
Successive governments have failed to turn bus services around, watchdog says
Services have been reduced and passenger numbers are below pre-coronavirus levels, a report by the National Audit Office (NAO) said.
The study, which covers England outside London, warned that the sector's commercial viability has weakened as revenues have fallen and costs have risen.
It warned that rural and suburban areas face a 'cycle of decline' whereby services are withdrawn because of low demand, which leads to a further fall in passenger numbers and more cuts.
Most local bus services are run by private companies, who set routes and timetables aimed at making a profit.
Some services seen as socially necessary are financially supported by local transport authorities.
Public funding to bus operators accounted for half their revenue in 2023/24, at £1.8 billion.
In February 2020, then-Conservative prime minister Boris Johnson pledged £3 billion in funding over five years for buses.
The Department for Transport (DfT) published a national bus strategy for England, Bus Back Better, in March 2021, which set out that the department wanted services to be more frequent, cheaper and better integrated with other forms of transport.
The NAO said the total number of bus journeys made in the year to the end of March 2024 was 1.78 billion, down 9% from 1.96 billion in 2019/20.
Over the same period, the mileage covered by buses fell by 15%.
Following Labour's success in the July 2024 general election, the Bus Back Better strategy is no longer government policy.
The DfT's Bus Services Bill – which is at committee stage in the House of Commons – will lead to an overhaul of buses by giving all local transport authorities new powers to run their own services.
But the NAO noted that this franchising model is 'difficult and expensive' to adopt, and recommended that the department should better target the support it gives different local transport authorities depending on their needs.
Gareth Davies, head of the NAO, said: 'Bus travel should be an easy and reliable transport choice but governments' attempts to improve services have not always worked.
'DfT should work with local transport authorities and the bus sector to maximise the impact of the available resources in reversing the decline in bus usage.'
A DfT spokesperson said: 'Better buses are around the corner and are central to the Government's Plan for Change— connecting communities, strengthening the local economy, and boosting access to jobs.
'After decades of decline, we're providing a record £1 billion investment to improve the reliability and frequency of bus services across the country.
'Our landmark Bus Bill, now progressing through parliament, will protect routes and prevent services from being scrapped – putting buses back into local control and bringing passengers back to the heart of buses.'
Graham Vidler, chief executive of industry body the Confederation of Passenger Transport, said commercial operators 'delivered growth' in many towns and cities by investing in new routes, zero-emission buses and more frequent services.
He went on: 'With a level of public investment still low by European standards, passenger numbers outside London grew by 15% last year and 83% of customers said they were satisfied.
'We do not recognise the description of an industry with weakening commercial viability.
'What's crucial going forward is that public funding delivers the outcomes that matter to passengers.
'More buses to more destinations with quick, reliable journey times should be front and centre of investment plans.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

The National
2 hours ago
- The National
Celtic chief Peter Lawwell 'revelled' in Rangers' downfall
Sir David Murray has opened up on his relationship with the then-Celtic chief executive during his ownership of the Ibrox club. The pair knew each other well through their work in the steel and mining industries before Lawwell took on the role of Celtic chief exec in 2003. However, it was at this point that Murray claims Lawwell, now chairman of Celtic, had 'completely changed trajectory'. In his new autobiography 'Mettle: Tragedy, Courage and Titles' - on sale from Thursday, July 3 with royalties going to Esrkine Hospital - Murray insists Lawwell held too much power with those who were influential in Scottish football. He wrote: 'Peter was someone I knew previously. One of my companies, GM Mining, did business with Scottish Coal where Peter worked. 'I once invited him and his wife to Ibrox for a game. He was delighted to accept and back then was good company. 'But by the time he rose to become chief executive of Celtic, he was on a completely different trajectory. Read more: 'For nearly two decades he tried to build up a seat of power and I honestly believe he was wielding far too much influence in Scottish football. 'At one point, after I sold Rangers, it seemed he was positively revelling in the demise of the club. 'With very few influential or credible figures working to Rangers' benefit he was a pivotal figure.'


Spectator
3 hours ago
- Spectator
The flaw in Wes Streeting's AI NHS app plan
Speaking at Blackpool Football Club earlier this week, Wes Streeting announced his latest bid to modernise the NHS: bold new additions to the NHS app. Artificial intelligence would be used to empower people, turning them into experts on their own conditions, while another feature would 'show patients everything from their nearest pharmacy to the best hospital for heart surgery across the country, with patients able to choose based on their preference'. These features will reportedly be introduced within the next three years, with an extra £10 billion allocated by Rachel Reeves in her spending review to fund NHS technology. How exactly will NHS providers be 'inspired' by patients being offered choice? Given the impressive capabilities of freely available AI tools, the need to spend £10 billion on bespoke NHS software appears questionable from the outset. Streeting's optimism about the NHS's skill with large IT projects is impressive. I have the NHS app on my phone, and it reliably opens without crashing. With a finger I can ask it to arrange repeat prescriptions or to show me my GP records, although in both cases it responds by saying it can't help as it can't connect to my surgery. The app also offers to transfer me seamlessly to 111 for medical advice where, after only five or six pages of warnings, it asks permission for it to pass on my medical history. With that granted, it passes me to 111 which, having received all my information, starts by asking me my sex at birth. £10 billion, coincidentally, is the amount the Public Accounts Committee said, in 2013, had been wasted on an abandoned attempt to introduce an electronic patient record system to the NHS. 'The biggest IT failure ever seen', Dan Poulter, back then a Conservative health minister, condemned Labour's incompetence and responded with 'a £1 billion technology fund to help the NHS go paperless by 2018'. Perhaps readers will be unsurprised to hear that the NHS is not, in fact, now paperless. Or to hear that we're already using artificial intelligence without the government's help. Some colleagues are shy about their use of ChatGPT for clinical knowledge but it's widespread and so it should be. Medical knowledge expanded beyond the bounds of a single person's memory generations ago, and knowing the best ways to look things up has been a key skill ever since. For patients, ChatGPT, Gemini, Grok, and others already help. I used to sometimes advise people not to look certain matters up, confident that a quick Google would yield them the wrong end of a needlessly frightening stick. Today's large language models are better. For all their hazards, they respond to clinical questions not only with a decent chance of accuracy, but also with a high degree of useful context. They are the best products of some of the world's finest – and most highly paid – minds. Our NHS IT experts may well be poised to do a better job, but history suggests they are more likely to take ChatGPT and ineptly make it worse, wasting another £10 billion in the process. Notably, Streeting's Blackpool speech was not chiefly about technology. He introduced the NHS App's new features as methods for tackling his real focus of inequality. Beveridge, in 1942, spoke of the need for a welfare state to fight the five giants of idleness, ignorance, disease, squalor and want. Streeting attributed today's inequality to 'poverty, a lack of good work, damp housing, dirty air, and the sporting, travel and cultural opportunities which are afforded to the privileged few being denied to the many'. The shift worth noticing, because it is society's and not just Streeting's, is that people, and particularly the less fortunate, have ceased being spoken of as though they possess responsibility or control. Both, instead, rest wholly with the state. Streeting is right to care most for the least fortunate, whose opportunities are most constrained, but encouraging them to believe that what freedom they do possess is an illusion, and that they are not active agents but helpless victims, is harmful. Compassion, when sufficiently misguided, can be unkind. When it comes to My Choice, the app's feature to 'democratise' the NHS, Streeting's thinking seems equally flawed. 'If NHS providers know that their waiting times, health outcomes of their patients and patient satisfaction ratings will all be publicly available,' he said in his speech. 'They will be inspired to respond to patient choice, raise their game and deliver services that patients value.' This sounds attractive, just as it does to hold the state responsible for everything that's wrong in the world, but it makes as little sense. How exactly will NHS providers be 'inspired' by patients being offered choice? Here in the NHS almost everyone has a job for life, and equality means that within each field we are paid the same, regardless of talent or industry. And the senior managers, the only ones whose jobs are tenuous, almost invariably seem to fail upwards, leaving one post where they've been harmful in order to take another at a higher rate. Odd, to invoke the invisible hand of market forces in a context that effectively bans them. Streeting appears to be a bright & decent man genuinely trying to improve the NHS. Against an admittedly dire collection of colleagues, he seems to be the highlight of Labour's benches. It is hard not to root for him, especially as any success he has will be our success too. Harder still, sadly, to see him pulling it off.


Scotsman
3 hours ago
- Scotsman
We're working to get our council to work for you
There will now be more flexibility over the siting of bin hubs. Who does the council work for? You might think the obvious answer is you, the public, but increasingly I get the impression that the council officer cadre works for its own interests, either those of management or the trade unions. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... On Monday my Conservative colleague Cllr Phil Doggart wrote in this paper calling for councillors to 'Take back control'. He cited examples from the secret Tour de France funding decision taken by the chief executive that I wrote about last week, to the lack of action on an all-party call to renegotiate with NHS Lothian on how we run social care services, and even failure to enforce park rules. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad I could add more very simple examples like the appointments at our recycling sites, which are a trade union demand. Or bins in parks being at the edges rather than where people need them because it's easier to empty them. Neither are designed to make services more public friendly. Yesterday this theme cropped up again with the issue of bin hubs. While the decisions were about the World Heritage Site, it affects bin hubs throughout the city. Essentially the issue is that many residents want bin hubs placed away from their windows where possible. They want them sited where it is convenient for residents. But the report once again tried to rule out any options that would allow this. In many streets the obvious place to put the communal bins is across the road from homes when the street only has houses on one side. Yet our officers decided to bring a report rejecting this out of hand. They had a long list of 'reasons' which they said brought cost and caused road safety issues. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad They don't want people crossing a quiet residential road to a bin even though most cross those roads regularly to get to parked vehicles – or even just the other side. Councillors tried to 'take back control' of this issue last November when we voted against officer advice. We agreed to listen to residents and community councils and change the criteria to try to meet residents' wishes. This was after many years of some political parties using officer dogma to say it could only be done a certain way. I was grateful for the Labour U-turn in November, under pressure from us, as it finally allowed for more resident input. For once, the committee held its nerve. We listened to the public and told the officers to implement what we had agreed and re-consult residents. A small step but it will take a marathon of steps to change Council culture to one that puts the customer first. Cllr Iain Whyte, Conservative Councillor for Craigentinny Duddingston Ward, Leader of the council Conservative group