£2 Price Cap on fares in England - Now extended beyond October 2023

[Dai Corner]

Given that over 50% of England bus journeys are in London how would the messaging come across on that?

"Great news! Fares reduced to £2, except for over half of you we're increasing them by over 20%."

A combination of 'levelling up' and 'levelling down'?

 

[Bletchleyite]

A combination of 'levelling up' and 'levelling down'?

If you're seeing this as trying to defend the "red wall", anything that kicks London a bit is likely to be very popular indeed with those voters.

But yes, I do think the London fare should increase to £2 before Khan shouts for more money again. Indeed I'd make it a condition of him getting any more subsidy at all.

 

[Goldfish62]

But yes, I do think the London fare should increase to £2 before Khan shouts for more money again. Indeed I'd make it a condition of him getting any more subsidy at all.

I hadn't put you down as anti-London in respect of public transport.

 

[Starmill]

In my view, a flat £2 single is a good idea for cities and towns, up to around 10 - 12 kilometres maximum. Personally I'd also set the daily cap to something like £3.80 in order to incentivise round trips and provide a small 'loyalty' discount. What you need to do is encourage people to use public transport services within towns and cities by any means possible. You simply cannot do this at the ludicrous fare levels that are sometimes set at the moment. The cost in extra government subsidy would be tiny. We need to just get on with it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I hadn't put you down as anti-London in respect of public transport.

I'm not but I think £1.65 is too low for the bus fare. At £2 London routes would be more financially viable and so the cuts would not be necessary. I'd rather pay £2 and have a service than be unable to pay £1.65 by not having one.

 

[miklcct]

I'm not but I think £1.65 is too low for the bus fare. At £2 London routes would be more financially viable and so the cuts would not be necessary. I'd rather pay £2 and have a service than be unable to pay £1.65 by not having one.

If the London fare is increased from £1.65 to £2 I will even use buses less, to the extent of making huge detours on the railway network.

At the current level of £1.65 I'm not going to make a journey between my home and the closest Overground station even if using alternative transport (Thameslink) means a detour, but I may still use it for a shopping round-trip to e.g. Brent Cross if I can get it done within an hour.

Getting it to £2 will mean I will do less shopping trips instead.

I will hope for a distance-based fare, starting from £0.5 for the shortest distance (e.g. within 1-2 km), and the abolishment for transfer fares and caps (i.e. you will need to pay twice if you make a transfer, however, the total amount is the same compared to taking a through service).

For example, a return train ticket from Brondesbury to Sunnymeads is £5.9 with Railcard, while the one from Cricklewood is £6. Because the high bus fare I am not willing to pay for it to get from my home to Brondesbury (1.7 km down the A5), despite that taking Thameslink from Cricklewood is a huge detour via West Hampstead.

If the bus fare is as low as the level in Hong Kong, for example, £0.5 for a single journey, I'll be happy to pay for it for a more direct journey.

 

[Busaholic]

In my view, a flat £2 single is a good idea for cities and towns, up to around 10 - 12 kilometres maximum. Personally I'd also set the daily cap to something like £3.80 in order to incentivise round trips and provide a small 'loyalty' discount. What you need to do is encourage people to use public transport services within towns and cities by any means possible. You simply cannot do this at the ludicrous fare levels that are sometimes set at the moment. The cost in extra government subsidy would be tiny. We need to just get on with it.

In total agreement with that. Is there any other country with still significant levels of public transport by bus that is perpetually obsessed by the fare structure, and gets nowhere near to ever resolving it? London got nearest to resolving it before George Osborne decided it had to suffer for deciding to abandon the Tories electorally, perhaps for the foreseeable future. Yes, just get on with it.

 

[miklcct]

In my view, a flat £2 single is a good idea for cities and towns, up to around 10 - 12 kilometres maximum. Personally I'd also set the daily cap to something like £3.80 in order to incentivise round trips and provide a small 'loyalty' discount. What you need to do is encourage people to use public transport services within towns and cities by any means possible. You simply cannot do this at the ludicrous fare levels that are sometimes set at the moment. The cost in extra government subsidy would be tiny. We need to just get on with it.

The daily cap is seldom relevant as an incentive to use public transport services within towns and cities. I was paying close to that level when I lived in Bournemouth as the bus companies offers carnet tickets which I can use one by one, however, the only reason I used it was because the route I travelled was an express route which runs up to 70 km/h non-stop to my destination (which took about only half of the time compared to riding a bike for the whole distance), which I'm happy to pay a premium in using it. In the latter days I lived there I didn't use the normal routes much except as part of a daily fare, mostly as a result of needing to take the express multiple times a day.

My willingness to pay is about £0.1 - £0.2 / km for a normal-speed bus service (i.e. one which isn't as fast as a taxi), at the lower end for a local stopping service and at the higher end for a service which runs on a trunk road and stops less often.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Getting it to £2 will mean I will do less shopping trips instead.

On the basis that "reduce, reuse, recycle" applies to travel as well, that's not a bad thing.

Bus journeys of about 1km or under should be walked, and of 2-3km and under should be cycled by preference. So a flat fare does have something going for it. Most people who are infirm enough that they can't do either of those things likely has a free pass of some kind.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

If the London fare is increased from £1.65 to £2 I will even use buses less

Yes because at that level, it is unsustainable so you will have fewer buses and fewer routes on which to get that fare.

In my view, a flat £2 single is a good idea for cities and towns, up to around 10 - 12 kilometres maximum. Personally I'd also set the daily cap to something like £3.80 in order to incentivise round trips and provide a small 'loyalty' discount. What you need to do is encourage people to use public transport services within towns and cities by any means possible. You simply cannot do this at the ludicrous fare levels that are sometimes set at the moment. The cost in extra government subsidy would be tiny. We need to just get on with it.

Indeed, fare levels are too high but sadly (as we know) as they are skewed because of ENCTS. That is most pronounced in shire towns where local bus services have simply collapsed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, fare levels are too high but sadly (as we know) as they are skewed because of ENCTS. That is most pronounced in shire towns where local bus services have simply collapsed.

The reimbursement model for ENCTS is definitely flawed, and I do fear that the model used for this scheme will be similarly flawed and result in cuts, not increases.

That doesn't mean ENCTS is itself flawed as a concept, just that the reimbursement is too low, and because it's often (though not always) based on single fares has caused those to be artificially raised. It would have been better to base it on something else, e.g. period season ticket prices.

 

[miklcct]

On the basis that "reduce, reuse, recycle" applies to travel as well, that's not a bad thing.

Bus journeys of about 1km or under should be walked, and of 2-3km and under should be cycled by preference. So a flat fare does have something going for it. Most people who are infirm enough that they can't do either of those things likely has a free pass of some kind.

In Hong Kong, the "official coverage" of a railway station is 500 m from it, anywhere further than that feeder transport provision will be provided.

It's infeasible to have a railway station covering every km². Considering my case where the nearest Overground station is 1.7 km from my home - too far to walk under normal circumstances. Are you serious that you expect everyone living in Cricklewood cycle on the A5 to Brondesbury station to take the train?

 

[Megafuss]

Two ways of doing it really, either:
A. Government pays all Operator costs and keeps all the revenue (including bus passes and smaller tickets) as a subsidy deduction.
B. Government pays a flat mileage fee for every £2 journey e.g. 55p a mile. Passenger has to declare end point when they board, total passenger journey distance is worked out and subsidy paid with ticket revenue deducted.

Working out reimbursement for single tickets is relatively straight forward

But how do you work out the compensation operators get for lost period pass revenue?

My local Megarider is £14.90 (which dont begrudge paying for) . I use the bus 6 days a week - once in each direction, so that would be a shortfall of £2.90 to the operator when I switch to £2 tickets instead.

 

[Busaholic]

Yes because at that level, it is unsustainable so you will have fewer buses and fewer routes on which to get that fare.

Not sure what you mean by 'unsustainable', a word that increasingly means whatever the user chooses. With a daily cap of £4 on bus use in London, and scrapping the 'hopper fare', virtually no regular users need be lost, so the excuse to further reduce routes wouldn't' be there. That is not to say that current levels of evening and Sunday services, and on sections of individual routes at other times, couldn't produce significant cost savings.

 

[GusB]

In Hong Kong, the "official coverage" of a railway station is 500 m from it, anywhere further than that feeder transport provision will be provided.

It's infeasible to have a railway station covering every km². Considering my case where the nearest Overground station is 1.7 km from my home - too far to walk under normal circumstances. Are you serious that you expect everyone living in Cricklewood cycle on the A5 to Brondesbury station to take the train?

1.7km is just over a mile, which for an average fit person is not a huge distance. If you can't be bothered walking, take the bus by all means. Do expect to pay a realistic price for your journey, however.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not sure what you mean by 'unsustainable', a word that increasingly means whatever the user chooses. With a daily cap of £4 on bus use in London, and scrapping the 'hopper fare', virtually no regular users need be lost, so the excuse to further reduce routes won't be there. That is not to say that current levels of evening and Sunday services, and on sections of individual routes at other times, couldn't produce significant cost savings.

I don't see a benefit to scrapping the Hopper fare. Its existence saves money - it allows routes to be removed, replaced with connections, and aids network simplification so you can run high frequencies on a smaller number of simpler routes with a change made to get to the desired part of central London. Just increase the single to £2.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jul 2022 ==

1.7km is just over a mile, which for an average fit person is not a huge distance. If you can't be bothered walking, take the bus by all means. Do expect to pay a realistic price for your journey, however.

I thought we'd established that they live just up the road from Cricklewood Thameslink, anyway

A key difference between the UK and most large Asian cities is the temperature. Slightly less so Hong Kong (it's warmer in the UK than there today), but many such cities e.g. Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore etc get much hotter than the UK generally does for about 4 days a year. Thus walking is seen as less feasible, and air conditioning is less of a desirability and more of an essential.

If you walk 1.7km at an average speed in typical UK temperatures (<20C) you won't get particularly sweaty. If you walk 1.7km in 30C+ (as to be fair it is today) it's a lot less pleasant!

I think as ever that poster's views are heavily influenced by their origins, where things are different for very good reasons.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Not sure what you mean by 'unsustainable', a word that increasingly means whatever the user chooses. With a daily cap of £4 on bus use in London, and scrapping the 'hopper fare', virtually no regular users need be lost, so the excuse to further reduce routes wouldn't' be there. That is not to say that current levels of evening and Sunday services, and on sections of individual routes at other times, couldn't produce significant cost savings.

Unsustainable....in that it isn't financially viable to set a fare level at £1.65, and that the person who I was responding to felt that an extra 35p would be the difference between getting a bus and not.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unsustainable....in that it isn't financially viable to set a fare level at £1.65, and that the person who I was responding to felt that an extra 35p would be the difference between getting a bus and not.

Exactly. London's bus passenger volumes are so high that if they bump the fare up just a bit they may well become commercially viable, and then at that point the network can expand without requiring any more subsidy.

 

[markymark2000]

I don't see a benefit to scrapping the Hopper fare.

Rather than scrapping it as it is a good scheme in general, why not put the hopper fare to £2.

That way, people pay more for using additional services but it also keeps the hopper scheme.

 

[miklcct]

1.7km is just over a mile, which for an average fit person is not a huge distance. If you can't be bothered walking, take the bus by all means. Do expect to pay a realistic price for your journey, however.

If you expect £2 for a 1.7 km bus journey, than a 10 km bus journey will well cost you £12.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Rather than scrapping it as it is a good scheme in general, why not put the hopper fare to £2.

That way, people pay more for using additional services but it also keeps the hopper scheme.

Yes, that is what I would do - keep it as a Hopper but increase it from £1.65 to £2 in line with the new national standard.

 

[Wolfie]

Yes, that is what I would do - keep it as a Hopper but increase it from £1.65 to £2 in line with the new national standard.

So, a nearly 20% rise in London bus fares at the same time as they are cut elsewhere in England.... and you really think that won't be spun as a further subsidy from London to the rest of the country? I'm sure that act of political suicide will go down well with Tory members in London and the South East.....

 

[Bletchleyite]

So, a nearly 20% rise in London bus fares at the same time as they are cut elsewhere in England.... and you really think that won't be spun as a further subsidy from London to the rest of the country? I'm sure that act of political suicide will go down well with Tory members in London and the South East.....

Umm, Tories, buses? A Tube fare increase would get Tory heckles up, but I very much doubt a bus fare one would.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

If you expect £2 for a 1.7 km bus journey, than a 10 km bus journey will well cost you £12.

Not really as public transport is typically based on a taper or reducing zone basis rather than a linear mechanism.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not really as public transport is typically based on a taper or reducing zone basis rather than a linear mechanism.

Indeed, it's just a pricing model. There is pretty much no direct relationship between the cost of carrying someone on a given journey and the fare. While a full bus does use more fuel than an empty one, one passenger isn't going to make a noticeable difference in a vehicle weighing 10 tonnes or more.

 

[Dai Corner]

So, a nearly 20% rise in London bus fares at the same time as they are cut elsewhere in England.... and you really think that won't be spun as a further subsidy from London to the rest of the country? I'm sure that act of political suicide will go down well with Tory members in London and the South East.....

'Levelling Up" has been a key part of the outgoing Prime Minister's agenda. Of course, we'll have a new one in a few weeks' time who might have different ideas about how to retain the 'red wall' seats.

 

[Starmill]

If you expect £2 for a 1.7 km bus journey, than a 10 km bus journey will well cost you £12.

Why would it? I'd charge the same fare for both.

Cheaper fares or zero fares for public transport on short journeys result in mode shift from active travel to public transport, which is undesirable.

The only issue is with the inclusiveness of active travel. But that's easy enough to solve by providing appropriate access to your reserved car-free paths for active travel and a suitable free pass for local journeys for disabled people.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The only issue is with the inclusiveness of active travel. But that's easy enough to solve by providing appropriate access to your reserved car-free paths for active travel and a suitable free pass for local journeys for disabled people.

Most people who through genuine disability can't walk a mile or so are entitled to free passes anyway. Some people can't because they're unfit, but that'll solve itself fairly quickly if they actually do, starting with walking to the next bus stop along etc.

The majority wouldn't cycle unless there was segregated infrastructure, the answer to that of course being to build it. The Dutch can answer any question about utility cycling correctly, and e-bikes answer any questions about British hills.

Flat "round" fares also allow for much quicker boarding, because all you have to do is tap in or chuck a £2 coin on the tray, grabbing the ticket without even stopping - nothing to chat with the driver about. I hope Ticketer are quick to update their software to allow for this and that the funding model used doesn't require collecting destination information. This makes the service much more attractive as well as on some very frequent routes potentially saving an entire vehicle from the circuit.

 

[Busaholic]

Unsustainable....in that it isn't financially viable to set a fare level at £1.65, and that the person who I was responding to felt that an extra 35p would be the difference between getting a bus and not.

Apologies, I got the wrong end of the stick.

 

[GusB]

If you expect £2 for a 1.7 km bus journey, than a 10 km bus journey will well cost you £12.

Not necessarily - the rate per mile is generally higher when you make shorter journeys.

So, a nearly 20% rise in London bus fares at the same time as they are cut elsewhere in England.... and you really think that won't be spun as a further subsidy from London to the rest of the country? I'm sure that act of political suicide will go down well with Tory members in London and the South East.....

Stop feeling that you're hard done by in London. A £2 flat fare to travel in the capital is not a terrible hardship.

Discussion about whether London subsidises the rest of the country does not belong in this thread anyway.