Cycle carriage on trains - petition

[AM]

People may be interested in supporting the following no 10 petition:

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/bikes-on-trains/

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to require the train operators to provide an integrated system for the carriage of bicycles and ensure there is adequate capacity available.

Currently there is no minimum requirement for train operators to carry bicycles and each operator has a different set of rules and booking procedures. This makes the system extremely complex to use, especially where multiple operators are used. Its not possible to book bicycle reservations online and hence one does not know whether there will be room for a bike on a train when a ticket is purchased (note, advanced tickets cannot subsequently be altered to a train with available bicycle carriage space). Some operators have extremely poor provision. The Crosscountry service has reduced the capacity of its trains from 4 bicycles per train to 2 bicycles (so they can provide secure accomodation for their retail trolly). Hence, a maximum of 2 people can travel together with bicycles when you using the crosscountry service (a major element of the national network). Clearly, a national policy is required with a fully integrated booking system (that is available online through the standard ticket retailers) and incentives/requirements for operators to improve capacity.
Regards



Alasdair

[Dee Jay]

I have already signed this some time back, but we should keep 'bumping' it to make sure that lots of folks get to see it.

[2Tubs]

I no longer bother with these.

I once received a reply from Hilary Benn’s office about a petition I signed asking for a reduction in building new roads and using the money to invest in the public transport infrastructure so that it appeared match with the claims of New Labour in reducing car journeys. It wasn’t actually in response to the petition but was loosely based on a “green transport” theme so they felt it answered my concerns.

Far from it.

So I emailed Hilary Benn’s office and got a reply that said something along the lines of: -

We apologise that you didn’t feel it answered your query. We can’t dedicate the time we would like to these petitions, which is a shame, because some of them might make a good point. Never mind.

If I can find the old email I’ll post it here.

But the impression I got was that the cabinet couldn’t give a toss about this. It was a sham for making us feel we were shaping policy when in fact they were ignoring the will of the people. The e-Petitions site is there to makes us believe we live in a democracy. And for a while, I fell for it.

In fact, I might start a petition asking for the e-Petition site to be brought down, and for MP’s to actually engage with the people again.

Gazza

[david143]

I no longer bother with these.

I once received a reply from Hilary Benn’s office about a petition I signed asking for a reduction in building new roads and using the money to invest in the public transport infrastructure so that it appeared match with the claims of New Labour in reducing car journeys. It wasn’t actually in response to the petition but was loosely based on a “green transport” theme so they felt it answered my concerns.

Far from it.

So I emailed Hilary Benn’s office and got a reply that said something along the lines of: -

We apologise that you didn’t feel it answered your query. We can’t dedicate the time we would like to these petitions, which is a shame, because some of them might make a good point. Never mind.

If I can find the old email I’ll post it here.

But the impression I got was that the cabinet couldn’t give a toss about this. It was a sham for making us feel we were shaping policy when in fact they were ignoring the will of the people. The e-Petitions site is there to makes us believe we live in a democracy. And for a while, I fell for it.

In fact, I might start a petition asking for the e-Petition site to be brought down, and for MP’s to actually engage with the people again.

Gazza

With enough numbers, a petition can get them to think twice sometimes. They may ignore you/me/us, but Governments have always done that.

If it serves the Government, can get them good PR, costs them nothing, or could help ensure they won the next election, they would be all over it.

[CJ]

Yeah I know, it's a stonewall, erected for us to bash our heads against, but what else can you do?

[pigman]

the problem I guess that with electronic communication its so easy to start a petition on anything. And dozens of armchair surfers will contribute either in a jocular manner, or without understanding the real issues. With a proper petition someone has to do some legwork convincing us to sign things and the signers have to be there and will have been convinced. So the thousands of petitions that the government gets is treated the same way that my junk mail is - I havent got the time to sift through and determine whats good or bad, so I bin em all. Some petiitions (this one) might be worthy. A petition to put vole watching on the school curriculm might not be. There needs to be a system in place that ensures that what is received in Commons as a serious issue is made distinct from the claptrap. Any ideas men out there?

[Firebird]

Thoroughly agree with this petition.

When trains used to have guards' vans and I was travelling between my home in North Wales and my family in Cheshire, I used to be able to take my little scooter, or bike, on the train.

They don't have guards vans now and hardly any space for luggage, never mind transporting bicycles, which is daft.

I am a recent convert to cycling (last two years) and get a lot of pleasure out of it, but it would be nice to go further afield and tour from another location.

[burnsie]

Agree with many comments here..but have signed it...it took 30 secs, and must be worth a go!!

[jan19]

I posted some time back when there were 30 -odd signatures, so while it may do no good in the long run, the more signatures, the better.

Today I had to go on business to Bath and caught a train from London Paddington to Bath Spa. Now, these are fast trains with only a few stops, but at every station the bike racks were full to bursting. In fact at Swindon, bikes appeared to have been just left on the platform and not chained because the racks were full. I've never noticed this before, but it seems travelling by bike is more popular then ever.

I apologise for not sussing out the bike provision on the train - I had a reserved seat and didn't venture from it...so no idea how First Great Western perform.

Jan

[patricktaylor]

The "winner" has been selected, it seems. The Prime Minister's Office response to the petition.

[CREPELLO]

Thanks for that info Patrick. I thought I'd paste it here for everyone to see

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to require the train operators to provide an integrated system for the carriage of bicycles and ensure there is adequate capacity available.”

Details of Petition:

“Currently there is no minimum requirement for train operators to carry bicycles and each operator has a different set of rules and booking procedures. This makes the system extremely complex to use, especially where multiple operators are used. Its not possible to book bicycle reservations online and hence one does not know whether there will be room for a bike on a train when a ticket is purchased (note, advanced tickets cannot subsequently be altered to a train with available bicycle carriage space). Some operators have extremely poor provision. The Crosscountry service has reduced the capacity of its trains from 4 bicycles per train to 2 bicycles (so they can provide secure accomodation for their retail trolly). Hence, a maximum of 2 people can travel together with bicycles when you using the crosscountry service (a major element of the national network). Clearly, a national policy is required with a fully integrated booking system (that is available online through the standard ticket retailers) and incentives/requirements for operators to improve capacity.”


And Here's the government's response:

"The Government recognises the importance of improving the synergy between cycle and rail as, used in combination, they provide one of the most environmentally friendly options for travel. The Department for Transport 2007 Rail White Paper, “Delivering a Sustainable Railway”, seeks to address this through development of a modern and sustainable railway system that is accessible and easy for passengers to use. The passenger strategy includes proposals for improving cycling provision to, from and at stations, and to enhance cycle storage facilities at stations. As a result, an industry led working group, the Cycle Rail Integration Task Force, has been meeting since the end of 2007 to promote best practice and encourage train operating companies to improve cycle facilities and services.

In April 2009, the Cycle Rail Integration Task Force launched a competitive fund seeking train operating companies to work with them on a bike and rail programme. This challenges train operators to improve cycle/rail integration across their franchise and to work with partners to improve access, reservation systems and station facilities. The winners, who will be selected in July, will be expected to deliver real improvements over the next 2 years setting the standard for all train operators."

Well, I'm not impressed at all. It looks like a red herring to me. It is down to the Dft (DafT) to specify the provision for carriage of bikes on trains on all franchises IMO, but the response only refers to the Cycle Rail Integration Taskforce, which I think will be largly concerned with station provision.

The train operators will avoid promoting cycles on trains as much as possible - in their eyes it's too much space to provide for minimum return in fares. To a point, I can understand this position. The train operatores by and large don't get to choose the rolling stock they use. Where the franchise operates longer trains and older trains (where parcel space provision could easily accomodate a few cycles) I imagine the attitude of some operators is more accomodating, because they have the capacity. Other operators are stuck with 2/3/4 coach trains for very busy lines, with regular overcrowding. The chance of substantial new provision of rolling stock is tenuous. DafT has promised new additional coaches, but the numbers will only make a dent in the overcrowding problem.

Until we have a nationalized railway, we will only see piecemeal progress even with the CRIT, because private innovation on the railways is almost non-existent, due to DafT's over-reaching influence - the problem is the civil servants in DafT are not qualified to run a railway, so why are they specifying how it should be run? And if they did understand how, they would appreciate that strategic cycle integration with trains was their business and not just that of train operators in isolation or even CRIT.

[patricktaylor]

... Government recognises the importance of ... White Paper ... seeks to address ... strategy includes proposals for ... industry led working group ... promote best practice ... deliver real improvements ...

I've read those words a thousand times. It's Government-speak for sod off.

[CREPELLO]

You're absolutely right there; it's been used sooo many times in countless interviews and policy docs. When will politicians realise that people see through that kind of language, or do they think that the more they confuse and filibuster through their media-speak, that they can hoodwink their way into staying in power. It is interesting to note that 'the opposition' has it's own coded language too - I remember that 'new' Labour used very similar language to Cameron's Conservative narrative.

[Manx Cat]

I always fail to understand why they also seem to keep harping on at improving cycle storage facilities at train stations. I understand this from a commuter basis so long as the train stops at your office, but surely a large number of the cycling population want to travel across the UK, or to get to stations where they can continue with their journey at the other end.


As said before, the UK government just are not interested in listening to the voting public.


Mary

[Phil_Lee]

Maybe someone should post a petition asking the PM to answer the petitions that are posted rather than the ones the government would like to have been posted.
And failing that, to make way for someone who will.