On Dec 30, 2:15*am, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 08:20:25 -0800 (PST), Paul
wrote:

Saw this article on the BBC website.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16357124

Ken Livingstone can criticise Boris Johnson for raising fares, but of
course he never did that when he was Mayor, did he?

Oh come on - it's Mayoral election time. *Fares are an area of
vulnerability for the current Mayor because no one likes paying more
for public transport and people have short memories of what Ken did 5
years ago. *The Mayor can, and I am sure will, point to the fact that
he has not increased the precept since taking office. *Ken increased
the precept every year. *Naturally enough there are different
approaches between the candidates as to what is spent and how the
money is raised.

Of course Ken will play games with fares - he has a long track record
of doing so and several of his initiatives worked well (fares zones,
low bus fares, introduction of Travelcard) and were popular at the
time. *They also helped reduce LT's costs because fare payment was
moved off system and bus boarding times were quicker. *Oyster has
taken those benefits on a lot further since then. *Boris has been
consistent in sticking to the RPI+2% inflator for fares in order to
maintain funding for TfL's operations and investment. *Patronage and
revenue has run ahead of budget for most of the Mayor's term anyway
and we're not exactly experiencing an economic boom! *If the economy
was doing better then I expect TfL would be raking the money in.

Whether we like it or not I think the comment by Isabel Dedring is
correct - in comparative terms London bus fares are cheap and the
network density and level of service is way ahead of the rest of the
country. *Only very short distance fares tend to cheaper than the TfL
flat fare and it's not unknown for people to be paying £2-£4 single
for journeys over modest distances outside of London. *The only saving
grace in deregulation land tends to be operator specific day rover
tickets which offer reasonable value for money (compared to singles).

ISTR that previous studies have shown that the average London bus fare
is considerably lower than elsewhere in the country. *All that Boris's
policy does is narrow the gap somewhat.

Also of interest is the statement at the end of the article saying
that 40% of people travelling on London Buses are doing so for free or
at a discount.

I wonder what effect this 40% has on bus fares for the remaining 60%?

Probably not a lot given there is a high level of overall subsidy
anyway and much of it is funded from government grant and not fares or
the Mayoral precept. *Freedom Passes are funded by the Boroughs and
they also bare the cost of English Concessionary Pass use in London.

I am genuinely surprised the full scale of concessions has lasted
through the current Mayor's term. *I had expected some to have been
trimmed or withdrawn by now but I guess the risk of adverse political
fall out was too great.

--
Paul C

CASH fares in other cities are considerably cheaper than London. For
example:-

Edinburgh - £1.30
Nottingham - £1.70
Glasgow - £1.80 (90p for short journeys)
Birmingham - £1.80 (£1.60 for short journeys)

All these cities offer day tickets and period tickets as well.

Whilst the Oyster fare in London is cheaper in all cases except
Edinburgh, none of these cities seems to penalise the casual visitor
who needs to pay a cash fare so much as London does.

I realise that most visitors to London will buy a one day or period
travelcard, but even this has become more difficult. In my opinion it
was a serious mistake to stop people from being able to buy a one day
travelcard from newsagents and ticket stops.