APPENDIX 2
Memorandum submitted by Railfuture
Since we are primarily a pro rail group, albeit
with interests in public transport as a whole, we will confine
this submission to issues that are related to rail transport.
DEREGULATION AND
INTEGRATION
Railfuture has always campaigned for properly
integrated bus and rail services with bus routes arranged to include
railway stations wherever possible with integrated fares and timetables
as can be found in Switzerland, for example.
Although there are some such successful examples
in the UK, they remain haphazard and seem more likely to be found
where the local bus operator is also the rail franchisee and it
would appear that bus service deregulation has presented barriers
to a nationwide integrated system.
Rail privatisation has not helped either, as
franchises are renewed there may be a loss of continuity of such
service provision.
The importance of integration cannot be over
emphasised and the sooner the DfT is able to regard bus and rail
services as complimentary to each other rather than one as an
alternative to the other, the sooner we may start to see progress.
Except in London, where a large measure of consistency
has been maintained, deregulation has led to confusion as new
routes have appeared on a trial basis, some with success, but
most disappearing soon after and where familiar route numbers
either vanish or no longer relate to their original points of
origin or destination, this is hardly surprising.
It would seem clear that this is the principal
reason for the continued decline in bus patronage outside London.
The success of the London franchise system would
therefore appear to present the model for the rest of the country
but integration with rail services would also help to increase
patronage as a whole.
PRIORITY MEASURES
We would agree that bus priority measures such
as road space allocated for exclusive bus use and priority at
traffic light controlled road junctions are an essential element
for increasing bus service reliability and ridership, particularly
where services may be integrated with rail.
CONCESSIONARY FARES
Although free local public transport nationally
for pensioners and the disabled is to be welcomed, we view the
exclusion of rail services from the scheme with some concern.
As proposed, there will be considerable abstraction
of passengers from rail services, making local train services
even more dependent on public subsidy than they are at present.
As an example, Nexus, the Tyne & Wear Metro
operators, have pointed out that if they retain their already
low concessionary fare for Metro services, the loss of passengers
due to free bus services will cause a loss of Metro revenue amounting
to about £1.8 million per year.
Conversely, if they scrap the Metro concessionary
fare to match the free buses, their costs will rise by a similar
amount of £1.8 million.
Additionally, it has already been noted that
these proposals also present problems for other supported bus
services such as school travel as the Government grant of an additional
£350 million is likely to prove inadequate.
Clearly, a lot more work needs to be done before
proposals for free concessionary travel are implemented in 2008
and it is of interest that at the recent Railfuture Annual General
Meeting, a motion calling for a study into extension of this scheme
to cover local and regional rail services was approved overwhelmingly.
More alarmingly, the recent Department for Transport
consultation on rail closures procedures made it clear that the
Government is inclined toward replacing some rail services with
buses as it regards them as cheaper.
Whilst it is acknowledged that the average subsidy
per bus passenger is around half that for rail passengers, albeit
with wide regional variations, this simplistic view fails to acknowledge
that, in terms of distance, the average train journey is about
five times longer, and quicker, than the average bus journey and
is also more likely to achieve modal switch from the car.
Recent studies also indicate that buses enjoy
significantly subsidised access to the road network and fail to
meet their true track costs. On balance, therefore, subsidies
for rail services may well provide better value for money and
this should be borne in mind under the concessionary fares proposals.
We would, therefore, support the idea of a nationwide
version of the London Freedom Card, perhaps means tested as not
all pensioners are unable to pay a fare rate for travel and there
may be an overcrowding issue generated by free travel for all,
whether by bus or train or both.
Alternatively, the existing Senior Rail Card
could be made available free of charge to all senior citizens
and the scope of the card extended to include all bus services,
instead of free local bus travel, and the discount rate raised
above the present 33%.
This would be more manageable than the present
proposals for free local bus travel and more likely to achieve
modal switch from the car and ease road congestion.
17 May 2006
| 
