Rail services to be included as part of Bee Network: how should this be achieved?

[RT4038]

Why so negative? The Mayor feels ( and i think with some evidence to support him) that he can drive better change to services & influence more local investment decision making in his region with control of as many levers as possible.

I am constantly amazed - no frankly saddened and disappointed - that so many posters criticise (often rightly) the current public transport offer, comparing it unfavourably with systems elsewhere in the world, and then when someone attempts to make changes to improve they are dubbed 'empire building' or schemes are shouted down because someone, somewhere loses out.

The country is not about to entirely revolve around public transport, with it being the overarching financial spending priority. We are not about to become Swiss. There is no freebie money pot about to come our way ( reparations from Italy over the Roman invasion?) so everywhere at once can have a Swiss style public transport system (the Swiss have been working on this for 100+ years - we are starting from where we are now, and we are not Swiss).

Improvements are only going to come on an incremental basis, and somewhere has to be first, then second etc. There is not the money, or the confidence, to splash improvements everywhere. People might not like the overarching politics of Andy Burnham - but let's leave that aside and judge on the quality and direction of the policies as they affect public transport in his region. As you @DarloRich point out, it is a bit rich for so many to demand more regional autonomy and then complain when it is granted to one as a first step.

One place / area has got to work financially, operationally and politically first. It is no good pointing to foreign systems as the final template as they will be working in different economic, cultural and political frameworks, which may not be easily recreated here without major upheaval.

As you say, there won't be a wall at the boundary. Yes, on the 'wrong side' of the boundary there probably won't be the full fruits of the changes (in service or fare offers etc., but I wouldn't expect any substantive worsening of the current situation to the majority), until those areas follow in the same footsteps. That may not happen for some time.

Yes, mistakes will be made, and idiosyncracies produced, but these can be righted over time. There will be side effects that some do not like.

If the complaint was directed at increased spending on public transport I can understand that view, and obviously there is a line somewhere as to the balance, and we will all have differing views on where that line is. But so often it is an individual who is seeking to improve things that is pilloried - I can only guess that our culture of knocking people down to the lowest common denominator, plus an industry view that improvements are somehow a criticism of existing practice (and therefore personally of the people involved) and therefore is to be resisted and denied. This is simply a nonsense - most diligently work with the framework they've got and are not in a position to change much.

 

[ThisIsSurbiton]

There was also, at one time, again at SWT's insistence, a requirement for someone intending to travel beyond the zones on their Oyster Travelcard (but still within the Oyster area) to buy a paper "extension permit" before touching in at the start of their journey. (On the Underground you would just touch out at the end of your journey and be charged the fare from the limit of your Travelcard Zones to the Zone you were in) Needless to say, these could only be bought at a ticket office, not at the machines (which were not at the time sophisticated enough to offer tickets starting from a station other than the one you were at)

It's a while ago now, but I thought that Oyster Extension Permits were products added to the card itself, and were available from ticket machines. Also, I don't think they were essential to the fare calculation, they were just something that could be inspected on the train. Were there paper extensions before that?

 

[TUC]

What is meant by 'Rochdale stopping services'? If this means that those services that travel non-stop from Rochdale-Manchester Victoria are excluded I can the potential for all kinds of confusion.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

How many miles is it from Manchester to Appley Bridge (the part considered TfGM-land) and from Appley Bridge to Southport (the remaining part of that rail route)?

What is meant by 'Rochdale stopping services'? If this means that those services that travel non-stop from Rochdale-Manchester Victoria are excluded I can the potential for all kinds of confusion.

That can only mean trains that stop at Moston, Mills Hill and Castleton, as they are the only intermediate railway stations.

 

[TUC]

Those making comparisons with TfL miss the point that Greater Manchester has another area with a complex set of routes right on its doorstep in the shape of West Yorkshire, with a number of cross-border routes. If London had a complex conurbation right next door to it, TfL would hit exactly the same challenges.

 

[deltic]

So if the fares are capped does this mean passengers from town and cities on the route are going to be subsidising the capped fares for passengers in Manchester. For example Chester to Leeds service run between Manchester and Rochdale. Hardly seems right to have passengers travelling from Chester to Leeds for example to be subsidising other passengers on the train?

Given all these routes are loss making - no-one is cross subsidising anyone else

More empire building by Burnham, what will change other than the stations getting a lick of paint and maybe getting staffed? The only difference will be that you can use a contactless card to travel within that area rather than 'paper' tickets with a price cap including the trams & buses

Both seem to be major improvements to me

 

[Ken H]

I am constantly amazed - no frankly saddened and disappointed - that so many posters criticise (often rightly) the current public transport offer, comparing it unfavourably with systems elsewhere in the world, and then when someone attempts to make changes to improve they are dubbed 'empire building' or schemes are shouted down because someone, somewhere loses out.

The country is not about to entirely revolve around public transport, with it being the overarching financial spending priority. We are not about to become Swiss. There is no freebie money pot about to come our way ( reparations from Italy over the Roman invasion?) so everywhere at once can have a Swiss style public transport system (the Swiss have been working on this for 100+ years - we are starting from where we are now, and we are not Swiss).

Improvements are only going to come on an incremental basis, and somewhere has to be first, then second etc. There is not the money, or the confidence, to splash improvements everywhere. People might not like the overarching politics of Andy Burnham - but let's leave that aside and judge on the quality and direction of the policies as they affect public transport in his region. As you @DarloRich point out, it is a bit rich for so many to demand more regional autonomy and then complain when it is granted to one as a first step.

One place / area has got to work financially, operationally and politically first. It is no good pointing to foreign systems as the final template as they will be working in different economic, cultural and political frameworks, which may not be easily recreated here without major upheaval.

As you say, there won't be a wall at the boundary. Yes, on the 'wrong side' of the boundary there probably won't be the full fruits of the changes (in service or fare offers etc., but I wouldn't expect any substantive worsening of the current situation to the majority), until those areas follow in the same footsteps. That may not happen for some time.

Yes, mistakes will be made, and idiosyncracies produced, but these can be righted over time. There will be side effects that some do not like.

If the complaint was directed at increased spending on public transport I can understand that view, and obviously there is a line somewhere as to the balance, and we will all have differing views on where that line is. But so often it is an individual who is seeking to improve things that is pilloried - I can only guess that our culture of knocking people down to the lowest common denominator, plus an industry view that improvements are somehow a criticism of existing practice (and therefore personally of the people involved) and therefore is to be resisted and denied. This is simply a nonsense - most diligently work with the framework they've got and are not in a position to change much.

My beef is that many services that start in Manchester end out well away. Manchester- Rochdale services all go on to Burnley and Blackburn which are in Lancashire. Or go on to Halifax, Bradford and Leeds which are in Yorkshire. Why should a mayor have jurisdiction over services operating over a vast tract of Northern England.
This is SO different from the London Overground which operates wholly in the London Mayors jurisdiction.

 

[Kite159]

Given all these routes are loss making - no-one is cross subsidising anyone else


Both seem to be major improvements to me

Happy for your council tax to increase to cover the cost of someone to sit all day at the likes of Moston?

 

[deltic]

My beef is that many services that start in Manchester end out well away. Manchester- Rochdale services all go on to Burnley and Blackburn which are in Lancashire. Or go on to Halifax, Bradford and Leeds which are in Yorkshire. Why should a mayor have jurisdiction over services operating over a vast tract of Northern England.
This is SO different from the London Overground which operates wholly in the London Mayors jurisdiction.

The Elizabeth line goes outside Greater London

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Elizabeth line goes outside Greater London

And Merseyrail goes into Lancashire and Cheshire.

This is a non-issue.

 

[deltic]

Happy for your council tax to increase to cover the cost of someone to sit all day at the likes of Moston?

We did some work a number of years ago on station devolution to TfGM and you would be surprised at the benefits that arise from reducing anti-social behaviour at stations, not only in increased patronage, reduced fare evasion but also reduced disruption from less trespassing and even reduced suicides that can arise from increased staff and CCTV surveillance.

 

[RT4038]

My beef is that many services that start in Manchester end out well away. Manchester- Rochdale services all go on to Burnley and Blackburn which are in Lancashire. Or go on to Halifax, Bradford and Leeds which are in Yorkshire. Why should a mayor have jurisdiction over services operating over a vast tract of Northern England.
This is SO different from the London Overground which operates wholly in the London Mayors jurisdiction.

I very much doubt that the Mayor of Greater Manchester will be given sole control (and the funding) of rail routes that run very far outside their boundary. Control of the route within the boundary - quite possibly - within some pretty tight confines of what can and can't be done to affect cross boundary travel. I would not expect the Mayor to be funding changes / improvements (either to service levels or fare structure) outside of the boundary either.

 

[Djgr]

Without stating the obvious but there has to be a boundary somewhere and therefore somebody is always going to be just the wrong side of the boundary.

It should also be remembered that many areas just outside the Greater Manchester boundary proactively lobbied to be outside when Greater Manchester was being set up. It seems a bit rich to complain now if they don't see the benefits.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Without stating the obvious but there has to be a boundary somewhere and therefore somebody is always going to be just the wrong side of the boundary.

It should also be remembered that many areas just outside the Greater Manchester boundary proactively lobbied to be outside when Greater Manchester was being set up. It seems a bit rich to complain now if they don't see the benefits.

Epsom and Watford had the same outcome.

Why should a mayor have jurisdiction over services operating over a vast tract of Northern England.
This is SO different from the London Overground which operates wholly in the London Mayors jurisdiction.

No it doesn't. Overground goes out to Watford and Cheshunt, Elizabeth Line to Shenfield and Reading, Underground to Epping, Chigwell, Amersham, and Chesham

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Without stating the obvious but there has to be a boundary somewhere and therefore somebody is always going to be just the wrong side of the boundary.

It should also be remembered that many areas just outside the Greater Manchester boundary proactively lobbied to be outside when Greater Manchester was being set up. It seems a bit rich to complain now if they don't see the benefits.

Borders are there for a reason when local authority finance raises its head. "Just on the wrong side of the border" would be a view that would soon be put in its place by any legal team worth its salt in a debate between two adjoining local authorities where an established agreement was not already in place between the local authorities in question.

"Benefits" are something that exists in the mindset of one party who have a blinkered approach to how others who might see no such "benefits"

 

[EODMAN]

Whilst this isn't exactly enough information to assume that the lines included won't extend past the boundaries of Greater Manchester, the post from Andy Burnham on the app formally known as Twitter only showed rail lines inside of GM and didn't show indications it extended outside that (with the exception of the bend at the bottom of Wigan. This could mean that the tapping in and out plus capping will only be valid when inside GM area.
But maybe not...

 

[Kite159]

Whilst this isn't exactly enough information to assume that the lines included won't extend past the boundaries of Greater Manchester, the post from Andy Burnham on the app formally known as Twitter only showed rail lines inside of GM and didn't show indications it extended outside that (with the exception of the bend at the bottom of Wigan. This could mean that the tapping in and out plus capping will only be valid when inside GM area.
But maybe not...
View attachment 154768

Wouldn't that simply be the same concept as in London where you can use contactless/oyster on say a London to Alton service between London & Surbiton but not beyond.
Or a London to Brighton service as far as Gatwick etc

 

[Old Yard Dog]

Greater Manchester is so inward looking, it doesn't even allow free transport on its trams for passengers from outside the area needing to travel between Victoria and Piccadilly to change trains (Orsdall curve services now only being hourly).

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Whilst this isn't exactly enough information to assume that the lines included won't extend past the boundaries of Greater Manchester, the post from Andy Burnham on the app formally known as Twitter only showed rail lines inside of GM and didn't show indications it extended outside that (with the exception of the bend at the bottom of Wigan. This could mean that the tapping in and out plus capping will only be valid when inside GM area.
But maybe not...
View attachment 154768

No Atherton line, I read Wigan-Victoria as Atherton line, forgetting about Golborne.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Whilst this isn't exactly enough information to assume that the lines included won't extend past the boundaries of Greater Manchester, the post from Andy Burnham on the app formally known as Twitter only showed rail lines inside of GM and didn't show indications it extended outside that (with the exception of the bend at the bottom of Wigan. This could mean that the tapping in and out plus capping will only be valid when inside GM area.
But maybe not...
View attachment 154768

On the Alderley Edge - Piccadilly line on that illustration, the railway stations of Handforth, Wilmslow and Alderley Edge are all in the county of Cheshire East, and as such, have no connections to the entity known as Greater Manchester.

 

[EODMAN]

On the Alderley Edge - Piccadilly line on that illustration, the railway stations of Handforth, Wilmslow and Alderley Edge are all in the county of Cheshire East, and as such, have no connections to the entity known as Greater Manchester.

Exactly, which is why they are not shown on the map, just the name of the line, which leads me to believe that the capping & integration may only be included within Greater Manchester.
That said, all of those places are commuter towns that feed into Manchester and part of the metropolitan area, so they have a connection in that way, but not politically connected.

 

[HSTEd]

No doubt this will be used to justify the lack of a bus only annual pass product in Greater Manchester after the completion of the franchising process.

I will be required to pay double what I pay now to subsidise rail operations I will never use.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No doubt this will be used to justify the lack of a bus only annual pass product in Greater Manchester after the completion of the franchising process.

I will be required to pay double what I pay now to subsidy rail operations I will never use.

More sensibly there'll hopefully be a zonal product for all modes so instead of paying by mode you can pay by the area/length of journey you are making.

Single mode tickets do not make any sense at all in an integrated system. The German systems don't have them for one. They cause pressure to design sub-optimal networks.

 

[EODMAN]

No doubt this will be used to justify the lack of a bus only annual pass product in Greater Manchester after the completion of the franchising process.

I will be required to pay double what I pay now to subsidy rail operations I will never use.

I think that's jumping the gun a bit. From my understanding, we won't have it as good as most parts of the world that have fully integrated travel, so whilst Rail will be added to tap in/out, it will likely have it's own cap. Same with buses here. So you will only be charged for trains if you use the trains. If you have an annual pass for buses, that won't be part of the train tap in/out.

But to be fare, subsides for fully integrated public transport are amazing. I've lived in Germany for many years and I wish like hell we had their system. They pay €49 a month for every train (s-bahn, u-bahn or regional bahn), tram or bus in the city and in every city. So if the equivalent was here, we would pay £42 a month for every bus, train and Metrolink in Manchester, but if we went to Liverpool, it would also include the train to Liverpool (except Transpennine Express) and then every bus and train in that city... the same for any other part of the UK... for £42 a month. That's a fair deal.

Of course, that's paid through their taxes, and they pay more taxes than us... but then that also pays for their better health care system, their better roads, their better schools etc and because they pay more taxes, their wages are higher to compensate.

But back to your fear... there is no evidence that your annual ticket will increase (let alone double) just to pay a rail subsidy.

 

[HSTEd]

I think that's jumping the gun a bit. From my understanding, we won't have it as good as most parts of the world that have fully integrated travel, so whilst Rail will be added to tap in/out, it will likely have it's own cap. Same with buses here. So you will only be charged for trains if you use the trains. If you have an annual pass for buses, that won't be part of the train tap in/out.

GMCA do not advertise an annual bus pass for Bee Network.
There is only one annual option, which is the County ticket valid on all modes.

Once the bus zone I use joins Bee Network I will be stuck either spending £1544 on that or endlessly forgetting to buy 28 day bus passes (and spending £1150 for the privilege). I currently have to pay Stagecoach more like £800.

EDIT: Correction, my Stagecoach annual pass cost £700, so it will be more than double.

 

[Bletchleyite]

GMCA do not advertise an annual bus pass for Bee Network.
There is only one annual option, which is the County ticket valid on all modes.

Once the bus zone I use joins Bee Network I will be stuck either spending £1544 on that or endlessly forgetting to buy 28 day bus passes (and spending £1150 for the privilege). I currently have to pay Stagecoach more like £800.

Most people don't buy annual tickets, they are incredibly niche. I suspect we might see a move towards Direct Debits paid monthly.

 

[HSTEd]

Most people don't buy annual tickets, they are incredibly niche. I suspect we might see a move towards Direct Debits paid monthly.

Well in South Manchester they happen to sell thousands of them, albeit Uniriders to students. [I am not a student any more, however]

But either way, the extra cost of selling an annual pass product is virtually nothing, so I don't see much reason to get rid of them.

 

[RT4038]

No doubt this will be used to justify the lack of a bus only annual pass product in Greater Manchester after the completion of the franchising process.

I will be required to pay double what I pay now to subsidise rail operations I will never use.

Not necessarily. I think it is a mistake to assume that what is happening now, in a transitional period from separate accounting for each mode and operator, will continue in the future.

60 years ago any kind of network/multi route bus or train pass was quite unusual (mostly aimed at tourists in holiday areas). Fares products are continually evolving and you being required to pay double is highly unlikely.

 

[Cricketer8for9]

Wouldn't that simply be the same concept as in London where you can use contactless/oyster on say a London to Alton service between London & Surbiton but not beyond.
Or a London to Brighton service as far as Gatwick etc

Exactly. A different example would be tapping in at East Croydon and tapping out at West Hampstead on a service going from Brighton to Bedford.

One point not mentioned yet is the sheer convenience of not having to buy a physical or even e-ticket. Turn up 30 seconds before the train, tap in and get on. No ticket machine or ticket office queues.

 

[Djgr]

Exactly, which is why they are not shown on the map, just the name of the line, which leads me to believe that the capping & integration may only be included within Greater Manchester.
That said, all of those places are commuter towns that feed into Manchester and part of the metropolitan area, so they have a connection in that way, but not politically connected.

...and not politically connected by their choice

We have to move away from ticketing that is mode specific. Of course this was the direction of travel until Maggie flogged the buses.

Try to look at the bigger picture rather than what's best for you as an individual.