Agenda item

Members were asked to consider several questions relating to fares and ticketing for the bus service.

·       Is it right that the ticketing structure gives discounts to regular uses and charges walk-in users a higher rate? Does this encourage people to use the service? How will the long-term impact to working from home impact this?

·       Are uniform flat fares desirable, or would graduated fares which were simpler than the current offer be preferable?

·       Should fares be the same across all districts?

·       Would a contactless capping system as used in London work well here?

·       Should concessionary fare schemes (currently offered to under-19s and for the elderly and disabled people) be extended to any further customer groups?

It was noted that offering lower fares to new/walk-on customers could work well in encouraging people to try the bus service, as could promotions such as group ticketing.

Members also discussed the fares offered in other areas, such as Edinburgh and London. Edinburgh offered a capped fare on travel through the day, as well as a cap on individual journeys. London used flat fares with the Oyster card. These schemes were praised for being simple to use, particularly if prospective passengers were unfamiliar with the route or may make more spontaneous journeys. However, it was noted that West Yorkshire as a region had different needs and challenges than Edinburgh and London, and we were multi-centered, with a number of city and town centres that are major destination points, and our journeys may be more complicated than those of people in Edinburgh or London.

It was questioned whether the choice was between flat fares and capped fares, or whether both could be implemented together. Officers advised that a combination of both was possible with a flat fare for single journeys and a daily cap, and this would mean that passengers would not need to tap off the bus, which would be required if more complicated fares were used. The M-card day ticket currently worked similarly to a cap system in the region, however, passengers unfamiliar with the bus service may not be aware of this. Passengers were often given a particular operator’s own day ticket, which would not be accepted by other operators.

Members raised the following other questions and comments:

·       If an Oyster-card style scheme were implemented, who would pay for the computer system? The Government had identified they would fund this, but there were questions as to how long this would take and what would be required to make existing systems compatible with this.

·       Had research been done on what models best drove usage? Certain models, such as flat fares, may seem attractive but be less relevant at a time when only a small minority of users paid through cash. Officers advised that the data and needs relating to our region were being examined closely, rather than simply adopting what models had worked well elsewhere.

·       The importance of marketing was highlighted, with buses being noted as appearing less effective at promotions compared to rail. It was anticipated that the loss of patronage caused by the pandemic would cause this to change, with new discount schemes potentially due to be announced soon.

·       Flat fares could risk making short journeys more costly, when bus journeys were already viewed to be expensive. The potential of having multiple levels of flat fares was discussed, to better differentiate between long distances and short city journeys.

·       The need to consider people who use cash was raised, to ensure that they weren’t left behind in regard to these improvements.

·       It was noted that in some areas around the world, LTAs were implementing bus services which were free at the point of use and were funded by taxpayers.