Rail season ticket prices to increase by 3.5% next year

Rail season ticket prices to increase by 3.5% next year

Rail season ticket prices to increase by 3.5% next year

First published in News

Rail passengers face paying hundreds of pounds extra for their annual season tickets next year.

From January, prices will rise by an average of 3.5 per cent, the Government has confirmed.

Colchester commuters travelling to London Liverpool Street could be forced to pay an extra £164 on top of the existing £4,680 for an annual ticket.

Regulated fares are determined by the Government, which allows train companies to increase price at a rate of inflation plus one per cent.

Next year’s prices were set after July’s retail price index was confirmed as 2.5 per cent.

Full story in tomorrow's Gazette

Comments (9)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:17pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Suffolkcommuter says...

I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts.

If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices.

Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city?

People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live?

On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different?????????

If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work.

Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!
I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts. If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices. Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city? People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live? On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different????????? If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work. Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!! Suffolkcommuter
  • Score: -4

12:28am Wed 20 Aug 14

Boris says...

Suffolkcommuter wrote:
I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts.

If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices.

Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city?

People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live?

On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different?????????

If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work.

Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!
SC, you are wrong because you commute by car. This makes the roads more crowded, it pollutes the environment, and it exposes you and others to greater risk of death or injury. But unless your work is in Diss or Norwich, I suppose your job in Norfolk is not readily accessible by train. Anyway it is your choice so, quite rightl;y, you are not complaining.
Does the government subsidise rail? I don't think so. And if it did, it should subsidise rail transport in general, not commuters. As you rightly say, commuters choose to commute, for they could live in London if they wished. In no other country do so many people commute for such long distances. Commuting should be discouraged.
The problem of course lies in our distorted economy. With the exception of your nice little earner in Norfolk, the best paid jobs are in London. A sensible government would take steps to move jobs away from London, but no British government has ever dared to do so.
[quote][p][bold]Suffolkcommuter[/bold] wrote: I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts. If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices. Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city? People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live? On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different????????? If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work. Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!![/p][/quote]SC, you are wrong because you commute by car. This makes the roads more crowded, it pollutes the environment, and it exposes you and others to greater risk of death or injury. But unless your work is in Diss or Norwich, I suppose your job in Norfolk is not readily accessible by train. Anyway it is your choice so, quite rightl;y, you are not complaining. Does the government subsidise rail? I don't think so. And if it did, it should subsidise rail transport in general, not commuters. As you rightly say, commuters choose to commute, for they could live in London if they wished. In no other country do so many people commute for such long distances. Commuting should be discouraged. The problem of course lies in our distorted economy. With the exception of your nice little earner in Norfolk, the best paid jobs are in London. A sensible government would take steps to move jobs away from London, but no British government has ever dared to do so. Boris
  • Score: 2

6:10am Wed 20 Aug 14

Brown Envelopes says...

Boris wrote:
Suffolkcommuter wrote:
I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts.

If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices.

Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city?

People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live?

On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different?????????

If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work.

Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


!!!!!
SC, you are wrong because you commute by car. This makes the roads more crowded, it pollutes the environment, and it exposes you and others to greater risk of death or injury. But unless your work is in Diss or Norwich, I suppose your job in Norfolk is not readily accessible by train. Anyway it is your choice so, quite rightl;y, you are not complaining.
Does the government subsidise rail? I don't think so. And if it did, it should subsidise rail transport in general, not commuters. As you rightly say, commuters choose to commute, for they could live in London if they wished. In no other country do so many people commute for such long distances. Commuting should be discouraged.
The problem of course lies in our distorted economy. With the exception of your nice little earner in Norfolk, the best paid jobs are in London. A sensible government would take steps to move jobs away from London, but no British government has ever dared to do so.
1. Coming out of your Brown Envelope ?
2. Going into the railways Brown Envelope ?
3. Who cares surely it is only money ?
[quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Suffolkcommuter[/bold] wrote: I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts. If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices. Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city? People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live? On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different????????? If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work. Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!![/p][/quote]SC, you are wrong because you commute by car. This makes the roads more crowded, it pollutes the environment, and it exposes you and others to greater risk of death or injury. But unless your work is in Diss or Norwich, I suppose your job in Norfolk is not readily accessible by train. Anyway it is your choice so, quite rightl;y, you are not complaining. Does the government subsidise rail? I don't think so. And if it did, it should subsidise rail transport in general, not commuters. As you rightly say, commuters choose to commute, for they could live in London if they wished. In no other country do so many people commute for such long distances. Commuting should be discouraged. The problem of course lies in our distorted economy. With the exception of your nice little earner in Norfolk, the best paid jobs are in London. A sensible government would take steps to move jobs away from London, but no British government has ever dared to do so.[/p][/quote]1. Coming out of your Brown Envelope ? 2. Going into the railways Brown Envelope ? 3. Who cares surely it is only money ? Brown Envelopes
  • Score: -1

6:15am Wed 20 Aug 14

Brown Envelopes says...

Suffolkcommuter wrote:
I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts.

If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices.

Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city?

People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live?

On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different?????????

If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work.

Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

!!!!!
1. That is funny ?
2. You Live In Suffolk ?
3. You work in Norfolk ?
4. You drive a car, but are commenting on the railway and trains ?
5. Yet you are also commenting in our local paper ?
6. We are from Essex mate do you know that ?
7. Can I suggest you Foxtrot Oscar ?
[quote][p][bold]Suffolkcommuter[/bold] wrote: I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts. If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices. Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city? People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live? On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different????????? If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work. Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!![/p][/quote]1. That is funny ? 2. You Live In Suffolk ? 3. You work in Norfolk ? 4. You drive a car, but are commenting on the railway and trains ? 5. Yet you are also commenting in our local paper ? 6. We are from Essex mate do you know that ? 7. Can I suggest you Foxtrot Oscar ? Brown Envelopes
  • Score: 3

9:35am Wed 20 Aug 14

Beyond Belief says...

I find it interesting that the government have a preferred measure of inflation which they prefer not to use when it comes to setting regulated rail fares. The end result is that rail passengers are exposed to a fare rise more than double the rate of inflation. Thankfully for those hard up MP's any rise in rail fares can be claimed back through expenses.
I find it interesting that the government have a preferred measure of inflation which they prefer not to use when it comes to setting regulated rail fares. The end result is that rail passengers are exposed to a fare rise more than double the rate of inflation. Thankfully for those hard up MP's any rise in rail fares can be claimed back through expenses. Beyond Belief
  • Score: 3

9:56am Wed 20 Aug 14

cynicalsubber says...

I commuted from Colchester for 15 years. The fares were expensive then, now they are ridiculous. And all that for cattle-class transport. And Suffolkcommuter, see how you feel when the government increases taxes on diesel to make up for the NOX emissions.
I commuted from Colchester for 15 years. The fares were expensive then, now they are ridiculous. And all that for cattle-class transport. And Suffolkcommuter, see how you feel when the government increases taxes on diesel to make up for the NOX emissions. cynicalsubber
  • Score: 3

10:11am Wed 20 Aug 14

eponymous coward says...

Inflation is a fact of life in our economy. The drawback is when a transport system, which is actually revenue generating for the government (Greater Anglia line is one of only 2 that makes a profit and subsidizes the rest of the rail network) gets worse and worse as time progresses, whilst costs increase above the level that commuters wages increase.
We are now in a situation where less than 40% of Peak time commuter trains run on time. The rail stock is between 25 (Class 321) and 40 (Class 90 Intercity) years old. There are no spare parts for these trains. They are not made anymore. There are no spares if these trains go wrong (36 Train units were returned by GA when they took over the franchise to increase profit margins).
When you don't have a choice to vote with your feet, you are kept in a captive market, by a profiteering company with no competition and the price rises increase above wages and inflation, well people tend to get a little annoyed. We look to our politicians who are meant to regulate and improve state funded services like this. And we get Priti Patel, Sir Bob Russell and Douglas Carswell, all members of the government party providing NO improvement.
Inflation is a fact of life in our economy. The drawback is when a transport system, which is actually revenue generating for the government (Greater Anglia line is one of only 2 that makes a profit and subsidizes the rest of the rail network) gets worse and worse as time progresses, whilst costs increase above the level that commuters wages increase. We are now in a situation where less than 40% of Peak time commuter trains run on time. The rail stock is between 25 (Class 321) and 40 (Class 90 Intercity) years old. There are no spare parts for these trains. They are not made anymore. There are no spares if these trains go wrong (36 Train units were returned by GA when they took over the franchise to increase profit margins). When you don't have a choice to vote with your feet, you are kept in a captive market, by a profiteering company with no competition and the price rises increase above wages and inflation, well people tend to get a little annoyed. We look to our politicians who are meant to regulate and improve state funded services like this. And we get Priti Patel, Sir Bob Russell and Douglas Carswell, all members of the government party providing NO improvement. eponymous coward
  • Score: 2

1:45am Thu 21 Aug 14

Boris says...

Brown Envelopes wrote:
Suffolkcommuter wrote:
I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts.

If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices.

Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city?

People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live?

On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different?????????

If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work.

Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


!!!!!
1. That is funny ?
2. You Live In Suffolk ?
3. You work in Norfolk ?
4. You drive a car, but are commenting on the railway and trains ?
5. Yet you are also commenting in our local paper ?
6. We are from Essex mate do you know that ?
7. Can I suggest you Foxtrot Oscar ?
Gordon Bennett, the man probably only lives in Nayland or Hadleigh, i.e as close to Colchester as Tiptree or West Mersea. These parts of Suffolk are part of our catchment area and the residents there have a perfect right to comment on Colchester. There is someone on here who sends in comments from California, for fcuk's sake. Learn a bit of elementary geography and spare us your ignorant remarks.
[quote][p][bold]Brown Envelopes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Suffolkcommuter[/bold] wrote: I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts. If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices. Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city? People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live? On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different????????? If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work. Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!![/p][/quote]1. That is funny ? 2. You Live In Suffolk ? 3. You work in Norfolk ? 4. You drive a car, but are commenting on the railway and trains ? 5. Yet you are also commenting in our local paper ? 6. We are from Essex mate do you know that ? 7. Can I suggest you Foxtrot Oscar ?[/p][/quote]Gordon Bennett, the man probably only lives in Nayland or Hadleigh, i.e as close to Colchester as Tiptree or West Mersea. These parts of Suffolk are part of our catchment area and the residents there have a perfect right to comment on Colchester. There is someone on here who sends in comments from California, for fcuk's sake. Learn a bit of elementary geography and spare us your ignorant remarks. Boris
  • Score: 1

1:46am Thu 21 Aug 14

Boris says...

Brown Envelopes wrote:
Boris wrote:
Suffolkcommuter wrote:
I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts.

If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices.

Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city?

People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live?

On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different?????????

If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work.

Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



!!!!!
SC, you are wrong because you commute by car. This makes the roads more crowded, it pollutes the environment, and it exposes you and others to greater risk of death or injury. But unless your work is in Diss or Norwich, I suppose your job in Norfolk is not readily accessible by train. Anyway it is your choice so, quite rightl;y, you are not complaining.
Does the government subsidise rail? I don't think so. And if it did, it should subsidise rail transport in general, not commuters. As you rightly say, commuters choose to commute, for they could live in London if they wished. In no other country do so many people commute for such long distances. Commuting should be discouraged.
The problem of course lies in our distorted economy. With the exception of your nice little earner in Norfolk, the best paid jobs are in London. A sensible government would take steps to move jobs away from London, but no British government has ever dared to do so.
1. Coming out of your Brown Envelope ?
2. Going into the railways Brown Envelope ?
3. Who cares surely it is only money ?
No idea what you are on about. Please explain yourself.
[quote][p][bold]Brown Envelopes[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Boris[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Suffolkcommuter[/bold] wrote: I am not sure what all the fuss is about as it all swings in roundabouts. If you choose to commute to London, I imagine. most people own or rent a property elsewhere, and I will use the example of Suffolk/Essex for example, as this is where I live. Living outside of the capital, brings considerably lower rent and property prices. Looking at comparisons - I would class myself as a middle class professional, I live in a well desired leafy village in Suffolk, and own, a large four bedroom grade 2 listed detached cottage...yet the equivalent cost would buy you a 1/2 bed flat in the city? People who live in London pays a premium for their property but have low commuter costs. They choose to pay and live this way, and this is their choice. Therefore, does it not depend on what lifestyle you want, and where you want to live? On the fare rises, there are questions being raised about government subsidising rail. As I have said, I choose to live in Suffolk, and (currently) commute to Norfolk to work, a daily round trip of 100 miles or so. This costs me around £360 per month (I own a diesel), which equates to around £4500 per year. This is the same cost on average for a yearly ticket from Sudbury to London Liverpool Street, but the government don't subsidise my car (quite the opposite in fact). Why should rail be any different????????? If you don't like it - get a job elsewhere, or vote with your feet and don't use the train. London is not the only place to work. Tell me I am wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!![/p][/quote]SC, you are wrong because you commute by car. This makes the roads more crowded, it pollutes the environment, and it exposes you and others to greater risk of death or injury. But unless your work is in Diss or Norwich, I suppose your job in Norfolk is not readily accessible by train. Anyway it is your choice so, quite rightl;y, you are not complaining. Does the government subsidise rail? I don't think so. And if it did, it should subsidise rail transport in general, not commuters. As you rightly say, commuters choose to commute, for they could live in London if they wished. In no other country do so many people commute for such long distances. Commuting should be discouraged. The problem of course lies in our distorted economy. With the exception of your nice little earner in Norfolk, the best paid jobs are in London. A sensible government would take steps to move jobs away from London, but no British government has ever dared to do so.[/p][/quote]1. Coming out of your Brown Envelope ? 2. Going into the railways Brown Envelope ? 3. Who cares surely it is only money ?[/p][/quote]No idea what you are on about. Please explain yourself. Boris
  • Score: 0
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree