(22 Oct 2018, 9:54 pm)James101 wrote I entirely agree it would be politically unpalatable to remove or reduce ENCTS given the demographic it serves. 

I'd be interested to hear why you think a system that would generate around £1bn per year would be less sustainable than the current money-pit system? 

You'll not be surprised to discover that given I'm against completely free ECNTS bus travel, I agree free rail travel for pass holders should also be replaced with a subsidised fare system. 



I'll set out my stall on the issue clearly here. Access to transport for those with mobility challenges is something I wholeheartedly believe in. In fact, I'm a volunteer driver for my local community transport charity. As it happens, a good number of the clients I ferry around could have once made their journeys by conventional bus, had they not been withdrawn. I'm in favour of a sustainable system, which ENCTS is not.

I think it's a tad facetious to jump from ECNTS contributions to NHS cuts Given that ENCTS wasn't introduced until 2008, the vast majority of current users weren't 'paying in to the system' expecting a bus pass in return, it's very much a Brucie Bonus for them and I've pretty much accepted there'll be barely a state pension left by the time I retire, let alone a free bus pass. 

I tend not to agree that the issue should be pushed back to the operator to fix. Your point assumes all operators are ran like Stagecoach & Go-Ahead, with large profits and shareholders. The reality is these companies have already moved away from the services most threatened by ENCTS, the non-core, often rural community route. These are left to marginal operators such as Scarlet Band and PCL Travel to fight over the scraps of what is left of the subsided network. These aren't mega-corporations, these are effectively family business. If they take any less money for there carriage of ENCTS passengers they'll simply be forced to withdraw, as is already happening up and down the country. 

The issue of operators unnecessarily taking funds for profitable contracted services is a scandal. It's unlikely to be repeated, however, as outside of PTE areas, more and more councils have a budget of £0 for subsidising services. If £1 surcharges were introduced, my fag-packet maths works out that could re-intoduce around 1000 extra buses on the road across the country, with many more if services require only part-subsidy. 

I'd be interested to hear any views from forum members who think a ENCTS surcharge is explicitly a bad idea.

I agree it is a 'Brucey Bonus' in the context free travel isn't something they were expecting when they started work. Having paid in to the system, I don't see any issue in them getting something as a reward. Something to assist them. Just like the TV licence perk, war time pension allowance and heating allowance. 
Whether me, you or uncle Tom Cobley get a state pension when we hit retirement is a moot point in this discussion. This is about now and what I think will be a disaster if the surcharge you propose is introduced. 

To touch on your point about the smaller independents picking up work. 
A number of those operators were around running work prior to 86. They ran around offering services between the two pass systems and have done since.
Yes, they may operate marginal tendered lifeline services - but a number of those services were abandoned well before the current system came in to play. A number since.
Any number of factors exist in those routes success or lack of success. I think we all know that it doesn't just boil down to the ENCTS pass scheme. 

Your point about the surcharge raising funds and providing 1000 extra buses, assumes the current rate of central government funding maintains the current status quo. 
Any drop in funding or a push on other vital services in an LA area, could easily see funds diverted or consolidated elsewhere. 
As an example, some LA's have levied surcharges on green waste collections. I haven't seen an improvement in bin collection service. I've never seen the frequency increase (quite the opposite).

One quick question though. 
The surcharge you propose. Will the operator still recieve support from PTE's/LA's under the current 'no better/no worse off' guise or will that change?