Skip to main content

Free bus pass value for money. Keep your hands off Mr Clegg.

Free bus passes for the elderly are under threat with funding reduced by more than a quarter. Some transport bosses have warned that the scheme will become unaffordable.

Nick Clegg wants to restrict eligibility, arguing it is unfair that wealthy pensioners should also get the  concession. But does Mr Clegg really understand the value of the bus pass scheme for the elderly? And what of the consequences of means testing? Would it really be fair that one pensioner who judiciously saved for retirement should be denied a bus pass, while another who did not do so receives it?

Not long ago I met a lady coming off the train laden with several bags which I offered to help carry. "I'm only going to the bus stop." She explained, which was handy because I was catching a bus too.

I had daily gone to the station by car but now I was using my free bus pass. There was an hourly service that passed through my village and stopped at Leighton Buzzard station.

 "Are you going far?" I asked.
"I'm visiting my daughter" She explained. "She lives in Nottingham."
"Nottingham?"
"Yes."
"But how are you getting to Nottingham from here?" Nottingham was a long distance.
"I'm  getting the bus to Milton Keynes."

She would get another bus, and then another. She had planned it out, and she had done it before.
It took a long time but she could travel free, and that made all the difference.

We were united by our bus passes. I was saving fuel and she was saving money. We were both keeping fit. Or at least she was.

Bus passes do more than simply giving free travel. They enable people to get out and about, to maintain friendships and links with the community. They can prevent loneliness and isolation. They can bring people together; keep people in touch.

A recent study by researchers at Imperial College, London, found that free bus passes encourage the over 60s to be more active. They examined data from the National Travel Survey from 2005 to 2008. The free bus pass was introduced in 2006. They found that free bus passes had encouraged holders to walk more, at least three or four times a week; good for health and ultimately the health budget. A small amount of regular exercise such as walking reduces the risk of disability in older people. 

Postscript

A principal argument against the universality of the bus pass is the apparent unfairness: why should millionaires get one free too, surely that is unfair. Well it might be if indeed many millionaires applied for one.  But this kind of argument seeks to make a general case by example of an extreme. When I ask what threshold of 'wealth' there should be I rarely get an answer that makes much sense, or that wouldn't create more unfairness at the margin.  I have yet to see any flesh on the bones of Mr Clegg's position.

We should make no mistake that the real agenda here is cuts. The cost to the exchequer of free bus passes is around £1bn, that of the winter fuel allowance is £3bn.  Once again it is easy for politicians to divide the community on the issue of 'fairness'; what they won't yet do is to say what their real policy would be.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

Prioritising people in nursing care.

There has been in recent years concern that care in the NHS has not been sufficiently 'patient centred', or responsive to the needs of the patient on a case basis. It has been felt in care that it as been the patient who has had to adapt to the regime of care, rather than the other way around. Putting patients at the centre of care means being responsive to their needs and supporting them through the process of health care delivery.  Patients should not become identikit sausages in a production line. The nurses body, the Nursing and Midwifery Council has responded to this challenge with a revised code of practice reflection get changes in health and social care since the previous code was published in 2008. The Code describes the professional standards of practice and behaviour for nurses and midwives. Four themes describe what nurses and midwives are expected to do: prioritise people practise effectively preserve safety, and promote professionalism and trust. The

When Finance Drives Destruction

Tackling climate change means stopping the funding of rainforest destruction, says a significant study commissioned by the World Wildlife Fund.  The UK's financial services have provided directly over £8.7 billion to 167 different traders, processors, and buyers of forest-risk commodities (cocoa, rubber, timber, soy, beef, palm oil, pulp & paper) from 2013 to 2021.   With direct and indirect investment,  the figure rises to a staggering £200 bn.  Whilst not all that investment is in destructive projects,  the study concludes there is little transparency on the risk.  Finance is the oil in the economic machine.  But it also drives decisions. We all know the importance of money. We borrow to invest. So much depends on it, such as company pensions.  Do we really know what our pension pots are doing? We invest for the future. But what kind of future? Is all investment good?  Much investment is bad. Investment drives the nature of our economy. It drives our decisions as individuals,