|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Sept 10, 2022 16:47:54 GMT 1
The simple answer is that we just don't know, I've heard at least 3 different versions of what the scheme will actually be, and since it was clear from the statement from the CPT that it doesn't appear if the DfT has spoken to most operators (let along agreed any principles with anyone) so until operators see some actual details on the funding & reimbursement we don't know how this will fly. If the DfT try to reimburse in the same way they recommend to do the concessionary fares then this will simply go nowhere except a few urban areas with relatively low fares. The important thing to remember in all this is that, since it hasn't passed through any statutory instrument, it is entirely voluntary participation so it is unlikely to include all operators and all routes whatever happens. If it's the West Yorkshire scheme (and presumably the Greater Manchester one, and the Liverpool one when it starts on the 18th) it's for the whole route, regardless of length. The DfT's three-month England-wide scheme next year, don't know. I'm waiting for one of the large operators to say that they won't be taking part, with it being voluntary. Even being for the whole route regardless of length may cause anomalies depending on direction of travel. While Leeds to Scarborough should be £2 for starting in Leeds, I sincerely doubt Scarborough to Leeds could be £2 until the national £2 limit comes in. |
|
|
|
Post by deerfold on Sept 10, 2022 20:19:29 GMT 1
The simple answer is that we just don't know, I've heard at least 3 different versions of what the scheme will actually be, and since it was clear from the statement from the CPT that it doesn't appear if the DfT has spoken to most operators (let along agreed any principles with anyone) so until operators see some actual details on the funding & reimbursement we don't know how this will fly. If the DfT try to reimburse in the same way they recommend to do the concessionary fares then this will simply go nowhere except a few urban areas with relatively low fares. The important thing to remember in all this is that, since it hasn't passed through any statutory instrument, it is entirely voluntary participation so it is unlikely to include all operators and all routes whatever happens. If it's the West Yorkshire scheme (and presumably the Greater Manchester one, and the Liverpool one when it starts on the 18th) it's for the whole route, regardless of length. Even being for the whole route regardless of length may cause anomalies depending on direction of travel. While Leeds to Scarborough should be £2 for starting in Leeds, I sincerely doubt Scarborough to Leeds could be £2 until the national £2 limit comes in. If it is, someone needs to tell Transdev, as they're very clear it's only within West Yorkshire. Metro also make it clear it's only within West Yorkshire. www.wymetro.com/mayorsfares |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Sept 11, 2022 7:51:57 GMT 1
Thank you for your link deerfold as it mentions this :- Which bus services and routes does this apply to? The maximum single fare of £2 and maximum daily fare of £4.50 will apply across West Yorkshire, on all service operators, on journeys within West Yorkshire. These are not applicable to Park & Ride services, football and other events specials, or the parts of journeys that are outside West Yorkshire. So, we clearly cannot stay on the bus beyond the County boundary with a £2 single. |
|
|
|
Post by yorkslad on Sept 11, 2022 15:20:11 GMT 1
If it's the West Yorkshire scheme (and presumably the Greater Manchester one, and the Liverpool one when it starts on the 18th) it's for the whole route, regardless of length. Even being for the whole route regardless of length may cause anomalies depending on direction of travel. While Leeds to Scarborough should be £2 for starting in Leeds, I sincerely doubt Scarborough to Leeds could be £2 until the national £2 limit comes in. If it is, someone needs to tell Transdev, as they're very clear it's only within West Yorkshire. Metro also make it clear it's only within West Yorkshire. www.wymetro.com/mayorsfaresSorry deerfold - that's me missing out the words "within the same county". So the full route *within West Yorkshire*, which could, for example, be the 508 from Leeds to Halifax.
I'm not sure how it works on First's service between Huddersfield and Oldham (I think) - it would be £2 in WY and GM, so should it be £2 throughout, or do you have to buy two £2 tickets for the two counties?
|
|
|
|
Post by deerfold on Sept 11, 2022 15:24:28 GMT 1
If it is, someone needs to tell Transdev, as they're very clear it's only within West Yorkshire. Metro also make it clear it's only within West Yorkshire. www.wymetro.com/mayorsfaresSorry deerfold - that's me missing out the words "within the same county". So the full route *within West Yorkshire*, which could, for example, be the 508 from Leeds to Halifax. I'm not sure how it works on First's service between Huddersfield and Oldham (I think) - it would be £2 in WY and GM, so should it be £2 throughout, or do you have to buy two £2 tickets for the two counties?
I'd expect that to be £4 - or almost worth getting a FirstDay. You could be charged anything though - whenever I've caught that I've had a Metro season ticket and have been charged all sorts of random fares for using it - last time I was charged about what I expected from the border to Uppermill, but was actually issued with a child ticket from where I'd boarded. |
|
|
|
Post by Father Dougal McGuire on Sept 12, 2022 15:07:09 GMT 1
We are charging passengers £2 in Lancashire on the 589 and 592. £1.40 1 fare stage, £1.80 2 fare stages then £2.00 for all subsequent stages. I thought we would still be using the old fares.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephen01 on Feb 17, 2023 18:54:02 GMT 1
National Scheme extended to 30th June 2023 and they are extending Post Covid Funds to the same date.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Feb 17, 2023 21:05:05 GMT 1
National Scheme extended to 30th June 2023 and they are extending Post Covid Funds to the same date. It will be interesting to see whether all operators continue taking part in the scheme – anecdotal evidence from some drivers is that it doesn't seem to have done a lot to boost passenger numbers (although that may depend how much advertising their company has done, and what its fares normally are!), so there will be some serious maths to do as to if the money they are getting from DfT makes up for the shortfall in fares, now that they've had a good few weeks to see the impact of the scheme. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2023 22:51:28 GMT 1
National Scheme extended to 30th June 2023 and they are extending Post Covid Funds to the same date. It will be interesting to see whether all operators continue taking part in the scheme – anecdotal evidence from some drivers is that it doesn't seem to have done a lot to boost passenger numbers (although that may depend how much advertising their company has done, and what its fares normally are!), so there will be some serious maths to do as to if the money they are getting from DfT makes up for the shortfall in fares, now that they've had a good few weeks to see the impact of the scheme. I Think if Operators are wanting to use this scheme as a way to boost passenger numbers then it would be wise for them to continue (i think it does need to be remembered that unlike the local schemes such as West Yorks or Manc the national one isn't about that, but rather helping lower income families with the cost of living) as if they do a decent job of advertising the fare (plus running the services!) then they could get a decent increase during the Easter Holidays. |
|
|
|
Post by leedsbusman on Feb 17, 2023 22:52:21 GMT 1
National Scheme extended to 30th June 2023 and they are extending Post Covid Funds to the same date. It will be interesting to see whether all operators continue taking part in the scheme – anecdotal evidence from some drivers is that it doesn't seem to have done a lot to boost passenger numbers (although that may depend how much advertising their company has done, and what its fares normally are!), so there will be some serious maths to do as to if the money they are getting from DfT makes up for the shortfall in fares, now that they've had a good few weeks to see the impact of the scheme. It depends what they are comparing to when they say it hasn’t boosted numbers. January and early February are usually quieter than November and the first three weeks in December, so an increase v a typical January might seem to be no increase v the previous months. It would be highly unlikely not to have generated some extra trips. |
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Feb 18, 2023 13:12:07 GMT 1
It will be interesting to see whether all operators continue taking part in the scheme – anecdotal evidence from some drivers is that it doesn't seem to have done a lot to boost passenger numbers (although that may depend how much advertising their company has done, and what its fares normally are!), so there will be some serious maths to do as to if the money they are getting from DfT makes up for the shortfall in fares, now that they've had a good few weeks to see the impact of the scheme. It depends what they are comparing to when they say it hasn’t boosted numbers. January and early February are usually quieter than November and the first three weeks in December, so an increase v a typical January might seem to be no increase v the previous months. It would be highly unlikely not to have generated some extra trips. The driver on the NYCC 74A yesterday was saying this has been the quietest February half-term he can remember, and even on the 72 they aren't seeing the numbers he would expect despite Transdev's advertising – so he was comparing like with like. And that's despite the weather having been reasonably kind this week, which you might think would encourage more people to go out for the day in that neck of the woods. It's worth remembering how the national scheme is funded – operators get a lump sum for taking part in the scheme. This was not calculated on the basis of the predicted shortfall, but was arrived at by divvying up the allocated budget between operators by some opaque and unknown formula that (theoretically at least) is in proportion to the predicted shortfall, but no determination was made as to whether it would hit that shortfall. The budget was set before operators applied so DfT didn't know how many or which ones they would be divvying it up between. I don't know how much of a grant each company got, or how that compares with the income that they would lose from their existing passengers, but my guess would be that it would be predicated on a substantial number of additional passenger journeys in order to break even. If some operators pull out for phase 2 then that leaves a slightly bigger share of the pot for those remaining in, which may be enough to swing the balance – their could be some games of chicken going on, if some operators felt it was borderline then they may wait til the last minute before making a decision. |
|
|
|
Post by leedsbusman on Feb 18, 2023 14:31:59 GMT 1
It depends what they are comparing to when they say it hasn’t boosted numbers. January and early February are usually quieter than November and the first three weeks in December, so an increase v a typical January might seem to be no increase v the previous months. It would be highly unlikely not to have generated some extra trips. The driver on the NYCC 74A yesterday was saying this has been the quietest February half-term he can remember, and even on the 72 they aren't seeing the numbers he would expect despite Transdev's advertising – so he was comparing like with like. And that's despite the weather having been reasonably kind this week, which you might think would encourage more people to go out for the day in that neck of the woods. It's worth remembering how the national scheme is funded – operators get a lump sum for taking part in the scheme. This was not calculated on the basis of the predicted shortfall, but was arrived at by divvying up the allocated budget between operators by some opaque and unknown formula that (theoretically at least) is in proportion to the predicted shortfall, but no determination was made as to whether it would hit that shortfall. The budget was set before operators applied so DfT didn't know how many or which ones they would be divvying it up between. I don't know how much of a grant each company got, or how that compares with the income that they would lose from their existing passengers, but my guess would be that it would be predicated on a substantial number of additional passenger journeys in order to break even. If some operators pull out for phase 2 then that leaves a slightly bigger share of the pot for those remaining in, which may be enough to swing the balance – their could be some games of chicken going on, if some operators felt it was borderline then they may wait til the last minute before making a decision. Not sure the 74a is the best barometer the UK industry! |
|
lucyp
Forum Member
Posts: 142
|
Post by lucyp on Feb 18, 2023 16:14:16 GMT 1
The reality is that the scheme is a failure on most services, as Transdev have stated. It's just the Government wasting tax-payers' money once again.
The reality is that outside London, most bus passengers are old people and students.
You can see that most of the services are no busier. Transdev say 10% increase on the 36 and Coastliner only. As I said before, those are the ones with the biggest fare savings.
The 7 is no busier and why would it be? Prior to the Government scheme, a single from Harrogate to Wetherby was £4. Return was 30p more and a Harrogate 1 ticket which allowed unlimited travel in the Harrogate, plus Knaresborough, out to Wetherby and Harewood was a few pence more. Most journeys will be returns, so the savings are small. Far too small to tempt someone out of their house and go somewhere, or to leave their car at home and use the bus.
The problem now is that delivery of goods ordered is often free, and if not, it is cheap. I can buy a light bulb for £3 and go on the bus to collect it for £4 return, or I can have it delivered for a £5 delivery charge. It isn't worth my time going in person to the shop to save £1.
The grant is likely to be a good scheme for the bus companies. If they have a lot of 36 and Coastliner type services where there is now a large fare drop, then they are probably losing out under the grant scheme, but only at peak times.
The 36 is only busy at peak times for example. On 7 type services, off-peak, they are doing well from the grant. Average load say 12. Of those 12, only 2 passengers will not be using an old person's pass, and will be paying the full fare, and at least one will be a return ticket, so there will be a drop in income of £2.30 on that service under the new scheme. I expect that the grant will be worth more than £2.30 per service.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2023 16:32:59 GMT 1
The reality is that the scheme is a failure on most services, as Transdev have stated. It's just the Government wasting tax-payers' money once again. The reality is that outside London, most bus passengers are old people and students. You can see that most of the services are no busier. Transdev say 10% increase on the 36 and Coastliner only. As I said before, those are the ones with the biggest fare savings. The 7 is no busier and why would it be? Prior to the Government scheme, a single from Harrogate to Wetherby was £4. Return was 30p more and a Harrogate 1 ticket which allowed unlimited travel in the Harrogate, plus Knaresborough, out to Wetherby and Harewood was a few pence more. Most journeys will be returns, so the savings are small. Far too small to tempt someone out of their house and go somewhere, or to leave their car at home and use the bus. The problem now is that delivery of goods ordered is often free, and if not, it is cheap. I can buy a light bulb for £3 and go on the bus to collect it for £4 return, or I can have it delivered for a £5 delivery charge. It isn't worth my time going in person to the shop to save £1. The grant is likely to be a good scheme for the bus companies. If they have a lot of 36 and Coastliner type services where there is now a large fare drop, then they are probably losing out under the grant scheme, but only at peak times. The 36 is only busy at peak times for example. On 7 type services, off-peak, they are doing well from the grant. Average load say 12. Of those 12, only 2 passengers will not be using an old person's pass, and will be paying the full fare, and at least one will be a return ticket, so there will be a drop in income of £2.30 on that service under the new scheme. I expect that the grant will be worth more than £2.30 per service. But as i pointed out above - the national scheme wasn't aimed at increasing passenger numbers, but helping existing ones (IE Them more likely to be struggling with the cost of living) - I'm sure bus operators won't be complaining at basically getting a free 10% increase included with that. |
|
|
|
Post by rwilkes on Feb 18, 2023 17:04:15 GMT 1
The reality is that the scheme is a failure on most services, as Transdev have stated. It's just the Government wasting tax-payers' money once again. The reality is that outside London, most bus passengers are old people and students. You can see that most of the services are no busier. Transdev say 10% increase on the 36 and Coastliner only. As I said before, those are the ones with the biggest fare savings. The 7 is no busier and why would it be? Prior to the Government scheme, a single from Harrogate to Wetherby was £4. Return was 30p more and a Harrogate 1 ticket which allowed unlimited travel in the Harrogate, plus Knaresborough, out to Wetherby and Harewood was a few pence more. Most journeys will be returns, so the savings are small. Far too small to tempt someone out of their house and go somewhere, or to leave their car at home and use the bus. The problem now is that delivery of goods ordered is often free, and if not, it is cheap. I can buy a light bulb for £3 and go on the bus to collect it for £4 return, or I can have it delivered for a £5 delivery charge. It isn't worth my time going in person to the shop to save £1. The grant is likely to be a good scheme for the bus companies. If they have a lot of 36 and Coastliner type services where there is now a large fare drop, then they are probably losing out under the grant scheme, but only at peak times. The 36 is only busy at peak times for example. On 7 type services, off-peak, they are doing well from the grant. Average load say 12. Of those 12, only 2 passengers will not be using an old person's pass, and will be paying the full fare, and at least one will be a return ticket, so there will be a drop in income of £2.30 on that service under the new scheme. I expect that the grant will be worth more than £2.30 per service. But as i pointed out above - the national scheme wasn't aimed at increasing passenger numbers, but helping existing ones (IE Them more likely to be struggling with the cost of living) - I'm sure bus operators won't be complaining at basically getting a free 10% increase included with that. |
|
|
|
Post by rwilkes on Feb 18, 2023 17:10:42 GMT 1
"The reality is that outside London, most bus passengers are old people and students"
Not true except on many rural routes. In cities like Oxford and about 6 others where the local authority embrace bus priority, buses are very popular.
The students are on bicycles and the university lecturers are on the bus. High frequency services on a Sunday evening. We need it here!
This is the real reason why the £2 is a waste of money. If the money was spent on bus priority buses in urban areas could soon be financially self susttaing or even expanding.
However you travel, if you do not like traffic jams and air pollution, you should be writing to your councillor in favour of bus priority
|
|
lucyp
Forum Member
Posts: 142
|
Post by lucyp on Feb 18, 2023 17:48:39 GMT 1
How many people who might be affected by cost of living don't either have a car or are not old people with a free pass? And for the minority that are not in those groups, as I said above, the savings are tiny. It's really an unjustified subsidy to keep unpopular bus routes afloat.
As for Oxford, what you really mean is that they have made it so difficult and so expensive to drive into Oxford, that you have to use public transport. That is fine for a popular, famous, tourist etc. city like Oxford. In most other places it will just kill off what is left of the High Street.
Bus priority is expensive and slow to create in towns that don't have existing dual carriageway routes, or any park and ride, or suitable park and ride sites.
Buses will never generally be self-sustaining or popular outside London or internationally renowned destinations such as Oxford.
|
|
|
|
Post by rwilkes on Feb 18, 2023 19:43:35 GMT 1
How many people who might be affected by cost of living don't either have a car or are not old people with a free pass? And for the minority that are not in those groups, as I said above, the savings are tiny. It's really an unjustified subsidy to keep unpopular bus routes afloat. As for Oxford, what you really mean is that they have made it so difficult and so expensive to drive into Oxford, that you have to use public transport. That is fine for a popular, famous, tourist etc. city like Oxford. In most other places it will just kill off what is left of the High Street. Bus priority is expensive and slow to create in towns that don't have existing dual carriageway routes, or any park and ride, or suitable park and ride sites. Buses will never generally be self-sustaining or popular outside London or internationally renowned destinations such as Oxford. Everything you say is factually incorrect. Oxford centre is thriving just for starters. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2023 20:20:49 GMT 1
"The reality is that outside London, most bus passengers are old people and students" Not true except on many rural routes. In cities like Oxford and about 6 others where the local authority embrace bus priority, buses are very popular. The students are on bicycles and the university lecturers are on the bus. High frequency services on a Sunday evening. We need it here! This is the real reason why the £2 is a waste of money. If the money was spent on bus priority buses in urban areas could soon be financially self susttaing or even expanding. However you travel, if you do not like traffic jams and air pollution, you should be writing to your councillor in favour of bus priority What funding pot are you expecting these new bus lanes & whatever else to come out of? The Bus Service Improvement Plan includes them things you mentioned, but the £2 national fare is part of the cost of living package (although the extra 3 month looks like its now been clubbed together with the bus recovery grant) I Doubt it would of gone down too well if they government announced during last Autumn 'to help with the cost of living we are going to introduce some new bus lanes' How many people who might be affected by cost of living don't either have a car or are not old people with a free pass? And for the minority that are not in those groups, as I said above, the savings are tiny. It's really an unjustified subsidy to keep unpopular bus routes afloat. As for Oxford, what you really mean is that they have made it so difficult and so expensive to drive into Oxford, that you have to use public transport. That is fine for a popular, famous, tourist etc. city like Oxford. In most other places it will just kill off what is left of the High Street. Bus priority is expensive and slow to create in towns that don't have existing dual carriageway routes, or any park and ride, or suitable park and ride sites. Buses will never generally be self-sustaining or popular outside London or internationally renowned destinations such as Oxford. Whilst it's different for us in West Yorks,or say Greater Manchester or Birmingham where there was already a £2 cap - There is a number of places where the prices will have dropped a decent amount for commuters (take places in the South East/West such as Bournemouth > Salisbury,Salisbury > Southampton,Dover or Folkestone > Kent or even places in Derbyshire/Nottinghamshire),or are we assuming the bus operators happily have double deckers out from 6am (some on fairly frequent routes) running empty until 9:30am when the free passes become valid. If people are suffering with the cost of living but still using their car, assuming buses work around their work times, that's not the governments fault (possibly the only thing you cannot blame them for), their job was to provide the support but you cannot force people to accept it. Buses can be popular across the UK as like in London - but as like London they need to be part of a larger Integrated network (of course due to the various sizes your never going to see the same numbers of passengers). As for removing cars killing the high streets - the same arguments was used in the Netherlands & France when they started removing cars from key areas & it didn't happen, but then again a proper integrated network with mass transit options are standard in most cities (not just a few fancy buses) |
|
lucyp
Forum Member
Posts: 142
|
Post by lucyp on Feb 18, 2023 20:27:09 GMT 1
What does "a proper integrated network with mass transit options" actually mean?
And as for the person who said that Oxford centre is thriving. Yes Baldrick, we know that, because as I said, it's a world renowned city which is a tourist magnet. The same doesn't really apply to Middlesbrough or Rotherham does it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 18, 2023 20:59:31 GMT 1
What does "a proper integrated network with mass transit options" actually mean? I Mean take a look at London or any major city across Europe or what's proposed for Manchester - A proper Mass Transit system (be it either an S-Bahn or Metro style trains or a network of Trams). Buses acting as part of the larger system rather than competing with the railways with all in one ticketing that isn't more expensive (so rather than a 'bus option' 'bus+train' it's just 1 ticket for anything) & everything is timetabled to connect with each other. The fact that Leeds is currently the largest city in Europe that doesn't have a mass transit system is one of the major issues. Of course there is little possibility of most of this happening due to the privatised system we have hence why Manchester is going back to Franchising but hopefully in time we will get there - although I'm not holding my breath over the current West Yorkshire Mass Transit proposals. |
|
|
|
Post by stantheman on Feb 18, 2023 22:42:02 GMT 1
This will only work and get people back onto buses if reliability improves. Last week a family member got buses home from St Luke’s Hospital to Thornton and it took 3 hours due to buses not turning up. Absolutely ridiculous!
|
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Feb 18, 2023 23:54:18 GMT 1
This will only work and get people back onto buses if reliability improves. Last week a family member got buses home from St Luke’s Hospital to Thornton and it took 3 hours due to buses not turning up. Absolutely ridiculous! It's a real chicken-and-egg situation. People don't use buses because they aren't reliable, so instead they jump into their cars, creating more congestion that delays the buses and reducing income for the operators, which leads to reliability getting worse. That's why we need heavy up-front investment from councils and government, to ensure that the infrastructure and funding is in place to run the service reliably before it gets people out of their cars, in order that it can do so. |
|
lucyp
Forum Member
Posts: 142
|
Post by lucyp on Feb 19, 2023 1:13:20 GMT 1
So basically, "a proper integrated network with mass transit options" is a tram, through ticketing and everything connecting with everything else?
Leeds had trams years and years ago and they were abolished. Can you imagine the cost and disruption of putting them back in now? Where would they go and not go? The city centre would be dead before they got the scheme half completed.
Google "Why trams are a waste of money" and look at the heavyweight articles. Look at the Edinburgh fiasco.
As for through ticketing - it's a non-issue in 2023. No one has to go to the right kind of tobacconist like you do in some European cities to buy a bus or tram ticket in advance. You just pay with your phone. There is the M Card app. Ticketing is not an issue now.
As for everything connecting with everything else, it can't and it never will. Where in the world does that happen?
That would mean that every train would have to arrive and leave at almost the same time, and every bus would similarly have to do the same from just outside the station, a few minutes later, and vice versa. Can you imagine the chaos? And what about buses that only run infrequently?
The UK is not Europe. We mainly don't live in rented flats in tower blocks and close to the city centre. We like to own our own houses, and to live in urban areas and villages, and rural areas, and we live near one town but work in another town or city.
And let's not pretend that Europe has any useful model for us to follow, because the UK is nowhere in the league table when it comes to car ownership per capita. We are at 18 behind New Zealand, Australia, Italy, Poland, Finland, Austria, Germany, Czech Republic, Switzerland, Portugal, Spain; Norway, Belgium, Netherlands, France, Japan and Sweden.
So for all those countries that you were about to hold up as a beacon of public transport efficiency, then how come their citizens must prefer to use their own car, because they own more of them per head than we do?
|
|
WYBS
Forum Member
Watch-o
Posts: 1,489
|
Post by WYBS on Feb 19, 2023 11:27:40 GMT 1
So basically, "a proper integrated network with mass transit options" is a tram, through ticketing and everything connecting with everything else? Leeds had trams years and years ago and they were abolished. Can you imagine the cost and disruption of putting them back in now? Where would they go and not go? The city centre would be dead before they got the scheme half completed. Google "Why trams are a waste of money" and look at the heavyweight articles. Look at the Edinburgh fiasco. As for through ticketing - it's a non-issue in 2023. No one has to go to the right kind of tobacconist like you do in some European cities to buy a bus or tram ticket in advance. You just pay with your phone. There is the M Card app. Ticketing is not an issue now. As for everything connecting with everything else, it can't and it never will. Where in the world does that happen? That would mean that every train would have to arrive and leave at almost the same time, and every bus would similarly have to do the same from just outside the station, a few minutes later, and vice versa. Can you imagine the chaos? And what about buses that only run infrequently? The UK is not Europe. We mainly don't live in rented flats in tower blocks and close to the city centre. We like to own our own houses, and to live in urban areas and villages, and rural areas, and we live near one town but work in another town or city. And let's not pretend that Europe has any useful model for us to follow, because the UK is nowhere in the league table when it comes to car ownership per capita. We are at 18 behind New Zealand, Australia, Italy, Poland, Finland, Austria, Germany, Czech Republic, Switzerland, Portugal, Spain; Norway, Belgium, Netherlands, France, Japan and Sweden. So for all those countries that you were about to hold up as a beacon of public transport efficiency, then how come their citizens must prefer to use their own car, because they own more of them per head than we do? "We mainly don't live in rented flats in tower blocks and close to the city centre. We like to own our own houses, and to live in urban areas and villages, and rural areas, and we live near one town but work in another town or city." Whilst this is somewhat true now, research trends show that this will change significantly in the future, with younger generations focusing more on their careers, and city centre (smart cities/ 15 minute cities ect...) living rather than the traditional route of buying a house in the suburbs and starting a family. |
|
