https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

The wobble in the price caps is especially eggregious, because they could
easily have a protected price cap for travellers all of whose trips were on
TfL.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares, and not those that included any actual or potential mainline
rail use, over which he had no control.


The wobble in the price caps is especially eggregious, because they could
easily have a protected price cap for travellers all of whose trips were on
TfL.

True.

On 19/11/2019 09:21, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares, and not those that included any actual or potential mainline
rail use, over which he had no control.


His manifesto had

"Freeze TfL transport fares for four
years ... Londoners won’t
pay a penny more for their travel
in 2020 than they do today."

No qualifications.

And when called on that in 2016 he did not point to any qualification.
He (to my mind quite bizarrely) said it was "for the DfT to make sure
they fulfil a promise that I made to Londoners".

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7070496.html

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Robin wrote:
On 19/11/2019 09:21, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares, and not those that included any actual or potential mainline
rail use, over which he had no control.


His manifesto had

"Freeze TfL transport fares for four
years ... Londoners won’t
pay a penny more for their travel
in 2020 than they do today."

No qualifications.

And he did exactly what he promised: he *did* freeze TfL transport fares.
He didn't, and couldn't, freeze fares set by the DfT. Travelcards and caps
that include elements of both TfL and DfT fares were accordingly not
frozen. But bus-only fares were.


And when called on that in 2016 he did not point to any qualification.
He (to my mind quite bizarrely) said it was "for the DfT to make sure
they fulfil a promise that I made to Londoners".

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...-a7070496.html

In message , at 09:21:29 on Tue, 19 Nov
2019, Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares,

If you can find a quote from him *before* the election, distancing
himself from "no ifs and buts" into "well, actually... on the trains
it's just daily tube fares, not even seasons, let alone suburban rail
services" a lot of people would be interested.

And at the time it would have lost a lot of votes, especially south of
the river.

and not those that included any actual or potential mainline rail use,
over which he had no control.

I think it's part of the opaqueness of fares setting that Londoners
might well think that national rail fares *within the zones*, while
being higher than tube fares for an equivalent trip, could be set by the
Mayor rather than the DfT. It'd have to be in the franchise agreements
of course.

While we are on the subject, who sets the Crossrial (nee TfL Rail)
fares? And is there an expectation in Khan's pledge that those might be
pegged as well (on routes currently operated by TfL Rail).

The wobble in the price caps is especially eggregious, because they could
easily have a protected price cap for travellers all of whose trips were on
TfL.

True.


--
Roland Perry

In message , at 10:21:06 on Tue, 19 Nov
2019, Recliner remarked:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares, and not those that included any actual or potential mainline
rail use, over which he had no control.


His manifesto had

"Freeze TfL transport fares for four
years ... Londoners won’t
pay a penny more for their travel
in 2020 than they do today."

No qualifications.

Also reported as:

"I want to be crystal clear, no ifs, no buts, what you will pay
if I'm elected Mayor in 2016 as a traveller in London is what
you'll pay at the end of my four years in office.

Note, "a traveller", not a "TfL passenger" although he did later start
claiming success based on bus/tram fares alone.

And he did exactly what he promised: he *did* freeze TfL transport fares.
He didn't, and couldn't, freeze fares set by the DfT. Travelcards and caps
that include elements of both TfL and DfT fares were accordingly not
frozen. But bus-only fares were.

What he promised, when questioned on the manifesto, was to freeze the
price of people's journeys to work. If anything he longer the campaign
went on, the more generic it became.

"For millions of workers in London, the cost of travel is a huge
part of their annual salary. With spiralling housing costs, the
mayor has the ability to help ease the financial burden for
commuters and I will deliver for them."

But his cat is out of the bag, his goose cooked (or is that the
electorate's goose)

People need to be a bit clearer in this General Election exactly what it
is they are being promised (bay any party).
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:21:29 on Tue, 19 Nov
2019, Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares,

If you can find a quote from him *before* the election, distancing
himself from "no ifs and buts" into "well, actually... on the trains
it's just daily tube fares, not even seasons, let alone suburban rail
services" a lot of people would be interested.

And at the time it would have lost a lot of votes, especially south of
the river.

Of course, and that's why he didn't do something so idiotic. He's a
lawyer-turned-politician, and used carefully chosen, precisely correct
terms that people were free to interpret as more generous than they were.
But he told no lies, even if some people mistakenly thought the pledge was
wider than it really was. He was under no obligation to correct their
mistake.


and not those that included any actual or potential mainline rail use,
over which he had no control.

I think it's part of the opaqueness of fares setting that Londoners
might well think that national rail fares *within the zones*, while
being higher than tube fares for an equivalent trip, could be set by the
Mayor rather than the DfT. It'd have to be in the franchise agreements
of course.

It would, but isn't.


While we are on the subject, who sets the Crossrial (nee TfL Rail)
fares? And is there an expectation in Khan's pledge that those might be
pegged as well (on routes currently operated by TfL Rail).

I think that TfL only sets them inside the zones. That's why, for example,
Oyster won't be usable on TfL Rail trains next month to Reading.

On 19/11/2019 10:21, Recliner wrote:
Robin wrote:
On 19/11/2019 09:21, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares, and not those that included any actual or potential mainline
rail use, over which he had no control.


His manifesto had

"Freeze TfL transport fares for four
years ... Londoners won’t
pay a penny more for their travel
in 2020 than they do today."

No qualifications.

And he did exactly what he promised: he *did* freeze TfL transport fares.
He didn't, and couldn't, freeze fares set by the DfT. Travelcards and caps
that include elements of both TfL and DfT fares were accordingly not
frozen. But bus-only fares were.

That's a fine politicians answer which fails to address the second part
of his promise ("Londoners won’t pay a penny more for their travel".)
Many do even when /all/ their travel is by TfL services.

He omitted to add something like "if rail operators agree to freeze
their fares and the caps" there or in the main body of the manifesto.

So "always made clear that his promise only applied to TfL fares" seems
to me yet to be evidenced.

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 10:21:06 on Tue, 19 Nov
2019, Recliner remarked:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares, and not those that included any actual or potential mainline
rail use, over which he had no control.


His manifesto had

"Freeze TfL transport fares for four
years ... Londoners won’t
pay a penny more for their travel
in 2020 than they do today."

No qualifications.

Also reported as:

"I want to be crystal clear, no ifs, no buts, what you will pay
if I'm elected Mayor in 2016 as a traveller in London is what
you'll pay at the end of my four years in office.

Note, "a traveller", not a "TfL passenger" although he did later start
claiming success based on bus/tram fares alone.

And he did exactly what he promised: he *did* freeze TfL transport fares.
He didn't, and couldn't, freeze fares set by the DfT. Travelcards and caps
that include elements of both TfL and DfT fares were accordingly not
frozen. But bus-only fares were.

What he promised, when questioned on the manifesto, was to freeze the
price of people's journeys to work. If anything he longer the campaign
went on, the more generic it became.

"For millions of workers in London, the cost of travel is a huge
part of their annual salary. With spiralling housing costs, the
mayor has the ability to help ease the financial burden for
commuters and I will deliver for them."

But his cat is out of the bag, his goose cooked (or is that the
electorate's goose)

There's a different, more valid criticism of his policy: was it wise to
damage TfL's revenue stream in that way? TfL is now in serious financial
trouble, being forced to postpone or cancel essential investment and fleet
replacement projects. Perhaps he should have committed only to limiting TfL
fare rises to the rate of inflation?

His plan depended on a stream of Crossrail fares revenue arriving during
2019; instead, there will be very little during his term. The only
Crossrail revenues that TfL will get before 2021 are the fares collected
from Reading.


People need to be a bit clearer in this General Election exactly what it
is they are being promised (bay any party).

Good luck with that!

On 19/11/2019 11:15, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:21:29 on Tue, 19 Nov
2019, Recliner remarked:
Roland Perry wrote:
https://metro.co.uk/2019/11/18/trans...-tube-dlr-bus-
tram-fares-sadiq-khan-says-11173313/

At a time when political promises are being made daily, it always pays
to ask about the small print.

So when Khan said

"I want to be crystal clear - no ifs, no buts - what you'll pay
if I'm elected Mayor in May 2016 is what you'll pay at the end
of my 4 years in office."

What he delivered was: all fares on buses and trams, plus single pay-as-
you-go Tube and DLR fares; but Daily and weekly price caps, plus weekly,
monthly and annual travelcards, are not included in the freeze.

So lots of people are paying many pennies more.

There are inevitable structural reasons why this might be the case, but that
simply brings the original pledge into more disrepute.

To be fair, I think he always made clear that his promise only applied to
TfL fares,

If you can find a quote from him *before* the election, distancing
himself from "no ifs and buts" into "well, actually... on the trains
it's just daily tube fares, not even seasons, let alone suburban rail
services" a lot of people would be interested.

And at the time it would have lost a lot of votes, especially south of
the river.

Of course, and that's why he didn't do something so idiotic. He's a
lawyer-turned-politician, and used carefully chosen, precisely correct
terms that people were free to interpret as more generous than they were.
But he told no lies, even if some people mistakenly thought the pledge was
wider than it really was. He was under no obligation to correct their
mistake.

Please explain to me how "Londoners won’t pay a penny more for their
travel in 2020 than they do today" were carefully chosen, precisely
correct terms that have the meaning you ascribe to them.



--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid