The three reforms spelt out, need to be analysed meticulously after accounting all the relevant practical considerations.
-------1----------
For switching of intra-city and suburban passenger traffic to rail from road, Govt. has to chip in substantial funds in the Suburban/ Metro rail networks. This investment Govt is not willing to make and should not, because it is easy for Govt of India to give 20000 crore Rs for improving the intra city rail traffic. What is unbearable is the recurring operational loss to the tune of several thousand crore Rs per year, after...
more... these20000 crore Rs. projects are commissioned. This is exactly the objection taken by the Niti Ayog before approving suburban projects for Mumbai. With railways hardly able to recover 30-40 of the actual cost of suburban travel, any further capital expenditure is financially unjustified. Several steps with active cooperation amongst IRlys,Centralgovt, State Govt & Local Municipal bodies are required for improving the financial sustainability of such projects like
(1) Integrating the project with commercial exploitation of land (especially with active participation of private sector) so as to generate maximum non-fare revenue. Japan is a great example.
(2) Increasing fare to a more reasonable level.
(3) Increasing FSI in the surrounding area to improve better returns for commercial utilization of Rly land.
(4) Additional taxes on the properties which shall be having value appreciation due to the upcoming project . This benefit is currently enjoyed in totality by property owner/brokers where as the Rlys which make the appreciation possible gets no benefit.
(5) Curtaining concessional & free travel.
-----------2------------------
It is a great misnomer that IRlys is providing a premium service (ac travel) and not charging for the same. Charges of I.Rlys, for the so called premium rich ac passengers are already high. I Rly cannot significantly extra-charge for providing speedier travel (from 130kmph instead of 70kmph or 5.5 hrs instead of 10 hours), because it cannot match Airlines which move passenger at avg. speed of 700kmph (in 1 hour). Poor patronage of Gatiman express is a clear indication.
Indian railways can fleece only ac chair car and ACIII passengers only because they do not have option to go by air there is appreciable difference in ACIII & air fares. Hence the ACC, ACIII fares had been kept higher. Rlys earn maximum profits in these classes. ACII & ACI passengers shall go by air instead. New civil aviation policy is going to promote low cost travel in non-metro as well as metro cities in a big way.
With increasingly better network of roads, proliferation of luxury & cost effective cars/buses, even the ACII & ACC passengers will have better options than AC rail travel. Durg to Cuttack ac chair cost is 600Rs, AC sleeper cost is 650 Rs, where as ACIII train travel is Rs 1055/- . It is only the toilet facility which has saved railways. The day luxury buses with bio-toilets proliferate, ac passengers on rly will start switching to these buses. At many places shared ac taxi travel is costlier than ac chair car like between Bhopal and Indore. The IND-BPL ac DD Express has flopped only because its higher fare as compared to luxury bus/ shared ac taxi. Only the heavily sleeper and general class of the Railways is cheaper than Bus/road travel.
Only drastic improvement in decision making right & financially justified decisions after proper analysis, quick and timely decisions/working, along with properly oriented & massive expansion & modernization could save railways from the above threat. Passenger services need to be loosely coupled with costing, so that it remains competitive w.r.t. buses on all the routes/ sections. There has to be some limit to the degree & quantum of concessions offered. No passenger service can be profitable if more than 90% travellers are subsidised and it charges much less than 50% of the costing from these bulk passengers.
------3---------
Rly movement has inherent benefits over road & air. The best way for IR is to complement the other two major modes rather than to compete with them by:
(1) Capturing 100% bulk traffic through proper pricing and guaranteed transit time
(2) Sharing small/ piecemeal with road sector traffic through Roll on Roll Off trains, Carrying passengers along with cars (as is done through channel tunnel between G.Britain & France), Containers which can move on road as well as on rail.
(3) collaborating with city bus operators/ municipal corporations to ensure seamless transport of people from one part of a city to other, through a mix of suburban.metro rail & taxies/bus/ others.
