Rail fare hike looms with potential 5.5% increase sparking outrage among passengers
The July Retail Prices Index (RPI) figure, which is frequently used to calculate the annual rise in rail travel costs, will be revealed on Wednesday, August 20, and that could mean higher fares for passengers in England. Meanwhile, Transport for Wales are offering £1 rail fares for a short period of time, you can read more here.
Transport organisations have been left furious by the potential rise in next year's railway fares, which they have condemned as "outrageous".
Just last year the Department for Transport confirmed costs would rise by 4.6%, but it looks like they may rise again.
RPI is an inflation measure - released monthly - which is utilised to gauge the change in the price of retail goods and services. For money-saving tips, sign up to our Money newsletter here.
It wasn't employed in 2022 or 2023, but it was in 2024, when the Department for Transport confirmed costs would rise by 4.6% - one percentage point above last July's RPI figure. These alterations to fares took effect on March 2 this year.
The Government has yet to announce how it will calculate next year's railway fare increase, although banking firm Investec has predicted this year's July RPI figure at 4.5%, meaning costs could leap by 5.5% in March 2026.
Bruce Williamson, of campaign group Railfuture, raged there was "no justification" for the massive increase. He said: "What would be the justification for jacking up fares above inflation? There isn't any."
He continued: "It's ripping off the customer, driving people off the trains and on to our congested road network, which is in no one's interest.
"One would hope that there would be some efficiency savings and economies of scale that you get from having a more integrated railway.
"But I strongly suspect that if there are any savings to be had, they'd be swallowed up by the Treasury and not passed back to passengers, which I think is wrong."
Around 45% of fares across Britain's railway network are regulated by either Westminster or the Scottish and Welsh governments. This encompasses season tickets for most commuter routes, certain off-peak return fares and flexible tickets for journeys around major urban areas.
Railway operators determine increases for unregulated fares, though these are expected to closely mirror changes in regulated ticket costs.
Ben Plowden, chief executive of Campaign for Better Transport, argued that costly fares were "putting people off" using trains. He continued: "Rising fares are not just burdening passengers, they are putting people off rail travel.
"Our survey found that 71% of people would be more likely to take the train if fares were cheaper. Public support for nationalisation plummets if fares continue to rise.
"As the Government progresses plans for Great British Railways, it must take the opportunity to reform fares and make rail travel more affordable."
An open return ticket from Cardiff Central to Edinburgh will set you back a whopping £239.50 (with a booking fee) if you buy the ticket in advance on Trainline. However, you can find return flights from Cardiff airport to Edinburgh airport with Ryan Air for over half of the price at £108 on Skyscanner.
The Department for Transport has confirmed that "no decision" has been made regarding fares for the upcoming year.
A spokesperson stated: "The Transport Secretary has made clear her number one priority is getting the railways back to a place where people can rely on them.
"No decisions have been made on next year's rail fares but our aim is that prices balance affordability for both passengers and taxpayers."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Make no mistake, what's unfolding is spiteful class warfare on steroids: JEFF PRESTRIDGE
Another day and yet another rumour emerges of an egregious attack on the wealth of Middle England by this tax-grabbing Government. It's enough to reduce grown men and women, the prudent and thrifty to tears. Having just informed us that a more pernicious inheritance tax regime is heading our way, Labour has now indicated that it is looking to impose a new property tax regime on middle-class homeowners. It seems that nothing in our financial armoury – our home, pension and savings – is sacred in the eyes of Labour. It's all there to be grabbed or taxed to the hilt. Although details of the proposed tax are rather sketchy – and Treasury officials are currently remaining schtum – the fact that the story broke in the Labour-supporting Guardian newspaper suggests that this new tax regime has legs. No smoke without fire. The tax, it seems, could apply to those selling homes worth more than £500,000 – and replace the current stamp duty tax which is levied on buyers. Another option is an annual levy on the value of a property – a wealth tax whichever way you look at it. At what rate the tax would be applied is anyone's guess but it would surely be set at such a level that it raised more than the Treasury currently receives in stamp duty (£11.6billion in the last financial year). After all, this is a tax overhaul driven essentially by Labour's desperate need to generate more revenue for the Treasury's coffers, much diminished by the Chancellor's bloated spending and costly U-turns on winter fuel payment and much-needed welfare reform. It's scary – bloody scary. Make no mistake about it, what is unfolding before our very eyes is class warfare on steroids. A spiteful assault on millions of people who through a mix of thrift, sacrifice and damned hard work have built their own financial fortress, only for the Big Bad Wolf that is Labour to come along and attempt to blow it down. While the current stamp duty tax regime is far from perfect, a replacement property tax – whichever form it takes – would bring with it a shedful of issues. For example, if it took the form of a seller's tax, it would surely clog up the housing market even more than it is now. I imagine that many elderly homeowners sitting in sizeable £500,000-plus properties would opt to stay put rather than sell up, pay the tax and downsize. But if it was an annual tax, it could blow a hole in your household budget. Alongside the replacement for stamp duty, Labour is also rumoured to be looking at abolishing council tax and introducing a 'local' property tax which owners, not residents, would pay. This would be based on the value of the home. Good luck there, Rachel Reeves, given that a similar idea (the poll tax) introduced some 35 years ago by a Conservative government led by Margaret Thatcher went down like a lead balloon – and was swiftly abandoned. Of course, there is a strong case for reform of property taxes in this country. But my suspicion is that Rachel From Accounts will use reform as cover to squeeze the middle classes until the pips squeak. As far as she is concerned our homes, pensions and savings are hers to tap for extra tax. Frightening. Beware of the Big Bad She-Wolf.
BBC News
24 minutes ago
- BBC News
US in talks over 10% Intel stake, White House confirms
The White House confirmed on Tuesday that the Trump administration is working on a deal that could see the US government taking a 10% stake in chip giant Intel."The president wants to put America's needs first, both from a national security and economic perspective," White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told potential deal could involve swapping government grants for Intel shares, according to US Commerce Secretary Howard move could help Intel as it struggles to compete with rivals like Nvidia, Samsung and TSMC, particularly in the booming artificial intelligence (AI) chip market. Intel has been contacted by the BBC for comment. The US wants a stake Intel in exchange for grants approved during the Biden administration, Lutnick said on CNBC on Tuesday."We should get an equity stake for our money," he added. "We'll get equity in return for that... instead of just giving grants away."The potential deal, which was first reported last week, aims to help Intel build a flagship manufacturing hub in the US state of Ohio. At the time, a White House spokesman told the BBC that the reports "should be regarded as speculation" unless officially week, Intel did not comment directly about reports but said it was "deeply committed to supporting President Trump's efforts" to strengthen manufacturing and technology in the Monday, Japanese investment giant Softbank said it would buy a $2bn (£1.5bn) stake in the announcement, Intel's shares rose by almost 7% in New York on Tuesday.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Labour's war on Middle England: Rural areas could foot the bill to pay for Rayner's reforms of council tax
Middle England will be hit by the highest possible increases in council taxes to pay for 's reforms to the system, town hall leaders have warned. Households in the countryside will reportedly be charged at unfairly high levels to pay for residents of cities under the Communities Secretary's 'fair funding' plans. Last night, Tory leader Kemi Badenoch branded it a 'spiteful' move that will push more cash into traditional Labour areas. Analysis by the County Councils Network (CNN) found rural and county local authorities will lose close to half a billion pounds in Government cash over the next three years thanks to Ms Rayner's attempt to level up the system. This will force them to cut vital services and hike bills for hard-pressed residents by the maximum 5 per cent allowed. The CCN demanded an urgent injection of cash from Whitehall to fill the gap, warning town halls on the brink would otherwise be unable to provide crucial care for the elderly and vulnerable children. It comes after almost all town halls raised bills by the maximum amount earlier this year to deal with soaring demand and costs, taking the average bill to £2,280. Chairman of the group, councillor Tim Oliver, said: 'Some 16 county and rural councils will see reductions in grant funding, while the Government's proposals place a disproportionate burden on taxpayers in county areas to fund local services and redistribute funding to urban areas. 'It's vital the Government makes more money available to mitigate the impact of these reforms.' Ms Badenoch said: 'Yet again the Labour Government is showing utter contempt for people living in rural Britain. 'The family farms tax has been devastating, and scrapping the rural services grant has put rural councils under enormous pressure. 'This latest change will steal more money out of the hands of county councils and send it straight into Labour-run urban areas.' Under Ms Rayner's Fair Funding Review 2.0, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) will make major changes to how English councils are funded. Her updated formula will allocate cash based on local areas' needs and their ability to raise council tax compared to others around the country. The Institute for Fiscal Studies think-tank has already warned it will create big winners and losers, with those in the home counties likely to suffer budget cuts unless council taxes rise. In its response to the MHCLG consultation, published last night, the CCN said it would mean 16 authorities – including some in the Midlands and North – losing £470million of funding over the next three years. In total, county and unitary councils' grant funding will rise by just £374million. Unless 33 of the 38 town halls impose the maximum 5 per cent council tax rises, they will see a real-terms cut in funding, according to the CCN. Metropolitan authorities will get £1.2billion, and a proposal to redistribute £1.6billion in council tax income will benefit urban areas at the expense of the countryside. An MHCLG spokesman said: 'We do not recognise this analysis. We are taking decisive action to reform the funding system.'
