Should the Isle of Wight ferries be renationalised and better integrated with the National Rail network?

[PTR 444]

The three main Isle of Wight ferry routes (Portsmouth - Ryde, Southampton - Cowes and Lymington - Yarmouth) are an essential strategic link for mainland connectivity. Unlike most railways where there are several road alternatives, the ferries have virtually no competition (apart from each other) due to the fact that no fixed road or rail link exists across the Solent. Any disruption caused by adverse weather, technical faults or greedy last minute cancellations to minimise financial losses has an adverse impact on the island community, with residents cut off from visiting the mainland and goods vehicles unable to deliver essential items. At least if the ferries were nationalised, the operators would be able to focus on providing an essential public service rather than just trying to profiteer off one another.

As for integration with the National Rail network, through ticketing already exists, but more could be done to ensure connections between train and ferry are optimal with no scenarios where the ferry arrives 5 minutes after the train departs. Having the ferries operated by NR (branded as Sealink) would enable this, with connections shown in National Rail timetables.

I personally believe in an era when the franchised railway is moving over to the GBR model, it would make sense to have the IoW ferries included as these are nationally important links which unlike most railway lines have no practical, alternative mode of transport.

 

[JonathanH]

Any disruption caused by adverse weather, technical faults or greedy last minute cancellations to minimise financial losses has an adverse impact on the island community, with residents cut off from visiting the mainland and goods vehicles unable to deliver essential items. At least if the ferries were nationalised, the operators would be able to focus on providing an essential public service rather than just trying to profiteer off one another.

Is nationalisation going to change the weather or prevent technical faults?

Do the ferry companies really make 'greedy last minute cancellations to minimise financial losses'? How does that work? Surely the only possible saving is the fuel cost.

Nationalised businesses can't just make uncontrolled losses.

As for integration with the National Rail network, through ticketing already exists, but more could be done to ensure connections between train and ferry are optimal with no scenarios where the ferry arrives 5 minutes after the train departs.

Is this where the ferry has to connect to the railway no matter how delayed the train is? Is that actually going to happen?

The three main Isle of Wight ferry routes (Portsmouth - Ryde, Southampton - Cowes and Lymington - Yarmouth) are an essential strategic link for mainland connectivity.

Portsmouth to Fishbourne is the main Isle of Wight ferry route.

 

[Snow1964]

Southampton-Cowes was Red Funnel which I think were independent.

The others were SeaLink (under BR) then became Wightlink when privatised. Originally at Lymington, the ferries use to be adjacent to the railway platform so was very short walk, and cars used the slipway reached via a level crossing) but from about 1976 a new linkspan was opened beyond the railway station, so passengers had to walk lot further, beyond the platform and along new walkway

 

[BayPaul]

When the ferries were sealink, rail connected travel was the main business, with half a dozen large passenger ferries running on the Ryde Pier route at peak times. That's a thing of the past, and not coming back. Freight and cars are the important business, and the two main routes are Portsmouth to Fishbourne and Southampton to East Cowes, neither of which are rail connected, so there's little logic in them becoming part of GBR. If they were to go into public ownership, then IOW Council would be the logical place, but their lack of skill running the chain ferry makes me feel that two independent competing private operators is probably the best option.

Southampton-Cowes was Red Funnel which I think were independent.

The others were SeaLink (under BR) then became Wightlink when privatised. Originally at Lymington, the ferries use to be adjacent to the railway platform so was very short walk, and cars used the slipway reached via a level crossing) but from about 1976 a new linkspan was opened beyond the railway station, so passengers had to walk lot further, beyond the platform and along new walkway

Correct for Red funnel. Always private, and has run for much longer than sealink.

Since the car traffic is the important part now , not having a level crossing is a much bigger plus than a few extra yards walk. Rosslare Europort has had a similar change, which causes occasional howls of protest on here, but massively improved the operation of the port.

 

[NoRoute]

What does the rail industry or the government know about running ferries, does it have experience and competence in running a shipping business? History suggests not.

I can see some benefits from better integrating services but that comes at handing over the service to organisations with no competence or experience of running the business, it also removes the commercial pressures which come from running as a private business, allowing inefficiency and loss of cost control. It isn't as if the railway industry or government has a good record of economic running of the railways, so hard to see why it should be branching out into other forms of transport.

Better to find ways of coordinating the ferries with the rail services through agreements with the existing organisations.

 

[MattRat]

If you really wanted a consistent way to travel between the two places, a bridge or tunnel would be better, although obviously more expensive. Nationalize can be just as bad as Privatization, corruption always exists.

 

[dk1]

Love that we can use these ferries free of charge with nothing more than a dated BR box.

 

[Mike Machin]

Definitely not, the State should have as little interference with operating transport as possible. I personally don’t like the idea of GBR at all, and would have preferred to see a much less rigid franchising system and a big increase in open access - freeing-up the market to innovation and commercial development based on market forces - with little or no involvement of government bureaucrat.

 

[windingroad]

Definitely not, the State should have as little interference with operating transport as possible. I personally don’t like the idea of GBR at all, and would have preferred to see a much less rigid franchising system and a big increase in open access - freeing-up the market to innovation and commercial development based on market forces - with little or no involvement of government bureaucrat.

True market forces are incompatible with the way the railway works, unless you want to see most of it closed down. It's a public service and the value it creates is primarily the service itself, rather than profit.

 

[SargeNpton]

What does the rail industry or the government know about running ferries, does it have experience and competence in running a shipping business? History suggests not.

Pretty sure that the rail industry ran ferries fairly successfully for 100 years or more, both in the private and public sector.

 

[windingroad]

Pretty sure that the rail industry ran ferries fairly successfully for 100 years or more, both in the private and public sector.

Plus it's not as if shadowy government employees replace all the existing staff! Most of the time it's all the same people, with all of the same expertise, just under a different umbrella.

 

[Gloster]

Personally, I would like the whole lot to be renationalised: services that are necessary, whether or not they require large amounts of public subsidy, should be under the control of the state. It hasn’t always worked, but then neither has privatisation (as far as the users and taxpayers are concerned). Unfortunately, renationalisation is not going to happen until the private companies are in such a mess that it is the least unprofitable option for them.

What I would like to see in the shorter term is services like this having a legally laid down and enforced minimum level of service (frequency, hours of operation, etc.), maximum price, and other performance standards. This might involve some subsidy (that shocking word) in order to keep early morning, late night and other less used, but socially necessary, services running.

 

[nanstallon]

The problems of connectivity on Portsmouth Harbour - Ryde (Wightlink) derive from the construction works at Portsmouth, which tend to cause late running of ferries, even if just a few minutes. Then, at Ryde Pier Head, there is now a train only every hour, so when that sets off just as the ferry is coming in, people are left to walk down to Esplanade for the next train half an hour later, or sit at Pier Head for the next hourly train from there. This is unsatisfactory, but may resolve itself when the works at Portsmouth are finished. I found Wightlink very efficient otherwise, and it seems unfair to blame them for the connectivity problems. Perhaps the IoW trains should be retimed - say 15 mins after the scheduled arrival of the ferry.

 

[BayPaul]

Pretty sure that the rail industry ran ferries fairly successfully for 100 years or more, both in the private and public sector.

Sealink was massively held back on international routes by being in the public sector, as investment was minimal due to plans for the Channel tunnel. The Isle of Wight didn't do too badly under Sealink, in fact in recent years Wightlink really hasn't impressed. However Red Funnel has always been private sector, and since the 1990s in particular has gone from strength to strength.

I think public sector is a bad option when routes are profitable and there is decent competition - private sector seems much more likely to invest in the right ships for the route

 

[windingroad]

Personally, I would like the whole lot to be renationalised: services that are necessary, whether or not they require large amounts of public subsidy, should be under the control of the state. It hasn’t always worked, but then neither has privatisation (as far as the users and taxpayers are concerned). Unfortunately, renationalisation is not going to happen until the private companies are in such a mess that it is the least unprofitable option for them.

What I would like to see in the shorter term is services like this having a legally laid down and enforced minimum level of service (frequency, hours of operation, etc.), maximum price, and other performance standards. This might involve some subsidy (that shocking word) in order to keep early morning, late night and other less used, but socially necessary, services running.

Couldn't agree more for pretty much all lifeline public services. It's true that the state hasn't always managed nationalised industries well, but that's an argument to improve the way government works, not against nationalisation.

 

[Gloster]

Perhaps the IoW trains should be retimed - say 15 mins after the scheduled arrival of the ferry.

Which would mean that the train with passengers for the ferry to Portsmouth would arrive one or two minutes after it had left.

 

[jopsuk]

Portsmouth to Fishbourne is the main Isle of Wight ferry route.

Honestly, the OP missing this key bit does show how weak the rest of the argument is.

In my "ideal" world yes, all public transit (which domestic ferries very much are) would be nationalised, with a coordinating body to ensure that all modes worked together with seamless ticketing.

It's wildly unlikely though, and I don't think it would solve any of the actual (rather than imagined) problems raised in this thread

 

[BayPaul]

Honestly, the OP missing this key bit does show how weak the rest of the argument is.

In my "ideal" world yes, all public transit (which domestic ferries very much are) would be nationalised, with a coordinating body to ensure that all modes worked together with seamless ticketing.

It's wildly unlikely though, and I don't think it would solve any of the actual (rather than imagined) problems raised in this thread

I suppose in such an ideal world, the logical situation would be for Portsmouth to Ryde, Southsea to Ryde and Southampton to West Cowes to be part of (let's call it) TfGB, whilst the three car routes should be part of Highways England, as they are effectively trunk roads

 

[PTR 444]

Honestly, the OP missing this key bit does show how weak the rest of the argument is.

In my "ideal" world yes, all public transit (which domestic ferries very much are) would be nationalised, with a coordinating body to ensure that all modes worked together with seamless ticketing.

It's wildly unlikely though, and I don't think it would solve any of the actual (rather than imagined) problems raised in this thread

I probably should have explained clearer, but I would argue that Portsmouth - Ryde and Portsmouth - Fishbourne are part of the same route that just serve different markets. Fishbourne is just a convenient place for vehicular traffic to load/unload, but I imagine a proportion of its traffic is headed for Ryde. The FastCat and hovercraft cater for the passenger markets, many of which will have made a connection from the train at Portsmouth and will be travelling onward by bus to other parts of the island.

Unless there are swathes of railway passengers at Portsmouth whose final destination is Fishbourne (a place with no bus connections*), there is probably not much point in providing through rail ticketing on this route, unless of course both the FastCat and hovercraft are out of action.

*It is a 15 minute walk to the nearest bus stop on the main road, but I doubt passengers with luggage would want to do this.

 

[jopsuk]

I probably should have explained clearer, but I would argue that Portsmouth - Ryde and Portsmouth - Fishbourne are part of the same route that just serve different markets. Fishbourne is just a convenient place for vehicular traffic to load/unload, but I imagine a proportion of its traffic is headed for Ryde. The FastCat and hovercraft cater for the passenger markets, many of which will have made a connection from the train at Portsmouth and will be travelling onward by bus to other parts of the island.

Unless there are swathes of railway passengers at Portsmouth whose final destination is Fishbourne (a place with no bus connections*), there is probably not much point in providing through rail ticketing on this route, unless of course both the FastCat and hovercraft are out of action.

*It is a 15 minute walk to the nearest bus stop on the main road, but I doubt passengers with luggage would want to do this.

OK, fair enough. Google maps shows a bus stop within the ferry terminal area but looking this seems to no longer be served?

 

[Gloster]

I probably should have explained clearer, but I would argue that Portsmouth - Ryde and Portsmouth - Fishbourne are part of the same route that just serve different markets. Fishbourne is just a convenient place for vehicular traffic to load/unload, but I imagine a proportion of its traffic is headed for Ryde. The FastCat and hovercraft cater for the passenger markets, many of which will have made a connection from the train at Portsmouth and will be travelling onward by bus to other parts of the island.

Unless there are swathes of railway passengers at Portsmouth whose final destination is Fishbourne (a place with no bus connections*), there is probably not much point in providing through rail ticketing on this route, unless of course both the FastCat and hovercraft are out of action.

*It is a 15 minute walk to the nearest bus stop on the main road, but I doubt passengers with luggage would want to do this.

I live very close to the terminal and when a queue of vehicles are turning out of Fishbourne Lane there are plenty of vehicles going in both directions: it serves most of the island. The choice of which car-ferry route you choose is affected by a number of factors, including where you are going to/coming from on the mainland. Fishbourne is also a quicker crossing and the time taken to Newport is virtually the same as that from the East Cowes terminal.

There are a surprising number of people who do seem to use the car ferry as foot passengers. I have done it because it is a short walk from my house, but these come in on the bus from the Ryde or (more often) Newport direction. I don’t know if the foot passenger tickets are cheaper on the car ferry than the FastCat.

OK, fair enough. Google maps shows a bus stop within the ferry terminal area but looking this seems to no longer be served?

The bus stop has two buses a day: at 00.46 to Newport and 00.50 to Ryde.

 

[hermit]

I live very close to the terminal and when a queue of vehicles are turning out of Fishbourne Lane there are plenty of vehicles going in both directions: it serves most of the island. The choice of which car-ferry route you choose is affected by a number of factors, including where you are going to/coming from on the mainland. Fishbourne is also a quicker crossing and the time taken to Newport is virtually the same as that from the East Cowes terminal.

There are a surprising number of people who do seem to use the car ferry as foot passengers. I have done it because it is a short walk from my house, but these come in on the bus from the Ryde or (more often) Newport direction. I don’t know if the foot passenger tickets are cheaper on the car ferry than the FastCat.


The bus stop has two buses a day: at 00.46 to Newport and 00.50 to Ryde.

The foot passenger fares are slightly cheaper than on the catamaran. (This is partly at least because the catamaran fares include an extra charge as a contribution to the maintenance of the pier - particularly unfair on those who reach Pierhead by train, not via Wightlink’s pier).

I’d be surprised if the small price differential would cause large numbers of people to choose the car ferry over the Fastcat, given the slower journey time and the relative inaccessibility of the Fishbourne and Gunwharf terminals. What does cause many of us to use the car ferry, reluctantly, is the lack of late evening crossings on the catamaran - the last from Portsmouth is at the ridiculously early hour of 2020. So we find ourselves forced to use the car ferry, arriving at Fishbourne either to pick up the car (but parking there for any length of time is prohibitively expensive) or walking up to the main road to get the bus (but no proper connections - as stated above, only the midnight ferry is met by buses).

This is a sad deterioration from the situation 15-20 years ago, when the last catamaran left Portsmouth at 0015, so allowing plenty of mainland trips - even trips to evening events in London.

On the general question of privatisation/ nationalisation, my view is that we have seen precious few of the supposed benefits of private sector operation in terms of more efficient operation or nimble management. What we have seen is both major operators, owned by a succession of financial interests, steadily reducing services and imposing above-inflation fare increases, and making large profits while doing so. Given that straight renationalisation would also have its problems, I agree with Gloster that the answer must be the imposition of some form of public service obligation, so that limits are placed on the price-gouging and we have services that meet the reasonable needs of the island and its population. If this involves some subsidy, so be it. It works with London buses and Scottish ferries.

 

[Bletchleyite]

One thing I would like to see is Wightlink agreeing to use the railway ticketing and reservations system for the catamaran service. The ferry is effectively compulsory reservation as there's a hard upper limit to passenger numbers, and so it'd be much easier if that reservation could be easily obtained as part of buying a through ticket on railway sales sites. At present the only way to guarantee carriage on a particular ferry with a train ticket is to phone them up for a reservation, which is a right faff. They're not often full, but in the height of summer it can happen.

 

[hermit]

One thing I would like to see is Wightlink agreeing to use the railway ticketing and reservations system for the catamaran service. The ferry is effectively compulsory reservation as there's a hard upper limit to passenger numbers, and so it'd be much easier if that reservation could be easily obtained as part of buying a through ticket on railway sales sites. At present the only way to guarantee carriage on a particular ferry with a train ticket is to phone them up for a reservation, which is a right faff. They're not often full, but in the height of summer it can happen.

A good idea, though I can’t see much incentive for Wightlink to agree it. (Those of us who don‘t buy through tickets but use separate ferry tickets can already reserve online, though I rarely bother).

But I’m not sure how this would work in the case of the main services from Waterloo, which typically have a 10/11 minute connection time at the harbour. Wightlink’s stated cut-off time for checking-in is 15 minutes before departure. Normally this is academic, but I have heard of cases when services are unusually busy (eg when the hovercraft is cancelled) where even those with reservations have been denied boarding because they missed the 15 minute deadline.

 

[21C195 Brentor]

It's often claimed to be the most expensive ferry service per passenger mile on the planet. Until a Wight Tunnel happens, I would nationalise Wightlink.

 

[JonathanH]

It's often claimed to be the most expensive ferry service per passenger mile on the planet. Until a Wight Tunnel happens, I would nationalise Wightlink.

What do you think will be the outcome of nationalising Wightlink? Why would a nationalised Wightlink charge less than the current fares?

 

[21C195 Brentor]

What do you think will be the outcome of nationalising Wightlink? Why would a nationalised Wightlink charge less than the current fares?

The outcome would be the removal of profit motive from the provision of a vital public service. All operational surplus would be either reinvested in improvements to the service or in reduced fares. Capitalism is indefensible.

 

[JonathanH]

All operational surplus would be either reinvested in improvements to the service or in reduced fares.

It would go to the Treasury for the money to be redistributed for other spending areas. The profit motive wouldn't be removed.

 

[21C195 Brentor]

It would go to the Treasury for the money to be redistributed for other spending areas. The profit motive wouldn't be removed.

Or its budget could be ring-fenced by law. You can bet the islanders would raise hell if the Wightlink profits were just going to the treasury and the cost remained as high as ever.

 

[gabrielhj07]

You can bet the islanders would raise hell if the Wightlink profits were just going to the treasury and the cost remained as high as ever.

In much the same way as they aren't currently, despite profits being used for less benevolent purposes?