Ben Webster, Transport Correspondent
Download 'Too Hot', an exclusive Specials track from iTunes
Commuters who were promised that privatisation would mean cheaper journeys will soon be paying more in real terms than they did in the days of British Rail.
Season tickets and saver fares will rise next month by 6 per cent – cancelling out the price cuts of the early years of privatisation.
John Major’s Government promised 12 years ago that fares would fall as a result of privatisation. Geoff Hoon, the Transport Secretary, said last week that regulated fares were no more expensive in real terms than they had been when Labour came to power in 1997. But an analysis by the Liberal Democrats has found that the average regulated fare will cost 0.6 per cent more in real terms than in 1997. On some routes the increase will be more than 6 per cent.
Over the next five years the Government is committed to increases above inflation each year until 2014. It wants passengers to pay 75 per cent of the cost of the railways. At present they pay half and taxpayers the other half.
Brian Mawhinney (now Lord Mawhinney), who was Transport Secretary when the railways were sold off, pledged that private rail companies would offer cheaper tickets and better value for money. He said in 1995 that there would be an “historic divide” between the era of British Rail and the lower fares provided by the private sector.
Regulated fares, which include season tickets and saver tickets, were frozen for the first three years of privatisation and then fell by one percentage point below inflation each year for the next four years. But, since 2004, the Government has been raising fares by one point above inflation each January.
Unregulated fares, which include peak singles and returns and are set by the train companies, will rise by 7 per cent in January. That increase will make them 35 per cent more expensive in real terms than in 1997.
Mr Hoon said that he had urged the main train companies “to bear in mind the difficult economic circumstances when setting their fares”.
A source at the Department for Transport said Mr Hoon was disappointed that most companies had chosen to ignore him. Norman Baker, the Liberal Democrat transport spokesman, said: “It makes a mockery of any claim to a climate change strategy to push up the cost of low-carbon travel.”
Anthony Smith, the chief executive of Passenger Focus, the government-funded watchdog, said: “We have a very, very expensive railway and increasingly the costs are going to be dumped on the passenger. Given that there is a monopoly on most routes, we need to look at how competition law could be used to protect passengers from exploitation.”
Win a luxury weekend to Newcastle and its neighbour Gateshead, find out more here
Risk, resilience and embracing new technology
Industry sectors news at a glance. Interactive heatmap, video and podcast
Discover the power of collective thinking. Submit a solution and be in with a chance to win a Media Hub Home Entertainment System
The inside track on current trends in the charity, not for profit and social enterprise sectors
Everything the Business Traveller needs to know to make a better trip
Make the most of the summer and enter our fabulous photographic competition, you could win a £5000 holiday
Corsica is an island of beauty and contrast, an ideal holiday destination
Enjoy further reading from Travel to Fashion, Business to Sport, discover more
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles
The clever way to lease a new car is with Car leasing made simple™
2009
per month on 36-month
Personal Contract Hire (PCH)
2008
42850
Car Insurance
£24,250 - £30,346
MI5
London
£60,000
The Environment Agency
Bristol
Up to £90K
Boots
Midlands
OTE £85k
Credit Protection Association
Nationwide Opportunities
Completely London
Luxury Condo's in Manhattan with NYC views
The best new homes in Wimbledon?
Nationwide
Fabulous Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers Including Virgin Atlantic Flights Prices Start From Only £699pp!
Last Minute Cruise And Cruise & Stay Offers. Med From £499pp, Caribbean From £699pp!
5 star quality at a 3 star price.
8 fabulous Canadian cities ...you won’t find cheaper
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times, or place your advertisement.
Times Online Services: Dating | Jobs | Property Search | Used Cars | Holidays | Births, Marriages, Deaths | Subscriptions | E-paper
News International associated websites: Globrix Property Search | Property Finder | Milkround
Copyright 2009 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
To Will of Grimsby: I've got news for you - the taxpayer not only "reimburses" (i.e. subsidises) the present operation of the railways, but four/five times more than was the case under BR. Furthermore, BT is hardly an example to be followed: it was obliged to give access following an OFTEL ruling.
John Buckeridge, London,
im guessing this doesnt include the massive yearly losses that the tax payer had to re emburse british rail for every year.
although of course the privatisation of the railways should have been done on a sale rather than franchise basis, with line operators having to give access like BT does.
will, grimsby, uk
Does this analysis factor in tax payer funding for the trains both then and now. If tickets were cheaper but more tax payers money supported the trains in the past then the comparison falls to pieces.
Peter Farrington, Maidstone,
Make no mistake: the cost of rail travel is as a direct result of government meddling, charging train companies huge fees for the privilege of running their own trains, which costs have to be passed onto rail passengers. It is simply another oppressive stealth tax.
James E. Petts, Burnham, England
How can competition between providers bring lower fares when each provider is by definition given a monopoly on the region it serves?
All it means is that commuting on that route is cheaper or more expensive than commuting on a completely different route.
The only choice consumers have is to move!
r hughes, middlesborough,