Transport for London will "declare itself bankrupt" by end of today (14 May 2020) without emergency finance

[Mikey C]

There are quite a few single door bus routes. Certainly a larger number than Borismaster routes.

Here is the full list from the TfL press release.

Thanks, I hadn't realised that there were that many routes

The number of actual buses (and passengers) will still be pretty small though, see that these single door routes tend to be the lightly used and infrequent ones on the edge of London, when compared to the bus routes the Borismaster are used on

 

[Nym]

Off topic I know, but it kind of defeats the point of the Furlough scheme where you're fuloughing staff while there's clearly productive work for them to do if they're 'being slow' to process their normal line of work.

 

[Starmill]

Off topic I know, but it kind of defeats the point of the Furlough scheme where you're fuloughing staff while there's clearly productive work for them to do if they're 'being slow' to process their normal line of work.

TfL were essentially forced to put staff who needed to be at work on furlough leave (thus legally preventing them from doing any work) in order to save money.

The 14 TOCs with Emergency Measures Agreements, of course, didn't ever have to do this, and many of their staff are paid for shifts they just haven't been asked to attend for.

 

[Halfway Boy]

Off topic I know, but it kind of defeats the point of the Furlough scheme where you're fuloughing staff while there's clearly productive work for them to do if they're 'being slow' to process their normal line of work.

Not really - the furlough scheme is being used for non-essential staff to help keep TfL moving by reducing staff costs (which amount for a significant proportion of the budget) whilst the biggest source of our income has been decimated.

Arguably if the government is paying 80% of their salaries, and TfL the other 20% (funded by the government bailout) then why not just have them at work since the government is paying either way?

It’s all political unlike the TOC’s sadly.

There is still a couple of people in staff travel to do essential things, like replacing staff passes for frontline and critical staff... Everything else can wait a while.

 

[Daniel740]

It seems that Sadiq Khan has taken a leaf out of Andy Burnham’s book and is going to oppose any move by the government to expand the congestion charge. If TfL do serve a section 114 what will the next steps be? Do you think the DfT will just seize control of TfL?

 

[Carlisle]

My guess would be that petty squabbles between tiers of national/local government now mean very little to the average transport user/layperson. They probably deem almost everyone involved to be displaying equal levels of incompetence & inability to see the bigger picture

 

[Mojo]

It was confirmed yesterday that the current funding settlement will last another two weeks, mainly because of revenue being higher than expected.

Talks still ongoing for a new settlement ongoing past the end of the month. Heidi Alexander (Deputy Mayor for Transport) said to BBC News last night that so far conditions included extending congestion charge to cover everything within the North & South Circulars, as well as removing the 60+ Oyster card, and the free Zip card.

 

[radamfi]

extending congestion charge to cover everything within the North & South Circulars

This is surely not a realistic option and is only being used as a bargaining tool. It might even be counter-productive if everyone in that area gets a residents' discount, meaning they can drive cheaply into central London. That was the problem with the western extension. It became cheaper to drive from Kensington to central London. Unless they divide the area into zones and you only get a discount for driving in your own zone.

 

[Mojo]

This is surely not a realistic option and is only being used as a bargaining tool. It might even be counter-productive if everyone in that area gets a residents' discount, meaning they can drive cheaply into central London. That was the problem with the western extension. It became cheaper to drive from Kensington to central London. Unless they divide the area into zones and you only get a discount for driving in your own zone.

I was about to reply & say the same thing. You are right in that offering a 90% discount to everyone living in this area will most likely result in people driving more as evidenced by the western extension.

I could also foresee significant difficulty with things like industrial relations on the underground, with many Train crew depots for instance being within these areas, especially given the charge now has much extended operational hours. From a business perspective also, many areas within the North and South Circulars have substantial industry, but cannot be compared to central London where at least you could argue you know what you’re getting yourself in for.

Like you say, it depends how they bring it in (if at all). Congestion in these areas of London is regularly quite poor and the idea of a charge to discourage such journeys isn’t a bad thing. Whether this be achieved by localised charges that are detached from the main zone, or some other way will be interesting to see. One thing of note is that the red routes offer free parking which is something I’ve always thought of as an anachronism.

 

[Mikey C]

Apart from anything else, the A406 and A205 while being a logistically easy boundary, are actually really unfair ones as the A406 goes much further out. Silver Street station which is directly above the A406 is Zone 4, ditto the likes of South Woodford and Wanstead, whereas the A205 never goes beyond zone 3 and in some parts (like in Wandsworth and Clapham) goes through zone 2.

And it would create an artificial but damaging boundary around London, where people would stop going to the "other side". For example in my area Brent Cross shopping centre is just outside the potential zone, whereas the retail estate on the other side of the A406 is just inside. Ditto my council's recycling depot is just outside the zone, making it very expensive for anyone just inside the zone to use!

 

[telstarbox]

I don't think the public transport in, say, Charlton is good enough to justify the CC being extended there yet.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I don't think the public transport in, say, Charlton is good enough to justify the CC being extended there yet.

But there you have the chicken and egg problem. Maybe the reason public transport isn't good enough is precisely because too many people drive (including many journeys for which they could walk, cycle or take the bus or train), and the most realistic way to solve that would involve extending the CC there (albeit with some reforms to make it more workable outside central London)

 

[Jamiescott1]

Commuting in London every day throughout lockdown
I have used the tube once since march (prior to then I'd used it daily for years)
I am not giving my custom to an organisation that spent months telling its potential customers not to use its services.
Imagine if a commercial organisation did this

 

[Darandio]

Commuting in London every day.
I have used the tube once since march.
I am not giving my custom to an organisation that spent months telling its potential customers not to use its services.
Imagine if a commercial organisation did this

So how else have you been commuting?

 

[Jamiescott1]

So how else have you been commuting?

Brought a bike and took advantage of quiet roads to build confidence of cycling in London.
I run in all weathers so cycling in middle of January doesn't bother me

 

[Darandio]

Brought a bike and took advantage of quiet roads to build confidence of cycling in London.
I run in all weathers so cycling in middle of January doesn't bother me

A lot better for you as well!

 

[bramling]

This is surely not a realistic option and is only being used as a bargaining tool. It might even be counter-productive if everyone in that area gets a residents' discount, meaning they can drive cheaply into central London. That was the problem with the western extension. It became cheaper to drive from Kensington to central London. Unless they divide the area into zones and you only get a discount for driving in your own zone.

We all know it’s just a way of the government continuing to punish both Khan and London as a whole. In practice it’s probably a good way to get the few remaining Conservatives seats to change colour.

It’s objectionable on the basis that this never featured in any manifesto. Whatever one thinks of Ken the congestion charge was clearly featured in his mayoral manifesto, so no one could say as a policy it lacked legitimacy. It’s the irony of ironies to see a Conservative government now actively pursuing a Livingstonite policy.

Suburban London is not like central London at all, and this simply will not be well received. People simply aren’t going to take the bus shopping, and then there’s loads of key workers to drive to places just inside the north circular. You’d for example have massive difficulty staffing a number of LU crew depots, Golders Green being an obvious one which springs to mind, already somewhere which for various reasons struggles to man a full roster.

Just another example of how Boris Johnson is shaping up to be completely clueless. The thing is that there must be some serious jitters bubbling up behind the scenes, as many MPs in more marginal seats must already be thinking ahead to 2024 with trepidation. If it were me I’d be horrified. It certainly points to the notion that Boris knows he will not be contesting another general election.

 

[Domh245]

It’s objectionable on the basis that this never featured in any manifesto. Whatever one thinks of Ken the congestion charge was clearly featured in his mayoral manifesto, so no one could say as a policy it lacked legitimacy. It’s the irony of ironies to see a Conservative government now actively pursuing a Livingstonite policy.

The current government seems to view manifesto commitments (or lack thereof) as rather non binding, so it is not at all surprising

Suburban London is not like central London at all, and this simply will not be well received. People simply aren’t going to take the bus shopping, and then there’s loads of key workers to drive to places just inside the north circular. You’d for example have massive difficulty staffing a number of LU crew depots, Golders Green being an obvious one which springs to mind, already somewhere which for various reasons struggles to man a full roster.

On the North side I'd agree, but on the South side 'inside' of the South Circular certainly doesn't feel suburban at all. It's not central London, but it definitely isn't suburbia, and I'd suggest that as a Southern boundary it could work well. It's certainly not an area that strikes me as car dependant (or friendly) as the the more northerly bits of London neat the North Circular

 

[tarq]

I was about to reply & say the same thing. You are right in that offering a 90% discount to everyone living in this area will most likely result in people driving more as evidenced by the western extension.
Like you say, it depends how they bring it in (if at all). Congestion in these areas of London is regularly quite poor and the idea of a charge to discourage such journeys isn’t a bad thing.

Traffic congestion in Inner London offpeak is unbearably high so I would welcome the expansion of the congestion charge to cover the N&S circulars.

To mitigate the impact, I would suggest introducing a 90% key worker discount for anyone working within C-Charge area. This should target those in critical frontline roles particularly local authority, fire, police, military, infrastructure, transport, health, care, education and social workers.

 

[bramling]

The current government seems to view manifesto commitments (or lack thereof) as rather non binding, so it is not at all surprising



On the North side I'd agree, but on the South side 'inside' of the South Circular certainly doesn't feel suburban at all. It's not central London, but it definitely isn't suburbia, and I'd suggest that as a Southern boundary it could work well. It's certainly not an area that strikes me as car dependant (or friendly) as the the more northerly bits of London neat the North Circular

You may well be right on that, my experience of London is much more heavily oriented to the north side. I wouldn’t even claim to be able to pinpoint exactly where the south circular is in places!

The Conservatives actually have a problem over manifestos, there’s still stuff from 2015 never delivered. When the distraction of Brexit is forgotten (which it eventually will be) a lot of middle England is going to think “we were promised X, why didn’t it happen?”. This might not be a problem in safe seats, but the Conservative lead is still fragile, especially with Corbyn off the scene.

 

[telstarbox]

But there you have the chicken and egg problem. Maybe the reason public transport isn't good enough is precisely because too many people drive (including many journeys for which they could walk, cycle or take the bus or train), and the most realistic way to solve that would involve extending the CC there (albeit with some reforms to make it more workable outside central London)

True, but politically you need to provide the carrot first before the stick. All of the current CC zone is well served by rail for example, whereas in the top end of Charlton where many households run two cars, a few bus routes won't cut it to achieve significant modal shift.

 

[Domh245]

You may well be right on that, my experience of London is much more heavily oriented to the north side. I wouldn’t even claim to be able to pinpoint exactly where the south circular is in places!

The South Circular is a bit of a misnomer to be fair, and really is better viewed as a bit of a half hearted attempt to match North London in name alone. It's nowhere near the North circular in terms of specifications and was pretty much cobbled together from whatever went the right way. It's (predominantly) the A205, which other than being marked in yellow on Google maps would be pretty hard to spot otherwise! Starts at Kew, then roughly follows the river as far as Clapham (straightlining the Barnes peninsula) before dropping towards Dulwich & Forest Hill, then heading back through Hither Green, Eltham and Woolwich. The outer edges (Kew/Woolwich) may be a bit more North Circular esque in terms of surrounding area, but the central Putney-Clapham-Battersea section strikes me as entirely feasible for a congestion charge-esque arrangement, possibly at half rate along with any northern expansion

 

[Bletchleyite]

FWIW I have a mixed view on the congestion charge issue, however I am happy with the idea that if TfL needs to receive national funding then the concessions should be identical to those enjoyed in other parts of the UK. London can have better ones, but it has to fund them itself, same as if any Council wants to allow ENCTS passes before 09whatever-it-is.

So if TfL needs a bailout, it needs also to ramp its concessions back to the basic national standard.

 

[big_rig]

I find it all quite strange to be honest. Do any news articles on this quote a source which is not linked to the mayors office? It feels like they (TfL) are deliberately muddying the waters with regards to the congestion charge as opposed to the Ultra low emissions zone as a public bargaining tactic. Expanding the former to the north/south circular sounds mad, expanding the latter has long been in the works for this time next year..

 

[MotCO]

Just another example of how Boris Johnson is shaping up to be completely clueless.

But Johnson is not responsible for TfL - Khan is. Khan opted not to raise fares which must have led to a larger gap between income and expenditure. Khan introduced the Hopper fare which again would have reduced income since passengers only got charged once and not twice for bus changes (but I acknowledge that it might have attracted more fare-paying passengers). It is questionable who is responsible for Crossrail not yet coming on stream with the extra costs materialising and no income as yet. If anyone is clueless it's Khan.

 

[bramling]

But Johnson is not responsible for TfL - Khan is. Khan opted not to raise fares which must have led to a larger gap between income and expenditure. Khan introduced the Hopper fare which again would have reduced income since passengers only got charged once and not twice for bus changes (but I acknowledge that it might have attracted more fare-paying passengers). It is questionable who is responsible for Crossrail not yet coming on stream with the extra costs materialising and no income as yet. If anyone is clueless it's Khan.

Oh absolutely, I'm not defending Khan at all, and you're quite right that the measures mentioned above had already messed up TFL's finances. However I don't think it's reasonable to blame Khan for the current situation, as the main issue at present is the drop in farebox revenue - remember that throughout March, April, May and June there was an "essential journeys only" policy, which ultimately came from the likes of Whitty, such that even skeletal services were running around pretty much empty.

Yes I'd say Khan bears some responsibility for Crossrail, but I don't think that's the central issue.

Let's face it Khan hates Johnson and Johnson hates Khan, and this bitterness is being played out in public. I don't think the rest of us should be dragged into that.

 

[big_rig]

I would also note it is a common misconception (no doubt due to the advertising from the Mayor himself) that he has frozen fares of any use or interest to Londoners except for the bus & tram (which is great, as is the hopper). The fares freeze applies to single use journeys and not travelcards or caps - I don’t know who it really benefits beyond tourists perhaps.

In any case it is fanciful to suggest individual Mayoral decisions have had more than a marginal impact on the situation were in now, unless he is successful in his advocacy however for another full lockdown for London

 

[MarkyT]

But Johnson is not responsible for TfL - Khan is. Khan opted not to raise fares which must have led to a larger gap between income and expenditure. Khan introduced the Hopper fare which again would have reduced income since passengers only got charged once and not twice for bus changes (but I acknowledge that it might have attracted more fare-paying passengers). It is questionable who is responsible for Crossrail not yet coming on stream with the extra costs materialising and no income as yet. If anyone is clueless it's Khan.

I think the fare freeze was the bigger mistake as it removed flexibility to adjust for economic realities for an arbritrary period. The hopper was a great advance however and eliminated unfairness for some of the poorest customers who through no fault of their own had to undertake infrequent short journeys requiring a change. That is partly a side effect of the flat bus fare across all of London clearly, which offers amazing value for some longer single-vehicle journeys.

 

[radamfi]

I hear a lot of criticism of the fare freeze, but when comparing with fares in other big cities, London is still extortionate. Is there any other world city with more expensive fares than London?

 

[ainsworth74]

Let's face it Khan hates Johnson and Johnson hates Khan, and this bitterness is being played out in public. I don't think the rest of us should be dragged into that.

Plus it strikes me that there's probably plenty of blame to go around regarding who screwed up TfL's finances. Khan instituted a fares freeze to be sure and Crossrail seems to have totally fallen apart under his watch. But under Boris £43m was spent on the Garden Bridge that never got built, we got the Emirate Airline at £24m, the bikes seemingly at £11m per year and the Boris Buses at somewhere around £300m for a bus which is double the price of a conventional doubler decker, has a rear door that is hardly ever (if ever now?) used, cooked the passengers in hot weather and has considerably less capacity and is just generally quite claustrophobic compared to a normal bus. Plus, of course, George Osborne has a roll to play in all of this as he cut the £700m central government grant from TfL.

So it seems to me that there's plenty of blame as to who is the real baddy when it comes to TfL's present parlous financial condition! That being said I'm sure it's personally and political convient for both Boris and Sadiq to try and muddy the waters and blame each other so doubtless the dance will continue. Meanwhile, it would be nice for those that rely (or will once again rely in the future) on TfL's services to know that it's not about to collapse. But that might be too much to hope for from our politicians these days...