Ticketing and Concessionary Travel on Public Transport - United ...
Ticketing and Concessionary Travel on Public Transport - United ...
Ticketing and Concessionary Travel on Public Transport - United ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Questi<strong>on</strong> 68<br />
Timings of Oyster <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> ITSO.<br />
This is actually in my view a red herring!<br />
<strong>Transport</strong> Committee: Evidence Ev 199<br />
1. In the first place it is my underst<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>ing that not all transacti<strong>on</strong>s within Oyster are d<strong>on</strong>e in 200<br />
millisec<strong>on</strong>ds or less. (Apocryphal evidence suggests that some take nearly a sec<strong>on</strong>d).<br />
2. Sec<strong>on</strong>dly Oyster is a closed system with a closed security system. ITSO is interoperable <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> has<br />
therefore to have a peer reviewed security that is capable of much wider use. This will inevitably have a small<br />
impact <strong>on</strong> transacti<strong>on</strong> times.<br />
3. Thirdly ITSO has a range of smart cards (see above) in its stables <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> some of these are indeed slower<br />
than Oyster, but some are the same platform as Oyster <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> would therefore be expected to be of similar<br />
speed to Oyster.<br />
4. Fourthly, the Department for <strong>Transport</strong>’s own research has suggested that a transacti<strong>on</strong> time of<br />
anything up to <strong>on</strong>e sec<strong>on</strong>d is quite acceptable as users of smartcards tend, when they touch their smartcards<br />
to the reader, to leave the smart card in the field for anything up to 1 sec<strong>on</strong>d. This also is quicker than the<br />
time taken for a magnetic ticket to pass through the magnetic ticket transport (<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> much more reliable).<br />
5. Fifthly users, so l<strong>on</strong>g as they are provided with a visual or aural “go”, signal will actually modify their<br />
behaviour (within reas<strong>on</strong>) so that the pass works. (It is much less hassle for it to work than to have to “seek<br />
assistance”.) This is eminently shown in L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong> where some individual transacti<strong>on</strong>s take much l<strong>on</strong>ger<br />
than others.<br />
ITSO therefore believes that majoring <strong>on</strong> transacti<strong>on</strong> times is obfuscati<strong>on</strong>, when all of the available<br />
evidence suggests that so l<strong>on</strong>g as a transacti<strong>on</strong> is properly completed within less than <strong>on</strong>e sec<strong>on</strong>d (<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> ITSO’s<br />
benchmark is less than 600 millisec<strong>on</strong>ds). Certainly in L<strong>on</strong>d<strong>on</strong>, replacing magnetic tickets with smartcards<br />
would give transacti<strong>on</strong> throughput benefits for every<strong>on</strong>e. It would be win-win for both users <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> for TfL.<br />
Related to Q84<br />
(The Encyclopaedia Britannica of Buses)<br />
The questi<strong>on</strong> relates to fraud. Experience has shown that when a new type of equipment is installed for<br />
the first time in an area revenue tends to increase, with no other changes, by between 10% <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> 15%. This<br />
then tends to fall away as time goes <strong>on</strong>. One possible explanati<strong>on</strong> that has been given is that this is because<br />
a new ticket machine makes every<strong>on</strong>e “more h<strong>on</strong>est” until the new machine (<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> its quirks) become known.<br />
This therefore suggests that underlying general losses to unknown events (such as customers not paying or<br />
overriding etc) is to the order of 10% to 15%.<br />
As was inferred in the written evidence in many cases the re-imbursement of c<strong>on</strong>cessi<strong>on</strong>ary fares does not<br />
relate directly to individual journeys but is related to the results of surveys.<br />
In relati<strong>on</strong> to the previous secti<strong>on</strong> (Q83) there is no requirement for pers<strong>on</strong>al data to be written into the<br />
card. This data can all be held securely in the back oYce, as currently. The Department for <strong>Transport</strong> has<br />
provided guidance to TCAs <strong>on</strong> this in its bulletins.<br />
I trust that this is of assistance to the Committee, please let me know if you need anything else.<br />
January 2008<br />
Memor<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>um from P G Rayner (TPT 44)<br />
The Positi<strong>on</strong> as at Early March 2008.<br />
A Pers<strong>on</strong>al View: P G Rayner.<br />
Having been actively involved now for over 10 years I am mindful that in some senses “I know too much”<br />
<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> have as a c<strong>on</strong>sequence tried to restrict this comment to essentials.<br />
Firstly as the recent history is important if <strong>on</strong>e is to underst<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> the development of c<strong>on</strong>cessi<strong>on</strong>ary travel<br />
it should be noted for more than 20 years some communities have provided free or reduced rate travel for<br />
their older citizens <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> for those with mobility diYculties. However it was not until the <strong>Transport</strong> Act 2000<br />
that the half price bus fares were made m<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g>atory <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> some of the funding was provided centrally. This<br />
was received with mixed feelings <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> immediately <strong>on</strong>e could see that <strong>on</strong>ly those authorities who believed in<br />
the value of such schemes implemented the system without political back biting <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> resistance. This has its<br />
roots in party politics but the pattern has never revealed that to be too much of an influence for many places<br />
out of sympathy with nati<strong>on</strong>al government of the day have good <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> generous schemes.<br />
So the <strong>Transport</strong> Act 2000 made some m<strong>on</strong>ey available but because that was a l<strong>on</strong>g time ago <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> the<br />
m<strong>on</strong>ey was, <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> is, mingled in with the general grants <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> not ring fenced it exists but is frequently forgotten<br />
when the debates rage <strong>on</strong> how much m<strong>on</strong>ey this or that authority gets.