Rail fare hike: the 10 worst London commutes

Today's spike in train fares hits some journeys harder than others.

A moment's silence for those of us who have to get around by train. Over the last month we have had to deal with floods, signal failures, staff shortages and overcrowding. Now comes the news that rail fares are to be hiked once again.

The average rise is only 4.3 per cent, but as long as they stick to this average, train companies can increase the prices of some tickets as far as they like. The result is uneven, some routes are hit worse than others. Campaign groups point out that this is the 10th successive above-inflation rise, London commutes being particularly affected. Here are the 10 worst hit London travel routes:

1. Sevenoaks to London has gone up 87 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £41.50 to £77.80 and season tickets from £1,660.00 to £3,112.00.

2. Ashford International in Kent to London has gone up 80 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £66.50 to £119.50, and season tickets from £2,660.00 to £4,780.00.

3. Bracknell to London has gone up 78 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £55.70 to £99.00, and season tickets from £2,228.00 to £3,960.00.

4. Canterbury to London has gone up 78 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £67.50 to £120.30, and season tickets from £2,700.00 to £4,812.00

5. Tunbridge Wells to London has gone up 71 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £60.30 to £103.30, and season tickets from £2,412.00 to £4,132.00.

6. Maidstone to London has gone up 68 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £59.00 to £99.00, and season tickets from £2,360.00 to £3,960.00.

7. Tonbridge to London has gone up 68 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £56.00 to £94.20, and season tickets from £2,240.00 to £3,768.00

8. Gillingham to London has gone up 67 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £55.10 to £91.80, and season tickets from £2,204.00 to £3,672.00.

9. Hastings to London has gone up 59 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £72.00 to £114.60, and season tickets from £2,880.00 and £4,584.00.

10. Eastbourne to London has gone up 58 per cent in the last 10 years. Weekly tickets have gone from £68.00 to £107.60, and season tickets from £2,720.00 to £4,304.00.

The data came from Campaign for Better Transport, and was calculated using the weekly and season ticket prices between 2003 and 2013. It took inflation into account. (There is not yet a complete data set for travel routes outside London).

Stephen Joseph, the executive director of Campaign for Better Transport, said:

“These fare spikes are bad for people and bad for the environment. Once again, the Government is talking tall but walking short when it comes to ensuring the transport sector tackles climate change. If it is serious about tackling climate change, it must ensure train journeys are an attractive, affordable option for people.”

The average rise in fares is 4.3 per cent. Photograph: Getty Images
Picture: ANDRÉ CARRILHO
Show Hide image

Leader: Boris Johnson, a liar and a charlatan

The Foreign Secretary demeans a great office of state with his carelessness and posturing. 

Boris Johnson is a liar, a charlatan and a narcissist. In 1988, when he was a reporter at the Times, he fabricated a quotation from his godfather, an eminent historian, which duly appeared in a news story on the front page. He was sacked. (We might pause here to acknowledge the advantage to a young journalist of having a godfather whose opinions were deemed worthy of appearing in a national newspaper.) Three decades later, his character has not improved.

On 17 September, Mr Johnson wrote a lengthy, hyperbolic article for the Daily Telegraph laying out his “vision” for Brexit – in terms calculated to provoke and undermine the Prime Minister (who was scheduled to give a speech on Brexit in Florence, Italy, as we went to press). Extracts of his “article”, which reads more like a speech, appeared while a terror suspect was on the loose and the country’s threat level was at “critical”, leading the Scottish Conservative leader, Ruth Davidson, to remark: “On the day of a terror attack where Britons were maimed, just hours after the threat level is raised, our only thoughts should be on service.”

Three other facets of this story are noteworthy. First, the article was published alongside other pieces echoing and praising its conclusions, indicating that the Telegraph is now operating as a subsidiary of the Johnson for PM campaign. Second, Theresa May did not respond by immediately sacking her disloyal Foreign Secretary – a measure of how much the botched election campaign has weakened her authority. Finally, it is remarkable that Mr Johnson’s article repeated the most egregious – and most effective – lie of the EU referendum campaign. “Once we have settled our accounts, we will take back control of roughly £350m per week,” the Foreign Secretary claimed. “It would be a fine thing, as many of us have pointed out, if a lot of that money went on the NHS.”

This was the promise of Brexit laid out by the official Vote Leave team: we send £350m to Brussels, and after leaving the EU, that money can be spent on public services. Yet the £350m figure includes the rebate secured by Margaret Thatcher – so just under a third of the sum never leaves the country. Also, any plausible deal will involve paying significant amounts to the EU budget in return for continued participation in science and security agreements. To continue to invoke this figure is shameless. That is not a partisan sentiment: the head of the UK Statistics Authority, Sir David Norgrove, denounced Mr Johnson’s “clear misuse of official statistics”.

In the days that followed, the chief strategist of Vote Leave, Dominic Cummings – who, as Simon Heffer writes in this week's New Statesman, is widely suspected of involvement in Mr Johnson’s article – added his voice. Brexit was a “shambles” so far, he claimed, because of the ineptitude of the civil service and the government’s decision to invoke Article 50 before outlining its own detailed demands.

There is a fine Yiddish word to describe this – chutzpah. Mr Johnson, like all the other senior members of Vote Leave in parliament, voted to trigger Article 50 in March. If he and his allies had concerns about this process, the time to speak up was then.

It has been clear for some time that Mr Johnson has no ideological attachment to Brexit. (During the referendum campaign, he wrote articles arguing both the Leave and Remain case, before deciding which one to publish – in the Telegraph, naturally.) However, every day brings fresh evidence that he and his allies are not interested in the tough, detailed negotiations required for such an epic undertaking. They will brush aside any concerns about our readiness for such a huge challenge by insisting that Brexit would be a success if only they were in charge of it.

This is unlikely. Constant reports emerge of how lightly Mr Johnson treats his current role. At a summit aiming to tackle the grotesque humanitarian crisis in Yemen, he is said to have astounded diplomats by joking: “With friends like these, who needs Yemenis?” The Foreign Secretary demeans a great office of state with his carelessness and posturing. By extension, he demeans our politics. 

This article first appeared in the 21 September 2017 issue of the New Statesman, The revenge of the left