One of the Mail's more intelligent (limited competition admittedly)
writers, Tom Utley, has a column re the wastefulness of giving
people like him free travel. I thought it was only available after
9.30 but so as to exclude those in most regular jobs but on
checking the 9.30 rule now only applies to overground rail, not
buses or the underground. Since when? It does seem unduly generous
also unfair to those whose main PT is rail (remember LB Bromley's
challenge to Fares Fair because they had no underground in their
borough)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...s-let-one.html

--
TonyB

One of the Mail's more intelligent (limited competition admittedly)
writers, Tom Utley, has a column re the wastefulness of giving
people like him free travel. I thought it was only available after
9.30 but so as to exclude those in most regular jobs but on
checking the 9.30 rule now only applies to overground rail, not
buses or the underground. Since when?

I think it was 09:00 in London until Ken Livingstone promised to scrap
the limit in an attempt to win the 2008 mayoral election.

It does seem unduly generous
also unfair to those whose main PT is rail (remember LB Bromley's
challenge to Fares Fair because they had no underground in their
borough)


In the interests of terminological exactitude (which of course
guarantees I won't get it right) the 09:30 rule applies to National
Rail other than the London Overground - a cruel trap for an ageing
traveller who mostly starts with the latter but very occasionally
marches into Hackney Downs too early

ageing_policy_wonk_stuff

I also regret Boris's election promise (spot the pattern!) to give free
travel at age 60 rather than letting the threshold continue to rise with
pension age. That handed a big stick to those who want to introduce a
means test.

But Tom Utley (like so many) is a wee bit one-sided on a means test for
universal benefits generally:

a. he slides over who will and won't be entitled. It's easy to talk
of "wealthy pensioners", much harder to define them. (And I wonder how
Mr Utley would defend eg instant Freedom Passes along with other
benefits for elderly immigrants but not for pensioners retiring on a
modest pension after 45 years working in a London old folks home?)

b. many old people *still* don't claim means-tested benefit: check
the DWP's figures; so the benefits don't reach many of their (alleged)
target population. Does he know/care?

c. the admin costs are high unless free travel is "passported" off
another means-tested benefit such pension credit. That creates an (even
bigger) trap where those who work, contribute to a pension and save end
up worse off than those who do bugger-all: hardly "incentives to save
for our old age";

d. any trade-offs like "greater tax incentives to save for our old
age" are too bloody late for those already there;

e. there's an exisiting system for dealing with "who's wealthy?"
called the tax system, and taxing the benefit of Freedom Passes etc
would be more rational - but still complicated.

That said, I'm resigned to a means test being introduced after the
election as the media (led by the BBC) have spread the meme that
universal benefits for pensioners are unfair to the young and
unaffordable.

/ageing_policy_wonk_stuff

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

In message , at 17:30:49 on
Fri, 7 Feb 2014, Tony Bryer remarked:
One of the Mail's more intelligent (limited competition admittedly)
writers, Tom Utley, has a column re the wastefulness of giving
people like him free travel.

It's "wasteful" giving the affluent older any sort of concession:
(theatre/movie/museum tickets, Over-60 railcard, Winter Fuel allowance,
State Pension, Free Prescriptions etc).

But although there are signs of weakening at the edges, these are all
entitlements that people have paid for over their working lives, and are
not means tested at the point of delivery.
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 09:23:06 on
Fri, 7 Feb 2014, Paul Corfield remarked:
I thought it was only available after
9.30 but so as to exclude those in most regular jobs but on
checking the 9.30 rule now only applies to overground rail, not
buses or the underground. Since when?

Since the 2008 Mayoral Election campaign when both Ken and Boris
promised to extend the hours it could be used on TfL services. Years
of negotiation have failed to secure an earlier start on National Rail
services - presumably because the TOCs want an astronomic amount of
"compensation" for lost revenue.

Why should the TOCs allow free travel? At the very least what Boris
should do is pick up the tab for all TOC trips made by the over-60's,
*paying the regular price* whatever that is according to the time of
day. Surely the numbers for that will drop out of the Oyster computer
'at the press of a button'.

If it's unaffordable, then don't do it; but at least everyone would know
where they stand [or where they sit, offpeak perhaps].
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:23:06 on
Fri, 7 Feb 2014, Paul Corfield remarked:
I thought it was only available after
9.30 but so as to exclude those in most regular jobs but on
checking the 9.30 rule now only applies to overground rail, not
buses or the underground. Since when?

Since the 2008 Mayoral Election campaign when both Ken and Boris
promised to extend the hours it could be used on TfL services. Years
of negotiation have failed to secure an earlier start on National Rail
services - presumably because the TOCs want an astronomic amount of
"compensation" for lost revenue.

Why should the TOCs allow free travel? At the very least what Boris
should do is pick up the tab for all TOC trips made by the over-60's,
*paying the regular price* whatever that is according to the time of day.
Surely the numbers for that will drop out of the Oyster computer 'at the
press of a button'.

If it's unaffordable, then don't do it; but at least everyone would know
where they stand [or where they sit, offpeak perhaps].

The TOCs don't fund the free travel for the over 60s. As I understand it,
the London boroughs pay for those entitled to a full Freedom pass, and TfL
pays for those over 60 but not yet entitled to the Freedom pass. But the
cost can't be calculated easily on a journey by journey basis, so gross
estimates have to be used, and are subject to negotiation.

Why should the TOCs allow free travel? At the very least what Boris
should do is pick up the tab for all TOC trips made by the over-60's,
*paying the regular price* whatever that is according to the time of
day. Surely the numbers for that will drop out of the Oyster computer
'at the press of a button'.

Why should the charge be based on "the regular price"? That seems a
remarkably crude approach (c/f your own arguments about airline pricing
in December). Any normal person buying in such bulk would expect - and
get - a substantial discount as the TOCs get in return a secure source
of revenue with few overheads. What's wrong with starting from the
long-run marginal cost (LRMC) to the TOC (including of course loss of
revenue from other customers displaced) plus a profit margin?

Of course if the LRMC is too high then something has to give. Eg I'd be
inclined to keep the pre-09:30 exclusion if that is where there would be
significant displacement and so additional cost. But let's not pretend
the TOCs are losing significant revenues from, say, me getting a train
mid-afternoon which is c10% loaded for a journey I'd rarely make if I
had to pay the full fare.

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid

On Fri, 7 Feb 2014 10:56:26 -0000 Robin wrote :
Why should the charge be based on "the regular price"? That seems a
remarkably crude approach (c/f your own arguments about airline pricing
in December). Any normal person buying in such bulk would expect - and
get - a substantial discount as the TOCs get in return a secure source
of revenue with few overheads. What's wrong with starting from the
long-run marginal cost (LRMC) to the TOC (including of course loss of
revenue from other customers displaced) plus a profit margin?

Of course if the LRMC is too high then something has to give. Eg I'd be
inclined to keep the pre-09:30 exclusion if that is where there would be
significant displacement and so additional cost. But let's not pretend
the TOCs are losing significant revenues from, say, me getting a train
mid-afternoon which is c10% loaded for a journey I'd rarely make if I
had to pay the full fare.

Agreed. The LMRC (unless services were increased to cope with demand) is
near nil, so the key number is how much this group would be spending on
fares in the absence of free travel. With an 0900/0930 restriction, the
answer is probably not a lot; remove this and you add in large (and
increasing) numbers of those in work who have to travel and will pay the
standard fare.

I now live in Melbourne where at 60 if you sign that you are no longer in
full time work (I don't know whether they check) you are eligible for
concession fares, half the adult fare, free travel at weekend. London is
more than a little generous by comparison.

--
Tony B

In message , at 10:56:26 on Fri, 7 Feb 2014,
Robin remarked:
Why should the TOCs allow free travel? At the very least what Boris
should do is pick up the tab for all TOC trips made by the over-60's,
*paying the regular price* whatever that is according to the time of
day. Surely the numbers for that will drop out of the Oyster computer
'at the press of a button'.

Why should the charge be based on "the regular price"?

Because that's what each over-60 would have paid, absent the discount
card.

That seems a
remarkably crude approach (c/f your own arguments about airline pricing
in December). Any normal person buying in such bulk would expect - and
get - a substantial discount as the TOCs get in return a secure source
of revenue with few overheads. What's wrong with starting from the
long-run marginal cost (LRMC) to the TOC (including of course loss of
revenue from other customers displaced) plus a profit margin?

Because many of the trains are already over-subscribed, and flooding
them with pass-holders may well put off regular travellers.

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:56:26 on Fri, 7 Feb 2014,
Robin remarked:
Why should the TOCs allow free travel? At the very least what Boris
should do is pick up the tab for all TOC trips made by the over-60's,
*paying the regular price* whatever that is according to the time of
day. Surely the numbers for that will drop out of the Oyster computer
'at the press of a button'.

Why should the charge be based on "the regular price"?

Because that's what each over-60 would have paid, absent the discount card.

Sure, but most wouldn't have travelled at all.

That seems a
remarkably crude approach (c/f your own arguments about airline pricing
in December). Any normal person buying in such bulk would expect - and
get - a substantial discount as the TOCs get in return a secure source
of revenue with few overheads. What's wrong with starting from the
long-run marginal cost (LRMC) to the TOC (including of course loss of
revenue from other customers displaced) plus a profit margin?

Because many of the trains are already over-subscribed, and flooding them
with pass-holders may well put off regular travellers.

Not after 9:30. Plus Freedom pass holders on discretionary trips probably
avoid travelling on packed trains.

I now live in Melbourne where at 60 if you sign that you are no
longer in full time work (I don't know whether they check) you are
eligible for concession fares, half the adult fare, free travel at
weekend. London is more than a little generous by comparison.

Very, very true.

green-eyed-monster-mode
But then you *do* get to live in Melbourne
/green-eyed-monster-mode

--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid