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

Ev 50 Transport Committee: Evidence
12 December 2007 Mr Stephen Joseph, Mr Anthony Smith, Mr Rufus Barnes <strong>and</strong> Mr Gordon Edwards
arguments which are destroying relationships
between local authorities <strong>and</strong> bus companies
arguing about concessionary fares reimbursement.
Q412 Mr Martlew: Various local authorities have
diVerent schemes that go beyond. In my area there is
no time restriction. How would you deal with that if
you decided on a national scheme? Would you
destroy that?
Mr Edwards: I think that to get a national scheme,
whether with the advent of smartcards you would
then be able to say a local authority would be able to
top it up—
Q413 Mr Martlew: Smartcards are not working at
the moment.
Mr Edwards: No, but with ITSO smartcards <strong>and</strong>
with bus operators being able to accept them <strong>and</strong>
read them, it would be possible to load cards issued
in a certain district with special features. I think the
current system is just so complex; 291 diVerent travel
concessionary authorities is a nonsense.
Q414 Mr Hollobone: How bad is fare evasion? Is
enough being done to tackle it <strong>and</strong> is enough being
done to diVerentiate between deliberate fare evasion
<strong>and</strong> passengers who make an honest mistake?
Mr Smith: Industry estimates say that something in
the range of 5% to 8% of the revenue is lost as it is
not collected. At the moment passengers put in
about £5.5 billion into the revenue stream each year
<strong>and</strong> that is soon going to creep up to £6 billion. That
equates to about £400 million, that would pay for
400 new carriages tomorrow. It is a lot of money; it is
a tremendous loss. Passengers who have paid deeply
resent the fact that other people have not because
they are subsidising them <strong>and</strong> the industry should
collect what it is owed before it puts the fares up.
Mr Edwards: The only comment I would make on
this is that obviously we support all passengers
paying the correct fare for their journey, but the
railway companies have to make available ticket
oYces with suYcient windows <strong>and</strong> ticket machines
that work <strong>and</strong> issue the full range of tickets.
Q415 Chairman: I think the odd person looking at
those tickets would help too.
Mr Joseph: That is correct. We are concerned that
the emphasis on revenue protection happens on
intercity lines <strong>and</strong> that some of the local lines that
actually need that revenue most do not get the
revenue protection that they need. Lines like the
Severn Beach Line in Bristol or some other lines in
that market, as we have discussed in relation to
concessionary fares, need that revenue to support
them <strong>and</strong> do not seem to have the priority that
should be given to making sure that people on those
lines actually all pay up. In particular, where you
have severe crowding on parts of the network <strong>and</strong> a
pay as you travel on-train ticketing system, you
often find that the conductor or guard physically
cannot make his way down the train to collect the
fares which is another loss of revenue. We are
concerned that it is the local services where the
revenue protection ought to happen most is not
happening.
Mr Smith: We support the concept of penalty fares
as long as they are consistently applied <strong>and</strong> also
passengers have the ability to buy the correct ticket
before boarding. The great concern here is ticket
queues.
Q416 Chairman: Yes, we have had that point. Mr
Barnes?
Mr Barnes: I think it is very important to recognise
that some of the new train operating companies have
installed a number of new gates at the stations <strong>and</strong>
it is very interesting, when talking to the managing
directors of the companies, that some of them are
saying that they are raising far more money then
they ever realised they would as a result of the gates
they have put in.
Q417 Chairman: I want to ask finally about the
English National <strong>Concessionary</strong> Fare Scheme which
is estimated to cost around a billion pounds per
annum. Is that good value or not?
Mr Edwards: It certainly is, yes. It has been a
tremendous success. You only have to go out on
buses <strong>and</strong> talk to elderly people to see how it has
revolutionised their lives, their ability to access
hospitals, health centres, to go to the shops regularly
<strong>and</strong> get fresh food, to go out <strong>and</strong> see their friends. It
is a great success story <strong>and</strong> it is only a pity that it has
been so overshadowed by these arguments between
operators <strong>and</strong> local authorities about
reimbursement. For the customer it is a great, great
success story <strong>and</strong> it has led to phenomenal growth in
bus patronage.
Q418 Chairman: It does rather cut out young people
or anybody on a low income who might actually
benefit from a diVerent scheme.
Mr Barnes: Yes, I think that we have in London seen
the number of concessions for young people
introduced by the Mayor of London. They have
raised separate issues which I am sure you have not
time to look at at the moment, but there are other
options for concessions which over time need to be
looked at.
Chairman: You have been very tolerant, gentlemen;
thank you very much indeed.