Although this is an anomaly generally restricted to metropolitan areas in Britain. In most major cities, transport is usually run by one municipal operator, or run by private companies contracted to a public authority, so there is no reason for one mode to undercut another, especially as their networks are usually integrated. National rail fares are sometimes also included within the standard city fare structure where they play a significant part in the city transport network.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Would free public transport work in the UK?
- Thread starter adrock1976
- Start date
- Status
Although this is an anomaly generally restricted to metropolitan areas in Britain. In most major cities, transport is usually run by one municipal operator, or run by private companies contracted to a public authority, so there is no reason for one mode to undercut another, especially as their networks are usually integrated. National rail fares are sometimes also included within the standard city fare structure where they play a significant part in the city transport network.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Indeed, I gather that the anomoly with heavy rail undercutting buses is unique to Leeds and Manchester. With Light Rail - eg Metrolink, it is doubtless a corporate decision and I know Serco wanted GMITA (as it was) to promote their campaign of undercutting (Stagecoach) fares, particularly on the then new Chorlton line. Naturally, the people approached at GMITA told them where to go.....
Now that 2CC has been completed, adding capacity across the city, an obvious "statement of intent" from the Elected Mayor would have been to get free cross city centre travel for bus passengers on Metrolink, but presumably the contract signed with Keolis Amey won't allow for this.
johnnychips
Established Member
Filmed on Gold Hill, Shaftesbury, Dorset!
Shaw S Hunter
Established Member
Since it would appear a number of posters have engaged with my comments, many of which are somewhat off-topic, I will refrain from further detailed discussion as managing the quotes will otherwise get rather messy. Suffice to say I am much more pro-public transport than some may think but I have enough experience to understand that, in this country at least, the political support needed to achieve seriously worthwhile reform is unlikely to materialise anytime soon. Accordingly my aspirations are based on what is reasonably possible and practical, not on pipedreams. And I also don't believe that progress can be achieved by seeking to favour one particular mode of public transport over another. Horses for courses...
Well, no, it would be based upon a monthly bill. Back then it would have been on a weekly wage. It had been costed back then so should be easily done so again. I suppose it would come down to what the annual total would be, say in the case of what your yearly commute costs you today. Too much over and it probably wouldn't be acceptable.
I got 16k when on Birmingham City Council, plus some SRA's (one of which was CENTRO) which brought it to about 27k. The vast majority of councillors in the UK get under 8k for their work. All Scottish councillors get ~17k, Welsh ones ~13k.
But what about your day job (or pension, if appropriate)?
I rather think that's his personal business.
You do seem to have a rather close interest in the income of other people. If you want to know how much public money your councillors are getting then just look it up on your local authority's website.
If you want to elect councillors who are on low incomes then ask your candidates how rich they are ...
Just to remind you how we went off on this tangent from the subject of this thread, which is "would free public transport work in the UK?"
Sorry, I didn't mean it literally. I meant that Income includes both allowances for Council work and from their day to day jobs. As for TMBC's website, I (literally) wouldn't waste my time. Last time I looked they hadn't updated statistics to reflect the 2011 Census, and they don't have an e-mail address for Complaints.
Not really, such decisions would be made by people with political power (note small "p") and such power rests too much with people above average incomes - which in terms leads to differing attitudes on what does or should constitute "public transport".
What about it? I would suggest that's my business, suffice it to say that I was taxed at the appropriate bands on my council allowances. I was allowed by my then employers, as is required by law, to take unpaid leave, annual leave or flextime to cover council duties, which I did to the tune of around half my leave allowance, around 20 days a year annual leave and not usually flextime.
Also the basic councillors allowance covers a wide range of expenses, not least a stationery and postage bill which was well over a grand a year.
I put in an average of 20 hours a week on being a councillor, during the two years I was appointed to Centro, that rose to around 25 hours a week. Note this was on council duties not on political campaigning.
Oh, I don't drive a car, except in extremis, since an accident in 2004 and travelled to the majority of council meetings by bus or train. I could however use the council's worksave scheme to get a small discount on a CENTRO bus pass, but not on a combined bus and train pass. During my period on CENTRO, i was given a full pass by CENTRO which I contributed the cost of to the Lord Mayors Charitable Fund - as well as declaring it for tax purposes.
People of above average abilities tend to earn above average incomes.
I'd prefer my decision makers to be people of above average abilities. They are therefore likely to earn above average incomes.
And the reason free public transport wouldn't work is primarily because of practical issues, not politics.
a) In some circumstances such as city centre areas etc
b) However, as a general thing nationwide, no.
Took me less than a minute to find all the details of the allowances scheme.
As I said to 6Gman , yes, of course, its your business. All I've said all along is that Councillors normally have day jobs or other incomes on top of the Council allowances, which takes them above the average local income - let alone the average for a no motorist. As I think I've said, canvassing is virtually non existant where I live, but when we used to have local media, local candidates did "announce" themselves there around late March/early April, and I don't ever remember any saying "My name is xxxxx and I'm unemployed".
The ability to be lucky, you mean. And I don't just mean at a very personal level. I mean lucky to be born to decent parents (which I was), lucky to be educated in a decent system (which I feel I wasn't) in a decent area (was then, isn't know) and taken an interest and/or discovered a talent in something that leads to a decent wage. But no we ARE drifting off-topic
In very general terms, yes and no respectively. Don't agree that it should be confined to city areas if it were to be adopted. Congestion is getting worse in poorer suburbs quicker than in "regional centres" and the price gap between private and public transport is widest in these areas.
If you consult the Register of Members Interests, you can find out about the employers of councillors, if they have shareholdings (above a certain value) that may cause conflicts of interest and if they own property or a hold a licence on a dwelling house in the authority. If anything they are held to a higher standard than MPs in such matters, although enforcement of the register is somewhat variable from authority to authority.
However, I'm not entirely sure how the income of a councillor is germane to free public transport.
We've had several unemployed councillors round here.
I've known the odd one who was probably unemployable.
If it's not practical how can it be a good idea?
To do so, would require visiting the Town Hall (during office hours) according to the web page you've directed me to. In short, that' half a day off work. With walking time, the bus journey is 50-60 minutes each way, with it running every 30-40 minutes. In theory, changing buses would be much quicker - but that brings us back to the argument about bus stop blocking!!!
I have to confess (as I don't like others doing it) that its a generalisation, but I would suggest the higher the Councillors' income, the more likely they are to represent a ward with similar incomes which in turn are more likely to have different public transport options - even if poorly used. Ergo, the higher the income, the more likely they are to oppose free public transport, per se or support it in certain circumstances only eg. rail only or on presentation of receipts from Park & Ride Car parks.
I didn't direct you to a web page.
However, I am quite surprised by your statement as it would be against the law to do that. There is an exception to allow some councillors to only have their details available on paper, but it is usually only given to those who have received threats.
And I see I am correct, each councillors web page on Tameside MBC (I assume you live in Tameside) contains a link to the declaration.
When I was on Birmingham City Council, the member who earned the most money (a barrister) represented one of the poorest wards, whilst the members for one of the most well off wards were respectively, a single mother with no outside earnings, a chap who treated the job as a full-time councillor and another chap who ran a very small music business which had a very variable income.
I have also noticed that most councillors, except for the permanently indolent who afflict all political parties, tended to get very het up both about bus service changes and NXWM's annual hiking of the fares and strongly defended the West Midlands Concessionary Scheme. We did discuss free travel for all under-16's and I remember there were a lot of voices at least partially in favour but I don't think we ever discussed universal free travel.
Once again, you make a statement which is simply untrue. Took me less than 20 seconds to find members' interests online.
Sorry. I tried to be clever and went on the Council website and searched for "members interests". This came up with what was available (no links) and stated they were accessible by calling into he Town Hall. What I should have done, was go the long way round through "Councillors and Democracy". Although, I have to say that it is not the best laid out page as you hen have to go through "About your Council" not "Democracy" to find details of your Councillors. Why not simply have an option labelled "Councillors" (rhetorical).
I must admit, you have given me food for thought. Whilst I still think after 44 years around the bus industry (employee, customer, voluntary), there is a link between promoting the interests of bus passengers on a par with other transport users and politicians with first hand experience, I have increasingly thought over the years that the non-motorist's biggest "enemy" is not the political mainstream, but the Media.
johnnychips
Established Member
Anybody else think we're off topic? Could you create a thread about councillors' wages in "General Discussion " or whatever it's called?
Because ideas usually start off as theories.
I think the discussion has reached a natural conclusion, but even the phrase "off-topic" probably needs defining. Anything to do with public transport and other services relied upon by a large proportion of the population is automatically intertwined with other services, finance and politics (party or otherwise).
- Status