Article: Taxpayers' share of rail fares increases ...

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

Taxpayers' share of rail fares increases, while CityTrain passengers continue to decline

Taxpayers' share of rail fares increases, while CityTrain passengers continue to decline

   * Ursula Heger
   * From: The Courier-Mail
   * June 15, 2010 9:18PM

EACH time a passenger travels on southeast Queensland's beleaguered rail network it costs taxpayers almost $10, despite major hikes in fares.

Six months after big fare rises were introduced, new data casts doubt on State Government plans to reduce the subsidy on the public transport network.

Figures released to The Courier-Mail show the Government will pay about $542 million to subsidise the southeast's CityTrain network this financial year, compared with $501 million last year.

It means that for every passenger trip taken on CityTrain, the State Government pays $9.51, up from $8.25 last year. With an average fare per journey of $2.36, it takes the total true cost of travel to $11.87 a trip.

Patronage of the rail network has dropped from 60.7 million trips in 2008-09 to an expected 57 million this financial year.

TransLink attributed the fall in passengers to a change in the way the number of trips was officially measured.

Journeys on the regional Traveltrain network, which carries significantly fewer people, cost taxpayers an average of $329 per trip, according to Budget papers.

By comparison the subsidy for the southeast's bus network is $2.18 per trip, up from $2.07 last year.

On January 1, the Government introduced up to 40 per cent increases on paper tickets and up to 20 per cent rises in the cost of go card fares, with plans for annual increases of 15 per cent a year from 2011 until 2014.

Transport Minister Rachel Nolan said on announcing the fare increases, that they would reduce the per-trip subsidy paid out by the Government.

"For every dollar that a passenger spends on a fare, taxpayers spend three in subsidy and that ratio needs to decrease rather than increase in the next five years," she said in October last year.

But the data shows the fare increases have had little impact so far on the State Government's per-trip contribution, with the bus and rail subsidy on the public transport network rising to 74 per cent of the total cost, compared to a Government target of 70 per cent in five years.

"A reduction can be achieved over time and on such a large network – not just in the space of six months," Ms Nolan said yesterday.

She attributed the increase in the subsidy for rail to new rolling stock, extension of services to Varsity Lake and other new services.

"At present we're putting a great deal of energy into providing more services and more seats across the network," Ms Nolan said.

"I don't think anyone is complaining that we're providing more services.

"The alternative is either saving money by cutting services or greatly increasing fares."

Robert Dow, spokesman for commuter advocacy group Rail Back on Track, said the Government should focus on increasing the frequency of train services rather than imposing higher fares to bring the subsidy down.

"We have a massive asset in the rail network but because of poor frequency it is under-utilised," he said. "If you actually increase the train frequency, it becomes a preferred means of transport, you increase the fare box revenue and the subsidy goes down."

Opposition transport spokeswoman Fiona Simpson said the Government should not write a "blank cheque" to cover the cost of Queensland's public transport.

"There has to be transparency in the costing and there currently isn't that," she said.

"There shouldn't be a blank cheque for unlimited subsidy.

"People have to see where that money is being spent and how it can be done better – there is no transparency in the figures that are published by Government."

Blog comment:

Rail trips are on average 3 times longer and the cost of rail infrastructure is factored into the rail subsidy, roads (bus) isn't.  In actual fact rail is cheaper.  Public transport saves the community much money in terms of reduced congestion, lessened environmental impacts and reduced costs to the health sector as road trauma reduced.  The cost and effects of road trauma is horrific.  As a community the more money spent on public transport the savings overall are considerable.

The figures from TransLink might suggest a fall, but this due to the changed methods of counting.  Ask any rail commuter if numbers have fallen?  No, they have risen, and will continue to rise as fuel prices take off.  

[ozbob]

There is a poll running at the CM ...

poll click --> here!

[Jon Bryant]

Public tranport gets 'Ursula'ed' again.  No attempt to look at the overall cost benefit. Lazy lazy lazy journalism. Oh that's right it is the Courier Mail.  That is their motto.

[#Metro]

It may not be popular, it may not be what we want to hear, but Ursula is right.
Brisbane's train system is falling over. Population is increasing, so we would expect some background increases, but are there patronage increases over that? Probably not.

Rail frequency is so bad that few people will bother to catch it. If what she writes is true- that ridership is decreasing, this would be further evidence. It's almost like building a rail system just for peak hour purposes only.
The feeder bus services to rail stations are also bad.
Unsynchronised buses that just happen to pass near the rail station are not feeders.
Feeders terminate at the station, they are timetabled to meet the train, and there are very few of these.

And the promised extra rail and ferry services are still to be delivered. It seems that many of these are "hair extensions" which are valuable, but what commuters such as myself want is trains every 15 minutes or even 20 minutes, to all major railway termini (Ferny Grove, Cleveland, Caboolture, Ipswich, Beenleigh, Gold Coast) in the OFF peak. If this is not possible, at least as close to that as possible.

It would be worthwhile to compare to Perth, which does publish financial efficiency metrics freely in its Annual report. They manage to put trains on very frequently in the off peak. Brisbane is a bigger city, it should start transitioning to do the same.

Of course people will not catch trains when the frequency is so bad and there is a bus every 15 minutes, and one every 5-10 minutes in the peak.

[#Metro]

Solution:
* Clock face timetable
* Feeder buses
* Major boost to frequency- turn up and go
* Reduce overcrowding on peak hour trains (actual reductions, not altering the statistics measures)
* Synchronise buses to meet trains
* Pulse timetable where possible (off-peak, weekends). QR should consult with the SBB (Swiss Railways) on how to do this.

[ozbob]

It may not be popular, it may not be what we want to hear, but Ursula is right.
Brisbane's train system is falling over. Population is increasing, so we would expect some background increases, but are there patronage increases over that? Probably not.

Patronage has been steadily increasing for the last 10 years. The recent aberration is due to a change in the way they are counting.  My observations suggest continued growth.  Figures of the lastest load surveys should be interesting.

The blog comments at the CM are well worth reading.  I will agree about frequency and that is the key.  The TransLink network plan has recognised that.  We are about to see a major turnaround.  Frequency frequency will drive a big shift.

[Derwan]

My comment:

Ditch public transport fares (and the costs involved with collecting/enforcing them such as ticketing systems and transit officers) in favour of a public transport levy that everyone pays.  If you choose not to use what you pay for, that's up to you - I still pay for rego even if I choose not to drive my car to work every day.  This would be a far better system.  Of course, it won't work until there are significant improvements to the entire network.

[#Metro]

Because population is increasing anyway, it would be normal to expect some natural increase from simply population growth alone.
So yes, train patronage is increasing but is it increasing fast enough? Compared to bus and ferry the answer is probably not.
Frequency and connectivity (transfers/feeders) remain the key issue. This needs to be fixed, more services and the timetable completely overhauled.

Ursula's article may well be the alarm that needs to get this going.


Lord mayors mass transit report. Reproduced here for the purposes of research, study, critisim and review.
http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/BCC:BASE::pc=PC_2698

[ozbob]

Those figures confirm that fact that growth has been following frequency increases.  More service increases on bus and ferry, but relatively less on rail.  Number of buses doubled so obviously there will be more pax.  Rail was neglected for most of the above period but still demonstrated growth. We are about to see the rail phase of super-growth .... bus can't take much more ..

[#Metro]

Those figures confirm that fact that growth has been following frequency increases.

Exactly. The Mohring Effect.

We are about to see the rail phase of super-growth .... bus can't take much more ..

One does not necessarily follow the other. That growth could easily be super car growth, unless feeder buses, the timetable is clock-faced and pulses are built in in the off peak and frequency is massively boosted.

There is another very interesting thing in that table.
SE Busway opened in 2001, but bus patronage did not increase significantly until 2004, which is exactly when TransLink was created and the fare system completely integrated and overhauled.

The main thing is: Frequency. The other one is to create a network of services rather than just focus on optimising individual bits.
The system needs to work together. At the moment, in parts, the network is competing against itself (bus vs rail). TransLink being on the ball and under scrutiny is essential.

[stephenk]

The figures from TransLink might suggest a fall, but this due to the changed methods of counting.  Ask any rail commuter if numbers have fallen?  No, they have risen, and will continue to rise as fuel prices take off.  

Actually, I'm not convinced that patronage on the Ferny Grove Line patronage has gone up. Loadings seem to be less than last year, which itself saw a decline in the pm peak. I'm very interested in seeing the March 2010 patronage figures when they are released. 

I think that Translink's theory that any decline is due to methods of counting is just spin to cover their lack of action. Decline is most likely due to fares going up by 20-30%, and train service increasing by 0%.

[#Metro]

Can I check something?
The load survey is done manually isn't it? And it is always done the same way more or less each time?

[STB]

I'm a bit annoyed at that question in that story 'Are Brisbane train fares too high?'

They are TransLink fares, not simply only valid for trains, valid for train bus and ferry.  The fares will be naturally higher to factor that in regardless.

[#Metro]

I'm a bit annoyed at that question in that story 'Are Brisbane train fares too high?'

I am too.    Typical trademark mud-stirring.
Its like asking "Would you like to pay zero taxes or have the government give you a free house."

I don't read CM that much now. I'm very put off at these attempts to copy the style of ACA or Today Tonight.
What will I call it? Whinge Jounalism.

Maybe they should have asked, would you like your local service cut in return for a cheaper fare?

But that would expose the silliness of it all. One train an hour maybe, for a city!
Cheap fares are useless if there is no service to catch.

[#Metro]

Actually, I'm not convinced that patronage on the Ferny Grove Line patronage has gone up.
Loadings seem to be less than last year, which itself saw a decline in the pm peak.
I'm very interested in seeing the March 2010 patronage figures when they are released.

I think that Translink's theory that any decline is due to methods of counting is just spin to cover their lack of action.
Decline is most likely due to fares going up by 20-30%, and train service increasing by 0%.

I thought I would have a look at the passenger load surveys. TL looks like they are right re: GoCard.
The thing is, these don't rely on go card, so any "aberration" in the counting does not apply.
There is a slight complication- that is giving one number for patronage doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
So I give 2- AM and PM. I haven't shown numbers for the PM- too much clutter.

More people travel into the city in the AM peak, than people leave in the PM peak (AM and PM peak have special definitions).
So people are probably catching buses home from work is my guess. I think the figures are probably better than the BCC tables.
At least I know how I made my graphs.

Thanks to QR for making the information publicly available.
http://www.media.qr.com.au/Libraries/Key_Documents/Passenger_Load_Survey_2009.sflb.ashx

So rail patronage is growing at about 2-5%, which is growth- maybe slightly more above natural population growth,
but not anything like buses or ferries.  Worth comparing this to Melbourne, Perth, Adelaide or Sydney.

Morning patronage on the FG line is increasing, but strangely it seems that more people are opting to get home
from work another way, probably by bus.

Something else- busway patronage. It would seem that the SE busway would carry a similar number of actual persons
as a railway line. So my guess is that it is carrying about 9000-10 000 city bound passengers in the AM peak, not 15 000 or 18 000.
This would suggest that the load factor on the buses, on average, is about 85% and is equivalent to 5 freeway lanes worth
of traffic in practice.

[#Metro]

Another thing... where possible buses should feed trains.
There are some people who have a choice between bus and train.
Trains are generally faster, require less people to operate
(roughly 2 people per 1000 pax vs 16 per 1000 pax) and are probably cheaper to move a large amount of people.

Savings, Efficiency, Rail.

[somebody]

Morning patronage on the FG line is increasing, but strangely it seems that more people are opting to get home
from work another way, probably by bus.

Or they may be going home at an off peak time.

That data doesn't answer the question though.  We need the 2010 figures.

[stephenk]

Morning patronage on the FG line is increasing, but strangely it seems that more people are opting to get home
from work another way, probably by bus.

Or they may be going home at an off peak time.

That data doesn't answer the question though.  We need the 2010 figures.

I was just about to say the same thing. Lets see the patronage figures post fare increase and no service increase.

Should alarm bells be ringing at QR and TransLink that on the Ferny Grove Line, whilst am patronage has increased, pm patronage has decreased? Due to the abysmal pm peak timetable for stations not served by expresses, and vastly improved INB services, I'm personally using the FG Line around 20% less than in the pm peak than this time last year. My neighbours went back to driving to/from work after the March 2008 timetable!

[ozbob]

http://www.fionasimpson.com.au/Pages/Article.aspx?ID=725

Falling passenger numbers cost taxpayers more

Wednesday, 16 June 2010

Expensive tickets, unreliable and infrequent services and regular faults have left Queenslanders footing a bigger bill for public transport, the Opposition said today.

LNP Shadow Minister for Transport Fiona Simpson said Queensland taxpayers were now paying the price for the Bligh Labor Government's mismanagement of South East Queensland's train services.

"While bus and ferry patronage have increased in the past 12 months, Translink's own figures show that the number of people catching trains continues to fall," Ms Simpson said.

"Translink claims that its previous habit of inflating passenger numbers is to blame, but after a 20 to 40 per cent increase in fares and horror months of delays and track faults you can hardly blame Queenslanders for looking for different ways to get to work.

"Queenslanders want reliable, safe and affordable public transport — and Bligh and Labor are failing on all three counts."

Ms Simpson called for greater accountability for funds spent on Queensland Rail.

"This Government needs to ensure taxpayers' dollars are spent on creating the best possible public transport system.

"Bligh and Labor shouldn't be writing a blank cheque for an unlimited subsidy — it's time for this Government and Translink to come clean with proper reporting on spending and passenger numbers."

[Golliwog]

Does Fiona Simpson offer any justifying figures to prove the governmnet is failing to provide a reliable, safe and affordable public transport system? I think its a fairly awesome system, on Monday I had not a problem using the system I had to drop my car off for a service at Taringa, and drop my laptop off as well for repairs at Mt Gravatt. All my transfers were simple with a minimum of waiting. I only had one bus either not turn up or show up late, which wasn't bad considering it was the 444 BUZ, and the next one was along soon.

[#Metro]

Well I did put my graph up! If you don't use go Card data, but train passenger counts, it is going up generally.
But the rate of growth might be comparable to that of population growth, so in "real terms" its stagnant. And nowhere near that of ferry or bus growth which seem to be double digit.

The rate of passenger growth in places like Melbourne, Perth and possibly Sydney is likely outstripping Brisbane.
It all really comes down to one thing: Frequency.

Financial efficiency metrics on the number of kilometers traveled, the cost per passenger, the cost per passenger kilometer and all that must be publicly released and compared to that of other cities such as Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne and Sydney. Perth has no trouble doing this in their Annual Report. Why does Brisbane omit them?

Note: Golliwog managed to post first before this post.

[somebody]

Does Fiona Simpson offer any justifying figures

What I was wonderring.  Perhaps she's been slipped some figures which haven't been released to the public??

I think its a fairly awesome system, on Monday I had not a problem using the system I had to drop my car off for a service at Taringa, and drop my laptop off as well for repairs at Mt Gravatt. All my transfers were simple with a minimum of waiting. I only had one bus either not turn up or show up late, which wasn't bad considering it was the 444 BUZ, and the next one was along soon.

You are easier to please than me. 

A 15 minute wait due to a bus not showing up would not leave me saying "It's an awesome system", unless, of course you just used one of the many other routes through Taringa.

[Golliwog]

I could have used another route, but I don't usually travel out that way so don't know what they are or where they stop and as my car wasn't going to be ready to pick up till later was heading to my girlfriends house which has a route through Indro that only comes once an hour (my only gripe with my travels on Monday) so it was really "am I going to wait in KGS or at Indro?"

[somebody]

I could have used another route, but I don't usually travel out that way so don't know what they are or where they stop and as my car wasn't going to be ready to pick up till later was heading to my girlfriends house which has a route through Indro that only comes once an hour (my only gripe with my travels on Monday) so it was really "am I going to wait in KGS or at Indro?"

You are hitting on one of my main gripes with the system there.  Why is it that there are so many city stop locations for routes to the same corridor?  For a Taringa-Mt Gravatt trip I would have changed at the Cultural Centre rather than KGSBS, but whatever floats your boat.  Maybe you wanted to do something in the city.

[#Metro]

You are hitting on one of my main gripes with the system there.  Why is it that there are so many city stop locations for routes to the same corridor?

Because they are buses.
You rarely get this with a train system.

[Golliwog]

I did both. Going out to Mt Gravatt I caught a train from Taringa to Roma St, then bus to CC then 140 to Mt Gravatt. Then coming back I used the GC line to get to the busway, and caught the 111 to KGS, where I changed to the 444. But yeah, I get your pont about the various stop locations. Perhaps if they're not going to move them closer together, they could put up a notice saying where the other buses left from? Its not the optimum solution, but I don't think you're ever going to have every bus to each suburb grouped together at the same or adjacent stops.

[O_128]

I did both. Going out to Mt Gravatt I caught a train from Taringa to Roma St, then bus to CC then 140 to Mt Gravatt. Then coming back I used the GC line to get to the busway, and caught the 111 to KGS, where I changed to the 444. But yeah, I get your pont about the various stop locations. Perhaps if they're not going to move them closer together, they could put up a notice saying where the other buses left from? Its not the optimum solution, but I don't think you're ever going to have every bus to each suburb grouped together at the same or adjacent stops.

why not?

It makes no sense that buses leave from all different places. The 412 and 411 dont even leave from the same spot and there is no where to check where your bus leaves from.

[somebody]

I do not understand why anyone, anywhere wants to argue the point about the consistency of the city stop locations.  It is not an arguable point.  It could and should be done and anyone who can't see that has no business being employed in the coordination of public transport.  So there!!! 

[somebody]

There once was an episode of "The Simpsons" where Principal Skinner says he's a virgin and Superintendant Chalmers says "no one, anywhere would pretend to be a 40 year old virgin".  I find the notion that Translink and Brisbane Transport who are supposed to be professionals in this field do not see the value in consistent city stop locations even more ridiculous.

[somebody]

You are hitting on one of my main gripes with the system there.  Why is it that there are so many city stop locations for routes to the same corridor?

Because they are buses.

That is not the reason.  The reason is that Translink and/or Brisbane Transport are dirty rotten so and sos.  There is no other possibility.  When I leave the city for Indooroopilly, I need to check what time it is and if the 444 is leaving soon.  If not, I will go to QSBS to see if there is a different bus leaving sooner.  Sometimes, I will also check on Adelaide St if it is on the way to QSBS.  Can't you see how annoying this is?

Not happy Jan.  I do not think I should have had to explain this on this forum.

[mufreight]

It is worth thought that the journeys made by Golliwog were mostly by bus services operated by BT for Translink and it is questionable if the location of bus stops is relevant in a thread about taxpayers share of rail fair increases, perhaps just a tad off topic.

[stephenk]

I do not understand why anyone, anywhere wants to argue the point about the consistency of the city stop locations.  It is not an arguable point.  It could and should be done and anyone who can't see that has no business being employed in the coordination of public transport.  So there!!! 

I'm strongly inclined to agree with you. It is bizarre that half of the buses to a destination can go from one stop, and the other half from another many blocks away. It effectively halves the useful frequency. I also find the lack of maps showing which bus routes go from which CBD stops rather annoying - London manages to get this right!

[Golliwog]

I agree, London's bus stop signs and maps are awesomely helpful. I wasn't trying to argue against bunching all the bus rotues together. I was jsut thinking that you can do it up to a point before there will be too many routes trying to use a group of bus stops, or you could end up with something like all the Indro buses leaving from the river end of Adelaide street (just an example) meaning that if people out that way are trying to get anywhere else in the city then its not convenient. I understand that bunching rotue stops together is important and definatly worth doing where possible, but it can realistically only be done up to a point.

[#Metro]

Evening peak service to Enoggera* 2006 - 7tph
Evening peak service to Enoggera* 2010 - 4tph
* departures from Central between 16:30 and 17:30.

What happened Stephenk? It looks like you got a service cut on your line?

[somebody]

there will be too many routes trying to use a group of bus stops, or you could end up with something like all the Indro buses leaving from the river end of Adelaide street (just an example) meaning that if people out that way are trying to get anywhere else in the city then its not convenient.
...
but it can realistically only be done up to a point.

Are these comments intentionally flamebait?

Putting all of the Indooroopilly buses on Adelaide St would be an obvious move, although the Northern Busway and Go Between Bridge have openned up other options.  If you say you do not want to have to walk from Eagle St or Parliament to QSBS to get your bus, precisely how does having a few buses in QSBS, a few in KGSBS and others on Adelaide St help this?  If you really want to solve this problem, you should increase the frequency and operating hours of the city loop buses.  The other alternative is running some buses as City Precincts (Wharf St and Margaret/Alice Sts) with interchange at some outside of the city location like Chermside interchange or Indooroopilly interchange.  I cannot go along with the latter solution off peak, except perhaps for the SE busway services.

It is definitely achievable keeping all the Indro routes together and it was almost achieved pre the KGSBS.  It is also achievable to rationalise the 111 & 160 in KGSBS.

I agree, London's bus stop signs and maps are awesomely helpful.

Sydney has something similar too.  Brisbane has something in QSBS which only covers routes from QSBS.  AARRGGHH!!

It is worth thought that the journeys made by Golliwog were mostly by bus services operated by BT for Translink and it is questionable if the location of bus stops is relevant in a thread about taxpayers share of rail fair increases, perhaps just a tad off topic.

True.  Oh well.

[#Metro]

There is now a thread for this http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=3996.msg28782#msg28782