Fair Fares Survey Analysis

‘Fair Fares’ Survey Analysis 1

D a v i d B r e m n e r , U r b a n P l a n n e r / C o m m u n i t y A c t i v i s t B r i s b a n e , S o u t h E a s t Q u e e n s l a n d

This document overviews the level of support received by respondents to a community survey regarding the formation of a ‘fair fares’ policy by Translink. Although written and designed by David Bremner, a volunteer community activist, the survey was publicly open and responses were invited from Translink, Queensland Rail and Translink bus operators (including Southern Cross Transit, Hornibrook, Kangaroo Bus Lines, Bus Link Qld, Bus Qld, Mt Gravatt Coaches, Brisbane Buslines, Surfside and Veolia). Responses were also sought from community‐based organisations such as ‘Communities Advocating Sustainable Transport’ and ‘Rail Back on Track’. Over 100 responses were received within two weeks demonstrating a strong community desire for the formation of a fair fares policy. This analysis demonstrates a consensus viewpoint of those respondents as to a good basis upon which any fares policy should be based.

May 08

‘Fair Fares’ Survey Analysis


Table of Contents

Overview ........................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction....................................................................................................................... 2

Section 1 ‐ Use of public transport and payment method ................................................... 3 What factors contribute to your choice to use, either Go card, cash or pre‐purchased tickets?...... 5 Section 2 ‐ Fare Policy Principles......................................................................................... 5 Overview of Principles...................................................................................................................................................... 5 Principle 1. Fair fares ........................................................................................................................................................ 5 Open text comments – Fair fares................................................................................................................................... 5

Principle 2. Fares that encourage the use of public transport ........................................................................ 6 Open text comments Fares that encourage public transport usage...........................................................6

Principle 3. Smart fares .................................................................................................................................................... 7 Open text comments Smart fares ...............................................................................................................................7

Principle 4. Financially secure funding for improved services....................................................................... 7 Open text comments Financially secure funding................................................................................................. 8

Section 3 ‐ Fare Policy Aims................................................................................................ 8

Section 4 ‐ Actions for Implementation .............................................................................. 8

Section 5 ‐ Additional Open Text Question Responses........................................................ 9 How can Translink promote users to switch to Go card over the next 2‐3 years................................... 9 Additional comments about Translink and the quality of services in the region................................... 9 Section 6 ‐ Petition........................................................................................................... 10

Suggested Fair Fares Policy Diagram................................................................................. 12

Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 13

Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 13

Overview This survey was designed and written by David Bremner, an urban planner and community activist. The survey was conducted via the internet using an online survey tool. The aim of the survey was firstly to educate respondents about the potential benefits of the Go card and secondly to produce a consensus viewpoint that could be submitted to Translink and the Government on the need for a formal fair fares policy.

The need for the survey has resulted from the rushed implementation of the Translink Go card and the inadequacy of the Go card fare structure. Many users have faced significant issues with the equipment (sensor errors, programming errors, clock time setting errors) which have resulted in them being charged a higher than normal fare. Additionally many users have faced a ‘hidden’ fare increase simply by switching to the Go card due to the lack of daily, weekly or monthly ticket products. Long distance passengers (who travel more than 10 zones) have also had a previous discount taken away.

Each of these facts highlights the need for a formal and fair, fares policy. As Translink is currently continuing to advertise and push forward with the Go card implementation, it is

extremely important that all of these actions being undertaken by Translink occur within an established policy framework. Decisions must be made in a consistent and fair manner. The ongoing success of the Go card, and the planning positives to be delivered will only happen with the full support of the community and public transport users.

Introduction The survey was viewed 158 times, started 128 times and completed by 101 respondents.

The survey was conducted on the internet and anyone could respond. The link was emailed to personal associates, Translink, QR, several bus operators and community organisations including Rail Back on Track and Communities Advocating Sustainable Transport.

There was a slight bias in the gender of respondents with 61% being male and 39% female.

The age of respondents is indicated in the graph below:


Section 1 ‐ Use of public transport and payment method When asked about the frequency of payment types 53% respondents either ‘always’ or ‘frequently’ paid for services by cash. Only 14% of respondents never pay by cash. In response to the same question 48% ‘always’ or ‘frequently’ pay by ‘pre‐purchased ticket (10 trip, weekly, monthly or other)’ however 48% said they ‘never’ pay ‘by Go card’.

Therefore a large proportion of the survey respondents could become prime Go card customers. Many of these people currently do not own or frequently use that method of payment. Although not quantifiably supported, a theme of dissatisfaction with Go card as it is currently priced and implemented is supported in the open text responses throughout the survey. This is contrasted with a generally positive outlook on the potentials of the Go card.

Frequency of method of travel:

How frequently do you use each of the following methods to pay for public transport services in South East Queensland?

A. By cash (when boarding or on the platform)

B. By Go card

C. By pre‐purchased tickets (eg 10 trip, weekly, monthly)


What factors contribute to your choice to use, either Go card, cash or pre‐purchased tickets?

• Reliability

Respondents indicated that they were holding off using Go card while the system bugs were being resolved, and those who were currently using the system were dissatisfied with the number of errors and penalty fees

• Finances

Respondents indicated a desire to have a fixed monthly outlay or daily or weekly limits.

• Confusion

Some respondents found the system confusing to use, difficult to tag on and off and difficult to use the ticket vending machines

Section 2 ‐ Fare Policy Principles

Overview of Principles The survey proposed that Translink should create a ‘fair fares’ policy that was based upon the following four principles:

1. Fair fares 2. Fares that encourage the use of public transport 3. Smart fares 4. Financially secure funding for improved services.

Each of these principles listed a number of components all of which had a high level of support by the survey respondents. In this section of the survey, respondents were asked to indicate their level of support from ‘Strongly Agree’ through to ‘Strongly Disagree’ on a five point Likert scale.

The table below lists the statement made, the averaged value between 1 to 5 it scored across the participants (where 1 represents ‘Strongly Agree’) and the combined percentage of respondents who chose either ‘Strongly Agree’ or ‘Agree’.

Principle 1. Fair fares

Statement Score ‘Strongly Agree’ or ‘Agree’

Concessions for youth, students, pensioners and low income earners 1.413 95.19% Fares offer value-for-money and are affordable to the community 1.456 87.38% Stable fares with price increases maintained at or below CPO 1.544 89.32% Passengers are promoted to use smart card with better deals and not punished for using paper tickets

1.602 87.38%

Open text comments – Fair fares

• Fare increases above CPI may be supported

Most respondents indicated a high level of support for the statement that fare increases should be kept as low as possible and no greater than the consumer price index, however some respondents acknowledged the immense task at hand and thought that increases above CPI may be warranted as long as these were clearly tied to service improvements. Such a rise would also need to be demonstrated within the context of an increasing government subsidy.

• Fares should encourage the use of public transport over the private motor vehicle

Respondents indicated a strong desire that the historic underfunding of public transport, and continuing overfunding of public roads should be addressed. Many respondents indicated that the benefits of public transport are often ignored along with the hidden costs of road usage (carbon emissions, death toll, congestion etc).

• Low income people should receive concession fares

Students, youth, pensioners and low income earners should all receive concession fares while children should receive free fares.

• Short journeys are currently too highly priced

Most journeys by car are very short, yet short journeys by public transport are very expensive a possible solution to this could involve inner zones of free travel in the centres of Brisbane, Gold Coast, Redcliffe etc based upon the Perth free travel zone.

• Go card needs to be a smart card

Go card should charge all equivalent paper ticket discounts such as daily, weekly and monthly

• Financial incentives are important in gaining a significant and early uptake of Go card.

Service efficiencies on buses should pay for discounts on tickets. Users, Translink and operators all benefit from customers using Go card, and thus significant discounts should be used to promote users to switch to Go card.

Principle 2. Fares that encourage the use of public transport


A payment system that is easy to use and understand 1.308 99.04% Discounts for higher use and longer journeys 1.398 94.17% Price guarantee – travelling by smart card will always be the cheapest alternative

1.461 87.25%

New and improved frequent user scheme for pre-paid smart cards 1.578 81.37% Cheaper off-peak travel 1.712 83.65% New monthly post-paid ‘caps’ and other fare packages 1.728 78.64% Special offers 1.971 73.79%

Open text comments ‐ Fares that encourage public transport usage

• Go card must be cheaper than paper equivalents to promote its uptake and usage

• Go card requires a daily cap

• Go card should guarantee to be the cheapest method of payment for public transport services


It needs to be easy for the community to use, this doesn’t mean it can’t offer different types of product (such as daily, weekly, monthly etc)

• Infrequent but consistent users should receive a discount

Many of the current users of 10 Trip Saver tickets such as students, working mothers, part time workers who travel four to eight times a week deserve a discount yet receive non under the current frequent user scheme.

• System errors need to be resolved

Go card should offer a viable alternative prior to the removal of 10 Trip Saver tickets from BT buses

Principle 3. Smart fares


Service improvements planned with better information about passenger demand

1.440 95.00%

An integrated system of payment across trains, buses, ferries and in future, taxis

1.534 90.29%

A growing funding base to meet growing demands 1.578 87.25% Smart fares promote greater community use of public transport 1.598 83.33% A system that manages demand by giving discounts for off-peak travel and re-allocates resources in real-time

1.693 83.17%

Open text comments ‐ Smart fares

• Taxis could be included in the future

The convenience of Go card would only increase by allowing for the metered balance of taxis in South East Queensland to be paid for by prepaid credit stored on the Translink Go card.

• Government subsidy should continue to be the major source of revenue, not fares

The goal of public transport fares should not be to pay outright for the operation of services as these should be predominantly funded through government subsidy as all users of the transport system benefit from them (ie those who use cars and drive trucks benefit from those who catch the bus and as such should contribute to the financial operation of public transport services)

Principle 4. Financially secure funding for improved services


Secure funding for an improving system 1.475 93.07% Ease of administration and reduced cash handling costs 1.696 85.29% A stronger negotiation position with service providers 1.743 81.19% Inter and intra-generationally responsible funding 1.792 77.23% Reduced ticket fraud and fare evasion 1.892 74.51%

Open text comments ‐ Financially secure funding

• Secure funding is important to maintain services and implement service improvements

• Fare evasion needs to be dealt with sensitively and not punitively

Fare evasion needs to be controlled however the method of which this occurs needs to be dealt with sensitively. Large amounts of money should not be spent enforcing and policing a low level of fare evasion as those funds could be better spent on service improvements. Passengers do not like to be made to feel like criminals and most recognise their responsibility to have a valid ticket.

Section 3 ‐ Fare Policy Aims Respondents to the survey were asked to rank in order of importance the following aims of any public transport fares policy. The aims are listed in the order ranked by respondents. The survey randomised the list for each different respondent, so what was at the top of the page for one respondent could have been at the bottom of the page for the next respondent. Thus there is no bias from respondents simply numbering the boxes in order displayed on the page.

Rank Public transport fare policy aim Averaged rank from 1 to 8

1st Provide affordable and financially equitable access to public transport services

3.16

2nd Promote public transport as a viable alternative to private motor vehicle travel

3.51

3rd Improve service quality, efficiency and reliability (particularly of buses) via cashless boarding

3.70

4th Deliver integrated ticketing across all modes of public transport including trains, buses, ferries as well as metered taxis

4.56

5th Achieve radical gains in the mode-share usage of public transport 4.88 6th Secure a stable and growing revenue base to fund an improving public

transport network 5.07

7th Achieve user input in policy formation and service improvements (eg community consultation regarding 'fair fares')

5.35

8th Improve the quality of customer service via internet, phone and other methods to improve community perceptions of public transport

5.66

Section 4 ‐ Actions for Implementation The following table includes the actions that were suggested for implementation of the fares policy. Each of these actions was listed by the survey and have come from either existing policy documents or obvious problems with the current implementation and fare structure. The survey sought to determine which had the most support. As such they have been ranked from most highly supported to least. These options were also randomized and thus this order accurately reflects the consensus view point of the survey respondents.

Rank Actions that should be considered for implementation by Translink Averaged level of support from 1 to 5

1st Reduce the cost of travel for smart card users with further discounts for 1.480


high-use and off-peak passengers 2nd Install smart card top-up and balance machines at all busway stations and

major interchanges 1.551

3rd Develop and offer for sale a larger range of fare packages on smart card 1.571 4th Explore options for free fares where the service arrives significantly late 1.612 5th Integrate Airtrain payment with Go card (either at existing cost or

preferably renegotiate contracts to allow integration with the zonal system – perhaps at zone 17 or 18)

1.649

6th Implement a daily travel cap on smart card based on the zones and journeys travelled that day

1.729

7th Maintain equitably priced paper tickets until smart card is broadly accepted by the community, functioning at the required level and offering a suite of products that match current and future user demands)

1.732

8th Maintain paper ticket price increases close to or below CPI 1.765 9th Implement a refund and contact process via the web portal and ensure all

valid refunds are processed within 15 business days 1.806

10th Improve usability of the 'value adding and ticket machines' especially for use by bus passengers

1.823

11th Allow the sale of weekly paper tickets via the 'value adding and ticket machines'

2.062

12th Expand Go card payment across all regional Qconnect public transport networks

2.031

13th Rapidly develop and implement a post-paid monthly 'cap' option (this could be based on mobile phone caps where a user selects their cap value and receives a bigger discount the bigger the value, as such this would not be zone dependant)

2.156

14th Introduce smart card (Go) payment for metered taxis in the Translink coverage area

2.505

Section 5 ‐ Additional Open Text Question Responses

How can Translink promote users to switch to Go card over the next 2‐3 years

• Daily Caps

• Weekly, Monthly travel cards or caps

• Discounts for regular but intermittent users

• Go card needs to be attractive in terms of cost, not just convenience to users to be widely accepted

Additional comments about Translink and the quality of services in the region

• Translink must progress the existing planned busway network as quickly as possible. If this means funding is diverted from road construction then that should occur.

• Translink needs to fund additional and new rolling stock for the railways and progress extensions to the rail network

• Translink must purchase and operate more buses

• Translink needs to communicate with the community more clearly and needs to respond quickly and accurately to complaints and comments

• Translink needs to improve late night services so that users do not need a car

• The issues of reliability, infrequency and overcrowding need to be dealt with promptly

• Community desire to see light rail in the inner city

• Government needs to recognise public transport as an investment rather than cost and needs to prioritise funding for public transport over roads

• Translink needs to engage the community when forming policy that affects them

Section 6 ‐ Petition Of the 101 respondents who completed the survey, 56 wished to have their name and postcode recorded as having contributed towards the consensus viewpoint established by the survey. The list is as below:

1. David Bremner, West End 4101 2. Tim Homel, Yeronga 4104 3. Sam Clifford, Wooloowin 4030 4. Robert Dow 4076 5. Jeffrey Addison, Palmwoods 4555 6. Murray Henman, Corinda 4075 7. Jeff Slattery, Eatons Hill 4037 8. Andrew Albiston, Moorooka. 4105 9. Stephanie Mills, Annerley 4103 10. John Nightingale 11. Louise Bremner Bardon 4065 12. Peter Bremner, Bardon 4065 13. Diana Wood, Indooroopilly, 4068 14. Paula King, Bardon 4065 15. Heather Horne, 4171 16. Daniel Favier, Carina Heights, 4152 17. Glenn Crompton, Nundah, 4012 18. Andrew McLean, Oxley, 4075 19. Lindna McInnes 4060 20. Scott Graby, Fortitude Valley 4006 21. Josh Campbell, 4113 22. John McBratney, Carindale 23. Kate Milne, Keperra, 4054 24. Chris Campbell, Nambour 4560 25. Rolf Kuelsen, Cannon Hill 4170 26. Anthony Brumby, Pacific Pines 4215 27. L van Heuzen, Cashmere, 4500 28. Monterey Keys 4212 29. Mike Hall, Ferny Grove, 4055 30. Kate Matthews. Clayfield 4011 31. Russell, Coopers Plains 4108 32. anonymous, Hendra 4011 33. Lisa Cory, Greenslopes 4121 34. Tristan Peach, Spring Hill, 4000


35. Daniel Young, Saint Lucia 4067 36. E A Smith, West End 4101 37. Bradley Smith, Greenslopes 4120 38. Carol Rogers, Camp Hill 4152 39. Peter Marquis‐Kyle, Highgate Hill 4101 40. Glenn Wright, Kelvin Grove 41. Clinton Roy, Highgate Hill 4010 42. Paul Murdoch, Kangaroo Point, 4169 43. Colin Sweett, Taringa 4068 44. Bruce Purdon, Herston, 4006 45. Rowena Shakes, Highgate Hill 4101 46. anonymous 4102 47. Bruce Dan, Hawthorne 4171 48. Cynthia Lie, Toowong 4066 49. anonymous 4013 50. Darren Godwell, South Brisbane 4101 51. Rob wilson, west End, 4101 52. Anna Keenan, Aspley 4034 53. Tony Cullum‐Brown 54. Trent Everitt, West End 4101 55. Greg Neill, Coorparoo, 4151 56. Peter Mitterocker, Redland Bay 4165

Suggested Fair Fares Policy Diagram


Recommendations a) It is recommended that Translink develop a fair fares strategy with regard to community input and this submission. The fare strategy must adequately address pricing issues, equity, the implementation of Go card and deliver a sustainable fare base (under the assumption that Government subsidy should provide the majority of operational funds for a public system that benefits the entire community and not just users).

b) In regards to Go card, it is recommended to progress the following actions:

• Immediate implementation of daily, weekly and monthly ticket types on Go • Resolution of technical bugs • Significant improvements need to be made to the ticket vending machines programming

to allow their installation on all busway stations and at major bus interchanges and ease of use by bus passengers

Conclusion The results of this survey clearly indicate a high level of support within the community for the need to resolve all outstanding issues (including an inequitable fare structure) with the Go card implementation and to formalise via community consultation, a formal Translink Fair Fares Policy. It is noted that Translink’s Strategic Direction mentions the need for a fares strategy and the current Transport Operations Bill will require the formation of a fares strategy once this legislation becomes law and this supported. However, it is proposed that any fares strategy must consistently respond to issues of social equity not in some vague sense, but in the everyday application of policy and the price levels at which fares are set. It is clear to the community that the recent implementation of Go has seriously failed this criterion. The stealth fare increases of 25% to 30% clearly do not constitute a fair implementation of a fare system that should bring about significant savings.

Documents

Fair Fares Survey Analysis