• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Back to the bad old days’: swingeing rail cuts set alarm bells ringing

Status
Not open for further replies.

Grumpy Git

On Moderation
Joined
13 Oct 2019
Messages
2,126
Location
Liverpool
Looking at prices for a return trip next weekend with my sons to visit my elderly father and bring him down to stay for a few days before Christmas. Avanti = £188, car = £55, door-to-door journey time comparable at around 4 hours (London outer suburbs to Manchester outer suburbs). Train is clearly more comfortable and relaxing, but can't ignore that sort of price differential. Fuel would have to be over £4/litre before the motoring charges start to bite
Have you considered changing at Crewe for the LNWR service to Euston? I don't know the cost from Manchester, but from Liverpool they are ~50% cheaper than Avanti off peak.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
The issue is that branch lines lose a ton of money. Commuter routes don’t, even with fewer people using them. (For the avoidance of doubt, most commuter routes do lose money, but much, much less than regional branch lines).

But it is going to be very difficult for the DfT with hard cash limits. Want to run some services on the reopened Northumberland line ? Sure, which services elsewhere will be withdrawn to pay for them.

Trust you to agree with Wolmar when he's wrong.

If the Government want's to be taken seriously about levelling up, it has to maintain the regional railway. Anything else would be politically unacceptable.
 

87 027

Member
Joined
1 Sep 2010
Messages
699
Location
London
Have you considered changing at Crewe for the LNWR service to Euston? I don't know the cost from Manchester, but from Liverpool they are ~50% cheaper than Avanti off peak.
Yes, I did that last time I made the journey earlier in the year. Travelling on my own account and not being particularly pressed for time I was pleasantly surprised by the comfort and speed of the 350s and not particularly bothered by the connection to/from Northern services at Crewe. I would always look at possibilities by rail before reverting to car.

However in the second half of this year I have seen prices creeping up on both Avanti and LNWR, and the consideration inevitably arises that a car can convey additional passengers at no extra cost. I suspect the cost of motoring will need to increase, but the more difficult question is how to resolve the question that on a train you are charging for individual seats but a car can carry several people for the same road footprint.
 

Cardiff123

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2013
Messages
1,318
From the thread I started a few weeks ago:
https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/r...rates-as-treasury-takes-control/60218.article
Railways and governments across Europe are working to attract passengers back to rail in the wake of the pandemic, spurred by the European Commission’s declaration of 2021 as the EU Year of Rail. Many are offering discounted or even free tickets to encourage people to try trains again. In some cases governments are launching subsidised multi-modal transport offers to encourage a transition away from high-pollution, low-occupancy transport to support green objectives; Austria’s Klimaticket initiative which officially launched on October 26 is a high-profile example.
The contrast in the UK could hardly be starker. In his Budget statement on the same day, Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced a 50% cut in the Air Passenger Duty levied on domestic flights, while fuel duty for road vehicles remained frozen for a twelfth successive year. In its response, the Rail Delivery Group noted that taxes make up 40% of the cost of traction electricity for rail, while aviation fuel is exempt from duty.
So whilst European governments are offering incentives to get passenger numbers up, offering discounted or even free rail travel, UK Govt does the exact opposite, hiking up fares and cutting services. Whilst halving tax on domestic flights and subsidising driving. During a catastrophic climate crisis. :{

I've never despised a government more than I do the current UK Government.
 

Peterthegreat

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2021
Messages
1,328
Location
South Yorkshire

From the thread I started a few weeks ago:
https://www.railwaygazette.com/uk/r...rates-as-treasury-takes-control/60218.article


So whilst European governments are offering incentives to get passenger numbers up, offering discounted or even free rail travel, UK Govt does the exact opposite, hiking up fares and cutting services. Whilst halving tax on domestic flights and subsidising driving. During a catastrophic climate crisis. :{

I've never despised a government more than I do the current UK Government.
Nor I.
 

Wilts Wanderer

Established Member
Joined
21 Nov 2016
Messages
2,463
Well the fact Plymouth are regaining London work again does suggest to me that it has been realised that obviously it isn't overall productive across the board to have 3 drivers driving one train. No real reason for Bristol drivers to work on the b and h. The fast London trains driven by Plymouth drivers with the slower ones driven by Exeter drivers (coupled with say an Exmouth trip) is surely the best way of diagramming b and h work, with Paddington taking some of the early down and late up trains as well.
Hopefully it will be this type of diagramming which was successfully employed for many years until recently that will return and enable money savings without the need for job losses, or ticket price increases.

Yes I guess the paradigm has shifted back slightly towards how it was previously. However it is very important for Bristol crews to retain work via Newbury as it is regularly required for weekend diversions - I doubt an hourly Bristol-London could be covered by Exeter and Plymouth.


Make that three of us.
 

XAM2175

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2016
Messages
3,469
Location
Glasgow
If the Government want's [sic] to be taken seriously about levelling up, it has to maintain the regional railway. Anything else would be politically unacceptable.
Yes. That fact, however, doesn't mean that Wolmar is wrong to note that the coldly rational thing to do in order to realise savings at the present time would indeed be to prune services that have some of the biggest costs for the smallest returns.
 

yorksrob

Veteran Member
Joined
6 Aug 2009
Messages
38,818
Location
Yorks
Yes. That fact, however, doesn't mean that Wolmar is wrong to note that the coldly rational thing to do in order to realise savings at the present time would indeed be to prune services that have some of the biggest costs for the smallest returns.

It boils down to the "what is the railway for" question. No one can be under any illusion that it is there to make a profit, which means it is a public service. With commuting down and regional lines bouncing back, it makes the regional routes more important within the industry, comparativey than they've ever been.
 

Wilts Wanderer

Established Member
Joined
21 Nov 2016
Messages
2,463
It boils down to the "what is the railway for" question. No one can be under any illusion that it is there to make a profit, which means it is a public service. With commuting down and regional lines bouncing back, it makes the regional routes more important within the industry, comparativey than they've ever been.

I think you have to qualify it more than that, especially with a right wing government in power. It’s a public service that helps drive and support economic activity, and therefore produce a positive return for the nation overall.
 

Grumpy Git

On Moderation
Joined
13 Oct 2019
Messages
2,126
Location
Liverpool
Whilst in the minority, I'd say I buy >95% of my tickets from my local Merseyrail station, (having done all my homework beforehand).
 

XAM2175

Established Member
Joined
8 Jun 2016
Messages
3,469
Location
Glasgow
It boils down to the "what is the railway for" question. No one can be under any illusion that it is there to make a profit, which means it is a public service. With commuting down and regional lines bouncing back, it makes the regional routes more important within the industry, comparativey than they've ever been.
I don't for a moment disagree with you on the notion that public transport - not just the railway - is an important public service and that it should be treated as such. What I am saying is that "cut branch lines" is a valid potential answer to the question "how do we reduce the amount of money by which the Treasury subsides railways" even if in doing so there are negative impacts.

You also, again, fail to note that just because you see passengers returning to the lines you use it doesn't automatically follow that the same amount of revenue is returning with them.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Whilst in the minority, I'd say I buy >95% of my tickets from my local Merseyrail station, (having done all my homework beforehand).

Sorry, moved my post to the speculative thread as it was mostly suggestions. But as this isn't...yes, a few people will, but the increasing majority will prefer online, and if contactless was introduced as will happen soon enough and Trainline fixed their e-ticket issue then ticket office usage will plummet to next to nothing.
 

Grumpy Git

On Moderation
Joined
13 Oct 2019
Messages
2,126
Location
Liverpool
I'm surprised there isn't a bigger effort in revenue protection? A decent inspector would pay for themselves many times over.
 

matacaster

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2013
Messages
1,595
Costs DO need to be cut. The current highly restrictive 'route knowledge' can be solved with technology. Train simulators, in-cab rolling roads with safety and other commentary can cut costs. It can also allow diversions over abnormal routes. Restrictive weekday / weekend overtime working needs looking at. Over the top safety requirements which do not apply in any shape or form to any bus, car, road. Any guards who just sit in the cab performing no revenue protection or safety function. Union reps who union should pay for. Things like this can make the railways more efficient.

The alternative is a beeching style review.
 
Last edited:

Horizon22

Established Member
Associate Staff
Jobs & Careers
Joined
8 Sep 2019
Messages
7,448
Location
London
Or we could somehow persuade the back cab guard heros to do something?

In some places (mainly urban / suburban) they're dispatching so often its pointless. A move to an Southern "OBS" type role with driver dispatch would resolve these sorts of issues and might (I'd say should) improve revenue collection too. In other places the lazier ones tarnish the good ones with a bad brush.

Ultimately, even though many members of this forum have been saying for months something is going to have to give, quite a few have had there heads buried in the sand and if it's not this week or next month or next year, if numbers don't rise then obviously a program to look at costs & efficiencies will need to begin besides just talking about it and will be a rather rude awakening for some I feel!
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,557
Costs DO need to be cut. The current highly restrictive 'route knowledge' can be solved with technology. Train simulators, in-cab rolling roads with safety and other commentary can cut costs. It can also allow diversions over abnormal routes. Restrictive weekday / weekend overtime working needs looking at. Over the top safety requirements which do not apply in any shape or form to any bus, car, road. Any guards who just sit in the cab performing no revenue protection or safety function. Union reps who union should pay for. Things like this can make the railways more efficient.

The alternative is a beeching style review.
I thought Union subs paid for union reps? Is that not the case.

What ever they do, do, they need to do it in away that allows things to come back later, should fortunes return.
 

Furryanimal

Member
Joined
4 Jun 2018
Messages
156
Location
Cwmbran
Late night services get people home from events such as concerts.
Without them I’d be looking at hotel stays which would probably seriously reduce my concert going.
And what of shift workers?
And what constitutes late night?
 

Royston Vasey

Established Member
Joined
14 May 2008
Messages
2,167
Location
Cambridge
Source?

I disagree that petrol at £3 a litre would not cause many people to switch their journeys to rail. Presumably the government also believe that, otherwise they would increase the duty accordingly (and capture that differential in perceived value as tax revenue). In fact the current prices are causing many people to change their travel habits.
I think there probably remains a huge amount of latent demand of people who look at a medium or long distance leisure journey price, and just say "sod it, I'll drive".
 

LNW-GW Joint

Veteran Member
Joined
22 Feb 2011
Messages
19,555
Location
Mold, Clwyd
So it looks like cuts will precede the formation of GBR rather than following it.
It would be easier to sell as part of a major reorganisation which delivered cost efficiencies (eg merging TOC/NR functions) rather than cutting services.
If each TOC has been asked to put up proposals for a 10% cost reduction, they will react in different ways for their IC/London/Regional networks.
TOCs like GWR and EMR with a mix of markets have to find a solution for all its sectors that makes sense to all users.
And what about Network Rail cuts? That's where the bulk of railway costs are incurred.

All those long-term train leasing deals now look like a noose around the neck.
But it was the government itself which signed up for 27.5 years for the IEPs, before saddling GWR/LNER with the contracts.
 

Skymonster

Established Member
Joined
7 Feb 2012
Messages
1,726
So no doubt with DfT micro-managing many aspects of the railway and seeking to cut costs, it will be looking at how well Cross Country is coping with HST and 170 services cancelled. If the current situation with capacity reduced and frequencies slashed is deemed tollerable, as a cost cutting measure DfT might decide the services aren’t worth maintaining in the longer term. And if so those staff who can’t be bothered to work rest days (and the union telling them not to do so) to maintain a service the public rely on could find they’re shooting themselves in the foot - like turkeys voting for Christmas, some battles are best not fought at inopportune moments.
 

JonathanH

Veteran Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
18,532
All those long-term train leasing deals now look like a noose around the neck.
But it was the government itself which signed up for 27.5 years for the IEPs, before saddling GWR/LNER with the contracts.
Not really, they can ditch the fleets with short term deals and move the trains with longer term deals elsewhere on the network to backfill for the withdrawn stock. So long as there are some fleets with short term leases, there is flexibility to deal with the longer term ones.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
So no doubt with DfT micro-managing many aspects of the railway and seeking to cut costs, it will be looking at how well Cross Country is coping with HST and 170 services cancelled. If the current situation with capacity reduced and frequencies slashed is deemed tollerable, as a cost cutting measure DfT might decide the services aren’t worth maintaining in the longer term. And if so those staff who can’t be bothered to work rest days (and the union telling them not to do so) to maintain a service the public rely on could find they’re shooting themselves in the foot - like turkeys voting for Christmas, some battles are best not fought at inopportune moments.

The XC capacity issue could be hidden with compulsory reservations. Overcrowding is very visible, people being turned away when booking much less so. The woeful implementation of demand responsive transport in MK is a good example - those unable to get journeys (I have a 1 in 7 success rate so far) are hidden behind people shouting about how good it is to get a cheap taxi.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,646
So no doubt with DfT micro-managing many aspects of the railway and seeking to cut costs, it will be looking at how well Cross Country is coping with HST and 170 services cancelled. If the current situation with capacity reduced and frequencies slashed is deemed tollerable, as a cost cutting measure DfT might decide the services aren’t worth maintaining in the longer term. And if so those staff who can’t be bothered to work rest days (and the union telling them not to do so) to maintain a service the public rely on could find they’re shooting themselves in the foot - like turkeys voting for Christmas, some battles are best not fought at inopportune moments.
Why should staff work rest days? The clue is in the name.....rest day. Of course those who want the money are perfectly entitled to put there name forward to work overtime, however there are increasing numbers of staff who are realising the time off is far more valuable.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Why should staff work rest days? The clue is in the name.....rest day. Of course those who want the money are perfectly entitled to put there name forward to work overtime, however there are increasing numbers of staff who are realising the time off is far more valuable.

The problem here is that they want their cake and to eat it, i.e. for it always to be available when they want but only when they want. I would like to see full staffing with overtime only for unexpected high sickness (e.g. the pingdemic) and delays.
 

Moonshot

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2013
Messages
3,646
The problem here is that they want their cake and to eat it, i.e. for it always to be available when they want but only when they want. I would like to see full staffing with overtime only for unexpected high sickness (e.g. the pingdemic) and delays.
And the resulting increase in costs paid for by who? Taxpayers or passengers?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top