Ticketing and Concessionary Travel on Public Transport - United ...

Transport Committee: Evidence Ev 115
were to be firmly applied, a vital corollary would be that the operator provided adequately-staVed bookingoYces,
to avoid more than the very shortest ticket-queues no matter how busy the lines were. Without such
a commitment, enforcing limits on what a train-conductor can issue from staVed stations is tantamount to
punishing some of the travelling public for the shortcomings of the service-provider, <strong>and</strong> is to be deplored.
By the same token, however, operators of rail <strong>and</strong> bus services need to see that all who travel pay their
due fare. This means than the fare-structures are simple enough to allow passengers to underst<strong>and</strong> them
readily, <strong>and</strong> fare-collectors to sell tickets to all who need them, even when unstaVed stations are close
together, <strong>and</strong> numbers using each one are comparatively high. Similar points apply to bus operations in that
ticket-issue methods should minimise the length of a queue outside a vehicle at busy stops, especially those
in town centres. Again, a carnet approach is a largely-untried but very simple way to achieve this.
7. (a) What appeals mechanisms exist for passengers?
Without better knowledge of what these mechanisms are, it is diYcult to answer this. ”Conditions of
Carriage” notices are rarely found on bus-stop poles, or even at some rail stations. The recent demise of
regional Rail Users’ Consultative Committees has made it more diYcult for rail travellers to find out that
such appeals are possible at all, never mind to decide where best to address them.
(b) Are they adequate?
A fortiori, no. It in any case depends on the nature of the complaint, <strong>and</strong> the character <strong>and</strong> persistence of
the person who wishes to make it.
8. Are the rights of passengers <strong>and</strong> the powers of ticket-inspectors well-balanced?
Here again, generalised comment borders on the futile. Conditions of work vary between bus, local train,
tram, metro, <strong>and</strong> longer-distance rail services. There are awkward customers, <strong>and</strong> there are (some) awkward
inspectors, but it is reassuring that, increasingly nowadays, staV training on all modes of travel emphasises
how best to h<strong>and</strong>le passengers whose tickets are invalid or mis-issued, to avoid conflict <strong>and</strong> to maintain basic
human respect—in both directions.
This is easier aspired to than attained; <strong>and</strong> the eVorts <strong>and</strong> patience required of inspection staV are
considerable, as well as frequently under-estimated by some of the travelling public. On buses, particularly,
where a passenger is causing trouble for whatever reason, the steps needed for an inspector to gain oYcial
back-up are prohibitively cumbersome <strong>and</strong> time-consuming. Bus operators do not like their buses being held
up for several minutes or more, even for a police reinforcement to arrive. Neither, it must be said, do other
passengers, who in such circumstances simply wish to continue their journey to its end, <strong>and</strong> then to leave
the vehicle rapidly.
9. Do operators of public transport take adequate measures to protect fares revenue?
This is yet another case where generalisation is virtually impossible. Some operators have at times been
guilty of over-kill (eg in central Manchester, at Oxford Road station, then at Piccadilly station, half a mile
further on, for those who have to change trains there in a hurry). With better application of discretion <strong>and</strong>
experienced judgement, this has eased oV recently. As stated earlier, there is always the potential conflict
between seeing, especially at busy times, that all passengers pay their fare, <strong>and</strong> annoying the majority who
have done so by asking them repeatedly to prove this. Mainly, this is a rail problem, since few buses permit
non-payers to get far beyond the driver’s cab-side. But cf points made about bus fare-collection in Questions
1, 3, 5 <strong>and</strong> 6 passim. The apparently-irreconcilable aims of making public transport attractive enough to
tempt car-users to change to it, <strong>and</strong> of seeing that all pay what they are supposed to pay, can become far
more attainable, we feel, if there are more carnet facilities on every type of public transport—<strong>and</strong> we make
no apology for repeating this point yet again here.
<strong>Concessionary</strong> Fares—the Right Strategy?
10. Is the Government’s concessionary fares strategy, including the proposed scheme for concessionary bus
travel, adequate?
In short, no. The free travel for OAPs <strong>and</strong> the disabled, welcome though it is to its users, has caused
financial problems at various points: the bus operators quote a nominal average ’fare’ for each free ticket
issued, <strong>and</strong> a local council, evidently, has to compensate the bus operators accordingly. Not all councils have
adequate finance to do this, evidently, <strong>and</strong> have to decide, rightly or wrongly, to reduce the levels of
“maintained” bus services, particularly in evenings when buses are few <strong>and</strong> far between anyway. It looks to
us as though much greater funding-levels are required than are now made available, <strong>and</strong> that the problem
will get worse in 2008, when the scheme goes nation-wide.