4.2 Links between services: “The seamless journey”
4.2.1 Introduction
.1 In this section, we start from the premise that if car users in significant numbers
are to be persuaded to use any form of public transport, where there is more than
one component part of a journey the parts must dovetail as much as possible.
Otherwise they will not be seen as a reasonable alternative to a door-to-door car
journey.
.2 People in Wales - both locals and visitors - receive a very poor deal in this respect
at present. For example, inter-availability of rail and bus tickets is much more
developed in London and the Passenger Transport Authority (PTA) areas of
England and Scotland. Moreover, other countries, such as the Netherlands, have
far better systems of connections, not only between rail services, but between rail
and bus.
.3 We believe that a great deal could be done here at little cost if the political will
existed. For example, the introduction of suitable ticketing should be enforced,
coupled with any necessary legislation (which might be within the Assembly’s
powers) to require the compliance of bus companies. In addition, the rewriting of
existing timetables to improve connections is vital. There are difficulties, given
that almost all public transport companies are privately owned. However, incentives
might be offered to secure co-operation and where local authority or
Assembly subsidies are involved contractual obligations can be laid down. Again,
as a last resort, legislation might be needed to ensure that the interests of the
travelling public are given absolute priority.
26 On Track for the 21st Century
4.2.2 Connectional policies
.1 This section focuses on rail / rail connections, but we would expect the same
principles to be applied when connections between different modes of transport
- particularly rail / road or road / rail - are involved.
.2 The following principles should be fundamental in timetable construction:-
• ‘clock-face’ timetables must be implemented on all routes to make connections
as easy as possible to arrange;
• if the service into which the connection is being provided is half-hourly or
better, passengers should not have a timetable wait of more than 10 minutes
for their connection;
• if the service into which the connection is being provided is less frequent than
half-hourly, the maximum timetable wait for a connection should be no more
than 15 minutes;
• every effort must be made to arrange rail, bus and ferry timetables with the best
possible connections between modes.
.3 The existing national railway policy on connections between services needs to be
stated more precisely and be much more widely known than the current note
hidden in the preface to the national timetable.
.4 The current policy states: “unless a connection is shown by times printed in light
type, you should generally allow a minimum of five minutes between arrival and
departure”.
.5 Instead of this we propose: “A recognised connection is one where the time
between arrival at and departure from the interchange station is at least five
minutes. At some interchanges, connections in less than five minutes are possible
while at others the station layout is such that more than five minutes are needed:
in both cases, minimum interchange times in minutes (e.g.: “3” in a block) are
shown against the station name.”
.6 We think also that a revised policy on holding connections is needed to increase
passengers’ confidence in the system.
.7 The existing policy says: “connections between trains cannot be guaranteed. To
delay one train to await…a late-running train… may cause significant disruption
to many other customers when they make connections at other stations along the
route. Every endeavor is made to minimise the total disruption and special
attention is given to services operating infrequently and the last services each day.”
.8 The current regulatory regime under which the TOCs operate imposes financial
penalties on them when their trains run late. Although at first sight this may seem
to work in passengers’ interests, in fact it provides an incentive not to hold
connecting services, especially where the onward connection is provided by a
different company from that whose service has been delayed. A solution to this
must be found - for example that any penalty is paid wholly by the late-running
company rather than by the company which holds a connecting service. We
recognise that the needs of people already on trains or waiting along the route are
very important, but the present system needs to give greater attention to the needs
of passengers trying to connect into a service.
.9 Therefore we suggest a revised policy:-
On Track for the 21st Century 27
• “all trains will wait up to five minutes for late-running connecting services.
They will not normally be held for longer than this because of inconvenience
to passengers already on board or waiting at stations further along the route.
Exceptions may be made where the connecting train is the last service of the
day on a particular route. However, every effort will be made to avoid delaying
the last train of the day by more than 20 minutes by providing alternative
transport for passengers who need to connect into that service;
• at all times of the day, every effort will be made to enable passengers to complete
their intended journeys to their final destinations. This does not mean to the
final rail station, but to the final ticketed destination. Where necessary, an
alternative mode of transport will be provided at the TOC’s expense to enable
the complete ticketed journey to be completed as punctually as possible;
• if as a result of a connection not being made, a passenger misses his / her last
train / bus of the day, the TOC which operates this last train guarantees to
provide either alternative transport to enable the passenger to complete his /
her full ticketed journey that day or, in the event of severe disruption to services
(for example as a result of exceptional weather conditions), to arrange overnight
accommodation;
• if the passenger’s arrival at his / her final ticketed destination is delayed by 30
to 59 minutes, a refund of 50% of the cost of the complete single journey will
be payable. For delays of 60 minutes or more, the refund will be 100%.” (The
principle of force majeur is accepted here, i.e. compensation will not be payable
for delays wholly outside the rail industry’s control, such as vandalism -
including bridge strikes by road vehicles - terrorism, extreme weather
conditions etc.)
.10 Nevertheless the aim must be to operate trains on time so that connections are
made. This, with the improved service frequencies proposed in this document,
requires a much more robust and reliable rail infrastructure than currently exists
on the UK rail network. That this is achievable, given the will, is shown by
reference to countries such as Japan and Switzerland, where high-density services
operate to very high punctuality standards.
4.2.3 Through ticketing
.1 As we have made clear already, rail should be seen as one element in a complete
journey. Where a journey involves use of more than one mode of public transport,
the concept of the ‘seamless journey’ demands a system of through ticketing
between the various modes.
.2 The Wales and Borders area currently has over 60 rail - bus through ticketing
schemes, so in this respect Wales compares favourably with most other areas of
the UK. 25 of these schemes are ‘PlusBus’ and these cover all the major conurbations
along the south Wales main line corridor and the north Wales coast. This
means that, in theory at least, more than half the households in Wales have
seamless ticketing available from their local bus stop to any rail destination (or
other PlusBus destination) in Britain.
.3 Unfortunately there are major disincentives to the widespread use of PlusBus:
• lack of public awareness;
• the need to purchase tickets in advance at a station (or by other means), with
28 On Track for the 21st Century
no possibility of purchase on the bus;
• pricing and conditions applied by PlusBus: in some cases separate purchase of
the bus fare to the station is cheaper than the PlusBus through ticket (which is
priced on the basis of a day’s unlimited bus travel in the specified zone);
• the large number of schemes in Wales has given rise to overlapping and
confusion. Cardiff, Ruabon, Caerphilly and Aberdare each have two (or even
three) through ticketing options, which is bewildering to users as each scheme
has a different price and terms of validity;
• major shortcomings in the benefits of through ticketing arise from the
complexity of the bus industry, and especially changes of operator when local
authority supported services are re-tendered (for example, the consequent
withdrawal of through ticketing to Usk, Raglan and Monmouth);
• confusion caused by ambiguity or lack of clarity on areas of validity and
acceptance on tendered services.
.4 We believe that this situation is unacceptable, yet when viewed along with the
successful Wales FlexiPass range of tickets, Wales should be seen as a leader in
the realm of though tickets. Clear information, a sensible approach and protection
of schemes by local authorities are essential. In addition, the SRA should work
towards improving the system when awarding and reviewing franchises.
.5 There are various ways in which the present situation can be improved, including:-
• the development of ‘smart card’ technology so that payment for travel is made
in the most efficient way possible. This is particularly important on buses,
where the vast majority of vehicles are driver-only operated and delays caused
by fare collection can cause the bus to become later and later after every stop;
• greater use of multi-modal passes, such as the London Travel card and Cardiff
Capital Card: these should be available in every area of the country, for both
peak and off-peak travel;
• ticket agencies should be appointed in every town or large village, so that
complicated tickets can be sold before the passenger boards a driver-only bus;
• in the case of air / rail fares, the air fare could have an optional add-on covering
rail (or bus) travel within a reasonable catchment area of the airport concerned.
4.2.4 Interchanges
.1 If people are to be persuaded to use public transport to make journeys involving
one or more changes between services, it is vital that those changes are made as
straightforward and reliable as possible. No longer can it be thought good enough
to leave a passenger on a cold, deserted, unstaffed station with no access to
information as to whether his / her onward connection is on time, late or canceled,
and if the latter, what alternative arrangements are being made. These considerations
apply equally whether the forward connection is by another train or by a
bus, and the latter includes cases where a temporary change to / from a bus is
needed because of engineering works on the railway.
.2 So far as physical resources are concerned, at every interchange station there must
of course be all the facilities which we see as necessary for all stations as a basic
minimum. However, in addition interchanges must have on duty (throughout the
period of the day when connections are possible there) a ‘despatcher’ who will be
responsible for:-
• seeing that connections (rail or bus) are held in accordance with national policy;
On Track for the 21st Century 29
• making arrangements for onward travel when connections are missed (thus
relieving pressure on central control offices and providing local knowledge of,
for example, road routes to stations to be served by replacement buses or taxis);
• providing reassurance to passengers about alternative arrangements in the
event of disruption;
• providing reassurance to passengers about their personal security;
• supervising or providing basic refreshment facilities;
• supervising toilet facilities.
.3 It is also essential that all public transport drivers are provided with radios or
mobile phones and are required as part of their duties to inform interchange points
on their routes of any delays which might require connections to be held or
alternative arrangements to be made.
4.3 Station facilities
.1 The aim here is to enhance existing facilities and set national / regional standards
in order to encourage the use of rail transport. An important aspect of this is to
improve the actual and perceived safety and security of passengers.
.2 Every railway station must have (in no particular order):-
• bilingual signs / information posters;
• a notice board reserved for (at least) a weekly update on planned disruptions
to services (eg. for engineering work) and alternative arrangements which may
be relevant to passengers at that station. ‘Relevant’ means on that station’s line
of route and also affecting connecting services from interchanges on that line.
The engineering work notice boards must be reserved for that specific use, and
when there is no engineering work to be announced they should carry messages
to that effect;
• covered waiting accommodation;
• real time train running information;
• a means by which a waiting passenger can speak directly to a member of staff
when problems arise;
• an accessible public telephone adjacent to the station platform, because it will
be many years before all rail passengers have mobile phones. In any case, the
station may be situated where mobile phone coverage is poor or non-existent.
Moreover it is not sufficient to have information about a train being late or
cancelled: often the passenger will need then to contact someone at the other
end of his / her journey to let them know what is happening;
• secure cycle accommodation;
• adequate lighting (including on the station approach road / path and positioned
such that all notice boards can be read);
• at unstaffed stations, CCTV supervision of platforms (as is the case at many
stations in urban areas already) to protect passengers and facilities;
• current timetable posters;
• effective cleaning of the station.
.3 Interchange stations (rail / rail and rail / other modes (see Para. 4.2.4) must have:-
• a ‘despatcher’ on duty for the whole period of the day when connections are
possible at that station;
• toilet facilities, including provision for the disabled;
• at least basic refreshment facilities, even if this amounts to no more than snacks
30 On Track for the 21st Century
/ drinks machines: these are commonly provided even at local stations in such
countries as Switzerland;
These facilities must be available throughout the period in which the train service
is operating.
.4 In addition, stations of appropriate importance must have:-
• a ticket and enquiry office;
• ticket machines (to relieve pressure on ticket windows);
• a secure car park;
• a higher standard of refreshment facilities;
• enhanced waiting accommodation (eg heated and with a higher standard of
seating than at unstaffed stations).
4.4 On
5. Integration of services: “the seamless journey”
5.1.Introduction
.1 In this section, we start from the premise that if car users in significant numbers
are to be persuaded to use any form of public transport, where there is more than
one component part of a journey the parts must dovetail as much as possible.
Otherwise they will not be seen as a reasonable alternative to a door-to-door car
journey.
.2 People in Wales - both locals and visitors - receive a very poor deal in this respect
at present. For example, inter-availability of rail and bus tickets is much more
developed in London and the Passenger Transport Executive areas of
England and Scotland. Moreover, other countries, such as the Netherlands, have
far better systems of connections, not only between rail services, but between rail
and bus.
.3 We believe that a great deal could be done here at little cost if the political will
existed. For example, the introduction of suitable ticketing should be enforced,
coupled with any necessary legislation (which might be within the Assembly’s
powers) to require the compliance of bus companies. In addition, the rewriting of
existing timetables to improve connections is vital. There are difficulties, given
that almost all public transport companies are privately owned. However, incentives
might be offered to secure co-operation, and where local authority or Assembly subsidies are involved contractual obligations can be laid down. As a last resort, legislation might be needed to ensure that the interests of the travelling public are given absolute priority.
5.2.Connectional policies
.1 This section focuses on rail / rail connections, but we would expect the same
principles to be applied when connections between different modes of transport
- particularly rail / road - are involved.
.2 The following principles should be fundamental in timetable construction:
• ‘clock-face’ timetables must be implemented on all routes to make connections
as easy as possible to arrange;
• if the service into which the connection is being provided is half-hourly or
better, passengers should not have a timetabled wait of more than 10 minutes
for their connection;
• if the service into which the connection is being provided is less frequent than
half-hourly, the maximum timetabled wait for a connection should be no more
than 15 minutes;
• every effort must be made to arrange rail, bus and ferry timetables with the best
possible connections between modes.
.3 The existing national railway policy on connections between services needs to be
stated more precisely and be much more widely known than the current note
hidden in the preface to the national timetable.
.4 The current policy states: “unless a connection is shown by times printed in light
type, you should generally allow a minimum of five minutes between arrival and
departure”.
.5 Instead of this we propose: “A recognised connection is one where the time
between arrival at and departure from the interchange station is at least five
minutes. At some interchanges, connections in less than five minutes are possible
while at others the station layout is such that more than five minutes are needed:
in both cases, minimum interchange times in minutes (e.g.: “3” in a block) are
shown against the station name.”
.6 We think also that a revised policy on holding connections is needed to increase
passengers’ confidence in the system.
.7 The existing policy says: “connections between trains cannot be guaranteed. To
delay one train to await…a late-running train… may cause significant disruption
to many other customers when they make connections at other stations along the
route. Every endeavour is made to minimise the total disruption and special
attention is given to services operating infrequently and the last services each day.”
.8 The current regulatory regime under which the Train Operating Companies operate imposes financial penalties on them when their trains run late. Although at first sight this may seem to work in passengers’ interests, in fact it provides an incentive not to hold connecting services, especially where the onward connection is provided by a
different company from that whose service has been delayed. A solution to this
must be found - for example that any penalty is paid wholly by the late-running
company rather than by the company which holds a connecting service. We
recognise that the needs of people already on trains or waiting along the route are
very important, but the present system needs to give greater attention to the needs
of passengers trying to connect into a service.
.9 Therefore we propose a revised policy:-
“*Dispatchers must ensure that all passengers wishing to make a connection have been physically able to do so before they allow the connecting train or bus to leave
*All trains will wait up to five minutes for late-running connecting services.
They will not normally be held for longer than this because of inconvenience
to passengers already on board or waiting at stations further along the route.
Exceptions may be made where the connecting train is the last service of the
day on a particular route. However, every effort will be made to avoid delaying
the last train of the day by more than 20 minutes by providing alternative
transport for passengers who need to connect into that service.
*At all times of the day, every effort will be made to enable passengers to complete
their intended journeys to their final destinations. This does not mean to the
final rail station, but to the final ticketed destination. Where necessary, an
alternative mode of transport will be provided at the TOC’s expense to enable
the complete ticketed journey to be completed as punctually as possible.
*If as a result of a connection not being made, a passenger misses his / her last
train / bus of the day, the TOC which operates this last train guarantees to
provide either alternative transport to enable the passenger to complete his /
her full ticketed journey that day or, in the event of severe disruption to services
(for example as a result of exceptional weather conditions), to arrange overnight
accommodation.
*If the passenger’s arrival at his / her final ticketed destination is delayed by 30
to 59 minutes, a refund of 50% of the cost of the complete single journey will
be payable. For delays of 60 minutes or more, the refund will be 100%.” (The
principle of force majeur is accepted here, i.e. compensation will not be payable
for delays wholly outside the rail industry’s control, such as vandalism -
including bridge strikes by road vehicles - terrorism, extreme weather
conditions etc.)
.10 Nevertheless the aim must be to operate trains on time so that connections are
made. This, with the improved service frequencies proposed in this document,
requires a much more robust and reliable rail infrastructure than currently exists
on the UK rail network. That this is achievable, given the will, is shown by
reference to countries such as Japan and Switzerland, where high-density services
operate to very high punctuality standards.
5.3.Through ticketing
.1 As we have made clear already, rail should be seen as one element in a complete
journey. Where a journey involves use of more than one mode of public transport,
the concept of the ‘seamless journey’ demands a system of through ticketing
between the various modes.
.2 The Wales and Borders area currently has a large number of rail - bus through ticketing schemes, so in this respect Wales compares quite favourably with most other areas of the UK. 25 of these schemes are ‘PlusBus’ and these cover all the major conurbations along the south Wales main line corridor and the north Wales coast. This
means that, in theory at least, more than half the households in Wales have
seamless ticketing available from their local bus stop to any rail destination (or
other PlusBus destination) in Britain.
.3 Unfortunately there are major disincentives to the widespread use of PlusBus:
• lack of public awareness;
• the need to purchase tickets in advance at a station (or by other means), with
no possibility of purchase on the bus;
• pricing and conditions applied by PlusBus: in some cases separate purchase of
the bus fare to the station is cheaper than the PlusBus through ticket (which is
priced on the basis of a day’s unlimited bus travel in the specified zone);
• the large number of schemes in Wales has given rise to overlapping and
confusion. Cardiff, Ruabon, Caerphilly and Aberdare each have two (or even
three) through ticketing options, which is bewildering to users as each scheme
has a different price and terms of validity;
• major shortcomings in the benefits of through ticketing arise from the
complexity of the bus industry, and especially changes of operator when local
authority supported services are re-tendered;
• confusion caused by ambiguity or lack of clarity on areas of validity and
acceptance on tendered services.
.4 We believe that this situation is unacceptable, yet when viewed along with the
successful Wales FlexiPass range of tickets, Wales should be seen as a leader in
the realm of though tickets. Clear information, a sensible approach and protection
of schemes by local authorities are essential. In addition, the Welsh Government and the Department for Transport should work towards improving the system when awarding and reviewing franchises.
.5 There are various ways in which the present situation can be improved, including:-
*the development of ‘smart card’ technology throughout the UK so that payment for travel is made in the most efficient way possible. This is particularly important on buses, where the vast majority of vehicles are driver-only operated and delays caused
by fare collection can cause the bus to become later and later after every stop;
• in the case of air / rail fares, the air fare could have an optional add-on covering
rail (or bus) travel within a reasonable catchment area of the airport concerned.
5.4.Interchanges
[.1] If people are to be persuaded to use public transport to make journeys involving one or more changes between services, it is vital that those changes are made as straightforward and reliable as possible. No longer can it be thought good enough to leave a passenger on a cold, deserted, unstaffed station with no access to information as to whether his/her onward connection is on time, late or cancelled, and if the latter, what alternative arrangements are being made. These considerations apply equally whether the forward connection is by another train or by bus, and the latter includes cases where a temporary change to/from a bus is needed because of engineering works on the railway.
[.2] So far as physical resources are concerned, at every interchange station there must be, as far as possible, all the basic, minimum facilities which we see as necessary for all stations. However, in addition, interchanges must have on duty (throughout the period of the day when connections are possible there) a `dispatcher` who will be responsible for:
Ÿ seeing that connections (rail or bus) are held in accordance with national policy;
Ÿ making arrangements for onward travel when connections are missed, thus relieving pressure on central control offices and providing local knowledge of, for example, road routes to stations to be served by replacement buses or taxis;
Ÿ providing reassurance to passengers about alternative arrangements in the event of disruption;
Ÿ providing reassurance to passengers about their personal security;
Ÿ supervising or providing basic refreshment facilities;
Ÿ supervising toilet facilities.
[.3] It is also essential that all train conductors and bus drivers are provided with radios or mobile phones and are required as part of their duties to inform interchange points on their routes of any delays which might require connections to be held or alternative arrangements to be made.
6.Station facilities
6.1 Our aim here is to press for the enhancement of existing facilities and set national/regional standards in order to encourage the use of rail transport. An important aspect of this is to improve the actual and perceived safety and security of passengers.
6.2 Therefore, every railway station must have (not necessarily in order of importance):
Ÿ In Wales, bilingual signs and information posters.
Ÿ Two notice boards, one for short-term and one for longer-term warnings and details of planned disruption of services (e.g. for engineering work) and alternative arrangements which may be relevant to passengers at that station. `Relevant` means on that station`s line of route and also affecting connecting services from interchanges on that line. The engineering work notice boards must be reserved for that specific use, and when there is no engineering work to be announced, they should carry messages to that effect.
Ÿ An appropriate size of covered waiting accommodation.
Ÿ Real-time train running information.
Ÿ A means by which a waiting passenger can speak directly to a member of staff when problems arise.
Ÿ An accessible public telephone adjacent to the station platform, because some passengers will not have mobile phones (or may have problems with them). This is important if passengers wish to contact someone about their arrival time or changed travel plans.
Ÿ Secure cycle accommodation.
Ÿ Adequate lighting (including on the station approach road/path and positioned such that all notice boards can be read).
Ÿ At least at unstaffed stations, CCTV supervision of platforms (as is the case at many stations in urban areas already) to protect passengers and facilities.
Ÿ Current timetable posters.
Ÿ Effective cleaning of the station.
Ÿ Appropriate access facilities for disabled people.
6.3 Interchange stations (rail/rail or rail & other modes) must have all of the above and:
Ÿ a `dispatcher` (see 5.4.[.2] aboveon duty for the whole period of the day when connections are possible at that station;
Ÿ clear announcements of the necessity to change and for which main destinations, together with clear signs directing passengers to connecting bus services;
Ÿ toilet facilities, including provision for the disabled;
Ÿ at least basic refreshment facilities, even if only a snacks/drink machine (commonly provided even at local stations in such countries as Switzerland).
All of these facilities must be available throughout the period in which the train service is operating.
A list of rail/ rail interchange stations where these facilities should be provided is given in Appendix 1
6.4 In addition, stations of appropriate importance must have:
Ÿ a ticket and enquiry office;
Ÿ ticket machines (to relieve pressure on ticket windows), both for the immediate sale of tickets and the collection of tickets pre-ordered on line
Ÿ a secure car park;
Ÿ a higher standard of refreshment facilities than specified above for interchange stations;
Ÿ enhanced waiting accommodation, for example, a heated room and a higher standard of seating than at unstaffed stations.