Will Labour scrap the £2 fare Cap? (now confirmed will rise to £3)

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If the scheme does continue it needs to have some more strings attached for operators, perhaps being contingent on increasing routes or service frequencies. Seeing certain large operating companies taking this subsidy whilst simultaneously cutting services and posting multi-million pound pound profits doesn't sit well with me.

I should imagine that the "large operating companies" response to what does not sit well with you could be answered by the famous Catherine Tate saying..."Am I bovvered"...

 

[noddingdonkey]

To be fair that was my answer when First were crying about low passenger numbers post-pandemic, having been surprised that having spent the preceding decade cutting services to a skeleton level designed for people who didn't have an alternative choice, once they did have a choice they decided to work from home rather than put up with the poor bus service.

For them to take all of this taxpayer's money and give nothing in return is taking the proverbial.

 

[duncombec]

I'm cautious of the fact this is a thread specifically about the £2 fare, so resisting the temptation to join the tap on/tap off or ENCTS debates too deeply to keep on topic.

Absolutely not. The free passes for older people are beneficial to all by encouraging older people whose senses are failing to give up driving sooner or drive less. It's not a pure benefit for the individual like e.g. the winter fuel payment, it benefits everyone.

I'm not sure this stands up to scrutiny, although I'll accept you probably have anecdotal evidence. I suspect for many, the ENCTS bus pass is something you apply for because it's a nice thing to have if you need it. My father has one, and I think he's used it about half a dozen times in two years, usually with me. Why? Because mum doesn't qualify yet, so cumulatively, it's still easier to use the car. Will mum qualifying change much? I doubt it - they are used to the convenience of a car (or walking).

Whether by design or accident it seems that in many areas rather than being a cap you have a £2 flat fare. Indeed after being charged £2 for going three stops I asked our local operator if there were any fares under £2 as I was unable to find any on their online fares guide.

There may have been fares "before" that have now moved to being capped, or cap levels - that was certainly the case with an evening special fare here, that rose from £1.70 to £2. Will there still be an evening fare if the cap goes, or will they just hope we've quietly forgotten about it? I think the reality is there are very few fares now, especially in the south, that could be offered for less than £2. Otherwise, do we start differentiating almost stop by stop, and have people walking to a less-convenient stop to save 20p?

There's a big social justice issue here too - it's not just about enticing people out of their cars, but putting on affordable provision for those that can't afford one. Busses were way too expensive before the cap, and anything other than a small rise in line with inflation (so not a 50p jump) would end up hitting the least well off hardest.

Sorry, I don't agree with "a small rise in line with inflation". I appreciate it may be hard for some, but one of the great benefits of a £2 fare is that is is simple. Raising it to £2.10 or £2.20 isn't. Furthermore, I think it has been said on here by "learned commenters" that the transport industry has generally had much higher than inflation cost increases across the board, whilst also fewer passengers and lower-than-inflation contract uplifts. I think the only logical jumps are 50p at a time.

Sorry but it’s an absolute joke that young people aged 16-18 have to pay sometimes full price to travel to compulsory education but that the old can doss about on buses all day free of charge (and many disabled people can get an identical commute to their colleagues free of charge whilst everyone else pays).
If we want to encourage bus use we need to make fares an affordable as possible life long and the best way to do this is to eliminate free travel so that the cost of the operation can be split as many ways as possible.
I also think it’s important to remember that the ratio of freebies to others on many routes have historically led to artifically high fares for those paying in order for the route to break even due to the way that free travel is reimbursed by councils.

Here I do agree - there is a notable disconnect between 16-18 (and 18-21) in England versus the great freebie cliff-edge that is ENCTS age*. I'm not sure changing ENCTS qualification is the best option, though. Perhaps if ENCTS was properly and fully funded (magic money tree?) then operators would be allow child fares for all "legal children" of their own accord? Unlike my local operator, who have recently decided to make child fares 85% of the adult fare..
I fear you are quite right in regard to the ratio of repayment for any subsidized fare scheme "basket" versus fare paying passengers, and can you blame the operators? If you were told it would cost you X pounds for an amount of coffee, pizza, pints of beer... whatever you choose) regardless of how much or how little you could actually consume, you probably wouldn't say "I'll just have one", would you?!

*I hasten to add this is unbridled sarcasm...

Tap in (and out, if necessary) is the way to go - people pay less attention to the actual price then because of the convenience factor. I suspect if you asked most Londoners what the bus and Tube fares were they wouldn't know, just as most people don't know the exact price of a loaf of bread or a pint of milk, just roughly what they spend on food in a week/month or similar.

Again, I don't doubt you for some people, but I suspect an awful lot more people know the price of a loaf of bread or a pint of milk than you think, especially those with low disposable income. I might know the exact price of either, but I know that the yellow supermarket charges me something like 20p more if I pick up 4 pints of "farmer's milk" rather than "regular milk", and I know if they charge me £1.50 for a loaf of bread then the price of wheat has gone up that week.

Must point out that my single journey into town used to cost £1.30 and it jumped to £2 because of the cap! But have a feeling that if the cap was removed, that single journey would now cost far more. And a jump to £2.50 for a few stops doesn't feel right.

Did it jump because of the cap, or did it jump because of various other factors since 2022 that have put the price up, and the operator considered £2 was "easier" (if not morally quite right) than, say, £1.80?

I think there probably is a definite north-south split. On my local route which runs through a mixture of wealthy rural villages and in complete contrast ex mining villages, lots of people are paying the £2 by cash. Nearly all paying by cash have the correct amount and certainly board the bus much quicker than some of those paying using a phone. Even raising the fare to £2.50 might result in lots of people requiring change.

Again, a lot comes down to disposable income. On my local route, many more people at the suburban end of the route pay by card or phone app, than do in the "grittier" end of the route nearest town, where incomes are significantly lower.

You say the company won't get useful ridership data. I'd also suggest Councils don't either. How can you justify bus priority measures, without data. Say the data showed people going from A to B, and people going B to C. What if a significant number were actually going from A to C via B, and there would be modal shift if there was a service A to C. I'd suggest with the current system, even ENCTS, significant flow data is missing, meaning informed strategic decisions can't be made. We see bus companies saying why you should use the bus. But do we hear why people don't? Even people going where buses go.

Hmm... not sure I agree here. Ticket machine data does, of course, give a lot of information, but I think that is more for nuances. How would it already know if you were going A to C via B (where you have to change bus) if you weren't using a day ticket, for example? For subsidized routes, it often comes down to pure passenger numbers versus cost and a headline figure of "per passenger journey".

Honestly id wish the cap was more distance based. Heathrow to Harlow shouldn't be £2. I'd say £1 cap for the first 5 miles then £2 cap for the next 5 miles and so forth. It would work alot better since prices would reflect the distance your travelling.

So essentially returning to a fully staged system, but with multiple caps? I think that's going to be more of a problem than an improvement, especially as distance-based fares tend to only be very vague in the UK. At its extremes, you'd end up with one end of a village paying more than the other, or headlines of "why does that village that's 5.5 miles away pay £2, but we, who are only 4.5 miles away, have to pay £3" headlines in local newspapers.

If the scheme does continue it needs to have some more strings attached for operators, perhaps being contingent on increasing routes or service frequencies. Seeing certain large operating companies taking this subsidy whilst simultaneously cutting services and posting multi-million pound pound profits doesn't sit well with me.

It's not really a subsidy, though, is it? I described it to a non-enthusiast a few months ago as a supermarket being told everyone can buy what they like, but the supermarket can't charge more than £50, and if they are over 65 then you can't charge them at all. In return, we'll give you a fixed amount of money, called an offer but which is only partly negotiable based on a random selection of things an educated guesswork number of people will buy, and make it out like we're doing you a favour. Her jaw dropped.. and I think she mentally replanned a few "this £2 fare is great" days out...

Do I think the fare cap has been a good thing? Absolutely. I'd be a hypocrite to say anything else based on how often I've used it (as I said in an earlier post, my regular bus fare was £4.10 single - at less than half price travel I can't complain). Do I think the time has come to look at the viability of it, and how we can find a new normal? Also absolutely. I'd rather have a £2.50 bus every 12 minutes that's viable than a bus every 15 minutes because £2 wasn't... likewise, I'm sure users of less frequent routes would rather have hourly at £2.50 than not at all at £2.

 

[Trainman40083]

To be fair that was my answer when First were crying about low passenger numbers post-pandemic, having been surprised that having spent the preceding decade cutting services to a skeleton level designed for people who didn't have an alternative choice, once they did have a choice they decided to work from home rather than put up with the poor bus service.

For them to take all of this taxpayer's money and give nothing in return is taking the proverbial.

I share your view there . I would say , post COVID, it has never been easier to not catch a bus.. More alternatives than the private car. You start with working from home (or even part week). Meetings on zoom etc, local shopping, online shopping of food, general items, banking.Then add the growth in e-scooters and e-bikes, walking etc. Maybe travelling less saw people have money to go by train (and many people find the cheap fares and work round them).. Some will opt for taxis . An example of that is private hire rates in my area don't seem to have changed in 5 years. And more electric/hybrid taxis. Many businesses companies have trolled out the excuse "it's not our fault we can't run our timetabled services". Saw one today "we can't track our spare buses". It had broken down. Passengers have had enough and moved to operators that always seem to run, or just opted for alternatives. Maybe they will never catch the bus again. Personally I love walking more. I even walk to local businesses for lunch, so save the bus fare. It is interesting to see Centrebus report that the £2 fare has seen ridership increase between 27% and 40% (Routeone magazine) . Any operator not achieving that must be doing something wrong. Very wrong.

 

[duncombec]

It is interesting to see Centrebus report that the £2 fare has seen ridership increase between 27% and 40% (Routeone magazine) . Any operator not achieving that must be doing something wrong. Very wrong.

I've just googled the article, and quote the relevant part here:

Centrebus says it has reviewed customer numbers between July 2022 and the same month in 2024. While the number of vehicles at depots in Buxton, Grantham, Leicester and Luton has remained relatively constant over that period, patronage has risen by between 27% and 52%.

That averages at around 40% across Centrebus, which Managing Director David Brookes says is “very pleasing.” The cap was introduced in January 2023, initially for a three-month period.

Adds Mr Brookes: “We are part of, and have benefitted from, the ground-breaking Leicester Buses Partnership, innovative reductions in weekly and monthly ticket prices in Luton, and of course the £2 bus fare cap throughout our network.”

He notes that while there are thus multiple factors influencing patronage growth, “we believe that the £2 fare cap has been one of them.”

So the growth isn't all down to the £2 fare cap (in fact, they don't actually know how much of it is down to that at all - it could be none!), and it's growth from the post-Covid position, rather than beforehand... so whilst growth is growth, it could be attraction back rather than new passengers.

 

[Trainman40083]

I'm cautious of the fact this is a thread specifically about the £2 fare, so resisting the temptation to join the tap on/tap off or ENCTS debates too deeply to keep on topic.


I'm not sure this stands up to scrutiny, although I'll accept you probably have anecdotal evidence. I suspect for many, the ENCTS bus pass is something you apply for because it's a nice thing to have if you need it. My father has one, and I think he's used it about half a dozen times in two years, usually with me. Why? Because mum doesn't qualify yet, so cumulatively, it's still easier to use the car. Will mum qualifying change much? I doubt it - they are used to the convenience of a car (or walking).


There may have been fares "before" that have now moved to being capped, or cap levels - that was certainly the case with an evening special fare here, that rose from £1.70 to £2. Will there still be an evening fare if the cap goes, or will they just hope we've quietly forgotten about it? I think the reality is there are very few fares now, especially in the south, that could be offered for less than £2. Otherwise, do we start differentiating almost stop by stop, and have people walking to a less-convenient stop to save 20p?


Sorry, I don't agree with "a small rise in line with inflation". I appreciate it may be hard for some, but one of the great benefits of a £2 fare is that is is simple. Raising it to £2.10 or £2.20 isn't. Furthermore, I think it has been said on here by "learned commenters" that the transport industry has generally had much higher than inflation cost increases across the board, whilst also fewer passengers and lower-than-inflation contract uplifts. I think the only logical jumps are 50p at a time.


Here I do agree - there is a notable disconnect between 16-18 (and 18-21) in England versus the great freebie cliff-edge that is ENCTS age*. I'm not sure changing ENCTS qualification is the best option, though. Perhaps if ENCTS was properly and fully funded (magic money tree?) then operators would be allow child fares for all "legal children" of their own accord? Unlike my local operator, who have recently decided to make child fares 85% of the adult fare..
I fear you are quite right in regard to the ratio of repayment for any subsidized fare scheme "basket" versus fare paying passengers, and can you blame the operators? If you were told it would cost you X pounds for an amount of coffee, pizza, pints of beer... whatever you choose) regardless of how much or how little you could actually consume, you probably wouldn't say "I'll just have one", would you?!

*I hasten to add this is unbridled sarcasm...


Again, I don't doubt you for some people, but I suspect an awful lot more people know the price of a loaf of bread or a pint of milk than you think, especially those with low disposable income. I might know the exact price of either, but I know that the yellow supermarket charges me something like 20p more if I pick up 4 pints of "farmer's milk" rather than "regular milk", and I know if they charge me £1.50 for a loaf of bread then the price of wheat has gone up that week.


Did it jump because of the cap, or did it jump because of various other factors since 2022 that have put the price up, and the operator considered £2 was "easier" (if not morally quite right) than, say, £1.80?


Again, a lot comes down to disposable income. On my local route, many more people at the suburban end of the route pay by card or phone app, than do in the "grittier" end of the route nearest town, where incomes are significantly lower.


Hmm... not sure I agree here. Ticket machine data does, of course, give a lot of information, but I think that is more for nuances. How would it already know if you were going A to C via B (where you have to change bus) if you weren't using a day ticket, for example? For subsidized routes, it often comes down to pure passenger numbers versus cost and a headline figure of "per passenger journey".


So essentially returning to a fully staged system, but with multiple caps? I think that's going to be more of a problem than an improvement, especially as distance-based fares tend to only be very vague in the UK. At its extremes, you'd end up with one end of a village paying more than the other, or headlines of "why does that village that's 5.5 miles away pay £2, but we, who are only 4.5 miles away, have to pay £3" headlines in local newspapers.


It's not really a subsidy, though, is it? I described it to a non-enthusiast a few months ago as a supermarket being told everyone can buy what they like, but the supermarket can't charge more than £50, and if they are over 65 then you can't charge them at all. In return, we'll give you a fixed amount of money, called an offer but which is only partly negotiable based on a random selection of things an educated guesswork number of people will buy, and make it out like we're doing you a favour. Her jaw dropped.. and I think she mentally replanned a few "this £2 fare is great" days out...

Do I think the fare cap has been a good thing? Absolutely. I'd be a hypocrite to say anything else based on how often I've used it (as I said in an earlier post, my regular bus fare was £4.10 single - at less than half price travel I can't complain). Do I think the time has come to look at the viability of it, and how we can find a new normal? Also absolutely. I'd rather have a £2.50 bus every 12 minutes that's viable than a bus every 15 minutes because £2 wasn't... likewise, I'm sure users of less frequent routes would rather have hourly at £2.50 than not at all at £2.

Now you say your bus fare was £4.10 and is now £2. A lot of people honestly believe that the Government pays the bus operator £2.10 and so the bus operator is no worse off and indeed gains if more people use the bus, and this making loadsa money.. But the bus operator gets a fixed sum that is around 50% to 70% of that gap, I presume to get them to up their game to attract new business. I meet people that don't even know there is a £2 fare, and probably hence never use the bus.

 

[DDB]

One of the problems with the £2 cap is that it doesn't apply to trams which has caused trams problems. I suspect most tram systems are in Labour council or mayoral areas so I suspect they will have been complaining behind the schemes.

I wonder therfore that if it does continue it might be at a higher price but might bring in trams.

 

[noddingdonkey]

And that's reasonable if you consider that a big proportion of passengers would be using weekly/monthly tickets that would not average £4.10 per jouney. When this all started First West Yorkshire were offering a £2 fare of their own if paid for on their app.

The recent documentary by Geoff Marshall on YouTube on various bus operations was pretty clear - the operators who are seeing growth are the ones who are investing in quallity services at a frequency that is attractive rather than a timetable passengers have to plan their life around. First were conspicuous by their absence from his programme.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I predict:

Along with the legal changes permitting local authorities to "run" bus services, they will also get devolved responsibility for fare levels. It will create "interesting" anomalies where a route passes through or serves >1 local authority area. And it won't be sufficiently funded.

 

[RT4038]

I predict:

Along with the legal changes permitting local authorities to "run" bus services, they will also get devolved responsibility for fare levels. It will create "interesting" anomalies where a route passes through or serves >1 local authority area. And it won't be sufficiently funded.

Who, in many cases, will be totally unprepared for it.

 

[Ianigsy]

I predict:

Along with the legal changes permitting local authorities to "run" bus services, they will also get devolved responsibility for fare levels. It will create "interesting" anomalies where a route passes through or serves >1 local authority area. And it won't be sufficiently funded.

That would indeed be interesting with a route like the Yorkshire Coastliner, which starts in West Yorkshire then ambles through North Yorkshire to the City of York and then back into North Yorkshire.

 

[Man of Kent]

The recent documentary by Geoff Marshall on YouTube on various bus operations was pretty clear - the operators who are seeing growth are the ones who are investing in quallity services at a frequency that is attractive rather than a timetable passengers have to plan their life around. First were conspicuous by their absence from his programme.

It's true up to a point, but there a myriad of things beyond operators' control that impact on the success of the business, including things such as parking policies and enforcement; concessionary fare reimbursement rates; bus priority; and planning policies - the towns that have hollowed out their central retail in favour of edge-based retail parks are frequently the ones with poor bus services.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Sep 2024 ==

That would indeed be interesting with a route like the Yorkshire Coastliner, which starts in West Yorkshire then ambles through North Yorkshire to the City of York and then back into North Yorkshire.

The Combined Authority for York and North Yorkshire has responsibility for the entire section outside of West Yorkshire. It currently devolves the powers back to the unitary councils, until such time as it builds up its own staffing (which may be the council staff TUPE'd over).

 

[RT4038]

An example of that is private hire rates in my area don't seem to have changed in 5 years. And more electric/hybrid taxis.

In the County of my residence, the quantity of taxis/private hire vehicles is determined by the number of Local Authority School / Special Educational Need contracts available. Hence it is not possible to hire one of these vehicles for about 90 minutes in the morning and afternoon on schooldays. The rates paid for these contracts enable the 'off peak' work to be done at near marginal rates. Of course, the bus industry could probably do the same, and not run any public bus services during these times either, which would enable fares to reduce I daresay.

 

[Trainman40083]

In the County of my residence, the quantity of taxis/private hire vehicles is determined by the number of Local Authority School / Special Educational Need contracts available. Hence it is not possible to hire one of these vehicles for about 90 minutes in the morning and afternoon on schooldays. The rates paid for these contracts enable the 'off peak' work to be done at near marginal rates. Of course, the bus industry could probably do the same, and not run any public bus services during these times either, which would enable fares to reduce I daresay.

I know what you mean . There are said to be well over 1000 taxis and private hire cars where I live, in a City of around 260000 people....Highly unlikely you will get one at school time or when sudden inspections of vehicles take place.

 

[johncrossley]

One of the problems with the £2 cap is that it doesn't apply to trams which has caused trams problems. I suspect most tram systems are in Labour council or mayoral areas so I suspect they will have been complaining behind the schemes.

I wonder therfore that if it does continue it might be at a higher price but might bring in trams.

It is quite a bizarre British quirk that buses are nearly always on a separate fare system to trams. At least not in London, where the £1.75 single fare applies to both buses and trams, even when changing from bus to tram. The so-called "£2 fare cap" outside London actually results in the vast majority of potential single journeys within an urban area costing at least £4. This might be lower than what it was before, but £4 is not fantastically cheap.

 

[Simon75]

Absolutely this! To run a bus these days costs how much per hour? Then work out how many £2 fares you need to have!

In addition to the low rebate for bus passes (England) they get

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure this stands up to scrutiny, although I'll accept you probably have anecdotal evidence.

The anecdotal evidence I have is my parents, who never used to use buses at all but started using them whenever possible when they got their passes, allowing them to go down to one car. Free is a very powerful incentive to consume something, hence why the "bag tax" works in the opposite direction despite the fee for a bag being so low it wouldn't break most peoples' bank.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Sep 2024 ==

It is quite a bizarre British quirk that buses are nearly always on a separate fare system to trams. At least not in London, where the £1.75 single fare applies to both buses and trams, even when changing from bus to tram. The so-called "£2 fare cap" outside London actually results in the vast majority of potential single journeys within an urban area costing at least £4. This might be lower than what it was before, but £4 is not fantastically cheap.

The various tram systems are a bit different - London's mostly replaced bus services, hence the bus fare being applicable, whereas Metrolink is a metro system with street running and entirely replaced heavy rail.

One issue with the scheme is that it prevents true integrated fares on the German model, i.e. all modes cost the same and are on the same ticket. Of course not even London does that.

 

[johncrossley]

The various tram systems are a bit different - London's mostly replaced bus services, hence the bus fare being applicable, whereas Metrolink is a metro system with street running and entirely replaced heavy rail.

Both those systems combine street running and former train routes. Wimbledon - Croydon and Addiscombe - Elmers End are former BR lines. That's about half of the London network. It actually started out with a separate (higher) fare system to buses albeit with some dedicated bus feeders but the fare system was harmonised with buses later on.

 

[Snex]

I've definitely noticed on my local route, some drivers always issue tickets to the terminus no matter what destination you ask for. So the company definitely won't be getting useful ridership data at the moment.

I'm not sure how the funding is working, but surely this is fraud aswell?

I'd assume a passenger travelling 1 mile isn't getting reimbursed at the same rate as someone travelling 50 mile.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I think there probably is a definite north-south split.

To me it seems more of an urban v rural split rather than north v south. I suspect say Manchester will be more card use heavy than rural Devon for example.

One of the problems with the £2 cap is that it doesn't apply to trams which has caused trams problems. I suspect most tram systems are in Labour council or mayoral areas so I suspect they will have been complaining behind the schemes.

I wonder therfore that if it does continue it might be at a higher price but might bring in trams.

Not just trams but also regular rail. It takes a lot longer but it's cheaper to get the number 70 bus from Filton to temple meads than it is to get the train. Also seeing this with the about to be opened Ashley Down station too where the rail fare is going be more expensive than the bus fare (and that specific example has hit with "normal people" too as its been mentioned in my street chat and local FB groups).

 

[johncrossley]

Even raising the fare to £2.50 might result in lots of people requiring change.

That would be a good opportunity to get rid of cash altogether. London has now been cashless for over 10 years. That enables London to have fares which are not round figures, such as the current £1.75 fare.

 

[Recessio]

That would be a good opportunity to get rid of cash altogether. London has now been cashless for over 10 years. That enables London to have fares which are not round figures, such as the current £1.75 fare.

As mentioned earlier in the thread though, it would require something like Oyster nation-wide, that can still be loaded with cash. Else it would be discriminating against people without bank accounts.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As mentioned earlier in the thread though, it would require something like Oyster nation-wide, that can still be loaded with cash. Else it would be discriminating against people without bank accounts.

It's of note that this isn't a protected characteristic.

 

[Belperpete]

The anecdotal evidence I have is my parents, who never used to use buses at all but started using them whenever possible when they got their passes, allowing them to go down to one car. Free is a very powerful incentive to consume something, hence why the "bag tax" works in the opposite direction despite the fee for a bag being so low it wouldn't break most peoples' bank.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Sep 2024 ==

Likewise my grandparents gave up their car when they retired. In their case, they had quite a severe drop in income when they retired, as neither had much of a company pension, so economies had to be made.

In order to release equity, they moved to a cheaper property, in an area with a high pensioner population. They would regularly complain about the elderly drivers who really shouldn't have been driving, "xx pulled out again without looking", etc etc. So if the elderly bus pass keeps even some of these off the road, it is surely worth it.

 

[Recessio]

It's of note that this isn't a protected characteristic.

True, but I don't think it would be politically acceptable to push forward with an entirely cash-free system, even if it isn't strictly a protected characteristics, but the disproportionate impact on people without bank accounts (or fixed addresses for bank accounts) could potentially be so. Either way this is drifting off topic slightly.

Back on £2 fares, the requirements for buses to take cash also makes it more likely to stick to "round" numbers e.g. 50p or £1 price increments for a price cap. London can charge £1.75 or whatever it currently is because you don't have to worry about having the correct change right then and there upon boarding. This won't be possible without an oyster style system or contact less payments only.

 

[johncrossley]

As mentioned earlier in the thread though, it would require something like Oyster nation-wide, that can still be loaded with cash. Else it would be discriminating against people without bank accounts.

Luckily ITSO already exists. But probably more useful would be a government sponsored contactless prepaid card that could be used for payments other than public transport. Many areas outside the UK abolished driver payment long ago.

 

[Recessio]

Luckily ITSO already exists. But probably more useful would be a government sponsored contactless prepaid card that could be used for payments other than public transport. Many areas outside the UK abolished driver payment long ago.

Something like the Netherland's OV system would be great.

 

[duncombec]

It is quite a bizarre British quirk that buses are nearly always on a separate fare system to trams. At least not in London, where the £1.75 single fare applies to both buses and trams, even when changing from bus to tram. The so-called "£2 fare cap" outside London actually results in the vast majority of potential single journeys within an urban area costing at least £4. This might be lower than what it was before, but £4 is not fantastically cheap.

Are you sure? For a single journey to be £4, you're assuming that "the vast majority" of passengers changes at least once. I'm not sure that's true - Fairly certain it's not for "within" an urban area here. And two journeys with changes (i.e. 4 journeys) already brings you over the day ticket price.

I'm not sure how the funding is working, but surely this is fraud aswell?

I'd assume a passenger travelling 1 mile isn't getting reimbursed at the same rate as someone travelling 50 mile.

I believe it is worked on a basket of fares, not down to the last passenger. The actual length of journey is irrelevant - it certainly isn't fraud.

That would be a good opportunity to get rid of cash altogether. London has now been cashless for over 10 years. That enables London to have fares which are not round figures, such as the current £1.75 fare.

As mentioned earlier in the thread though, it would require something like Oyster nation-wide, that can still be loaded with cash. Else it would be discriminating against people without bank accounts.

No, No and no again. As I and others mentioned up thread, there are many people who use cash for budgetary reasons, often those with least disposable income. It is just just people without bank accounts, but people on any form of limited budget.
Aside from two small operators who don't provide scheduled services any more (one because they pulled out of their sole one-bus contract in favour of extensive contract/coaching work, the other because the business closed owing to retirement) who didn't have card facilities, I haven't paid cash on the bus since the day the big group company introduced contactless payments. That doesn't mean I think other people should have that facility withdrawn because I'm held up for 30 seconds whilst they put two £1 coins (and a 50p, if I had my way) on the cash tray.

 

[Snex]

I believe it is worked on a basket of fares, not down to the last passenger. The actual length of journey is irrelevant - it certainly isn't fraud.

But surely this would cause issues aswell? Just picking a route out say the 21 from Newcastle to Durham. If everyone has Durham tickets but in reality 2/3 of the bus is emptying at Low Fell which is 1/4 of the route in (actually does happen) then it opens the door for GoNorthEast to just claim people are going anywhere because they don't have a clue.

I know Arriva at Ashington have been very strict recently, down to the level of grilling people for exact bus stop names, which few people know, as they just name the local town/village usually. Ashington having the Newcastle to Berwick routes which could be a real minefield for manipulation if the data is off.

 

[Belperpete]

True, but I don't think it would be politically acceptable to push forward with an entirely cash-free system, even if it isn't strictly a protected characteristics, but the disproportionate impact on people without bank accounts (or fixed addresses for bank accounts) could potentially be so.

If it was politically acceptable to do so in London, which probably has a significantly higher number of people without fixed addresses than anywhere else in the country), I don't see why it shouldn't be acceptable elsewhere.

Dealing with cash causes the bus companies significant overheads, the cost of which has to come from somewhere - i.e. fares. I am not saying that abolishing cash payment would reduce fares, but it would mean that some marginal routes would be less likely to be abolished. And the £2 fixed fare scheme could be raised in price slightly, rather than drag on until it becomes uneconomic and is abolished (by whatever political party eventually decides it is time to pull the plug).