Did you complain to the operator? What was the outcome?
I haven't advocated that. I have advocated limiting companion passes to those who can't travel alone.
Not only is means testing expensive in the first place, it would also need to be regularly updated because senioors citizens' personal circumstances do change from time to time. Consider the total cost of such a 'cost saving' measure before justifying an expensive administration machine just to satisfy a jealous minority.
Each year that passes, a new tranche of entitled people qualify for the pass, having reached the qualifying age requirements.
I think the use of age-based passes is mainly 'self means-tested'. People often don't apply if they're not going to use them, and don't use them if they can afford alternatives.
Are there statistics available that will show the percentage of ENCTS pass recipients of the qualifying age that are still working?
Quite possibly. Our esteemed moderator may wish to split the thread.
www.mygov.scot
I suspect this is more to do with arriving punctually for the 09.30 medical appointment to find a whole waiting room full of others who have been given the same time, and finally being seen at 11.45.
It was Gordon Brown's Labour government
No the York lad wasn't a wheelchair user
I have no issue with someone who needs a companion having one, what I along with my colleagues objected to was the way he was using his pass solely to get his mates free rides in and out of York
I believe it operates at least UK-wide and when we were in the EU throughout that Union. I remember there was some controversy surrounding reports that our NHS weren't bothering to charge other countries for work they did.
I wasn't expressing a clear view either way on the right way to fund reduced rate or free travel because I don't know what the sums involved are or the scale is like. I was just pointing out that it would be possible to "return" charges to where someone lives if there were a view that this would better balance the costs of the scheme.
How about 'free' healthcare or education?
I think that this is one occasion where it is better to accept the very tiny additional costs for people who don't need it than to risk denying people who do need it. It has got to be an extremely niche thing.
Or only allow companion travel to passholders who cannot travel alone, as a previous poster indicated happens in Scotland.
Unfortunately that's just human nature. I'd guess that most people are just happy with the ability to use their pass and get on with life, but there always be some people who think that they're a cut above everyone else, and this by no means restricted to the world of concessionary travel. As someone who has worked in customer service positions for most of my working life, I've seen more than my fair share of entitled individuals!
I don't think that's quite correct as Concession plus Companion card holders in Scotland can and do travel alone.
I sense that a kindred spirit inhabits this website.
Unable to travel alone at all then.
Something similar applies to ENCTS. For example popular tourist areas are re-imbursed by a levy on local authorities where those tourists come from. Or that was the situation. Whether that re-imbursement reflects the costs is another thing. With smart passes it ought to be able to easily identify who is using their pass where and pass back the cost of travel. You could, like the delay allocaters in the rail industry, build quite a bureaucracy around such arrangements.
