All pain no gain in train fare rise
Rail passengers in the West will feel the pain of soaring fares – but gain none of the benefits, campaigners warned yesterday.
They spoke out as it emerged many journeys will go up by an average eight per cent in the New Year, and some by much more.
The coalition Government said regulated fares, such as on popular commuter routes, will rise on average three per cent plus inflation, announced yesterday as five per cent. However, there will be even bigger increases, as train companies can put some fares up by as much as five per cent over the eight per cent average, as long as price increases are lower on other routes.
And only 40 per cent of all fares in revenue terms are regulated, such as season tickets, meaning there could be even higher price hikes for many other tickets.
The current price formula lasts for the next three years, and the Campaign for Better Transport used inflation projections to estimate the increases.
It said a season ticket from Bristol to London, travelling via Warminster and Salisbury, would increase by £1,872.51 to £8,500.51 in 2015, with an ‘any route’ ticket rocketing even further from £9,453 to £12,123.61.
A season ticket from Bristol to Bath, currently £1,324, would cost £1,698.05 by 2015, a £374 increase.
A season ticket from Bristol to Taunton would rise by £849.80 to £3,857.80 and to Chippenham by £472.36.
David Redgewell, of the South West Transport Network, told the Daily Press that fares in the West were becoming “price prohibitive”.
He said: “It is eye-watering if you are a long-distance commuter.
“It is definitely far too expensive for the Intercity routes in the South West and many of the fares out of Bristol, Bath, Gloucester and Cheltenham to London and the North are becoming very price prohibitive, unless you book in advance or travel when there are no time restrictions.
“But if you want to travel at the normal sort of times you will have very expensive fares, and that is not down to First Great Western or South West Trains, but the Government. We will see investment in services to Bristol and South Wales, but where is the investment in the local train services, between Gloucester and Cheltenham and Bristol, or from Bristol to Taunton, or Frome?
“I think the balance is wrong and there should be more from the taxpayer and less from the fare box.
“Forcing people back into their cars just causes more congestion and more pollution, and it seems to be a recipe for gridlock.”
Mr Redgewell added: “The Government’s transport policy is jam today and jam tomorrow.”
Bristol East Labour MP Kerry McCarthy also deemed the fare increases unfair.
He said: “Fares are far too high, but also capacity is a real problem. People feel they are paying more and more for a service that is getting more and more crowded.”
Transport Secretary Philip Hammond said he recognised the increase would not be popular, but it was necessary in order to fund rail improvements.
Mr Hammond pointed to projects such as Crossrail, a scheme to build a major new railway link under central London, which have seen the Government invest vast sums of money. He said: “We are now embarked on one of the biggest programmes of rail investment for 100 years, delivering more than 2,700 new rail carriages, a £900 million programme to electrify more lines and the vital Crossrail and Thameslink projects in London.
“Due to the scale of the deficit, these investments would simply have not been possible without the difficult decision we have made to increase rail fares.”
27 Comments
View all
by McFrank
Friday, August 19 2011, 11:12PM
“Let the train cause the pain!
Standing room only, auguments over prebooked seating, late (or no) trains, lack of carriges, dirty, smelly carriges, couldn't give a **** attitude from staff (not that I blame them), endless list of lame excuses and way OTT prices.
Travel by car because it's cheaper by far! Just follow your governments lead and SCREW the environment!!!!”
by airhellair
Friday, August 19 2011, 6:51PM
“Not at all. London has a disproportionate number of public transport users, for whatever reason. There's no reason why investment shouldn't match.
London has achieved a good public transport system with significant public investment. It now needs enhancements and improvements where possible, with funding to match. Public transport in the regions, using Bristol and Bath as examples, speak for themselves. Demands maybe different, but not even the basics are right. Attemps to integrate transport under the control of a regional transport authority have been continually thwarted. No effective competition exists as large corporations dominate and apply stranglehold practices. Any attempt to prioritise public transport in whatever shape or form is always met with opposition.
Bristol South Glos and its predecessors managed to argue away - over 20 years - money intended for a tram system. I see this happening elsewhere now. If, as you always tell me, the southwest is such a highly desirable place to live, you would prioritise, with some urgency, measures to restrict traffic congestion. Clearly, the west country is collectively incapable of doing this. So yes; if there is investment to be had, it should be spread around London, home counties and other metro cities already equipped with regional transport authorities.”
by MajorFlack
Friday, August 19 2011, 6:29PM
“"@airhellair - Don't you think it odd (hypocritical) that you consistently complain about poor regional public transport on the one hand and on the other that London deserves to benefit by funding from national ticket price hikes in saying: "London has the largest community of public transport users in the UK. They should get the best."?
The majority of consumers are yet again to be hoodwinked by false promises of fare rises being necessary to make improvements, with none likely to improve the value of services to the customer outside the greater London area if past experience tells us anything.
It's not that I think the needs of the capital shouldn't be met, but the disproportionate attention to the funding of those needs is a major contributory factor to the decline of the remainder of the UK's transport infrastructure.
If you seriously think you have every reason to complain, as you often do, about public transport in this part of the world, those reasons pale into insignificance for those of us that live here and are continually being ripped off for the benefit of others like yourself."”
by airhellair
Friday, August 19 2011, 5:49PM
“@ rogerh3: "......London."
Absolutely. London has the largest community of public transport users in the UK. They should get the best.”
by rogerh3
Friday, August 19 2011, 5:02PM
“"......But where are the actual improvements and benefits to passengers those many increases have funded?"
London.
--”
by MoeXXX
Friday, August 19 2011, 4:08PM
“mcupis "why do you think it is good for society as a whole for net givers to continually be asked to hand over more and more cash to net takers?"
Indeed. The bosses of Stagecoach have recently rewarded themselves £88m, but we are told (our) fares need to increase because the public subsidy (our taxes) is too great.
http://tinyurl.com/3f362q6
Yet again it is demonstrated that privatised public services are just a licence to print (our) money. Yes, Mr Cameron, we truly do live in a sick society.”
by airhellair
Friday, August 19 2011, 3:04PM
“......But where are the actual improvements and benefits to passengers those many increases have funded?"
Like anyone else using trains, I'm not keen on fare rises. The actual improvements for me are a brand new station near where I commute from and the inclusion of all rail services upto zone 9 in the oyster scheme. Ideally, would like to see further air-conditioned carriages and free wifi introduced on longer commuter routes.”
by rogerh3
Thursday, August 18 2011, 6:38PM
“"Why is this increase based on RPI which is so much higher than CPI, yet the rest of us have to have CPI?"
CPI for the money it pays out; RPI for the money it takes in.
--”
by MajorFlack
Thursday, August 18 2011, 4:27PM
“TiminBath - True, technologies won't provide solutions for every problem. But I do think there are some ingrained habits that are not being addressed and, in denial of them, they're probably practised by many of those that habitually whinge about the traffic congestion they cause.
A case in point is Transport Secretary Philip Hammond saying: "the increase would not be popular, but it was necessary in order to fund rail improvements."
Just like all previous price hikes then. But where are the actual improvements and benefits to passengers those many increases have funded?”
by TiminBath
Thursday, August 18 2011, 4:02PM
“MajorFlack, I completely agree that technology makes business travel less neccessary. It doees not however replace it completely. We have actually invested in things like video conferencing as a result of the trains becoming more expensive and they work reasonable well fror many things.”