The government must put the brakes on ticket office closures
In July, proposals were made by Rail Operators with the support of the Department of Transport to close nearly a thousand station ticket offices across the rail network in England. Ticket offices were no longer needed, it was claimed, because of the increasing trend of buying tickets online or from station machines. Furthermore, it was alleged that the move would allow staff to move onto the platforms to assist passengers who needed it rather than being confined to ticket offices. A brief consultation period on the proposals was announced to take place from 5th – 26th July, although after widespread complaints that the time allowed for detailed responses was far too short this period was extended until September 1st.
In both the House of Commons and the House of Lords, the proposals have been strongly criticised across political and party divides. There have been heated debates and questions raised in Committees and on the floor in both Parliamentary chambers. MPs have raised objections on behalf of their constituents and Peers have spoken about the impacts of the proposals on their local stations and their local communities.
Outside parliament, the opposition to the proposals has been overwhelming, and the consultation has elicited nearly three-quarters of a million responses, a record, apparently, for such a consultation. Importantly, the proposals have attracted opposition from a number of well-known organisations concerned with disability issues, such as the Royal National Institute for the Blind, the Royal National Institute for the Deaf, and Disability Rights UK. The Equality and Human Rights Commission called for an equality impact assessment to be carried out and has publicly expressed its keen disappointment that this has not yet been delivered or published. All in all, over 90 organisations, many of them nationwide bodies, have weighed in with their objections.
The Labour Party’s official position is against the proposals, and the major trade unions are also opposing them, fearing not only a deterioration in service to the public but also concerned as to whether the proposals are a cover for cutting employment costs and laying staff off.
Then, just as important has been the strong reaction from the travelling public, something I have witnessed for myself, seeing people queuing up at my local station, Alnmouth, in Northumberland, all wanting to sign a petition in protest.
Throughout this hue and cry, Government Ministers in both houses have maintained that the proposals are about improving service to passengers and repeating that staff will be released from being restricted in ticket offices in order to be available on platforms to provide assistance and advice. However, at my local station the staff already provide excellent service to passengers both in the ticket office and on the platform, so closing the ticket office has to mean a reduction in overall service not an improvement! Yet, despite making this point in questions and letters, Ministers have failed to respond directly to it.
So far, the Government has yet to acknowledge the compelling evidence presented by numerous organisations, highlighting that the proposed measures are poised to disproportionately affect elderly individuals and those with disabilities. SCOPE, for example, stated that “these plans will make rail travel impossible or much harder for many disabled people'' and pointed out just how many passengers this would impact given the percentage of the population who have some degree of disability.
A further question which Ministers have shown great reluctance to address is, if the result of the consultation shows a large majority against a ticket office closure, will the ticket office remain open, and will the majority view of passengers prevail?
All along, there have been suspicions that the consultation is not genuine as the outcome has been determined in advance. Ministers say that the Secretary of State will have the final power to decide whether a particular station stays open or not, but have not said that the views expressed in the consultation will be the deciding factor. There are also worries that the Government is adopting a “one size fits all” approach, even though with such a variety of stations, large and small, urban and rural, there are clearly numerous local situations to be taken into account.
Given the enormous response to the consultation, this issue, important in itself, is also a test case about government consultations in general. If the views of the consultees are ignored what is the point of such consultations and what is their role in our democracy? This is a wider and longer-term issue which will no doubt surface again in the future, but meanwhile, I for one, will hope that the government bows to the clear majority view in this instance and decides to abandon these ill-thought out and deeply unpopular proposals.
Baroness Joyce Quin is a member of the House of Lords known for her long-standing service in the Labour Party and her roles as Minister for Europe and Minister of State for Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food.
