Should Bus Travel be Free

[HST43257]

For me the question of the price of buses should be a wider question: Should all local transport cost for local people?

Imagine local taxes are raised and local rail and bus transport is fully subsidised by the combined authority or whatever. Rather than scanning my contactless or Oyster, I scan a residents card of some sort. If I’m not a local, I use contactless or cash if needed, as I’m not paying by tax. Likely loads more public transport journeys made, because everyone is paying so there’s every incentive to use it for, effectively, free, rather an a car that I need to pay Petrol, parking and a congestion charge for. So more locals using rail and bus rather than car hopefully

 

[Grimsby town]

The actual cost of eliminating bus fares would likely be less than this because there would be major operational savings from eliminating revenue protection requirements.
Buses could practically use multiple doors, load and unload faster and all the ancillary costs would be eliminated.

Considering the bus driver wage bill is ~£2.3bn, even modest improvements in bus driver productivity would yield significant savings

But by making something free there is less disincentive to stop consumption. So presumably bus services would become more busy meaning slower boarding and alighting.

Its also likely to incentivise shorter journeys that don't really need to be taken by bus. If I'm travelling 25 miles and I'm very price sensitive, a £2 bus is already likely to be my mode of choice. For a 0.5 mile journey, I'd likely walk it currently as £2 is quite expensive for such a short journey. If its free why not take the bus? More short journeys are going to make bus routes very stop start.

It's difficult to say how all of that balances out and it'd be very route specific.

 

[HSTEd]

But by making something free there is less disincentive to stop consumption. So presumably bus services would become more busy meaning slower boarding and alighting.

At least in my own experience, buses do tend to stop at a large fraction of bus stops in any case.

The ability to flow people on and off a bus with multiple doors without concern for interaction with the driver is, in my view, likely to swamp any problems with increased demand causing this.

Its also likely to incentivise shorter journeys that don't really need to be taken by bus. If I'm travelling 25 miles and I'm very price sensitive, a £2 bus is already likely to be my mode of choice. For a 0.5 mile journey, I'd likely walk it currently as £2 is quite expensive for such a short journey. If its free why not take the bus? More short journeys are going to make bus routes very stop start.

In urban areas buses are already very stop start.
(My own bus often spends more time stopped than moving on my route to work).
In rural areas, the bus service density is likely to be low enough that waiting for the bus for an 800m walk is unlikely to be attractive, because yuo are likely to be at your destination before the bus even arrives!

It might be an issue in some edge cases, but I'm far from convinced it is a serious problem.
In the long run, crowding and journey times would form the ultimate control on bus use.

 

[Grimsby town]

At least in my own experience, buses do tend to stop at a large fraction of bus stops in any case.

The ability to flow people on and off a bus with multiple doors without concern for interaction with the driver is, in my view, likely to swamp any problems with increased demand causing this.


In urban areas buses are already very stop start.
(My own bus often spends more time stopped than moving on my route to work).
In rural areas, the bus service density is likely to be low enough that waiting for the bus for an 800m walk is unlikely to be attractive, because yuo are likely to be at your destination before the bus even arrives!

It might be an issue in some edge cases, but I'm far from convinced it is a serious problem.
In the long run, crowding and journey times would form the ultimate control on bus use.

As I said it's very route dependent. I work with bus tables a lot and see plenty of routes were there's clearly not allowance for people boarding at every stop. Sure there's an element of self regulation with longer journey times and crowding acting as deferent to shorter journey times too. The Talin free public transport scheme saw a reduction in journey length though and abstraction from walking journeys. That has a health cost.

I'm just not convinced by mass free public transport. Where it has been trialed its not been overly succesful and there isnt much evidence of huge cost efficiencies. Where free public transport has been implemented, fares were already massively subsidised. Fares in Dunkirk, for example, only covered 10% of costs.

Removing payment systems has its drawbacks too. I know from work that we use the data for patronage counts. There'd have to be a replacement for that data which would have an associated cost.

 

[Magdalia]

it's about time all local bus journeys were free or only a nominal charge.

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Some services are free at the point of use, but they still have to be paid for, usually out of central or local taxation. There they compete with all of the other things that central or local government would like to do.

Making services free at the point of use works when demand and access are near to being universal and predictable. A good examples is primary/secondary education. Services where not everyone uses them equally, but everyone might need them, are usually free at the point of use too, for example police and fire. Here in the UK we also include health.

Access to bus services is not universal. Here in the Fens there are lots of communities that have no bus service at all.

How would the level of service be determined?

Demand for bus services is not predictable, except through the farebox.

I quite like what we have now, with free travel for some groups and a maximum single fare of £2.

Free is much better than nominal because with one step you remove a whole load of non-productive costs.

I agree that, if the maximum fare was further reduced, this point could be reached. I don't think we are there with the £2 cap, though happy to be guided by those who know a lot more about the bus industry.

Considering the bus driver wage bill is ~£2.3bn,

The main difficulty with stoking up demand for buses is inelasticity of supply. Here in the Fens the main constraint on level of service is driver recruitment and retention.

And, anyway, I'm not convinced that demand for bus travel is particularly sensitive to price. I know lots of people who are entitled to senior concessionary travel but still drive everywhere, even when they could make the journey by bus.

I would also suggest a system by which anyone who doesn't own a car gets free bus travel, but this may be harder to implement. Perhaps anyone who doesn't have a valid drivers licence.

I think that this is an interesting idea, though it might create perverse incentives. For example, would an 18 year old without a driving licence get concessionary bus travel, but then have their bus pass confiscated if they passed a driving test?

 

[Falcon1200]

So presumably bus services would become more busy meaning slower boarding and alighting.

The ability to flow people on and off a bus with multiple doors without concern for interaction with the driver is, in my view, likely to swamp any problems with increased demand causing this.

Agree; On the buses I use in Oxford the journey can be incredibly slow, thanks largely to the time spent at stops, given that the city has a large number of both visitors and students who are often not familiar with the fares or payment methods.

 

[dk1]

Was quite amusing when I travelled from Aberystwyth to Haverfordwest a few years ago. On weekends all Welsh bus travel was free for some reason. A relief bus had also to be arranged such was demand. I couldn’t believe my luck even though the fare was only going to be a tenner. The woman behind lived in the area and said she never uses the service and wouldn’t do if she had to pay. Considering no revenue was coming in I still don’t understand the point apart from possibly helping out tourism in some way.

 

[michael8]

In Gibraltar the local swimming pools are free, as they are funded by tax, and so the residents can use them for free.
If a tourist tries to go to the pool, they can't, because there is no way to pay (no till etc).
Just makes you realise in the UK we pay twice for a lot of things. First through tax, and then when we go to use them (eg. pools, buses etc).

 

[PTR 444]

There is no such thing as a free lunch.

Some services are free at the point of use, but they still have to be paid for, usually out of central or local taxation. There they compete with all of the other things that central or local government would like to do.

Making services free at the point of use works when demand and access are near to being universal and predictable. A good examples is primary/secondary education. Services where not everyone uses them equally, but everyone might need them, are usually free at the point of use too, for example police and fire. Here in the UK we also include health.

Access to bus services is not universal. Here in the Fens there are lots of communities that have no bus service at all.




Demand for bus services is not predictable, except through the farebox.

I quite like what we have now, with free travel for some groups and a maximum single fare of £2.




I agree that, if the maximum fare was further reduced, this point could be reached. I don't think we are there with the £2 cap, though happy to be guided by those who know a lot more about the bus industry.




The main difficulty with stoking up demand for buses is inelasticity of supply. Here in the Fens the main constraint on level of service is driver recruitment and retention.

And, anyway, I'm not convinced that demand for bus travel is particularly sensitive to price. I know lots of people who are entitled to senior concessionary travel but still drive everywhere, even when they could make the journey by bus.



I think that this is an interesting idea, though it might create perverse incentives. For example, would an 18 year old without a driving licence get concessionary bus travel, but then have their bus pass confiscated if they passed a driving test?

Or would that 18 year old even choose to take their driving test at all?

Not that I am against the idea of young people making the decision not to drive, but there may come a time when they might need a car for work/family reasons.

 

[Magdalia]

Just makes you realise in the UK we pay twice for a lot of things. First through tax, and then when we go to use them (eg. pools, buses etc).

No you don't pay twice. You pay partly by taxation and partly at point of use.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jul 2024 ==

On the buses I use in Oxford the journey can be incredibly slow, thanks largely to the time spent at stops, given that the city has a large number of both visitors and students who are often not familiar with the fares or payment methods.

Buses in Cambridge can be a nightmare for this. Once I was on a bus heading from the hospital to the town centre. It arrived nearly empty at the railway station, and there was only one person waiting to board, but they messed up some supposedly wonderful form of digital payment. Meanwhile a queue formed behind, of people arriving at the stop after the bus should have departed. 10 minutes later we still hadn't moved and the bus was full!

 

[mangyiscute]

Or would that 18 year old even choose to take their driving test at all?

Not that I am against the idea of young people making the decision not to drive, but there may come a time when they might need a car for work/family reasons.

But imagine a world where no one ever 'needs' a car because the public transport is so good - we should aspire to achieve this.

 

[PTR 444]

But imagine a world where no one ever 'needs' a car because the public transport is so good - we should aspire to achieve this.

I wholeheartedly agree that we should aspire to eliminate unnecessary car journeys. I don't however think it will ever be practical to replace every single car journey unless we can somehow serve every single shack and hamlet with at least a "parliamentary" bus service. That requires a lot of funding, and unless the entire general public are willing to subsidise the community for the greater good, I can't ever see it happening.

The problem is that we now live in a 24 hour economy, and so many jobs start and finish at different times that there isn't really a "peak" travel time anymore. If there was, you could certainly run a daily commuter bus from a string of small hamlets and villages to the nearest town or railhead. Nowadays that demand is spread out, and to transport all those passengers at the times they want to travel means putting on more buses, making the operation less commercially viable.

Even if everywhere had outstanding public transport coverage, there would still be many groups of people, such as families with small children, who would be unwilling to give up their car as it forms an extension of the home. Owning a car is also handy if you're self employed and carry a lot of bulky items around, and I doubt anyone will want to come home from their IKEA or Costco shopping spree by train. I imagine there are also a few people who like to own a car as it gives them a sense of freedom and responsibility - they take pride in looking after their own vehicle and feel independent by not relying on other people to transport them places.

 

[PGAT]

Even if everywhere had outstanding public transport coverage, there would still be many groups of people, such as families with small children, who would be unwilling to give up their car as it forms an extension of the home. Owning a car is also handy if you're self employed and carry a lot of bulky items around, and I doubt anyone will want to come home from their IKEA or Costco shopping spree by train. I imagine there are also a few people who like to own a car as it gives them a sense of freedom and responsibility - they take pride in looking after their own vehicle and feel independent by not relying on other people to transport them places.

Bicycles exist. Cargo bikes can carry what most people need 99% of the time. It’s not worth the large expense of buying a car to account for that other 1%. Bikes also fit the bill for independence and responsibility

 

[slowroad]

Bicycles exist. Cargo bikes can carry what most people need 99% of the time. It’s not worth the large expense of buying a car to account for that other 1%. Bikes also fit the bill for independence and responsibility

People make their own choices and the evidence across countries is that, even when there is excellent public transport and provision for active travel, once people can afford cars, the vast majority of distance travelled is by car.

 

[PGAT]

People make their own choices and the evidence across countries is that, even when there is excellent public transport and provision for active travel, once people can afford cars, the vast majority of distance travelled is by car.

Only if the infrastructure for cycling is unsafe will people opt for the car. Assuming perfect cycling and public transport infrastructure there is basically no objective reason to use the car

 

[Starmill]

I would be in favour of increasing the subsidy so the adult single for most routes is cut to £1. This then tips the balance so much that even a medium distance journey of 1.5-2.5 miles is getting just enough value for money from the bus that they won't be as tempted to drive and chance parking illegally or anti-socially. It would have the disadvantages associated with totally free travel. It also avoids worrying about nonsense like over-riding on a short hop fare.

I would make under 18s and over 60s a flat 50p. I'd also spend a lot more subsidising routes on weekends and a little later into the evenings, which are often lacking. I would also require ticketless contactless "tap and go" for all routes, retaining the option to pay cash or for the driver to authorise one free single in extremis.

 

[Magdalia]

Bicycles exist. Cargo bikes can carry what most people need 99% of the time. It’s not worth the large expense of buying a car to account for that other 1%. Bikes also fit the bill for independence and responsibility

That may be ok in somewhere like Selhurst.

But it does not work for people living in villages with no shops, no bus service and miles from the nearest town.

Nobody is going to ride a cargo bike along a windy, hilly and unlit country lane.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jul 2024 ==

Only if the infrastructure for cycling is unsafe will people opt for the car.

In most rural areas infrastructure for cycling is non-existent.

 

[Ken H]

I would be in favour of increasing the subsidy so the adult single for most routes is cut to £1. This then tips the balance so much that even a medium distance journey of 1.5-2.5 miles is getting just enough value for money from the bus that they won't be as tempted to drive and chance parking illegally or anti-socially. It would have the disadvantages associated with totally free travel. It also avoids worrying about nonsense like over-riding on a short hop fare.

I would make under 18s and over 60s a flat 50p. I'd also spend a lot more subsidising routes on weekends and a little later into the evenings, which are often lacking. I would also require ticketless contactless "tap and go" for all routes, retaining the option to pay cash or for the driver to authorise one free single in extremis.

It depend on how much of a hurry you are in. I use the bus for the last mile to the local hospital to escape the dft parking charges. I park for free, and the bus is free as I have a granny pass.
But sometimes you are late because of traffic so you have to fork out at the hospital to get to the appointment on time. And despite having a granny pass, I still work so my time is money. Making a journey 30 minutes slower isnt an option....

 

[PGAT]

That may be ok in somewhere like Selhurst.

But it does not work for people living in villages with no shops, no bus service and miles from the nearest town.

Nobody is going to ride a cargo bike along a windy, hilly and unlit country lane.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jul 2024 ==


In most rural areas infrastructure for cycling is non-existent.

I was responding to a comment referencing a scenario that hypothetically has perfect transport. If you are in a small village you would have transport to work from in this scenario. Anyway I think this is starting to get off-topic

 

[Mgameing123]

Moderator Note - split from:

TfL bus fare prosecutions may be invalid

The Evening Standard has a story today which states that TfL bus fare prosecutions may be invalid due to incorrect online advice within their Frequently Asked Questions. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/tfl-dodging-bus-fare-convictions-invalid-sjp-b1171653.html The basis of the problem is...

www.railforums.co.uk

To be honest, it's about time all local bus journeys were free or only a nominal charge. If they really are serious about reducing pollution then the ULEZ zone charges should be increased and bus fares reduced. It's the easiest way to reduce traffic.
In my own part of the country we have had £1 flat rate fares. This has been so successful that guess what... The flat fare is being increased to £2. How to kill a good thing.

No as that will encourage unnecessary short hops. What we truly need is affordable bus fares which would get people out of their cars.

 

[mangyiscute]

Going back to the current subsidy, I would prefer it changed to a tiered thing of like £1 for 0-10 miles, £2 for 10-20 miles etc with a £3/5 overall cap.
Currently, spending £2 on say Leeds to Whitby is insane value, but within cities there often isn't much if any of a price cut so there's less incentive to use the offer.
Therefore going to £1 should be done for those routes, but great value can still be provided for cross country routes without going down to £1.

 

[6Gman]

By demand, just as it is now. Unpopular routes have service reduced, popular routes have service enhanced.

Yes, but currently the commercial network is determined by the companies involved and then supplemented (or not) by the relevant local authorities.

The private companies are not going to provide free services so who does?

And who pays whom?

 

[30907]

Anecdotal reply; I am biased in favour of public transport, and reasonanly fit. I travel free after 0930 (and half price on local rail), and one of the criteria for our retirement home was decent public transport.

Bus into Bradford is 5min walk away and frequent - no-brainer, but if I were paying £4 return I would walk 10min to catch the train as it would be cheaper.
Bus to the local hospital is a pain (I've done it 3x this week though, with the summer weather) - at £4.50 I would opt for car plus walk - unless like my son and d-in-law I had chosen not to have a car.
Supermarket shopping by bus is quite possible (I've just had to replace the trolley!).
Voluntary work in Keighley - train is slightly quicker so I use it about 50/50 despite the modest cost.

What about short hops instead of walking? Yes, occasionally I catch the bus 3-4 stops uphill, which I wouldn't pay for unless it was raining heavily.

So overall free travel reduces my car use considerably (and my rail use somewhat), but makes only a marginal difference to my walking.

 

[signed]

The problem is that we now live in a 24 hour economy, and so many jobs start and finish at different times that there isn't really a "peak" travel time anymore

Some transport network over in France now have on-demand (booked the day before) feeders to the nearest tram or train station for the most underserved communities. That would allow to pool a council resources and respond adequately to demand

Having something like that could be very useful in my view. But it can't be free of course

 

[Starmill]

That may be ok in somewhere like Selhurst.

But it does not work for people living in villages with no shops, no bus service and miles from the nearest town.

Nobody is going to ride a cargo bike along a windy, hilly and unlit country lane.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jul 2024 ==


In most rural areas infrastructure for cycling is non-existent.

Cars and other motor vehicles only cause the most damage in places like Selhurst of course, so it only really matters to try to manage them out of cities. The rural places where restrictions could or should ever apply are very limited, probably nothing beyond the national parks.

 

[The exile]

Free is much better than nominal because with one step you remove a whole load of non-productive costs.

Ticket selling, ticket checking, prosecution. You also remove a lot of idle time when the driver could actually be driving.

But you make the whole thing entirely subject to the whim of politicians. Once a service is entirely free it makes no difference whether it runs full or empty (or even at all). Also - entirely free encourages people to use buses for very short distances instead of walking / cycling - possibly meaning that people who really need to use transport for a longer distance can't get on at all. Removing the idle time can be done by encouraging ticket sales off-bus (like virtually every municipality in many European countries has done for decades)

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jul 2024 ==

People make their own choices and the evidence across countries is that, even when there is excellent public transport and provision for active travel, once people can afford cars, the vast majority of distance travelled is by car.

Not surprising - and, in fact, not the major problem in terms of congestion (emissions are a different kettle of fish). However good a public transport network is, the longer the distance to be travelled, the more likely it is that the traveller will have luggage or the journey will involve some element that makes public transport less than ideal. In terms of urban congestion, it is the short to medium distance journeys that cause the most problems. 30 1/2 miles journeys will cause far more urban congestion than 1 200 mile trip, but will make very little dent in the statistic you quote above. There are some types of journey that will almost never be made by public transport, even if it runs every 2 or 3 minutes "door to door" and is free (think IKEA and the trip to the council recycling centre as quick examples)

 

[Bevan Price]

By demand, just as it is now. Unpopular routes have service reduced, popular routes have service enhanced.

Reducing frequency just makes people even less likely to use buses.

Personally I would just like a bus service that can be trusted to actually run, rather than leave me standing in the cold because the operator cancels journeys because the previous working was running a bit late.

 

[Falcon1200]

Bicycles exist. Cargo bikes can carry what most people need 99% of the time.

Given the (long and steep) hill between my home and the nearest supermarket, not to mention the often wet and windy weather in the West of Scotland (even in summer as just seen for the Open at Troon!) a cargo bike would not be suitable; I sometimes do walk one way and get the bus back, however the service has been unreliable of late.

Not all bus travel should, or could be free, but perhaps that for Park & Ride schemes, as well as the car parking, should be free, coupled with high car park charges for those who still drive into the city centre? Maybe starting as an experiment somewhere suitable.

 

[slowroad]

Only if the infrastructure for cycling is unsafe will people opt for the car. Assuming perfect cycling and public transport infrastructure there is basically no objective reason to use the car

It is hard to see how (except in the centre of large cities), cycling and public transport could ever equal the convenience (and privacy) of cars.

The Netherlands has a level of car ownership very similar to the UK. Traffic levels are also high - cycling seems to substitute mainly for car passengers (rather than drivers) and bus users.

 

[Magdalia]

Not all bus travel should, or could be free, but perhaps that for Park & Ride schemes, as well as the car parking, should be free, coupled with high car park charges for those who still drive into the city centre? Maybe starting as an experiment somewhere suitable.

Cambridge Park and Ride has worked successfully like this for many years.

Parking at the 5 Park and Ride sites is free up to 18 hours.

A return ticket on the bus to the City Centre is £3.50 with up to 3 children travelling free if with an adult. There are some £3 fares for short journeys. These undercut the £2 single journey cap.

Park and Ride is increasingly being used for commuting to/from the Cambridge Biomedical Campus.