Should local public transport become free after Covid-19?

[philosopher]

After the Covid-19 pandemic has ended and a vaccine has been discovered (assuming it will) what do people think about local public transport becoming free? This has already occurred in Luxembourg and Tallinn in Estonia. I think there is good argument for free public transport after this as I will explain.

It seems likely that public transport will have a hard time in the post Covid-19 world. It seems that after this there will be more working from home, some people will be reluctant to use public transport due to it being associated with disease and people will do more shopping and leisure activities from home. All this will reduce public transport use.

Public transport is generally regarded as a necessity across the world, even the most car dependent parts of the United States generally have some form of public transport. Therefore even with a large fall in use, public transport systems will need to be kept. Lower use obviously will result in falling revenue and therefore require greater subsidies to run.

Added to the falling revenue of public transport, post Covid-19 there may be fewer shops, restaurants, etc, resulting in the government receiving less business rates from these businesses. Some of this could be offset from greater tax revenue from online companies, however lets be honest online firms are not great at paying their taxes. Declining city centres will also probably have more social problems such as crime and dereliction.

Free public transport obviously will cost money for the government, however if it encourages people back onto public transport and into city centres, keeping shops, restaurants, pubs, etc in business it will result in maintaining or increasing tax revenue from these businesses and reduce the other costs associated with declining city centres. In addition free public transport will reduce some overheads such as maintaining ticket collection systems. So financially I reckon the hit to the government will be small. Free public transport will also likely reduce or offset any increase in road congestion that could occur if people are reluctant to use public transport and improve air quality. Therefore when all this is considered I think overall there is a net benefit.

 

[yorkie]

It's a good idea in theory, but could it lead to a rise in antisocial behaviour?

 

[Mat17]

Some cities do or did a very simplified version of this idea in that they had free city clipper buses that transport people around the key locations, transport hubs, key shopping areas, hospitals (if they are in the central vicinity). I suspect there was some merit to this on the points you raise, as the cost to run the services were offset by the increased revenue of the buinesses supplied. In some areas it worked, in others, it was trailed and quickly abandoned.

Going more mainstream though? It depends how local is 'local', a mile, two, three, five? I don't know, noble idea, some merit to encouraging people into town centres and the green aspects of such a service, but in practice? I'm not sure it would be widely viable. I suspect the incumbent private bus companies would fight hard to overturn such a move, unless of course they were designated to provide the service and were paid what they considered a 'viable' rate.

I suspect it's more unlikely due to the current social distancing measures, which will push even private operators to the wall, but also the country as a whole is going to be looking at a lot of debt when this thing reaches its conclusion. The last thing any government (regardless of hue) will want is to spend more and more, for what could be less than a outright roaring success. But then again, you never know. Maybe this crisis will change the country's priorities?

 

[westv]

Can I have free tickets for my Hull to London journeys when I eventually go back to the office?! Thanks.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's a good idea in theory, but could it lead to a rise in antisocial behaviour?

That would be a concern. How well has the "stick" method worked in London, i.e. that instead of it being universally free you get a free travelcard (Oyster Zip or ENCTS style) which can be withdrawn if abused?

There would also be a need to consider how rail contributes to this - I wouldn't want to see mass branch line closures due to people deserting them as the bus is free.

 

[philosopher]

Going more mainstream though? It depends how local is 'local', a mile, two, three, five? I don't know, noble idea, some merit to encouraging people into town centres and the green aspects of such a service, but in practice? I'm not sure it would be widely viable. I suspect the incumbent private bus companies would fight hard to overturn such a move, unless of course they were designated to provide the service and were paid what they considered a 'viable' rate.

I suspect it's more unlikely due to the current social distancing measures, which will push even private operators to the wall, but also the country as a whole is going to be looking at a lot of debt when this thing reaches its conclusion. The last thing any government (regardless of hue) will want is to spend more and more, for what could be less than a outright roaring success. But then again, you never know. Maybe this crisis will change the country's priorities?

I think free local public transport would only be feasible if it was operated by a local authority. Given the current social distancing measures I suspect the government will have nationalise or at least pay private operators to run services. I do think in the long run the financial costs to the government will be small, however there is of course the risk that this is not case and it ends up being costly with little societal benefit.

I think free public transport would need to trialled first in a large town or small city to see what the costs and benefits are to see if there is an overall net benefit.

 

[Mat17]

I think free local public transport would only be feasible if it was operated by a local authority. Given the current social distancing measures I suspect the government will have nationalise or at least pay private operators to run services. I do think in the long run the financial costs to the government will be small, however there is of course the risk that this is not case and it ends up being costly with little societal benefit.

I think free public transport would need to trialled first in a large town or small city to see what the costs and benefits are to see if there is an overall net benefit.

Well I'm certainly not opposed to the idea. I think it would be brilliant if a way to work the system could be found.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well I'm certainly not opposed to the idea. I think it would be brilliant if a way to work the system could be found.

One thing that makes it difficult is that we don't have a clear split between local and InterCity train services to give validity on the former but not the latter - any thoughts on how that could be achieved?

Another option may be a zonal system, but it'd have to be based on where people want to go, not Council areas. It would be silly for instance if the people of Ormskirk couldn't go to Liverpool which is their most likely destination - Preston far less so.

 

[alex397]

It's a good idea in theory, but could it lead to a rise in antisocial behaviour?

That would be a concern. How well has the "stick" method worked in London, i.e. that instead of it being universally free you get a free travelcard (Oyster Zip or ENCTS style) which can be withdrawn if abused?

There would also be a need to consider how rail contributes to this - I wouldn't want to see mass branch line closures due to people deserting them as the bus is free.

In my experience, growing up on the Essex-London border about 10 years ago with a few TfL services, I do think antisocial behaviour could become a problem if there was free travel, even with a pass system.
I have many memories of chaotic bus journeys. Groups of kids throwing stuff at people, abusing elderly people, drivers switching the engine off until the chavs get off. Kids winding up drivers so much that they end up getting out of their cab and having a rant - I remember one having some sort of breakdown! Drivers obviously knew they were powerless, as most kids just piled on without scanning their passes, and the drivers understandably not getting involved. So, I can certainly see potential problems!
I've never had any problems like that living in east Kent, apart from a few very isolated incidents. Companies seem to be stricter with problem passengers, and kids are largely well behaved because if they get their passes taken away, their parents will likely be angry. TfL don't seem to really care (or didn't back then anyway).

 

[farci]

'Free transport in Luxembourg, but what's the cost?

'With a population of only 614,000, it may be one of Europe's smallest countries and the idea is not unprecedented. But the "free mobility" drive has captured the imagination. Buses, trams and trains are now free to ride on and you don't need a ticket. One aim is to ease traffic congestion but critics see it as a PR stunt.
"The government wants Luxembourg to become a laboratory for mobility," says Mobility Minister François Bausch, who points to the grand duchy's fast-rising population, with a rise of 40% in 20 years. Some 200,000 workers - almost half of Luxembourg's workforce - commute from Belgium, France and Germany, attracted by high salaries and a wealthy economy.'

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-51657085

This article discusses some of the issues. Like TfL, it is a political decision whether to - leave it totally to the market, a franchise system (like railways?) or treat it like a social service paid for from taxes

 

[Bletchleyite]

This article discusses some of the issues. Like TfL, it is a political decision whether to - leave it totally to the market, a franchise system (like railways?) or treat it like a social service paid for from taxes

No reason you can't contract out the operation. Many (but not all) Councils contract out bin collection, for example. Whether it is or isn't operated directly, it's still taxpayer-funded. Buses, as a "piece of infrastructure", could be done the same. Switzerland for instance (which does charge fares) has a definition of how frequent the service must be for a settlement of any given density, we could adopt the same.

 

[W-on-Sea]

I'm not convinced that free public transport is a viable long-term solution, unless there is a public consensus about substantial increase in taxation to fund it (and probably, in practice, a greater degree of devolution to the country or city or regional bodies that would be best placed to fund it). I'm not sure I see such a consensus emerging in the UK anytime soon, and particularly not in England. In fact I think such a model would lead to a progressive reduction in the use of public transport on a greater scale than that which we have yet seen.

I did live in a large city in Ukraine in which the trams and trolleybuses (but not the buses, which mostly served longer distance routes in the city, and which in general were faster and also had fewer stops) were free to use in the mid-90s. This wasn't a planned thing, but rather the consequence of the city council not being able to afford to employ conductors or ticket inspectors. (Obviously nowadays, technology would permit the installation of ticket machines at stops). And while it'd be hasty to draw too many conclusions from a country that was in the deepest peacetime economic collapse seen in Europe in recent decades (until now....) - let's say it led to a perceptible downgrading in the quality of the service provided: lots of vehicles out of service, meaning long gaps between trips, and questionable standards of maintenance (trams running around with missing windows, even in winter temperatures of minus 10 or minus 20 celsius....). Again, some of this would probably not occur, or be allowed to occur, in the UK - other than the long gaps between trips.

Certainly the quality of vehicles used (the comfort of which in the UK today is substantially higher than that found in most European countries - uncushioned plastic seats are the norm, for example, in many places, but all but unknown here) could be expected to decrease if funding pressures intensified, and this too would go against all the great and successful efforts made by Stagecoach, in particular, but a few other operators, large and small, too, to make bus use attractive to those who could and previously would use their cars instead. Given that there are going to be concerns about the "safety" aspect of bus travel for some time ahead, as a result of the COVID pandemic, I can't see any programme of widespread free public transport (as opposed to the city centre shuttles found in Manchester and some towns in West Yorkshire, for example) being anything other than disastrous.

Which is not to say that the current model is working. Nor indeed necessarily viable once we emerge from the gradiated lockdown.

 

[thenorthern]

Problem would be what is classed as local as would there be the strange situation similar to the what happens currently where the last station within a PTE area has much cheaper fares than the first station out the PTE area on the same line even if they are close to each other?

Another problem is cost as this surprises a lot of people but the largest single household expense for most households is transport. Most households spend more on transport than things like rent/mortgage, utilities or food. This would mean a big bill for Government to cover the cost and also if public transport was free at the point of use more and more people would use it increasing the cost even further.

 

[Starmill]

While free public transport is a wonderful idea in principle for its great democratising effect and positive efficiencies, I'm not entirely sure it works as well in practice, for many and complex reasons.

It would rather more effective I think to go for nationwide congestion charging or road pricing, with very high charges either for motor fuel or based on air pollution output. A wider CO2e Levy might be more suitable and flexible than those measures.

I think that a token fare, say £1 PAYG within urban 'metro areas' would be a good objective, and potentially easier to implement. What we really want to create is a hierarchy where active travel comes first, then public transport, then everything else. Currently of course that's all a dither because of COVID-19, but it will be more relevant than ever to get back to it in the future.

One way or another, my priority is a big increase in government funding for decent active travel initiatives, and for public transport local and regional. This, inevitably, needs some tax increases - which I would be happy to pay for.

 

[yorksrob]

I also prefer the idea of subsidised fares, rather than totally free. Afterall, transport is still a resource that has to be paid for.

That said, I would rather a subsidised fares structure over the whole public transport network rather than just urban areas, to avoid the situation of sharp disparities when you try to go over the urban border, and also to avoid residents in rural areas getting soaked by extortionate fares (anyone who's tried to get a bus in the Lake District in recent years will know what I mean).

 

[SouthEastBuses]

I suppose for me it's a good idea (as I won't have to worry about paying tickets lol), although the only problem is that as @yorkie has rightly said, it can lead to a rise of antisocial behaviour.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

After the Covid-19 pandemic has ended and a vaccine has been discovered (assuming it will) what do people think about local public transport becoming free? This has already occurred in Luxembourg and Tallinn in Estonia. I think there is good argument for free public transport after this as I will explain.

It seems likely that public transport will have a hard time in the post Covid-19 world. It seems that after this there will be more working from home, some people will be reluctant to use public transport due to it being associated with disease and people will do more shopping and leisure activities from home. All this will reduce public transport use.

Public transport is generally regarded as a necessity across the world, even the most car dependent parts of the United States generally have some form of public transport. Therefore even with a large fall in use, public transport systems will need to be kept. Lower use obviously will result in falling revenue and therefore require greater subsidies to run.

Added to the falling revenue of public transport, post Covid-19 there may be fewer shops, restaurants, etc, resulting in the government receiving less business rates from these businesses. Some of this could be offset from greater tax revenue from online companies, however lets be honest online firms are not great at paying their taxes. Declining city centres will also probably have more social problems such as crime and dereliction.

Free public transport obviously will cost money for the government, however if it encourages people back onto public transport and into city centres, keeping shops, restaurants, pubs, etc in business it will result in maintaining or increasing tax revenue from these businesses and reduce the other costs associated with declining city centres. In addition free public transport will reduce some overheads such as maintaining ticket collection systems. So financially I reckon the hit to the government will be small. Free public transport will also likely reduce or offset any increase in road congestion that could occur if people are reluctant to use public transport and improve air quality. Therefore when all this is considered I think overall there is a net benefit.

I believe public transport is free also in some South East Asian countries (sorry can't remember which ones!) as well as some shuttle buses all over the world. Even here in the UK we have free buses, such as (in my local area), the Crawley Asda bus, Chichester Tesco & Sainsbury free bus routes. As well as Metroshuttles in Manchester.