(18 Oct 2018, 9:41 pm)James101 wrote Councillor Tett sums up up succinctly. Councils are forced to provide free travel via ENCTS yet are in no way obliged to provide the service in the first place. There’s only one way it could have ever ended, marginal socially necessary services are withdrawn hand over fist.

ENCTS is a failed system. 


The various figures online point to around 1bn ENCTS journeys being made annually just in England. If every journey was surcharged by £1 (payable by the passenger, kept by the local authority by way of deducting said £1 fares from bus company’s ENCTS reimbursement total) there would be an awful lot more money to keep services operating in the first place.

Trouble is it would now be politically unpalatable to reverse one of the few socially progressive policies this country has seen since 1979. Also, would a flat rate surcharge be fair or indeed, sustainable? The biggest problem seems to be for bus companies away from the conurbations, presumably because the re-imbursement is a lower percentage and a higher proportion of passengers LA-wide are concessionaries. The latter due to a combination of less full fare paying adults using buses and the better life expectancy. Remember, the entitlement is linked to the state Pension age which is increasing, whilst in many parts of the country, life expectancy has stalled (and in some areas has been stalled for many years). 
There is also the question of what happens in areas where Concessionary travel is free on Rail? The general public aren't interested in the subtlety of who subsidises what, but is it really fair that Pensioners without access to rail (the vast majority) should pay for their public transport, whilst those with a car or within walking distance of a rail/tram stop continue to get free travel? Further, if this leads to more defections from commercial bus services to Rail, will the full farepayer suffer (as usual) yet more service cuts?