Aside from debates as to what actually constitutes a ‘working person’, the Labour government does ostensibly seem clear as to whom it wants to shield in the forthcoming Budget: the less well-off and those who continue to struggle financially. It is therefore perverse that it should remove a benefit that has been a blessing to precisely that demographic: the £2 cap on bus fares.
The government looks set to be making another long-term error
This measure, an initiative of the last Tory government, was introduced last January and implemented in England outside areas that already have devolved powers over transport. It’s been an invaluable aid for those who use the bus to go to work, school or college, especially the young and poorer sections of society who don’t own a car and can’t afford the train where viable. It’s helped already long-suffering rural communities, for whom bus services have long been an imperilled asset.
This matters little to the bean-counters. The cap is reputed to cost the Treasury £350 million a year, with every £1 spent to support the cap generating 71p to 90p in benefits. An analysis by the Department for Transport has found it is ‘not financially sustainable for taxpayers and bus operators.’ The Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, is to introduce a new 2 per cent productivity, efficiency and savings target for Whitehall departments next year, and seeks £35 billion in spending cuts and tax rises. The £2 bus fare cap, which is due to expire in December, is one of the subsidies to go. Keir Starmer has confirmed that the cap will rise to £3.
This is an example of myopic, short-term thinking (a hallmark of this government, what with its pacifying yet inflation-busting public sector wage settlements). The £350 million bill for the current cap is only a crude, tangible figure. It doesn’t take into account the cap’s invisible, wider and long-term benefit for the economy and for so many people who rely on it to go to work or school or college. Employment has an immeasurable knock-on effect for economies at a local level, while the present and future worth of having young people in education is also literally incalculable. No doubt the cap has been invaluable for lowly-paid NHS workers, and we never talk about their contribution to society in terms of pounds in the short term, and nor should we.
The cap has already proved its social worth. The Rural Services Network, a body which campaigns on behalf of 6,000 villages and market towns, said that rural poverty has driven down car ownership, leaving many totally reliant on the bus. In North Yorkshire, where bus passenger numbers rose 11 last year, the cap is credited with helping to maintain the viability of many rural routes.
As a weekly user of buses, I not only appreciate the cap in a personal capacity, but witness it in operation here in East Kent, where so many workers and school kids use the bus to make their daily commute to and from the de facto capital of these parts, Canterbury.
Silviya Barrett, the director of policy and research at the Campaign for Better Transport, says that the cap has been a lifeline for the bus sector, and should be extended, not scrapped: ‘Taking the bus shouldn’t be a financial cap or scrapping it entirely could leave passengers struggling to afford travel on lifeline services.’
Scrapping the current cap fails to take into account long-term consequences. Not only does this decision leave many struggling to get to work, it could put in jeopardy the very existence of many routes, particularly in the countryside. This decision also makes a mockery of any pretensions the government has towards attaining net zero. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband is forever inveighing against motor cars, yet this abolition will only push people back onto private transport – if at all. This is not an example of joined-up thinking.
The government looks set to be making another long-term error, in terms of electoral support. Not only do 55 per cent of the public think that abolishing the cap is the ‘wrong decision’, there is also broad agreement between Labour and Conservative voters, with 54 per cent from the former and 60 per cent of the latter saying that this the wrong move. Shadow work and pension secretary Mel Stride said it would be ‘yet another slap in the face’ for pensioners after winter fuel payment cuts. Richard Holden MP, a former transport minister, adds: ‘Labour are going to hammer car and van drivers, now they’ve revealed they’re going to cripple bus users, too.’ Conservative leadership candidates Robert Jenrick says: ‘If Labour knew what a working person is they’d know that more often than not they catch the bus to work.’
That, indeed, seems one pretty concise definition of a ‘working person’.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in