Afternoon:
15°c
Commuters were warned today they faced cuts to bus services after Boris Johnson's transport aide confirmed plans for a 40 per cent cut to London's bus subsidy.
Kulveer Ranger said the Mayor would press ahead with the £1.7 billion cut but insisted the savings would be made through “backroom efficiencies” and that most services would not be cut —despite an expected squeeze on London's transport budget in the Government's spending review.
Mr Ranger told a transport fringe at the Labour conference: “The bus subsidy got out of control under Ken. That's why we've planned a 40 per cent reduction while maintaining the majority of the bus network. This is an example of doing more with less.”
However, transport experts claimed some of the busiest services would have fewer buses, while political opponents warned that fares would rise.
Jo de Bank from London Travelwatch said: “A reduction would almost certainly mean fewer buses, cuts on routes and longer waits for passengers.
“We are concerned about [these] cuts as they affect the most vulnerable disproportionately as buses are the most accessible form of public transport.”
Labour's London transport spokewoman Val Shawcross added: “With fares already set to rise above inflation every year and with services being reduced, further cuts would decimate London's bus services and lead to even higher fares.”
Mr Ranger said it was “nonsense” to suggest bus services would suffer, adding that any changes would be “marginal” and would be introduced over eight years. He said: “Greatly reducing the subsidy does not mean greatly reducing services. The Mayor wants to preserve the improvements the subsidy brought as he believes passionately in supporting bus users and that the capital's bus service is indispensable.”
TfL has conceded that bus routes with low demand could be scaled back.
The bus subsidy cut is part of £5 billion “efficiency savings” from the Mayor's Tube and bus budget which he announced last year.
Before TfL was established in 2000, the annual subsidy was £41 million. By the end of Ken Livingstone's second term it had reached £560 million.
It was due to rise to £721 million by 2018. However, under Mr Johnson's revised plan it would fall to £452 million, 40 per cent lower than originally planned.
The subsidy means 40 per cent of passengers — including the unemployed, elderly and children — travel free or at a heavily discounted rate. Mr Johnson is understood to be keen to protect concessionary fares.
The Mayor has been negotiating with transport ministers to protect London's transport settlement and guarantee the future of the bus service, the Tube upgrade and Crossrail.
Reader views (27)
I came to London a few weeks ago and I have to say I was shocked at the amount of traffic in central London and is probably the reason why buses turn up in 3's. Personally I don't think the bus service should have cuts but it would be better for London to become a car free zone between certain times so buses will be able to to stay on there timetable and arrive at the correct times. And as for old people and children getting free travel is ridiculous some old people probably earn more in there pension that some one on a low paid wage and they have to pay. Free travel should be means tested.
- Shane, UK, 01/10/2010 23:13
Report abuse
To all those ranting about the new Boris bus, could I make one thing clear...?
It is the world's first electric bus. It will have very, very low pollution levels (that's pollution not Co2).
London is in line to be fined £300m for busting pollution limits. £11m for a new range of super-clean electric buses is a bargain and will play well in the EU courts when we are pleading for clemency.
PS - the pollution limits were breached under Ken Livingstone's plans.
- J H Holloway, battersea, London, 01/10/2010 17:24
Report abuse
To those complaining about lots of empty buses running around - what you see in one location might not be representative. Places like Oxford Circus are the terminus for quite a few routes, so you can't expect the buses to be full right at the beginning/end of their routes - a few stops later they can be completely full.
The Borismaster is an absolute insult - while complaining that there's so little money to go round, they're wasting millions developing something we don't need - there are plenty of perfectly good double decker designs available off the shelf which are working perfectly well at the moment, and at a fraction of the cost.
- Moogal, London, 29/09/2010 10:09
Report abuse
If the Present Government state that "they see Trams as being BOTH Greener and Value For Money":
It JARS with Boris Abandoning KEN's Admirable CROSS-RIVER TRAM Project;
Die-Hard Selfish Local Residents Stopping Ken's Shepherds Bush to Uxbridge TRAM-ROUTE;
Boris & Kulveer Stopping the Extensions to Croydon's Tram-Routes;
And The Proposed OXFORD Street TRAM-ROUTE has been still-born.
Meanwhile:
BORIS-BUS has already Cost Millions;
Existing BENDY-BUS FEETS are being replaced at an additional Cost of More MILLIONS, by New 1/2 Capacity Double-Deckers.
Where is the Prudent Financial Sense, whilst a 40% Reduction in the Bus Subsidy is being enacted?
- CHRISTOPHER CROWDY, Chelsea SW3, 28/09/2010 21:27
Report abuse
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex
So Ken didn't increase bus fares by 12.7% in 2005 then? Or tube fares by 4%? The following year they also rose by similar amounts, apparently. So when did he ever reduce fares?
Have you ever travelled on public transport in London during rush hour? How exactly would the already overcrowded system cope with more passengers (ie. motorists) while they're trying to build new tram lines?
And Manchester doesn't have a Mayor, just a powerless Lord Mayor, who has nothing to do with public transport. But similarly, they do have lots of empty buses clogging up the city centre during the day.
And the Metrolink extension is just that, because currently it only serves the north and south of the city and has just two lines. Not the same as closing and digging up London's already busy roads to replace existing bus routes with new trams at, you guessed it, the taxpayers' expense.
- paul mcdee, london, 28/09/2010 20:46
Report abuse
Why have subsidies in the first place if the company can't make a profit then there's something wrong with the business model, ban all private vehicles being on London roads between 7am and 9-30am and 4-30pm to 6-30pm to give the buses free movement, then have a look at the number of buses on the road because there does seem an awful lot of them all behind one and other.
- James, Grays, 28/09/2010 19:56
Report abuse
Paul McDee not only did Ken REDUCE fares (it is only the plonkers who pay "£2 cash fares) but he also had a 1 day bus pass which could be bought from RTMs or shops and is something that Boris has withdrawn!!!
The biggest irony of this story is while London frets over its Bus Services Manchester has just got the go ahead from this government for most of the planned extensions to its Metrolink Tram network while the new Transport Secretary for buses and Trams Norman Baker announced while opening an extension to the tram depot that he wants to investigate why most of the tram schemes planned when Labour came to power failed to be built? - (i.e cost of utility diversions see Oxford Street re Crossrail) as the new government is keen to press ahead with trams and light rail as they form a better basis than buses for getting car drivers out of cars and onto public transport.
The big problem for London is that Boris (with encouragement from this paper) abandoned the Tram and light rail schemes on which many millions had been spent and if the new government announce funds for this type of transport then because of Mother Hubbard Boris Londons cupboard will be bare!!!
As Boris should know Tempus Fugus and now we have a government that sees trams and light rail as a VFM option of providing greener transport will London loose out to cities like Leeds,liverpool and Sheffield which have schemes awaiting funding?
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 28/09/2010 19:05
Report abuse
Looking at these ludicrous subsidy amounts it's clear that politicians have absolutely no idea how to manage our money or run the transport system.
We pay extortionate fares which are some of the highest in Europe but they still need to prop up the system with even more taxes.
And why don't we have school buses for certain routes during rush hour? It would certainly ease overcrowding and also ensure kids get to school/home safely.
- bob forton, london, 28/09/2010 17:01
Report abuse
Erm - can I just point out to you kneejerk anti-poor, anti-London commenters that the tube is subsidised to the tune of 80p against the bus's 30p?
Hello?
What you are saying is, you want to stop those in poorly paid jobs being able to get to work, by putting up fairs (because for all Boris's waffle, that's what's going to happen). What happens when those poor people who clean the hotels after you've gone to bed can't get to work? What about road sweepers? What about poor women ferrying their babies to hospital?
Last time the bus fares went up, it was estimated that the network lost 180k journeys. That was poor people, not able to take the bus. It is essential for the economy of London that cheap transport solutions exist. There's no other way round it.
I have two young children and I do not own a car. I use my local buses often and I'm damn grateful for the services. I do not begrudge subsidising mine, or anyone else's kids going by bus. I do not wish to ghetto-ise children, or the poor because they cannot afford to travel.
- Cait Hurley, Streatham, England, 28/09/2010 16:50
Report abuse
Kulveer Ranger,the boy wonder transport adviser to the waffling scarecrow has got to be the biggest waste of space in local government.If Boris needs transport advice then get someone from Paris or Berlin.
- colin, barking essex, 28/09/2010 16:47
Report abuse
Bring in a 20p flate fare for children, this will stop a lot of overweight little darlings filling the buses to go one stop.
- Vince London, West London, 28/09/2010 16:18
Report abuse
Waiting for a bus in Oxford Street it seemed that eight of one number were in convoy all empty. Then latter catching a No 25 bendy bus, most seemed to get on at the back and I couldn't help wondering how many paid.
- alan, England., 28/09/2010 16:09
Report abuse
MAKE THE RUDE , SEATED SCHOOL CHILDERN PAY THEIR WAY!!!!
- SUE, SOUTH NORWOOD, 28/09/2010 15:09
Report abuse
John, couldn't agree more. Far too many people are getting free journeys and I can often barely squeeze onto a bus filled to bursting with mostly freeloaders I'm subsidising.
It's actually a good metaphor for the country after 13 years of Labour - far too many people living off the state being paid for by far too few taxpayers.
- Kevin T, Beckenham, Kent, 28/09/2010 15:07
Report abuse
Why are only FOUR out of ten paying anything for their journey? This is a real scandal.
Millionaire pensioners in Belgravia should not be subsidized cleaners on poverty wages.
Kids should be limited to trips to school only, unless the parents are hard up. Again, the working poor are subsidizing the wealthy again
- John, Twickenham, 28/09/2010 14:49
Report abuse
Current bus routes are inefficient. Too many and too long, leading to half-hour waits and then three turn up at once. Restructure them into shorter routes, connecting with each other at hub locations.
It needn't cost more this way. Just reprogram Oyster so if you've paid for a bus journey in the sixty previous minutes, this one is assumed to be a free continuation of the same journey.
The advantage: just get on any bus headed in the right direction, and change where necessary, like we're used to on the tube. With no need to wait for a particular route, there would be no long waits. With short routes, there would be no three-at-once syndrome.
- Nigel, London, 28/09/2010 14:47
Report abuse
to start wouldn't be good idea to cut down boris's huge salary?
- fodil, london,uk, 28/09/2010 14:25
Report abuse
Just charge any person taking a box of chicken and chips onto a bus a quid. That should clear up any shortfall.
Personally, I don't see why children cannot pay a nominal fare of say 50p for a days travel. Used to pay in my day, unless you lived more than three miles away from your school. Most of the journeys I witness taken by children are only a few stops.
- Mark, Gerrymandered African Republic of Southwark, 28/09/2010 13:59
Report abuse
The gridlock caused by an excessive number of nearly empty buses along Oxford Street and the west end is disgraceful. Why on earth during the quiet periods are these buses not kept off the road? It environmental and economic insanity.
Why also during rush hour(s) is the congestion charge not hiked in an intelligent way so that buses taking people to work can make haste?. It would raise money for TFL avoiding cuts and save having to reduce the bus service, especially in the morning which is at capacity already.
Sorry I forgot most of those wielding the axe travel by taxi !
- Sam, London,UK., 28/09/2010 13:55
Report abuse
Hybrid buses would make immense savings and vast improvements to the environment. By the way Mr Ranger, a massive fan of yours. I'd like to see you fight Boris for the London Mayor spot.
- Liberal, London, West Side..., 28/09/2010 13:50
Report abuse
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex
How deluded are you? You're talking about the same wasteful, spendthrift Ken saving Londoners money by changing a few bus routes? He probably spent any money saved on whisky anyway.
And did he ever put fares up after promising not to?
If Londoners wanted him why did they vote him out in favour of Boris? Most would be grateful if Ken just went away for good.
Don't hold your breath regarding his glorious return to office although I hear N.Korea might have a vacancy. Can't see it, though. They haven't got any money.
- paul mcdee, london, 28/09/2010 13:49
Report abuse
Roy,to complicated me ol mucker, get rid of TfL and lets have our transport returned to us, we (all of us) have an input into the fare structure, timetables etc, and if we don't like it,we resort to the ballot box.
- Charlie, London, 28/09/2010 13:47
Report abuse
Mark: the private bus operators are merely contractors to TfL. TfL decides which routes go where and sets the fares. The contractors bid to run the routes and the lowest bidder wins. If it happens that the fare revenue from that route is higher than the contractor's bid, then there is no subsidy (and TfL keeps the difference). If the fare revenue is lower than the bid, then TfL's subsidy makes up the difference.
- Roy, England, 28/09/2010 13:05
Report abuse
Spot on Mark, poor Arriva,(and this is just one opperator) we hand them a fortune of our hard earned salary by way of tax,yet in 2009 their bus opperation made a profit of 121.7 million pounds, and they paid out record dividends to their shareholders, are we all bloody mad or what?
- Jason Bryant, London, 28/09/2010 13:02
Report abuse
So will millions of pounds still get poured in the Boris Master black hole together with the millions of pounds being wasted on the Dogma of removing Artic buses (passengers on the highly suitable 149 loose their buses soon!!).
Its time to both call a halt to BOTH these schemes and get the Artics back on Londons streets before the reach Malta!!! -(anyone who has been to Malta can imagine an Artic bus taking one up those cliffs!).
So what is Boris going to do given that he has no idea of how much could be saved by joining routes to-gether when all he and his Ranger have done is withdraw Artics and re-new bus contracts with no thought to better use of buses.
How grateful Londoners will be to get Ken back as Mayor who actually did things that SAVED money like extending the 170 to Victoria and thus allowing removal of the 239 which meant fewer buses and joining of places together thus increasing the number of passengers.
Boris is a deadweight which London commuters can ill afford to wait 2 years to be rid of.
Just goes to show how Green Cameron really is I suppose!
- Melvyn Windebank, Canvey Island, Essex, 28/09/2010 13:01
Report abuse
In effect, we are talking about a £108m per annum cut.
It would make far more sense to stop replacing bendy bus routes with conventional buses (this costs more to run, as you need more buses on the route to offer the same capacity as per bendies), and to stop wasting money on the vanity 'New-Routemaster' bus. Yes, it looks nice, but if we are having to save money, surely it makes sense to buy standard 'off the shelf' buses, instead of expensive bespoke ones.
- Mark Lee, Vauxhall, 28/09/2010 12:52
Report abuse
Why the hell are we handing out a 40% subsidy to these PRIVATE companies, I run a company, and without any subsidy from tax payers, why not cut out the middle man and send the 1.7 million pounds of OUR money direct to their shareholders, better still return ALL our public transport into OUR ownership,
- Mark, London, 28/09/2010 12:50
Report abuse
