Should forecasting for future post-Covid19 travel demand wait until more data is available?

[moggie]

Moderator note: Split from

£10bn rail enhancement pipeline to be ‘reassessed’ for post-Covid world

The following article in "New Civil Engineer" a couple of days ago is worrying: https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/10bn-rail-enhancement-pipeline-to-be-reassessed-for-post-covid-world-17-09-2020/ Schemes in the government’s £10bn rail enhancements pipeline are being reassessed to see if...

www.railforums.co.uk

One would have thought it obvious that forecasting the impact on future travel demand DURING the current pandemic with all its imposed constraints should wait until the ALL the impositions have been removed and there real demand data available.

Why not simply be honest and state they're now beginning the costing of future sacrifices to pay the bill for abject government failure?

 

[DB]

Why not simply be honest and state they're now beginning the costing of future sacrifices to pay the bill for abject government failure?

Be honest? Politicians?

 

[Domh245]

One would have thought it obvious that forecasting the impact on future travel demand DURING the current pandemic with all its imposed constraints should wait until the ALL the impositions have been removed and there real demand data available.

Forecasting the exact impact on future travel demand would be near impossible to get right. It is however possible to carry out several different studies using different predictions and then as things gradually emerge out the other side, they can then pick the set of results using predictions that were nearest the truth.

 

[moggie]

In context of the NCE publication referred above any attempt by government now to forecast future demand for public transport based on the current collapse of demand wholly brought about by the imposition of government emergency dictates is barmy UNLESS the it's simply an exercise not concerned with post pandemic travel demand but merely a sign of the desperation in treasury circles now to claw money back from the various government departmental budgets. So much for the 'Build Back Better' BS! However one never knows before it becomes policy whether it remains merely a scoping exercise or becomes reality. Certainly one would expect a crude estimate of jobs gained for the £££'s allocated - the 'economic benefits' - will be happening and probably to a set of different criteria to that originally used for entry into NR's pipeline. However, if NR's £10Bn CP6 Enhancement pot is genuinely under threat then it must be likely that the £36Bn CP6 Renewals, Maintenance and Operation pot will also be targeted. After all, less trains = less wear and tear etc as a crude forecast, irrespective of eventual recovery levels post pandemic.

I think the clue is in this weeks announcement on the post October employment support policies. Sunak appears to be defining viable jobs as those capable of sustaining some hours of employment NOW. So roles in those sectors currently prevented from operating by the governments own rule set (mainly social distancing and the constraints this imposes) are seemingly no longer considered viable even though post pandemic many of these roles would most certainly resume providing the business is able to survive the current state of deep freeze long enough. IF the treasury is now cutting these sectors adrift by not offering financial support to employees beyond Furlough then surely the same doubt on viability will exist in the minds of officials when considering rail - even though that doubt is only created by current government pandemic policies but is being used to model future demand when pandemic policy will be consigned to history. It only makes sense if the answer is - cost cutting - now - i.e. Austerity MkII.