Birmingham second cheapest fares in Europe. Shock.
I heard on the radio this morning that the British face the highest fares in Europe – twice the cost of the rest of Europe.
Anyone buying a commuter ticket recently is bound to agree. This twice-the-price fares statement is based on the survey, out today, comparing rail travel in different states in Europe. Produced for Passenger Focus, the national government’s rail user watchdog, the survey tries to investigate prices and service levels across Europe.
However, you only have to delve a little into the survey’s research to find that fares in Britain are quite “twice-the-price”, indeed our fares compare very well with other countries.
Where does this twice the price come from then?
Well, the survey only chooses a few European countries – seven out of the twenty seven states in Europe. Who knows how our fares compare to the majority of countries that were left out? But the main point is that the comparison was based on fares to the capital city – in our case London.
The problem is that London is not comparable to any other city in Europe – it is so much larger – dwarfing the next largest city Paris. (If you centred London’s underground rail network on Brussels it would also cover Antwerp – Belgium’s second city) Again, because London relies so much on rail, its fares are higher than typical fares across Britain. Also, in order to make the comparison between countries the cost of the fares were deflated by each country’s disposable income. This is sensible. However what the survey does next is not. It takes London fares and deflates them by – the much lower – average national income, so it makes London fares in comparison to other countries seem much higher still.
There are two ways to avoid this problem – deflate London prices by London income which will make them lower or use another British city for the comparison. I could not do the former but the later information was in the survey.
When Birmingham was compared to similar cities across Europe its prices, although higher than Sweden and the Netherlands, were lower than Germany and Spain. And this was the “sky high” walk-on fare. If you looked at discounted fares Birmingham has the second lowest fares in Europe (after Göteborg in Sweden).
So we must be careful when making comparisons and treat such headlines as “twice-the-price” with a large pinch of salt.
Putting fares to one side and looking at the service levels – Britain basically trumps the rest of Europe. The service frequency is substantially higher than in the next country (France) and trains arrive up to six times more frequently in Britain compared to similar journeys in other countries. Also our first and last train services are considerably better than elsewhere. It is no surprise that Europe’s busiest railway station is in Britain.
Here’s a thought: on average, London’s commuters get wet twelve times a year.
Previous article: An investment in middle England (Friday, 13th February, 2009)
Comments
Wishful Thinking
The idea that Britain's train services are somehow better than the European's (or even many third world countries for that matter) is total nonsense. The cost of travelling is ridiculously high (I travelled from Reading to Scarborough for a meeting on a Monday morning and the train fair was in excess of £270! - I could have flown to New York for less), our railways have been privatised in a ridiculous way, they are overcrowded and all this despite being highly subsidised by the taxpayer. Guards are over officious and the penalty charge system is verging on the illegal and the companies have plastered their stations in signs stating that smoking outside is against the law (which is a clear misinterpretation of the legislation). They use complex pricing systems (based on the airline model) to ensure that they extract maximum revenue from each passenger journey (and why would you expect anything different from a private company whose job after all is to make money for the shareholders).
The railways state that passenger numbers are increasing and that record levels of investment are being put into the rail-network; the reason for the former is that we have a political status quo that encourages people to commute vast distances to work and the former may be true but has to be looked at context (the money spent on motorways is far greater that that spent on the rail network).
In conclusion, we have let the train companies take us for a ride (quite literally) for far too long, taking profits for the shareholders whilst not providing the service (let’s not forget they are a service). They need to be re-nationalised and adequately subsidised, with fairs low enough and services good enough to get people out of their cars and onto the railways (I doubt there is any other country that would stand for a system as bad as ours).
Rail fares
It is nonsensical to compare anything other than walk-on fares, since that is the deal provided by the private car.
Comparisons
You are correct. Comparisons are difficult. It is not so easy to compare travelling by train and by car. The marginal cost of using car is so much less than using a train.
But walk-on fares are not the only ones that need to be considered. Return fares and their off peak counterparts can compare against car travel if parking is taken into account.
Rail fares and service
Whilst I applaud your attempt to 'talk up' British train services - I would like to make a couple of comments:
1. you say "because London relies so much on rail, its fares are higher than typical fares across Britain." What is the logic of this ... I could make the same opposite argument - eg. that fares should be lower than typical ... due to density of use, high demand efficiency etc.
2. I am afraid that perceptions must count here too -and anyone who has travelled on the continent by train will have been impressed by the regularity, promptness, comfort and seating ability of continental trains when compared to Britain - especially the SE commuting experience ...
London and Perceptions
Yes I was putting forward a counter argument – in no way am I defending the current position of the railways in this country. There are so many improvements in service and fares that I, and many other people, would like to see.
I had taken the time to read the full report of Passenger Focus on fares and found that their report gave a different picture from that portrayed by the media.
Like you, when I travel on trains in other states in Europe I am struck by the high level of service, the quality of engineering and design the general look and the feel of the experience. I must say that while abroad I rarely travel in the rush hour because I am on holiday.
However, my own experience of travelling on trains in Britain is also somewhat different from that which others experience. I rarely, if ever, experience a delayed or cancelled train. The trains that I travel on are far better than they used to be. The service is more frequent, the information is clearer. I cannot remember the last time that I did not have a seat.
It is clear that, in London and the south east especially, the rail system is bursting at the seams. The terminus stations have no slots available in peak times so trains “stack” as they wait their turn for a platform. In straight economic terms London should build more through rail services like Thameslink, Crossrail and south crossrail – these would increase capacity significantly. The south crossrail (from Waterloo to London Bridge) would cost little in transport terms for a great expansion in capacity.
In a pure market (if there is such a thing) fares to London are higher because there is little competition. Commuters travelling to into Leeds, Manchester or Birmingham are far more able to use their car than commuters travelling into London. Until the credit-crunch the London economy was bursting - sucking even more people into it. Left without government control I suspect the London train companies would increase their fares into London even further to maximise their revenues.
But the government, because of pressure from commuters, has placed a cap on London commuter fares (linked to the retail price index). This will mean that if the inflation rate goes minus this year – which is likely – the fares next year should fall.
This approach means that more people are willing to make the journey, even at the high walk fare, than can be comfortably carried. Some routes into London are no better than cattle trains – some would say worse. I do not think that in the ordinary course of events people should be aloud to stand on express trains (in my view that is any train that passes a station without stopping). Understandably, such a rule could not be introduced overnight without severe disruption but it should be a goal of transport planners. For a while, in the peak times there would either be queues at the stations or fares would have to jump even higher to choke-off demand. No politician would suggest that.
When I was young, for a couple of years, I used to commute to London. The car park was free and never full. I always got a seat - often with a seat free to my side. I had space and quiet to tuck into my book. Even so I decided that I would feel better if I reverted to working within walking distance from home – something that I have done since I was three. At least when it snows I can get to work – if I want to.
Perceptions of train travel
I am amazed to read Andrew Davis saying that he 'rarely experiences a delayed or cancelled train'. You clearly don't travel on Arriva Cross Country a lot! This company runs short trains, often only four coaches one of which is First Class, and they are frequently full: and delays and cancellations are not an uncommon experience for regular travellers on the route. Moreover their schedules are ridiculously generous (typical time from Durham to Newcastle, for which National Express East Coast allows 13 minutes, is 21 minutes, so a train running 8 minutes late miraculously arrives 'on time': and long catch-up waits at stations en route).
Worse, their cheap fares are vanishing. Last year a friend came from Redruth up to Newcastle for a single fare (booked well in advance, and unchangeable) of £17.85. Looking three months ahead for an equivalent fare, we could find nothing under £150! An incitement to drive if ever there was one.
Come back British Rail, I say, with a simple and regulated fare structure and none of this business where a fare from, say, London to Newcastle is much more expensive than the sum of two fares from London to Peterborough and Peterborough to Newcastle, ON THE SAME TRAIN! Time the train operators ceased to be their own worst enemy.
Sarah Richards
Cancelled Trains
I know the national statistics and also I understand that many lines have been and still are running below acceptable standards. I have been fortunate in that my own experience is that last year I had one late train and this year none at all so far. It was not always the case.
Reason Statistics and Anecdotes and Perceptions
I applaud your excellent attempt to inject a rational analysis into the negative media hype. I trust your careful analysis rather than anecdotes. But - The perception issue is difficult though. So here are my perceptions (anecdotes..?).
I often travel between Montpellier and Aberystwyth. If I am ready to pay about £100 more than Ryanair....
My experience is that it gets worse with each train, spacious TGV to Paris, more cramped Eurostar to London, cramped over crowded Virgin Voyager to Birmingham, dirty broken Arriva diesel to Wales with an emergency bus somewhere in the hills.
But - if I look at the timetables I can calculate that the trains between London and Aberystwyth are more frequent than a few years ago, and noticeably faster.
Sometimes the horribly complex advance fares system delivers an unbelievably cheap ticket, £12 London to Aberystwyth...