Scottish rail travel subsidy

[cjp]

Somewhat high?

"The Scottish government already pays 75p in the £1 for every train ticket used on ScotRail services, but we want to do more," she added.

From the BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-23682508
quoting Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.

I wonder the figure might be down south?

 

[Goatboy]

Seems like a proactive government that values sustainable transport.

 

[Oliver]

Any activity which has costs greater than those paid by its immediate users will need external funding to support its continued existence. In this case that comes from the government (i.e. taxpayers). The higher the proportion of such funding becomes the more dependent it will become on political whims and economic circumstances. Sooner or later a crunch will come along and some painful decisions will be made.

I am not saying that no subsidies are justified, but it is in Scotrail's interest to generate as much of its costs as possible from the farebox, and to reduce operating costs where possible in order to demonstrate value for money. In this respect Scotland is far behind England, and hard times lie ahead.

 

[Monty]

Seems like a proactive government that values sustainable transport.

Or a government desperate for yes votes in a coming referendum in 2014...

 

[Goatboy]

Or a government desperate for yes votes in a coming referendum in 2014...

Have there been price reductions in Scotland then?

 

[SkinnyDave]

Not desperate for votes
Both campaigns are just sparring at the moment it won't kick off until early next year.

It seems that Transpirt Scotland and Scotrail have a decent relationship from the outside. I wonder if that would change with new custodian in charge of franchise..

 

[SemaphoreSam]

Any activity which has costs greater than those paid by its immediate users will need external funding to support its continued existence. In this case that comes from the government (i.e. taxpayers).

All well and good. Now, what percentage of the costs of road construction and maintenance, and real estate taxes, are paid by users (motorists)? The same questions should be asked of both rail and road...answers, Mr. Marples? Sam

 

[Oliver]

All well and good. Now, what percentage of the costs of road construction and maintenance, and real estate taxes, are paid by users (motorists)?

An excellent point. The exact numbers are difficult to determine, though clearly motorists do pay large amounts of tax through excise duties and vehicle licenses. But car travel serves far more of the population than rail travel, and it is hard to visualise a world with no roads, whereas a large slice of the population manages to get around without the use of trains.

Of course railways do add benefit to the whole community and I am not saying there should be no subsidy. I am simply stating that reliance on government subsidies is a risky strategy, and any activity should aim to be as self-reliant as possible, to avoid political interference and external shocks. Rail travel in Scotland has grown less than in England, and the level of subsidy is much higher - that is a risky path to follow.

 

[edwin_m]

We did taxes on motoring versus costs of road a couple of months ago, though not in the specific context of Scotland. It appears motoring taxes more than cover the cost of road maintenance but do not cover the external costs of the road network including accidents and pollution.

Without government "subsidy", there wouldn't be any rail network in Scotland, and not much anywhere else for that matter. While rail carries only about 5% of passenger-km in the UK as a whole, the share for some markets like commuting into Glasgow is likely to be much higher and with no rail network there would be more road congestion in these markets.

 

[tbtc]

I wonder the figure might be down south?

IIRC the (UK) Government wanted to bring the proportion down from the Government paying two thirds of the cost to the Government paying half of the cost?

So, if the figure is currently at the start of that process then there's not a *huge* difference between 66p in England/ Wales and 75p in Scotland.

Problem is that a disproportionate number of Scottish lines are going to need big subsidies, so rail there will always need a larger subsidy (in those terms).

In another thread recently, there was a quote that the Caledonian Sleeper covers 80% of its costs (i.e. 20p subsidy) - can this be right in that context?

Also, depends on what the "costs" being talked about are - does the "75p" include the total costs of the railway (including the costs of new lines, electrification) or just the operational subsidy?

 

[chuckles1066]

We did taxes on motoring versus costs of road a couple of months ago

Someone driving 12000 miles per year in a 3 year old Ford Focus 1.6 petrol car @ 40mpg will pay:

£831 in fuel duty
£24 in IPT (average premium £400)
£4.95 of the MOT fee
£150 vehicle excise duty
£30 VAT on a £180 service (£150 service, 20% VAT)

So over a grand a year to the Government just to drive from A to B.

Motorists are doing their bit.