In a competitive arena, Britain’s railways have a stronger claim than most to being a symbol of our broken nation, although water firms are putting in the yards and could yet take that dubious honour.
The HS2 fiasco, egregious fare rises and the reverse ferret on ticket office closures add to the sense that our railways have become yet another national embarrassment. High time, then, for some positive PR.
Enter the Rail Delivery Group (RDG), the membership body that represents rail firms, and this week published research touting the benefits of taking the train over flying across our island (ataboy).
Trains are, it coos, “17 times greener than taking a flight”. Well, yes. And, once you’ve factored in the inevitable airport drudgery, it adds, quicker. Again, hardly a surprise given the diminutive size of old Blighty. But one benefit that may raise eyebrows among those accustomed to rail travel in this country is the claim that taking the train is cheaper than flying.
The report’s findings were, inevitably, enthusiastically welcomed by LNER, which runs trains between London and Edinburgh – also the UK’s busiest domestic air route. David Flesher, the train operator’s commercial director, said: “Time and again people claim that it’s cheaper and quicker to fly between London and Edinburgh or London and Newcastle. However, when you properly compare the cost and the time, rail works out considerably quicker and cheaper.”
Forgive me for missing the trend for flying between London and Newcastle, and for being tone deaf to the apparently oft-repeated lament that it’s cheaper to do so. Good to know for the next time someone suggests I fly up to Newcastle. Whenever that will be. My guess is never.
Using London to Newcastle feels more than a bit cynical and invites further scrutiny of the report, particularly on the claim that taking a train is cheaper.
It turns out that the RDG bases this assertion on the assumption that travellers would get to and from airports by minicab, instead of, say, taking the Tube, the train, or a bus – all of which are much cheaper than a return minicab journey to London Gatwick (£120-£200).
RDG based its research on journeys departing 27 May and returning 31 May – for many, this is the summer half term week. The cost of travelling by train between London and Edinburgh on 27 May, it claims, is £111 (although the cheapest fares i could find were £159).
And flying? £394, reckons the RDG. However, a quick search on the easyJet site yields return air fares on the same days for £81 (admittedly that excludes hold luggage and tedious seat selection).
For the difference in price, you could more or less get a return train from central London to Gatwick and the shuttle bus between Edinburgh airport and city. Overall, it works out costing about the same.
The RDG report, then, is spin. But it’s also right: travelling by train is more sensible. It’s quicker (assuming there are no delays – a big if these days). You get more leg room. Nobody makes you take your shoes off before you get onboard. You can bring your own booze with you. You can watch the scenery. And it’s better for the environment.
That we even have domestic air travel in this country seems faintly absurd. The next government would do well to follow France’s lead and axe internal flights where there are viable train equivalents in two and a half hours (or, ideally, four).
It should also make train travel cheaper – because our inflated rail fares are a political choice. They go up every year because the government lets them, just like it allows fuel duty to stay the same for drivers and absolves airlines of paying tax on kerosene – all worth bearing in mind before you book those flights to, erm, Newcastle.
