Written evidence from London TravelWatch (STA0011)

Submission to the Transport Select Committee inquiry into surface transport to airports

1      Introduction:

London TravelWatch is the official body set up by Parliament to provide a voice for London’s travelling public, including the users of all forms of public transport.  Our role is to:

• Speak up for transport users in discussions with policy-makers and the media;
• Consult with the transport industry, its regulators and funders on matters affecting users;
• Investigate complaints users have been unable to resolve with service providers, and;
• Monitor trends in service quality. 

We cover all rail services within the London Railway area, an area defined by Parliament as including all London’s five airports, including Gatwick, Luton and Stansted as well as Heathrow and London City.

Our aim is to press in all that we do for a better travel experience all those living, working or visiting London and its surrounding region.

Our remit and experience focuses on London’s airports – however, we feel that there are lessons that can be learnt from this that can be applied universally rather than just to the specific London airports that we cover.

Surface access to airports is a major issue for travellers, often forming the most stressful part of a much longer journey. It also has much wider economic and transport ramifications if it is not got right. Our recent research found that because the accessibility of London’s airports is uneven across the London and South East region the benefit consumers could derive from competition between airports and airlines can be undermined by this poor surface accessibility, an opaque system of public transport fares and ticketing, poorly designed interchanges and patchy customer service. This means that the full economic and environmental benefits of competition are not being realised and passengers are being forced to make longer, more expensive, more congested journeys than they should have to.

In the London Railway area[1] (that includes five major airports) these poor passenger experiences are limiting the effectiveness of policies designed to encourage a shift towards using public transport to get to or from airports. Therefore, as a matter of immediate priority we think that government, transport operators and airport owners should focus their efforts on improving the customer experience of passengers’ journeys to and from airports.

2              The Inquiry

London TravelWatch welcomes the House of Commons Transport Committee’s inquiry, looking at surface access to airports. This echoes our concern about this issue (and in particular a failure to address current surface transport issues) which led us to produce our own report on this subject, drawing on research that we had previously commissioned and evidence from other sources. This response concentrates on passenger issues, as freight and other commercial activity is not within our remit.

This report is entitled ‘Improving public transport access to London’s airports[2] and was published in September 2014. A copy of the hyperlink to this is attached as Appendix A to this submission.

3              The range and capacity of current strategic connections to airports and how predicted changes in demand for capacity (both passengers and freight) are planned for.

Connectivity is a key factor in passengers’ choice of routes to and from airports. The nature of journeys to airports, which often involve larger quantities of luggage, group travel with families, children and older people and limited familiarity with the options means that for most users minimising the numbers of changes between mode is one of the major deciding factors as to how they make their journey to and from the airport. The tables below show how many people use the various modes of access to London’s airports, the numbers of passengers, the percentage using public transport, the split between business and leisure travellers and the number of separate modes that passengers use. In this latter figure it is clear that car based travel is the single most important mode of travel because it eliminates the uncertainties of public transport based journeys – particularly where these involve the need to interchange en route.

Table 1: Mode of Access to the London Airports 2010 (%)[3]

Table 2: Numbers of passengers arriving at London Airports (000s)

Table 3: Passengers using public transport to access London’s Airports (%)

Table 4: Number of separate modes of transport used by passengers to get to their airport in 2012 (%)

Table 5: Split of business and leisure travellers in 2012 by airport (%)

The availability of direct links to the airport is an important factor in determining whether passengers choose to make their journey by public transport or not.

Where a direct service is not available, it is the ease of connecting, and knowing that this is possible, that will determine whether a passenger, especially one travelling with luggage or young children, chooses to use public transport or a car based mode or indeed whether to use an entirely different airport.

We note that the airports with the highest proportion of public transport use – London City and Stansted - are those that have the largest numbers of direct services and connections where only one change of service or mode is required. Other airports such as Heathrow, Gatwick and Luton are far more dependent on car based access, because public transport connectivity is much less. However, journey time reliability on the road network serving these airports is in many cases less than 60%. This means that air passengers coming by road suffer a significant risk of missing flights, suffering consequential loss (which is normally not reclaimable - public transport has limited forms of redress that we have previously highlighted as a separate issue to be addressed), or are compelled to arrive excessively early for their flight. In turn they may then be required to make greater use of services such as hotels and car parking, than if their arrival time at the airport could be guaranteed - adding inconvenience and cost that would not otherwise have been incurred.

If demand for air travel continues to grow in line with current trends this unsatisfactory situation risks getting worse. In our view there is a powerful case for investment in those modes of transport that are most likely to deliver reliable journey times. This points above all to investment in rail, in bus priority on the road network, and in improved interchanges to maximise the catchment area of airports within one easy change of mode.

There are already some signs of progress. We welcome recent proposals in the East Anglia rail franchise to provide direct rail services to Stansted Airport from Norwich and for Great Western to increase the frequency of the Reading to Gatwick Airport train service. These are small incremental improvements, but they point to others of a similar nature. There is for example a powerful passenger argument for investment in direct rail links to Heathrow Airport from South London, North West Surrey and the Thames Valley, and in new interchanges such as at West Hampstead on the Chiltern, Jubilee and London Overground lines that would benefit passengers travelling to all the airports serving London, other users and the wider economy.

We have also argued strongly for the establishment of a ‘city air hub’ in central London connected to Farringdon station that would provide direct rail access to all London’s airports. Once the Crossrail and Thameslink projects are complete, there will already be direct access to Heathrow (apart from Terminal 5), Gatwick and Luton from this station. Farringdon will be served by direct train and underground services from a large number of stations throughout Greater London and the wider South East region, simplifying a large number of journeys to and from all of these airports to a single attractive, one change journey that will be attractive to passengers who previously might have travelled by car, taxi or private hire vehicle ; adding a dedicated link from Crossrail’s Custom House station to London City Airport, and providing direct services to Stansted and Southend airports from Farringdon should be a top priority beyond this.

4              The importance of surface transport in freeing up existing spare capacity in airports

Inconsistency in surface access to airports reduces the efficiencies of the airline  and airports sectors, because of the constraints on consumer choice and competition. There is little advantage in a relatively cheap fare for a flight if travel to and from the airport is expensive or time consuming Particularly with budget airlines, the cost of getting to and from the airport can easily exceed the cost of the flight; and many flights within Europe can take much longer than the surface journey.

As a result many passengers may end up choosing airlines on the basis of airport proximity and ease of access, rather than the offerings of the airlines themselves. Passengers who factor the cost of travel to and from the airport into their decision making may decide not to pursue options that would otherwise be attractive. Those who do not, run the risk of unwelcome surprises in the form of unexpectedly high costs, especially if they find that their only viable choice is a premium priced one.

Some of these connectivity issues are going to take substantial amounts of time and resources to fix. What is clearly of the first importance is that, as soon as the Government announces its response to the Davies Commission, planning should start for a step change improvement in surface access, especially to those airport(s) designated for expansion. The momentum created by the decision on runway capacity needs to be matched by momentum for a radical upgrading of public transport links. Meanwhile there is a series of more modest changes that can and should be introduced in a shorter timescale. These include a formal commitment to removing the obstacles to Crossrail serving Heathrow Terminal 5; extension of Oyster facilities to Luton and Stansted (as well as the long overdue extension to Gatwick); clearer information about the cheaper alternatives to Heathrow and Gatwick Express; and action to reduce the number of taxis and private hire vehicles travelling empty either to or from London’s airports.

5              The Government’s role in planning surface access to airports in conjunction with airport owners, local authorities and Local Enterprise Partnership.  The funding of strategic connections to airports, particularly : Department for Transport’s (DfT) role in ensuring that surface access infrastructure is planned and built in a joined – up way where different parts of the infrastructure are funded by different parties. The level of responsibility that should be borne by the taxpayer for funding access and interfaces with national networks.

Funding of improvements is a complex issue as airport traffic usually constitutes only a proportion of usage of the transport networks and services concerned. London TravelWatch does not have a view on the balance of funding between taxpayers, passengers and airport operators. Airport operators generally contribute to investment only in those roads, stations and bus services that directly affect the operation of their airport or are a direct consequence of any planning decision to allow expansion. An example of this is the surface transport mitigation measures proposed for the second runway at Gatwick. These are limited to improvements to roads directly adjacent to and the rail station at the airport. But electrification of the slow but potentially very useful Reading – Gatwick rail route, provision of an interchange station at West Hampstead on the Chiltern rail route, to improve connectivity and journey times from north west of London and improvement to the road links between the M23 and Croydon would significantly improve Gatwick’s connectivity to and within London and the wider South East. However, as the benefit of these projects is so much wider it is difficult to justify that Gatwick Airport alone should be responsible for funding these improvements. Indeed in the case of the West Hampstead interchange, any upgrading would also improve connectivity to Luton and London City Airports.

Similarly, investment in improving the accessibility of rail stations and bus stops – eg by providing step free access- would primarily be seen as aimed at extending journey opportunities for people with disabilities., But it also has a benefit to air passengers because it removes or mitigates concerns about carrying luggage up or down stairs or across “step gaps” (the gaps between a train and the platform), which are a continuing major barrier to many passengers using public transport to go to or from an airport.

6              The Government’s effectiveness in ensuring that its own policies, such as modal shift, are being achieved in decisions about surface transport to airports.

In the London Railway area (that includes five major airports) we have found that a poor passenger experience of the fares and ticketing system and levels of customer service are limiting the effectiveness of policies designed to encourage a shift towards using public transport to get to or from airports.

Government policy towards a common ticketing system and greater transparency of fares on public transport services linking the airports to central London and each other is a case in point. Passengers need easy access to the range of fares and options available, not just the heavily marketed premium products. Too often they are pushed towards more expensive services by ticket machines, journey planners, advertising and airport staff, without being aware that there are cheaper or more effect alternatives.

The lack of availability of London’s Oyster / Contactless fares and ticketing system to most of London’s airports is a case in point. At present, over 5,000 passengers a year are given a Penalty Fare at Gatwick Airport station because they have started their journey using Oyster or Contactless without realising that Oyster / Contactless is not valid here. The Government’s commitment to an extension has been repeatedly delayed by administrative indecision, to the significant dis-benefit of passengers. Lack of Oyster/Contactless facilities also leads to huge queues at Victoria Underground station and in the booking hall at Gatwick. Similarly, the lack of acceptance of Oyster / Contactless on Heathrow Express, Heathrow Connect, and on trains to Luton and Stansted airports is a major barrier to passengers using public transport to access these airports serving London. It needs to be corrected at the earliest opportunity, and could be easily remedied through the rail franchising process.

Rail franchises also need to be more focused on improving the customer service aspect of the journeys of airport passengers, by improving staff availability on trains and at interchange stations to provide assistance, advice and reassurance to passengers. Clear signage and up to date information at interchange stations en route to the airport is also crucial. But it is unlikely to happen unless it is specified in franchises.

We also note that ‘remapping’ of rail franchises at various times has led to the cutting back of some direct services to airports e.g. withdrawal of Cross Country, Southeastern and West London Line services to Gatwick Airport.

7              The extent to which airport customer preference and DfT policy concur in terms of preferred modes of surface transport to airports.             

As noted above the consumer preference is for direct, convenient and reliable journeys to and from airports. Without significant investment in public transport and interchanges, this tends to encourage the use of car based (including Taxi and Private Hire) travel which offers the nearest fulfilment of this preference. However, this is not a viable basis for long term policy in the crowded South-East. The only serious prospect for handling increasing passenger numbers lies through a greater role and mode share for public transport.

8              London TravelWatch recommendations and conclusions

London TravelWatch considers that:-

Immediate steps should be taken to rectify major areas of passenger disbenefit within the fares and ticketing system:

• London’s Oystercard/contactless payments ticketing system should be extended to Gatwick Airport without further delay

• London’s Oystercard/contactless payments ticketing system should be extended to cover journeys on Heathrow Express and Heathrow Connect to and from Heathrow Airport, and on journeys to and from Luton Airport Parkway and Stansted Airport stations

• Passengers should be easily able to buy the full range of National Rail tickets from the three stations at Heathrow Airport operated by Heathrow Express (ie Terminals 1,2,3; Terminal 4 and Terminal 5)

• More, easy to find, ticket vending machines for train travel from Luton Airport Parkway Station should be provided in the arrivals hall at Luton Airport

• Oystercard retailing outlets should be available round the clock at Heathrow Airport bus stations

• Clear, transparent and easy to find information on the costs of travel for different modes to central London (including coaches and  taxi or private hire vehicles)  and to other significant destinations should be provided at all London’s airports.  This should be available in the main languages that reflect the countries of origin of passengers using the airport.

Improvements are needed in the level of customer service and how passengers are treated by airports and transport operators:

• Existing transport interchanges giving direct access by public transport to London’s airports should be better tailored to the needs of airport passengers.  In particular they should be step free to make it possible to move around more easily when travelling with luggage
• Additional staff at airport rail and bus stations should be available to assist passengers with luggage, including by giving advice on the location of lifts or where best to stow large items on the train or bus
• All airports should have easy to find maps which clearly show how to reach key destinations by public transport services
• When services are disrupted for any reason clear information and advice should be provided on coping with contingency planning and this should be co-ordinated across the different transport modes on key routes to airports.  This advice should be tailored to the needs of airport passengers as appropriate.

Legal and contractual barriers should be addressed to:             

• Allow Crossrail to serve Terminal 5 at Heathrow Airport from its opening in 2018
• Reduce the numbers of ‘empty’ taxi and private hire journeys to and from airports, freeing operators to pick up passengers outside their home operating area. This would increase consumer choice, reduce operating costs, congestion and pollution and potentially allow lower fares to be charged.

Investment should be prioritised to encourage:

• Public transport operators to improve the design of their rolling stock to cater for the needs of airport and local passengers simultaneously
• Improvements in accessibility of local stations and bus stops to ensure that the entire journey to the airport can be step free
• The provision of new interchanges that reduce journey times to and from airports and increase consumer choice of airports and airlines by providing better connections to services to airports. West Hampstead on the Chiltern line is a prime example
• The provision of direct rail links from South London, North West Surrey and the Thames Valley to Heathrow Airport, regardless of the decision about aviation capacity at Heathrow.

Stephen Locke

Chair

London TravelWatch

October 2015

Appendix A

Hyperlink to ‘Improving public transport access to London’s airports can be found here http://www.londontravelwatch.org.uk/documents/get_lob?id=3894&field=file