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

Ev 152 Transport Committee: Evidence
2. The Government appears to have no strategy for the development of integrated ticketing.
3. Outside London, <strong>and</strong> to a lesser extent Scotl<strong>and</strong>, the industry is proving very reluctant to adopt
Smartcard ticketing. Many smaller operators do not even possess or use ticket machines. In North
StaVordshire <strong>and</strong> rural Northumberl<strong>and</strong> return tickets are h<strong>and</strong>written <strong>and</strong> no ticket is issued for single
journeys. Derbyshire County Council has attempted to overcome this by leasing modern ticket machines to
smaller operators in order to apportion concessionary fares revenue <strong>and</strong> monitor use of tendered services.
TrentBarton are trialling a new Smartcard based ticketing system this summer but this does not appear
to be compatible with the Smartcards issued by Nottingham City transport for season tickets although many
routes overlap. Furthermore concessionary fare holders in Nottinghamshire have a separate Smartcard to
permit free oV-peak travel but have to pay for peak journeys by cash.
4. I believe that this issue is open to debate <strong>and</strong> do not feel able to comment upon it at present.
5. Smartcards work very eYciently on gated systems such as Tube/Rail stations with automatic barriers
<strong>and</strong> on buses as season tickets or with a flat fare provided there is just one entry point to the bus with a
Smartcard reader monitored by the driver. However they are cumbersome to read with h<strong>and</strong> held machines
on multiple entrance vehicles such as articulated buses in London <strong>and</strong> trams in Nottingham. This leads to
a substantial (<strong>and</strong> unquantifiable) revenue loss especially at peak times.
6. Discretion needs to be exercised as appropriate to avoid genuine honest passengers being deterred from
using public transport for a fear of being penalised for inadvertently using the wrong ticket or service.
7. The need for, <strong>and</strong> frequency of, appeals should be at an absolute minimum.
8. Yes, provided that discretion is exercised by ticket inspectors when appropriate.
9. Many rail operators fail to ensure that on-train staV make regular ticket checks whilst few bus
companies now employ ticket inspectors <strong>and</strong> drivers have neither the time nor power to check tickets after
the passenger has boarded to prevent “over-riding”.
10. The Government’s concessionary fares policy is an unaVordable disaster. It is a subsidy to both bus
operators <strong>and</strong> those over 60’s <strong>and</strong> disabled persons fortunate enough to both live close to a bus route taking
them where <strong>and</strong> when they want to travel <strong>and</strong> be in suYcient good health to travel by bus. It leads to
overcrowding between 0930 <strong>and</strong> 1030 which deters other potential paying customers <strong>and</strong> it will result in
single fares increasing at a greater than expected rate whilstever reimbursement to operators is based upon
an agreed proportion of the single fare.
It will do nothing to encourage operators to oVer integrated ticketing as it removes up to 50% of the oVpeak
market <strong>and</strong> therefore makes the administration of such schemes even less commercially attractive.
It will also lead to a deterioration in service quality as customers travelling free are less likely to complain
about the service oVered <strong>and</strong> will exhibit less br<strong>and</strong> loyalty to a particular operator. EVectively free travellers
will catch the first available bus <strong>and</strong> it is likely that the viability of “all day” routes will be undermined by
low quality operators targeting free oV-peak passengers possibly between school journeys.
11. There is a danger that free bus travel will reduce oV peak use of parallel rail services, especially for
medium distance inter-urban journeys where journey time is of less importance. The proposed Engl<strong>and</strong>-wide
free bus travel has significant cost implications for tourist areas where “outsiders” will seasonally outnumber
“locals” yet it appears that the local authority will be expected to foot the bill. It is to be hoped that this will
not lead to cuts in supported bus services which local residents rely upon to reach essential services such as
health <strong>and</strong> shopping, whilst “over 60” leisure travellers <strong>and</strong> holidaymakers enjoy free travel.
I must stress however that the solution to this problem is not to oVer free “local” rail travel but to
withdraw the exorbitantly expensive free bus travel scheme <strong>and</strong> replace it with a UK concessionary half fare
scheme available on all modes at all times using Smartcard technology. Operators should be oVered a flat
rate administration fee per passenger carried (paid by Central Government) <strong>and</strong> savings should be diverted
to installing compatible Smartcard readers on all buses <strong>and</strong> at all rail stations with all concessionary passes
being Smartcard based. This would reduce boarding times <strong>and</strong> provide a robust, reliable means of tracking
the use of concessionary travel passes. It would also restore an element of competitiveness in the market <strong>and</strong>
allow the continued use of well established elasticity theory; free concessionary travel invalidates such theory
<strong>and</strong> will inevitably lead to some fares increasing at a higher rate.
March 2007
Memor<strong>and</strong>um from Scheidt & Bachmann (TPT 27)
Scheidt <strong>and</strong> Bachmann GmbH is a global provider of intergrated <strong>and</strong> automated fares systems for public
transport services.
In the United Kingdom the company is a major provider to the National Rail Passenger Franchise
operators <strong>and</strong> is currently delivering the DfT funded Yorkshire multi modal smartcard ticketing programme
Yorcard to the ITSO St<strong>and</strong>ard.