Quiz 1: Rail Transport Case Study, 2013 This quiz requires knowledge of the pre-release case study, the issues that lie behind it, and of the Unit 4b specification QUESTIONS WITH ANSWERS

Evidence A – UK has ‘most expensive train fares in Europe’ 1. While Britain’s “turn up and go” fares are more expensive than in Europe, which British fares are cheaper? Advance Purchase tickets 2. If it were the case that British fares were higher, is this necessarily an indication that British trains are run inefficiently? No. Costs in Britain may well be higher, especially in our congested Southeast. And British government subsidies might be lower.

Evidence A 2 of 4 3. The number of passengers per train journey kilometre is said to be 294 in France, compared to 107 in Britain. What is the true French figure? see page 256 of Realising the Potential of GB Rail (May 2011) at Does the fact that the average French train is carrying almost twice as many passengers as the average British train mean that the French operation is more efficient? No: it means that French rail travel is dominated by infrequent long-distance journeys on large trains, while British rail travel is dominated by smaller, more frequent commuter trains.

Evidence A 3 of 4 5. “French SNCF is highly profitable”. Are British train operators also profitable? Yes, British train operators generally make a profit. The actual track, run by Network Rail, relies on a government subsidy. But so does the French track, run by Réseau Ferré de France (RFF). 6. Why might Passenger Focus want to suggest that British rail travellers are getting a poor deal? Because its job is to “protect the interests of Britain’s rail and bus passengers”.

Evidence A 4 of 4 7. Is it unreasonable for passengers to pay “above-inflation fare increases year-on-year during a recession” ? It depends what the fare increases are. In this case, the government has set a limit of RPI plus 1%, so the real increase is very small. Indeed, this is less than general services inflation, which is normally significantly above all inflation.

Evidence B High Speed Rail 8. What would be the impact of HS2 on journey times between London and Birmingham, and London and Manchester? London to Birmingham would be 35 minutes faster at 50 minutes; London to Manchester would be 60 minutes faster at 70 minutes. 9. Where and what is HS1? HS1 is the high-speed line linking London to the Channel Tunnel and onto the French and Belgian high-speed networks. HS2, if built, will link up with HS1.

Evidence B 2 of How do the potential benefits and costs of HS2 compare? On the figures from Evidence B, costs are £32 billion and benefits are £71 billion, giving a benefit-to-cost ratio of 2.2. By contrast, the DfT has, since April 2012, only claimed a ratio of 1.5. The suggestion has been made that the true figure may be nearer 0.9. See transport/ /Benefits-of-HS2-were-exaggerated-secret-report-reveals.html transport/ /Benefits-of-HS2-were-exaggerated-secret-report-reveals.html 11. What would be the implication of a benefit-to-cost ratio of less than one? HS2 would cost more to build than it delivered in benefits, both private and external.

Evidence B 3 of Who supports HS2 and why? Birmingham City Council and other city councils near the few stations. Their areas will gain economically. Also the subsidiary of the DfT called HS2 Ltd., whose job it is to promote the project. Also supporters of public transport, and those generally in favour of government intervention to solve problems. 13. Who opposes HS2 and why? Those living on the route of HS2 but not near a station – particularly in the Chilterns in the crowded Southeast. Those sceptical of grand projets, and those sceptical of the economic case for HS2. Environmentalists are evenly split on HS2.

Evidence B 4 of What current alternatives might there be to HS2? 1. Upgrading the existing line. Thameslink, for example, is a more modest £6 billion project to upgrade the stations and rolling stock on London’s North-South rail arteries. 2. Road pricing. This would reduce road congestion, and its introduction would also increase demand for rail travel, making schemes such as HS2 more financially viable in the future with less need for taxpayers to finance it.