distance travellers be expected to subsidise the local travellers.

Worked for BR for years

But I am concerned that rail will turn into the bus industry (at least in less areas) where buses operate 0700 - 1800 at half hourly frequencies because it is profitable. After 1800 you either get no buses or the local authurity has to pay. To some extents Lincolnshire is like that with the exception of the Lincoln to Doncaster line which only gets a service when a unit is space so is of little use to the leisure traveller or commuter.

 

[wibble]

I agree about mixing profitable and unprofitable routes btw, it seems the 'integrated' routes are much more reasonable and also they will probably have fewer conflicting movements with other operators, as a sectorised split will tend to mean two operators at least on a lot of lines.

Don't we have that already?

SWT's Island Line
NXEA's branch lines in East Anglia
EMT's local services
FGW's non-Intercity/Alphaline routes
ATW's services outside of Cardiff
Large sections of Northern

 

[mikeg]

Yes, we do... But not everywhere. Take the West Coast mainline for example. Virgin and London Midland's franchises would be better off merged in my opinion.

And there are some areas where it once was different and much worse for it, but the franchise has since been 'integrated' - the Greater Western franchise vs. the Great Western, Wessex and Thames franchises for example.

As for Northern, it operates mostly local services anyway, perhaps it could be merged with TPE to give it a mix of short and long distance franchises.

This thread runs the risk of going off topic. Let's see what happens to the fares regulation formula and subsidies later today and discuss that.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
RPI+3% for 3 years from 2012. New Rolling stock (not very specific on this) and North Western electrification to go ahead - I think that's what he said. Crossrail to go ahead. Wasn't as bad as I thought.

 

[yorksrob]

I can never understand why it is considered acceptable that the long-distance travellers be expected to subsidise the local travellers.

On the contrary, it's the only sensible way to run a railway. The less burden that has to fall on taxpayers, some of whom, don't forget, won't use trains anyway, the better. If you look at the amount of subsidy paid to the railway as a proportion of government spending it's tiny, and yet this is an area that is always squeezed first.

Plus, there is more of a chance that a long distance traveller may need the local routes as connecting services. The fact is, the railway is far more useful as a broad network covering the whole country rather than just four or five inter-city routes so it is absolutely right that long distance travellers should subsidise local routes.

That said some taxpayer subsidy will always be needed. It would be impossible for the network to be subsidised by longer distance travellers in it's entirety. That road leads to Beeching, Serpell and madness!

 

[philjo]

Just announced by the Chancellor:

Rise in regulated cap on rail fares to 3% above RPI from 2012.

 

[mikeg]

Actually deferring it until 2012 is quite a clever move. I believe The Bank of England forecasts inflation to fall by then, so the cash terms increase will probably be in the area of 5%, rather than a headline-grabbing 10% hike.

 

[swt_passenger]

Actually deferring it until 2012 is quite a clever move. I believe The Bank of England forecasts inflation to fall by then, so the cash terms increase will probably be in the area of 5%, rather than a headline-grabbing 10% hike.

If only they'd leaked it a couple of weeks ago, thousands of gallons of ink needn't have been wasted on scary headlines everywhere...

 

[WatcherZero]

It was intentional, leak bad and announce better, same way they leaked 80% cuts to University funding but only cut 40%.

 

[northwichcat]

I can never understand why it is considered acceptable that the long-distance travellers be expected to subsidise the local travellers.

Well look at it this way. I use TPE, Virgin and XC services but if there weren't local trains to Stockport, Manchester and Chester I wouldn't be able to use any intercity/regional services.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Don't we have that already?
ATW's services outside of Cardiff
Large sections of Northern

Not exactly a mix of intercity, regional and local.