5. Ticketing and connections

We hear a lot about fare simplification and about better reliability from the new government. Few of us doubt that a more reliable service and one on which prices are better understood would be a good thing. We also hear of fiscal conservatism - plans to reduce the cost of the railways.

In recent years, through trains from Bristol, Bath, Bradford-on-Avon and Trowbridge to London (Waterloo) and to Brighton have been withdrawn by SWR^» (South Western Railway - about)» and GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway). Groupsave has been moved to an 09:30 start and had the "children go for £1" element withdrawn. Railcard discounts are being trimmed back this month. A Freedom of Information response following the withdrawal of through trains from London to our county town in Wiltshire was heavily redacted, with other services also under consideration for culling blacked out as being "commercial in confidence".  With "nationalisation" looming the redactions should no longer apply, and indeed joined up benefits could accrue.

I applaud the improvements in services in recent years to Okehampton and the planned improvements to Newquay in frequency and in running the trains from there beyond the isolated junction at Par. What other plans are being made? As an example, the London Waterloo to Salisbury "stopper" is operated by class 158 and 159 units by SWR. The Bristol to Salisbury "stopper" is also operated much of the time by class 158 units.  Much used and much loved facilities, with significant potential in the new era, could be provided.

I also commend the railcard and groupsave principles.

a) Can you tell us of any other services that are under consideration for culling from the redacted report, or any service level reductions as we see no commitment to retained service levels

b) Can you tell us of plans to join / connect services across ex-franchise boundaries bearing in mind a 40% loss of passengers if they have to change trains

c) Can you tell us if there are other fare "simplifications" in the pipeline which will result in backdoor rises in the cost of travel for the average passenger?

d) Are there any other simplifications which will truly result in an easier and more consistent product - for example the "Network" railcard to universally apply across the whole network, or Groupsave to apply universally on all operators to encourage journeys to Barry Island or Birmingham?

Text I have typed from the recording of the Zoom session - please forgive typos.
DM - Daryn McCombe, GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway)
TL - Thomas Lydon, GWR
GE - Graham Ellis
BC - Bryony Chetwode
CB - ChrisB

Question 5

GE: Ticket simplifications resulted in hidden price rises

DM; TL posting politically correct answer on forum. Obviously the treasury controls regulated prices relies on the revenue stream coming in from the railway. For any fares reform they are not going to be giving up significant amounts of money so there will be winners and losers through any reform that happens.  What we have to do is to make sure overall that the reform is fair and that we're not seeing unfair outcomes from that but ultimate no-one in GW^▸ (Great Western) is going to be involved in making the decisions on it. We'll be able to help influence as you are on regulated fare ans I suppose even unregulated fares will become a matter for government.  It is inevitable when you are trying to make changes but not make a reduction in the overall revenue inevitably you are shifting the balance from one element of the fares system to another and how that balance lands and your own perspective will determine whether you're a winner or a looser.

GE: Far more with you than the question may suggest.  We had a system of peak fares that was set to maximise the money that was taken and perhaps to discourage travel on the busiest trains. We now find the bust crowded trains are Saturdays and Sundays when we have the super off peak fares. it may surprise you that the 06:32 Melksham to Southampton which is a peak train is rarely very crowded

DM: Observation we have regularly and Mark has made in public and private that the fares are not in kilter with what they were designed to do and we would advocate for that as well.

TL: Pre-pandemic and with other operators we did advocate fares reform. We all accept that they's too many anomalies that have been in place since the railways were privatised, and will be in place when no longer privatised but there needs to be a decision taken beyond train operators across the industry and with passenger groups but with wide scale reform there will be winners and losers. And there needs to be an acceptance of that.  If people want there to continue to be improvements, that has to be matched with investment.  That comes from public funding but we need to see it matched from the farebox as well, particularly in these challenging economic times.  There's a job for all of us to do that note that while there are fares out there that don't seem to be the cheapest, the vast majority who are travelling don't use those fares.  If you're on a high speed service e basically from anywhere into London, peak time on a Tuesday or Wednesday, probably the majority of people on that train are using an advance purchase ticket which compared to the cost of driving and parking is not incomparable and (personal comment) all of use who are passionate about rail need to talk about the issues and be advocates

GE: Sure, ironing out some of the anomalies also irons out some of the bargains. Example given.

TL: And we have brought in our pay as you go scheme cover the whole of SOuth Cotswolds and Swindon into Bristol and single leg pricing which "I am sure is something people joining us on Zoom will have been arguing for" for a long time, so there's that innovation there. There's areas where we would like to replicate contactless like we've had in London - not Oyster^▸ (Smartcard system used by passengers on Transport for London services) but where you can just use your phone or debit card and encourage people to use the rail. Obviously these things are far more complicated in the back office.  We do want to see fare reform, the government is committed to it. Ultimately this does it with government and Louise Haigh and Lord Hendy to resolve

GE: If it's one of those things I was looking to resolve, I wouldn't want to be starting from where we are.

TL: We have spoken a lot in our written answer about National Rail Contracts and our decreasingbbudget. Ask - we will be sick and tired of hearing but Mark and the business made a point that it was about protecting our timetable; without a timetable we don't have a product to sell and a huge amount of investment and work went into the 2019 timetable and, yes, there are some areas where we have had to make changes that are very difficult but for the vast majority of the network we have not only protected [it] but enhanced it like around Bristol and to Carmarthen and in the summer the new service down to Devon and Cornwall

GE: Agreed, and with the exception of the GW services to Brighton which you'll note we were muted in protest, whereas all hell broke loose when SWR^» (South Western Railway - about) withdrew through trains from London to the county Town of Trowbridge (and B-o-A, Bath, Bristol).  Hats off to Mark and the team there - we may be critical but we are critical as friends.

GE: We are trying to get a gallon into a pint pot this afternoon ... long written answer too, thank you.  Can remaining questions dome though?  Yes -  thank you.