Number of city rail commuters in England and Wales surpasses pre-Covid levels, figures show
Almost 1.9 million people took trains into cities on a typical weekday last autumn – the highest figure since the records were first collated in 2010.
However, there were about 13% fewer passengers arriving during the morning peak than in 2019.
Arrivals into every station in London grew in the 12 months to autumn 2024, with particularly rapid growth at Paddington and Liverpool Street stations, both served by the Elizabeth line.
The data suggests the line, fully opened in 2023, has taken the pressure off other trains, with overcrowding in the capital down from 2019 levels.
However, trains into Birmingham are now matching London for the squeeze on commuters.
Five separate Thameslink and West Midland train services were now the most overcrowded according to the Department for Transport, with the 7.30am Bedford to Three Bridges having an 184% load factor – or almost twice as many passengers as seats – when it reached London St Pancras station.
Southwestern and Chiltern services made up the rest of the top 10 most overcrowded trains recorded by the DfT.
The DfT figures allow for standing capacity on many London commuter services, with almost one in four passengers standing on arrival in the morning.
It found that average overcrowding – or 'passengers in excess of capacity' – on midweek (Tuesday to Thursday) morning arrivals had increased slightly in the last 12 months to 1.6%, a figure now matched by Birmingham, with Bristol and Sheffield ranking as the next most crowded stations, after rapid growth in rail commuting last year.
The total for cities outside London remains below pre-pandemic levels, at about 660,000 daily arrivals compared with 730,000 in 2019.
The DfT said while directly equivalent statistics on crowding were not available, British rail passenger numbers appeared to be recovering faster than those in France, Germany or Italy, with growth of 9% last year compared with 5-7% in the three biggest EU economies.
Public transport campaigners heralded the figures as underlining the return of rail, after the industry struggled during the pandemic as well as subsequent industrial unrest.
Ben Plowden of Campaign for Better Transport said: 'Gloomy predictions for the future of rail at the time of the pandemic have proven wrong: rail is back in a big way, boosting our economy, keeping workers moving and saving our streets from gridlock.
'The fact that passenger arrivals are up while overcrowding is down is partly due to the huge success of the Elizabeth line. With more bold projects like this we could transform cities and improve daily life for vast numbers of people. An expanded rail network combined with more affordable fares could really bring about a rail revolution.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
25 minutes ago
- BBC News
Hexham train station's accessibility improvements praised but 'lift needed'
Campaigners have praised a train operator after it improved accessibility at one of England's oldest stations, but said there was still a long way to step-free route to the westbound platform can only be used if staff are available to confirmed staff would be there from the first to the last train of the day and it was "working hard" to make sure that travelling by train was "accessible for everybody".Patrick Rice, chair of the Tyne Valley Rail Users' Group, called the change a good "stop-gap measure" but the Northumberland station, which is Grade II listed, would only been fully accessible when a lift was installed. Mr Rice said the barrow crossing across the tracks "affords better access from one side to the other" as the walking route around the station was "absolutely diabolical".Staff are required to use the crossing, however, to block the signals and make sure no trains are due. "We will take the view, however, that it is a stop-gap measure because even with this it doesn't afford independent travel," Mr Rice said."It's great that it can be done but the whole idea is accessible travel should be a right, not a privilege and it should be something that the user can do independently wherever possible, not having to seek the access."Passengers on the ticket office side need to ask the on-duty member of staff to use the crossing, while those on the other platform need to use the bell on the wall to ask for assistance.A spokesperson for Northern said: "Having colleagues available to help from the first train to the last train means we can offer consistent support to customers who need help getting across the foot crossing or accessing services."This change is part of our wider efforts to improve the experience for all customers." Follow BBC North East on X, Facebook, Nextdoor and Instagram.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
New bus service to Birmingham Airport from Birmingham
A new bus service between Birmingham city centre and Birmingham Airport should improve transport links for people in parts of Birmingham and cut congestion, a bus operator 17A service starts on Sunday and will run up to every 30 minutes via Small Heath, Yardley and Tile Cross, National Express West Midlands move comes after the firm extended the 97A route to the airport in July changes would mean a better link to the airport for residents in central and east Birmingham, Mat Hidson, from National Express, said. He added the new service would also help "to reduce traffic and drive down harmful emissions on our region's roads".Bosses at Birmingham Airport said they have been working with the firm as part of their moves to cut carbon emissions on journeys to and from the the new service, some journeys will also be extended on the existing 17 service between Birmingham and Tile Cross, to serve Chelmsley Wood every 30 minutes, a National Express spokesperson said. Follow BBC Birmingham on BBC Sounds, Facebook, X and Instagram.
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Heathrow's third runway plan is wrong – and not just because of noise and pollution
Here we go again. To say there is a deja vu aspect to the latest proposal to build Heathrow's third runway is an understatement. For reasons that are not clear, Sir Keir Starmer has determined the airport's expansion to be a key plank in the government's economic growth strategy. Seemingly, he did not take into account the issues that grounded the plans in the past, as far back as 1968 – namely, Heathrow's unfortunate and unavoidable proximity to the M25, the rivers and their valleys that cross that part of west London, the additional noise pollution, and the need for improved and costly transport links to and from the centre of the capital that will result from the vast uplift in passengers. On the constant sound from the increased number of planes landing and taking off, the prime minister will insist that great technological strides have been made in curbing the din. It is true that new aircraft are less noisy. However, they are still extremely audible, there will be more of them, and they will be flying over a heavily residential area. As for the rest, nothing has altered fundamentally, environmentally and logistically, since Heathrow last submitted a scheme, pre-Covid. Inflation means the bill is now an eye-watering £49bn. The bill, ultimately, will be borne by the air passenger, and Heathrow is already the most expensive airport in the world. Will the airlines and their customers stomach at least a doubling in charges? There is the thorny problem, too, of public transport to and from London. The London mayor will be expected to find a way to enable an extra 60 million people a year to use Heathrow. Transport for London is strapped for cash, struggling to upgrade the Tube network. How the additional demand will be met is not clear. What has shifted as well is the nature of air travel. Post-pandemic, business travel is down and looks unlikely to recover – that, certainly, is what the industry is saying. During the outbreak, holding meetings remotely came into its own and employers took a hard look at their budgets – Zoom or Teams often represent a better alternative in executive time and expense. That therefore raises a major doubt about one of the main claims made for Heathrow's extension. It is said to be necessary to enhance London and the UK's standing in the business world, but how, if the commercial users are not there? There has been movement too, and not of the positive kind, in attitude towards Heathrow the operator. The power outage that shut down the plum in Starmer's vision for resurgence and global acclaim was a shocking episode; it not only highlighted a neglected infrastructure but also a failure of management. Thomas Woldbye, who is seeking permission to build this national project, is the same boss who slept through the night as Britain's busiest airport ceased to function. Heathrow's reputation in the sector was already poor, but this took it to a new low. Woldbye has an idea that is different from the one previously suggested, which is to build the third runway over the M25, taking the motorway underneath – and all without any disruption to road users. This is fanciful even without a track record that hardly inspires confidence. Which raises another question. Why? Why should Heathrow as a company get to preside over the airport's improvement and reap the benefits? If we're all agreed that it is a vital national asset, holding a pivotal place in the economy, then why should the incumbent be in charge, not to mention entrusted, with its development? Those who wax lyrical about Heathrow's importance like to reminisce about how Britain led the transformation of international aviation. Boosting the airport is seen as completing that journey. It is the case that we once did. That was in the Margaret Thatcher era, when British Airways was freed from the shackles of state ownership. Thatcher did more than that, though. She enabled and encouraged competition, giving a steer to the challengers and disruptors, notably to Richard Branson at Virgin and Michael Bishop at British Midland. The newly privatised BA was forced to raise its game, and together, these three set new standards. There appears to be an assumption that Woldbye's company must be given the job. But there is another option. Surinder Arora, the self-made billionaire who has masterminded the building of leading hotels at Heathrow and other airports and is a substantial Heathrow landowner, has his own remedy. His is much cheaper, envisaging a shorter runway that does not affect the M25. It is easy to dismiss Arora. But he is popular with the airlines, he rails rightly against Heathrow's pricing, and he knows a thing or two about customer service. He also possesses heavyweight advisers in the shape of Bechtel, the US engineering, construction and project management giant. He deserves to be taken seriously. Heathrow needs a competitor. Likewise, if neither the airport operator nor Arora is selected and the third runway is again kiboshed, then surely serious thought must be given to expanding rival airports. Heathrow has been resting on its laurels for too long. As for Starmer, he perhaps should ask himself how it is that someone who professes to be forensic legally is so capable of displaying rushes of blood to the head politically. Giving Heathrow such prominence smacks of impetuousness. He's done it and has been left with an almighty headache.
