Protests over planned rail fare hikes

The cost of some fares could rise by 3.6p per cent in 2015, warns the TUC

The cost of some fares could rise by 3.6p per cent in 2015, warns the TUC

First published in News

CAMPAIGNERS are due to stage protests today over rail fare price hikes they claim will see costs of tickets along some regional routes soar.

The Trades Union Congress (TUC), whose members were due to highlight the issue at Liverpool Lime Street this morning, say that based on retail price index increases, the cost of some fares could rise by 3.6p per cent in 2015.

It means some Merseyside routes could go up by as much as £37 in the next year, the union says.

Regulated rail fares – which include season tickets – are allowed to rise by July’s RPI figure of 2.6 plus one per cent, and would therefore increase by 3.6 per cent in January 2015.

According to the union, next year’s fare hikes will mean that rail fares will have increased by 24.9 per cent over the current parliament, 2010 to 2015, and have risen faster than wages in every year.

Over the same period, average earnings have increased by just 10.7 per cent, meaning rail fares have risen more than twice as fast as wages under the current government.

North West TUC Regional Secretary Lynn Collins said: “It’s grim news for commuters that they face yet another year of fare hikes above inflation, while their wages keep dragging behind inflation.

“The cost to passengers of the failed privatisation of our railways keeps growing year on year. We’ve ended up with slower trains and higher fares than countries who have kept their trains in public hands.

“It’s time to stop private companies profiteering from our railways and to make sure that passengers and taxpayers’ money is reinvested to improve our services. The only way to do this is to bring our railways back under public ownership.”

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:54pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Bill Bradbury says...

Apart from the Editor of Rail Magazine, the privatisation of rail has only benefited the franchisers and the foreign owned rail stock who are in it to make a profit at all costs. Hence why in the NW we are still landed with 40 year old Pacers to flog the last ounce of profit out of them.

For instance to travel over the rail system Virgin used to pay £10 per an approved distance ( think it was a mile) now they only pay £5. The result is that Railtrack has made £billions of loss which the Government places on its books hence why the national debt increases.

Who are the commuters to complain?? They can now have the privilege to travel on 35 year old rolling stock, an electric train when Northwest Rail decides to have more than the current 2, currently training drivers at Newton Heath. Somebody has to reduce the debt and pay for the electrification and sorry to say it's the rail users many who have not had a pay rise for years.
Apart from the Editor of Rail Magazine, the privatisation of rail has only benefited the franchisers and the foreign owned rail stock who are in it to make a profit at all costs. Hence why in the NW we are still landed with 40 year old Pacers to flog the last ounce of profit out of them. For instance to travel over the rail system Virgin used to pay £10 per an approved distance ( think it was a mile) now they only pay £5. The result is that Railtrack has made £billions of loss which the Government places on its books hence why the national debt increases. Who are the commuters to complain?? They can now have the privilege to travel on 35 year old rolling stock, an electric train when Northwest Rail decides to have more than the current 2, currently training drivers at Newton Heath. Somebody has to reduce the debt and pay for the electrification and sorry to say it's the rail users many who have not had a pay rise for years. Bill Bradbury
  • Score: 6

6:04pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Keva68 says...

Just buy a car/motorbike or scooter to commute and forget public transport it works out cheaper.
Just buy a car/motorbike or scooter to commute and forget public transport it works out cheaper. Keva68
  • Score: -3

12:22pm Wed 20 Aug 14

DrChan says...

The Green Party wants to see the railways brought back into public ownership. It makes good money sense too. Profits would go back into the public purse instead of to shareholders pockets.

East Coast is actually generating a good profit, and taken as a whole, the entire network makes a profit. Of course, certain routes are subsidised, but that has to be case to serve many of the smaller towns and villages, such as in the North of England.

79% of Labour and 52% of Tory voters want to see renationalised railways. 73% of UKIP voters too. It looks like most people should be voting Green!

http://yougov.co.uk/
news/2013/11/04/nati
onalise-energy-and-r
ail-companies-say-pu
blic/

Labour is pushing a watered down version of 'renationalisation', the Tories don't want to know.

And as for UKIP - all I could find, was this... http://theroyalfacto
r.blogspot.co.uk/201
4/06/ukip-trials-new
-musso-railway-polic
y.html
The Green Party wants to see the railways brought back into public ownership. It makes good money sense too. Profits would go back into the public purse instead of to shareholders pockets. East Coast is actually generating a good profit, and taken as a whole, the entire network makes a profit. Of course, certain routes are subsidised, but that has to be case to serve many of the smaller towns and villages, such as in the North of England. 79% of Labour and 52% of Tory voters want to see renationalised railways. 73% of UKIP voters too. It looks like most people should be voting Green! http://yougov.co.uk/ news/2013/11/04/nati onalise-energy-and-r ail-companies-say-pu blic/ Labour is pushing a watered down version of 'renationalisation', the Tories don't want to know. And as for UKIP - all I could find, was this... http://theroyalfacto r.blogspot.co.uk/201 4/06/ukip-trials-new -musso-railway-polic y.html DrChan
  • Score: 1

6:14pm Wed 20 Aug 14

keepitreel says...

smashing lets put the railways back into public ownership,how long before the unions started demanding pay rises and benefits well beyond what they get now,we the tax payer would then have to spend billions on infrastructure,the tax revenue would drop from the companies having the franchise now how much would it all cost us,we should stop all franchised subsidies for rail and other public transport and let those that use it pay for it,if no one used them the firms would go bust,but thats life.
smashing lets put the railways back into public ownership,how long before the unions started demanding pay rises and benefits well beyond what they get now,we the tax payer would then have to spend billions on infrastructure,the tax revenue would drop from the companies having the franchise now how much would it all cost us,we should stop all franchised subsidies for rail and other public transport and let those that use it pay for it,if no one used them the firms would go bust,but thats life. keepitreel
  • Score: -9

7:57pm Wed 20 Aug 14

DrChan says...

Spending on any infrastructure is not a waste. It is a key way of generating economic development. Road and rail is how trade and goods move from farm to factory to market. It's how workers get to work. It creates and sustains employment. Those are economic basics. And yes, people do need to get paid, and they ought to be paid a fair wage - not what the big bosses of energy companies and rail companies get paid now. Big boss bonuses and pay is excessive, not the decent salary and pension demanded by the worker.

We the taxpayer spend billions on roads and pavements, without which, you'd be scared to let elderly relatives walk outside due to human-sized holes in the ground. You wouldn't want to drive your shiny car down those dangerous roads either. Believe me, I've lived in places just like it.

Perhaps we should stop spending any money on capital infrastructure projects such as hospitals, roads, military hardware, airports, satellite weather and communications systems, ports, police systems, sewers etc. And if we wanted to buy a peach grown in Spain, we'd have to walk, swim and dodge pirates en route. And fend for ourselves if someone attacked us, or maybe we can pay for our own private police constable/hired thug to enact our own justice. Or perhaps we should all dig holes and do our dirty business in them? None of us can afford to dig up a road to lay pipes on our own, or rail tracks, or lay tarmac, or send satellites to space, or pay for medicines. I guess if you got sick, well, then tough luck. You don't have the £1000 per dose of medicine? Ah well.

The collective effort which has built and maintained what we take for granted today is exactly that - a collective effort. We cannot achieve the level of economic development today without collective effort (taxation).

You're in essence arguing against the very tenets of civilised society, because that is the ultimate conclusion of your line of logic.
Spending on any infrastructure is not a waste. It is a key way of generating economic development. Road and rail is how trade and goods move from farm to factory to market. It's how workers get to work. It creates and sustains employment. Those are economic basics. And yes, people do need to get paid, and they ought to be paid a fair wage - not what the big bosses of energy companies and rail companies get paid now. Big boss bonuses and pay is excessive, not the decent salary and pension demanded by the worker. We the taxpayer spend billions on roads and pavements, without which, you'd be scared to let elderly relatives walk outside due to human-sized holes in the ground. You wouldn't want to drive your shiny car down those dangerous roads either. Believe me, I've lived in places just like it. Perhaps we should stop spending any money on capital infrastructure projects such as hospitals, roads, military hardware, airports, satellite weather and communications systems, ports, police systems, sewers etc. And if we wanted to buy a peach grown in Spain, we'd have to walk, swim and dodge pirates en route. And fend for ourselves if someone attacked us, or maybe we can pay for our own private police constable/hired thug to enact our own justice. Or perhaps we should all dig holes and do our dirty business in them? None of us can afford to dig up a road to lay pipes on our own, or rail tracks, or lay tarmac, or send satellites to space, or pay for medicines. I guess if you got sick, well, then tough luck. You don't have the £1000 per dose of medicine? Ah well. The collective effort which has built and maintained what we take for granted today is exactly that - a collective effort. We cannot achieve the level of economic development today without collective effort (taxation). You're in essence arguing against the very tenets of civilised society, because that is the ultimate conclusion of your line of logic. DrChan
  • Score: 7

11:21pm Wed 20 Aug 14

keepitreel says...

DrChan wrote:
Spending on any infrastructure is not a waste. It is a key way of generating economic development. Road and rail is how trade and goods move from farm to factory to market. It's how workers get to work. It creates and sustains employment. Those are economic basics. And yes, people do need to get paid, and they ought to be paid a fair wage - not what the big bosses of energy companies and rail companies get paid now. Big boss bonuses and pay is excessive, not the decent salary and pension demanded by the worker.

We the taxpayer spend billions on roads and pavements, without which, you'd be scared to let elderly relatives walk outside due to human-sized holes in the ground. You wouldn't want to drive your shiny car down those dangerous roads either. Believe me, I've lived in places just like it.

Perhaps we should stop spending any money on capital infrastructure projects such as hospitals, roads, military hardware, airports, satellite weather and communications systems, ports, police systems, sewers etc. And if we wanted to buy a peach grown in Spain, we'd have to walk, swim and dodge pirates en route. And fend for ourselves if someone attacked us, or maybe we can pay for our own private police constable/hired thug to enact our own justice. Or perhaps we should all dig holes and do our dirty business in them? None of us can afford to dig up a road to lay pipes on our own, or rail tracks, or lay tarmac, or send satellites to space, or pay for medicines. I guess if you got sick, well, then tough luck. You don't have the £1000 per dose of medicine? Ah well.

The collective effort which has built and maintained what we take for granted today is exactly that - a collective effort. We cannot achieve the level of economic development today without collective effort (taxation).

You're in essence arguing against the very tenets of civilised society, because that is the ultimate conclusion of your line of logic.
good rant but just typical left wing tripe,without the tax paid by big business we would not have enough to build infrastructure,and if the unions demand more than the business can afford no business,the tax revenue from individuals is going down,so why spend billions on subsidising rail fares for commuters,would it not be better to employ more local labour instead of moving thousands of people around the country every day,look at the way British rail was run,do we really want to go back to those days.
[quote][p][bold]DrChan[/bold] wrote: Spending on any infrastructure is not a waste. It is a key way of generating economic development. Road and rail is how trade and goods move from farm to factory to market. It's how workers get to work. It creates and sustains employment. Those are economic basics. And yes, people do need to get paid, and they ought to be paid a fair wage - not what the big bosses of energy companies and rail companies get paid now. Big boss bonuses and pay is excessive, not the decent salary and pension demanded by the worker. We the taxpayer spend billions on roads and pavements, without which, you'd be scared to let elderly relatives walk outside due to human-sized holes in the ground. You wouldn't want to drive your shiny car down those dangerous roads either. Believe me, I've lived in places just like it. Perhaps we should stop spending any money on capital infrastructure projects such as hospitals, roads, military hardware, airports, satellite weather and communications systems, ports, police systems, sewers etc. And if we wanted to buy a peach grown in Spain, we'd have to walk, swim and dodge pirates en route. And fend for ourselves if someone attacked us, or maybe we can pay for our own private police constable/hired thug to enact our own justice. Or perhaps we should all dig holes and do our dirty business in them? None of us can afford to dig up a road to lay pipes on our own, or rail tracks, or lay tarmac, or send satellites to space, or pay for medicines. I guess if you got sick, well, then tough luck. You don't have the £1000 per dose of medicine? Ah well. The collective effort which has built and maintained what we take for granted today is exactly that - a collective effort. We cannot achieve the level of economic development today without collective effort (taxation). You're in essence arguing against the very tenets of civilised society, because that is the ultimate conclusion of your line of logic.[/p][/quote]good rant but just typical left wing tripe,without the tax paid by big business we would not have enough to build infrastructure,and if the unions demand more than the business can afford no business,the tax revenue from individuals is going down,so why spend billions on subsidising rail fares for commuters,would it not be better to employ more local labour instead of moving thousands of people around the country every day,look at the way British rail was run,do we really want to go back to those days. keepitreel
  • Score: -7

1:12pm Thu 21 Aug 14

DrChan says...

Yes, my thinking is left-wing. Does that surprise you? Yours is very right-wing, neoliberal. In fact, a view that many Tory voters would disagree with.

And unions fighting for increased pay to the point that their employer goes bust forcing them to lose jobs?

Removing public support for unprofitable routes would doom much of the North of England, leaving millions without rail transport. St Helens would no longer have an operating railway. Tax money used to subsidise railways that ends up lining the pockets of shareholders and bosses is abhorrent. This is why the private operation of the railways is a bad idea. It's a utility that inherently relies on the state to function, and should be renationalised for the best use of money, otherwise, as we see now, the money goes to shareholders, and passengers are asked to shoulder the burden.

Your idea of only employing local labour is idealistic, almost communitarian (Soviet) in idea, but realistically unachievable. We don't live in self-sufficient towns. And don't forget people don't just use the railways for commuting to work.

Only a proportion of the revenues earned by big businesses are taxed. Corporation tax of the 101 largest businesses paying tax in the UK amounted to £78 billion last year. I'm not arguing for wholesale nationalisation. I don't think a state-run supermarket would be the best idea, but would it not be better if all of the income from railway companies went back into public funds? We could afford a lot more infrastructure building and importantly, fares would be much cheaper. The majority German state-owned Deutsch Bahn is a great example of what happens when the state plays a more active role. A new British Rail can do better, can learn from our European neighbours, and from failings in the past. Revenues would help bolster public finances rather than be paid back to shareholders around the world. The British invented the railway in Rainhill, and I believe along with most others in the country, that the railway could be something that Brits could take pride in again.
Yes, my thinking is left-wing. Does that surprise you? Yours is very right-wing, neoliberal. In fact, a view that many Tory voters would disagree with. And unions fighting for increased pay to the point that their employer goes bust forcing them to lose jobs? Removing public support for unprofitable routes would doom much of the North of England, leaving millions without rail transport. St Helens would no longer have an operating railway. Tax money used to subsidise railways that ends up lining the pockets of shareholders and bosses is abhorrent. This is why the private operation of the railways is a bad idea. It's a utility that inherently relies on the state to function, and should be renationalised for the best use of money, otherwise, as we see now, the money goes to shareholders, and passengers are asked to shoulder the burden. Your idea of only employing local labour is idealistic, almost communitarian (Soviet) in idea, but realistically unachievable. We don't live in self-sufficient towns. And don't forget people don't just use the railways for commuting to work. Only a proportion of the revenues earned by big businesses are taxed. Corporation tax of the 101 largest businesses paying tax in the UK amounted to £78 billion last year. I'm not arguing for wholesale nationalisation. I don't think a state-run supermarket would be the best idea, but would it not be better if all of the income from railway companies went back into public funds? We could afford a lot more infrastructure building and importantly, fares would be much cheaper. The majority German state-owned Deutsch Bahn is a great example of what happens when the state plays a more active role. A new British Rail can do better, can learn from our European neighbours, and from failings in the past. Revenues would help bolster public finances rather than be paid back to shareholders around the world. The British invented the railway in Rainhill, and I believe along with most others in the country, that the railway could be something that Brits could take pride in again. DrChan
  • Score: 9

11:18pm Mon 25 Aug 14

Bill Bradbury says...

I have just returned from spending some time on trains in the SE and what a revelation. Modern silent rolling stock with a degree of comfort that we in the NW can only dream about. High speed Javelins and type 375 which make travelling a pleasure.
As I wrote in the Star the other week why are our MP.s not kicking up a fuss over we have to make do with 40 year old Pacers, ex Leyland bodies on rollers because in the words of the lessees that own them they are "cost effective" plus rejects from the south which have to be modified to comply with disability access and to cope with a different electric system.

The Governments have put more money into the pockets or the privateers than they ever did under British Rail who pay only a fraction to Railtrack who maintain the system, the loss which is put on to the Government books. So the electrification is to be paid for by the travelling public to maintain the profits of the continental companies that own the rolling stock from whom the likes of Northern Rail lease.

What do we get from our MP's in parliament? Silence and acquiescence.
I have just returned from spending some time on trains in the SE and what a revelation. Modern silent rolling stock with a degree of comfort that we in the NW can only dream about. High speed Javelins and type 375 which make travelling a pleasure. As I wrote in the Star the other week why are our MP.s not kicking up a fuss over we have to make do with 40 year old Pacers, ex Leyland bodies on rollers because in the words of the lessees that own them they are "cost effective" plus rejects from the south which have to be modified to comply with disability access and to cope with a different electric system. The Governments have put more money into the pockets or the privateers than they ever did under British Rail who pay only a fraction to Railtrack who maintain the system, the loss which is put on to the Government books. So the electrification is to be paid for by the travelling public to maintain the profits of the continental companies that own the rolling stock from whom the likes of Northern Rail lease. What do we get from our MP's in parliament? Silence and acquiescence. Bill Bradbury
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree