Except the rail network - which let it not be forgotten only represents about 10% of journeys in the UK is already heavily subsidised by non users. So given there is, due to Covid, a much increased operating deficit, why should the majority be expected to bridge this for the minority? Surely the users should be expected to cover some of it - and as I posted earlier the increase is 2p / £ or 20p on a £10 fare, so hardly exorbitant or extortionate.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Should Shapps raise rail fares in a time like this?
- Thread starter Hey 3
- Start date
- Status
Except the rail network - which let it not be forgotten only represents about 10% of journeys in the UK is already heavily subsidised by non users. So given there is, due to Covid, a much increased operating deficit, why should the majority be expected to bridge this for the minority? Surely the users should be expected to cover some of it - and as I posted earlier the increase is 2p / £ or 20p on a £10 fare, so hardly exorbitant or extortionate.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
A lot of people { not only 'rail enthusiasts'} are going to have to rethink transport economics. It will soon not be possible to say rail is 'greener'- cars are already a lot less polluting than they were and once all-electric is here, esp if rail still has diesel in use, the 'green benefit of rail' is at least debatable. What I understand economists call 'elasticity' is also a factor. Though many travellers may contend they HAVE to travel, and where and when they do, there is going to be more choice and more diversity in 'patterns'- lower, longer 'peaks', more Working from Home. IIRC many routes were already at and beyond capacity pre-Covid. fares are a way of 'managing' demand. There is at least an argument that those creating greater provision than would otherwise be needed should pay for that greater provision. As an argument taken to its extreme, picture either all 'work' being carried out equally spread over 24/7, that would need a lot lower provision than what we have with two peaks setting the amount of rolling stock, staff etc; or if everyone lived so close to where they worked as to be able to walk/ cycle etc? I never understood the logic of season tickets other than reducing queues and staffing at ticket offices. Pricing is an effective way of managing demand. IF the then price is too high for low-paid workers then either they will 'vote with their feet' and/or employers will have to pay more. Travellers can transfer to road and parking and congestion if they prefer. Market economics. Hard- yes. Free lunch no.
And all those charges will do is hasten the demise of more and more high streets as people switch to shopping on line. But your average council isn't clever enough to work that out.
Peregrine 4903
Established Member
After working for one that ideology is permanently fixed there and won't change. Its the way they are moving, particularly in London where they don't need to worry as much as public transport is better and they have TfL's backing. I do think the idea in London has some merit but they way its been delivered is extremely poorly thought out in many places.
But how much would rail fares have to decrease to make any significant difference to modal choice? Certainly more than the 2%-ish we are talking about here.
Is it heavily subsidised? Wikipedia doesn't have recent figures. Let the dust settle on covid-triggered and -hastened changes before we judge the size of the deficit, it's not good to put the burden on too soon and kill growth.
If it were up to me, public transport would be funded almost entirely by road pricing, with token low fares for urban trips and around half of the current rates for long distance trips. This has a big advantage for the Treasury that it helps to reduce their reliance on fuel duty.
People expecting the high-yield businesses travellers and loyal long-distance (£5k +) London commuters who were previously paying the bills to just pop back once restrictions are lifted are unfortunately trapped in wishful thinking.
People expecting the high-yield businesses travellers and loyal long-distance (£5k +) London commuters who were previously paying the bills to just pop back once restrictions are lifted are unfortunately trapped in wishful thinking.
I don't have kids - why should I pay tax which goes towards education and child benefits? I don't use most of the services provided by the local council - why should I pay the same amount of council tax as those who do? - etc.
The point is that tax funds things which are of benefit to society, and trains fall into this category as they are far less polluting, per passenger, than private cars.
Peregrine 4903
Established Member
Couldn't have put it better myself.
In most of those cases you could choose to use them. Whereas for the overwhelming majority of journeys people make the train isn't an option.
To use an example, my parents live about 50 miles away, their nearest station is 4 miles away, my nearest is 5 miles away, to reach them would take well over 2 hours, for a journey I can drive in about an hour.
Only about 10% of journeys are made by train - whereas the other services you mention have a far higher rate of usage. In fact even if you don't have children, you'd have used the education system so in effect you're paying back what you have benefitted from.
Purple Orange
On Moderation
While it is relatively unlikely that anyone will be swayed one way or another in the face of a 20p change in fares, it is worthwhile nothing that over time compound rises can make a significant difference.
A good example, exactly five years ago an Off Peak Day Return ticket from Bolton to Manchester cost £4.10. Not cheap for restrictive ticket on an 11 mile trip but competitive enough in the market in question. However, today this costs £6.10. Note the 48.8% increase despite the fact that inflation has averaged about 2.5% a year for the last five years. Were a strictly inflationary increase applied today's price would be £4.60. Plainly, this does have an effect. Of course you might respond "but it's only £2", but that's the entire point.
Problem with your idea is if you deter people from driving and onto public transport your road pricing scheme will not bring in the revenue you need to pay for your public transport scheme.
It's also massively biased against people who live in rural areas and travel longer distances to access basic services where public transport isn't viable and biased in favour of city dwellers who tend to travel shorter distances and have better public transport provision.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Given that you can buy a GMPTE rail ranger for £7.20, I wonder how much of that fare setting is driven by the PTE?
It's true that it would probably need to be coupled with a parking tax where land values are high and a form of payrolled contribution for central office jobs, but there's plenty there to keep it all going.
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Here is food for thought... living in low density areas are unsustainable, that expends far more carbon per person than a city dweller. We should be seeking to reduce driving as much as possible and that electric vehicles will not be the answer. A journey made in an EV over an electric train or tram requires additional energy to be produced, which is small for one journey but cumulatively is a lot. Plus the congestion.
It's been deliberate over the last few years to increase the price of the relatively excellent value GM fares (frankly, historically very underpriced)
There are council services (and other things paid for by tax) which are aimed at specific demographics and which I would never use. That doesn't mean that I don't think they are worth spending tax income on though.
The fact that only 10% of journeys are by rail really is not a valid argument. There are too many cars on the roads, and despite what many people seem to think electric vehicles do not remove the problem - they reduce the emissions pollution (depending on how the electricity is generated), but that that doesn't remove the pollution caused by their manufacture and disposal, nor does it reduce congestion and road accidents. Public transport use therefore needs to be encouraged.
Of course there are circumstances where a car is necessary - locations not accessible by public transport, transporting bulky items, etc - but that really doesn't invalidate the argument.
But that's just it. They weren't underpriced. It was particular examples driven by London where they were very overpriced. In so many places the actual fares people are asked to pay have been going up much more rapidly than the government would like for you to believe.
There are so many examples of this sort of fiddling. If you lived in Sheffield and wanted to have a Saturday day out in Manchester for some shopping, maybe a museum visit and a meal etc, exactly the kind of thing post-Covid that we need to see coming back, the price five years ago would have been £18.50. Now you're asked to pay £24.30. A 31.4% rise in 5 years. The £18.50 rate for a relatively unrestricted ticket for a day trip of 40 miles was no bargain but about right. It should therefore be about £20.80 today - but it's not.
People aren't interested in "oh it's because it's the PTE" or "oh it's because of fares regulation" or whatever else, they will just see the price and realise that it isn't very good value for money.
Yes they were. I used to do Horwich to Manchester Airport in the late 2000s for £2 return with my Railcard (£3 no Railcard). I loved it, but no way was that comparable with other fares nationally.
Well IMO you're talking rubbish but if you want to continue this discussion I'd suggest you create a new thread tbh, I've made my point.
I'm literally telling you the fare I used to pay, so not sure how that is "rubbish".
Yes, pretty typical fares for short urban journeys in a modern European city?
I hardly think 26 miles - which is what Horwich to Man Airport is - classes as a "short" journey? To put it in context that's a similar distance to the width of the Isle of Wight !
Most of those "modern" European cities are *much* smaller both in population and geographic terms.
Who buys an Off Peak Day Return from Horwich Parkway to Manchester Airport though? An enthusiast deliberately looking for a bargain by choosing two stations as far apart as they can at a particular price.
£1.50 each way 13 years ago, or £2.10 today, between a park and ride site just at the edge of the urban area and a major city centre 16 miles away is in fact very much what one might expect to find. Most people doing an afternoon of shopping or going out to the cinema on Friday night doing that trip today are likely to get caught by the SDR fare of £9.40 - say there's two of you and you're putting down £20. Not sustainable for leisure traffic.
Greybeard33
Established Member
Northern used to receive an additional "PTE" subsidy specifically to keep fares low within Greater Manchester and so encourage modal shift. This was funded by central government but routed via TfGM. A DfT policy change removed this subsidy from the new Arriva Northern franchise in 2016 and required Northern to raise additional revenue within GM to compensate. This was done partly by making GM off peak returns invalid in the evening peak and partly by raising fares within GM.
That accounts for much of the 49% increase in that Off Peak Day Return. If you want to return in the evening, the increase has been much steeper than that, because you now have to buy an Anytime ticket.
I disagree - 5 hours parking in Central Manchester will cost you about £15 - looking at Printworks or Arndale for prices. If you were heading out for a meal and a film/show/concert you'd easily take 5 hours.
I used to try to convince my mother to use public transport for evenings in Manchester, but she parked for free in the cinema (car parking price deducted from the cinema ticket) and would think I were crazy to advocate paying £9.40 per person. She's also steadfastly refused to use public transport for a year now and it will be very very difficult to change her mind again.
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Yet people still drive in to a city centre to do a 9-5 job when they could get public transport. There are car parks far cheaper than the Arndale & Printworks. If every car park was priced at NCP prices, the train would be very competitively priced.
There are still £2 car parks on the edge of the city centre on waste land, providing you're happy to leave your vehicle in them! Again I've argued for these to be regulated out of existence but they're clearly quite profitable. The one on the former Oxford Road BBC site was always very well used indeed between the demolition and the start of the redevelopment.
Purple Orange
On Moderation
Thankfully they are being pushed further and further out of the city. I’m looking forward to seeing all the surface car parks in New Cross disappear as the whole area builds up. That whole area east of Great Ancoats Street was just a massive surface car park. My dad used to park in Greengate arches regularly, but look at the place now.
- Status