|
|
Post by snoggle on May 13, 2013 15:03:50 GMT
| Financial year | Bus network subsidy | Passenger journeys | Subsidy per jny | Subsidy per jny own calc | Change in Subsidy | Change in pass jnys | Change in subsidy per jny | | | | | | | | | | - | £m | m | (E) | (E) | £m | m | (E) | | 1999–2000 | -10 | 1296 | -0.01 | -0.01 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | 2000–01 | 24 | 1354 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 34 | 58 | 0.03 | | 2001–02 | 118 | 1430 | 0.08 | 0.08 | 94 | 76 | 0.06 | | 2002–03 | 241 | 1534 | 0.16 | 0.16 | 123 | 104 | 0.08 | | 2003–04 | 384 | 1702 | 0.23 | 0.23 | 143 | 168 | 0.07 | | 2004–05 | 422 | 1793 | 0.24 | 0.24 | 38 | 91 | 0.01 | | 2005–06 | 446 | 1816 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 24 | 23 | 0.01 | | 2006–07 | 461 | 2069 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 15 | 253 | -0.03 | | 2007–08 | 500 | 2176 | 0.23 | 0.23 | 39 | 107 | 0.01 | | 2008–09 | 563 | 2247 | 0.25 | 0.25 | 63 | 71 | 0.02 | | 2009–10 | 540 | 2257 | 0.24 | 0.24 | -23 | 10 | -0.01 | | 2010–11 | 428 | 2289 | 0.19 | 0.19 | -112 | 32 | -0.05 | | 2011–12 | 393 | 2344 | 0.17 | 0.17 | -35 | 55 | -0.02 | | 2012–13 | 378 | 2335 | - | 0.16 | -15 | -9 | -0.17 | | 2013–14 | 374 | 2387 | - | 0.16 | -4 | 52 | 0 |
The above table shows the trend in bus subsidy, pass journeys and subsidy per jny as well as changes year on year in each measure. Numbers are from a House of Commons reply plus TfL actual / forecast / budget numbers. Forecast and budget numbers apply for the last two rows in the table. This shows how things have changed over the years under the stewardship of two Mayors. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2013 16:34:26 GMT
Journeys have increased significantly, while subsidy has dropped progressively since 2008/2009. Not ideal...
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 13, 2013 17:28:14 GMT
Journeys have increased significantly, while subsidy has dropped progressively since 2008/2009. Not ideal... Well the more worrying aspect is that the end figure for 2012/13 (financial year just finished) shows a fall in ridership. The 2,335m is well below the previous forecast of 2,349m and the budget number of 2,356m. Something has gone wrong, somewhere - might be fares, the economy or the weather. Nonetheless this makes the target for 2013/14 even more challenging for TfL to achieve. If fares levels are the thing that are causing a fall in ridership then the Mayor's policy of shoving up fares higher than inflation will not work as it will cause ridership to fall further. We then get into the position of TfL having to make more service cuts to reflect the reduced ridership. I do understand that year on year subsidy increases of £40m-60m are not tenable. However a return to a cycle of decline is the last thing we need. |
|
|
|
Post by john on May 16, 2013 14:51:57 GMT
Journeys have increased significantly, while subsidy has dropped progressively since 2008/2009. Not ideal... Well the more worrying aspect is that the end figure for 2012/13 (financial year just finished) shows a fall in ridership. The 2,335m is well below the previous forecast of 2,349m and the budget number of 2,356m. Something has gone wrong, somewhere - might be fares, the economy or the weather. Nonetheless this makes the target for 2013/14 even more challenging for TfL to achieve. If fares levels are the thing that are causing a fall in ridership then the Mayor's policy of shoving up fares higher than inflation will not work as it will cause ridership to fall further. We then get into the position of TfL having to make more service cuts to reflect the reduced ridership. I do understand that year on year subsidy increases of £40m-60m are not tenable. However a return to a cycle of decline is the last thing we need. The one question I have, and is fairly valid, is do the ridership figures include passengers such as Freedom Pass users and, of course, Kids free travel? I know it's a contentious issue, but I'm sure that the free travel issue has had a significant impact on bus services in recent years. I'd also like to point out that I am in no way saying that the freedom pass should be withdrawn, if anything that is the one aspect that should remain as it is, aslong as it is financially viable. I do feel it should be a last resort though.....kids fares, however, that is another subject. In theory, the introduction of a kids fare should then enable the reduction of the adult fare to a more reasonable level for all. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2013 22:26:53 GMT
Well the more worrying aspect is that the end figure for 2012/13 (financial year just finished) shows a fall in ridership. The 2,335m is well below the previous forecast of 2,349m and the budget number of 2,356m. Something has gone wrong, somewhere - might be fares, the economy or the weather. Nonetheless this makes the target for 2013/14 even more challenging for TfL to achieve. If fares levels are the thing that are causing a fall in ridership then the Mayor's policy of shoving up fares higher than inflation will not work as it will cause ridership to fall further. We then get into the position of TfL having to make more service cuts to reflect the reduced ridership. I do understand that year on year subsidy increases of £40m-60m are not tenable. However a return to a cycle of decline is the last thing we need. The one question I have, and is fairly valid, is do the ridership figures include passengers such as Freedom Pass users and, of course, Kids free travel? I know it's a contentious issue, but I'm sure that the free travel issue has had a significant impact on bus services in recent years. I'd also like to point out that I am in no way saying that the freedom pass should be withdrawn, if anything that is the one aspect that should remain as it is, aslong as it is financially viable. I do feel it should be a last resort though.....kids fares, however, that is another subject. In theory, the introduction of a kids fare should then enable the reduction of the adult fare to a more reasonable level for all. I believe free travel is something that should be protected for as long as possible, to price deprived young people out of travelling could just mean that school or college a few miles away is to expensive. I agree that restrictions could be looked at but the cost saving if any were implemented would be little to worth implementing them. |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on May 17, 2013 6:04:25 GMT
The one question I have, and is fairly valid, is do the ridership figures include passengers such as Freedom Pass users and, of course, Kids free travel? I know it's a contentious issue, but I'm sure that the free travel issue has had a significant impact on bus services in recent years. I'd also like to point out that I am in no way saying that the freedom pass should be withdrawn, if anything that is the one aspect that should remain as it is, aslong as it is financially viable. I do feel it should be a last resort though.....kids fares, however, that is another subject. In theory, the introduction of a kids fare should then enable the reduction of the adult fare to a more reasonable level for all. I believe free travel is something that should be protected for as long as possible, to price deprived young people out of travelling could just mean that school or college a few miles away is to expensive. I agree that restrictions could be looked at but the cost saving if any were implemented would be little to worth implementing them. I disagree on the scale of the free travel and its extra hours. I see no reason to subsidize kids in the evening and summer holidays. I'm also not a fan of enhancing freedom passes above what Government pays for (60th birthday to state pension age, and tubes but not trains as that is discrimination against South London) I also know a police detective who earns more than £60k so why does he need a £2200 subsidy as people earning that much can afford to buy a travelcard Like I have to. TfL might say it doesn't cost much to give out these passes, but in reality for everyone that exists, real cash revenue (ticket or travelcard sold) is income not received. If 470 extra people buy an annual travelcard that is an extra £1m. So cutting the couple of million passes could bring in £ millions extra |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 17, 2013 9:24:43 GMT
Well the more worrying aspect is that the end figure for 2012/13 (financial year just finished) shows a fall in ridership. The 2,335m is well below the previous forecast of 2,349m and the budget number of 2,356m. Something has gone wrong, somewhere - might be fares, the economy or the weather. Nonetheless this makes the target for 2013/14 even more challenging for TfL to achieve. If fares levels are the thing that are causing a fall in ridership then the Mayor's policy of shoving up fares higher than inflation will not work as it will cause ridership to fall further. We then get into the position of TfL having to make more service cuts to reflect the reduced ridership. I do understand that year on year subsidy increases of £40m-60m are not tenable. However a return to a cycle of decline is the last thing we need. The one question I have, and is fairly valid, is do the ridership figures include passengers such as Freedom Pass users and, of course, Kids free travel? I know it's a contentious issue, but I'm sure that the free travel issue has had a significant impact on bus services in recent years. I'd also like to point out that I am in no way saying that the freedom pass should be withdrawn, if anything that is the one aspect that should remain as it is, aslong as it is financially viable. I do feel it should be a last resort though.....kids fares, however, that is another subject. In theory, the introduction of a kids fare should then enable the reduction of the adult fare to a more reasonable level for all. As the figures are for passenger journeys then they will include travel on all forms of passes and permits. TfL are financially recompensed by London Councils for those journeys undertaken by Freedom Pass holders. The extension to 24 hour cover and also the 60+ pass (recent Mayoral commitments) are funded by TfL and not London Councils (AIUI). People may have noticed a sudden flurry of tweets from TfL saying how many millions of people use London's buses and how important they are. There is also a press release. www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/27916.aspxwhich is on the same theme. The interesting point is that investment just seems to mean the NB4L and accessible bus stops rather than actually improving the network by relieving overcrowding or adding new routes. It's all a bit pathetic and desperate to me. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2013 21:04:39 GMT
I believe free travel is something that should be protected for as long as possible, to price deprived young people out of travelling could just mean that school or college a few miles away is to expensive. I agree that restrictions could be looked at but the cost saving if any were implemented would be little to worth implementing them. I disagree on the scale of the free travel and its extra hours. I see no reason to subsidize kids in the evening and summer holidays. I'm also not a fan of enhancing freedom passes above what Government pays for (60th birthday to state pension age, and tubes but not trains as that is discrimination against South London) I also know a police detective who earns more than £60k so why does he need a £2200 subsidy as people earning that much can afford to buy a travelcard Like I have to. TfL might say it doesn't cost much to give out these passes, but in reality for everyone that exists, real cash revenue (ticket or travelcard sold) is income not received. If 470 extra people buy an annual travelcard that is an extra £1m. So cutting the couple of million passes could bring in £ millions extra You're detective friend would have travel benefits assuming he is with the met already on most managed TFL services but I agree withyour point. Children should not be bound to their local areas in the long summer holidays there are many schemes and activities that they may be unable to get to. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2013 21:20:48 GMT
I disagree on the scale of the free travel and its extra hours. I see no reason to subsidize kids in the evening and summer holidays. I'm also not a fan of enhancing freedom passes above what Government pays for (60th birthday to state pension age, and tubes but not trains as that is discrimination against South London) I also know a police detective who earns more than £60k so why does he need a £2200 subsidy as people earning that much can afford to buy a travelcard Like I have to. TfL might say it doesn't cost much to give out these passes, but in reality for everyone that exists, real cash revenue (ticket or travelcard sold) is income not received. If 470 extra people buy an annual travelcard that is an extra £1m. So cutting the couple of million passes could bring in £ millions extra You're detective friend would have travel benefits assuming he is with the met already on most managed TFL services but I agree withyour point. Children should not be bound to their local areas in the long summer holidays there are many schemes and activities that they may be unable to get to. Assuming child-rate fares would be half the adult fare, it shouldn't be impossible to scrape £1.40 for a two-way journey. Doesn't everyone outside of London have to fund their own summer holiday travel? |
|
|
|
Post by rambo on May 17, 2013 21:32:59 GMT
Mmmmmmm, the child pass? London schoolkids do not realise how lucky they are.
Free travel for police? Only on the basis that if they are needed they will step in.
|
|
|
|
Post by john on May 18, 2013 15:06:48 GMT
I disagree on the scale of the free travel and its extra hours. I see no reason to subsidize kids in the evening and summer holidays. I'm also not a fan of enhancing freedom passes above what Government pays for (60th birthday to state pension age, and tubes but not trains as that is discrimination against South London) I also know a police detective who earns more than £60k so why does he need a £2200 subsidy as people earning that much can afford to buy a travelcard Like I have to. TfL might say it doesn't cost much to give out these passes, but in reality for everyone that exists, real cash revenue (ticket or travelcard sold) is income not received. If 470 extra people buy an annual travelcard that is an extra £1m. So cutting the couple of million passes could bring in £ millions extra You're detective friend would have travel benefits assuming he is with the met already on most managed TFL services but I agree withyour point. Children should not be bound to their local areas in the long summer holidays there are many schemes and activities that they may be unable to get to. In that case you get discounted rates during those times like Students do with their 18+ Oyster Cards. I agree with snowman on the points about freedom passes. It should be income related, just like other pensioner benefits when related to tax. The more money you have, the less benefit you get. That way, at least the needy of pensioners would get the most benefit (and need) from the Freedom Pass. snoggle, thanks for clarifying my question. If that's the case then the change in subsidy etc must relate to network cuts in the majority. What it explains to the more trained eye is that more people are using the bus yet their is less investment in services via subsidies. Does that mean that TfL, or London Buses, are wasting money in areas that are not needed? To really understand what's going on a more in depth look at figures would be needed. I still stand by my view that to really gain more revenue, a restriction on the 11-18 Oyster Cards is needed. At the very least, allow them to be free on all school contract routes, whether that be extra normal route workings, such as the 498 and the current 256D, or the 6** series of school routes. Other than that, fares should be charged, possibly around the 50p bracket, at weekends and any other time during the week. If it's a school holiday, then bus fares remain the same UNLESS travelling further afield at which point a greater discount should be applied on the price cap of PAYG. In theory, the reduction of the adult fare and the introduction of the child fare should not be much different from what it is now. The main benefit will be to the lack of youth hostels running around, which would hopefully draw even more people on to the bus, hopefully leading to service improvements. |
|
|
|
Post by rambo on May 18, 2013 16:39:09 GMT
Dis agree with means tests for oap freedom passes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2013 19:53:06 GMT
Dis agree with means tests for oap freedom passes. I don't see the problem with it. We means-test practically every other state benefit - why should we fund perks for wealthy pensioners? |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 18, 2013 21:05:42 GMT
Disagree with means tests for oap freedom passes. At a principle level I probably agree. Unfortunately the economic reality is that the London scheme is very lavish compared to elsewhere and will end up being unaffordable. Local authorities are being screwed into the ground while their responsibilities are being expanded (e.g. health prevention, ever expanding social care demands). Something has to give. At the moment the Mayor is simply stealing from the TfL budget to fund the 60+ pass, the Veterans Pass and to expand the Freedom Pass to 24 hour coverage. This cannot go on forever regardless of the political pressure and votes that are "in play" with the pensioner lobby. The situation outside London is far worse - the national concessionary scheme is under funded and is causing the removal of services from many areas because the mechanism is all wrong. Again LA funding cuts are just worsening the pressure. At some point a real crunch will arise where pensioners have passes but no services which is beyond daft. It is clear pensioners value the mobility the pass gives and that's fine. *However* there needs to be an informed debate with pensioners, local authorities, government and bus companies to explain what the heck is going wrong. It wouldn't be about blame, it would be working out a solution to the problem. I think some form of taxing these "universal" benefits is required as is a reform of the reimbursement mechanism for concessionary travel. I also think a small annual charge for the pass or a small notional fare would help improve the economics. This would not be popular with some pensioners but the real point is whether they want to keep their bus services and mobility or not. Nothing comes for free and bus operating costs are only ever going to go up. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2013 0:10:07 GMT
Disagree with means tests for oap freedom passes. At a principle level I probably agree. Unfortunately the economic reality is that the London scheme is very lavish compared to elsewhere and will end up being unaffordable. Local authorities are being screwed into the ground while their responsibilities are being expanded (e.g. health prevention, ever expanding social care demands). Something has to give. At the moment the Mayor is simply stealing from the TfL budget to fund the 60+ pass, the Veterans Pass and to expand the Freedom Pass to 24 hour coverage. This cannot go on forever regardless of the political pressure and votes that are "in play" with the pensioner lobby. The situation outside London is far worse - the national concessionary scheme is under funded and is causing the removal of services from many areas because the mechanism is all wrong. Again LA funding cuts are just worsening the pressure. At some point a real crunch will arise where pensioners have passes but no services which is beyond daft. It is clear pensioners value the mobility the pass gives and that's fine. *However* there needs to be an informed debate with pensioners, local authorities, government and bus companies to explain what the heck is going wrong. It wouldn't be about blame, it would be working out a solution to the problem. I think some form of taxing these "universal" benefits is required as is a reform of the reimbursement mechanism for concessionary travel. I also think a small annual charge for the pass or a small notional fare would help improve the economics. This would not be popular with some pensioners but the real point is whether they want to keep their bus services and mobility or not. Nothing comes for free and bus operating costs are only ever going to go up. Snog ... another well reasoned post ... something has to give and those that lose out will not like it ....but a harsh decision needs to be made ... pensioners ...kids ... forces ... unemployed ... maybe it was fool harder giving the vote winning concessions in the first place!!!! So out of curiousity rambo ... where do you see the multi million pound savings being made ... I am assuming not off yours (and others) salary! |
|
