Memorandum from Stagecoach Group plc (TPT
07)
0.0. INTRODUCTION
0.1 Stagecoach Group welcomes the opportunity
to contribute to this inquiry and present evidence to the Transport
Committee.
0.2 Stagecoach Group is a leading international
public transportation group, with extensive operations in the
UK, United States and Canada. The Group employs around 27,000
people, and operates bus, coach, rail, and tram services.
0.3 In the UK, our fleet of around 7,000
buses connects communities in more than 100 towns and cities across
the country. We carry nearly two million passengers a day on a
network stretching from the Highlands of Scotland to south-west
England. It includes major city bus operations in Liverpool, Newcastle,
Hull, Manchester, Oxford, Sheffield and Cambridge.
0.4 We also operate express coach services
linking major towns within our regional operating company areas.
The Group runs the market-leading budget inter-city coach service,
megabus.com, which carries around two million passengers a year
on a network covering more than 30 locations. Scottish Citylink,
our joint venture with ComfortDelGro, is the leading provider
of inter-city express coach travel in Scotland.
0.5 Stagecoach Group is a major rail operator
and has an involvement in running around a quarter of the UK passenger
rail network. The Group operates the South Western rail franchise,
which incorporates the South West Trains and Island Line networks.
South West Trains, the UK's biggest commuter franchise, runs nearly
1,700 trains a day in south-west England out of London Waterloo
railway station. Island Line, on the Isle of Wight, has been designated
a Community Rail Partnership. We also operate Supertram, a 28
km light rail network incorporating three routes in the city of
Sheffield.
In addition, Stagecoach Group has a 49% shareholding
in Virgin Rail Group, which operates the West Coast and CrossCountry
inter-city rail franchises.
0.6 The Transport Committee is considering
ticketing arrangements and concessionary travel on public transport,
specifically the way in which ticketing is organised, handled
and enforced. We believe that ticketing is an important contributory
factor in attracting passengers, delivering modal shift and driving
growth in the future.
0.7 The information below outlines Stagecoach
Group's views in response to the specific questions set out in
the Transport Committee's call for evidence, published on 8 February
2007.
1.0 INTEGRATED
TICKETING
1. Is ticketing sufficiently integrated across
different modes of transport and between different geographical
areas?
1.1 It is fair to say that ticketing is
already highly integrated across rail. Indeed, the structure of
rail franchising requires full through ticketing and inter-availability
to be maintained, and there are strong commercial imperatives
to do this as well. It could be argued that integration is less
effective between different modes, although great strides have
been made in the past ten years with the introduction of bus links
and bus-rail schemes under the "PlusBus" banner, to
feed into rail stations from communities remote for the network.
There is still plenty of scope for enhancing these schemes as
they are still somewhat sporadic. The best example of integration
remains the example of travel to and within London, where integration
between national rail and Transport for London ticketing has existed
for over 20 years. ITSO could provide the common platform to make
greater integration possible.
1.2 Each of the metropolitan areas has a
range of integrated multi bus operator and multi modal tickets
as do many Shire Counties. The Transport Act 2000 enables Authorities
to require bus operators to introduce ticketing schemes where
none exist. There is, therefore, no reason why integrated bus
tickets are not offered wherever they are needed.
2. Does the Government have an adequate strategy
for developing the integration of ticketing systems?
2.1 The Government has made an important
step in facilitating easier integration between modes by mandating
ITSO as the national public transport smartcard standard. Going
forward, this will provide a common platform for schemes on all
modes. By specifiying the format of data across each interface,
ITSO enables scheme implementers to mix and match their system
component suppliers in the knowledge that they will be able to
work together.
2.2 However, technical solutions need to
be complemented by commercial strategies that ensure incentives
exist for deals to be made between different ITSO users. Clearly,
there needs to be a business case to support each such strategy.
2.3 It is important that scheme promoters—whether
they are public authorities promoting concessionary travel schemes,
or bus or rail operators promoting their own commercial ticketing
schemes—should drive forward the appropriate commercial
mechanisms. They are best placed to ensure that they are appropriate,
adequate and effective in achieving the desired objectives.
3. Is the industry taking up modern smartcard
technologies adequately and appropriately?
3.1 The last 12 months has seen the rail
industry increasingly take up smartcard technologies, spurred
on by inclusion in rail franchises as they come up for renewal
as well as local authority sponsorship of ITSO-based concessionary
schemes. Stagecoach is fully supportive of the take up of smartcard
technologies in the bus and rail industries and is actively developing
schemes for its bus and rail companies.
3.2 It is widely accepted that it is difficult
to make a stand-alone case for commercial smartcard systems on
buses. However, the business case improves considerably when the
system infrastructure is already in place. Thus the introduction
of nationwide smartcards for concessionary travel on buses is
an important first step in developing the use of smartcards for
commercial ticketing applications.
4. Does the ITSO system cater for the needs
of all passengers and travel providers?
4.1 In theory, there is no reason why ITSO
cannot cater for the needs of all passengers and travel providers.
As ITSO is an open standard, it has the added advantage that a
scheme promoter does not need to lock in to one sole supplier.
This has further benefits when consideration is given to system
replacement, which can be undertaken on a component-by-component
basis. However, as discussed earlier, while ITSO deals with the
technical issues arising from the need to operate from a common
smartcard platform, it does not in itself address commercial issues.
Whether the necessary commercial agreements that drive integration
are made will depend on operators being incentivised to make a
positive business case.
5. What can be learned from the experiences
of areas such as London and Scotland where smartcard technology
is already in place?
5.1 London has worked well as an example
of how a transport smartcard can work, although it has also thrown
into relief some of the issues that need to be overcome. On the
positive side, Oyster works well from the customer point of view,
as it is popular and flexible. There is no doubt that the rapid
movement of passengers over to Oyster has been very heavily influenced
by pricing strategies that charge significant premiums to passengers
choosing to pay with cash. On the systems side, the use of a PFI
contract between TfL and a sole supplier has created numerous
hurdles to the effective and rapid rollout of Oyster to TOCs.
The principles behind the ITSO platform are far more straightforward
in permitting the organic growth of individual schemes and linkages
between them.
5.2 In Scotland the scheme is still in the
implementation phase, but it is already producing benefits for
the rest of the UK in that a number of ticket machine suppliers
have been contracted to provide the necessary on bus equipment
to the ITSO specification. They will, therefore, be well placed
to provide equipment for English systems when called upon to do
so.
REVENUE PROTECTION
AND THE
POWERS OF
TICKET INSPECTORS
6. Is the legal framework within which ticket
inspectors function appropriate?
6.1 Stagecoach Group believes the legal
framework in which ticket inspectors operate appears both fair
and reasonable. We believe the respective rights of passengers
and ticket inspectors are well balanced and appropriate, providing
they are properly and consistently applied and managed.
7. What appeal mechanisms exist for passengers,
and are they adequate?
7.1 There is no doubt that the area of rail
penalty fares is a sensitive one that requires the highest standards
of stewardship. To ensure that stewardship is carried out in a
fair and reasonable way, passengers currently have the right of
appeal to an independent appeals body IPFAS (the Independent Penalty
Fares Appeals Service).
7.2 In the case of buses, Stagecoach companies
have not experienced any issues that they have been unable to
resolve with those who have been charged penalty fares. Should
it prove necessary, the Traffic Commissioner would arbitrate in
such cases.
8. Are the rights of passengers and the powers
of ticket inspectors well-balanced?
8.1 Clearly, one of the keys to a successful
revenue protection policy is communication, ensuring passengers
know what the rules are, how they are to be applied and what recompense
is available. It is clearly in everyone's interest, not least
that of the genuine fare-paying passenger, that all available
revenue is collected. The best environment is one where a combination
of education and enforcement convinces people it is simply not
worthwhile economically trying to travel without a ticket.
8.2 However, it can sometimes be difficult
for bus ticket inspectors to establish a person's identity, which
can make penalty fares difficult to collect.
9. Do operators of public transport take
adequate measures to protect fares revenue?
9.1 Stagecoach, through its bus and rail
companies, is adequately incentivised to collect as much revenue
as possible from passengers and to do everything possible to minimise
ticketless travel.
9.2 Stagecoach designs its bus ticketing
systems to enable drivers to visually check all prepaid tickets,
which itself limits fares evasion. The introduction of smartcards
would enable more sophisticated fares offers, which are currently
precluded by this visual inspection constraint.
CONCESSIONARY FARES—THE
RIGHT STRATEGY?
10. Is the Government's concessionary fares
strategy, including the proposed scheme for concessionary bus
travel, adequate?
10.1 Stagecoach would ideally like to see
a nationally administered concessionary travel scheme in England,
modelled broadly on the Scottish arrangements. 10.2 While it is
for DfT to determine how the English national scheme will function,
Stagecoach would wish DfT to ensure that the funds available to
reimburse operators under the scheme are sufficient to minimise
the need for appeals against the proposed reimbursement arrangements.10.3
Stagecoach would also welcome the use of smartcards by all concessionary
bus pass holders as this would minimise the potential for fraudulent
use and provide accurate recording of trips made, thereby aiding
reimbursement arrangements.
11. Are concessionary fares schemes sufficiently
integrated across different modes of transport and different geographical
areas?
11.1 The introduction of English national
concessionary travel on buses from April 2008 will increase the
geographic coverage of concessionary travel significantly.
11.2 Local concessionary authorities are
currently able to extend the concessions to tram and rail modes
if they so wish and some already do so, within their area of jurisdiction.
11.3 Whether or not such facilities should
be provided across all modes nationwide, or across the whole of
Great Britain is a matter for Government.
March 2007
| 
