Big fare rises coming for rail commuters
Discussion
30-40% rise over the next 4 years!!
If you thought that Wednesday’s spending review was all about Whitehall and welfare waste, then think again. So sharp are the cuts planned that some of the Coalition’s core voters are in for another shock, on train fares.
About 600 million annual train journeys have fares that are regulated by a formula set by the Government in relation to the near £2 billion subsidy it gives to the train operators.
The end result will be train fares rising by near double digit percentages in each year of the Spending Review.
Overall, Government sources are expecting these train fares to be over 30 per cent higher by 2015, and industry sources pointed towards a 40 per cent hike by 2015.
The increase in regulated fares is currently set at the Retail Price Index plus 1 per cent, I understand from industry and Whitehall sources that this is set to rise substantially.
As the RPI number used in this equation is currently set at 4.8 per cent, I was told that under the current settlement, multi-year double digit rises were possible.
This would mean for annual season ticket for commuters, that prices could rise by well over a thousand pounds.
There are two things driving this. Firstly, this is a government that believes in the market, and as we have seen with university fees debate, it believes that the user should pay.
So this is a fundamental big bang, shifting the burden of payment from taxpayers towards passengers.
Secondly it is important to note that this rise in fares will not go to train companies. Government says it is keen to do this so that there is funding for investment in train infrastructure, but surely these extra fees will simply go into the general deficit reduction pot?
And then there’s the politics in all of this. If we end up, on some lines, with RPI plus 5 per cent, where on earth will that leave Norman Baker, the Lib Dem transport minister, who was elected on a manifesto of RPI minus 1 per cent?
And if it is the Coalition’s strategy for a so-called modal shift from private to public transport, then these sorts of fare rises will do the opposite, unless they are planning massive road taxes too.
And then don’t forget that Network Rail is sitting on some rather valuable real estate, that could prove a handy piece of family silver for George Osborne.
http://blogs.channel4.com/faisal-islam-on-economic...
It's already almost cheaper to drive so this could change things for many people.
Unless there are massive road tax increases / petrol price hikes coming too of course...
Amazed noone else has picked up on this. There is no way that petrol duty or VED won't rise in line with this (it was the Tories who brought in the fuel escalator in the first place). CMD has pegged himself on green credentials. With QE biting, I wouldn't be surprised to see a £2.00 litre of petrol in 2011/12.
Bing o said:
Amazed noone else has picked up on this. There is no way that petrol duty or VED won't rise in line with this (it was the Tories who brought in the fuel escalator in the first place). CMD has pegged himself on green credentials. With QE biting, I wouldn't be surprised to see a £2.00 litre of petrol in 2011/12.
I'm surprised too that this hasn't been picked up and discussed more. I can only imagine if you've just lost your child credit and now you are looking down the barrel of 40% increase in transport costs for rail fare!We have the Vat rise which will increase fuel prices anyway and if they hit us again personally I don't think this country could take higher fuel prices.
Trains are packed - put rail fairs up
People moan but trains still packed - put fairs up
People moan, use alternative transport, still packed - put fairs up
Keep putting fares up until passenger levels reduce, railway is way over capacitated I think its by 2012 it will running at 100% capacity.
People moan but trains still packed - put fairs up
People moan, use alternative transport, still packed - put fairs up
Keep putting fares up until passenger levels reduce, railway is way over capacitated I think its by 2012 it will running at 100% capacity.
Chipper said:
Bing o said:
Amazed noone else has picked up on this. There is no way that petrol duty or VED won't rise in line with this (it was the Tories who brought in the fuel escalator in the first place). CMD has pegged himself on green credentials. With QE biting, I wouldn't be surprised to see a £2.00 litre of petrol in 2011/12.
I'm surprised too that this hasn't been picked up and discussed more. I can only imagine if you've just lost your child credit and now you are looking down the barrel of 40% increase in transport costs for rail fare!We have the Vat rise which will increase fuel prices anyway and if they hit us again personally I don't think this country could take higher fuel prices.
thinfourth2 said:
You work, your nothing more then a walking cashpoint.
Good authority on a PH relevant aside here - at a past ACPO meeting somebody joked that on efficiency grounds car number plates should be replaced by barcodes including the sort code and account number of the registered keeper's personal bank account, very few laughed.Off-topic or on-topic who knows given the interplay between modes of transport and impact from policy in one area on other areas. Probably of interest to some anyway, and good to see that Presclot's CfIT is being abolished.
Cut Concessionary Travel Spend and Raise Motoring Taxes says CfIT
Cuts to concessionary travel, higher motoring taxes and more spending on travel behaviour change policies have been recommended by the Commission for Integrated Transport in advice to ministers on transport policy in the new era of austerity. The report is the final piece of advice to be offered by the Commission that was set up by former deputy prime minister John Prescott in 1998. The Government this week confirmed that CfIT is being abolished. CfIT says the £1bn spent on concessionary travel for the elderly and disabled in England each year represents poor value for money. “At the time of our 2002 report we estimated that a 100% [ie free] scheme would have a benefit:cost ratio of less than 1. The main reason why [the BCR is so low] is that we estimated that the great majority of trips made by those entitled would have been made without the concession. “Given our focus on reducing carbon dioxide emissions, economic recovery and the fiscal crisis, a universal 100% concession for older people does not therefore seem a high priority for transport spending.” CfIT suggests giving people eligible for free travel a preloaded value on their smartcards. The entitlement should be valid on any mode of transport where smartcard readers are fitted. “We estimate that a £500m scheme could still allow at least £75 per annum per person, and perhaps as much as £100.” The Commission suggests raising an extra £1.5bn a year from taxes in the form of higher fuel duty, air passenger duty and a system of charging for foreign lorries to use Britain’s roads. It justifies higher motoring taxes by asserting that the marginal cost of car use is “generally lower than the cost which that use imposes on society”. In the longer-term CfIT suggests introducing road user charging across much of the network, a policy that it says should raise an extra £6bn a year. CfIT says the Government’s CO2 reduction targets and the lower fuel tax yields as cars become more fuel efficient has fundamentally changed the case for road pricing. “What previously might have seemed a policy option increasingly looks to be an inexorable policy necessity given the fiscal and congestion consequences of the current mix of taxes,” says the body, chaired by London’s transport commissioner Peter Hendy. It suggests road pricing could be extensively introduced by 2016 at the earliest. CfIT says some of the additional fuel duty income should be used to fund a ‘sustainable travel fund’ of policies to reduce car use. It strongly endorses small-scale ‘smarter choice’ travel behaviour change measures and suggests the policies could have resonance with the Government’s Big Society agenda. “[The policies] provide an opportunity for community leadership and engagement, coupled with encouragement of personal responsibility, which is lacking in more traditional transport interventions,” it says. CfIT also wants a more rapid switchover from Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) – fuel duty rebate – to a per passenger subsidy (Incentive Per Passenger (IPP)). It describes the previous Government’s plan to complete the transition by 2020 as “disappointing”. The Commission concedes that the switch to IPP will harm rural services because IPP payments on these routes will be much lower than BSOG payments. CfIT therefore recommends a £31m rural bus safety net. It says there is also a need to rethink public transport in rural areas, with greater use made of taxibuses.
London Borough Switches Off More Traffic Signals
The London Borough of Ealing this week approved plans for further traffic light switch-off trials after declaring the first trials a success. Ealing’s cabinet has approved plans for switch-off trials at five further junctions where the signals are believed to exacerbate traffic congestion. Councillors this week endorsed the permanent removal of lights from the two trial sites implemented last year. The trials saw the lights switched off and mini-roundabouts installed. Nick O’Donnell, Ealing’s assistant director of transport planning, told members that monitoring by Project Centre revealed that the volume of traffic through both trial site junctions had increased and average queue length had been cut by two-thirds. He added that typical pedestrian wait times had been halved and no accidents had been recorded.
Anyway not wishing to be seen as hijacking the OP's thread that'll be it.
Cut Concessionary Travel Spend and Raise Motoring Taxes says CfIT
Cuts to concessionary travel, higher motoring taxes and more spending on travel behaviour change policies have been recommended by the Commission for Integrated Transport in advice to ministers on transport policy in the new era of austerity. The report is the final piece of advice to be offered by the Commission that was set up by former deputy prime minister John Prescott in 1998. The Government this week confirmed that CfIT is being abolished. CfIT says the £1bn spent on concessionary travel for the elderly and disabled in England each year represents poor value for money. “At the time of our 2002 report we estimated that a 100% [ie free] scheme would have a benefit:cost ratio of less than 1. The main reason why [the BCR is so low] is that we estimated that the great majority of trips made by those entitled would have been made without the concession. “Given our focus on reducing carbon dioxide emissions, economic recovery and the fiscal crisis, a universal 100% concession for older people does not therefore seem a high priority for transport spending.” CfIT suggests giving people eligible for free travel a preloaded value on their smartcards. The entitlement should be valid on any mode of transport where smartcard readers are fitted. “We estimate that a £500m scheme could still allow at least £75 per annum per person, and perhaps as much as £100.” The Commission suggests raising an extra £1.5bn a year from taxes in the form of higher fuel duty, air passenger duty and a system of charging for foreign lorries to use Britain’s roads. It justifies higher motoring taxes by asserting that the marginal cost of car use is “generally lower than the cost which that use imposes on society”. In the longer-term CfIT suggests introducing road user charging across much of the network, a policy that it says should raise an extra £6bn a year. CfIT says the Government’s CO2 reduction targets and the lower fuel tax yields as cars become more fuel efficient has fundamentally changed the case for road pricing. “What previously might have seemed a policy option increasingly looks to be an inexorable policy necessity given the fiscal and congestion consequences of the current mix of taxes,” says the body, chaired by London’s transport commissioner Peter Hendy. It suggests road pricing could be extensively introduced by 2016 at the earliest. CfIT says some of the additional fuel duty income should be used to fund a ‘sustainable travel fund’ of policies to reduce car use. It strongly endorses small-scale ‘smarter choice’ travel behaviour change measures and suggests the policies could have resonance with the Government’s Big Society agenda. “[The policies] provide an opportunity for community leadership and engagement, coupled with encouragement of personal responsibility, which is lacking in more traditional transport interventions,” it says. CfIT also wants a more rapid switchover from Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) – fuel duty rebate – to a per passenger subsidy (Incentive Per Passenger (IPP)). It describes the previous Government’s plan to complete the transition by 2020 as “disappointing”. The Commission concedes that the switch to IPP will harm rural services because IPP payments on these routes will be much lower than BSOG payments. CfIT therefore recommends a £31m rural bus safety net. It says there is also a need to rethink public transport in rural areas, with greater use made of taxibuses.
London Borough Switches Off More Traffic Signals
The London Borough of Ealing this week approved plans for further traffic light switch-off trials after declaring the first trials a success. Ealing’s cabinet has approved plans for switch-off trials at five further junctions where the signals are believed to exacerbate traffic congestion. Councillors this week endorsed the permanent removal of lights from the two trial sites implemented last year. The trials saw the lights switched off and mini-roundabouts installed. Nick O’Donnell, Ealing’s assistant director of transport planning, told members that monitoring by Project Centre revealed that the volume of traffic through both trial site junctions had increased and average queue length had been cut by two-thirds. He added that typical pedestrian wait times had been halved and no accidents had been recorded.
Anyway not wishing to be seen as hijacking the OP's thread that'll be it.
Seriously? I'm one of the people that put off getting a car for a long time because it was cheaper to use a train when I needed. One of the drivers to getting a car was that paying rail fares made me angry on a regular basis; £30 fares rose to £60 over the course of about 6 years.
I can't work out why it is that I'm flying to Prague later today for £80 return, yet it costs me almost £70 to get a train to Newcastle and back? Can anyone explain why it is possible to run planes at that price per head, yet trains were too expensive 10 years ago, are a complete joke now and won't be a viable mode of transport in 5 years time? WTF.
I can't work out why it is that I'm flying to Prague later today for £80 return, yet it costs me almost £70 to get a train to Newcastle and back? Can anyone explain why it is possible to run planes at that price per head, yet trains were too expensive 10 years ago, are a complete joke now and won't be a viable mode of transport in 5 years time? WTF.
V8mate said:
OzzyR1 said:
It's already almost cheaper to drive so this could change things for many people.
But way, way slower. Every day I watch the poor sods sat in stationary traffic, morning and evening, on the A12 as my train zips by. Time is money too!A car is cheaper and faster
paulrockliffe said:
Seriously? I'm one of the people that put off getting a car for a long time because it was cheaper to use a train when I needed. One of the drivers to getting a car was that paying rail fares made me angry on a regular basis; £30 fares rose to £60 over the course of about 6 years.
I can't work out why it is that I'm flying to Prague later today for £80 return, yet it costs me almost £70 to get a train to Newcastle and back? Can anyone explain why it is possible to run planes at that price per head, yet trains were too expensive 10 years ago, are a complete joke now and won't be a viable mode of transport in 5 years time? WTF.
Lots of different points in here.I can't work out why it is that I'm flying to Prague later today for £80 return, yet it costs me almost £70 to get a train to Newcastle and back? Can anyone explain why it is possible to run planes at that price per head, yet trains were too expensive 10 years ago, are a complete joke now and won't be a viable mode of transport in 5 years time? WTF.
The total cost of running a motor vehicle (capital cost, loan interest, depreciation, insurance, VED, fuel, repairs and maintenance) are substantial and, if you happen to live somewhere where there is a half-decent public transport system that suits your travelling needs and your local traffic congestion is appalling, then yes, sometimes it can be a better option to use public transport.
The problems arise when it is no longer just you doing the travelling (ie. add a wife and a couple of kids into the equation and it will generally put your public transport costs up by around 300%). Problems also arise when you live in an area that doesn't have public transport available when you want to go. In other words, anybody who by choice drives from Ealing to Catford is probably losing their senses because you could do that trip far faster by public transport and probably for little more than the fuel cost only. Conversely, if you want to get from say, Cheddar to Radstock at 11pm on a Friday night, see how well public transport will assist you. Or not, as the case may be.
As regards train fares versus air fares, we are in a situation that finds its roots in the 19th century. When the railways were built, they were made responsible for all their infrastructure. Trains, rails, signalling of course, but also every fence, every bridge, every drain, every embankment, every cutting, every building on the system. Somebody is also paying for "British Rail residuals" - the upkeep of all those bits of railway infrastructure that closed in the Beeching era and have never been sold off. There is, for example, a bloody great viaduct at Pensford, just south of Bristol, that has not seen a train since 1968, has never been sold off, and now has listed status. It can't be knocked down, but it does need maintaining, and somebody has to pay for it. In essence, today's railway passengers have to pay for it. Repeat the Pensford scenario a couple of thousand times around the country.
The cost base of the airlines is very different. To over-simplify, buy a plane, hire the staff to run and maintain it, pay for the fuel and the usage charges to every airport you fly to, and thats that. There are no signalboxes at 35,000 feet, no stations to maintain, no rails to renew etc etc.
In a nutshell, that's why you can fly to Prague for £80 whilst the open return second class rail fare from here to London (98 miles) is a little over £100.
Edited by rs1952 on Sunday 17th October 11:06
paulrockliffe said:
I can't work out why it is that I'm flying to Prague later today for £80 return, yet it costs me almost £70 to get a train to Newcastle and back? Can anyone explain why it is possible to run planes at that price per head, yet trains were too expensive 10 years ago, are a complete joke now and won't be a viable mode of transport in 5 years time? WTF.
Politics and regulation in a heavily unionised system. Low cost airlines are competing on a flat playing field - the rail companies have their hands and feet tied together and no immediate competition.V8mate said:
OzzyR1 said:
It's already almost cheaper to drive so this could change things for many people.
But way, way slower. Every day I watch the poor sods sat in stationary traffic, morning and evening, on the A12 as my train zips by. Time is money too!Time is money too!
Bing o said:
Amazed noone else has picked up on this. There is no way that petrol duty or VED won't rise in line with this (it was the Tories who brought in the fuel escalator in the first place). CMD has pegged himself on green credentials. With QE biting, I wouldn't be surprised to see a £2.00 litre of petrol in 2011/12.
What country shall I move to next year then, since I see the Labour mess taking this one down 
royceybaby said:
V8mate said:
OzzyR1 said:
It's already almost cheaper to drive so this could change things for many people.
But way, way slower. Every day I watch the poor sods sat in stationary traffic, morning and evening, on the A12 as my train zips by. Time is money too!Time is money too!
V8mate said:
royceybaby said:
V8mate said:
OzzyR1 said:
It's already almost cheaper to drive so this could change things for many people.
But way, way slower. Every day I watch the poor sods sat in stationary traffic, morning and evening, on the A12 as my train zips by. Time is money too!Time is money too!
ks.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff