For every one mile one passenger travels, the British taxpayer pays an average 8 pence subsidy to the train operating company. That is an average of 8p per mile subsidy for every single journey for every single passenger. That is, of course, in addition to your train fare.
The train fare system in the UK is ridiculously complicated, so much so that it makes comparison to other countries difficult in searching for like for like fares. The simple methodology adopted by this site linked to finds the UK has the second most expensive train fares in Europe. This further site linked to finds Britain has the most expensive commuter fares of eight expensive comparators. This Sky News investigation found some stunning examples of comparable British tickets being around three to four times more expensive than comparable fares in France and Germany.
Since privatisation, taxpayers have paid much more money in real terms to the rail network that they gave to British Rail, as shown by official government statistics.
Much of that taxpayer money has simply gone to the profits of the subsidised train operating companies – which peculiarly are for the most part foreign state-owned railway companies. As trains get ever more filthy and overcrowded, the promised privatisation benefits of passenger experience remain elusive.
I attended a family funeral in Norfolk just before Easter. as such events are necessarily unplanned, and I would have to come home on Good Friday when trains are very busy, I bought a first class ticket from Peterborough to Edinburgh at great expense, but ended up standing from Peterborough to Berwick. My ticket was, from memory, £210. On arrival at Edinburgh I went to Virgin customer services to ask if I might have some refund. I was told that as I had an open ticket and no reservation, I was not guaranteed a seat. I pointed out that I had received no food and no drink, as entitled by a first class ticket. The lady replied that these were “complimentary” and that meant they were a gift and not an entitlement with the ticket.
I replied that I had received no benefit from my first class ticket, neither a seat nor any refreshment, so I should at least be refunded the difference between a first and second class ticket. No, the lady replied, I had the right to stand in a first class carriage. She really did say that.
Today Britain’s train operating companies are launching a consultation on rail fares, which precludes from the start the notion that fares should be cheaper. It sounds like their motive is an attempt to remove their legal obligation to issue discounted season tickets to commuters, dressed up in guff about “flexibility” and new technology.
The urgent need is the renationalisation of the railways and for Britain to catch up with the more enlightened world in the rolling out of high speed rail. I view HS2 as a minor idea, compared to the need to provide high speed rail all the way to Aberdeen and Inverness, with a high speed network connecting all the UK cities of over 500,000 people, and involving multiple direct links to a variety of European cities. This is the kind of public project which can have a revitalising economic effect. If the Victorians could undertake economic projects on that scale with a much inferior construction technology, then so can we.
I’m sure the first class standing was worth every penny!
You stand with a better class of person.
Ah yes! I went to the considerable expense of buying a first class ticket to travel home on GWR at Christmas, because I knew from previous experience travel on that day (Christmas Eve) would be Hell. I bought a ticket online complete with seat reservation. When I boarded the train there was no First Class compartment. The guard – who did not seem greatly surprised by this – told me I could claim the difference in price between a first and second class ticket. I tried many times contacting GWR customer services pointing out that this was in no way acceptable and that I wanted some compensation that reflected the outrageousness of taking money for a service they could not deliver. Imagine, I said, ordering champagne for your wedding and then getting orange juice only to be told they would refund the difference in price. I wrote quite a few times but never got a sensible response, just boilerplate, and eventually gave up.
Here endeth the rant.
I have also arranged with my parents to celebrate Christmas with them a week early this year because the combination of railway engineering works, rail replacement buses and striking drivers & cancellations, which happen every year, have made train travel over the Christmas period simply unbearable.
KoWN – you’ve hit the nail again! I am firmly of the view that all these so called engineering works during bank holidays, Christmas and other public holidays are nothing to do with engineering works rather, they are to do with the TOCs saving having to pay staff double time and other inducements to work these holidays. They are allowed to get away with it.
It’s not the TOCs, they’re not the ones working on the rails. It’s Network Rail. They have to pay compensation when they shut down a segment of rail, and that compensation is lower during the night, weekends, and during bank holidays. (On the theory that a shutdown during those periods is less inconvenient for TOCs and passengers.)
LOL, I have the exact same story from when I used to live in Italy. (Where the high speed trains are very good, but all other trains not so much.)
Didn’t realise this happened further north too, though.
KoWN – I have posted something later on in this blog about GWR – biggest bunch of cowboys ever in terms of rail travel – They don’t even deserve to be a TOC.
It’s good to know that you travel 1st class Craig; your next plea for money will be taken due notice of.
Why don’t you try saying that again, something like “I am sorry to hear of your family funeral.”
eh snap , i dont know why some people bother Craig , oh well keeps them off the streets i suppose .
Mr. Murray, I’m sorry for your loss, my sincere condolences.
Ooh, you’ll incur the wrath of the Craigie fanbois for that!
It is no need to be a fan of any person to understand indecency of the words, Mr. Malcolm.
Harry Perkins in A Very British Coup said that he’d prefer to abolish Second Class (Standard Class as it’s referred to these days – there’s nothing standard about it) so this clip somewhat ties in with this conversation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vgI9hjRzmq0
It’s only 21 seconds long in case you think I’m trying to bore you.
Once, returning from Spain and travelling alone, I had a (very spacious) private cabin on the ferry from Santander to Plymouth. The single train ticket from Plymouth to Glasgow cost more than my private cabin from Santander.
The EU rules on rail operation are heading towards a scenario where renationalisation will become increasingly difficult (if not impossible), with state-owned rail companies obliged to bid against private operators for operating licenses.
http://theconversation.com/fact-check-do-new-eu-rules-make-it-impossible-to-renationalise-railways-61180
EU law is without prejudice to the ownership of anything. So you can nationalise whatever you like. What you can’t do is nationalise the railways and then run it in a wildly inefficient manner secure in the knowledge that passengers have no alternative.
Defending the indefensible again Martinned? You always appear on here whenever any aspect of the operation of the Tory government is criticized.
The notion that EU law prevents nationalisation is one of the most odious Lexit lies, because it is so easily disproved.
http://www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2017/11/17/everything-you-need-to-know-about-lexit-in-five-minutes
Thanks for the link Martinned. That’s a very informative article.
Ian Dunt is generally someone worth following, because he’s a fairly left-wing Labour activist who went from being pro-Leave to pro-Remain in the months before the referendum, and has been commenting steadily on the Brexit process ever since.
Oh yes. Dunt. V Reliable. Appears on Murdoch’s Sky News. Reviewing the ‘papers’. Continuing the narrative.
If you’re going to rule out people who appear on Sky News but not people who appear on Russia Today, I’m afraid it’s you that is the extremist, not them.
We shouldn’t automatically rule out people who appear on either Sky or RT.
But people who regularly appear on the BBC. Jeez.
The government could run their own franchise but that’s not the same as nationalising the railways.
Part of the appeal of nationalisaton is subsidising less popular routes via expensive ones while also stopping price gouging at peak times.
@Stu: both of those things you can also do right now. (And both of those things the UK government is currently doing, although maybe not as much as it ought to.)
It seems fairly clear to me at least that Martinned is here not defending the indefensible (whatever that is) but clarifying that EU law does not stipulate that railways cannot be run by the state. This is a matter of fact and not opinion.
“This is a matter of fact and not opinion.”
That is quite an inexact understanding. Saying that the law signifies something is a legal opinion, as any lawyer will tell you.
Cher ami, let’s cut through all the clever-clever crap, shall we? Does EU law forbid nationalisations or not?
and they say that satire is dead.
No alternative to Virgin for anyone in Scotland wanting to travel to England . They run the East and West coast routes.
Not quite. The west coast route is run by the Virgin Trains Group. The east coast route is run by a company called Virgin Trains East Coast, which is a joint venture with Stagecoach. Stagecoach own 90% of the equity and Virgin Trains Group the remaining 10%, but Branson still somehow gets to have his branding over them.
There’s also the Caledonian Sleeper service, which is run by Scotrail, and First Group will operate a rival London to Edinburgh service from 2021
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/may/12/first-group-budget-london-edinburgh-rail-service-trains-east-coast-mainline
Exceedingly bad news that First Group will operate a rival London to Edinburgh service from 2021. They shouldn’t be operating at all on their track record. What that will mean is that there will be significant daily delays, expensive fares, appalling customer service and many cancellations. Good choice!
I think the English should vote on Scottish independence, and Welsh and Irish. Do the English want to continue to be attached to these countries? I suspect the answer would be “No”.
Maybe you’re right about that. But the English power elites certainly intend to do their damnedest to keep Scotland. The likes of May want Scotland for the revenues and to satisfy their Britnat mania. The likes of Corbyn want Scotland as part of their Soviet Yoonion.
I’m not sure why you’ve put that comment on a post about nationalising railways, but anyway.
You’re looking at it completely wrong. Independence is about self-determination. Only Scotland can decide if it wants to be independent. England by the same token could do the same and have a referendum on English Independence. In the same way that England has no say in the result of a Scottish Independence referendum, Scotland would have no say in the result of an English Independence referendum. And the same principles would apply to Wales.
As for the ‘Irish’ – you need to be more specific (and more respectful to be honest) about who you’re speaking about. As I hope you know, most of what was originally ‘Ireland’ has been independent for over 100 years. If you mean Northern Ireland, then say so. I would say the same principle applies, although with Northern Ireland, the option they chose might be to rejoin with the rest of the Republic of Ireland, which would presumably need the Republic of Ireland to agree (as they would be joining and not breaking away).
“I’m not sure why you’ve put that comment on a post about nationalising railways, but anyway.”
It’s easy to get confused as to which post you are commenting on. He’s not the only one. A few posts ago there was a commenter angrily asking where his comment and attached replies had gone. Reading the comments on the next post found them all alive and well.
yep mrjohn the groundwork has been well prepared , the years of the jock subsidy junkie idea is now entrenched . Their papers and their TV have been promoting it for years , we should really thank them for doing the heavy lifting for us .
Vote on Thursday
Work on the new border fence begins on Monday
We should be out by the end of the week , thanks chaps dont forget to write byee .
It’s about time that the English had a say in the affairs of other countries. That’s something that’s been sorely lacking, over the centuries…
Since this used to be my area of (professional) expertise, two points:
– Comparing fares across countries isn’t really a very useful comparison, since difference countries have different splits of taxpayer and passenger funding. There isn’t really a correct answer for that. UK fares are high, but the question is whether the overall cost of the railway system is value for money. (The 2012 McNulty “Value for Money” study concluded that it wasn’t.)
– Making the railways more expensive is exactly the point of privatisation. The inevitable consequence of state ownership (and control) is that every year the Chancellor will chip away a little bit of the capex budget for the railway infrastructure, because the cost of doing so won’t show up for years/decades, while the political benefit of such a cut is immediate. As a result, BR ended up with chronic underinvestment (as did other utilities in public ownership, such as the water and sewerage sectors). It is exactly the point of privatisation that this should be corrected post-privatisation.
Whether the TOCs walk away with too much money is a question that is not easily answered, because you can’t compare it to the pre-privatisation situation. Just because the government doesn’t recognise its cost of capital as an expense – as it should do as a matter of strict economics – doesn’t mean that private companies aren’t entitled to a return on their investment. The key question is whether they also have a downside – as they ought to – or whether they will always get bailed out by the government when they get in trouble.
And yes, they should have refunded you the difference. (Though that’s only a moral position. The relevant EU legislation doesn’t seem to back me up on that.)
It is not merely the lack of high-speed lines, such as to Aberdeen (which would take a while to build), it is that much of the mainline network is still not even electrified, something that was completed in most of western Europe fifty years ago, and started at the beginning of the 20th century in Switzerland, a time when not even a thought of leaving the steam engine ever entered entered rail owners’ heads in Britain.
Didn’t you hear? Boris’s brother has decided that electrification would be a waste of money, because soon trains will all have batteries instead.
https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2018/05/02-electrification-a-waste-of-moneyminister.html
Yes, I knew about that. I can imagine batteries lasting from London to Aberdeen. I quite enjoyed an article the other day about trying to take an electric car on holiday from London to a gîte near Limoges. It’s only mildly possible because of super hi-speed charging stations on the best routes, and then not everywhere. Changing batteries on the trains every couple of hundred miles should be good for punctuality. The Brits are famous for their niggardliness regarding investments, aren’t they?
Obviously not yet, but electricity storage technology is advancing in leaps and bounds so it’s possible we’ll see it in the not too distant future. Anyway, the ECML is already electrified as far north as Edinburgh, so the batteries would only have to last from Edinburgh to Aberdeen
Battery/super capacitor tech should be top of the list for new technology. Not only is exceptionally useful for mas transit, but private vehicals, too. More importantly, super capacitors would make all forms of “green” energy significantly more useful as they all (apart from geothermal) suffer from either unpredictably or non-productive periods.
We’re starting to see some impressive new tech coming through.
“Yes, I knew about that. I can imagine batteries lasting from London to Aberdeen.”
Well the case with batteries is analagous to the case of steam locomotive and water. It was impossible for a locomotive to carry enough water to reach Aberdeen from London, so they recharged their tanks en route. The same thing would be perfectly possible for a battery locomotive: short stretches of overhead catenary to allow the batteries to be recharged without stopping. It’s got to be cheaper than a catenary all the way.
Developments with hydrogen fuel cells look interesting.
http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/traction-rolling-stock/single-view/view/hydrogen-train-to-be-tested-in-the-uk-by-2020.html
But have been going on since I was riding a Triumph Tiger 110.
The big problem with hydrogen is not getting fuel cells to work but solving the problem of containing the hydrogen. A hydrogen economy will require hydrogen production stations dotted about as pipelines and tankers of the petrol/diesel economy are not viable.
We will be back in the steam age where trains stopped to take on coal and water.
Hydrogen is a very small molecule and as such it can seep between the atoms of any vessel you might use to contain it. Water can do that too, but over much longer timescales which is why ancient sealed bottles contain only residues.
When compared with electricity which already has a robust distribution network and batteries which lose very little if any charge and have good efficiencies hydrogen cannot compete.
That is not to say it cannot be appropriate in some contexts where electric power is not or less viable but then how do you produce the hydrogen if you cannot generate electricity?
It is not entirely surprising, Laguerre, that Switzerland – a country with no fossil fuel resources but with a considerable electricity generation capability – should have been the first European country to go in for large-scale electrification of its railways (as you say, at the beginning of the 20th century).
The sneer that ‘at the beginning of the 20th century in Switzerland, a time when not even a thought of leaving the steam engine ever entered entered rail owners’ heads in Britain’ is otiose (but not unexpected).
Yes, of course I know why Switzerland started early, and it’s irrelevant to my point. Once started everyone else moved forward, because of the obvious advantages, but Britain didn’t, and even then the change was to polluting diesel, because it was cheap, and didn’t involve much investment. It’s more complicated than that, but yes it was poor policy, and typical British niggardliness.
If it is irrelevant to your point then you might have considered not mentioning it.
“If it is irrelevant to your point then you might have considered not mentioning it.” Funny. it was you who mentioned the irrelevant point, not me. Short on reading understanding, are we?
Cher ami Laguerre.
You mentioned Switzerland at 1:54 pm.
I replied, taking you to task re the comparison with Switzerland, at 2:22 pm.
Now take a deep breath and tell me who mentioned (the irrelevant, according to you, example of) Switzerland first?
And yes, obviously it was a matter of cost. In the UK coal was abundant and cheap and, thereafter, diesel was also cheap owing to the low price of oil (the $2 a barrel age).
It is also not a question of ‘typical British niggardliness’ – that is another pointless sneer. Poor policy, yes – as I tried to explain in my first comment, it was the result of British governments finding it inconvenient to face down the unions and the coal lobby (also nationalised, by the way) or, alternatively, incur the displeasure of the voting public by making the rail travelling public pay the proper price for the product.
I’ll leave it there.
Good to hear your jingoistic nationalism. You evidently don’t have much self-awareness as a Brit.
Insults are a poor substitute for reasoned arguments and fact, cher ami Laguerre. Can you point to the parts of my comments at 3:27 pm which you find to be ‘jingoistic nationalism’?
Laguerre is right though – the British Govt (let’s look at our current worthless Tory bunch) not historically – has little or no understanding of long-term investment options in many sectors of the economy – it’s always half measures, changes on the cheap, cutting corners – with no long-term strategic plan, investment strategy, outcomes etc. We always look to find excuses NOT to invest properly in something rather cut the corners – at a cost to the future economy as we are finding now with the mess that is now rail privatisation, privatised utilities, severe cuts in funding to local government, the Garden Bridge, the M25 etc. It is a British malaise – the first response to something is a Non! Second response is, well maybe it is a necessary thing, therefore, let’s do a hatchet job and not do it properly with a long-term economic plan but do it cheaply and risk future backlash. The problem with this Govt and other Tory Govt’s is that there is no long-term economic planning for anything – hence we have seen the demise of the manufacturing industry so that now it is reduced to its bare minimum – and due to get worse. It’s got nothing to do with facing down the Unions or making the rail travelling public pay a ‘proper market price’ – it is economic short-termism at its worse – let’s get this clear.
I hate to point it out, but the Victorian railways were built by private companies. And the cost of it mostly bankrupted them, which is why it ended up being nationalised.
Comparing the present day to Victorian times is always risky. In 1900, the government was only 10 per cent of the economy, now it is 50 per cent. Most Victorian achievements were funded and built by private companies and individuals.
The 4 surviving private railway companies weren’t nationalised until 1948 – by Atlrrs labour government as part of a widespread programme of nationalisation that included coal and steel.
My e-mail to a friend this morning @ 8.58 refers.
‘Do you think the Rail Delivery Group ‘consultation’ will result in the elimination of the cheaper multi ticketed routes? Their spokesman Robert Nisbet, all over the media this morning, has moved to them seamlessly from Sky News where he was their Europe Correspondent up to last month!
Linked In https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-nisbet-24494ba/
Regional Director at Rail Delivery Group
London, United Kingdom
University of Wales, Cardiff …
I am the broadcast spokesman for the UK’s thriving rail industry, sitting as Regional Director on the industry body’s Executive Committee. I joined the Rail Delivery Group (which brings together publicly owned Network Rail and the private train operators) after 25 years at the BBC and Sky News as a reporter and presenter. …
Regional Director Rail Delivery Group
Dates Employed Apr 2018 – Present
Senior Political Correspondent
Sky Sep 2015 – Present
London, United Kingdom
After 8 years as a foreign correspondent in Brussels and Washington DC, I have returned to London to join Sky News’ award-winning Millbank team as a Senior Political Correspondent.
BBC Correspondent for BBC One’s main bulletins, mostly as Entertainment and Leisure Correspondent on the Six O’Clock News. I was also Chief Correspondent on Liquid News and presenter (with Nicki Chapman) of BBC One’s The Morning Show. During my decade at the BBC I reported extensively from London and Los Angeles for BBC Radios 1, 4 and 5 Live as well as Breakfast News and Newsnight – even Top of the Pops. Dates Employed Apr 1994 – Jan 2005
Nisbet has a very useful voice and has all the right contacts.
Look at the board stuffed with representatives of the train operators. Handy that.
eg Mark Carne Chief Executive, Network Rail Deputy Chair of the RDG Chair Network Rail.
ex Royal Dutch Shell.
O’Toole. Boris’s stooge at TfL. and so on
https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/about-us/governance/rdg-members.html
Carne was paid £675,000 ‘on appointment in 2014.’ More since. Of course. The trough at Network Rail is overflowing with bank notes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Carne
More jobs for the boys. There is one girl on the board.
That Branson woman sounds odious. I don’t suppose she even offered her condolences.
I think that animal transport has higher standards than Branson’s operation. ‘The right to stand in a 1st class carriage’.
How about suing them in the small claims court?
And the clown Grayling oversees it all. He couldn’t run the proverbial whelk stall. How I loathe the Tories.
I think I saw her once on the TV in her tropical island hideaway – all that sun tan and long hair, to say nothing of her beard ! There should be a law against them and their ilk. People have been ripped off since the railways were privatised. I want these scroungers from the public purse to have their assets sequestrated without any thought to compensation and to railways returned to their natural owners, the British public. They’ve been afforded more than ever the British Rail received during the period 1948-97 under nationalisation. I’m just tired of hearing that any profits made go to shareholders while losses go straight to the tax-payer.
It is certainly true that the rail fares system is exceedingly complicated and that the private rail operators receive heavy subsidies from the government, aka the taxpayer as, in effect, and absent road travel pricing, do those who travel by road).
However, was heavy subsidisation not also a feature of the former British Rail under public ownership – albeit in a different form and with different consequences?
What happened in the past? Governments were held responsible for fare increases and were therefore naturally reluctant to approve such increases. At the same time, the same reluctance applied to resisting union demands for wage increases (the government would be held responsible for strikes) and to efforts to increase productivity eg by reducing over-manning (this in times of full if not over-full employment, by the way). The net result was that the rail system was starved of the cash needed to modernise. The slowness to switch from steam to diesel and from diesel to electricity was but one consequence of this.
The majority of commenters on this blog are – often by their own admission – senior citizens or near to it. They will therefore remember the British Rail of the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. If they are honest, can they really seriously claim that British Rail offered a better travel experience than the one available after privatisation?
And : the majority if not all of Continental railways run at a commercial loss and are dependent on large government subsidies which are in the end paid for by the general taxpayer. Is it more equitable for the user to pay most of the cost of his rail travel or for the general public to subsidise the entirety of the cost of rail travel for that part of the population which chooses or is obliged to travel by rail?
To answer that final question, I think the key thing is (as you say) is to put road and rail on a level footing. Driving costs money because they government taxes care ownership (but that’s independent of distance traveled, so it doesn’t create any incentives), and because the government taxes petrol. The rail has fares. Outside of areas like the congestion charge zone in London, I think the rail still has an unfair cost disadvantage, but it’s difficult to evidence that one way or another.
I agree. But I’m sure you’d agree that were the government to go in for correct road travel pricing in any serious and logical way, the first people to start screaming would be exactly the same people who are screaming against the subsidies paid to the rail companies, In other words : the cost of railway travel is merely another stick with which to beat the government/the capitalist system/the ‘powers that be’, etc…..
It’s like the Republicans were saying in the US a few years ago: train travel is “collectivist”. There is something about the reactionary mind that makes them crave control over some kind of steering wheel.
Amtrak in the States can’t win. Despite being a quasi-public corporation many consumer rights people deride it as being run in both corporate and union interests at the expense of the consumers. While Republican Presidents have consistently reduced federal funding because it clashes with free market ideology.
“To answer that final question, I think the key thing is (as you say) is to put road and rail on a level footing. ”
Most of the commenters on here screaming about subsidy levels and private profits are failing to notice that the “subsidy” includes spending on infrastructure, like Crossrail (and also pointless vanity projects like HS2). No-one is saying that government spending on road infrastruture is a subsidy. In neither case is the money being given to the private companies actually operating on the network. Indeed, in both cases a considerable abount of the benefit is to private citizens who happen to live along the route of the new infrastructure (or, in the case of a new road, live along the route of the road the new one replaces).
Well-in a word, yes.
To be honest I could afford to buy a a ticket in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, Now, despite being better off, its a calculation. Nice try on behalf of the rent extractors.
Yes I can really seriously claim that British Rail offered a better travel experience than the one available after privatisation. I remember it as being affordable, with an easy to understand price structure and regular services everywhere. There wasn’t so much standing on journeys and the seats were more comfortable. I’m 66. I thought the 70s were great and everything went downhill when Thatcher got elected.
Mr Alexander
Rail travel may well have been more ‘affordable’ when the railways were nationalised. I ‘ve tried to explain why that was so (see my comments at 2:16 pm above). That is because, as explained, governments, wary of electoral displeasure, kept fares lower than the balance sheet of the operation, taking into account the need for investment/modernisation, justified. If you read the memoirs of various Conservative and Labour politicians of the 1950s to 1970s) you will find this to have been admitted…. once the said politicians were no longer in office.
As I understand it, the NHS is reckoned both to be cheaper than the US private healthcare system and to have better outcomes. Why should a “National Rail Service” be any different?
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jul/14/nhs-holds-on-to-top-spot-in-healthcare-survey
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/uks-healthcare-ranked-the-best-out-of-11-western-countries-with-us-coming-last-9542833.html
What, be cheaper and have better outcomes than the American railway system? Would that be a great leap forward?
We know what a nationalised railway system would be like as we had one for many decades. The question is, do we want to go back to that?
Because economies of scale in purchasing are likely to be a more important factor in the NHS (medicine, doctors) than in rail.
My memories of rail travel in the 70s are of trains being two hours late and having to ring the station before setting out to find out whether the train was seriously delayed or even cancelled.
My memories of rail travel just last week are of the train I was expecting to catch mysteriously disappearing from the schedule five minutes before it was due. This together with a complete absence of station staff to ask for platform and route information made my journey an hour and a half longer and more stressful than it should have been.
There’s a radio advert for East Midlands Trains in which the spokesperson claims their website will help customers ‘penetrate the dark art’ of purchasing rail tickets. They’re not even trying to disguise it anymore; they’ve normalised the expectation that things have to be this way and everyone has to put up with it.
HS2, indeed high soeed rail in general, is a political football.
Here are a few obvious truths:
1) HS2 was deliberately designed by London interests NOT to connect to HS1 and the Continent. London sees the rest of the country as their underlings and allmedia, political and spying power iscentred there.
2) London receives hugely more per head in transport infrastructure investment than the redt of the country. Londoners still squeal about HS2 as unaffordable but Crossrail II as absolutely necessary.
3) London does not want a strong regional economy as they operate on a plutocratic system of nepotism, profoundly rejecting any form of honest competition.
4) The obvious HS2 route of Birmingham Parkway-Heathrow-Gatwick-Stratford-St Pancras, with loop from Gatwick to Ashford, was never discussed. Property developers at Old Oak Common and Euston are all that matter.
5) HSR to Scotland is not entertained seriously: that needs 3hrs Glasgow/Edinburgh to London. Running HSR trains on old rails is what London means by HSR.
6) When HS3 was being discussed, talk of shaving 10 mins Manchester to Leeds was the aim. Having commuted standing on hot sweaty days, a new line is required to call it High Speed. Not to mention tunnels. 1 hour 15 minutes Liverpool to Hull is HSR…..
7) HSR is the spinal cord, little value to many if efficient nerves do not link places like Bradford, Sunderland, Blackpool, Rochdale, Wakefield, the Three Cities of East Midlands, Stoke on Trent, to key nodes. As the railway is built to benefit contractors not passengers, do not presume such things matter…..but Maglev bullets would make sense….
As it is, some believe Phase II will be scrapped so Birmingham becomes commutervtown of London. I disagree, but it shows the London centric nature of all things England….
I’ve often thought that the push for HS2 to Birmingham is so that they can use it as accommodation for London’s workers, allowing them to clear areas of London to build over-priced billionaires homes.
My thought is that the push for HS2 is to make a few Brummie landowners millionaires by bringing Birmingham within commuting distance of London, as evinced by the lack of stops along the line. Public expenditure, private profit.
Hence the need for a (higher) land value tax…
Yes, if you want to go high speed from Birmingham to Paris you will have to get out and walk, with your luggage, from Euston to St. Pancras. WTF?
I’ve traveled all over Europe and Asia by train, and can honestly say that British public transport is among the worst and by far the most expensive. I know people who are very green, but have been forced to give up on it with lots of reluctance and buy a vehicle.
It is absolutely correct to state that Britain needs to get ‘enlightened’ about public transport, instead of squandering the public’s money on pothole plugging, the Queen, overseas interference, and other countless stupidities.
Excellent. Not forgetting the useless F-35.
Another wonder of British public transport is the bus. It costs an almost unbelievable 5 GBP to take a return trip of no more than five miles to the centre of Swansea, which also takes the best part of an hour. The shortest journey – literally between two stops – will cost about 4 GBP.
The reason for this ludicrously high minimum price becomes apparent when the free passes for pensioners are considered. Worst Group can ding the taxpayer for the average cost of a fare every time a pensioner’s pass is used. The best way to make an average fare high is to ensure the minimum charge is high.
Naturally, they bleated and wined about the high cost of diesel a few years back, using that as an excuse to pretty much double the fares. When diesel came back down in price, the fares – to everyone’s astonishment – did not.
That may well be the only thing that’s cheaper in London. £1.50 for an hour’s worth of unlimited bus travel seems reasonable value for money for me.
Yes, it is reasonable value. No doubt the public wouldn’t stand it if London travelers were subjected to regional prices. By “the public”, I mean politicians and the media – people who actually matter.
I’ve never understood why it would be legal to sell a ticket without committing to provide the basic things the ticket represents. Here, a seat and refreshment, in exchange for the exorbitant price and bad food. At a minimum, that seating is “optional” and that standing room only is guaranteed, is the sort of information that should be emblazoned in large letters across the ticket and at the counter before purchase. Not doing so seems fraudulent.
Neoliberals are famous for wanting people to have “skin in the game”. By “people” they mean consumers. Corporations and their patrons have to be immunized and indemnified against it. And never let government engage in an activity that the meanest private person might want to perform for a profit, no matter the reasons for it, no matter the true cost of government not doing it. Neoliberals consider that “opportunity theft” – as opposed to seat theft, which they do not recognize – and pounce on it like a Typhoid Mary in the Public Gallery.
Why has their perspective become the norm?
Good point. I guess the key question there is what the essential consideration is that the TOC is providing in return for the fare. It is transportation – as in: getting you from A to B – but is it anything else?
Having discovered the national rail standard terms & conditions, we find:
3.3 Unless you have made a reservation please note that your Ticket does not automatically entitle you to a seat, and at busy times you may have to stand.
You will not be entitled to any refund in these cases unless you hold a first class Ticket and no first class seats were available on a train service where the timetable indicated that first class seats would be provided. More information on the refund to which you are entitled in such circumstances can be found in section 31 of these Conditions.
31.1 If you have a first class Ticket and the train service you use is shown as offering first class accommodation at http://www.nationalrail.co.uk, but when you travel first class accommodation is not provided or is otherwise fully occupied, you may claim a refund. The minimum refund to which you will be entitled will be the difference between the price of the first class Ticket purchased and the cheapest valid standard class fare available on the service you used.
31.2 If you hold a first class Season Ticket, the minimum to which you will be entitled will be a refund of the difference between the first class and standard class fare for the journey concerned.
(That seems to cover Craig’s situation, as far as I’m concerned.)
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/Conditions%20of%20Travel%202016.pdf
The TOC crooks are really clever. They have covered all eventualities there.
You are back to the Rail Delivery Group there via another website.
About National Rail Enquiries
We are the definitive source of customer information for all passenger rail services on the National Rail network in England, Wales and Scotland. National Rail Enquiries is part of the Rail Delivery Group (RDG), which provides business services to Train Operating Companies.
Introduction
We handle an average of two and a half million journey planning enquiries every week day through our contact centre, mobile, apps, website and through information services supplied to 3rd parties. We offer journey planning, ticket sales, real time information, fares information and a range of rail-related information to rail customers.
Quick Facts and Stats
National Rail Enquiries has evolved from a contact centre business to a multi-channel award-winning customer service provider. Here’s a snapshot of our success story.
Number one website in travel and transport
28 awards
630 million contacts (Including 3rd Party) from 01 April 2014 to 31 March 2015
136.3 million 3rd Party Contacts
Over 8.9 million downloads of smart phone apps to date
1.8 million Registered customers and followers and still growing
Over 17 million people used our service last year
Listening to our customers
Customer feedback is important to us. Did you know that last year alone over 72,000 customers took part in surveys to tell us what they liked and disliked about our service?
In addition to the survey comments we also closely monitor feedback (good and bad) received through Facebook, Twitter, our ‘Community’ channel and Customer Relations Department.
Changes are continuously being introduced as a result of customer feedback and we’ll soon be letting you know more about these enhancements via our website.
Managed by: Multiple Train Operating Companies’
http://www.nationalrail.co.uk/46383.aspx
The TOCs are:
Arriva Trains Wales,
c2c,
Chiltern Railways,
CrossCountry,
East Midlands Trains,
Eurostar,
Gatwick Express,
Grand Central,
Great Western Railway,
Greater Anglia,
Heathrow Connect,
Heathrow Express,
Hull Trains,
Island Line,
London Midland,
London Overground,
Merseyrail,
Northern,
Rail Delivery Group,
ScotRail,
South Western Railway,
Southeastern,
Southern,
Stansted Express,
TransPennine Express,
Virgin Trains,
Virgin Trains East Coast
Which ones are owned by French and German railway companies? We know about Virgin. They did well in handing back the East Coast Line contract. No penalties. Three cheers for Grayling from Branson there.
East Coast could return to public sector, Chris Grayling admits
MPs told collapse of franchise means government or Virgin could run line in short term
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/feb/05/east-coast-could-return-to-public-sector-chris-grayling-admits
Incredibly, the clown Grayling is considering giving them and Souter another go at it.
https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/chris-grayling-refuses-to-rule-out-virgin-and-stagecoach-bidding-to-run-east-coast-rail-franchise-again/
What a bloody shambles.
.
‘
‘Which ones are owned by French and German railway companies?’
That sounds rather like a Little Englander comment.
Sharp Ears said: ‘Which ones are owned by French and German railway companies?’
Charles Bostock replied: ‘That sounds rather like a Little Englander comment.’
I love the way you focus on the nationality pure and simple, and not the fact that the shareholders of some of our privatised services are governments. How does that fit into your economically-efficient individualist ideology?
The neo-liberal perspective has become the norm because huge amounts of money have been spent, via think tanks, to promote it in academia, politics and the media. Perhaps its was crowd funded by poor people who yearned for the world of opportunity it has brought.
O/T
Ref Philip Cross. The one who is not averse to altering the Wikipedia entry on Craig Murray.
Here the Medialens editors, two decent men, David Cromwell and David Edwards, respond. I think Cross is Kamm.
https://twitter.com/medialens/status/
They also said:
‘Somebody just told us that @philipcross63 has edited our Wikipedia page en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M… at least 800 times.
[Ready for this? Cross has edited your page at least 800 times: that’s a conservative figure. You beat even @CraigMurrayOrg into a cocked hat.
5:16 am – 8 May 2018https://twitter.com/leftworks1/status/993827088246497280 ]
But when we try to see Cross’s tweets… @NeilClark66 @CraigMurrayOrg @PiersRobinson1 @Tim_Hayward_ Oliver Kamm is now mentioned 12 times.’
https://twitter.com/medialens/status/993836691680002049
These are their latest articles about the lies on Douma.
http://medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2018/868-douma-part-1.html
http://www.medialens.org/index.php/alerts/alert-archive/2018/869-douma-part-2-it-just-doesn-t-ring-true.html
Sharp Ears
Thanks For the Media Lens post
I found this Heart breaking Re Syria –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmiEyZ9anLQ
Oliver Kamm masquerades as one of the occasional posters on this blog. In fact he’s posted once in these comments. And no I’m not him.
“The urgent need is the renationalisation of the railways . . .”
And all the other nationalised industries the pirates and privateers stole from us to feather their nests.
Or Labour Chancellors in the seventies who quietly stole funding from the nationalised industries so they could play Santa Claus and get short term political benefit.
Although it was Norman Lamont’s baby, Labour fell in love with PFI, we’ll be paying it back for forever and a day.
On the subject of the trains didn’t the East Coast nationalised service do well, and dare I say it make profit? For a time.
When Abellio’s contracts up I’d like to see the beginnings of re-nationalisation of the train services in Scotland, cumulating in a separate Scottish Network Rail.
PFI is a separate issue, caused by the weird fetish of politicians of all three major parties with the specific definition of “government debt” used in official statistics. PFI projects may or may not be privatised in any real sense.
Lancaster to London is considerably cheaper than Preston to London. Lancaster is 20 miles north of Preston. It is the same train.
Our offices are in Lancaster – admin bought two tickets Lancaster to Euston. As one of the staff lives in Preston, they boarded there.Then had to pay an additional £60 or so for the pleasure.
It’s no wonder you can’t find comparable fares abroad as perhaps they employ a modicum of common sense.
The railways along with water, and possibly gas, should never have been privatised. There is still a minute chance to stop the NHS and the police force becoming totally privatised…how do we go about stopping that?
“The railways along with water, and possibly gas, should never have been privatised. There is still a minute chance to stop the NHS and the police force becoming totally privatised…how do we go about stopping that?”
Vote for Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party.
The last thing Britain needs is for its privatised rail services companies to price tickets as if they were Amazon: Individualised pricing, not standard fares, determined by the day and time of purchase, the day and time of travel, the record of previous purchases, the number of seats already sold for that journey and class of travel, and all the other “criteria” Amazon considers in its ever changing price quotations.
Public transportation is an essential public good. Access to it should not depend on the whims of private corporations, intentionally over-burdened with debt so that cash can be shipped by the pallet-load to shareholders, and which put profits ahead of everything else, including providing a seat after one has paid full-price for the privilege.
I’d think airlines are the more obvious point of comparison than Amazon. If airlines are allowed to price that way, why not trains?
For 7 hours of Norway rail journey, enjoy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7VYVjR_nwE
It’s front seat. 😉 and extremely relaxing.
I travelled first class once and was greatly looking forward to it. A freak snow disruption resulted in no lounge, no refreshments on the journey, and a general non first class experience.
I complained (nicely) on Virgin’s web site and they gave me a free first class trip of my choice. Give it a go – the lady you complained to on the spot was probably in no mood to be nice to her 200th angry customer that day.
Depends on what “reforms” – price increases and changes in ticket pricing requirements – the railway companies have in mind.
I’m no fan of current air travel ticket pricing regimes, or the ways in which they disguise prices via extra charges, or the safety-implications of providing as much seat room as would make comfortable a box of England’s Glory matches.
EoH one thing that can be said for sure about this alleged ‘consultation’ – it will be nothing to do with what is good for the passengers – but for the TOCs. What that means will be a woolly minded, duplicitous report justifying huge hikes in fare prices – or something like that – and we will stand by and do nothing as usual.
Branson probably makes much more per passenger mile just for the use of his Virgin brand name.
Eminent sense and, perhaps uniquely, would be massively popular in ALL political shades of the electorate. What are we waiting for?
After a Hope Over Fear rally in George Square, – I’m sure it was the day I told Craig it was good to hear the angry voice on – I travelled home in a packed train.. Unable to hold on to anything.. Lucky for me I Know some Tai Chi .. GET Yirsel tae Tia Chi
This is privatisation British style…
It costs more than state ownership
Prices go through the roof
A bunch of Tories get extremely well paid for doing non-jobs
….and the alleged Regulatory Authority protects the vested interests of the Govt and the Companies and, as such, is neither impartial or willing to exercise it’s regulatory prowess.
The railways are a state backed monopoly at regional level. There is no real competition. More money looted from the populace into foreign pension funds, foreign owners. People are also treated worse than cattle at times in some stations, having to queue to show a f**king ticket at some barrier. Another success for Monetarism / Thatcherism, where the public are looted as usual.
Could Craig not have gone to Stansted and used Ryanair or such? £210 for a ticket is plain muppetry.