Abolish Railcards

[RLBH]

Seeing as we now have the 25-30 Railcard, and the Veterans Railcard is just launching (and I expect on the basis of that that lobbying for an Emergency Services Railcard can't be far behind), the number of railcards is multiplying. I don't think there's much doubt that this is because people are increasingly put off rail travel by the cost of fares.

So, here's a radical idea. Abolish all railcards, but cut fares across the board by one-third. Everyone gets Railcard fares, no complex rules around restrictions, no need to buy a Railcard and hope you use it enough.

I mean, it'd cost in the region of £3 billion per year, and the network would probably fall over if rail use increased too much, but other than those minor issues, the idea seems to have merit. I shall now retire to a bunker and await your criticism.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

The fares should be simplified and made more transparent. I find it easier to do my tax self-assessment...

But from where I come from, fares are very expensive and certainly don't do anything to entice travel by rail. Even an Advance fare costs the same price!

 

[GNER 91128]

In an ideal world this would happen! I'd increase the subsidy from government, sure it would mean more tax payers money going towards people who use trains but it is supposed to be public transport after all!

Or failing cutting fares wholesale, I would like to see ANOTHER railcard introduced for those that don't fall into the eligibility criteria of the current ones. You could make it a bit more expensive to buy than the existing ones available now, say at £50 a year to give the third off fares.

 

[mrcheek]

In an ideal world this would happen! I'd increase the subsidy from government, sure it would mean more tax payers money going towards people who use trains but it is supposed to be public transport after all!

Or failing cutting fares wholesale, I would like to see ANOTHER railcard introduced for those that don't fall into the eligibility criteria of the current ones. You could make it a bit more expensive to buy than the existing ones available now, say at £50 a year to give the third off fares.

I disagree 100% with your first point. But agree 100% with your second point!

 

[pdeaves]

Abolish all railcards, but cut fares across the board by one-third

There's a psychological advantage in giving people the option of a discount (even if it is taken by all the people). I read somewhere of a supermarket that decided not to do regular 'sales' but keep the prices low and found fewer customers as a result. Revenue went up when customers thought they were getting some additional benefit. I think that even if all fares were cut, people would still demand additional discounts because they are young/disabled/old/whatever.

 

[HSTEd]

Its a huge infrastructure maintained for almost no purpose.

Some huge fraction of the population is now eligible for railcards.
At some point it's just a farce.

 

[alistairlees]

Its a huge infrastructure maintained for almost no purpose.

Some huge fraction of the population is now eligible for railcards.
At some point it's just a farce.

Everyone in Britain is eligible for a railcard (or is a child).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Everyone in Britain is eligible for a railcard (or is a child).

Only if they have a second person to travel with.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

The challenge is working out what price a 'railcard for all' should be available at. Given that trains are busy right now, you don't want to attract too many people in that there's not the capacity to move them. But politically/PR-wise you can't price it too high, else it's seen as just another way to rook the punters.

 

[alistairlees]

Only if they have a second person to travel with.

No. Everyone is eligible for a railcard.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No. Everyone is eligible for a railcard.

OK, everybody is eligible for a Network Railcard. But that's a pointless piece of pedantry if like many people you don't live anywhere near nor travel to/from/within the South East.

The Gold Card, if you mean that, isn't strictly a Railcard, and also has limited validity, though not quite as limited as the NSE.

 

[class387]

An idea: If advance tickets were abolished to pay for the 33% cut in fares, what would be the impact on passenger numbers and cost?

 

[GNER 91128]

The challenge is working out what price a 'railcard for all' should be available at. Given that trains are busy right now, you don't want to attract too many people in that there's not the capacity to move them. But politically/PR-wise you can't price it too high, else it's seen as just another way to rook the punters.

I say £50 but you could go anywhere between £50-£70. A price which is worth it if you make more than a couple of trips a year but cost prohibited if you don't use the train that often.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I say £50 but you could go anywhere between £50-£70. A price which is worth it if you make more than a couple of trips a year but cost prohibited if you don't use the train that often.

I'd go for a monthly direct debit. You could probably get away with going as high as £120 pa then.

 

[transmanche]

Seeing as we now have the 25-30 Railcard, and the Veterans Railcard is just launching (and I expect on the basis of that that lobbying for an Emergency Services Railcard can't be far behind)

Why do you expect that? London has had the Veteran's Oyster Card for twelve years and I've not seen any popular demand for an Emergency Services Oyster Card.

The Veteran's Oyster Card is not just restricted to London residents either. Anyone who qualifies can get one, which gives free travel on TfL services at any time (plus free travel on National Rail services too - although most are only after 09:30 weekdays/any time at weekends).

As for Emergency Services, Police Officers often receive free travel on TOCs local to their force area. For example, in London, Met Police and City Police (even Special Constables) get free travel on all TfL services, whether on or off duty. (I believe that PCSOs only get free travel when in uniform.)

 

[markymark2000]

The multiple railcards just need reducing as it makes the ticketing stuff even more confusing.
I think I would reduce it down to the following:
National Railcard (£25 valid for you and 1 child off peak), Friends and Family Railcard (£30 for 2 adults (cardholder must be present) and 3 children. Off peak only) and Concessionary Railcard (£20 only valid for those entitled to the government ENCTS pass, can be used off peak).

Reduced to 3 passes which offer the range of benefits for the same or reduced price as now. Also rids all peak travel using railcards. While it may be an inconvenience to some, it will help put more money into the railway and try to reduce peak travel very slightly.

 

[BigCj34]

If Germany, Netherlands and Switzerland can have railcards for all then surely we can. Driving and flying don't get more expensive with age, and that's what the railway is up against.

 

[transmanche]

Concessionary Railcard (£20 only valid for those entitled to the government ENCTS pass, can be used off peak).

Anyone over 60 qualifies for a Senior Railcard. Only those over 66 qualify for an ENCTS card. (I assume that you would include those who have the equivalent Scottish or Welsh pass too?)

A Senior Railcard holder or Disabled Persons Railcard holder can get discounted standard and first class fares with no time restrictions (other than morning peak journeys with a Senior Railcard that are wholly within the London & SE).

That's a massive reduction in Railcard benefits that you're proposing. It won't be popular.

 

[lachlan]

The multiple railcards just need reducing as it makes the ticketing stuff even more confusing.
I think I would reduce it down to the following:
National Railcard (£25 valid for you and 1 child off peak), Friends and Family Railcard (£30 for 2 adults (cardholder must be present) and 3 children. Off peak only) and Concessionary Railcard (£20 only valid for those entitled to the government ENCTS pass, can be used off peak).

Reduced to 3 passes which offer the range of benefits for the same or reduced price as now. Also rids all peak travel using railcards. While it may be an inconvenience to some, it will help put more money into the railway and try to reduce peak travel very slightly.

What is the point of a Railcard if I can't use it in peak times, ie the times when I'd be going to work?

I wouldn't mind abolishing rail cards, if all fares are reduced by 1/3. I can't drive due to my disability and rail travel can get very expensive

Personally I think this is a gimmick, and don't see why veterans deserve a Railcard anymore than nurses, teachers, people on the minimum wage etc

 

[Fawkes Cat]

What is the point of a Railcard if I can't use it in peak times, ie the times when I'd be going to work?

I wouldn't mind abolishing rail cards, if all fares are reduced by 1/3. I can't drive due to my disability and rail travel can get very expensive

This is where simplification gets complicated. Most railcards are about helping the railway to profit from excess (off-peak) capacity, hence the peak restrictions, but the Disabled Person's card is about making sure that people with disabilities are not disadvantaged by that disability, so needs to allow holders to commute to work (at peak time, just like everyone else).

It does seem to me that there are steps that could be taken towards simplification: I think that Ts&C's have been partly harmonised, with extra conditions for each card. But surely this could go further - common usage times for all off-peak cards for example. The ideal end point would surely be one card with common conditions available to all off-peak travellers, but with variable pricing for the card depending on how much the railway wanted to encourage a particular demographic.

 

[Bletchleyite]

What is the point of a Railcard if I can't use it in peak times, ie the times when I'd be going to work?

Because that is what Season Tickets are for.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The ideal end point would surely be one card with common conditions available to all off-peak travellers, but with variable pricing for the card depending on how much the railway wanted to encourage a particular demographic.

Yes, I agree this should be the case.

 

[GNER 91128]

Anyone over 60 qualifies for a Senior Railcard. Only those over 66 qualify for an ENCTS card. (I assume that you would include those who have the equivalent Scottish or Welsh pass too?

I qualify for a ENCTS card due to my poor mental health, but the annoying thing is I don't for a disabled persons railcars because the eligibility is pretty rigid for it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I qualify for a ENCTS card due to my poor mental health, but the annoying thing is I don't for a disabled persons railcars because the eligibility is pretty rigid for it.

And yet my Dad gets one because he's partially deaf in one ear and uses a hearing aid (it's this that gives rise to the entitlement). While he's also entitled to a Senior Railcard anyway so it barely makes any difference other than the companion aspect, it seems to me that this is such a minor disability that it probably shouldn't be entitling to one. Arguably, to me, the criteria should be the same as a Blue Badge (for ENCTS too, I'm afraid).

 

[JonathanH]

But surely this could go further - common usage times for all off-peak cards for example. The ideal end point would surely be one card with common conditions available to all off-peak travellers, but with variable pricing for the card depending on how much the railway wanted to encourage a particular demographic.

That completely misses the point of why the railcards have different conditions in the first place.

For example, the 16-25 railcard (which of course was once a 16-23 railcard) is designed to prevent short distance commuting being discounted during school / university terms but allow longer distance journeys to be discounted year round. This restriction isn't needed when schools / universities are on their summer break.

This particular restriction doesn't need to apply on other railcards.

 

[JonathanH]

On the original topic, there is a very strong case for abolishing the Network Railcard with its minimum fare restriction when the fare structure changes, particularly if PAYG is extended out from the current London zones.

I am amazed that the minimum fare hasn't increased from £13 since 2009. It should be about £18 if it had kept pace with ticket price inflation.

 

[yorksrob]

On the original topic, there is a very strong case for abolishing the Network Railcard with its minimum fare restriction when the fare structure changes, particularly if PAYG is extended out from the current London zones.

I am amazed that the minimum fare hasn't increased from £13 since 2009. It should be about £18 if it had kept pace with ticket price inflation.

A strong case for whom ?

I doubt it for the travelling public, who have to endure extortionate fares anyway.

Maybe for the grasping DfT and its TOCs.

 

[E100]

I agree by and large. The most workable solution is to make it one railcard and vary the price based on concessions IMO. Make it valid for off-peak only for non-concessions (ok so 2 railcards).

PS if it can be sorted by 2023 that would be grand (when I turn 32)

 

[yorksrob]

If Germany, Netherlands and Switzerland can have railcards for all then surely we can. Driving and flying don't get more expensive with age, and that's what the railway is up against.

That's because Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands haven't been run by swivel-eyed, free market lunatics for the past forty years.

 

[JohnR]

Railfuture did some research on a National Railcard a few years ago - they've long campaigned for one. I seem to recall that suggested a £30 cost and a 50% discount (for off peak fares) would actually produce the biggest net increase in receipts (all options did so). Cant see why that isnt still the case now.