National Excess

The UK's largest scheduled coach operator has made modifications to its luggage policy, which sees an airline-style excess charge applied to oversized and overweight items. With very little publicity, this has become live only recently.

National Express' luggage policy ostensibly remains the same, however:

• One item of hand luggage may be brought on board the coach, provided it can be stored in either the overhead compartment or beneath an individual seat
• Two items of luggage may be stored in the coach's boot, provided neither item exceeds 20kg
• 'Outsized' items, such as skis and surfboards will be carried provided sufficient room exists at the point of boarding
• Excess luggage will be carried provided sufficient room exists at the point of boarding

However, on the matter of 'outsized' items and excess luggage, a fee will now be charged per item: £10 single, £15 return. The fee will also apply to the two items of permitted boot luggage if either exceeds 20kg. Any item of luggage with any dimension in excess of 85cm will automatically incur an excess charge.

Furthermore, the definition of hand luggage has been (rightly) clarified, in so doing, made stricter:

With the exception of brief cases, no hard-shelled cases, wheelie bags or hard-framed rucksacks/back packs will be allowed on board.

I'm sure there are hundreds of readers who travel with National Express regularly and, while their luggage provision may be sensible, have seen plenty of people's whose aren't!

With such strict guidelines imposed with virtually no advance warning to passengers, it came as quite a shock to us when we were told by one driver (and since received clarification from many others) that scales and tape measures have not yet been supplied by the company. It would seem that while National Express want to introduce similar luggage restrictions to airlines, they are not yet equipping their drivers with an adequate means of clarification. There's a very good reason why an airport check-in desk has scales.

The prospect of arguments between cashless tourists and drivers will be high. Until tape measures and scales are issued, one driver's consideration of what is 25kg will be what another driver believes to be 20kg; one driver's consideration of 85cm will be different to another's. While NX is encouraging a common sense approach, one has to wonder whether the introduction of such an excess baggage policy to the coach industry is itself common sense. There seems little point of such new rulings when, to save a loss of custom, drivers are to be asked to effectively back down when confontation occurs.

Megabus don't charge for excess luggage and neither does Greyhound. It is true that there have been occasions when NX has found itself with more luggage than certain coaches can handle. This used to take place on overnight journeys between London and Cornwall when Trathens operated the only double-deckers on the network (Neoplan Skyliners). Then, a van would be hired and follow the coach to somewhere like Exeter. At £500 a pop, any profit from the journey was wiped out, so it's understandable to see why these 'deckers no longer operate NX services.

Even with scales and a tape measure, alienation is what will occur when a driver demands £10 else refuse to load the luggage. Especially on competing services to university cities. You might pay the excess once, but when the term is over and you're lugging all your worldly possessions back home, you'll stay well clear of NX and choose Megabus, Greyhound, the train, or - worse still - arrange to be collected by car.

Unless Megabus et al are to follow suit. We can but hope not.

If you take care of your luggage and ensure you never exceed 20kg and that the cases are compact and well packed, you may be of the opinion that those who do not ought to be charged. Drivers are not permitted to lift any item of luggage in excess of 20kg - asking a passenger to load his luggage alone if in excess of 20kg is punishment enough?

The company recorded 1% growth last year, which isn't too far off what is recorded normally, so the effects of recession don't appear to have forced this ruling's inception as a means to offset lost revenue. Perhaps the nature of coach travel is to change? NX's very skilled and capable route team is currently working on the largest shake-up of its coach network since privatisation, with the results expected to take place next year. Dean Finch, the group's new chief executive, has said that there are some aspects of the coach business they do better than others and that they should concentrate more on these.

Creating ambiguity through the interpretation of their new luggage policy, regrettably, isn't one of them - not if drivers aren't yet properly equipped and passengers not properly informed of the financial consequences of travelling with more than they should.

NX Luggage Policy (in full)

**UPDATE** from an anonymous emailer: I have been issued with my scales and tape measure as of start of work today. 'Argumentsville' here I come....

The cost of parking

Stagecoach recently won a legal battle with the Department for Transport (DfT) over when its 'cap and collar' payments - worth around £70 million - for its South West Trains (SWT) company should kick in. It argued that subtle alterations made to its £1.2 billion contract to operate the SWT franchise for a decade, permitted it to receive revenue support from the DfT before February 2011.

The uninitiated might be wondering why one of the world's most successful transport groups requires £70 million in revenue support.

To protect financial shortfalls during recessions, each train operating company (TOC) agrees with the DfT a minimum and maximum level of revenue it will earn. Should this drop below the minimum, the DfT steps in with an effective hand-out and should it exceed the maximum, the DfT takes a share. Obviously, being in a recession, TOCs have been badly hit and many have required the financial assistance of the DfT.

Stagecoach, however, was not eligible for revenue protection until February 2011, or so the DfT thought when it drew up the SWT contract a number of years ago. Noting this was worth in the region of £70 million, Stagecoach instructed its lawyers to seek arbitration because some re-wording in the SWT contract had taken place and it believed it was entitled to money before the buffer (sorry!) period was over.

With egg firmly on the face of the DfT, Stagecoach won and SWT is in the process of receiving around £70 million of tax payer's money to ensure it registers a profit.

What Stagecoach weren't as vociferous about was a separate issue that they took to arbitration: that of revenue generated from car parking fees at its station, worth in the region of £8 million a year. The railway arbitration board ruled in the DfT's favour on this occasion; that this revenue should be taken into account before further revenue support is made.

Anyone who's ever had to park at a railway station - particularly one that is on a direct line to London - will know how much you can be stung for. With SWT being the largest TOC, one would reason that it has the most car parking spaces available and so will generate the most revenue. Logically, therefore, other TOCs probably won't earn £8 million a year this way, but I suspect some won't be far off.

M'colleague and I have travelled from Peterborough on countless occasions as it's kind of the south-west gateway to the LEYTR area and we find transport links to the station reasonable from our respective locations in Lincolnshire. What we find less than reasonable is that to park your car at Peterborough railway station - maintained by East Coast (to whom the money goes) costs £12 per week day. Making a comparison, two days' parking at Peterborough station is as much as a weekly Stagecoach 'Megarider+' ticket covering its entire Cambridgeshire operation; it's £9 more than a weekly ticket on Delaine Buses in from Bourne and the same for First's excel X1 from Norwich!

Like with most stations, reductions are available for season ticket holders, but using Peterborough as an example, it's cheaper to park your car in one of the suburbs close to the town centre and hail a taxi!

Neither of us knew just how profitable this was for TOCs. Stagecoach's effective loss of £8 million really opened our eyes!

A really shiney red arrow

On Sunday at 0810, the first of the new coaches for Trent Barton's flagship 'red arrow' coach service took to the road, bound for Chesterfield. Being one of TB's newer routes, the red arrow links Nottingham and Derby city centres every ten minutes with a half-hourly extension north of Derby to Chesterfield. There have been a number of different vehicle types used over the past few years, though the staple diet of the route is the Scania K94/Irizar Century.

Photo: Barney Cam

However, an increase in frequencies was decided and in order to meet demand a number of new coaches were purchased. Chesterfield saw its hourly service double and Derby-Nottingham has seen an extra two coaches per hour, taking departures here to one every 10 minutes.

Five new Scania/Irizar Centuries arrived over the past few weeks and, my, how the Irizar Century body has changed over the space of six years. Immediately noticeable is the mid-entrance door for wheelchair users. The front end looks a lot lower, offering a more accessible entrance for all able-bodied passengers. The vehicles are numbered 72-6 and registered FJ10 OXM/N/P/R/S. 73 is named 'Dean Thornhill'. The coaches offer leather seating and climate control.


Now there are promotional events and then there are Trent Barton-organised promotional events. Their effective roadshow took in Derby's market square last Friday and Nottingham's on Saturday. Free cake and promo goodies were in abundance and I'm sure a good time was had by all.

Photo: Barney Cam

The red arrow uniform appears to have been downgraded to more a 'smart casual' affair than its urban counterparts and the omission of a tie (in the opinion of someone who has a few in his cupboards) is very disappointing.


The press pack was in attendance more so on the Friday event, but both days received excellent coverage on local radio and TV. The red arrow has its own facebook page which appeared to go into melt down in the days before the promotional events. Trent Barton was arguably the first of the current breed of media savvy bus and coach operators and while it is impossible to guess just how much additional goodwill it has received from its now well-established online presence and deep-rooted brand identity, the company will be quietly confident that no one else could have the same impact it has.

You can tell the body design is based on the Irizar Century, but the deeper front windscreen and raised roof are but two modifications made since Trent Barton last purchased some of this type in 2004

The increase in frequency and new vehicle intake has seen some subtle improvements made to the red arrow. The biggest boon to passengers boarding in Derby will be the introduction of a check-in desk by the coach's departure gate, so that passengers can save time by buying their tickets before the coach has arrived. It also makes matters considerably easier for the driver, too. This isn't a new concept for Trent Barton, though, as I've seen it in operation in Nottingham Broadmarsh bus station with their 'indigo' service. A nice touch - something many operators shy away from, however, as it's 100% labour intensive and the revenue received is likely to be identical to that cashed in by the driver if he did it himself. It will clearly aid reliability and show the company is willing to put its money where its mouth is.

Photo: Barney Cam

We've both travelled the red arrow on numerous occasions and while it suffers the same problems with peak time traffic congestion in its city centres and the Clay Cross-Chesterfield corridor as all other services of this type, the doubling of frequency certainly shows ridership is growing nicely. When a 'big hitter' like Trent Barton undertakes such a upgrade, you know all bases have been covered.

red arrow facebook page
red arrow website

Heathrow loses out

You might remember the Tories taking the unfortunate position of not accepting the findings of the official government High Speed 2 Report, which was given to the then Transport Secretary Lord Adonis at Christmas. He published the report in March. Not wanting any part of the 152-page document, the Tories' then Shadow Transport Secretary Theresa Villiers largely dismissed the finer points of Sir David Rowlands' report, because the Tories want the new north-south route to operate via Heathrow at all costs.

HS2 Ltd's report suggested that the most cost-effective and beneficial route would be to omit Heathrow, as the line heads north-west from London Euston, but for a spur to be built at Old Oak Common for connections to/from Heathrow which would take 10 mins. This would ensure those travelling between London and Birmingham could enjoy a 49-minute journey time and further afield, London-Glasgow in just over 3 hours.

BAA - owner of Heathrow, British Airways and civil engineers were dead against the original report's findings. Lord Adonis commissioned an independent report into the Heathrow element and appointed former Tory MP Lord Mawhinney to chair it. The findings were made last week and they comprehensively back the original report.

During the early stages, with HS2's construction being up to Birmingham, there is 'no defensible, economic or business case' for Heathrow to be included on the main route. When HS2 reaches Manchester and Leeds and beyond, then the spur should be built - but only a spur, which by this time will be the only option since HS2's route will not be deviated when operational!

LEYTR Comment: As laymen to the building of railways, neither of us could fathom why the Tories were dead set on routing HS2 via Heathrow when the number of internal flights the line is likely to offset being tiny. This would have an increase in journey times and therefore be detrimental to everyone else. They played down the "HS2 via Heathrow justifies cancelling the third runway" angle when it became clear just how ridiculously minuscule the affect of HS2 would be on flights from Europe's busiest airport.

Lord Mawhinney makes another recommendation that is not related to Heathrow: that HS2's terminus in central London should be at Old Oak Common and not at the re-built Euston! Travel between Old Oak Common and central London would be made using Crossrail, which of course would be operational by then. This has the potential to alienate more people than routeing HS2 via Heathrow. The whole point, surely, is to make High Speed rail as accessible to as many people as possible. What will be more convenient? Jumping on a Virgin Pendolino at Euston for travel to Glasgow in 4 hours or lugging all your cases down two escalators to Crossrail and then transferring at Old Oak Common (where more escalators will surely be encountered) onto HS2 for a 30-minute time saving - not to mention the premium fares HS2 will charge.

Mawhinney's reasoning is that since no link between Euston and St. Pancras is planned and thus HS2 will not link-up with HS1, there seems very little point in Euston being served by HS2, though to assume the only people travelling will want to additionally use HS1 to France or Belgium *in the same journey* is incredibly presumptuous to say the least.

How do you solve a problem like Network Rail?

Next Saturday, in order to liven up BBC One's evening programming, Graham Norton will host a new show: How do you solve a problem like Network Rail?, in which the public gets to vote on how best to solve the nationalised infraco's debt mountain through new and innovative ways the company can be operated. The casting vote will go to Lord Prescott of Hull, who will be sat on a make-shift thrown.

Each week, two ideas will be pitched to the audience - each being spearheaded by a well-known celebrity - and the one receiving most votes goes through to the final in a month's time.

Said BBC One's commissioning editor: "We expect this new prime time slot to be extremely popular, as the Great British Public get to say exactly how Network Rail's £22 billion debt can be recouped. With all proceeds of the 09011 phone calls going to direct to the Department for Transport's hospitality fund, we're sure all those aged 18 and over will want a piece of the action!"

The following are the ways in which Network Rail's twenty-two billions can be slowly reduced. Which one will you vote for?

1. Split NR into four parts - Scotland, Wales, North England and London & South East England, the latter handily grouping all third-rail operation into one operation. To be presented by Jeremy Clarkson (surreptitiously including thousands of sycophantic references to Isambard Kingtom Brunel)
   
2. NR to lose its mandate for 'strategic thinking', with this passing to train operating companies (TOCs). Quite how they'd find the finance and indeed experience is another question, though Fern Britton puts forward the pros convincingly in this film. Producers thought Britton would be ideal for the role after seeing how she deftly interviewed Tony Blair)
   
3. Re-introduce the Strategic Rail Authority, which would have the final say on major projects, pricing and the manner in which NR interfaces with all of its partners. Although this would take an eternity in setting-up, Lord Adonis tries his hardest to sell it to the viewers
4. Full nationalisation of the rail network would cost a fortune and, its critics claim, will deliver far less in the short to medium term. Arthur Scargill provides the voice-over and will say that compared to the £22bn NR owes, re-nationalisation is chicken feed to the Treasury
5. In a surprise appearance, coinciding with the last programme of the heats, Dr Richard Beeching speaks from beyond the grave to offer his thoughts on how effective simply downgrading NR's role to that of a third-party private contractor to the DfT and TOCs would be.

Meanwhile, the BBC continues to look for a celebrity who is linguistically skillful enough to explain to viewers how NR's £22 billion debt fails to show up on the government's books, despite the DfT parading how many millions they'll be able save by reducing efficiencies within, er, Network Rail!

Rail Ticket Overhaul

Passenger Focus, the watchdog charged with representing the views of rail passengers (and also bus passengers), has concluded that further simplification of the industry's ticketing is needed if further passengers are to be gained. We're both firmly in agreement with this.

Only a couple of weeks ago we highlighted a First Class fare aboard a gratuity-free CrossCountry '170' that was 292% higher than its Standard Class equivalent. Only this week, we learned that two people wishing to purchase a Travelcard for unlimited travel in the whole of London plus train travel to/from Peterborough at weekends can save money buy purchasing a group ticket for 3! There are occasions where asking for a station beyond that to which you're travelling provides a cheaper ticket: take Skegness-Nottingham. The first train ex Skegness arrives Nottingham at 0923 - within the morning peak, costing £31 (Anytime Return) - yet asking for Derby, where a connecting train will deliver you by 1004 (i.e. outside the morning peak) will cost £18.90 (Off-peak Day Return).

I remember being told during my A Level Politics lessons that Britain's constitution is not like that of our cousins across The Pond. Ours does not fit into a nicely ring-bound file that can be purchased from specialist shops. Ours has been carefully developed over centuries and accordingly it's scattered all over the place. This is virtually identical to the manner in which our national rail ticketing policy has been allowed to grow exponentially over the years.

Tickets denote that travel is via "Any permitted route", yet we're not told what these are (though we had a go last year). Tickets also claim that travellers should "See Restrictions" - what restrictions? Where? Nobody knows.

It's a myriad of obfuscation. If more seasoned transport journos are to be believed, there's a huge void of knowlegde presenting itself within the industry as stalwarts from BR days - people who could roll off the tip of their tongues what the restrictions were and which routes were permitted - retire/are made redundant. Timely, then, that Passenger Focus has stepped in.

Or is it? They did it all before a couple of years ago, when they rightly claimed the number of ticket names - NOT, importantly, types, was growing out of control. They forced the Association of Train Operating Companies (ATOC) to concede, and they ostensibly produced three main ticket types: Advance, Off-peak, Anytime. There was, however, nothing to stop individual train operating companies from introducing their own ticket names for specific ticket types they felt not covered by the main three.

Some have argued that reducing the number of names was superficial, since the number of ticket types remained high and that it is this root cause that needs addressing.

One of the headline figures quoted by Passenger Focus, who has recently undertaken a large study into the problems passengers face when purchasing tickets, is that "around seven in 10 are satisfied with purchasing tickets". This means around third are not. Yes, a third. One in three. While this is something of a minority, it's certainly not latent enought to weild a virtual back-slap.

We were both pleased to see that Railway Eye agreed, too: "Out in the real world, for any business to have an activity which left 30% of customers dissatisfied would see a rapid change in the management responsible. Especially since this is the operation which delivers cash flow."

There are some cracking fares out there for those willing to book in advance. Walk-on fares remain very high indeed, though. Passenger Focus seems to be concentrating its energies on having any restrictions that apply to individual ticket types being made clear before a passenger using a self-service machine commits to purchase. They've suggested a member of staff being present where there are a large number of self-service machines - similar to self-service checkouts in Asda - but this involves paying a wage and the employee would need to be Über-knowledgeable: can't have the machine knowing more than ticket clerk, after all; this would not send out the best image!

Perhaps, then, Passenger Focus - for real substance - ought to consider what a growing number of people within the industry have been warming to for the past 18 months or so: Singles Tickets. Spear-headed by fares expert Barry Doe (for it is he!), mixing and matching single fares has been the staple diet for those purchasing well in advance. Why not do it for on-the-day purchases?

Take a return journey from Leeds to London. If the passenger wishes to arrive in London before 9am he/she needs to accept that this is a journey falling within what is regarded as a peak period. The on-the-day (Anytime) ticket costs £223 for all trains departing Leeds before 0803. Thereafter, the Off-peak Return can be purchase, costing £142. However, if the traveller wishes to return at, say, 2100, he/she does not receive any reduction on their £223 ticket, despite only 50% of it being during a designated peak period. Mixing and matching singles would ensure only the southbound ticket price would be extortionate - not the northbound one.

The reason why nothing will happen, save perhaps a few superficial tinkers, is that TOCs are paranoid at losing revenue. As it is, most are claiming millions from the DfT under their respective 'cap and collar' agreements (a revenue share is made when profits fall below agreed minimum and, likewise, excessive profits above an agreed maximum are shared with the DfT). The prospect of the unknown is just too dangerous for TOCs right now.

We wish Passenger Focus well, though you can bet ATOC will fight its corner with much vigour!

Those pesky laws

Health & Safety is often branded as the reason why children cannot learn in such a hands-on manner as their parents did; why sensible working practices are often outlawed; and why lengthy, time-consuming procedures must be followed for no noticeable end gain.

Second to H&S are actual laws that have been passed during yesteryear which actually hinder the manner in which the surroundings in which they sit operate today. These laws and legislative rulings are to be met head-on by the new Coaltion. They were a central part of the Conservative Party's manifesto and something that LibDem leader and Deputy PM Nick Clegg has been personally spearheading: Your Freedom.

Billed as the biggest-ever shake-up of the country's laws and regulations, the plan is to repeal what are commonly seen to be unnecessary legislation. Naturally, what one man considers unnecessary, another will believe it to be a fundamental requirement of his life. It's quite a contentious issue and one that the opinion polls suggest the Tories didn't get across as well as they might during the election campaign.

Transport - specifically public transport - has mercilessly few unnecessary laws and regulations that are latched onto by people in their millions. It has its fair share of H&S red tape though. Using the new Your Freedom webiste, that's proved very popular indeed thus far, citizens (or should that be subjects?) can log on and simply identify which laws and regs they'd like removed. At the time of writing, most transport-related pleas relate to motoring, though a few others exist.

• Bank Holidays should be classified as Sundays for parking and bus lane enforcement purposes, meaning greater choice for motorists to park their cars and more road space for motorists to utilise
• Nottingham's Workplace Parking Levy should be scrapped, which could have a considerable knock-on effect for public transport provision in the city (though perhaps less so now the NET extensions have been effectively cancelled)
• The scrapping of differing speed limits for different vehicle types; it would therefore be acceptable for a tanker or coach to travel at 70mph along the M11, for example
  
• Remove all speed humps
• Railways should not be able to issue their own penalty fares for ticket irregularities
• Railways should not be able to prosecute people; this would pass to the Police
• Taxi drivers would dearly love to see the Act that permits a local council the power to suspend a cabbie's licence for up to 28 days if photographed driving in a bus lane or parked on double-yellows
• Railway volunteers want to be able to do more in-depth work without the need for expensive insurance cover
• Receive a free bus pass for permanently surrendering your driving licence and means-testing those over 65 for theirs
• Include free home-to-school transport for those living within their school's catchment but on low incomes

However, a large number are in cloud cuckoo land, it has to be said. Take a look for yourself - and feel free to add your own.

Your Freedom website

Mobile phone usage

Contributing writer 'GWB' blows the dust off his keyboard and considers two local bus service scenarios and the manner in which the driver has handled each.

On a recent bus journey, I and my fellow passengers were subjected to what I describe as the scourge of the modern-day bus passenger: music being played out loud from a 'personal music device', which on this occasion was a mobile phone. People - generally teenagers or disaffected twenty-somethings with an axe to grind - seem not to care that the entire bus (in this case the upper deck) could hear Snoop Doggy Dog being played incredibly loud. Where were the headphones? They still come with every new mobile phone and offer a far superior stereo effect!

People just can't be bothered bringing such weighty, cumbersome lengths of wire with them. By contrast, we've all sat near someone listening to music through headphones and have been able to hear the bass or even the lyrics, but at least they've been considerate enough to plug them into their phone.

However, in a shock move, up came the driver. In a manner that was completely faultless he effectively stopped the music within seconds. No threats, intimidation or incomprehensible dialogue spoken at 100mph. He stood at the top of the stairs, looked in the direction of the music player and his possy and said nothing. After five seconds it soon became apparent that something was wrong, to the point that the live band at the back turned their music off, only to see what was occurring. The driver said "Can you keep the music off or plug some headphones in, please", to which a rather nervous response was, "Err, yeah, sure". The driver concluded: "We don't have a licence for you to do that so we don't allow it. Thanks."

After awaiting acknowledgment of his final sentence, he headed off to his cab. The music never started up. As the miscreants alighted, a fellow passenger told me that one actually apologised to the driver. Perhaps more ought consider using minimalist language while politely 'facing-off' the mobile music studios. There are a number of legitimate reasons why drivers might not though.

While clearly this driver's opinion of using a mobile phone in such a manner was pretty low, the driver of a First Manchester bendy bus's thoughts of mobile phone usage was even lower, following the YouTube clip that I've recently found online. Essentially, the video maker was incensed that the driver refused to use the manual ramp, located under the front step, to assist the person in an electric wheelchair to alight. There are a whole host of questions that need asking and answering here and I can't help feeling that the budding Manchester Evening News correspondent could have handled things slightly differently.



Anyone who's ever used a bus will know that all bus drivers act and behave differently. All bus drivers know that every passenger acts and behaves differently. Never more so has this been in evidence!

Bus passes (again!)

Did the then Chancellor Brown know exactly what he was unleashing when, as a seemingly off-the-cuff remark, on 16 March 2005 at the end of his Budget statement to the House of Commons, he announced free, off-peak local bus travel would be made available to anyone qualifying for a concessionary fare?

As soon as you genuinely offer something for nothing, there's no going back. Even a 10p flat fare is an immeasurably high percentage increase from zero.

Unlike Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, the English scheme has never been administered in a manner that bus operators and local authorities have wanted. It's all been done at local authority level, though steps are being made for this to be moved up a notch to county council level. The cash each local authority receives is not ring-fenced either. Scores of judicial reviews have taken place with operators taking authorities to court over the level of reimbursement they receive compared to what they believe they ought to receive. Generally, operators win.

While the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish schemes operate on a much reduced scale to that of the English, they are all administered centrally with the same reimbursement percentage per journey offered across the board within each scheme.

None of this has ever made the national press since, to be honest, it wouldn't sell many papers. What did get the nationals excited today though was news that the Coalition Government is considering speeding up the process that will delay the age at which people are eligible for their free bus pass. Over the next ten years, the qualifying age will increase from 60 to 65, in line with the same increase women are to incur before they are able to receive the state pension.

Initial steps to delay the age of entitlement from 2020 had been put in motion by the outgoing Labour chancellor and this has been taking effect since April. In a bid to save cash - and not forgetting the Coalition said they wouldn't remove the free bus pass scheme in England (at a cost of £1 billion a year) nor make it means tested - the DfT has been asked to cost the savings likely to be made by bringing the 2020 date forward.

If the scheme is implemented, a scenario could exist where females eligible for their state pension are not entitled to a free bus pass, which would cause all manner of legal problems for the government on grounds of discrimination.

It's been suggested, though, that this plan, while being real and genuine, could simply be part of the DfT's attempts to show how it would save 40% of its budget in a worst-case scenario, rather than the likely 25% cut it's likely to face.

LEYTR Comment: Love it or loathe it, the free bus pass scheme really is a vote winner. Although the incumbents have a fixed parliament for five years, the removal of any part of the scheme will be sure to anger millions of travellers. Yes, millions. Forget whether they are morally entitled or not, the elderly are generally more likely to vote Tory and have very long memories!! It will have a direct impact on the way people vote - even in May 2015.

Our related blog entries

2010 bus pass age to change
The story of eventual free local bus travel
Free bus pass scheme from 1 April 2008
2008 bus pass loop holes
Bus-less Isle of Scilly receive reimbursement
DfT overhauls admin of bus pass scheme
2009 bus pass report issued

There were 7 typos in yesterday's blog entry. The perils of typing while still not fully awake. In an unusual move, I've hacked into the original entry and put them right. There are a couple of subjunctives that still may be wrong though.... Apologies.

Devil's in the Detail

When I see an advert for a product and its associated wow-factor price tag, it's the pessimist in me that thinks "Yeah, sure!" I'm willing to believe that, on occasion, if you're willing to run the gauntlet laid down by the company in question, give your details for spam mail ad infinitum and even then only be guaranteed a slightly better than average chance of acquiring said product for the amazing price, you might consider doing it (some people love filling out forms and receiving post), but on the whole you're on a road to nowhere other than hassle.

So, when Ryanair advertised flights to either Gothenberg or Dusseldorf for £10 one-way, subject to availability and optional fees, I just knew that it would be virtually impossible to be charged £10 for such a fare - even if I spent hours searching for this Holy Grail.

I've learned that some airlines charge you just for paying by card - be it debit or credit - and some charge you to print out your boarding pass when there is no alternative manner of boarding pass acquisition. The airlines that charge some or all of these add-ons are the no frills brigade, who undoubtedly plug a gap in the market (m'colleague and I flew with easyJet to Gibraltar in March without problem). Savvy frequent flyers will know all too well that Ryanair charge to the 'mandatory optional' fee to print out your boarding pass and then, along with easyJet, charge per kilo for baggage etc.

Which is why no human complained to the Advertising Standards Agency (ADA) about two national newspaper ads Ryanair made for its £10 Gothenberg/Dusseldorf flights. The complaint was made by its corporate rival, easyJet.

We all know that you won't get the flight for a tenner, but put up with the sundries because the total price is still about 300% cheaper than British Airways. Ryanair's Achilles heel, however, was not including the word 'from' in their one-liner. Had they placed "fare FROM £10 one-way", subject to virtually anything they liked etc., the ASA would have ruled in their favour. Without 'from', easyJet's lawyers successfully argued that £10 was likely to be regarded as a set price for flights between these points. It's similar to Virgin Trains' failed court case against Southern over whether a train 'calls' at a station upon 'terminating' there.

Ironically, Ryanair said they'd reduced some of their Gothenberg/Dusseldorf flights further to £5, and admitted their dates of availability ran from 1 January to 28 February earlier this year. Now, if they'd included this, along with the word 'from', easyJet would have been placated and the customer would know whether it was worth him searching for fares (hardly, if travel was for April, for example).

Slightly better is the UK coach industry, where First's Greyhound, Stagecoach's Megabus (and certain Citylink routes - with ComfortDelGro) and National Express all use yield management to set incredibly low fares on their respective services. These £1 headliners do genuinely appear reasonably regularly. Only NX have no compulsory add-on by way of a transaction fee, though only for debit card holders.

Sensibly, all fares are "FROM £1" (Ryanair take note!), so each's competition cannot cry foul. We've pondered before the requirement for the number of fares to be offered at £1. I've booked tickets online with one of the above coach operators seconds after seats have been released and £5 has been the minimum - from which I'd infer that no fares of £1 are on offer on that journey.

The psyche's the same though: we know the likelihood of a £1 Greyhound fare/£10 Ryanair fare is as scarce as rocking horse manure, but are willing to purchase a ticket one notch or two higher as we know this still represents good or excellent value for money. It could be argued these corporate bodies are limiting such offers in future with their complaints. As it turns out, Ryanair's omitted 'from' allowed them to offer £5 fares - something they wouldn't have otherwise been able to do. The ASA's insistance of 'from' being added to make their claim less confusing will prevent fares from a fiver in the future.

The Elite Citylink Gold

Monday saw the launch of Citylink Gold, from the joint Stagecoach and ComfortDelGro Citylink coach company in Scotland. Two existing Citylink services have been upgraded and re-branded 'Gold' using a fleet of new 54-seat, tri-axle Volvo B12Rs with the striking Plaxton Elite body.

Glasgow-Aberdeen and Glasgow-Inverness are the two services affected and the exterior appearance is not the only thing to have changed. Inside, the new coaches boast a fascinating tartan and leather trim with mahogany tables, free wi-fi and, most surprisingly, free refreshments served by on-board attendants.

Park's of Hamilton's HSK 647 arrives at Glasgow's Buchanan Bus Station ready to work a Citylink Gold service to Inverness

Both routes aim to offer travel times comparable to competing rail services but with fares available from just £4. Journey times between Glasgow and Aberdeen are just under 2:40 and those between Inverness and Glasgow will take as little as three 3:23. Services are provided by Park's of Hamilton and Stagecoach.

Initial Citylink Gold timetable & fares

The Scottish Citylink brand was once under the control of National Express, who chose to relinquish the entire operation when they were the successful winners of the Scotrail franchise post-rail privatisation. They were not allowed to operate both the national coach and rail networks. NX subsequently lost Scotrail to First and has very little presence in Scotland now, save their urban bus network in Dundee.

Rivals First and Stagecoach are both based in Scotland and have competed at local level on many occasions, both in this country and abroad. With Stagecoach and Singaporean-based ComfortDelGro providing the new Citylink Gold service, it puts them in direct competition with Scotrail. Yet Stagecoach's Brian Souter and ComfortDelGro's Jaspal Singh were very careful not to mention this in their press statements.


The bigger goal, of course, is modal shift from commuters and leisure travellers in cars.

It is a fascinating venture. Both the leather tartan interior which really suits the coaches - it's been specially designed by The House of Edgar - and that on-board attendants have been re-introduced. A few months ago we commented on how rare this re-introduction is and how First have been the only operator to have done so. Not anymore.

Tartan antimacassars provide a very striking interior decor
All exterior photos: 'WesternSMT'

Citylink Gold website

IEP Report

One of the last actions taken by outgoing Transport Secretary Lord Adonis was to initiate a review into the InterCity Express Programme (IEP). A shrewd move this was as it prevented the incoming Coalition Government from axing the scheme as the report would be underway rather than completed.

Now, however, Sir Andrew Foster's report into the IEP has been published and provides uncomfortable reading for the Department for Transport (DfT). We summarise the main points in bullet form.

General Conduct & Secrecy

• Secrecy and poor management by the DfT has hampered the scheme and has thrown up a good deal more questions than answers
• Despite consistently passing internal assessment tests, the scheme evoked scepticism and hostility amongst external stakeholders
• Key stakeholders were kept at arms length, which reduced goodwill and increased suspicions
• Scepticism throughout the industry has been put down to the DfT's unwillingness to comment on anything but the absolute bare minimum
• Agility Trains - who'd build the new trains - claimed better acceleration would counter-act the overall slower speed, but refused to release any documentation proving this, citing commercial sensitivity
• The all-diesel version "fatally undermined" when Lord Adonis revealed plans for the electrification of the Great Western Main Line, which in turn reduced the train's value for money rating and the precise figure has never been released by the DfT
• Formations have been altered: the Feb 09 release claimed IEP trains would be either 5- or 10-cars in length, though this was latterly altered to either 5- or 8-car electric-only and 5, 7, 9 or 10-car bi-mode versions. This significant alteration was never officially announced

Technical Issues

• There are unresolved issues surrounding the technical aspects of the entire project, specifically that the diesel-only aspect of the trains' bi-modal power source will struggle to run on the more hillier and curved tracks, such as the Highland Main Line and Great Western Main Line in Cornwall
• The bi-mode trains would be less powerful than those they're replacing and would necessitate an increase in journey times
• There are no bi-mode inter-city express trains anywhere in the world, so very limited experience from which to draw, especially since the national rail industry is not comprehensively supportive of the scheme at all
• Insufficient credible alternatives to the IEP were not assessed. Options such as other new, cheaper types of train, building new carriages and locos to haul them in a more traditional manner and costing a scheme to life-extend our existing fleet of High Speed Ttrains (HSTs).
• Original concept, revealed by the DfT in February 2009, was substantially altered on three occasions once Agility Trains had been chosen as the preferred manufacturer, which Sir Andrew believes showed how floored the original plans were

Cheaper Credible Alternatives

• Better flexibility on carriage lengths by using traditional locomotive traction - simply attach a loco to as many/few carriages as is deemed sufficient
• An option for electric trains to be hauled by diesel locos for short distances beyond electrified sections should have been considered
• A number of alternatives could benefit 60% of the East Coast Main Line and 75% of the Great Western Main Line for between 40%-60% of the cost of IEP
• Extending the life of our existing HSTs to 2030 is technically feasible and cost-effective compared to building a fleet of new trains but would not cater for increased capacity
  
• Fewer but higher-capacity trains should be operated, rather than more services with fewer carriages

Sir Andrew concludes: "I have been surprised that more attention is not paid by the DfT, and perhaps more widely by the UK rail industry, to international comparison and interaction. The caricature that I have heard is that we go it alone and miss opportunities to drive down some costs and build on the experience of others. I appreciate that there are some important differences between us and continental Europe, but are they forever writ in stone?"

We think it safe to assume IEP is dead.

Our guide to loco-hauled alternatives

Original IEP announcement, Feb 2009

IEP placed under twelth-hour review

Ebay bus seller escapes prison

You may have seen on the national news programmes a few days ago that the first conviction for falsely advertising goods for sale on the Internet auction site eBay had taken place at Bradford Crown Court, with the defendant told to pay a fine of £5,000, plus court costs and undertake 250 hours of community service.

The guilty party - Paul Barrett from County Durham - was selling a bus advertised with lower mileage than it actually had. A little deeper digging showed that the company Barrett owned, Connors Minibuses, had an O Licence for just 2 vehicles yet his auctions showed a fleet of five, all wearing his company's livery. The company website even states that vehicles with "8, 10, 12, 14 and 16 seats or more" can be hired.

A further allegation was made of 'shill bidding', which is the term used to describe a seller bidding on his own item in order to raise the sale price. He had a secondary username and would use this to bid on his own items and would also provide positive feedback for himself using this alter ego, giving the impression to other bidders that he'd received far more satisfied customers than he actually had.

Not all items he bid on were buses, and in his defence, Barrett said he did not know that this constituted breaking the law.

Charging him with breaches of the 2008 Business Protection from Misleading Marketing Regulations and 2008 Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations, Judge Peter Benson left Barrett in no doubt that had the sums of money involved been higher and that had his own record not been clean, he would have faced a custodial sentence.

LEYTR Comment: This is yet another area of how the Internet can prove to be more foe than friend. There have been recent cases of Facebook turning against operators and drivers as well as the more established ways in which critical comments are left against stories written by authors of media outlets and blogs. Mr Barrett was clearly made an example of and this was seized on my the media, too. Ebay suffers from a worryingly high proportion of sellers who deliberately mislead buyers by wording their item descriptions in such a manner that it appears you get more than you actually do. Our bug bear is when sellers inflate postage costs to ensure a decent sum is received for the item being sold.

It's a faceless media that will always attract people who want to benefit from the associated relative anonymity. Clearly Mr Barrett wouldn't - indeed couldn't - have committed a number of the crimes he had if the buyer of the minibus in question had visited his premises to view the bus and to ask questions. Hopefully it will serve as a warning to others.

Weird logic

Was it an April Fool? Did I mis-read it? Was Christian Wolmar having a laugh? Those who've read his column in the most recent RAIL will sure know what's to follow.

In a recent meeting with the new Transport Secretary Philip Hammond, Wolmar reveals some rather odd (and worrying) thoughts from the head of the Department for Transport. What initially caught my eye was Hammond's inability to understand why cars give way to trains at level crossings and not the other way round.

Yes, this is true. The Transport Secretary - already nicknamed 'Petrol-head Hammond' by Railway Eye - seemed to think that the logic behind cars having to wait at level crossings a little strange. Wolmar dug deeper and deduced that the Transport Secretary was unaware that the railway network was older than the road network so has priority because it was there first. Never mind the effect this would have on train timetables.

"Give him a break, he's only been in the job a month" is what some might be saying. True, but there are some fundamentals a transport secretary is surely expected to know. I suspect GCSE History would cover the formation and evolution of the railways in relation to the road network as we now know it.

In another very recent meeting with the Transport Secretary, we understand Stagecoach's chief executive Brian Souter has been explaining just how damaging the Coalition Government's consideration to scrap the Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG), or fuel duty rebate, would be. The previous administration was considering removing the fuel duty rebate set at a fee-per-mile and replacing it with a per passenger premium (making the quieter services even less profitable), though rumour has it Hammond and his DfT are considering just scrapping it altogether.

The result? Bus fares would, by and large, increase by between 20-30%. A number of months ago, one LEYTR operator told us their single fares would increase by 20p and returns by 30p. And this is independent to the annual increase they make.

It would appear the government like trumpeting transport's green credentials, but aren't always willing to commit financially.

The general consensus amongst transport watchers is that rail will be hit harder than buses, purely due to the leg-up the rail industry was given by the former transport secretary, Lord Adonis - a self-confessed railwayman. The higher you climb, the further you have to fall. The bus industry's saviour could come in the strange form of Liberal Democrat Norman Baker - thought to favour re-regulation through Quality Partnerships. While private bus companies in the main shy away from such agreements, it's the lesser of two evils when the threat of BSOG's removal is considered.

Real-time Mapping

Some clever computer people have devised a website that allows you to follow all London Underground trains. So successful has the site been, that it's been down for the past few days, though its creators pledge its reinstatement as soon as is practically possible.


As someone fascinated by cartography and transport, combining the two to provide something completely unique is an excellent step forward. I've always found it interesting to charter the Underground's actual routes through central London, rather than Harry Beck's iconic linear representations.

The map itself has a Google Maps foundation layer with the Tube lines layered above and yellow dots thereon represent the trains themselves. A video showing the site in action can be seen by clicking here.

This really is a fascinating site. We brought you something similar regarding shipping a couple of years ago that has proven popular. Here's one on aviation, too.

London Underground real-time train tracker
Shipping real-time tracker
Aviation real-time tracker

To pay or not to pay

No...... TO PAY!

New Transport Secretary Philip Hammond has incensed virtually every bus passenger over the age of sixty by 'daring' to suggest that those who are 'better-off' ought to consider paying for the journey they make.

Hammond commented on the issue during an interview with the BBC recently and it was obviously not going to go down well. He reiterated the Coalition's promise not the remove the £1 billion English National Concessionary Scheme (Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales fund their own) nor make it means-tested, but felt that those who could afford to pay perhaps, er, should.

The general response from those over sixty has been that the better-off use their cars anyway. Another avenue ventured down is that those entitled have paid National Insurance all their lives and are now reaping a very minor benefit. The more sedate have claimed that perhaps a flat fare of £1 in rural and 50p in urban areas ought to be levied.


Hammond's words have gone down very will with operators and local authorities, who would love cash fares to be paid to bus drivers; dependant on where the OAP boards, the bus operator will receive anything ranging between 45-75% of the average adult fare as reimbursement by the local authority in whose area the journey commences. For a cash fare to be paid, 100% is received. The operator is properly reimbursed at source and the local authority saves a sum of money.

One major disparity within the existing scheme is the time limit applied. The legislation affords those entitled to a concessionary bus pass "off-peak free travel", with off-peak being defined as 0930-2300 weekdays and at all times at weekends and bank/public holidays. Some local authorities have gone above and beyond and have removed all time restrictions; others have done so but for pass holders who are resident in their area only.

With improvements to the minimum legal requirement comes additional cost, which the DfT does not bare, but each local authority. Generally, the Labour-controlled urban councils and PTEs are those who offer such generous concessions - but not all. All councils within Lincolnshire, for example, offer a deal better than the minimum requirements of the scheme to their residents. Cutting back here, perhaps, could save cash, rather than the Transport Secretary putting his foot in his mouth on TV.

Operators have complained to us about the number of people using their bus pass to travel to work in the mornings (when pre-0930 concessions apply). They unanimously feel that this is not right. By the same token, many would be willing to 'move' on the official 0930 start time. Bus journeys commencing between 0830-0930 are reasonably quiet, having just missed the peak morning period. Many operators have given us the impression they'd prefer the legislation to kick-in from 0830 on weekdays in return for this to be universally applied throughout England with no option for individual councils to improve on it.

Perhaps this is the better way, or to coin a New Labour phrase, "the third way"?

YourBus & Rotala

"To refer to YourBus as being part of the Rotala group just because of a tenuous connection at board level is like saying Norfolk Green is the same as Stagecoach Manchester".

This is what a credible and respected contact within the transport industry told me when I kept referring to YourBus as something Rotala was assisting with in a number of perfectly legal and above-board ways.

To some extent, my contact's statement is correct. Two of the Dunn brothers sit on the board of the AIM-listed Rotala Group and another member of family (i.e. not the same person) heads up YourBus, but is this as tenuous as saying Norfolk Green is managed in the same way since its MD was a former Stagecoach manager who, in keeping with all Stagecoach employees at that time, was offered shares in the company?

Then I stumbled across the following:

Exhibit A - YourBus driver poses for a photo


Exhibit B - Rotala's Marketing Manager receiving an award last year


Spot the difference? I don't think there is one!

Rotala's marketing manager offering his services for the YourBus launch is perfectly acceptable and legitimate, it is just one of the many ways to which I alluded that YourBus and Rotala assist each other.

**UPDATE** Sirs, The chap featured above is the Diamond Bus Company's (Rotala-owned) Marketing Assistant, not the Marketing Manager for Rotala. The direct connection between Diamond Bus and Your Bus is Scott Dunn - the MD of Diamond, who uses staff at Diamond to provide various back office functions and I can assure you that such work, as well as the loan of vehicles, is charged to Your Bus at the correct rates. I hope this clarifies matters.

Arriva CrossFingers

A LEYTR Avid did bring to our attention today that Arriva's CrossCountry company has developed a somewhat surreal calculation when formulating its First Class fares on routes that see its Class 170 'Turbostars' deployed.

Consider the following:

Stamford - London King's Cross (changing trains in Peterborough) costs:
£96 Standard Class Anytime return and
£129 First Class Anytime return

Stamford - Birmingham (direct train) costs:
£49.50 Standard Class Anytime return
£144.50 First Class Anytime return

Why the huge disparity between Standard and First fares on the two routes? The Stamford-London journey sees the fare set by the East Coast franchise operator, whoever that may be at the time, whereas CrossCountry set the fares for travel between Stamford-Birmingham.

Under normal circumstances, most train operating companies (TOCs) increase the walk-on First Class fare by around 60% of the Standard fare. First Class generally affords the user a wider seat, which is aligned with a window, a table lamp of sorts and generally 2+1 seating throughout. Most TOCs provide an edible gratuity, too, though ironically not CrossCountry aboard its Turbostars.


Goodness knows what calculation XC has used when working out its Turbostar First Class fares. It certainly is not a 60% on Standard - more like 292% and not a free packet of biscuits or item of fruit to be had.

Top of the Ops

A relative newcomer to the National Express scheduled coach network has walked away with the superbrand's coveted Top of the Ops Award at a recent awards ceremony. Luckett's Coaches of Fareham was named the best of all National Express' third-party contract operators, of which there are 44.


The number of third parties undertaking NX coach work has steadily risen following the reduction in work covered by the larger operators. Silverdale of Nottingham was the beneficiary of Trent Barton's decision to surrender its diagrams in 2007 and South Gloucestershire Bus & Coach has gained its first regular services following First Bristol (and more recently Devon & Cornwall) relinquishing their work.

Luckett's Coaches has become a relatively large operator of NX coach services quite by chance. There have been no major operator changes along the South Coast over the last few years. Lucketts has been the main beneficiary of NX's desire to fight back against the inroads to its dominance by newcomers Megabus and Greyhound, and Fareham is ideally situated from where to mount a counter-attack.

Not that Lucketts is in any way in dispute with any other operator; indeed the official line from NX is that they themselves relish the challenge posed by increased competition and are confident that their passengers will see they continue to provide the better service.

So how has Lucketts managed to scoop the top prize so soon? Surely if the company was that good, they'd have been considered by NX for their scheduled coach operation years ago. The answer lies in Lucketts' core business - day tours and holidays. They were simply not in the market for stage-carriage services until the NX timetable change in March last year when they mutually decided to commence operation of five services: Service 027 (London-Chichester); Service 030 (London-Portsmouth/Southsea); Service 031 (London-Portsmouth); Service 032 (London-Portsmouth/Southampton); and Service 300 (Southsea-Bristol). They also ran the seasonal Butlins service between London-Bognor Regis.

Luckett's Coaches provide NX-standard Levante coaches

Their emergence was largely due to alterations to operators in the area, with Arriva's Tellings Golden Miller subsidiary and Transdev Bournemouth being assigned slightly different diagrams.

In September, Greyhound commenced its operation and NX fought back immediately (well, actually beforehand, with services legitimately not registered with VOSA and hence not covered by BSOG) which were provided by Lucketts.

The family-owned company is now firmly in the NX fold of operators and has cemented its place further with this prestigious award. Generally, those third-party operators whose main bread-and-butter is coach work tend to fair highly in the annual awards, with names such as Galloway European, Excelsior Coaches and Haytons frequently being in the upper quartile. Only Arriva and Go Ahead represented the 'big five', with Arriva Midlands, Classic Coaches and Go Northern winning different categories, based on size of their respective fleets.

We've unofficially seen the full document, ranking all third-party operators and while there's a winner, there's also a loser. We won't divulge who the poorest NX third-party performer is because their score is pretty woeful and it may detract from the good work the specific company is striving to achieve in order to allow someone else to be ranked 44th next year.

On a personal note, we always enjoy travel with Bruce's Coaches of Salsburgh and find the cleanliness of Selwyn's NX fleet unbeatable. East Yorkshire provide some very well-mannered drivers and we've had some memorable journeys aboard services provided by Ambassador Travel, too.

Luckett's Coaches' website

Under Review

The rail industry is bracing itself for the potential of up to twenty planned schemes being cancelled, as part of the Coalition Government's recent review of its Regional Funding Allocation. Additionally, the Department for Transport (DfT) has announced that it will not review schemes at the same level as it had previously done.

£494.5 million is the total cost of rail schemes that could potentially see the hangman's noose. Though the total pot of schemes being reviewed by the DfT totals £5 billion, so rail has on this occasion not bore the brunt - the majority of which appears to have befallen the Highways Agency.

In future, local authorities have been urged to show caution before passing a scheme onto (costly) public consultation; they are being urged to simply not consider it as the price tag of letting residents know of and pass comment on adds another financial tier which may be wasted if (when?) the scheme is turned down by the DfT.

The rule of thumb so far as rail schemes are concerned is that if construction has already started, or is pencilled in to start before the end of the year, success is likely. After that, well, I'm not a betting man, but I wouldn't head to the local bookmakers!

Uncommitted Rail Schemes

• £8.52m Wakefield Westgate
• £4.53m Haxby station
• £30.58m Yorcard Smart Ticketing
• £10.75m East Leeds Parkway station
• £14.88m Kirkstall Forge & Apperley Bridge stations
• £14.17m Leeds station - southern entrance
• £25m Midland Metro - Birmingham centre
• £53.1m Midland Metro - Wolverhampton
• £12.42m Nuneaton-Leamington
• £51.5m Kemble-Swindon line doubling
• £25.3m Portishead line re-opening
• £42m Manchester station refurbs
• £37m Crewe rail gateway
• £30m Tees Valley Metro
• £22.5m Chesterton station
• £26m Watford Junction Interchange
• £6.2m Croxley link
• £7.8m NET tram lines 2 & 3
• £51m Lincoln-Nottingham line speed improvement

Local authorities have understandably taken the line that, at best, this is an "annoying delay" to proceedings and that it doesn't necessarily spell disaster for new stations at Kirkstall Forge or two new tram lines in Nottingham.

Only five schemes currently in the pipeline have been confirmed by the DfT: Birmingham Gateway/New Street station upgrade; Reading station upgrade; Manchester Metrolink extensions; Tyne & Wear Metro package; and Blackpool tram upgrade. The country's existing tram networks have faired rather well, though beneficiaries of timing rather than goodwill, we suggest.