Every year the news that train fares will be going up leads to an outburst of political bickering amongst the Towns’ politicos.

The mud is slung back and forth, debating what percentage fares would’ve gone up under one party and whose most at fault.

Meanwhile hard-pressed commuters worryingly look at their budgets to see if/how they are going to be able to cope with forking out more money for travel.

Amid the debate about percentages it’s worth remembering many people think fares shouldn’t be going up at all. Why pay more if the service stays the same, they ask.

The truth is, whatever party is in power, fares go up. The percentages may be different but that’s likely to be of little comfort.

Running the railways costs money, and the government wants you to foot more of the bill.

The white paper stipulating this was introduced by the last Labour government in 2007, but the Tories haven’t rushed to reverse it.

When the railways were nationalised, tax payers and commuters split the cost down the middle. One thing our politicians agree on is that fares are too high, so would they contemplate re-nationalisation?

--

Bosses at Medway Hospital show no signs of backing down in the row over blue badge charges, which will return to the agenda this week.

Councillors called for them to be scrapped at full council last month, but in a letter the hospital’s deputy chief executive Patrick Johnson said they are satisfied their position is “equitable and reasonable”, pointing out the hospital offers a number of concessions for disabled visitors.

Chief executive Mark Devlin is due to be quizzed by councillors on the health committee tomorrow evening (Tuesday).

As one disgruntled rail commuter put it: "Only 46 per cent? If they'd surveyed every passenger, it would have been 100 per cent."

He was referring to the latest survey by the watchdog group Passenger Focus, which has released its latest report on what passengers think about rail services. Among a host of indicators, the one that stands out is the 46 per cent who feel that the costs of travelling on trains run by Southeastern does not represent value for money.

Southeastern: Not value for money, say 46 per cent of Kent's rail passengers>>>

That made the operator the worst-rated company on costs of all 22 in the country - not an enviable position.

In one sense, the finding is hardly surprising. Commuters have been stung by some harsh ticket rises - as much as 13 per cent on some routes - that came in at the point the survey got underway so there's no doubt it would have been high on people's minds.

And there will be more pain to come if, as the government intends, rail operators are permitted to hike their fares up by three per cent plus inflation over the next three years.

This is a political Achilles' heel for the coalition government and particularly the Conservatives. Labour is committed to opposing the Government's decision for regulated fares - which include commuter, season and saver tickets - to rise by this amount. It clearly believes that there is electoral capital to be made out of commuter angst and anger.

Kent MPs have been vocal in their efforts to support hard-pressed commuters and highly critical of Southeastern's performance. Kent may have the benefit of high speed services but not everyone uses them and there is sometimes a sense that the government fails to appreciate that.

It will be test of their collective mettle to wring out of their government concessions that might just spare long-suffering rail users even more pain in the years to come.