Proposed 1 Day Boycott of Rail Services (all Brisbane area lines) - 17 March

[Gazza]

Watch out if you are in Melbourne.  There the fine for not swiping off is the fare to the end of the line!  Ouch!

Which is only 2 zones anyway...

[Nina M Blackwell]

I tried to do my bit by affixing the yellow flyer to my backpack this morning but I have to say not too many people have heard about this proposed "boycott".  What would happen if everyone refused to touch on/off one day?   They don't enough TOs to go around!

[Fares_Fair]

Feedback Required.

Does anyone have results of the reduction in commuter numbers expressed as a %age please (realistic please - no exaggeration)
for lines on the Gold Coast or Ipswich or anywhere else ?

Required by 4pm.

Thank you.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[somebody]

Does anyone have results of the reduction in commuter numbers expressed as a %age please (realistic please - no exaggeration)
for lines on the Gold Coast or Ipswich or anywhere else ?

Don't think anyone has such data.  How do you expect age to be known?

What is relevant is the % of full fares (counting frequent user discount as full fare, of course).

[Fares_Fair]

hi somebody,

I meant percentage, e.g. Palmwoods was 67% down.

Regards,
Fares_Fair

[somebody]

Doh!

[Stillwater]

I'd say 30-35 per cent less passengers at Nambour round 7am today.

[ozbob]

Channel 9 News Brisbane might have a story on the boycott/fares  in the 6pm bulletin ..

[Fares_Fair]

 
great work ...
which channel do we watch  

I'll record Channel 9 Win and Brisbane and watch Channel 7.
Do we need a third TV for Channel 10 ?

Just saw Channel 7 News.
the Minister stated that as "afar as she knew, there would not be increased travel times for [Sunshine Coast] commuters !!  

Just saw Channel 9 Win News.
Minister guarantees movement on 6 month and 12 month ticket options.
Robert Dow mentioned weekly discounts and options for the go card. That needs to be pursued.
Thanks Robert.

Regards,
Fares_Fair.

[#Metro]

Channel 9 ran it.

Shots of empty Sunshine Coast train station. Interviews with people on the street etc.
Minister for Transport on record, but a bit vague. What does "movement within a few months" mean?

They need to increase frequency. Public transport will always be a basket case until rail frequency is fixed up! Half an hour waiting is not acceptable.

[BrizCommuter]

http://brizcommuter.blogspot.com/2011/03/boycott-success-or-failure.html
BrizCommuter thinks the former.

[ozbob]

From the Brisbane mX 17th March 2011 page 4

LNP support for boycott

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

TransLink boss admits public transport has a bad rap in southeast Queensland

TransLink boss admits public transport has a bad rap in southeast Queensland

    * by Robyn Ironside
    * From: The Courier-Mail
    * March 18, 2011 12:00AM

TRANSLINK'S chief executive has admitted public transport has a major image problem in southeast Queensland, with State Government research showing only 3 per cent of people believe it to be better than private transport.

As hundreds of commuters staged a boycott of public transport in protest against big fare hikes yesterday, TransLink's Peter Strachan told a business lunch 68 per cent of residents thought cars were quicker than buses or trains.

A further 29 per cent believed they were comparable.

Mr Strachan said TransLink was trying to get "reliability and frequency" of services right to encourage more people to use trains and buses.

"For two-thirds of customers, reliability is their absolute number one priority," he said. "They want to know they'll turn up on time and they'll get to their destination on time."

Without public transport like the busways, the South East Freeway would have to be "nine lanes wider".

"It is our goal to have 14 per cent of all trips made in southeast Queensland made on public transport by 2031," Mr Strachan said.

"That amounts to about 2 million trips a day. Currently we're at about 700,000 trips a day, or 7.9 per cent."

TransLink spokesman Andrew Berkman said yesterday's boycott of public transport was not noticed at Nambour, Robina and Central stations where passenger numbers were within normal ranges.

But commuter advocacy group Back on Track, which supported the boycott, declared it "an overwhelming, spectacular success".

"The value of the boycott has been in highlighting how out of whack the go card fare structure is with the community's expectations and the reality of public transport fare systems everywhere," Back on Track spokesman Robert Dow said.

"There needs to be an urgent review and implementation of a fare structure that is in line with other public transport jurisdictions."

State Transport Minister Annastacia Palaszczuk said she was setting up a ministerial review committee to look at issues of concern including fare increases.

Although it was unlikely planned fare rises of 15 per cent a year for the next three years could be reversed because of the growth occurring in southeast Queensland, Ms Palaszcuk said she would consider the need for six-monthly and annual fares.

Mr Dow said the Transport and Main Roads' research touted by Mr Strachan only served to underline the need for "an incentive fare structure".

"That's a pretty sad indictment on public transport in southeast Queensland," he said.

"We should be making public transport the first choice, not last by improving frequency outside of peak times and providing ticketing options that allow people to use public transport all of the time."

Without the Ipswich railway line the Ipswich highway would need to be 30 lanes wider ...

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

18th March 2011

Thanks to the Minister for Transport

Greetings,

Thanks to the Minister for Transport for moving forward with a committment for setting up a ministerial review committee to look at issues of concern including fare increases, and considering the need for seasonal ticketing.  Other smart card systems can hold concurrently seasonal ticketing and pay as you go.  The go card needs to be fully exploited in terms of technology.

Of real concern is the article in the Courier Mail this morning:

TransLink boss admits public transport has a bad rap in southeast Queensland  
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/translink-bos-admits-public-transport-has-a-bad-rap-in-southeast-queensland/story-e6freoof-1226023506289

We have constantly highlighted the base issues with the public transport network in south-east Queensland.  The poor frequency and integration for rail and much of the bus network is actually  anti-public transport, and when combined with a fare structure that is not broadly encouraging to users the end result is no real surprise, is it?

Have a happy commute in the peak-hour car parks of Brisbane!

Best wishes
Robert

[Stillwater]

So Translink has an 'image problem', eh.  Is Translink selling Translink-the-brand or a transport service that people find convenient to use?   Let's hope Translink's reaction to the boycott is not more marketing and spin in support of brand Translink. 

The ticketing issue at the start of the year could have been handled better.  Insufficient resources were applied to the task and there was some hasty last-minute manoeuvring that resulted in retention of single one-way paper tickets.  Translink sought to tough it out, and make only token changes.  Frequent and loyal users deserve encouragement to build up a baseload of customers.  Even my butcher throws in an extra couple of free sausages now and then, the publican shouts me a beer occasionally and, as a card-carrying member of my local coffee shop, I get one in 10 coffees free.

I go to my particular butcher because he sells good meat, albeit at a price slightly above the average elsewhere, but I am prepared to pay for the quality of product on offer.  I get good service and I am pushed to try new things, aided by handout cooking instructions.  He doesn't rely on ads promoting 'Bob the Butcher', just simple word of mouth.

People probably would have worn a 15 per cent increase on their periodic tickets and there was enough feedback to Translink on what the issues were.  People will pay more if there is a commensurate improvement in service frequency and convenience.

Sending marketing troops out to give the Sergeant  Shultz defence ('We saw nothing yesterday – no change in passenger numbers') shows that Translink's first line of defence is to ignore there is a problem.  The sooner Translink starts an intense dialog with customers, line by line (and not monitor them through telemarketing polling), the better.

[#Metro]

Question: Does TransLink know how to operate a train system properly?

You don't do it by providing a terrible, rotten product and then marking it up by 15% and then dressing it up in fancy marketing.
People will feel scammed!

That's how you send a business broke and a recipe for high subsidy, low quality.

[Jonno]

What really irks me is that nowhere is any political leader highlighting that such low public transport numbers demonstrate the complete failure of urban and transport planning in SEQ.

Every plan in the last 15 years has claimed to be delivering increased public transport usage and reduced motor vehicle usage.  Yet the exact opposite has occurred. 

This is not a failure io the operators or image this is a FAILURE TO DELIVER THE DEDIRED OUTCOMES.  15 years ago we highlighted that the transport projects would not deliver the desired mode shift outcomes.  Well " I TOLD YOU SO".

Blaming Translink soley for this problem is just making them the scapegoat.  Mr Strachan should be saying "What did you suspect? Our Governments have spent 40 years, and continue today, making sure driving is the first and in many cases only real choice for people.  I am a CEO of a Regional Transport Authority not a miracle worker.  I have both my hands tied behind my back by transport planning that says increase public transport yet delivers increased motor vehicle use. Change the mind set our our politicians and transport planners and I will deliver".

[longboi]

The big problem TL face is that money needs to come before improvements. I'm quietly confident that TL do have an abundance of plans for new routes, frequency upgrades and maybe even planned infrastructure. However, these can't be put into action without $$$ and I think its up to TransLink to perhaps release some information on what the increase in fares will actually pay for. I don't mean 'x new seats', I mean actual plans (i.e. BUZ upgrades to 180, 375 etc.)

If there were some concrete plans in place, I think the public would find fare increases much more easier to swallow.

[somebody]

The big problem TL face is that money needs to come before improvements.

With all due respect, don't be daft.

There was money for the P88 route, which we don't need.  There is money to continue to run around the 393 air parcel service.  There is money to have excessive levels of service on the route 66 while having out of service buses passing scrums of intending passengers.

There is money for infrastructure improvements to do less with more.

What really irks me is that nowhere is any political leader highlighting that such low public transport numbers demonstrate the complete failure of urban and transport planning in SEQ.

I don't see why a politician should put their neck on the line to do something SOO unpopular.  Brisbanites don't actually want good PT.

[longboi]

With all due respect, don't be daft.

There was money for the P88 route, which we don't need.  There is money to continue to run around the 393 air parcel service.  There is money to have excessive levels of service on the route 66 while having out of service buses passing scrums of intending passengers.

You only believe its daft because you think P88 is a waste of money. For the record I do not. I think its an important step in the next generation of cross-town/cross-city/whatever you want to call it.

[somebody]

With all due respect, don't be daft.

There was money for the P88 route, which we don't need.  There is money to continue to run around the 393 air parcel service.  There is money to have excessive levels of service on the route 66 while having out of service buses passing scrums of intending passengers.

You only believe its daft because you think P88 is a waste of money. For the record I do not. I think its an important step in the next generation of cross-town/cross-city/whatever you want to call it.

Most followers believe that the P88 is a waste of money.

You are entitled to your viewpoint, of course, but I do not see how you can think that a route like the 88 (or 77 before it) is more of a priority than upgrades like BUZifications (100, 120, 180, 330, 375, 4xx, 555), improved train frequency Virginia-Petrie etc, etc, etc.

[#Metro]

I would agree with Somebody.

I agree with you that through routing is a good idea in many cases- see route 199. The problem with P88 is that it is not a mobility improvement. You can't really get anywhere significantly faster than you could with an interchange at CC and there are already heaps upon heaps of buses plying that corridor. There is a need to consolidate services, not add more IMHO.

P88 would be better spent on the suggestions somebody made with the BUZ services to build a Core Frequent Network.

The P88 service is only really justified in the am and pm peak hours when there is demand for that to fill the bus and have an express service. There are people who use it in peak, but Coronation Drive with no bus lane is terrible. There was no frequency problem or capacity problem either on the busway or along Coronation Drive or Moggill Road in the off-peak.

[longboi]

With all due respect, don't be daft.

There was money for the P88 route, which we don't need.  There is money to continue to run around the 393 air parcel service.  There is money to have excessive levels of service on the route 66 while having out of service buses passing scrums of intending passengers.

You only believe its daft because you think P88 is a waste of money. For the record I do not. I think its an important step in the next generation of cross-town/cross-city/whatever you want to call it.

Most followers believe that the P88 is a waste of money.

You are entitled to your viewpoint, of course, but I do not see how you can think that a route like the 88 (or 77 before it) is more of a priority than upgrades like BUZifications (100, 120, 180, 330, 375, 4xx, 555), improved train frequency Virginia-Petrie etc, etc, etc.

Not necessarily a priority above those BUZifications, but at the same time there's no reason to scrap it.

[Gazza]

I think its an important step in the next generation of cross-town/cross-city/whatever you want to call it.

But the thing is, route 88 doesn't really improve mobility....all of the places along the route is serves enjoy high frequency services already, and the only thing this route offers is avoiding the need to change buses, which is kind of pointless because the sheer volume of buses coming through Cultural Center means you never wait too long for a change.

My definition of a cross town route is one that allows you to get 'across town' without having to go via the CBD....GCL being the prime example. In other cities, it would be the ones that form part of a grid, but dont go into the CBD either.
Proper cross town is definitley a postive because it multiplies the number of possible journeys that can be done on the network.


However, routes like 88 and 199 are what I would simply call a 'through running' route, not "cross town'.

There is nothing special about a through running route that goes via the CBD.
The train network does that too, so whilst it's useful if say you live in Northgate and work in Milton, and can ride straight through without changing trains, it's a largely not useful for people from Ferny Grove, Shorncliffe, Gold Coast, Beenleigh etc etc. (As a side note, this demonstates the folly of trying to give everyone a single seat journey...its not possible!)


By all means, through running is useful from an operational standpoint, because it means your terminus is out in the suburbs, and not in a congested CBD, and if you can link routes together without impacting upon reliability, by all means do it for this reason.

But it's a joke to argue that we should be establishing new through running routes like 88 because they benefit passengers in any meaningful way.

[somebody]

With all due respect, don't be daft.

There was money for the P88 route, which we don't need.  There is money to continue to run around the 393 air parcel service.  There is money to have excessive levels of service on the route 66 while having out of service buses passing scrums of intending passengers.

You only believe its daft because you think P88 is a waste of money. For the record I do not. I think its an important step in the next generation of cross-town/cross-city/whatever you want to call it.

Most followers believe that the P88 is a waste of money.

You are entitled to your viewpoint, of course, but I do not see how you can think that a route like the 88 (or 77 before it) is more of a priority than upgrades like BUZifications (100, 120, 180, 330, 375, 4xx, 555), improved train frequency Virginia-Petrie etc, etc, etc.

Not necessarily a priority above those BUZifications, but at the same time there's no reason to scrap it.

First there isn't money for upgraded services and then there is no reason to save money to spend elsewhere.

[O_128]

What happened to the ministers timetable announcements? Or is that next week

[longboi]

With all due respect, don't be daft.

There was money for the P88 route, which we don't need.  There is money to continue to run around the 393 air parcel service.  There is money to have excessive levels of service on the route 66 while having out of service buses passing scrums of intending passengers.

You only believe its daft because you think P88 is a waste of money. For the record I do not. I think its an important step in the next generation of cross-town/cross-city/whatever you want to call it.

Most followers believe that the P88 is a waste of money.

You are entitled to your viewpoint, of course, but I do not see how you can think that a route like the 88 (or 77 before it) is more of a priority than upgrades like BUZifications (100, 120, 180, 330, 375, 4xx, 555), improved train frequency Virginia-Petrie etc, etc, etc.

Not necessarily a priority above those BUZifications, but at the same time there's no reason to scrap it.

First there isn't money for upgraded services and then there is no reason to save money to spend elsewhere.

Both are equally important as each other IMO. It just so happened that P88 came first.

[#Metro]

I think P88 is not a mobility improvement, so I agree with Somebody and Gazza on this one. It really is only justified as a peak hour only service when there is high enough demand for this kind of trip.

At all other times, interchange can be used. That's the value of interchange- you can do these low demand trips without having to put on a specialized everywhere to everywhere bus.

[somebody]

In peak hour the train service is to be much preferred for the western half of the P88.

[ozbob]

From the City News 24th March 2011 page 8

Fare boycott just the ticket

[Fares_Fair]

 

Regards,
Fares_Fair.