每日好文1 What‘s the Future of Train Operators?

     How can the train operators possibly justify yet another increase to rail passenger fares?

It has become a grimly reliable annual ritual: every January the cost of traveling by train rises, imposing a significant extra burden on those who have no option but to use the rail network to get to work or otherwise.
This year’s rise, an average of 2.7 percent, maybe a fraction lower than last year’s, but it is still well above the official Consumer Price Index (CPI) measure of inflation.
Successive governments have permitted such increases on the grounds that the cost of investing in and running the rail network should be borne by those who use it, rather than the general taxpayer.
Why, the argument goes, should a car-driving pensioner from Lincolnshire have to subsidize the daily commute of a stockbroker from Surrey?
火车运营商如何证明再次提高铁路客运票价是合理的？

这已经成为一个严格可靠的年度仪式：每年一月，乘火车旅行的成本都会上升，给那些别无选择只能使用铁路网络上班或其他方式的人带来沉重的额外负担。

今年的涨幅平均为2.7%，可能比去年低一小部分，但仍然远高于官方消费物价指数（CPI）的通胀指标。

历届政府都允许这种增加，理由是投资和运营铁路网的成本应由使用铁路网的人承担，而不是一般纳税人。

论点是，为什么来自林肯郡的汽车驾驶养老金领取者必须补贴来自萨里郡的股票经纪人的日常通勤？
Equally, there is a sense that the travails of commuters in the South East, many of whom will face among the biggest rises, have received too much attention compared to those who must endure the relatively poor infrastructure of the Midlands and the North.
However, over the past 12 months, those commuters have also experienced some of the worst rail strikes in years. It is all very well train operators trumpeting the improvements they are making to the network, but passengers should be able to expect a basic level of service for the substantial sums they are now paying to travel.
The responsibility for the latest wave of strikes rests on the unions. However, there is a strong case that those who have been worst affected by industrial action should receive compensation for the disruption they have suffered.
The Government has pledged to change the law to introduce a minimum service requirement so that, even when strikes occur, services can continue to operate. This should form part of a wider package of measures to address the long-running problems on Britain’s railways.
Yes, more investment is needed, but passengers will not be willing to pay more indefinitely if they must also endure cramped, unreliable services, punctuated by regular chaos when timetables are changed, or planned maintenance is managed incompetently.
The threat of nationalization may have been seen off for now, but it will return with a vengeance if the justified anger of passengers is not addressed in short order.
同样，有一种感觉是，与那些必须忍受中部地区和北部相对较差的基础设施的人相比，东南部通勤者的痛苦（其中许多人将面临最大的上升之一）受到了太多的关注。

然而，在过去的12个月里，这些通勤者也经历了一些多年来最严重的铁路罢工。火车运营商都在吹嘘他们正在对网络的改进，但乘客应该能够期望获得基本水平的服务，因为他们现在支付了大量旅行费用。

最新一波罢工的责任在于工会。然而，有充分的理由表明，那些受工业行动影响最严重的人应该为他们所遭受的破坏获得赔偿。

政府已承诺修改法律，引入最低服务要求，以便即使发生罢工，服务也可以继续运营。这应该成为解决英国铁路长期问题的更广泛一揽子措施的一部分。

是的，需要更多的投资，但如果乘客还必须忍受狭窄、不可靠的服务，在更改时间表时被经常的混乱所打断，或者计划维护管理不善，乘客将不愿意无限期地支付更多费用。

国有化的威胁目前可能已经摆脱了，但如果不在短时间内解决乘客的正当愤怒，它将卷土重来。