Fare rises, failing franchises and why rail nationalisation is popular

The Rail Delivery Group says it “brings together the companies that run Britain’s railway into a single team with one goal – to deliver a better railway for you and your community”.

It’d be interesting to see how commuters would react to that being read to them after the new year delivered them a 2.7 per cent average rise in fares together with the news that transport secretary Grant Shapps had commenced a process that could strip Northern rail of its franchise.

The reason for the latter was the lack of any sign of improvements being delivered by that particular train operating company.

Schapps fulminated about its “unacceptable” service with good reason. That’s what it is.

Having acquired so many northern seats, the Tories now have to pretend to care about the region and the travails imposed on it by said rail franchise.

They probably won’t be all that pleased to be reminded that Northern’s poor performance is the end result of a previous Tory government’s botched rail privatisation programme.

Northern has complained about late delivery of infrastructure projects and Network Rail, which handles the track and infrastructure.

The phrase “heard it all before” comes to mind. But part of the problem with the aforementioned privatisation has always been the split in responsibilities between the train operating companies and Network Rail.

There has been a suggestion knocking around that Schapps cooked up the Northern franchise fuss, delivered via a BBC interview, in an attempt to divert attention from the fare increase.

If that’s the case then it didn’t work very well.

Long suffering commuters aren’t getting rides. They’re unlikely to be taken for one by Schapps if that was his intent. The two stories landing at the same time just served to highlight what a godawful mess the railways are in.

What happens next? When it comes to the question of Northern, it gets a bit fuzzy. You see, Arriva, Northern’s parent company, might still end up in the driver’s seat via a “management contract” under revised terms.

Alternatively, the government could take over via the “operator of last resort”, which already runs LNER. I have a sneaking suspicion that Schapps would rather avoid that because there’d then be a line of accountability that could find its way to his desk if Northern fails to improve.

As for the fare increase, we’re told that it’s the third year in a row that average fares have been held below RPI inflation. Well whoopee. Here’s the thing: RPI inflation is no longer an official statistic. It’s been replaced by CPI inflation. I won’t go into great detail about the reasons for the change other than to say that nobody’s calling for a volte face.

Anyway, CPI inflation is running at 1.5 per cent. So no it’s not the third year of below inflation fare rises. It’s an above inflation rise for what is, in too many places, a shoddy service.

Schapps talked about the need for money for investment, as transport secretaries always do. So when will we see an impact? Northern is hardly the only troubled franchise.

There really is no happy new year for rail passengers.

Labour did not win the argument at the general election, despite what its outgoing leader would have you believe, but it did have one or two popular policies of which rail nationalisation was one.

The current mess is only going to strengthen the hands of those arguing for it.