The Highway Safety Action Group of NSW Incorporated

Access to rail services provided by the NSW Rail Access Corporation

Submission to the National Competition Council April 1997

Prepared by Mrs Marjory Bollinger on behalf of the Highway Safety Action Group

Executive summary

Comments contained in this submission from the Highway Safety Action Group of NSW Inc are derived from comments made to members of our group by concerned residents of inland NSW who have identified the need to maintain, and, in many instances restore, a coordinated transport system to service the needs of rural communities.

It is essential, for rural communities to survive, and hopefully prosper in future, that an effective, efficient, cost effective, coordinated transport system making better use of rail, be in place to encourage regional development and employment in inland areas.

To justify the maintenance of rail infrastructure it is imperative that maximum levels of traffic be encouraged to operate on the rail network, taking advantage of all possible opportunities to increase usage.

By replacing Countrylink rail services with coach services by no means encourages greater use of existing rail infrastructure, but rather places rail in a further state of decline which will eventually result in the total failure of the system.

By placing all traffic onto a road network with an existing infrastructure totally incapable of coping with existing levels of freight, let alone increasing it, will create a situation where there is no alternative, with catastrophic results at a community level.

It is therefore imperative that existing Countrylink services be maintained by:

Developing and increasing services to cater for the developing tourist market.
Provide timetables that are appropriate to the needs of the community rather than catering for the needs of staff and management.

Become more cost effective by:

Reducing top heavy levels of management and returning employment to areas that can achieve higher levels of productivity.
Establish a fleet of rollingstock of a size and type with the ability to adequately service the market.

Re introduce Rail Motor type vehicles

These vehicles would better cater for low volume passenger usage than coaches would.
Have fuel consumption cost effective advantages over coaches especially as low cost oil reserves diminish.
Be more environmentally friendly.
Steel on steel alternatives more cost effective than rubber on tar, eliminating the need to replace rubber tyres as well as eliminating the need for disposal.

Public Hearing

The Highway Safety Action Group of NSW Inc here by requests the opportunity to appear at the Public Hearing to be held on 4 November 1996 to expand on these recommendations.

Background

The Highway Safety Action Group of NSW Inc is a high profile, non-profit voluntary community organisation promoting safe road travel for the benefit and welfare of the community at large.

Aiming to encourage a realistic balance of road and rail haulage of goods and passengers.

Acting as a community group to achieve our aims by liaising with other bodies with similar objectives promoting local community awareness on road safety.

The HSAG was formed in Orange in May 1992 at a public meeting attended by some 400 people following a spate of fatal road accidents in the Central West.

During the near five year life of the HSAG we have successfully obtained many benefits for the community which include major construction works to the Great Western Highway between Bathurst and Lithgow and increased volumes of flammable fuel transported by rail.

Our group has representation on many Community Consultative Committees, both Government and non-Government.

Objectives

Our comments to the National Competition Council regarding Access to a Rail Service Provided by the Rail Access Corporation of New South Wales are made with the intention to demonstrate to Council the need to maintain and encourage patronage on the infrastructure referred to in the SCT submission for the benefit of the community at large.

In most instances these communities are ageing, thus will have a greater reliance on air services and public transport to maintain their mobility in the future.

Therefore air services and public transport must be maintained to insure the type of services which are available are suitable to meet their needs.

In assessing passenger rail services, all aspects must be considered not simply the dollar value and dollar profitability of providing services but also the economic and social costs to the community by placing additional traffic on roads.

As examples of costing considerations:-
Increased road maintenance costs
Cost of road accidents
Social cost due to isolation
An aging population needing accessibility to medical services
Costs associated with overnight accommodation required if an adequate transport system is not available to provide access to essential services for an aging population.

Methodology

Members of the community have compiled this Submission from general comments representing views passed on to the HSAG. Most who have not had the opportunity to read the detailed information as set out in the issues paper.

Broadly speaking the comments are not based on technical or statistical data, rather a common sense view from average members of the community as they see the need for the provision of public transport to services and to meet their needs, now, and in the future. Most agree that all Government decisions should not be made based on the balance of statistics and the dollar profitability of each individual Government service or department but consider profitability should be considered and balanced by answering the following questions: -

What will be the costs and benefits if this service is withdrawn?'
What are the costs and benefits of maintaining the service?'

It is our view the real cost of lost services to rural communities serviced by Countrylink far out weight the dollar savings of withdrawal of services.

The issues are set out in bold print followed by community comment on each issue.

Comments

The Tribunal is interested in detail on Countrylink's corridor management agreements.

The issues paper states:

"Corridor management agreements have been established to specify cost sharing arrangements between rail authorities.'"

From that information and not being aware of the detail of these agreements it is impossible to comment as to wether they are effective or not.

The only broad comment that could be made is providing all users equally share all costs of corridor usage and not 'over managed' by executive salaries it should be equitable and acceptable.

The Tribunal is interested in views on the ability of coach services to effectively replace rail services and the effects of the previous rationalisation of Countrylink rail services.

Depending on the definition of Pensioners, it would appear there may be reasons other than the fact that coaches offer significantly less generous concessions than Countrylink for Pensioners to use Countrylink rather than Coaches.

Aged Pensioners and Pensioners with disabilities find trains far more accessible than coaches, elderly people have difficulty climbing steps into coaches where as they can easily step onto a train from a platform.

The unemployed and younger concession Pensioners would undoubtedly be attracted to Countrylink by price concession differentials.

The Tribunal seeks views on wether discounted fares for air travel provide a realistic travel alternative for Countrylink customers.

Most sectors of the community who are Countrylink customers would still find discounted air fares out of their financial range. Discounted airfares would advantage business people who use air travel due to time factors rather than price.

This statement is made based on observations at country air terminals of the passenger on airlines.

Therefore it is our conclusion that discounted airfares do not provide a realistic alternative.

The Tribunal invites comments on changes to service levels and efficiency gains from the station-skipping program. The Tribunal is also interested in Countrylink strategies to improve the efficiency of the feeder coach network.

Station skipping undoubtedly improves travel times but should be weighed against loss of revenue due to the inability of passengers to use a service which passes through a station but does not stop.

A typical example of this is in the case of the new Broken Hill train which passes through Molong however passengers who wish to use the service must travel to Orange and have a two hour wait to catch the train to travel back through Molong.

This situation would surely not fall within best world practices and is not isolated to Molong.

To improve patronage, services should be tailored to meet the needs of customers rather than customers are tailored to meet the service.

Trains should be permitted to stop at non-stop stations where passengers wish to join trains. This would cause minimal delays and increase patronage thus profitability.

The fact that pick up points are available should also be publicised.

It would appear there is a need to review feeder coach timetables in some instances, one unconfirmed comment is that the coach from Dubbo to Cootamundra 'meets nothing'. No Link in Countrylink!

The Tribunal seeks more detailed information on ticket sales, journey purpose, demographics, customer incomes and frequency of usage for each Countrylink service.

It can be difficult to purchase tickets, as Countrylink Travel Centres are not open weekends in some areas. Non English speaking and elderly people find recorded messages difficult if not impossible to follow and give up, finding alternate means of travel if possible.

A single number in the phone book should be made available where customers are able to access a 'real person' to speak with for information at all times to increase customer service and usage.

The Tribunal requires information on actual patronage and off-peak load factors for each ticket type across the ten Countrylink rail services.

Due to the vast distances covered by Countrylink it would not be realistic to expect a 100% of seats to be occupied for the entire journey as the further out you travel the less the population.

Consideration may be given to reducing the number of cars on a train in off peak times to produce a higher occupancy rate, always given however, that additional cars were available to add to the train if a situation were to arise where that was required.

Passenger capacity of Countrylink Coaches should be applicable to the number of passengers who utilise the service. It is pointless running 45 seat coaches when the majority of seats are unoccupied most of the time, a Mini Buses may well provide a better cost recovery. On the other hand passengers have been known to be left stranded at Lithgow when there have been insufficient seats available to cater for the volume of passengers transferring from a train service to a coach service.

The Tribunal will review Countrylink's strategies to increase cost recovery through growth, and invites suggestions on new measures to achieve these goals.

With 36% of passengers using the service provided with free travel and a further 23.5% provided with half fares it would be unrealistic to expect the service to run at a Dollar profit.

Some analysis and breakdown of the Free Pensioner Travel Voucher passengers and the half fare Senior Citizen/Pensioner component may be necessary to identify the definition of 'Pensioner' that is quoted twice.

There may be a need for a review of this system for a greater cost recovery. We would question why Senior Citizen (Aged and Invalid) Pensioners pay half fare whilst other Pensioners travel free.

There are known instances of unemployed and other designated Pensioners abusing the free travel system whilst other genuine needy people are disadvantaged.

Countrylink need to improve promotion of Countrylink to encourage patronage with Metropolitan counter staff becoming more conversant with locations and distances as well as feeder services.

It has been know for customers who have made enquiries at the Countrylink Travel Centre at Central Station to be told there is no service available to a destination the customer had already made a reservation for. THIS IS UNSATISFACTORY SERVICE IF THERE IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN ATTEMPT TO PROMOTE AND ENCOURAGE BUSINESS.

The Tribunal seeks views on the relative merits of time, distance and market based pricing for long distance passenger services.

From information available it would appear rail travel times are comparable with other forms of land transport for long distance travel.

Prices should be maintained within competitive range to other forms of transport.

The Tribunal invites comments on any aspect of Countrylink fare system.

Investigate the feasibility of a $10 fare for all long distance pensioners and an equity fare for Pensioners who travel with Countrylink comparable to the $2 City Rail concession fares. This equity may be achieved by raising the $2 City Rail ticket price to a reasonable level to enable Countrylink passengers to travel further than just one or two towns in some instances for the same price.

The Tribunal invites comments on current and/or alternate strategies to improve the efficiency of Countrylink resources.

By employing effective, efficient marketing strategies through promotion of inland long distance travel on programs such as 'Get Away' etc for tourist travel to all areas of interest.

By reducing top heavy management and making better use of employment in more productive areas.

The Tribunal seeks to quantify the externality benefits (including community benefits) produced by Countrylink and invites comments on how these benefits should be taken into consideration when evaluating fare principals. It also invites comments on how Countrylink should be subsidised.

All costs and benefits should be calculated in making assessments of fare prices including additional road maintenance costs if coaches are to be used to replace rail services.

The social costs of isolation and lack of ability to interact with other communities due to restricted travel opportunities and country roads that become impassable in wet conditions.

Easier accessibility to trains for the aged and disabled as opposed to coaches.

Travel times on long distances due to regulations that require coach drivers stop for rest periods on one driver coach operations.

Consideration of a standard low payment for all Pensioners rather than some free whilst others pay half fares.

Countrylink services should be subsidised through CSO payments, as Countrylink is a true Community Service.

The Tribunal seeks views on the following issues:

the social equity achievements of current Countrylink services
the most appropriate balance of objectives in Countrylink pricing.

Countrylink should provide services appropriate to the needs of the public by setting timetables that meet the needs of travellers. For example run return country services to the city in the morning returning in the afternoon rather than the other way around to encourage business people and members of the community needing medical treatment to use the service.

Personal safety early in the morning and on return is safer in country areas than at Central Station particularly for the aged and women travelling alone.

Provide Multi lingual employees to assist at booking offices, most travel agents provide this service.

The Tribunal seeks views on the implications of the various roles of government for the pricing of Countrylink. The Tribunal also seeks views on the merit of forming a national rail passenger corporation.

State Governments are in a better position to identify the social needs applicable in their own state, it is hard enough for Metropolitan based staff to understand the needs of rural communities without further removing management from the coal face.

By further splitting the atom and creating yet another corporation to eat up even more revenue in administration costs would be counter productive to the needs of rural communities.

The more different departments or corporations which are created the harder it is to arrive at a consensus or agreement to get anything done, it simply creates another link in the chain to be able to pass the buck from one to another so as no one has to make a decision.

The Tribunal invites general comments on PTV seat guarantees, the coordination of government funding and the price setting process.

There should be an allocation of seating for aged and invalid PTV passengers however if these seats are not required there should be a provision for them to be sold to paying passengers.

Pensioners other than aged and invalid should have to compete with paying customers for seat allocation on a first in first served basis.

The Tribunal invites views on the need for regulations and the most appropriate methods for setting prices and government contributions.

Prices should be set in line with competition, unless they are competitive customers will be lost to the competition.

As rail was intended to provide a community service, it should remain just that with the Government ensuring best management practices are in place. Any business, large, small, private or Government is only as good as its management. There should be no reason why we can't have good management within Government.

There must be sufficient productive employees rather than top heavy management. It is understood in recent times unnecessary staff has been employed at railway stations to handle luggage, a job we understand used to be performed by staff who controlled the trains and train staff.

The Tribunal is interested in views on how standards could be enhanced and the possible effects of proposed enhancements on efficiency.

Special tourist oriented trains could be run on week ends and during holiday periods offering group packages with entertainment on the train, sight seeing and accommodation included in a round trip package.

The Tribunal seeks views on how contestability for long distance passenger rail operations may be improved and the best measures to achieve this.

Special tourist oriented trains could be run on weekends and during holiday periods offering group packages with entertainment on the train, sight seeing and accommodation included in around trip package.

The Tribunal seeks detail of Countrylink strategies to increase cost recovery and the views on other methods to improve cost recovery.

There is a need for more productive employees as opposed to top heavy management.

By employing effective, efficient marketing strategies through promotion of inland long distance travel.

With 36% of passengers using the service provided with free travel and a further 23.5% provided with half fares it would be unrealistic to expect the service to run at a Dollar profit.

Some analysis and breakdown of the Free Pensioner Travel Voucher passengers and the half fare Senior Citizen/Pensioner component may be necessary to identify the definition of 'Pensioner'.

The Tribunal seeks information on the avoidable costs and views on the appropriate level of cost recovery for each service.

Well maintain rolling stock would achieve cost savings in fuel and repairs.

Provide services at a frequency to best service the needs of the community with comfortable carriages where passengers will enjoy comfort and service applicable to their needs.

Reduce top heavy management and develop better work practices with greater productivity at all levels.

Provide an info line with real people to answer calls rather than recorded systems with number selection to obtain information as many aged customers are unable to cope with.

Properly managed Travel Centres which are staffed at times customers seek to use them should be a better alternative to commission travel agents as the dollar commission drives the insensitive to market a product. Agents who can gain a greater commission by selling a higher priced air ticket will be driven to make a sale on the highest commission they can earn.

Reverse the system so as Travel Centres are earning commission on external sales they are able to offer in conjunction with the sale of rail tickets to customers who can use either or both.

The Tribunal seeks views on the quality of service provided by refurbished rollingstock as opposed to new rollingstock.

Refurbished rolling stock that provides passenger comfort is equitable to new rolling stock, which only has a pretty external appearance, is equally acceptable and more cost effective.

The Tribunal is interested in current and further programs to achieve greater efficiency in the area of labour.

Reduce top heavy management and develop better work practices with greater productivity in all areas.

The Tribunal seeks information on the expected size of Countrylink's future overheads, and views on wether the benefits of the service for the community requires a level of overheads in excess of competitive transport benchmarks.

Countrylink must keep overheads within an affordable range to be able to be competitive with other modes of transport.

Any business is only as good as its management.

The Tribunal wishes to see results of financial analysis that compares 'best practice' Travel Centre costs with those of using travel agents, on a 10% commission basis for all products and packages. The Tribunal is also interested in comments on wether Travel Centres benefit rural communities.

How do you define 'Best Practices'?

Reduce top heavy management and develop better work practices with greater productivity at all levels.

Provide an info line with real people to answer calls rather than recorded systems with number selection to obtain information as many aged customers are unable to cope with.

Properly managed Travel Centres which are staffed at times customers seek to use them should be a better alternative to commission travel agents as the dollar commission drives the incentive to market a product. Agents who can gain a greater commission by selling a higher priced air ticket will be driven to make a sale on the highest commission they can earn.

Reverse the system so as Travel Centres are earning commission on external sales they are able to offer in conjunction with the sale of rail tickets to customers who can use either or both.

Travel Centres do have a benefit to rural communities who are more inclined to want to deal with someone local whom they know rather than speaking to a 'plastic voice'.

The Tribunal seeks relevant information on market research into NSW long distance passenger transport market. Also of interest are information on fare elasticities and the implications of these for fare structures.

Current practices of evaluation are based on overseas experiences which are totally inapplicably to meet Australian needs as Australia has vast distances with sparse population thus overseas benchmarks do not apply.

Traditionally, rail opened up inland Australia and it has the ability today to sustain or destroy inland Australia in sparse areas.

Fares must remain accessible and appropriate to the income levels of inland residents as well as promotion of tourist trade to support cost recovery.

The Tribunal seeks information on the patronage and cost recovery of sleeper carriages and competitive revenue of sleeping and standard carriages.

Unable to comment.

The Tribunal is interested in the return on the investment from the 'Fast Train' and 'two tickets for one' campaigns and wether a market for leisure travel by rail can be built in the current climate of airfare discounting.

If the right type of rolling stock is used and services are well promoted and trains cater for paying customers the is no feasible reason why leisure rail travel could not be encouraged and profitable.

The Tribunal is interested in sales of first class seats on each service and comments on the desirability of first class service and the value of differentiating on service when benefits are minor.

XPT trains would be best costed on a fair average fare price for the entire train, same train, same price.

The Tribunal is interested in the redemption (and average redemption value) of PTV tickets. Comments are also sought on the likely effects of converting the four free tickets into a fixed dollar equivalent. The Tribunal is also interested in the feasibility of establishing a PTV usage register to prevent the transfer of vouchers.

Would strongly support a user register.

The Tribunal is interested in the impact of discounted travel strategies and cost recovery.

Unable to comment.

The Tribunal welcomes suggestions on ways of improving the current pricing system.

Unable to comment.

The Tribunal seeks views on the strength of Countrylink's market position and wether Countrylink should be declared a monopoly, in which case its maximum fares should be determined by the Tribunal.

If the SRA, under Corporatisation is genuine about offering private sector competition for services

Countrylink could not be declared a monopoly if it is to truly be a level playing field.

The Tribunal is interested in assessments of wether Countrylink has dominant market position in the provision of long distance passenger services to the concession and pensioner markets and wether benefits are likely to flow from the regulation of Countrylink services.

Unable to comment.

The Tribunal seeks comments on methods of enhancing the competitive service levels of Countrylink.

Strongly support the re introduction of the motorail service that ceased in 1989 to allow greater flexibility.

The Tribunal is interested in wether coaches can provide a satisfactory alternative to rail services. Views are sought on wether a coach with the same frequency is inferior to rail, and wether a more frequent coach service would compensate any loss. The Tribunal is also interested in the nature of any benefits to the wider community that would be lost if a coach service replaced a rail service.

Coaches are not a satisfactory alternative to rail for the aged and disabled who have difficulty boarding coaches for these passengers the frequency of coach services would be irrelevant.

Smaller Rail Motor type trains running at appropriate intervals to meet community needs would provide far wider community benefits than running additional coach services.

1. Accessibility to all members of the community.

2. Social cost benefits due to reduced road traffic, reducing road trauma costs.

3. Cost benefits to government from road maintenance

4. Faster travel times as trains are permitted to travel faster in built up areas and on open track than coaches on open road.

5. Staffing costs should be comparable, surely Rail Motor staff could adopt the same method of operation as coaches, ie Driver collects fares etc.

6. Long term benefits would far outweigh the cost of establishing such services, as it is a known fact that steel on steel is far more economical than rubber on tar.

7. As road networks become more congested road construction costs will escalate.

8. The road network in some rural areas does not provide for all weather services, rail could.

9. Seating capacity is often inadequate on feeder coach services in peak periods with more passengers transferring from train services than coaches have capacity for.

10.Passengers would not have the inconvenience of transferring from train to coach enabling them to complete their journey uninterrupted.

The Tribunal needs to be aware of the implications of fare changes and seeks views on the potential effects of altering the current system.

Fare charges must be applicable to the service provided as well as comparable to competition.

If changes need to be made which can clearly be justified and substantiated to the community there should be few problems with community acceptance provided there is wide community consultation prior to the event.

Community ignorance, lack of government transparency and lack of community consultation are the main reasons for community objections to changes they consider are unnecessary and simply imposed by government.

Clear understanding by all parties prior to change is imperative.

The Tribunal seeks a better understanding of the social benefits of the current system.

Social benefits that are being met, in part, by the current system are clearly spelt out in comments listed through out this submission.