Would free public transport work in the UK?

[Dentonian]

I'm sure a lot of pensioners are capable of catching a bus and then an onward tram or train, even if there isn't a tram or train stop near their house.

Regarding commuters if you had to pay to park at the station (or Metrolink stop), while the bus to the station becomes free will it attract those who 'park & ride' to leave the car at home?

Many, but by no means all, could connect with rail transport, but in practise, it would be pointless unless you lived a considerable distance from the city centre and the bus sector was only a couple of miles. Even then, its probably only worth considering for heavy rail. Most Metrolink running times are barely faster than off-peak buses, most Metrolink stops are devoid of meaningful shelter from the "elements" (and I don't just mean weather) and the same goes for bus stops. As things stand, all three forms suffer from poor punctuality, so it is often just as quick (and less hassle) to stay on the bus.

 

[northwichcat]

unless you lived a considerable distance from the city centre

People of all ages don't just use public transport as a way of getting to the nearest city, even if those are the most lucrative routes for transport operators.

 

[Dentonian]

OAPs and under 16s get free travel on London buses AIUI. Free for all sounds like a good idea but who would pay all the "little" companies that run rail and bus services - especially in and around London? Enough to send shock waves through shareholders' minds....

I suspect London would be the *least* problematic. Bus fares are already cheaper than most of the UK - especially for short journeys - and politically, public transport is more acceptable in London. And let's face it, free buses would be a drop in the ocean to finance compared to CrossRail I/II, Thameslink, HS2, Elizabethan Line etc. Although, even in London, I suppose Investment is "sexy" (especially if someone else is paying towards it!) and Subsidy is a dirty word.

 

[northwichcat]

but who would pay all the "little" companies that run rail and bus services

Surely it would be simpler. Currently if there's bad weather or a lot of people on holiday or a bug going around then revenue can drop on a bus route but if they get a fixed amount for running it (funded by tax payers) they don't have to keep changing routes and frequencies to try and make a profit.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

A political knee-jerk reaction to the failure by politicians to deal with a known problem. Giving away anything with definite value will always cause problems because firstly it ends up being taken for granted and the true costs of its provision becomes resented and secondly it builds false expectation of what might be possible. In the case of transport this leads to unsustainable downward pressure on costs of infrastructure, equipment and staffing, and expectation of provision in circumstances when the costs really are much higher, eg deep rural areas, overnight, etc.

As for the idea that "guilty parties" might be able to cover the costs... Motor manufacturers may make good profits but those profits will soon dry up if you massively undermine their market, and then who pays? And mentioning tax evaders really is clutching at straws; the sums involved are tiny compared to what would be involved with a free public transport scheme.

A much more practical solution would be a ban on internal-combustion powered vehicles in those areas where the problem of emissions is worst and the provision of electrically propelled substitutes. These could be trains, trams, buses, taxis: take your pick. And these needn't be free of charge: select your preferred balance of fares v subsidies. There would still remain the thorny problem of HGVs as it seems electrically propelled trucks of a usable size are still some way off. Perhaps the magic fuel cell will be the saviour...

 

[Mutant Lemming]

It would be better described at "Free at Point of Use" - for it would have to be funded somehow - higher income tax, VAT increased and put on to more items etc.

 

[Essan]

However it was a time when cars were expensive and ownership much lower. People are now far too wedded to their own personal vehicle that the cost of public transport is probably not the main reason many people don’t use it.

Aye, I remember even in the 90s knowing a girl who drove to work each day. As did her father. And her sister. All worked lived together and worked within 5 minutes walk of each other and they lived on a regular bus route ..... But cars meant they could come and go as they each liked .... And, anyway, these days we have a right to drive!!!!

 

[Dentonian]

People of all ages don't just use public transport as a way of getting to the nearest city, even if those are the most lucrative routes for transport operators.

Very true! But Rail is geared towards doing just that! And without Bus Reform, its becoming clear that First Manchester and Stagecoach are developing the same strategy. I'd be interested to know if the same is happening in West Midlands and West Yorkshire, especially, as they both have a number of large towns surrounding the regional centre. I know that sounds like I'm drifting off-topic, but that's why I raised the question does it mean Free on all forms of public transport. Nightmare scenario would be (in GM & WM) Free Light Rail; Free heavy rail within (e.g) 10km of Manchester/Birmingham, but no reduction on buses.

 

[Dentonian]

It depends what you mean by "free public transport".

Noteworthy that most existing systems are city-based.

If all public transport was to be free imagine the pressure on the WCML if Liverpool were playing a Manchester team in the FA Cup Final!

Depending on which Manchester team, there is an obvious retort to that............ Mind you, statistically I believe its been demonstrated that the retort would apply at least as much to Liverpool as said Manchester team. And anyway, by the time it was implemented, could it not just as easily be Everton? Oh! well, maybe not.

 

[Dentonian]

The key is car parking and possibly road charging. Central London works, even if you pay for your fare, because there is no affordable or feasible way of accessing work by car.

Not a chance of it happening in Greater Manchester then. We've just had the situation where Manchester City Council have considered, Whitehall's demand (sorry, request) for suggestions to reduce Transport-based pollution (note, I said Pollution) in the city centre. That in turn, IIRC came from an EU study saying that many UK cities were breaching legal emissions levels. FTR, the City council rejected the suggestion of a workplace parking charge scheme. But not before the Media and Motoring populous said this was all to do with Andy Burnham trying to bring in a *Congestion* charge by the back door.

Also, elsewhere in GM, parking is generally free and even where there is a charge, its calculated to make sure that local residents don't pay more in fuel and parking combined as they would in bus fares.

 

[radamfi]

Presumably the point of free travel is to attract car users to public transport. In that case it would be best to look at where the highest modal shares for public transport are achieved and see what they do. Switzerland is the obvious place to look but their fares are not particularly cheap. Although there is a high take up of the famous GA card, giving unlimited travel nationwide for a year on almost all transport.

In countries where proper cycle facilities are provided, especially the Netherlands, they effectively have free local transport.

 

[Ianigsy]

So by "free", we're really talking about 100% funded from taxation and subsidies rather than fares?

I suppose the question is whether people who currently travel by car would change their travel habits if they knew that the cost of getting to work by public transport was already included in their PAYE and council tax.

 

[topydre]

Is TrawsCymru the bus network that connects places such as Cardiff - Llandrindod Wells via Brecon, and Aberystwyth - Carmarthen?

Yes, the following:
T1: Aberystwyth - Carmarthen (though not the same route as the railway)
T2: Aberystwyth - Bangor via Dolgellau (partly parallel to existing railways, partly runs on old Porthmadog - Carmarthen link
T3: Wrexham - Barmouth (follows old railway)
T4: Newtown - Cardiff (almost follows old Mid-Wales Railway)
T5: Aberystwyth - Haverfordwest (connects Cardigan and Aberaeron which used to have railway stations but on different axes)
T6: Brecon - Swansea (follows old railway)
T9: Cardiff - Airport (parallel to railway)

Last time I looked the ridership had increased by something like 25% with minimal publicity. At times, extra buses had to be brought into service due to overcrowding. But it really does tempt people out of their cars

 

[Dentonian]

It seems people in Greater Manchester getting rail tickets issued to Manchester CTLZ (allowing free city centre travel on Metrolink) results in many people getting a tram from Piccadilly to Market St or Market St to Victoria, so perhaps a Metrolink type frequency would be sufficient for that?

Another thing to consider is if you're somewhere unfamiliar then a free bus from the station to where ever you are going might be easiest even if you're more than capable of walking.

Actually, even this example proves my point. I have on a number of occasions caught the train to Piccadilly and transferred to the tram as far as Market Street or Shudehill. More often than not, the additional walking time to Station and the transfer and waiting time on the Metrolink platform has meant my journey has taken longer than by bus to Piccadilly Gardens. In particular, the average wait for a tram seems to be 8-10 minutes just to get to Market Street, and I don't recall any occasion that walk/rail has been as fast was walk/bus only to the Gardens, Albeit, I would never have need to do it in the morning peak.

As for MetroShuttle, I wouldn't use that to familiarise yourself with the city. For one thing M/S 2 only serves Shudehill southbound, despite virtually passing the Interchange northbound.

 

[Dr_Paul]

Worth considering would free public transport make us more lazy? If there was a free frequent bus that would take you 1 mile down the road would you be less likely to walk instead of the bus costing £2 to take you 1 mile down the road?

I have free transport in London (railways after 0930) as I live in London and I am over 60; I usually walk the 10 minute journey to or from the town centre, and will only catch a bus if it's raining hard. Up in London I often walk from Waterloo to Holborn, Bloomsbury, Fitzrovia, Clerkenwell, or a similar distance from another station, rather than catch a bus. So: having free transport does not necessarily make one lazy.

 

[Dentonian]

So by "free", we're really talking about 100% funded from taxation and subsidies rather than fares?

I suppose the question is whether people who currently travel by car would change their travel habits if they knew that the cost of getting to work by public transport was already included in their PAYE and council tax.

That's only one side of the equation, and the argument isn't helped if the initiative is based solely on reducing pollution and not congestion.
The other side of the equation is how much money would the business sector save through reduced congestion? How much would be saved through less cost to the NHS in terms of not only pollution related diseases, but less road "accidents".

But then, there is the more detailed question of how encompassing will it be?

If it only covers regional centres, won't it just transfer the problem to the suburbs - this is already happening, anyway?

And if it only covers rail, won't it end up doing exactly the opposite of what its intended, especially where rail (heavy and light) competes with bus? Increasing car "acquisition" (legal or otherwise); increasing car use (and the proportion of uninsured or generally poor drivers) and increasing socio-economic exclusion (the remaining 10-20% of adults for whom health or wealth issues means cars will never be an option).

 

[Dentonian]

In countries where proper cycle facilities are provided, especially the Netherlands, they effectively have free local transport.

*They* being a small minority of the population and - as an aside to this specific thread, but increasingly relevant to Urban Transport Policy as a whole - how law abiding are Dutch cyclists?

 

[radamfi]

More often than not, the additional walking time to Station and the transfer and waiting time on the Metrolink platform has meant my journey has taken longer than by bus to Piccadilly Gardens.

But Piccadilly Gardens is just one place. People's actual destination can be anywhere in the spread out city centre, if not further afield. In most cities of the size of GM, you wouldn't expect one stop to serve everyone's city centre needs. It is normal in major cities outside Britain to make one or more transfers within the city centre to get to where you need to go.

 

[sheff1]

Plenty of rich pensioners use ENCTS passes,

Is this a proven fact ? I wouldn't say I knew many rich pensioners but the few I would class as comparatively "rich" would not been seen dead on a bus - if they don't want to drive somewhere they will take a taxi.

 

[Dentonian]

But Piccadilly Gardens is just one place. People's actual destination can be anywhere in the spread out city centre, if not further afield. In most cities of the size of GM, you wouldn't expect one stop to serve everyone's city centre needs. It is normal in major cities outside Britain to make one or more transfers within the city centre to get to where you need to go.

True, but transferring still involves time penalties. This plus the cost penalties (no CTLZ on buses!) and general connectivity, means that those to the east of GM are increasingly isolated from the growth areas of the city and beyond, compared to the other three quadrants.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

The tram in Salt Lake is free on the section between the Amtrak Station and the city center, the rest is fare'd. As an aside, it was quite depressing to see, the sheer number of homeless people who seem to ride up and down all day on the free section to keep warm.

Exactly. So the free bit is quite small. And the result of it being free was that last time I was in Salt Lake City, I used the tram to go one stop - a journey that I could easily have walked (and I'm fairly strongly into keeping fit as well as environmentally aware, and do frequently walk to places). I guess that answers jcollins's question about whether making public transport free would cause people to swap from walking to using public transport for some journeys!

 

[billio]

Worth considering would free public transport make us more lazy? If there was a free frequent bus that would take you 1 mile down the road would you be less likely to walk instead of the bus costing £2 to take you 1 mile down the road?

Well in those days when I could buy an annual London bus pass for £60, I sometimes used to hop-on a bus just to cross a busy traffic junction. That was in the days when you could hop-on a bus. At the same time I would run between buses stopped at traffic lights to get on the one at the front. A particularly useful technique for making progress along the Wandsworth Road.

 

[radamfi]

*They* being a small minority of the population and - as an aside to this specific thread, but increasingly relevant to Urban Transport Policy as a whole - how law abiding are Dutch cyclists?

They are only a small minority of the population in countries where there is little provision, such as the UK. It would seem odd to provide free local public transport in the Netherlands when so many people already take advantage of virtually free cycling.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

A political knee-jerk reaction to the failure by politicians to deal with a known problem. Giving away anything with definite value will always cause problems because firstly it ends up being taken for granted and the true costs of its provision becomes resented and secondly it builds false expectation of what might be possible. In the case of transport this leads to unsustainable downward pressure on costs of infrastructure, equipment and staffing, and expectation of provision in circumstances when the costs really are much higher, eg deep rural areas, overnight, etc.

I think this sums it up nicely. The problem is that on a large scale, free public transport would not only be not workable (because demand would soar and the cost would become huge), but arguably it wouldn't even be desirable on a large scale: It would put so much pressure on costs that it becomes very difficult to keep the quality of public transport up. And of course public transport does cause environmental damage and noise and etc., and does consume a lot of energy - just not as much as cars. You wouldn't only get people swapping from cars to public transport, you'd get people swapping from walking and cycling to public transport too, which would be pretty bad for the environment (although the reduced car use would balance that).

Right now the balance of what it costs to use public transport versus what it costs to drive if you have a car is wrong, and I'd strongly favour making public transport cheaper, and making driving more difficult/more expensive in congested cities. But I don't think making it completely free would be a good idea (other than in very limited situations, such as for example dedicated park-and-ride routes to stop people driving into town centres).

 

[radamfi]

True, but transferring still involves time penalties. This plus the cost penalties (no CTLZ on buses!) and general connectivity, means that those to the east of GM are increasingly isolated from the growth areas of the city and beyond, compared to the other three quadrants.

Transferring is inevitable in major cities, simply because it is impossible to provide a direct service from everywhere to everywhere. Unless you can persuade people to make transfers in major cities, a high modal share will be difficult to achieve.

 

[route:oxford]

Exactly. So the free bit is quite small. And the result of it being free was that last time I was in Salt Lake City, I used the tram to go one stop - a journey that I could easily have walked (and I'm fairly strongly into keeping fit as well as environmentally aware, and do frequently walk to places). I guess that answers jcollins's question about whether making public transport free would cause people to swap from walking to using public transport for some journeys!

Many US tourist towns and cities have a "free" trolley. I often use the one in Alexandria when I'm in DC on business:-

All Aboard the King Street Trolley!
Free River-to-Rail Service Officially Begins April 1

Clang! Clang! On April 1, the distinctive sound of a brass bell will fill the streets of Old Town Alexandria as the King Street Trolley officially goes into service, transporting residents, visitors, and those who work in Old Town between the King Street Metrorail Station and the Old Town waterfront.

The free trolley will operate seven days a week from 10 a.m. to 10 p.m. Approximately every 15 minutes, riders can board at the unit block of King Street near the Potomac River waterfront, the King Street Metrorail station, or at any of the signed stops along King Street, which are approximately 2 blocks apart. The new trolley service replaces the weekend DASH About bus service, which will be discontinued after Sunday, March 30. Typically, four trolley vehicles will circulate on King Street in order to maintain the 15-minute intervals.

In addition to the bell, the trolley sports a black and red exterior, rubber tires for a smooth ride, and adjustable paned windows.

The Alexandria City Council approved and funded the trolley service as part of the City’s National Harbor initiatives. The trolley will complement the water taxi service from the National Harbor Development across the Potomac River in Prince George’s County, Maryland, also slated to open by April 1. It is expected that the water taxi service will bring hundreds of new tourists to Alexandria every day throughout the year. The trolley will also encourage Washington, D.C. area residents to visit Old Town to shop and dine. The trolley is also part of the City’s continuing efforts to manage congestion and reduce mobile emissions by encouraging residents, commuters, workers, and visitors to choose travel options outside of driving alone.

But it's only a limited service that essentially links shops with a river taxi and the Metro.

 

[radamfi]

I suppose the question is whether people who currently travel by car would change their travel habits if they knew that the cost of getting to work by public transport was already included in their PAYE and council tax.

Free travel wouldn't make that many drivers switch to public transport on its own. The service has to be sufficiently attractive. However, excessively high fares can deter drivers from switching even if the public transport alternative is good.

The question is, does spending money on free travel result in higher patronage compared to spending that money on improved services? The evidence from Switzerland suggests not.

 

[billio]

I don't think it makes sense to have free public transport in the rush hours, maybe outside those times it might make some sense, particularly when the usage of a service is weak. However, there is always a danger from subsidised travel in that over the years the service will decline.
It is interesting to note that people over 66 living in the greater Manchester area have free tram and train travel in that area. Free travel for the elderly also applies to some tram networks, for example Sheffield. Is there research on the impact of this benefit on travel ?.
What's annoying is the wide variety of schemes across the country and the irritation that if you live just outside a Transport Executive area you can't benefit from their free or cheap train travel offers.

 

[3141]

I'd be interested to know the costs of some form of transport - mode or modes, and within a defined area - to be compared with the income from fares. That would give as starting-point to think about the amount of money that would have to be found to provide free transport services. You could then think about the changes in costs if patronage changed; and about the increases in capacity that would be necessary and whether it would be possible to provide them, if patronage increased. A considerable amount of modelling would be necessary to work out if this idea might be practicable and worthwhile, or is just something that in other contexts is called "crayonista".

 

[Tetchytyke]

Enough to send shockwaves through shareholders minds

Stagecoach in Newcastle make a profit margin of 23%.

I think that sums up how likely cheap or free buses are in this city.