Connect with us

Business

Peak time rail fares scrapped on ScotRail trains

Published

on

Peak time rail fares scrapped on ScotRail trains


Debbie JacksonBBC Scotland News

Getty Images A close-up image of a train ticket from Edinburgh to Glasgow Central, held in someone's hand. The ticket is orange and white.Getty Images

From 1 September, there will be no more peak fares on ScotRail trains

Peak rail fares have been scrapped on ScotRail trains, meaning passengers will no longer pay higher prices for travelling on busy weekday trains.

Until now, many ScotRail tickets were based on the time of travel. Edinburgh to Glasgow peak times will be almost 50% cheaper, with trips between Perth and Dundee a third lower.

The Scottish government-owned operator said its aim was to get more commuters out of cars and onto trains.

Season tickets and fares on routes with peak time prices are unchanged. Multi-journey flexipass tickets have been adjusted with smaller savings.

Peak ScotRail fares used to cover tickets bought for travel before 09:15 on weekdays and certain services between 16:42 and 18:30.

A pilot scheme scrapping peak-time fares, a policy championed by the Scottish Greens, was introduced in 2023 but ended in September 2024 after ministers said the costs of the subsidy could not be justified.

However, in his programme for government speech in May, First Minister John Swinney announced that peak fares would again be scrapped.

Speaking at the launch of the scheme in Edinburgh on Monday, he said it would help people to move “from their cars onto trains”, which would provide environmental benefits.

He added: “This is financially sustainable because it’s an investment in the rail network and it’s an investment in the people of Scotland.

“People in Scotland simply travelling from Edinburgh to Glasgow on a daily basis will see their travel costs fall by almost 50%. That’s a massive saving when people are struggling financially.”

ScotRail ticketing will also be more straightforward and flexible under the new system, the firm has said.

How is scrapping peak fares being paid for?

A digital billboard at Queen Street Station in Glasgow  says "Peak fares. Gone for good."

ScotRail has launched a marketing campaign to promote the cheaper fares

ScotRail has been owned and run by the Scottish government since 2022.

In October 2023 the rail firm started a year-long trial of scrapping peak fares with the aim of persuading more people to swap car journeys for rail travel.

Last year, Scottish ministers announced the trial had “limited success” and would not be extended.

An evaluation of the first nine months of the trial found passenger levels increased by a maximum of about 6.8%.

This represented around four million extra rail journeys, of which two million are journeys that would previously have been made by private car.

However, the scheme required a 10% rise to be self-financing.

Scotland’s Transport Secretary Fiona Hyslop also said at the time that the pilot “primarily benefited existing train passengers and those with medium to higher incomes”.

The evaluation found the estimated cost of the scheme was “in the annual range of £25m to £30m per annum (in 2024 prices) with the possibility of being as large as £40m”.

Swinney said he expected the annual cost to be between £40m to £45m each year and lead to a “huge saving” for individuals.

If the new scheme does not become self-financing through an increase in passenger numbers, the costs will be met from the ScotRail budget.

This is made up of revenue from passenger fares and the £1.6bn the Scottish government puts into rail services every year.

Getty Images A ScotRail train arrives at Waverly station in Edinburgh in the sunshine, the castle in the background. People are making their way off the train and up the platform.Getty Images

ScotRail ticketing will be more simple and flexible under the new system

Joanne Maguire, managing director at ScotRail told BBC Scotland News: “We are really excited at the opportunity to get more customers out of their cars and onto the railway.

“If you are travelling from Edinburgh to Glasgow you will see a saving of about 50%.

“From Inverkeithing to Edinburgh, you will save 40% and between Inverness and Elgin it is 35% – so it’s great news for our passengers.”

Ms Maguire said the trial period had seen an increase in passenger numbers and that ScotRail had enjoyed a successful summer of moving customers around to numerous big leisure events.

She added that the goal now was to grow the commuter passenger base.

Tommy Whitelaw, who has a bald head and is wearing glasses, is seen from the mid-chest up. He appears to be middle-aged, has a friendly expression and is smiling. He is wearing a dark olive green or greyish-green jacket or windbreaker with a zipper and a hood.  In the background is a train station with large windows with reflective glass showing a city street scene beyond, including a light-coloured building with arched windows.

Passenger Tommy Whitelaw said the end of peak fares made a huge difference

‘Deeply unfair tax’

Several passengers at Glasgow’s Queen Street station told BBC Scotland News they were unaware that peak time fares had been dropped – but welcomed the move.

Student Robbie McCormack said: “I commute every day for college and it’s quite expensive.

“I’ll be able to save throughout the week, save more college money and get something else for lunch.”

Passenger Tommy Whitelaw travels across Scotland giving talks to charities and care homes.

He said the end of peak fares removed the limits on when many people could travel.

He added: “It makes a difference to everybody, its our duty to make everything achievable for people.

“The cost of living shrinks our world, this is one way to open it up a wee bit.”

Susan Watts, from Leeds, told BBC Your Voice that peak fares should be scrapped UK-wide.

She said: “Our complicated fare system is enough to put anyone off using trains.

“In Italy, I paid the same price for a ticket when I turned up an hour before as if I’d booked months earlier – the price is just the price.”

Green MSP Mark Ruskell said peak rail fares were a “deeply unfair tax” on people who had no say over when they needed to travel.

“I am delighted that we are finally rid of them,” he said.

“I’m glad that the Scottish government has finally listened to the Greens, the trade unions and the rail users who were responsible for securing the initial pilot.”

Your Voice Your BBC News strapline



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

Has oil crisis Trumped US? Inside the war-time paradox of fighting Iran and funding its crude – The Times of India

Published

on

Has oil crisis Trumped US? Inside the war-time paradox of fighting Iran and funding its crude – The Times of India


The United States is fighting Iran on the battlefield, and turning to its oil to keep the global economy afloat. As war in the Middle East chokes supplies through the Strait of Hormuz and sends prices soaring, the Donald Trump administration has begun easing restrictions on Iranian crude, allowing allies to buy the very resource that funds Tehran. For a president who came to power vowing to avoid “stupid” wars, the moment is especially fraught, a conflict he helped set in motion now risks slipping beyond his control, both on the battlefield and in its economic fallout.The move lays bare a stark war-time paradox — in trying to weaken Iran, Washington is being forced to rely on it.Though the move has been framed as “very temporary”, Mike Waltz, speaking at a CNN town hall, defended it as necessary to counter Iran’s strategy of driving up global energy prices.Even the administration’s messaging has been mixed — de-escalation in rhetoric, escalation in action. Trump said he was considering “winding down” military operations in the Middle East, even as the United States deployed three more amphibious assault ships and roughly 2,500 additional Marines to the region. Moreover, it attacked Iran’s nuclear facility Natanz again, even as Tehran has clearly warned against any attacks on its energy infrastructure, else bear oil shocks. Then what explains this sanctions shift?

World’s energy lifeline hit

Three weeks into the war with Iran, the United States is confronting a supply disruption of a scale few policymakers had anticipated. The near-total shutdown of the Strait of Hormuz has choked one of the world’s most critical oil arteries, sending shockwaves through global markets.The crisis has been compounded by direct attacks on critical energy infrastructure across the region. Strikes on Iran’s South Pars gasfield, part of the world’s largest natural gas reserve, were followed by missile attacks on Qatar’s Ras Laffan LNG facilities, causing extensive damage to one of the world’s biggest gas export hubs. Additional targets have included refineries in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the UAE, raising fears of a broader energy war. With some of these facilities expected to take three to five years to fully repair, the disruption is no longer temporary — it threatens to lock in a prolonged global supply crunch. Brent crude, the international benchmark, has surged to around $106 per barrel, up sharply from roughly $70 before the conflict, underscoring how rapidly the crisis has escalated and how tightly global prices are tied to Middle East stability. Inside the administration of Donald Trump, officials are scrambling for solutions that can meaningfully ease supply pressures. A newly announced pause in sanctions applies only to Iranian oil already loaded on ships and is set to expire by April 19, limiting its immediate impact. Crucially, the move does not increase actual production, a central factor behind soaring prices, and much of Iran’s oil was already finding its way to buyers despite sanctions. That reality mirrors earlier steps, including a temporary pause on restrictions on some Russian shipments, which critics said offered only modest relief while exposing the limits of Washington’s options.

Policy levers pulled with little effect

Washington has already deployed nearly every conventional mechanism to cushion the blow. Hundreds of millions of barrels have been released from strategic reserves, sanctions on Russian oil have been partially eased, and domestic crude flows have been accelerated in an effort to boost supply. Yet these measures have barely dented rising prices. Global benchmarks continue to surge, and US consumers are feeling the impact at the pump. Officials privately acknowledge that the tools at their disposal are either insufficient in scale or too slow to counter the immediacy of the crisis, exposing the limits of state intervention in a tightly wound global oil market. The strain is also evident in Washington’s shifting diplomatic posture. After initially insisting the US did not need Nato’s help to secure the Strait of Hormuz, Donald Trump publicly urged allies to “step up” and help reopen the vital route. The appeal has met a muted response, with many countries reluctant to be drawn into a conflict they did not start, further complicating efforts to stabilize the situation and underlining the limits of US leverage even among its partners.Trump has criticized Nato countries as “cowards” for refusing to assist while insisting the campaign is unfolding according to plan, even declaring the battle “militarily won.” Yet those claims sit uneasily against the reality of a defiant Iran continuing to choke off Gulf energy flows and launch missile strikes across the region, underscoring the widening gap between rhetoric and conditions on the ground.

Finally, turning to enemy’s oil

With options dwindling, the administration has turned to a controversial stopgap: allowing allies to purchase Iranian oil already at sea. The move is designed to inject roughly 140 million barrels into a market starved of supply, offering short-term relief even as the broader conflict rages on. Officials argue that this oil would have likely been sold regardless, particularly to countries willing to bypass sanctions. Redirecting those flows to US allies, they contend, helps stabilize markets without fundamentally altering the pressure campaign against Tehran. Still, the decision lays bare an uncomfortable truth, that immediate economic needs are forcing Washington into choices that cut against its own strategic posture.

But is it enough to solve the energy crisis?

Even with Iranian barrels entering the market, the relief is expected to be fleeting. The additional supply amounts to barely a day and a half of global consumption, underscoring how limited the impact will be if disruptions persist. Energy experts warn that without a reopening of key shipping routes, the imbalance between supply and demand will continue to widen. That leaves the administration facing a stark choice: find a way to restore passage through the Strait of Hormuz or brace for prolonged economic fallout. For now, officials appear to be managing rather than resolving the crisis, navigating a war where the battlefield extends far beyond missiles and troops, deep into the fragile mechanics of the global economy.

Will the war end?

Beyond the immediate energy crisis, the conflict is pushing Donald Trump toward a deeper strategic crossroads. Analysts say the administration now faces a narrowing set of choices under what it has called Operation Epic Fury, with no clear indication of which path it is prepared to take, Reuters reported. One option is escalation — intensifying the offensive, potentially targeting critical infrastructure such as Iran’s oil hub at Kharg Island or expanding the US military footprint along Iran’s coast to neutralize missile threats. But such a move risks drawing Washington into a prolonged conflict, one that could face significant resistance from an American public wary of another long war in the Middle East. The alternative is to claim victory and scale back operations. Yet that, too, carries risks. It could leave Gulf allies exposed to a weakened but still defiant Iran, capable of disrupting shipping lanes and projecting power across the region. With diplomacy stalled and neither side showing signs of backing down, the administration is left navigating a conflict where every option deepens the very uncertainty it is trying to contain.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Dalal Street sees massive bloodbath as Middle East tensions intensify, what should investors do? Here’s what NSE’s Harish Ahuja says – The Times of India

Published

on

Dalal Street sees massive bloodbath as Middle East tensions intensify, what should investors do? Here’s what NSE’s Harish Ahuja says – The Times of India


Global markets have been on a bit of a roller-coaster ride lately, shocked by the ongoing Middle East conflict, which has now entered its fourth week. Just by Thursday, he sharp sell off wipped off Rs 12.87 lakh crore from investor’s wealth as Dalal Street witnessed a bloodbath. Going back further, ever since the crisis unfolded in the region, investors have lost over Rs 37 lakh crore as of March 19.As indices swing, investors are left staring at red screens and wondering whether to act or sit tight. The big question is what should you do? Make a move now, or wait for that golden opportunity. But amid the noise, a familiar reminder is making the rounds: market moves may be sharp in the short term, but reacting too quickly can often do more harm than good. Speaking on the volatility in global markets, Harish K Ahuja, head of sustainability, Power & Carbon Markets, Listing & Social Stock Exchange at the National Stock Exchange of India (NSE), has called on retail investors to stay steady and avoid reacting to short-term market swings.Commenting on recent trends, Ahuja said that the correction being witnessed is not restricted to India but is part of a broader global movement. “Most of the exchanges across the globe are seeing a correction of 7% to 10%. And this up and down is a part of the very market,” he said.He cautioned retail participants against panic-driven decisions during periods of uncertainty. “My suggestion to retail investors: don’t panic. Show the patience, you are an investor, not a trader,” he said.According to Ahuja, India’s economic fundamentals continue to remain supportive despite external pressures. “My understanding of the Indian market, India is growing. Indian fundamentals in terms of GDP growth, inflation, most of the indicators, be it industrial growth, electricity consumption, are very positive,” he stated.He also highlighted the strength and scale of India’s capital markets, pointing to strong participation levels and activity. “India has witnessed the largest number of IPOs in the world. We are one of the largest exchanges in terms of the number of unique investors and unique accounts,” he said.Ahuja highlighted that investing should be viewed with a long-term perspective rather than a daily trading mindset. “Investment means, for me, the definition of investment is once you buy a stock, at least for the next five to ten years, don’t watch the stock daily,” he said.Reiterating his outlook, he added that patience and an understanding of macroeconomic fundamentals are key to navigating volatility. “I think I am always positive about the market because I am a patient investor. Once you have patience, once you understand the fundamentals of the economy and the country as a whole, you should not panic.”He further indicated that investors who maintain discipline and focus on long-term horizons are more likely to withstand short-term geopolitical disruptions and benefit from market growth over time.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Govt to pay around Rs 48bn to OMCs under fuel price differential claims – SUCH TV

Published

on

Govt to pay around Rs 48bn to OMCs under fuel price differential claims – SUCH TV



The government is set to pay oil marketing companies (OMCs) up to Rs176 per litre under price differential claims (PDCs) in the wake of the decision against fuel price hike in the country, read the Ministry of Energy’s (Petroleum Division) letter addressed to the Oil and Gas Regulatory Authority (Ogra).

The letter, dated March 20, says that the government will pay PDCs to the OMCS from March 21 (today) till March 27, which amounts to around Rs48 billion, with the payment set to be made by the Finance Division via the Ogra.

In this regard, the government will pay a price differential of Rs176.41 per litre on high-speed diesel (HSD) and Rs77.98 per litre on petrol (MS) to the OMCs.

The PDCs will be paid as Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, on Friday, announced the government’s decision to keep the petrol and diesel prices unchanged for next week after rejecting a proposal to raise rates on the occasion of Eid ul Fitr.

The prime minister announced this during an address to the nation, delivered on the eve of Eid ul Fitr. The statement comes as the federal government was scheduled to review the fuel prices on March 20.

Previously, on March 13, the government maintained the petroleum prices despite a surge in global oil prices.

Addressing the nation today, PM Shehbaz referred to the global situation in light of the Middle East conflict between Iran, US and Israel leading to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz — which has disrupted the oil shipping routes resulting in hike in global oil price — and said: “Today, the world is facing an extraordinary test. [Mideast] conflict has shaken the global economy as well as peace and stability”.

The premier pointed out that attacks on energy installations in brotherly countries have worsened the crisis. “There is a fear that this crisis may intensify further,” he said.

Highlighting the economic impact, the prime minister said oil prices in the global market have surged sharply. “Oil, which was priced at $72 per barrel just weeks ago, has now reached $158 per barrel,” he stated.

The prime minister warned that the situation could lead to rising inflation.

The prime minister further said that another increase in oil prices had been observed in the week starting today, after which he was advised again to raise petrol by Rs76 per litre and diesel by Rs177 per litre, but he rejected the proposal.

“So, the federal government will bear the additional burden of Rs45bn once again,” the PM added.

He said the federal government had spent Rs69bn from its savings and development budgets over the past two weeks to prevent petrol prices from rising by Rs127 per litre and diesel by Rs252 per litre.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending