Fury as commuters face train fare rises of up to 11.2%

When I was a kid there used to be cheap excursions to make the rail networks more economic. It was quite a day out to take a train journey. Now they have electrification, radios and all sorts of gizmos and when I went to a railways station a couple of months ago, all the trains were cancelled. They are only three empty coaches when I do see one. They used to be that full, there would be people standing. It's a little like the High Streets, pedestrianised, with kerbs sticking out into the road and no parking anywhere. They wonder why there are no shoppers... I understand they are queuing up for tickets to the Orient Express...

I have little sympathy. A major cost here is rolling stock. Had it not been for the mad panic over safety in the period after the Clapham rail accident, the mark 1 slam door stock would still be in service. This would have considerably reduced the costs of the whole operation. It was good for about 45 years from 1975 ie in the normal way of things the last of it would have been withdrawn in 2020. As it was, the last of the stock was taken out of service in 2005, which means that 15 years of service life was lost - nearly one-third of the total. There were a variety of enhancements that could have been made to this stock at minimum cost to bring them up to modern standards, plus the option of re-bodying but retaining the most expensive and valuable components ie bogies and other running gear and the electrical equipment which was simple and robust and could have been made to last indefinitely. The new stock, being heavier, also consumes more electricity which has to be paid for. One of the reasons why the less expensive option was not chosen was because the oligolopoly of train manufacturers was anxious to sell their very expensive new products and convinced the politicians who make these decisions that trains are like cars and have a fifteen year replacement cycle. Things are going to get much worse. The real cost of railway rolling stock went up by a factor of about 6 between 1955 and 1995 and has risen again with the advent of trains like the Pendolino, the Crossrail replacement and the Hitachi Inter City Express which has just been ordered. The latter costs about £2.9 million per vehicle compared with £6000 per vehicle in 1955. Allowing for a factor of 40 for inflation, that makes the new trains ten times as expensive in real terms. They are not ten times more comfortable, or ten times faster or ten times safer. Passengers travelling in 1950s trains normally remark how spacious and comfortable they are in comparison with the new ones.

The above inflation, sorry, inflationery fare increases (Maggie Thatcher was right on that one) are supposed to provide money for the railway companies to invest in improving the service. Any company will have an investment plan that shows how much it needs in order to make planned investment. Here we have a random amount being paid to the railway companies based on the rate of inflation on a randomly chosen date. There is no business plan and no investment plan. Railway companies should be required to publish costed investment plans each year showing improvements and investments and should be publicly accountable for their delivery. The rule should be "no plan, no fare increase", "failed plan, reconsideration of contract and no increase next year", "plan too expensive, Government veto".