Trains are out of steam

IF, as a newspaper editor (which I'm not), I was told that 80per cent of readers liked my paper, my reaction would be: Well how come the other 20per cent don't.

After all, if they don't like my paper, why are they still reading it? Perhaps it's because it's the only paper left at the shops when they get there, or maybe it's because it's the only newspaper the shop stocks.

So I think that if I was running Britain's railways, and a survey came back which said that four out of five people travelling were 'satisfied' with the experience they got, I'd like to think I'd set about finding why the other one in five didn't.

But I'm obviously wrong, because when greeted with this statistic, them what run the railways decided what it meant was: "Let's stick up rail fares!"

Because that's exactly what the Association of Train Operating Companies (ie those who wish to make a profit on the railways) are doing. And not just by inflation either.

What else to expect from the organisation who felt that the National Rail Enquiries phoneline would be more customer-friendly operated from India than Tyneside. No racism intended here, just fact: I don't know how to spell any train station names in India, so it's fair to expect Indians won't know how to spell 'Morpeth' or 'Euxton Balshaw Lane' without having to spelt out.

But back to ATOC. Their director general George Muir said: "While no-one likes to pay more for their travel, we need the revenue to pay for the ongoing improvements to the railways that passengers expect - and overall satisfaction levels are now at an all time high of 80%."

So, randomly, it is now cheaper to fly return to Prague from Manchester than it is to travel by train to London. Mad, isn't it?

What the 80% stat doesn't reveal is a) how they got to the figure, b) whether it is 80per cent of passenger journeys and c) why they think it is a figure to be proud of.

If I am a passenger on one of the new Virgin trains, and my train runs on time most of the time, I probably am happy. Especially because I know my train, if running late, will make the slower, localised services wait at stations so I can overtake to make up time.

But if I travel five times a week, does that mean I am unsatisfied at least once a week?

And what does it mean to be satisfied by a train journey? Am I satisfied just to get from a to b close to on time or do I expect some level of comfort? If that's in the North West, I'm out of luck.

Across the North of England, there are to be no new trains. Just the rattling old ones which leak when it rains. I'm not joking. And if you catch one late at night, you share the train with a day's worth of rubbish. On a Virgin train, they are cleaned at the start of each journey. Not so on Northern.

Many of the trains Northern uses date back to before privatisation. Where's the investment there? And there's none to come in the future. Ultimately, we still pay for the railways - through the massive subsidies the Government gives the franchise firms.

Imagine going into a hospital, paid for by your taxes, and being told: we're charging you for this service because four out of five people rate us. You'd wonder where your money had gone, wouldn't you?

If the Government is determined to get us on public transport, lets go for something bold. Free trains. First class costs extra. Like hospitals.