Would Rail North have a harmonised fare structure across the various TPE/Council boundaries (zones etc)?
Would Metrolink tickets be interavailable with rail, or more generally bus/rail?
How would Day Rangers work?
Examples of awkward questions ahead.
The "Rail North" body would be in the public sector, but the operating franchise(s) (ie TOCs) would still be bid periodically by private groups as everywhere else.
No change at all in Network Rail.
Originally Posted by yorksrob
As I understand it, it's more a specifying role than directly running the railway, so I wouldn't have thought they'd have to devote huge staff resources to it. Presumably whichever official deals with transport at the moment might be expected to attend meetings, review and comment on documentation and liaise with the elected members, but that's generally a responsibility that can be absorbed.
But outside the PTE areas the councils don't have any responsibility for transport to speak of. And (in my experience anyway) what limited responsibilities they have, they manage to screw up. My local council, Blackburn with Darwen, has done nothing transport-oriented except spend the last decade adding more and more one-way systems, traffic lights and road narrowing measures in order to create the worst traffic jams I have experienced outside the M25. Their current big idea on transport is spending untold millions on a new bus station for the town. The current bus station is immediately outside the town's railway station and provides an excellent transport interchange that other towns would sell their grannies for. The new bus station is on the other side of the town centre. And it's only been made necessary because the council pedestrianised all the roads in the town centre forcing all traffic to have to drive through the current bus station, rendering it impossible to use for buses, pedestrians and other road-users.
Also, as a Unitary Council, they are in a permanent state of war with both Lancashire County Council and their neighbouring borough councils. What I see does not fill me with confidence in their ability to participate in running a pan-Northern England railway system!
I think some of it comes down to how those Council's view transport/rail transport in the first place. If they don't have an interest, then they're not likely to be very active in the organisation - but then again, how is that any different to the current situation with Whitehall now ?
At least if they have have to send someone to the meetings, there's the chance that:
1) It might prompt them to take more of an interest.
2) They're more likely to influence the wider franchising process.
Yes, harmonised fares and targeting of fare anomalies and that would mean that some fares in PTE areas would likely go up.
Hmmm - think I'm gonna need a bit more convincing than that!
I'm not necessarily opposed to the idea in principal (or even on principle). My problem is that I just don't have any faith in the abilities of far too many councils to be able to do anything properly! Transport for oop't North will cover a huge area and involve a vast number of councils being able to work together. (I can't even begin to calculate how many councils would have to be involved.) It would be another tier of bureaucracy in addition to what's already there - just what the railways need!
Do you think the matter of the fare increases and the reason for this will be one that certain bodies will not want to receive much in the way of media discussion ?
I've heard that their subscribed to the idea that no rail ticket should be cheaper than an equivalent bus journey.
At the moment journeys wholly within PTE areas are heavily subsidised leading to anomalies such as a fare spike when crossing out of PTE area and the same journey distance through a rural county costing more.
At the moment journeys wholly within PTE areas are heavily subsidised leading to anomalies such as a fare spike when crossing out of PTE area and the same journey distance through a rural county costing more. You would likely see these anomalies end with subsidy in PTE areas diverted away from straight fare reduction and instead into investment in rolling stock and infrastructure which will bring down running costs (and which should have the knock on effect of generating additional revenue), meanwhile there would likely be more subsidy going into reducing fares in rural areas particularly on commuter routes into citys.
As 185 says its likely that fares overall will remain roughly equal and continue to rise with the national fare cap possibly with a small one off above inflation rise, thereafter rising faster in PTE areas than rural areas for several years to redress the balance (and give services a firmer commercial footing). They will sell fare rises as paying for new investment improving the quality of service which as this franchise goes on would be very visible with the electrification and increased frequencies.
It should always be remembered the strategy of Rail North isnt to splurge on new services but to target operating costs and reinvest savings, they wont have any money to increase spending, and their budget is likely to be set at the existing subsidy level with any additional investment they want having to be paid for from finding savings elsewhere.
Didnt you read the earlier thread on the consultation paper?
Would these new bodies have all the requirements in place and ready to start once the new franchises are awarded ?
A franchising director for Rail North has already been appointed and it already has a small staff so in some sense its up and running already, would have to be some legislation to devolve responsibility but nothing stopping it existing beforehand in shadow form and specifying the franchising in partnership with the Dft in a couple of years.