Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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!
There are countries where schools and hospitals are usually paid for by the user.
Our society decides that provision of public transport is relatively poor, there are many which prefer a much higher provision, and even the odd one which makes it free at the point of use.
There isn't much more that can be done in many areas. A lot of urban and even some rural roads are beyond capacity for at least part of the day.
A further factor, and one which often adds to congestion, is that people expect to be able to store their private vehicles on public roads as and when it suits them.
I'd like to think there is a happy medium - improving provision enough to make some journeys unnecessary while still making private transport usage viable for those where it is more appropriate.
I've got to say one thing I'm finding more and more as I get older is that while I usually enjoy driving I'd like to have the option not to without it being a major encumbrance.
In what way would cheaper public transport (which would require more taxation) be attractive to people who have private cars and think they already pay enough tax and have no interest in better public transport???
There are countries where schools and hospitals are usually paid for by the user.
Our society decides that provision of public transport is relatively poor, there are many which prefer a much higher provision, and even the odd one which makes it free at the point of use.
Those countries aren't THIS country. People who don't have a National Health Service won't be as wedded to supporting universal health care as we are in the UK.
As for public opinion, they are usually very keen for greater taxation...as long as it's "the rich" being taxed on not them. The only reason that Labour can increase some taxation (along with spending cuts elsewhere) is because after 14 years of Tory austerity, we are all too well aware of the impact on the condition of roads, schools, the NHS etc. In Bristol in 2001, the council gave the populace a choice via a referendum about council spending on services such as buses, libraries, leisure centres, as well as their statutory duties such as education and refuse collection. You could have no increase in council tax but cuts to services, 2% and some cuts, 4% to maintain the current provision, or 6% to improve services. 54% said no increase, and only 18% said yes to maintaining service provision.
There isn't much more that can be done in many areas. A lot of urban and even some rural roads are beyond capacity for at least part of the day.
A further factor, and one which often adds to congestion, is that people expect to be able to store their private vehicles on public roads as and when it suits them.
I'd like to think there is a happy medium - improving provision enough to make some journeys unnecessary while still making private transport usage viable for those where it is more appropriate.
I've got to say one thing I'm finding more and more as I get older is that while I usually enjoy driving I'd like to have the option not to without it being a major encumbrance.
This is a real consideration. People believe that they have a right to park their metal box outside the home, and that any approach to curtail this is some evil WEF inspired plot to restrict their freedoms. I've long been an advocate of an incremental removal or reduction in on street parking especially on major corridors. However, if you think it will be easy, think again.
The clue is looking at those areas where bus patronage improved in the late 2010s (i.e. pre-Covid). Bus operators being aligned with local authorities. Operators provide higher quality services (better vehicles, higher frequencies) in exchange for bus priority worked in a number of urban and inter-urban environments. It needs bravery from local politicians to achieve - not easy when we have right wing populism on the rise.
Getting back onto the actual topic, that some of the success stories are where council operators exist (e.g. Reading) and some aren't (e.g. Brighton, Bristol) merely emphasises that it isn't the ownership of the bus company that is the pivotal factor. Nationalisation would be too expensive, and is purely an ideological point rather than one based on evidence.
I doubt it, often it's not about cost but convenience. How much has car usage dropped in Luxembourg since public transport became free? I don't know but be interested to find out?
There's obviously an incentive if public transport is reasonably priced but some people will still not use it.
There are, but it is not like this in this country, as @TheGrandWazoo points out. Instead of price, we use waiting lists and appointments to ration the use of health services (as unlimited use is not affordable or practical). There are people who would like to see reduced taxes and health care paid for by the user.
Our society decides that provision of public transport is relatively poor, there are many which prefer a much higher provision, and even the odd one which makes it free at the point of use.
I'd like to think there is a happy medium - improving provision enough to make some journeys unnecessary while still making private transport usage viable for those where it is more appropriate.
I've got to say one thing I'm finding more and more as I get older is that while I usually enjoy driving I'd like to have the option not to without it being a major encumbrance.
Sounds a bit like having your cake and eat it. You may well like this medium - whether the taxes to be paid to enable it will make the majority happy is another matter.
I doubt it, often it's not about cost but convenience. How much has car usage dropped in Luxembourg since public transport became free? I don't know but be interested to find out?
There's obviously an incentive if public transport is reasonably priced but some people will still not use it.
The £2 scheme has certainly grown bus usage (though not enough to make it pay in and of itself). I'd expect similar true of rail - rail is crushingly expensive at the moment - but the failure there would be lack of capacity.
I doubt it, often it's not about cost but convenience. How much has car usage dropped in Luxembourg since public transport became free? I don't know but be interested to find out?
There's obviously an incentive if public transport is reasonably priced but some people will still not use it.
Care usage in Luxembourg has fallen but remains high (partly because lots of journeys are cross border from neighbouring countries with lower house prices, which aren't free, so a difficult comparison with other places). From March 2023:
This program has produced some outstanding results. The use of private vehicles has fallen by 11% while the number of people using free public transportation has climbed by 25%.
I doubt it, often it's not about cost but convenience. How much has car usage dropped in Luxembourg since public transport became free? I don't know but be interested to find out?
There's obviously an incentive if public transport is reasonably priced but some people will still not use it.
I can't tell you about Luxembourg, but we do know what happened in Tallinn when public transport was made free to local residents. Now, the move was made for political reasons (an election bribe) and was packaged (like the £2 fare) as being a benefit to struggling workers rather than to effect modal shift.
However, there was significant modal shift but not as you'd expect. It massively reduced the amount of active transport (i.e. cycling, walking) as people simply hopped on a bus, tram or trolleybus. Did it reduce car usage/ownership? No - it has increased over the period.
The reasons for this are many and varied. Like the UK, there have been societal changes. How industry has relocated and fragmented - those huge centralised workplaces like factories, shipyards or mines don't exist. Also, there is just the aspirational element of having a car - freedom to go where you want. In addition, and more pertinently, whilst the carrot has been there in free travel, there have been no sticks with driving becoming increasingly cheaper (as we've seen in the UK). Interesting article here https://www.fastcompany.com/9096889...transit-free-a-decade-ago-car-traffic-went-up - it does conclude that without the free fares, perhaps the move to car ownership MIGHT have been greater but certainly, there are great limitations to what is achievable. Cheaper public transport, painting buses yellow and having a multi-operator ticket doesn't move the needle in terms of modal share in and of itself.
One thing I think I'd like to see stats on is the effect of free vs. "tap on tap off". TOTO moves public transport to be more like using the car - it has a cost, but you don't directly associate it to the individual trip because it is sort-of hidden compared to explicitly purchasing a ticket for cash out of your pocket. It's quite possible that TOTO is almost as powerful as free yet less costly to the taxpayer.
I doubt it, often it's not about cost but convenience. How much has car usage dropped in Luxembourg since public transport became free? I don't know but be interested to find out?
From what I've seen car usage by Luxembourg citizens has dropped by 5%-10% but, because of the large volume of cross-border commuting, overall congestion hasn't changed much at all.
It was similar in Tallinn I believe. Car usage only dropped by about 5% but the significant drop was in active travel, about 40% of people who would have walked instead took the bus.
The average car journey is about 7 miles, and that average is distorted upwards by a smallish number of long journeys. Most car journeys are very short and the most common reason for a short journey is shopping. This makes sense, if I need to pop to the shop a mile away for bread and milk I often jump in my car; walking takes too long if I'm in a hurry and waiting for a bus would be similar. So the modal share for public transport is always going to remain low because you have lots and lots of short journeys that public transport will never be able to accommodate.
But where you do see modal shift is with journeys to work or into the centre of the city.
The average car journey is about 7 miles, and that average is distorted upwards by a smallish number of long journeys. Most car journeys are very short and the most common reason for a short journey is shopping. This makes sense, if I need to pop to the shop a mile away for bread and milk I often jump in my car; walking takes too long if I'm in a hurry and waiting for a bus would be similar. So the modal share for public transport is always going to remain low because you have lots and lots of short journeys that public transport will never be able to accommodate.
That's where the "15 minute city" comes in, i.e. by making basic local services closer to home (including shops) people are less likely to use cars for them. A mile is indeed a bit far, 15 minutes for most is going to be about a kilometre (unless bicycles are involved - but getting people to cycle is a much harder problem than getting them to walk).
It isn't really applicable to buses, though - almost never is the bus going to be involved in this sort of journey - car-free people will usually walk such journeys, arguably they're too short to even bother getting the bike out.
Things like low-traffic neighbourhoods can nudge modal shift away from the car - you're less likely to use it if it takes longer to drive than walk due to needing to go out onto the main road and round to reach the local shop.
Living in Wales, buses became free and trains one third cheaper for me on my 60th birthday.
This has changed my behaviour to some extent as I tend to use public transport to visit nearby towns for leisure purposes if there's a decent service. Newport to Bristol, Cardiff, or Swansea on the bus and back for under a fiver on the train is attractive compared with city centre parking charges even though the journey time is much greater.
Grocery shopping is by car, or home delivery. I'm not able/prepared to carry a week or fortnight's supplies home on the bus or visit a supermarket every day or two.
Living in Wales, buses became free and trains one third cheaper for me on my 60th birthday.
This has changed my behaviour to some extent as I tend to use public transport to visit nearby towns for leisure purposes if there's a decent service. Newport to Bristol, Cardiff, or Swansea on the bus and back for under a fiver on the train is attractive compared with city centre parking charges even though the journey time is much greater.
Pensioners are usually time-rich and cash-poor, thus cheap/free public transport appeals even if actually less convenient. This has a beneficial side effect - older people driving less or even giving up their car entirely as their reactions start to become less acute is a significant road safety benefit.
Pensioners are usually time-rich and cash-poor, thus cheap/free public transport appeals even if actually less convenient. This has a beneficial side effect - older people driving less or even giving up their car entirely as their reactions start to become less acute is a significant road safety benefit.
The downside being that Pensioners do not want to walk long distances to fixed bus routes, which if they are to be successful in achieving modal shift, need to be the most direct as possible and not trailing around every pocket of housing.
Pensioners are usually time-rich and cash-poor, thus cheap/free public transport appeals even if actually less convenient. This has a beneficial side effect - older people driving less or even giving up their car entirely as their reactions start to become less acute is a significant road safety benefit.
I'm time-rich and cash-comfortable but don't like spending money if I can avoid it. I also enjoy the public transport journeys for their own sake. I can foresee public transport becoming less attractive if I become less mobile and the walk to the bus stop painful or impossible. Unfortunately, that's likely to coincide with a loss of competence and confidence in driving...
From what I've seen car usage by Luxembourg citizens has dropped by 5%-10% but, because of the large volume of cross-border commuting, overall congestion hasn't changed much at all.
It was similar in Tallinn I believe. Car usage only dropped by about 5% but the significant drop was in active travel, about 40% of people who would have walked instead took the bus.
I think it's more complicated than that.
The average car journey is about 7 miles, and that average is distorted upwards by a smallish number of long journeys. Most car journeys are very short and the most common reason for a short journey is shopping. This makes sense, if I need to pop to the shop a mile away for bread and milk I often jump in my car; walking takes too long if I'm in a hurry and waiting for a bus would be similar. So the modal share for public transport is always going to remain low because you have lots and lots of short journeys that public transport will never be able to accommodate.
But where you do see modal shift is with journeys to work or into the centre of the city.
If I both have a car and a bike, and want to pop the shop a mile away, I will get my bike out instead of a car, because it is more convenient and cheaper.
That's where the "15 minute city" comes in, i.e. by making basic local services closer to home (including shops) people are less likely to use cars for them. A mile is indeed a bit far, 15 minutes for most is going to be about a kilometre (unless bicycles are involved - but getting people to cycle is a much harder problem than getting them to walk).
It isn't really applicable to buses, though - almost never is the bus going to be involved in this sort of journey - car-free people will usually walk such journeys, arguably they're too short to even bother getting the bike out.
Things like low-traffic neighbourhoods can nudge modal shift away from the car - you're less likely to use it if it takes longer to drive than walk due to needing to go out onto the main road and round to reach the local shop.
If I have a car and also a bike, I will prefer a car over a bike for journey distances over 5 km, unless a steep hill is involved (in which the car always wins). When we are talking such sort of distances, the notation of 15-minute city is not relevant.
So we should work on making car usage difficult for short journeys (under 1 km), and more importantly we should make bus prices more distance-based to decrease the cost for bus journeys which are too far to walk, such as between 1 and 5 km.
I'm time-rich and cash-comfortable but don't like spending money if I can avoid it. I also enjoy the public transport journeys for their own sake. I can foresee public transport becoming less attractive if I become less mobile and the walk to the bus stop painful or impossible. Unfortunately, that's likely to coincide with a loss of competence and confidence in driving...
But having to book the day before with no guarantee of a time to connect with a train or scheduled bus and definitely no waiting if the return journey is delayed.OK if you're just going to the supermarket or bingo I suppose.
But having to book the day before with no guarantee of a time to connect with a train or scheduled bus and definitely no waiting if the return journey is delayed.OK if you're just going to the supermarket or bingo I suppose.
The sort of people who these services are aimed at typically would be too disabled to make a train journey unaccompanied even with the assistance provided on National Rail TOCs, so typically the person they are travelling with would drive them or share a taxi with them. They are designed around accessibility rather than people with time pressures.
There are countries where schools and hospitals are usually paid for by the user.
Our society decides that provision of public transport is relatively poor, there are many which prefer a much higher provision, and even the odd one which makes it free at the point of use.
There isn't much more that can be done in many areas. A lot of urban and even some rural roads are beyond capacity for at least part of the day.
A further factor, and one which often adds to congestion, is that people expect to be able to store their private vehicles on public roads as and when it suits them.
I'd like to think there is a happy medium - improving provision enough to make some journeys unnecessary while still making private transport usage viable for those where it is more appropriate.
I've got to say one thing I'm finding more and more as I get older is that while I usually enjoy driving I'd like to have the option not to without it being a major encumbrance.
Transport being market-run instead of government doesnt intrinsically mean that it is inadequate, however there is a huge discrepancy between how private transport is paid for by users and public transport.
Historic/current planning decisions mean that the cost of providing parking (land) is not borne by drivers, but socialised by housebuilders, councils, businesses, and consumers who pay via other means. This leads to road space and parking being overconsumed and the bus sector competing with a significant "nerf" - congestion, and driving has a significant OP "buff" - which is how universal and cheap parking is.
It strikes me the biggest problem in the UK is the refusal to change 'how things are'. Doesn't matter how much better an alternative is, someone will kick up enough fuss to get it rejected.
That won't be possible under FPTP. An unencumbered Labour government would implement these policies without question, but when one party as to keep so many sweet (and fight against misinformation in the press) then truly transformative policies will never happen.
Sounds a bit like having your cake and eat it. You may well like this medium - whether the taxes to be paid to enable it will make the majority happy is another matter.
Such an easy way to dismiss things without actually debating the merits. Again typical of modern politics. There are journeys where public transport makes sense and with decent provision wouldn't take much longer. There are others where you can't expect provision to be good enough so the car becomes the means of choice. Not difficult to understand, the argument comes as to where that line gets drawn.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
There is a massive difference between the odd cheap EV being available and there being sufficient volume and range of EVs to meet the second hand demand.
There is also a considerable difference between the price of the cheapest EV and the cheapest combustion car that even the lower running and servicing costs don't cover.
Transport being market-run instead of government doesnt intrinsically mean that it is inadequate, however there is a huge discrepancy between how private transport is paid for by users and public transport.
The same people who support public transport being run on a commercial basis by private companies, with the user footing the bill, would absolutely lose their minds if we started running the road network on the same basis.
Even the motorways which are operated by private companies are paid for entirely by general taxation through "shadow tolls". Start charging those tolls to the motorway users and you'd have full-on rage from the same people who think buses should be run in exactly that manner.
It's funny how a state-run and state-maintained road network isn't "socialism".
It strikes me the biggest problem in the UK is the refusal to change 'how things are'. Doesn't matter how much better an alternative is, someone will kick up enough fuss to get it rejected.
You mean such is not present in other countries too? Really? I would have thought it was inevitable with anything that involves threatening the (particularly financial and/or well being) situation of some people that a fuss will be made? Whether any other system is 'better' is a matter of opinion, rather than fact. Some countries have worse and/or less organised and/or less costly public transport than the UK. Is that better? Depends from which angle it is being viewed?
That won't be possible under FPTP. An unencumbered Labour government would implement these policies without question, but when one party as to keep so many sweet (and fight against misinformation in the press) then truly transformative policies will never happen.
FPTP just raises the bar - it doesn't make it impossible. You'll just have to convince an even more improbably larger number of people. An unencumbered Reform party would probably implement different policies. Be careful what you wish for. I would suggest unencumbered political parties are not such a good idea, as it seems we may find out shortly in the US. There is a reason why they are 'encumbered' - the Labour Party would be nowhere near Government without them.
Such an easy way to dismiss things without actually debating the merits. Again typical of modern politics. There are journeys where public transport makes sense and with decent provision wouldn't take much longer. There are others where you can't expect provision to be good enough so the car becomes the means of choice. Not difficult to understand, the argument comes as to where that line gets drawn.
The trouble is there aren't many journeys where public transport makes sense over private transport (and they tend to be concentrated in certain urban areas or main longer distance transport corridors), and the expense of expanding to cover substantially more journeys is so expensive compared to the likely modal shift. I would suggest that your line would be drawn in a different place to much of the voters.
It strikes me the biggest problem in the UK is the refusal to change 'how things are'. Doesn't matter how much better an alternative is, someone will kick up enough fuss to get it rejected.
The first election that I voted in was 1992. In that time, we have had the tail end of the Thatcher era with the privatisation of British Rail, we had increasing financial liberalism, and then some fairly large changes during the New Labour era where expenditure on infrastructure like schools and hospitals was increased albeit moved off the books via PFI agreements. Then you have the days of Tory austerity, and Brexit (don't get me started), and now we're into a hopefully different era of investment in public services.
The fact is that public transport ISN'T the issue that you and me wish it was. I could ask 100 of my friends if we should have better public transport and they'd say yes. It's like arguing against motherhood and apple pie. Then if I asked them if it would swing their vote, I'd say very few would because it simply doesn't resonate in the same way as Health or Education.
And if you asked those 100 people if they wanted to pay more tax for a service that they'd get little or no perceived benefit from (as they're not public transport users, and don't want to be), then the answer would be no.
Such an easy way to dismiss things without actually debating the merits. Again typical of modern politics. There are journeys where public transport makes sense and with decent provision wouldn't take much longer. There are others where you can't expect provision to be good enough so the car becomes the means of choice. Not difficult to understand, the argument comes as to where that line gets drawn.
Modern politics is where we are though? The reality is that a) some people will NEVER leave their car behind and b) public transport can never provide the freedom that the car provides. Even if we accept that better public transport has some wider benefits in reducing congestion and pollution, many people are simply not in a position to avail themselves of it, would not do so if it were offered, and certainly wouldn't pay for it. That is the reality.
There is a massive difference between the odd cheap EV being available and there being sufficient volume and range of EVs to meet the second hand demand.
There is also a considerable difference between the price of the cheapest EV and the cheapest combustion car that even the lower running and servicing costs don't cover.
The fact is that there are still plenty of ICE powered cars being sold, and that modern cars are infinitely more durable than they ever were so they last longer. I remember my childhood and I can't recall too many 15 year old cars on the road; they'd mainly rusted by that point. Nowadays, they can last considerably longer - I'm beginning to think that were there to be nuclear Armageddon, all that would survive would be cockroaches and Mk2 Nissan Micras!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The trouble is there aren't many journeys where public transport makes sense over private transport (and they tend to be concentrated in certain urban areas or main longer distance transport corridors), and the expense of expanding to cover more journeys is so expensive compared to the likely modal shift. I would suggest that your line would be drawn in a different place to much of the voters.
My wife has a job in a neighbouring town. She drives as there's no direct link and never has been, save a weekly shoppers bus. Even if they suddenly did put on a bus every hour (cost £300k p.a?), it probably wouldn't serve the business park where she works, and it would take twice as long. When she worked in Bath, she drove to the park and ride. The buses were every 15 mins (or better), had priority so it compensated for a multi-stage journey, and it meant she didn't have to find an expensive, all day parking space.
Most people use public transport if it's Hobson's choice OR where it makes sense in terms of convenience/time. Few people do it on principle.
It would be interesting to know whether the nationalised public transport advocates in this thread have access to cars, what the services are like in their areas and whether they get concessionary travel.
As I've mentioned before in this thread, cost can be a factor too. I tolerate the inconvenience and long journey time of the free (to me) bus if it saves me high city centre parking charges. I've also been known to use the bus by choice for a day out since it's been free in Wales or £2 a journey in England but I think that's a very niche market.
My wife has a job in a neighbouring town. She drives as there's no direct link and never has been, save a weekly shoppers bus. Even if they suddenly did put on a bus every hour (cost £300k p.a?), it probably wouldn't serve the business park where she works, and it would take twice as long. When she worked in Bath, she drove to the park and ride. The buses were every 15 mins (or better), had priority so it compensated for a multi-stage journey, and it meant she didn't have to find an expensive, all day parking space.
Most people use public transport if it's Hobson's choice OR where it makes sense in terms of convenience/time. Few people do it on principle.
When she wants to go via the shop to pick up a few items, the bus doesn't go via there and even if did, she would take 15 mins to buy and then wait 45 min for the next one. And so on...
The trouble is, our society has moved so much to revolve around the convenience of the car. We are not alone though - France is in a similar position, where outside the major cities the car is undoubtedly king and not having one is a severe handicap. . They spend lots of money on their public transport, and still don't seem to get much better outcomes than us (My opinion, and yes they have a few flashy systems).
It would be interesting to know whether the nationalised public transport advocates in this thread have access to cars, what the services are like in their areas and whether they get concessionary travel.
Where I live the buses are run by the government. The fare into Douglas from my house- just under three miles- is £1.40 single (or £1.10 per single if I buy a 12-journey smartcard carnet in advance). I don't have a concessionary pass. Buses are every 20 minutes on the main road and, separately, every 30 minutes through the estate. Both routes are about a 10 minute walk away. The last bus is 2305 (0015 on Fridays and Saturdays).
I also have two cars, one for me and one for Mrs Tyke.
I generally drive to work in Douglas city centre for the simple fact that my employer gives me a parking space for free. Parking in the multi-storey would be £7 per day. If I didn't have the space I'd get the bus. If I'm going out drinking after work I get the bus.
Mrs Tyke generally drives to work as, although she works less than two miles away, it would involve a bus into town and one back out. There is a direct bus to her work, but only (bizarrely) on evenings and Sundays.
The island is generally very rural and so cars are very much a necessity here. But despite that we have a good bus service. We currently have as Chief Minister a man who doesn't care about you unless you drive a Bentley, but even despite that we have a good bus service. It's a good bus service that is well used.
And, tellingly, it costs about £5m a year net to run. That's about the same as what Stagecoach are being paid to run Guernsey's bus services, even though Guernsey bus fares are higher, the Guernsey network isn't nearly as expansive as ours, and even though Guernsey is barely a quarter of the size of the Isle of Man. It's a similar story in Jersey.
Where I live the buses are run by the government. The fare into Douglas from my house- just under three miles- is £1.40 single (or £1.10 per single if I buy a 12-journey smartcard carnet in advance). I don't have a concessionary pass. Buses are every 20 minutes on the main road and, separately, every 30 minutes through the estate. Both routes are about a 10 minute walk away. The last bus is 2305 (0015 on Fridays and Saturdays).
I also have two cars, one for me and one for Mrs Tyke.
I generally drive to work in Douglas city centre for the simple fact that my employer gives me a parking space for free. Parking in the multi-storey would be £7 per day. If I didn't have the space I'd get the bus. If I'm going out drinking after work I get the bus.
Mrs Tyke generally drives to work as, although she works less than two miles away, it would involve a bus into town and one back out. There is a direct bus to her work, but only (bizarrely) on evenings and Sundays.
The island is generally very rural and so cars are very much a necessity here. But despite that we have a good bus service. We currently have as Chief Minister a man who doesn't care about you unless you drive a Bentley, but even despite that we have a good bus service. It's a good bus service that is well used.
And, tellingly, it costs about £5m a year net to run. That's about the same as what Stagecoach are being paid to run Guernsey's bus services, even though Guernsey bus fares are higher, the Guernsey network isn't nearly as expansive as ours, and even though Guernsey is barely a quarter of the size of the Isle of Man. It's a similar story in Jersey.
That's approaching London levels of subsidy, but then with a GDP per capita getting on for twice that of the UK the Isle of Man can afford it.
If I had to pay to get the municipally-run bus the three miles or so into Newport it would cost me £2.30 They run half hourly and the last one home in the evening is 2120 (1900 on Sundays). My nearest stops are 10 mins walk (peak times only) or 15 mins (off peak). The subsidy is cloaked in secrecy but I'm sure it's nothing like that in the IOM. The company has had the benefit of electric buses funded by the UK and Welsh Governments though.
