Rail services to be included as part of Bee Network: how should this be achieved?

[YorkRailFan]

Andy Burnham has announced that plans to bring rail services into the Bee Network have been brought forward. The Greater Manchester mayor said that eight train lines will be part of the new local transport network by 2028.

This means that passengers will be able to pay for their journeys on these commuter rail services by tapping in and tapping out with contactless payments. Fares would be capped at a maximum daily rate for buses, trams and trains.It comes ahead of a trial of this form of payment - which is already used on Metrolink trams - along two routes covering 17 stations across Greater Manchester. The trial on the Glossop to Piccadilly and Stalybridge to Victoria lines will begin next year with full multi-modal fares set to be rolled out by 2030, according to the government.But speaking at the Northern Transport Summit in Manchester today (March 21), Mr Burnham said that he will bring these plans forward by two years. The Labour mayor also announced that 'stopping services' on routes to Rochdale and Manchester Airport would also be part of the Bee Network, taking the total number of lines included to eight.

The railway lines which are set to be included in the Bee Network by 2028 are:Wigan – Victoria
Stalybridge –Southport
Glossop – Hadfield – Piccadilly
Rose Hill – Piccadilly
Buxton – Piccadilly
Alderley Edge – Piccadilly
Rochdale stopping services
Manchester Airport stopping servicesMr Burnham told the Manchester Evening News that he discussed the proposal with 'senior players' at Network Rail this week. The government agreed to the move in principle last year, with details to be agreed with the rail industry.The Greater Manchester mayor insisted that the latest announcement has been agreed by the industry. However, he said the industry has been slow to agree details and made a plea to bosses to help bring rail into the Bee Network.

He said: "We've identified eight commuter lines across the city-region. What that will mean, for people served by those stations in those areas, you'll tap in to the station and you're into the Bee Network cap like in London, so you can use buses and trams and it's all capped at a certain price within a given day.

"Rail has got to get with the Bee Network now. That's our message."Asked whether the rail industry has agreed to the move, he said: "Yes, we have their agreement. They're working with us to the same timetable.

"Obviously, the treasury would have to sign off some of this because we'd have to change the way the railways are working with regards to fares and ticketing. So there are bigger issues, but absolutely, I can say to you that we've all agreed to work in this way."

Andy Burnham announces Bee Network rail plans to be brought forward

The Greater Manchester mayor said eight train line will are set to be part of the local transport network by 2028

www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk

This is very good news, these routes make up major commuter services for Greater Manchester which should be under local control. This gives Manchester an almost S-Bahn style system. It's also good timing by Burnham to announce this whilst the DFT argues over the future of Avanti.

 

[Farigiraf]

Are there plans to eventually include the Stockport-Stalybridge parliamentary train?

 

[A S Leib]

This is very good news, these routes make up major commuter services for Greater Manchester which should be under local control.

Although hopefully that won't mean stations / services in Greater Manchester being prioritised to the detriment of those in Derbyshire and Cheshire.

 

[Djgr]

Although hopefully that won't mean stations / services in Greater Manchester being prioritised to the detriment of those in Derbyshire and Cheshire.

I would imagine out of area services will depend on good folks of Derbyshire and Cheshire putting their hands in their pockets.

If we take London v Essex Central tube line as an example then I would imagine Greater Manchester services will indeed be prioritised.

 

[TheSmiths82]

I would imagine out of area services will depend on good folks of Derbyshire and Cheshire putting their hands in their pockets.

If we take London v Essex Central tube line as an example then I would imagine Greater Manchester services will indeed be prioritised.

Would a lot of those trains just terminate at places like Hazel Grove then? Obviously there will still be many trains that go into Derbyshire or Cheshire but if the councils won't fund it then it would be commercial fares and the frequency might be reduced.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Would a lot of those trains just terminate at places like Hazel Grove then? Obviously there will still be many trains that go into Derbyshire or Cheshire but if the councils won't fund it then it would be commercial fares and the frequency might be reduced.

It's highly unlikely that the DfT would approve reductions in service levels for those routes (ie nearly all of them!) which cross from GM into surrounding counties. So the only changes would be increased frequencies for GM only services. There aren't too many locations where this is practical and even then paths for more trains are few and far between. The biggest political issue is ensuring that longer-distance operators come into the scheme and get the appropriate share of revenue. Of course by the time all this happens the revenue apportionment might not be so relevant. It could also be a sign that TfGM policy is starting to shift away from trying to pursue Metrolink expansion by tram/train conversion of certain heavy-rail routes.

 

[Kite159]

More empire building by Burnham, what will change other than the stations getting a lick of paint and maybe getting staffed? The only difference will be that you can use a contactless card to travel within that area rather than 'paper' tickets with a price cap including the trams & buses

 

[WF4HA5HE]

So if the fares are capped does this mean passengers from town and cities on the route are going to be subsidising the capped fares for passengers in Manchester. For example Chester to Leeds service run between Manchester and Rochdale. Hardly seems right to have passengers travelling from Chester to Leeds for example to be subsidising other passengers on the train?

 

[swt_passenger]

Would a lot of those trains just terminate at places like Hazel Grove then? Obviously there will still be many trains that go into Derbyshire or Cheshire but if the councils won't fund it then it would be commercial fares and the frequency might be reduced.

I can’t think of any London centric routes that were suddenly cut back when Oyster PAYG came in. The trains still run to the original country destinations, people just had to realise PAYG had a limited area - and they still have to do so. Even with subsequent PAYG and now with future contactless extensions and additions, I don’t think any routes have been, (or are going to be), significantly changed at the outer ends.

I don’t think changes to the outer Central Line in Essex make any sort of precedent, they’re really only of historic interest by now.

I‘m not including outer end frequency reductions due to other post 2000 causes though, that’s a separate issue.

 

[507020]

I don’t think changes to the outer Central Line in Essex make any sort of precedent, they’re really only of historic interest by now.

But does the Central Line in Essex receive the same frequency as the Central Line in Greater London and how does the full frequency extending all the way to the terminus compare between Epping and e.g. Cockfosters on lines that stay entirely within Greater London? I am aware some services terminate at Arnos Grove but not familiar with the Central Line service pattern.

I have also seen it suggested that TfGM’s contactless scheme will extend as far as Southport simply because the majority of the route is in Greater Manchester.

 

[swt_passenger]

But does the Central Line in Essex receive the same frequency as the Central Line in Greater London and how does the full frequency extending all the way to the terminus compare between Epping and e.g. Cockfosters on lines that stay entirely within Greater London? I am aware some services terminate at Arnos Grove but not familiar with the Central Line service pattern.

I have also seen it suggested that TfGM’s contactless scheme will extend as far as Southport simply because the majority of the route is in Greater Manchester.

I think the point is that any frequency reductions at the outer limits of tube lines are not directly caused by the addition of a PAYG scheme. There are quite a few tube lines where the whole core service doesn’t run all the way to the ends, whether they’re in the Greater London area or not.

 

[30907]

But does the Central Line in Essex receive the same frequency as the Central Line in Greater London and how does the full frequency extending all the way to the terminus compare between Epping and e.g. Cockfosters on lines that stay entirely within Greater London?

The Epping branch has the same frequency all the way from Leytonstone; neither the border (Roding Valley Jn) nor the end of the built-up area (Debden) makes a difference (is this pattern affected by current issues?).
I lived in Buckhurst Hill in the 80s and memory says that Epping was only 4tph offpeak, Debden possibly 8, so this surprised me slightly.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Would a lot of those trains just terminate at places like Hazel Grove then? Obviously there will still be many trains that go into Derbyshire or Cheshire but if the councils won't fund it then it would be commercial fares and the frequency might be reduced.

That was certainly the case at one time on the Cross City Line when WMPTE paid for an improved service, but only within the WMPTE area, resulting in half the trains terminating at Blake Street. The railway press of the time highlighted the nonsense that, because there was no turnback facility at Blake Street, the trains had to run empty to Lichfield, cross over there, and back to Blake Street to re-enter service. Eventually common sense prevailed and they ran in service to Lichfield

 

[PyrahnaRanger]

So if the fares are capped does this mean passengers from town and cities on the route are going to be subsidising the capped fares for passengers in Manchester. For example Chester to Leeds service run between Manchester and Rochdale. Hardly seems right to have passengers travelling from Chester to Leeds for example to be subsidising other passengers on the train?

if fares made sense in the first place, I’d be more concerned, but as a Preston -> Piccadilly ticket used to be a longer run on the same train for less than Buckshaw Parkway -> Piccadilly, four return tickets Buckshaw -> Piccadilly were cheaper than four singles for the same trip, and either ticket was more expensive than a ticket from Liverpool to Manchester, I’m not going to worry about it!

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Are there plans to eventually include the Stockport-Stalybridge parliamentary train?

The ticket activators for Reddish South and Denton would probably cost more than they would ever earn (with the current level of service), they don't even have ticket machines (as of the March 2022 streetview).

 

[Thirteen]

Creating a TfL style system in Greater Manchester does make sense and I would imagine a Labour DfT would back it.

 

[Sir Felix Pole]

That was certainly the case at one time on the Cross City Line when WMPTE paid for an improved service, but only within the WMPTE area, resulting in half the trains terminating at Blake Street. The railway press of the time highlighted the nonsense that, because there was no turnback facility at Blake Street, the trains had to run empty to Lichfield, cross over there, and back to Blake Street to re-enter service. Eventually common sense prevailed and they ran in service to Lichfield

I am all in favour in principle, but I can see some major rows developing due to the vagaries of the GM boundary, with stations outwith included, yet a fair number within excluded. Southport and Buxton are the surprising ones - they are both nearly 15 miles outside GM (Gathurst and Middlewood respectively). Bramhall is not included, yet Handforth, Wilmslow and Alderley Edge are. I'm surprised that the New Mills services aren't included or are those venturing onto Sheffield a step too far?

 

[Ant158]

Looking at the current structure of how many trains operate through say Victoria from Yorkshire, Lancs and Merseyside, will these proposals mean passengers won't be able to say book a national rail ticket from Clitheroe to Rochdale or Mills Hill to Burnley?

One of the big bugbears with Metrolink as is, is that there is no integrated ticketing outside of Greater Manchester. Will Bromley Cross for example become a Kirby type operation??

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Looking at the current structure of how many trains operate through say Victoria from Yorkshire, Lancs and Merseyside, will these proposals mean passengers won't be able to say book a national rail ticket from Clitheroe to Rochdale.

London does it fine, just have through tickets avaliable as usual.
Contactless then optional for those within the area.

 

[plugwash]

More empire building by Burnham, what will change other than the stations getting a lick of paint and maybe getting staffed? The only difference will be that you can use a contactless card to travel within that area rather than 'paper' tickets with a price cap including the trams & buses

My hope would be that, if nothing else, we see some improvements to intermodal tickets. The current situation is both a godawful mess, and poorly advertised.

I would agree that getting the long distance operators on board with any new ticketing scheme is vital to it's success though.

 

[CL395]

More empire building by Burnham, what will change other than the stations getting a lick of paint and maybe getting staffed? The only difference will be that you can use a contactless card to travel within that area rather than 'paper' tickets with a price cap including the trams & buses

So according to yourself:
1) Refurbished stations
2) Staffed stations
3) Contactless payment integration
4) Fare caps
5) Ticket integration with bus and trams

Sounds like a good deal to me

 

[Snex]

Guessing they had no choice after the announcement on the Northumberland Line with POP Cards being accepted on there. Good to see, and hopefully we see it in more areas.

Other than fares though, is anything actually changing? It seems like it's more of an all London trains being part of Oyster type system rather than the trains being branded Bee, unless I've missed something.

 

[Russel]

Let's talk finance...

Will these services still be run by Northern on behalf of TfGM, as per Arriva running LO for TfL? If so, will TfGM be financing them or will the cash still be coming from central government via the current channels?

If it's TfGM financing them, where is all of this money coming from to subsidise multiple forms of public transport, given other local and regional authorities are declaring bankruptcy?

Not a criticism of what is happening in Manchester, it's the right way to go, I'm just interested in who is paying for it all.

 

[JJmoogle]

Manchester's the city region most advanced in getting devolved funding isn't it, instead of having to go to multiple central government departments it only has to go for one now, so it has more power to do stuff like this.

I know they wanted to fully control the stations but that got rejected so it's negotiated with the DfT/Network Rail.
They have some documentation on the TfGM website that shows some rail improvements with funding sources listed and it seems like it's from whatever and wherever they can get it.

 

[Bantamzen]

Let's talk finance...

Will these services still be run by Northern on behalf of TfGM, as per Arriva running LO for TfL? If so, will TfGM be financing them or will the cash still be coming from central government via the current channels?

If it's TfGM financing them, where is all of this money coming from to subsidise multiple forms of public transport, given other local and regional authorities are declaring bankruptcy?

Not a criticism of what is happening in Manchester, it's the right way to go, I'm just interested in who is paying for it all.

I would imagine if TfGM are offering daily / weekly fare caps for travel within GM then just like any other PTE products such as season tickets, they will have to subsidise them.

 

[DarloRich]

More empire building by Burnham, what will change other than the stations getting a lick of paint and maybe getting staffed? The only difference will be that you can use a contactless card to travel within that area rather than 'paper' tickets with a price cap including the trams & buses

Why so negative? The Mayor feels ( and i think with some evidence to support him) that he can drive better change to services & influence more local investment decision making in his region with control of as many levers as possible.

I would much prefer to have Burnham "empire building" and taking on transport than the approach taken by Benny Boy in Tees Valley. Funnily enough Burnham doesn't appear in the every edition of Private Eye! Ask @ainsworth74 if you don't believe me!

Although hopefully that won't mean stations / services in Greater Manchester being prioritised to the detriment of those in Derbyshire and Cheshire.

they are not just going to put a wall up at the GM boundary! This is about being in charge of transport strategy and being able to make more "locally focussed" decisions on service and investment and using that influence to get a good deal out of central government and getting others to deliver faster

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Let's talk finance...

Will these services still be run by Northern on behalf of TfGM, as per Arriva running LO for TfL? If so, will TfGM be financing them or will the cash still be coming from central government via the current channels?

If it's TfGM financing them, where is all of this money coming from to subsidise multiple forms of public transport, given other local and regional authorities are declaring bankruptcy?

Not a criticism of what is happening in Manchester, it's the right way to go, I'm just interested in who is paying for it all.

My guess is that they'll function more like Thameslink or other non TfL trains.
My guess is that (especially in the short term) we'll just see contactless pads installed at most stations, and barriers updated for contactless.
Maybe some branding, but I'd expect not on the trains (at least not yet).

 

[norbitonflyer]

My hope would be that, if nothing else, we see some improvements to intermodal tickets. The current situation is both a godawful mess, and poorly advertised.

I would agree that getting the long distance operators on board with any new ticketing scheme is vital to it's success though.

It was certainly an uphill struggle in London to get some operators (notably SWT) on board. But how it works in London is that the fares are set by TfL, but the TOC (or now DfT) gets the revenue from journeys made on their trains - and some proportion of Travelcard revenue. TfL collects the revenue (via Oyster, or the banks for contactless) on behalf of the TOCs.

It has not been without its problems. Sadiq Khan promised a fares freeze, but was unable to deliver on it for Travelcards because National Rail fares had to rise by DfT diktat, and with them the revenue the TOCs got from Travelcards. Moreover, there is a two-tier system of fares with many TOCs (predominantly those south of the Thames) charging a higher Oyster/contactless rate than TfL's own services - and because of the aforementioned fares freeze the difference has increased over time. (We also have to pay a higher rate still if a journey involves both TOC and TfL services - e.g Bromley South to Oxford Circus)

There was also, at one time, again at SWT's insistence, a requirement for someone intending to travel beyond the zones on their Oyster Travelcard (but still within the Oyster area) to buy a paper "extension permit" before touching in at the start of their journey. (On the Underground you would just touch out at the end of your journey and be charged the fare from the limit of your Travelcard Zones to the Zone you were in) Needless to say, these could only be bought at a ticket office, not at the machines (which were not at the time sophisticated enough to offer tickets starting from a station other than the one you were at)

 

[Ken H]

My guess is that they'll function more like Thameslink or other non TfL trains.
My guess is that (especially in the short term) we'll just see contactless pads installed at most stations, and barriers updated for contactless.
Maybe some branding, but I'd expect not on the trains (at least not yet).

Branding on trains would be silly. The branded trains would stray and end up in Barrow, Newcastle and Scarborough.

 

[Garulon]

More empire building by Burnham, what will change other than the stations getting a lick of paint and maybe getting staffed? The only difference will be that you can use a contactless card to travel within that area rather than 'paper' tickets with a price cap including the trams & buses

That's a pretty big "All"

I'd love it if I could use random trains and buses to get to my destination using a single app that also warned me about disruption

We should have one of those country wide TBH