England’s buses: more ambition needed to undo a decade of decline and get bums back on seats, Transport Committee tells Govt
|
A new Transport Committee report (attached) calls on the Government
to reform the way local bus services are funded and to adopt a
national ambition for a minimum level of public transport
connectivity. This would protect residents in England's towns and
villages from becoming increasingly isolated, MPs say. The
last decade has seen bus routes and service frequencies diminish in
many parts of the country, directly in tandem with a drop in
ridership. ...Request free
trial
A new Transport Committee report (attached) calls on the Government to reform the way local bus services are funded and to adopt a national ambition for a minimum level of public transport connectivity. This would protect residents in England's towns and villages from becoming increasingly isolated, MPs say. The last decade has seen bus routes and service frequencies diminish in many parts of the country, directly in tandem with a drop in ridership. Department for Transport (DfT) data shows that the number of bus journeys taken in England outside of London fell from 4.6 billion in 2009 to 3.6 billion in 2024, a reduction of 21.7%. The County Councils Network reported that, between 2019 and 2024, bus services decreased by 18% on average in areas covered by county and unitary councils. The countryside charity CPRE told the Committee that 56% of small towns were in a “transport desert”. According to the Health Foundation, public funding for bus services fell from 2009/2010 for a decade until the Covid pandemic saw funding levels almost double to keep them going. Then in 2023/24 the public subsidy returned to a similar level as in 2017/18. Despite this period of decline, buses remain the most-used form of public transport in the country. The Government now seeks to turn the sector's poor fortunes around with provisions in its Bus (No.2) Services Bill. The legislation aims to: make it easier for more councils to set up franchised services, like those used in Manchester and London; to support collaborations between private bus firms and councils under Enhanced Partnerships; and to provide a definition of and require local authorities to list ‘socially necessary services'. A full summary of the Transport Committee's main conclusions and recommendations is included below. Transport Committee Chair Ruth Cadbury MP said: “Buses are fundamental to many people's quality of life. Without them, residents on low incomes, older and younger people, face social exclusion or being cut off from employment and services like hospitals or education. In many areas that is tragically already the case. “The DfT should change the way funding is provided to ensure councils and bus firms would be committed to running socially necessary services, and, on that basis, should also adopt an ambition for all councils to develop and maintain a minimum level of public transport connectivity. To achieve this the sector will need greater financial certainty, which is why we say the Government should announce funding in five-year blocks. “Those most affected by unreliable or even non-existent buses include the young, who need them to get to school, college, university and their first jobs. Denying young people these experiences denies them their life chances. We call for a universal, free bus pass for all under-22s to equalise opportunity. “While the bus fare caps have been beneficial, the Government has yet to spell out a coherent strategy of what they aim to achieve, and whether more targeted options could produce better outcomes. “Franchising works for London and Manchester but is unlikely to be a silver bullet for the rest of the country. Many local councils' workforces now lack the skills and capacity to suddenly start overseeing bus services. We therefore say that the Bus Centre of Excellence should be expanded to provide more targeted support and training. “While the Government's Bus Services Bill contains positive ideas, the Transport Committee's report says ministers should go further to get bums back on seats.” The real-world consequences of bus decline One anecdote provided to the Committee by the charity Sustrans, from a young man in Pembrokeshire, described how they were denied a job because the employer said they wouldn't be able to rely on a bus for their commute. “We've had people try to use the buses before… it just doesn't work […] you'll probably have to drive or have some alternative way to get in,” they were told. A woman in her seventies from Dorset said she could no longer travel independently after all her local buses were cancelled. Unable to drive, she now relies on neighbours for essential trips and has become “far more isolated, lonely and depressed.” Meanwhile, Research by KPMG estimated that bus passengers spend £39.1bn annually in local businesses, and that over 2.2 million commuters rely on buses to get to work, generating £72bn in collective income each year. The same analysis suggested that every £1 invested in bus services would yield an economic benefit ranging from £4.55 to £5. Safeguarding ‘socially necessary' routes The Committee heard that, amid a backdrop of scarce funding and revenue, bus firms have been incentivised to cut less commercially viable services and prioritise those that attract more fare revenue, leaving some communities even more isolated. DfT has said local authorities will be left to determine their own socially necessary routes. But in principle they would ensure that communities are not cut off from being able to access the most vital services, such as their local hospital, schools and other important amenities. The Government has said it wants councils and bus firms to earmark and protect those socially necessary services. But the Committee recommends that ministers ensure this by ringfencing a portion of the funding it gives locally so that there is a practical requirement to protect those socially necessary routes. A minimum level of connectivity DfT should adopt a national ambition for councils to provide a minimum level of public transport connectivity by the end of this Parliament (2028-29). The Committee is calling for this minimum level to be considered regionally as well as being supported by long-term government funding. Decisions should be made locally about whether this minimum level of connectivity can best be delivered by a conventional, timetabled bus service, or instead by alternative models such as demand-responsive transport (DRT). This is where typically smaller buses can collect and drop off passengers from locations by request, making them more flexible. Five-year funding deals The report notes that DfT said in its written evidence that “investment in measures to improve journey times and reliability […] promotes patronage and brings down operating costs,” enabling reinvestment in services and creating “a virtuous cycle”. Yet government funding has for years been provided on an annual basis and subject to change, making it difficult for councils and bus firms to plan ahead. However, in the Spending Review (June 2025) the Government confirmed it would spend £900m a year on bus services for the next three years. The Chancellor also announced funding settlements for city region mayors to spend on all forms of transport, from 2027-28 to 2031-32. The Committee welcomes the Government's longer-term approach, but recommends that it set five-year settlements for both capital and revenue funding. This would enable all transport authorities to make sustainable improvements. Young people's life chances constrained Limited services and high fares make it harder for young people to reach college, training , entry-level jobs, or shift-based work. Somerset Council told us some local young people faced three to four hours of daily travel to reach education, affecting both their learning and wellbeing. England's patchwork of local youth concessions requires a coherent national approach to ensure fair access and to drive economic growth and equal opportunity. DfT's review of the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme should consider piloting a free bus pass for under-22s, valid for travel at any time of day. The bus fare cap lacks a strategy Bus and coach fares in the UK have increased by 505% since 1987, far outpacing inflation over the same period (280%), as well as rail fares and motoring costs. Between 2022-23 and 2023-24, the bus fare cap helped bus ridership in largely rural areas rise by 10.1%. But the Committee argues that the Government's bus fare caps, though positive, are only a short-term measure. DfT should develop, in partnership with local transport authorities and within 12 months, clear strategic priorities for what bus fares are aiming to achieve. It should articulate the strategic purpose of fare structures and guide consistent, transparent fare-setting at a local level. Franchising not a silver bullet Franchising sees a local transport authority decide details such as routes, fares, service levels, and vehicle standards. Bus companies then compete for contracts to operate those services. Long established in London and recently adopted in Manchester, DfT is now taking forward franchising pilots in York and North Yorkshire, Cheshire West and Chester. When done successfully, franchising can offer a pathway to more integrated and accountable services. However, many hollowed-out local authorities currently lack the legal, commercial, and operational capacity to take on the risks and challenges of franchising. DfT's Bus Centre of Excellence should be expanded to provide more targeted support to local authorities that may look to adopt franchising. Grants should be weighted towards rural areas Two major sources of state funding, the Bus Service Operators Grant and capital funding for Bus Service Improvement Plans, are calculated in a way that fails to recognise the distinct challenges of running services in rural areas. Operating costs in isolated areas are often higher due to longer journey distances and low population densities, yet the services are just as vital to those residents who use them. DfT should consider introducing a rural weighting into its revised Bus Service Improvement Plan funding formula to reflect the higher per-passenger costs. This would help ensure that ambitions to improve are not undermined by geographic disadvantage. The Bus Service Operators Grant provides funds based on how much fuel is used. As urban services tend to consume more fuel per mile compared with rural services, this leaves rural services in receipt of relatively less funding for having to travel longer distances. The Committee also says DfT should reform the Grant so that it would instead be based on passenger journeys, which would further incentivise operators to grow their passenger numbers. Note to editors
In response to the House of Commons Transport Committee
report 'Buses Connecting Communities', CPRE head of policy Paul
Miner said:
|