Scottish rail fares double as Government price cut ends

The last day of September was the first day of new fares in Scotland. For many travellers this will have come as a shock, and a very big one at that. An experimental scheme, underwritten by the Scottish Government, had seen peak-hours fares suspended. The regular, or off-peak fares, were applied all day. The intention was to encourage more people to travel by rail. It worked, but according to the Scottish Government, not by enough.

In a climate of climate change and an environment of environmental awareness, encouraging self-loading cargo – otherwise known as passengers – to make the modal shift to rail seems like a good idea. So almost doubling some fares on the busiest routes does seem to be a counterintuitive way to go about it. Nevertheless, that’s exactly what the Scottish Government has done.

Dissuading passengers from travelling

Commuters are the worst affected by the resumption of the ‘peak fare’ regime. Many people on lower incomes, living further away from places of work, say the cost of rail travel is a significant living expense. The tens of thousands who work in Glasgow and live in Edinburgh (sometimes teased by the acronym “Wiglies”) will see their walk-up fares for the 100-mile (160km) round trip go from just over £16 to just under £32. A doubling if not exactly overnight, certainly ‘over weekend’.

The scheme effectively ended on Friday of last week. Peak-time fares do not apply at weekends. David Ross, director of communications at the government-managed passenger operator ScotRail, defended the position in media interviews given on the first day of the new fares. Ross’s job was made all the more challenging by having his now departed managing director, Alex Hynes, gave a slightly less than wildly ringing endorsement in a promotional video (above) which could be construed as passively dissuading passengers from travelling for fear of overcrowding.

Minister: return to peak fares “challenging”

ScotRail might also be accused of playing down their own initiative. Ross said that at one point there was a promotion almost every other minute on TV, telling passengers about the promotion. That claim may not be vindicated by the advertising logs. Contemporary newspaper reports said ScotRail actually reigned in its awareness campaign. Many commuters have indeed expressed ignorance of the scheme – and certainly ignorance of the scheme ending.

It must be recognised, however, that the Scottish Government mandated the experiment. They always made clear the temporary nature of the trial run. There was obvious optimism among transport campaigners that it would become a permanent move. “The analysis showed that it increased passengers up to about six per cent as a maximum,” said Ross – although Government figures claim slightly more. Scottish Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop, who was not in office when the experimental policy was launched, said she understood the problems faced by passengers, who are now staring at a near-doubling of their daily commuting costs. Those journeys are by definition made out of necessity. “I am aware that a significant minority of people who cannot choose when they travel to and from work did and would benefit from lower priced rail travel – these are people who might find the return to peak fares challenging,” she said.

Polar Express and unpleasant with added expense

Several other factors undoubtedly undermined the scheme. The long-running series of industrial disputes significantly affected the reliability of trains. ScotRail has, for years, been plagued with overcrowding on many routes – notably services into Edinburgh from the Scottish Borders and Fife. Outdated rolling stock has been deployed on scenic routes, in the West Highlands for example – with one train running without heating in the winter months dubbed by hypothermic travellers as “The Polar Express – except there’s nothing express about it”.

ScotRail is also still implementing what it calls an ‘emergency timetable’. This was introduced several months ago because of a shortage of drivers, and working conditions which do not compel staff to be scheduled outside office hours. To avoid the mass cancellations which passengers have endured – ScotRail has taken the pragmatic but hardly encouraging step of radically reducing the number of trains scheduled in the evenings and at weekends. Transport watchdogs have all remarked that none of this has helped persuade new passengers to take to the rails. When they have, the experience has often been unpleasant. Now, with the new fares regime, it will be unpleasant with added expense.

Government disagrees with its own agency

Not for the first time, the government in Holyrood disagrees with the civil service in George House. Transparency over the figures remains obscure. Scottish Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop, who was not in office when the experimental policy was launched, said that the scheme had attracted an increase in passenger numbers of 6.8 per cent. However, she said that the promotion would have required an uplift of ten per cent to break even on the claimed forty million pound investment (funding set aside for ScotRail).

However, questions have been asked over how transparent was that ‘target’ of ten per cent and what efforts were made to monitor the progress of the scheme. Transport Scotland’s “Fair Fares Review” was published just over a month ago, and states that the scheme had a positive ‘cost to benefit’ ratio – in other words, it was economically profitable.

No solace even in a dram

ScotRail has reintroduced some promotional fares. These were largely suspended during the scheme. For example, carnet style tickets, that give “12 journeys for the price of ten” have been reintroduced, and season ticket deals are more widely available. However, that’s no solace for those 6.8 per cent who did make the modal shift to rail.

By answering the call, passengers have potentially made lifestyle and work decisions based on the fare structure. The whole affair will come as an unjust blow, whatever motivated them. It’s enough to drive one to drink – except that Scotland’s unique minimum alcohol unit pricing regime was also revised as of Monday, making that respite thirty per cent more expensive as well.