London parents, did you know about public transport changes?

[SilverDragonfly1]

If so, apologies for bringing it up again but I haven't noticed it being discussed here.

One of the bailout conditions for TfL is to stop allowing children free travel on buses, meaning you may need to add bus fares into your budget next term. This is temporary, but I can't find any indication of how temporary. I have to admit, free travel was what allowed us to keep above water as a family when my son went to secondary- if it hadn't been there, his first choice school would have really impacted our budget.

If anyone has better info about the decision than me (not hard really), please share.

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

Lordfrontpaw good for him- I want to preserve my child’s back!

[Pelleas]

OnlyFoolsnMothers Any idea could be dismissed on the grounds that it might be carried out badly. If we take the view 'Let's not do that in case we mess it up' we'd never do anything.

[SilverDragonfly1]

Just to point out, TfL is entirely subsidised by tax and fare paying people in London and Greater London. This means parents are paying for their children's travel, and those without children are paying for them too (not any taxpayers outside the area). There's no question of Londoners being given free stuff (ever!). You can be certain that adult fares will not come down to compensate for child fares coming back. The Mayor has already said they will go up above inflation.

I agree with those who feel travel for children should be free everywhere. I also believe the government should be obliged to make sure there is a decent amount of public transport for everyone. But as long as we vote for low taxes and respond to the media's constant horror of OMG SOCIALISM!, that won't happen.

If someone has something you don't, don't try and get it taken away from them, whether it's money, jobs, decent conditions or anything else people need. Instead, think about how you can get the same- petitioning the government, using your vote, speaking to your employer (and joining a union!) and so on.

I'm glad I've let some people know what's happening and very glad that so many more knowledgeable people have shared their understanding about it.

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

Pelleas it’s not a vague “we can’t do anything” it’s a direct example of the way we as a country means test. Anyway travel is for children, a child of a better paid adult isn’t worth less a child of someone on min wage.

[Pelleas]

Pelleas it’s not a vague “we can’t do anything” it’s a direct example of the way we as a country means test.

So we should aim to means test in a more sensible way.

Anyway travel is for children, a child of a better paid adult isn’t worth less a child of someone on min wage.

It's got absolutely nothing to do with how much a child is 'worth' (something that's completely unquantifiable anyway). It should be based on whether, as a household, the children's travel costs are affordable without causing hardship.

Put another way, why should someone on minimum wage whose travel costs to enable them to work might mean the choice between having the heating on, or having something to eat, pay for their travel while the children of millionaires (and for that matter, millionaire pensioners) who can easily afford get it for nothing?

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

Put another way, why should someone on minimum wage whose travel costs to enable them to work might mean the choice between having the heating on, or having something to eat, pay for their travel while the children of millionaires (and for that matter, millionaire pensioners) who can easily afford get it for nothing?

Children paying will not make travel for adults cheaper. Or do you think travel for adults should be means tested?

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

Also means testing of children will push more households into such circumstances you describe, does their child walk to school or eat a meal that evening!

[Pelleas]

Or do you think travel for adults should be means tested?

Yes - as I said in my earlier post - 'All public transport concessions, regardless of age or location, should be means-tested on the basis of household income.'

Also means testing of children will push more households into such circumstances you describe, does their child walk to school or eat a meal that evening!

Not if it's done properly! The whole idea of means testing would be to stop lower-income families having to make those choices.

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

There’s plenty of people who will be on the boarder line- what do you propose the limit be?

[Pelleas]

what do you propose the limit be?

Well, if we accept what you say earlier that existing means-testing for benefits is flawed, I think we'd have to start from scratch by surveying people to get an idea of the sort of level of disposable income (which would probably be area-dependent) that would allow travel to be comfortably paid for - so I wouldn't like to suggest an income level without research to back it up.

Alternatively, if it could be agreed that any existing means-tested benefits were reasonable, it could be an add-on to those - so free for anyone on Universal Credit, free for people on Working Tax Credit, free for anyone on State Pension for example.

[Malmontar]

@pelleas I agree if your idea but it sounds like it'll cost more in admin fees to implement than money it would save tbh. This is the reason things like universal credits and FSM are unfair for many, including the self-employed. I remember when I was in college my friend got EMA. His family was absolutely loaded but they were self employed and played the system. This is not the case with all self employed people ofc but it's such a complex thing; asking to measure how much disposable income someone has.

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

You also have to appreciate there will be children whose parents don’t care to apply for their free travel, neglectful parents - and it will be the children who suffer. Just allow all children to travel to school for free, it will better for society as a whole.

[Pelleas]

but it's such a complex thing; asking to measure how much disposable income someone has.

Yes, I agree, but I was thinking of that more as a way of establishing levels to be applied universally, rather than being done for every case. Some of the responsibility for budgeting would have to sit with the individual but if a survey showed, say, 95% of families in area X could afford travel costs on an income of £35,000 then the level for that area would be set at £35,000. The remaining 5% might have an exemption that would be covered by another scheme (e.g. disability) or might have to learn to budget differently.

[Lordfrontpaw]

@OnlyFoolsnMothers

Lordfrontpaw good for him- I want to preserve my child’s back!

Only when he hasn’t got bags - dear god my back is knackered so I wouldn’t let him lug around heavy bags. He is build like an ox but his older cousin damaged his back carrying heavy backpacks to school and back.

[formerbabe]

Our family is at that level where we don't qualify for extra help but aren't really high earners. This will massively affect us. My ds's school lunches cost me about £70 a month...it's a stretch. Paying for travel will make things so much harder.

When we didn't have a car, we would use buses all the time...it would be cost me about £100 a month for me. If I'd have had to pay for my DC too then it would have really had an effect on where we could have gone especially in school holidays.

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

Pelleas so £35k - mortgage- utilities- food- and then you expect money left over to send 1, 2 possibly 3 children ?! Love the concept to better budget an already stretched budget- said by the most out of touch in society.
Wouldn’t work in London as you have million pound houses alongside council properties so an area idea can be dismissed.
What do you actually have against giving ALL children free travel?

[Bojohair]

I am not sure that is correct about TFL funding being entirely subsidised by fare payers. Unless I misunderstood what was being said?

tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/how-we-work/how-we-are-funded

[Pelleas]

You also have to appreciate there will be children whose parents don’t care to apply for their free travel, neglectful parents - and it will be the children who suffer.

But in those circumstances, travel is likely to be the least of their problems, so what we should be doing is making sure those children receive the intervention they need in their lives as a whole, not covering the problem up with the sticking plaster of free travel.

Just allow all children to travel to school for free

It would be one thing if this were just travel to school we were talking about, but the present scheme includes any travel for any purpose. If it looked as though children were missing out they could be issued with a bus pass covering their school route and valid only around school start and finish times.

[Pelleas]

Pelleas so £35k - mortgage- utilities- food- and then you expect money left over to send 1, 2 possibly 3 children ?!

I made it very clear in my post that there would have to be a survey to establish the actual income threshold, so you are being deliberately disingenuous by starting to argue based on an arbitrary figure I have plucked from the air.

FWIW £35k is more than I earn!

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

But in those circumstances, travel is likely to be the least of their problems, so what we should be doing is making sure those children receive the intervention they need in their lives as a whole, not covering the problem up with the sticking plaster of free travel

Travel is not to enable them to have a jolly up, it’s to allow them to have an education and in some cases their only meal.

Whilst it is a lovely idea for social services to intervene in every questionable case of parenting, realistically it won’t happen. The cost of all the social workers needed alone would outweigh the cost of free travel for all children.

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

FWIW £35k is more than I earn! ok and?!

[OnlyFoolsnMothers]

It would be one thing if this were just travel to school we were talking about, but the present scheme includes any travel for any purpose. If it looked as though children were missing out they could be issued with a bus pass covering their school route and valid only around school start and finish times well some kids take the tube/ tram or train to school. And so what if it enables a kid to travel to a museum in the holidays, or to go between separated parents homes - it also benefits parents on a squeezed income to fill the holidays with exercusions. Again Why you object to children getting out and about is beyond me.

[Pelleas]

ok and?!

Your comment Love the concept to better budget an already stretched budget- said by the most out of touch in society seemed to imply I was suggesting this from the position of being on an income where I didn't have to budget myself.

[Pelleas]

Why you object to children getting out and about is beyond me.

I don't object to them getting out and about - I simply think that, where they can afford to, their families should pay for it.

[formerbabe]

Eventually you reach a point where you can no longer budget. The money just doesn't stretch anymore.