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

Ev 134 Transport Committee: Evidence
C. Specific Questions Raised by the Committee
Integrated ticketing
1. Is ticketing suYciently integrated across diVerent modes of transport <strong>and</strong> between diVerent geographical
areas?
A high level of integration has been established by train operators, as set out above. Integration is
particularly needed in urban areas, <strong>and</strong> requires proper contractual relationships <strong>and</strong> a sound legal basis,
consolidating the block exemption by the OYce of Fair Trading which underpins bus/rail ticketing.
Continuing referrals of train operators to the Competition Commission where short-listed bidders also
operate buses in the area do not help to build confidence.
2. Does the Government have an adequate strategy for developing the integration of ticketing systems?
Government has been the driving force behind Transport Direct, the key to providing information about
integrated journeys, <strong>and</strong> has supported ITSO, but the strategy on integrated ticketing has so far been led by
train operators through ATOC, <strong>and</strong> in the case of Plusbus, in partnership with bus operators through
Journey Solutions.
The railway has been criticized over the complexity of its fares structure <strong>and</strong> is working hard to simplify
it. From the beginning of March, the National Rail Enquiry Service web journey planner has simplified
displays to give passengers much better information on the cheapest tickets available for the journey they
want to make. However, integrated ticketing adds to that complexity, <strong>and</strong> this is being addressed through
simple add-on fares such as Plusbus <strong>and</strong> the use of smartcard technology.
The use of smartcard technologies
3. Is the industry taking up modern smartcard technologies adequately <strong>and</strong> appropriately?
Yes. Commercial pressures are driving a rapid take-up of new ticketing technologies. Train operators
have devoted substantial resources to accepting Oyster travelcards in London (<strong>and</strong> are now moving to
accept Pay as you Go as well). TOCs have been in the forefront of the development of e-ticketing <strong>and</strong>
permission to travel by mobile phone. ATOC has been part of ITSO from the outset.
4. Does the ITSO system cater for the needs of all passengers <strong>and</strong> travel providers?
Yes, ITSO is comprehensive, but in practice is likely to be more widely used for frequently made local
journeys than for long distance travel or infrequent trips.
5. What can be learned from the experiences of areas such as London <strong>and</strong> Scotl<strong>and</strong> where smartcard technology
is already in place?
The lessons learned from London are that of the need for a national st<strong>and</strong>ard, <strong>and</strong> that when specified it
should be capable of use by all operators involved, rather than requiring the retrofitting a system designed
for a diVerent purpose. The second lesson is that smartcards require simple fare structures.
Revenue protection <strong>and</strong> the powers of ticket inspectors
6. Is the legal framework within which ticket inspectors function appropriate?
Yes. They work within the Penalty Fares Rules 2002, established by the Department for Transport under
the Penalty Fares Regulations, 1994 <strong>and</strong> s.130 of the Railways Act, 1993. They are applied to:
— Southeastern (inner suburban area only).
— Southern (inner suburban area only).
— South West Trains (inner suburban area only).
— First Capital Connect (Bedford to Redhill only).
— One (most routes other than paytrain lines).
— c2c Ltd (all routes).
— First Great Western (West Drayton to Paddington <strong>and</strong> branches only).
— Central Trains (Birmingham area only).
— Chiltern Railways (all routes).
— Northern (Leeds area only).