The age of the train-I don't think so

I heard a comment on the radio from the government this morning saying that prices for rail customers have to be balanced against the cost to the taxpayer.

What does that mean? Surely they are one in the same person or is the government trying to say that the railways are only for the lower classes.

Rail prices are too high.Often I will make a decision to travel by car because that is the cheapest option.

As for the argument that tickets can be a lot more cheaper purchased in advance,well how many people can pre plan their journey up to 9 weeks in advance.

It is correct that subsidy should go to capacity but let us remember.The rail network by private companies and as such it is their job to match demand capacity and price.

Northern Trains which I use a lot is a case in point.They are using rolling stock that is 30 years old.They were given a 9 year contract to run trains in this region.(One of the train companies arguments was that the franchise periods were too short for planning strategy)

There has been no noticeable investment in the network,save new electronic signs at the stations and employing securicor agents to check tickets constantly.

The government has not got the rail strategy correct.Increased prices will deter additional customers as will lack of investment