Bus Fare Cap will be £2 from January

[Statto]

Breaking on BBC that most bus fares are going capped at £2 from January, they're currently £3, but some areas it's still £2

Most single bus fares in England will be capped at £2, PM announces
06:09​

Most bus fares in England will be capped at £2 from 1 January in 2027, the government has announced.

The reduction would see the cap on fares go down by a third from the current £3 cap.

This is breaking news. We will bring you more detail as it comes.

Andy Burnham says £2 bus fare cap in England being paid for by 're-prioritising' money

Speaking on a visit to Bath, the new PM also says there is currently "no commitment" to increasing the tax-free personal allowance threshold.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[BuhSnarf]

Breaking on BBC that most bus fares are going capped at £2 from January, they're currently £3, but some areas it's still £2

Andy Burnham says £2 bus fare cap in England being paid for by 're-prioritising' money

Speaking on a visit to Bath, the new PM also says there is currently "no commitment" to increasing the tax-free personal allowance threshold.

www.bbc.co.uk

This is good news.

 

[KHCT]

Widely trailed so not a shock, but certainly welcome. Clearly the increase to £3 was a Starmer/Reeves mistake.

However, my first two responses were why wait 5 months and why only for a year.

 

[derbybusdepot]

This is good news.

Is it? Has it really helped increase bus usage that much? Is it good use of tax payers money? Would promotion/discounts of weekly/monthly tickets not be better, and save people more money, encouraging people to use the services regularly? Anyone working all week may be better off buying a full price weekly ticket, so will be no better off with the £2 singles.

Maybe it makes sense in Manchester where services have been reviewed to meet passenger needs, but it other areas the basics need to be improved before the services are promoted.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jul 2026 ==

Is it? Has it really helped increase bus usage that much? Is it good use of tax payers money? Would promotion/discounts of weekly/monthly tickets not be better, and save people more money, encouraging people to use the services regularly? Anyone working all week may be better off buying a full price weekly ticket, so will be no better off with the £2 singles.

Maybe it makes sense in Manchester where services have been reviewed to meet passenger needs, but it other areas the basics need to be improved before the services are promoted.

One shoe does not fit all. £2 fare sounds good, but there are places where it really is not needed. And of course there will be places where companies opt out, adding to the confusion.

 

[BuhSnarf]

Is it? Has it really helped increase bus usage that much? Is it good use of tax payers money? Would promotion/discounts of weekly/monthly tickets not be better, and save people more money, encouraging people to use the services regularly? Anyone working all week may be better off buying a full price weekly ticket, so will be no better off with the £2 singles.

Maybe it makes sense in Manchester where services have been reviewed to meet passenger needs, but it other areas the basics need to be improved before the services are promoted.

Yes, it is.

For those going all week they will already be paying less on a weekly ticket.

But for those who make occasional journeys where there is an option of car or bus this will encourage more people to take the bus, £2 single means that a trip in to city is now £4 (return) and so less than the cost to park for 3 hours.

 

[johncrossley]

A single will still cost £4 or even more because of the quirky British tradition of charging again when changing vehiclesl.

 

[KHCT]

Is it? Has it really helped increase bus usage that much? Is it good use of tax payers money? Would promotion/discounts of weekly/monthly tickets not be better, and save people more money, encouraging people to use the services regularly? Anyone working all week may be better off buying a full price weekly ticket, so will be no better off with the £2 singles.

Maybe it makes sense in Manchester where services have been reviewed to meet passenger needs, but it other areas the basics need to be improved before the services are promoted.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jul 2026 ==


One shoe does not fit all. £2 fare sounds good, but there are places where it really is not needed. And of course there will be places where companies opt out, adding to the confusion.

On one level you are right, the £2 cap is better for occasional and/or long distance journeys. However, the administrative cost of trying to discount hundreds if not thousands of daily/weekly/monthly tickets would be huge. Also, what about areas with no multi-operator tickets. This is far simpler to implement as it's a simple flat fare; not perfect and not a magic solution to everything, but it's still welcome.

You're also correct to say the ONS rated the original £2 fare cap as poor value for money. However, it's politically attractive because it's simple and gets good headlines.

 

[Harpo]

However, my first two responses were why wait 5 months and why only for a year.

A phased earlier start for youngsters would have been good. £80 off of the £240 a month to get a couple of kids to secondaries or college in ruralshire is a big saving.

 

[DDB]

What about trams? They keep being left out and I hoped an ex Manchester Mayor would remember about them.

The problem with buses is not (just?) the price but the existence of them in rural areas. I do think if there is money for buses it could be better targeted.

 

[Bletchleyite]

This is good news.

It's not as it is an affront to integration and coverage. It would be better to fund reinstatement of lost services with the money and improvement of frequency and time of day coverage.

 

[Leedsbusman]

A single will still cost £4 or even more because of the quirky British tradition of charging again when changing vehiclesl.

Which is still less than if the cap wasn’t there!

 

[YorkRailFan]

I wonder how many operators will opt out of this because of reimbursement rates. Preston Bus has already opted out of the £3 fare cap.

 

[johncrossley]

Which is still less than if the cap wasn’t there!

Most of the time a day ticket will be cheaper for a return journey that involves a change of bus. When will they ever learn?

 

[Gareth1990]

Is it? Has it really helped increase bus usage that much? Is it good use of tax payers money? Would promotion/discounts of weekly/monthly tickets not be better, and save people more money, encouraging people to use the services regularly? Anyone working all week may be better off buying a full price weekly ticket, so will be no better off with the £2 singles.

Maybe it makes sense in Manchester where services have been reviewed to meet passenger needs, but it other areas the basics need to be improved before the services are promoted.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jul 2026 ==


One shoe does not fit all. £2 fare sounds good, but there are places where it really is not needed. And of course there will be places where companies opt out, adding to the confusion.

I wonder how many operators will opt out of this because of reimbursement rates. Preston Bus has already opted out of the £3 fare cap.

Which is why the fare cap needs to be made compulsory, there’s really no excuse not to now

 

[BuhSnarf]

It's not as it is an affront to integration and coverage. It would be better to fund reinstatement of lost services with the money and improvement of frequency and time of day coverage.

Surely any reinstatement of services or improvement of frequency would either be down to the local operator or funding from the local council. Neither of which the government could impose?

And whilst I'd agree that improvements to services are needed in some areas. It'd also only affect a smaller number of people - usually in the more rural and therefore better off areas as opposed to those in the less wealthy areas and it'd be a less impactful headline.

 

[johncrossley]

What about trams? They keep being left out and I hoped an ex Manchester Mayor would remember about them.

The fact that he kept trams as a premium fare as Mayor, not integrated into the £2 Hopper fare, showed he didn't care.

 

[Snow1964]

Which is why the fare cap needs to be made compulsory, there’s really no excuse not to now

Basic economics though, if reimbursement is insufficient value, (or difficult to receive) then might be, that not operating service is more profitable (or less of a loss).

The flat rate fare cap is clumsy relative to costs of operating the service, and potential distance it could be used for.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely any reinstatement of services or improvement of frequency would either be down to the local operator or funding from the local council. Neither of which the government could impose?

They could provide the funding.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jul 2026 ==

And whilst I'd agree that improvements to services are needed in some areas. It'd also only affect a smaller number of people - usually in the more rural and therefore better off areas as opposed to those in the less wealthy areas and it'd be a less impactful headline.

Far be it to suggest that it's more to do with votes than actual improvements...

 

[BuhSnarf]

They could provide the funding.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jul 2026 ==



Far be it to suggest that it's more to do with votes than actual improvements...

They could provide the funding, but there's no requirement that the council use it wisely. It would likely result in lengthy consultations and tendering processes that will waste most of the money leading to maybe one extra service per county, that gets pulled next year when the funding goes as it wasn't a sustainable service anyway.

The fare cap is a much easier stick for them to wield and is likely to be most beneficial to those who need it most (the less affluent.)

It's politics, everything is about votes. But I'm not sure why you think reducing the cost to everyone wouldn't be an improvement as well.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It's not as it is an affront to integration and coverage. It would be better to fund reinstatement of lost services with the money and improvement of frequency and time of day coverage.

I perhaps wouldn't go as far as to say it's an affront. However, we have lost a lot of bus services over the years and whilst BSIP if partly helping, the nature of the funding and the lack of local government resources is being reflected in the use of funds being "patchy".

Most of the time a day ticket will be cheaper for a return journey that involves a change of bus. When will they ever learn?

In London, they have the Hopper ticket and that's now becoming a huge financial burden. The reality is that a fare cap is simple and it's financially affordable (to an extent) but having a Hopper across the UK... just not affordable.

Which is why the fare cap needs to be made compulsory, there’s really no excuse not to now

Apart from firms simply not being able to afford to be in it as it doesn't get financed properly.

 

[johncrossley]

Operators should be banned from selling the fare cap as a paper ticket. Tap on contactless or smart card or mobile apps only. Stagecoach is particularly bad with boarding times now that everyone buys £3 tickets from the driver.

That way they can make it a Hopper fare at a random amount that makes financial sense (for example £2.55). Accepting cash means it has to be a round amount.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Operators should be banned from selling the fare cap as a paper ticket. Tap on contactless or smart card or mobile apps only.

What happens if someone wishes to pay by cash?

 

[johncrossley]

What happens if someone wishes to pay by cash?

Full fare without cap.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Full fare without cap.

So you penalise those who pay cash who are generally the poorest and who are supposed to benefit most from the cap. Brilliant!!

 

[YorkRailFan]

Full fare without cap.

Why should people who use cash be punished for using cash? Low income households (ie those who would benefit most from the cap) disproportionately use cash.

 

[pr1]

It's a great policy and its return is welcomed.

Here in Lancashire Preston Bus left the £3 cap, and recently left the County Council funded £1 cap for evenings/Sundays, so I assume it'll be a case of going back down again.

Believe me: those of us on very little money appreciate the cap.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I perhaps wouldn't go as far as to say it's an affront.

If you subsidise one mode of transport to be cheaper than others you don't have an integrated network, you have a set of separate modes. It does make it cheaper to add bus to rail, to be fair, but it also means bus competes with rail by being cheaper rather than sitting closely alongside it as a partner.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jul 2026 ==

Here in Lancashire Preston Bus left the £3 cap, and recently left the County Council funded £1 cap for evenings/Sundays, so I assume it'll be a case of going back down again.

No guarantee Rotala will rejoin, they have long not liked the scheme, claiming reimbursement is insufficient.

 

[pr1]

Full fare without cap.

I have to object.

There are many reasons why people pay cash. Sometimes I prefer cash for certain purchases (bus fares amongst them) to keep track of spending (card payments drive me mad if I can't always track what has gone out.)

Penalising cash users is no incentive.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jul 2026 ==

No guarantee Rotala will rejoin, they have long not liked the scheme, claiming reimbursement is insufficient

That's a concern (the £1 cap will go in September for other companies, too, which worries me).

The sound of this policy announcement is the end of a postcode lottery/patchwork quilt of fares. It would be a bit frustrating if, to give an obvious example, Greater Manchester had cheaper fares than Lancashire!

 

[mangad]

The fact that he kept trams as a premium fare as Mayor, not integrated into the £2 Hopper fare, showed he didn't care.

In Greater Manchester the Metrolink is seen as a rail service. It's integrated into National Rail ticketing system, it uses a zonal fare structure. Why would it be treated to bus fares? Indeed by the same argument you could say why aren't tube fares subject to a cap.

Besides which, it's hardly expensive. Single zone fare singles are £1.40. 2 zone singles £2.80. It's still a lot cheaper than National Rail singles for equivalent journeys.

 

[johncrossley]

Why should people who use cash be punished for using cash? Low income households (ie those who would benefit most from the cap) disproportionately use cash.

Other countries have banned cash altogether and before that cash was only accepted at a huge premium to deter cash usage. I am talking 20+ years ago, long before contactless bank cards and mobile apps were invented. London banned cash 12 years ago.