Would free public transport work in the UK?

[underbank]

They had got to the stage where the cost of collecting the ridiculously low fares was greater than the income it brought in.

But that was then. Today we have more efficient systems of fare collection. Eg travel cards covering days/weeks, or prepay cards for x number of journeys, or Oyster cards, or tap-your-card systems. What costs is the collection, counting and banking of cash. Today, there's no need for cash to be used at all on buses or trains. Today, there's no reason at all why the costs of collecting even "ridiculously low" fares would be greater than the income.

 

[urbophile]

There have been studies in the past. There are certain groups who already had free travel. Police officers in a number of cities were given free travel, on and off duty, from way back in the 1970s, and as many had cars as well that was a group to study. It was found that they did not really use the service any more, and continued to use cars on the grounds that they were more convenient, often a lot more.

In London schoolkids up to the age of 16, and adults over 60, have free travel. That leaves just 44 years of payment, just half a lifetime. The adults still economically active and in work have as many cars and lifestyles as typical adults do, study of them showed no discernible additional use, apart from some totally leisure journeys made to places "just because we have a pass now", which is not what public transport is all about.

As an oldie I feel slightly guilty having a free pass when young people (with less disposable income on the whole) don't. Especially those who are unemployed and/or on benefits, who are frequently compelled to shell out money they don't really have in order to get to mandatory interviews and assessments.

As others have said, on many bus services the vast majority of passengers are freebie pensioners anyway. It would not cost any more to allow anybody on these buses for free. If there were a clear distinction between local trains and long distance ones, fares could be charged for the latter but not the former.

Charging fares for peak hours only is another idea, but few people who don't have to are going to willingly suffer the crush hour, and the expense of maintaining a ticketing system simply for that seems excessive.

Surely the way round the disparity between urban and rural provision is to make it comparatively dearer to run a car where there is plentiful public transport, and cheaper in rural areas where that is impractical to provide in any quantity.

 

[radamfi]

Surely the way round the disparity between urban and rural provision is to make it comparatively dearer to run a car where there is plentiful public transport, and cheaper in rural areas where that is impractical to provide in any quantity.

That might cause some people to deliberately deprive themselves of public transport by moving to a remote location.

 

[Dentonian]

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.

True, but this goes back to the arguments about it being very unattractive in the UK (outside London, maybe), for various reasons other than just cost.

 

[Dentonian]

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.

IS It a benefit. Free Metrolink and Rail travel for "over 66s" (I think its about 64 at present, as it is tied to the State Pension age) costs GM Council Taxpayers something between £10 million and £13 million a year, depending on which figures you have access to. Of course, that figure is spread across the county and not just levied on people lucky enough to live near rail. Coincidentally, that figure isn't far adrift from the total subsidy for Socially necessary (ie. non-Schools) bus services in the county.

 

[Dentonian]

One difficulty would be the way the UK doesn't really segregate local and IC rail, and a bus only option would be potentially disastrous for the railway.

Not as much as Rail only would be for buses - and in the long-term result in exactly the opposite of what is intended.

 

[Dentonian]

To the extent to which it exists the spare capacity currently is on the bus network, not rail/tram, so if it were to be selective it would more likely be the other way round.

Hope so. But then many bus services do still operate close to capacity, especially captive market ones with the highest fares. These would need to be improved because the key to reducing congestion, pollution and socio-economic exclusion remains removing the need to have a car in the first place.

 

[Dentonian]

For me it would make little difference as Birmingham's transport network is far too concentrated on the city centre being the hub of everything and my commute is from one outlying suburb to another. Even free public transport wouldn't make a quadrupling of travel time worth it. Now if TfWM could change and improve connections that don't go via the centre we might be in business...

So, a similar scenario to Greater Manchester, but as things stand, isn't your problem more to do with NXWM than TfWM, or has Andy Street said he wants TfWM to tackle the problem, under Bus Reform options.

 

[Dentonian]

Unless there's a bus already there...I have taken a bus between the two Manchester University stops (barely 200m apart) before when in a massive hurry to get from one lecture to another just because the bus arrived at exactly the right time to make it worthwhile.

Oxford Road is unique, as it has up to 72 buses an hour at peak times and hardly reduces at Night on Fri/Sat during University term. Of the top of my head, the only other corridors in GM that still have 18 or more buses per hour are Stockport Road (192), Rochdale Road and Swinton-M'cr. Certainly, once you get 4 or so miles out of Manchester, 6 bph is now classed as frequent.

 

[Dentonian]

Is the bus situation still quite as crazy along Wilmslow/Oxford Road in Manchester as it was 10 or 15 years ago? I seem to remember that competition on the route mean that buses were pretty much every 1 - 2 minutes.

That's probably a bit of an intense example, but for any free transit system to be worthwhile presumably the aim would be to encourage people to not drive across a city center; rather, they'd park on the edge of the area or connect in with paid public transport. So it would need to have a bus/metro/train/tram at something approaching that level of frequency; anything much worse than every 5-7 minutes would struggle.

Oxford Road is still as intense as it was 15 years ago. The only difference is the buses using the corridor have vastly reduced emissions. The problem with parking on the "edge" of the city, or even further out, is that you are transferring the problem, not solving it. In Greater Manchester, virtually all the top 10 pollution "hot spots" are close to the M60 orbital motorway or out in the suburbs. Similarly, congestion is often worse at "pinch points" many miles from Manchester city centre, and bus journey times reflect this.

 

[Dentonian]

Not quite as bad but it's still way overbussed and grindingly inefficient compared with what it could be.
.

At what times of day/week is Oxford Road overbussed? I attended my (all to) regular Outpatients appointment at MRI last Friday, and with my clinic running efficiently (which, in fairness it is very good compared to some other departments there), I was actually out of the building just before Noon. Whilst waiting for not only ped-x phase, but the absence of cyclists running the red light, and then the long walk including having to cross back across the cycle lane to get to the bus stop, I did miss 4 or 5 buses shared between Operators and fare options. Nevertheless, I only waited a couple more minutes for a 43 (not the cheapest) to pull up - and it was rammed. Full downstairs and barely a dozen spare seats upstairs. Significantly, 39 of us continued all he way to Piccadilly. There are some overbussed corridors in GM - starting with the three I mentioned in a reply above - but Oxford Road isn't one of them - certainly not Monday to Fridays off-peak.

 

[Dentonian]

And if there is a lonely elderly person who finds it is beneficial for his/her mental health to ride around on the bus all day as there genuinely is nothing better to do, at least managing to talk to the odd driver or other passenger, is that not a good thing?

(I work from home quite a lot, and I do find it really isolating even given that I tend to be out doing stuff most evenings - it is sometimes a bit depressing to think that the only person I talk to, other than electronically, is the woman behind the counter in the chippy some days - and a lot of the people in this demographic don't even have the electronic interaction).

All very true - and, even the old flat fares meant that for many elderly people living alone it was cheaper to ride on buses for few hours and save on heating bills.

 

[trash80]

So, a similar scenario to Greater Manchester, but as things stand, isn't your problem more to do with NXWM than TfWM, or has Andy Street said he wants TfWM to tackle the problem, under Bus Reform options.

Well i've given up hoping NXWM will sort anything out to be honest...

 

[Tio Terry]

There's absolutely no way the railway network within around 100 miles of London could deal with free travel.The demand would be so great as to make it unsafe to be on platforms and trains during peak periods. The current network works at 100% capacity, there's no room for more trains, or longer trains. For as many years as I can remember - and I've worked in the railway industry for more than 53 years - pricing has been used to reduce demand because the network cannot cope with demand. Free travel would be a total disaster.

 

[Dentonian]

Since deregulation bus fares have risen far above inflation and towns have become far more congested, but it is far cheaper for me to drive and park than get the bus.

If bus fares were free or a very small amount to deter people riding all day then I would get the bus. It would save billions in congestion costs.

Absolutely spot on! What is needed is a flat fare for short, essential journeys of say, £1.50 for up to 3 miles* - If £1.50 ANY distance is good enough for the richest city in Europe, its good enough for the rest of us. This could be coupled with a levy on free parking (Supermarkets, rather than Workplace) and/or a ban on discounted petrol/diesel at said retailers. Funny, how they never give you discounts on Fruit or Veg if you spend £xx amount in a single shop.................

 

[Dentonian]

There have been studies in the past. There are certain groups who already had free travel. Police officers in a number of cities were given free travel, on and off duty, from way back in the 1970s, and as many had cars as well that was a group to study. It was found that they did not really use the service any more, and continued to use cars on the grounds that they were more convenient, often a lot more.

In London schoolkids up to the age of 16, and adults over 60, have free travel. That leaves just 44 years of payment, just half a lifetime. The adults still economically active and in work have as many cars and lifestyles as typical adults do, study of them showed no discernible additional use, apart from some totally leisure journeys made to places "just because we have a pass now", which is not what public transport is all about.

Trouble is, this is another case where you can't use London as an example. In the rest of the country, its adults of retirement age, which is increasing daily, with current Government Policy making it 68 in 2026. Also I think even some paets of London don't have life expectancy of 88 - although most of Sussex, Surrey and large parts of Berkshire and NE Hampshire might! Here in east Manchester, male life expectancy has stubbornly stalled at 75-76 for over a decade, so the demographic affected/benefitting could be much larger than you estimate. The corollory is that these higher proportions already coincide with the highest bus use - especially off-peak - so would need the increased service levels to cope. But buses don't need the same eye-watering investment figures or lead-in times that Rail do, so the reduced cost to the local economy and Health Services could off-set the initial cost. Of course, that could dilute my argument of shorter life expectancy..............

 

[maire23]

I have an ENCTS pass (Disabled) and I am very guilty of using it from one part of my village to another (15 min walk although I am mobility impaired so to most people probably about 5)
However I don’t think free travel round here would cause any issues as the so called service is so lousy.
My pass works on buses only and strictly only after 9.30. I often have to get the bus before this to get to appointments or uni and the fare is eye watering, I’m on benefits and can’t always afford it. If I lived down the road I could use it before 9.30. I could also use it on trains as far as Peterborough, Kettering and Nuneaton.
As far as free travel is concerned I would love to see it, but at the moment I would dearly love all the bureaucracy around ENCTS passes to be removed and all brought in line to give similar benefits to users!

 

[al78]

Can we actually have a public transport system before we start worrying about whether to make it free or not. There are huge areas of the country where public transport is pathetic. It takes my son 2 hours to travel just 5 miles to school each morning - yes he would be quicker walking, but that's out of the question when he has to carry a 10kg rucksack, a games kit bag and a musical instrument (school has no lockers!). That's because despite us being on the major A road into our nearest city, there are no direct bus routes. It "may" work in the major cities which have decent public transport but in smaller cities and towns that don't, there's no point making a non existent or impractical service free.

That is an ideal distance for cycling, 25 minutes max even at a leisurely pace. A decent pair of panniers and you're away.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At what times of day/week is Oxford Road overbussed? I attended my (all to) regular Outpatients appointment at MRI last Friday, and with my clinic running efficiently (which, in fairness it is very good compared to some other departments there), I was actually out of the building just before Noon. Whilst waiting for not only ped-x phase, but the absence of cyclists running the red light, and then the long walk including having to cross back across the cycle lane to get to the bus stop, I did miss 4 or 5 buses shared between Operators and fare options. Nevertheless, I only waited a couple more minutes for a 43 (not the cheapest) to pull up - and it was rammed. Full downstairs and barely a dozen spare seats upstairs. Significantly, 39 of us continued all he way to Piccadilly. There are some overbussed corridors in GM - starting with the three I mentioned in a reply above - but Oxford Road isn't one of them - certainly not Monday to Fridays off-peak.

I tended to find at most times of day - but that was a few years ago now. Have there been substantial service reductions? I can't see why there would be increased demand - if anything I'd expect Metrolink to Parrs Wood, Chorlton etc would reduce it.

 

[boxy321]

For me it would make little difference as Birmingham's transport network is far too concentrated on the city centre being the hub of everything and my commute is from one outlying suburb to another. Even free public transport wouldn't make a quadrupling of travel time worth it. Now if TfWM could change and improve connections that don't go via the centre we might be in business...

I agree, there is a cliff edge around Brum where buses go from every 5 minutes to half an hour or worse. Trains are the same. I'm currently lucky in this regard but when the company moves out to a crappy out-of-town business park in a couple of years I'llbe back in the car.

 

[Taunton]

I agree, there is a cliff edge around Brum where buses go from every 5 minutes to half an hour or worse. Trains are the same. I'm currently lucky in this regard but when the company moves out to a crappy out-of-town business park in a couple of years I'llbe back in the car.

The "company" will often move to the out of town business park precisely because parking there is not constrained by local authority-imposed parking restrictions which are found a nuisance for the majority. This particularly applies if you are moving from a city authority over the border into a county authority. And apart from inner London (not even outer), you generally find the majority of journeys to work at any office are by car.

I am sometimes amused by how companies making such moves, going away from easy and frequent public transport access, tout that their new premises have "green credentials".

 

[underbank]

That is an ideal distance for cycling, 25 minutes max even at a leisurely pace. A decent pair of panniers and you're away.

Unfortunately, as the school is at the top of a steep busy hill, they discourage cycling and have no provision for cycles at the school (i.e. no bike sheds, bike racks, etc). If a pupil is seen riding their bike either up or down the hill (1/2 mile long), it's an automatic detention. Hence, barely a handful of pupils go by bike. There are no cycle lanes/tracks along the main A road either.

 

[al78]

The "company" will often move to the out of town business park precisely because parking there is not constrained by local authority-imposed parking restrictions which are found a nuisance for the majority. This particularly applies if you are moving from a city authority over the border into a county authority. And apart from inner London (not even outer), you generally find the majority of journeys to work at any office are by car.

I am sometimes amused by how companies making such moves, going away from easy and frequent public transport access, tout that their new premises have "green credentials".

Or sometimes they locate themselves out of town with no nearby parking, and no access by public transport, somewhere that is dark and creepy and few people would be happy to walk around alone, then only provide enough on site parking for 25% of the workforce.

 

[al78]

Unfortunately, as the school is at the top of a steep busy hill, they discourage cycling and have no provision for cycles at the school (i.e. no bike sheds, bike racks, etc). If a pupil is seen riding their bike either up or down the hill (1/2 mile long), it's an automatic detention. Hence, barely a handful of pupils go by bike. There are no cycle lanes/tracks along the main A road either.

Detention for riding a bicycle to school? Jesus Christ, every time I think we've reached the pinnacle of stupidity in this country, something else comes along to top it.

It is a shame, cycling on an A road is not dangerous despite popular perception, perception is not fact. If the child is old enough to have decent spatial awareness and road sense, they should be fine (accompanying them initially might be best). Cycle lanes make things worse, as they are designed by people in authority who have never ridden a bike since they were five years old, and so they are badly constructed and end up being more dangerous for the cyclist. As for hills, that is what gears are for, drop down and spin at a comfortable pace.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Detention for riding a bicycle to school? Jesus Christ, every time I think we've reached the pinnacle of stupidity in this country, something else comes along to top it.

Quite. Schools should be making provision for cycling e.g. secure CCTV-covered storage, not banning it.

It is a shame, cycling on an A road is not dangerous despite popular perception, perception is not fact. If the child is old enough to have decent spatial awareness and road sense, they should be fine (accompanying them initially might be best). Cycle lanes make things worse, as they are designed by people in authority who have never ridden a bike since they were five years old, and so they are badly constructed and end up being more dangerous for the cyclist. As for hills, that is what gears are for, drop down and spin at a comfortable pace.

Cycling on an A road is not much fun. But really the answer, if there's a school there, is to ensure a proper segregated path is provided. Or even at a push to whack a 30mph limit and a set of painted on cycle lanes on it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The "company" will often move to the out of town business park precisely because parking there is not constrained by local authority-imposed parking restrictions which are found a nuisance for the majority. This particularly applies if you are moving from a city authority over the border into a county authority. And apart from inner London (not even outer), you generally find the majority of journeys to work at any office are by car.

I am sometimes amused by how companies making such moves, going away from easy and frequent public transport access, tout that their new premises have "green credentials".

FWIW in Germany you still get this, but they run a staff bus to/from the nearest relevant[1] railway station. Perhaps that should be mandatory.

[1] If not careful in drafting such a law, some prat will run a small minibus to/from something like Polesworth carefully avoiding the time anything stops there and consider the box ticked.

 

[bastien]

FWIW in Germany you still get this, but they run a staff bus to/from the nearest relevant[1] railway station. Perhaps that should be mandatory.

[1] If not careful in drafting such a law, some prat will run a small minibus to/from something like Polesworth carefully avoiding the time anything stops there and consider the box ticked.

I wish a certain vacuum cleaner manufacturer (well, design shop really) would do something like that. It's all well and good to tout your ultra-efficent motors' green credentials, but something else when everyone involved has to drive to a shed 20 miles from anywhere every day.

 

[B&I]

I tended to find at most times of day - but that was a few years ago now. Have there been substantial service reductions? I can't see why there would be increased demand - if anything I'd expect Metrolink to Parrs Wood, Chorlton etc would reduce it.

I've never understood why Oxford / Wilmslow Road never seems to have been targetted for a Metrolink line in any case

 

[B&I]

The "company" will often move to the out of town business park precisely because parking there is not constrained by local authority-imposed parking restrictions which are found a nuisance for the majority. This particularly applies if you are moving from a city authority over the border into a county authority. And apart from inner London (not even outer), you generally find the majority of journeys to work at any office are by car.

I am sometimes amused by how companies making such moves, going away from easy and frequent public transport access, tout that their new premises have "green credentials".

That's a reflection of our idiotic planning laws. Even the Americans get transit-oriented development better than we do.

 

[158756]

That's a reflection of our idiotic planning laws. Even the Americans get transit-oriented development better than we do.

Councils often even encourage such developments - they are required to identify new land for employment use, and access to the motorway network seems to be the most important requirement - and from the council's point of view that makes sense - any business pretty much can set up there, and it doesn't bring more traffic onto already congested roads. The trouble is it you aren't London or another major city business doesn't want to be in an inaccessible congested town centre and many potential employers (distribution/manufacturing) are wholly unsuited for such locations.