England National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS)

[neilmc]

Both of those places have very highly subsidised local rail service, which means that no bus service is ever going to commercially viable.

The problem with this is that in Cumbria the subsidised rail service only goes to certain points, and ENCTS pass holders don't get to use it for free, so an elderly person wishing to make an occasional journey from Kirkby Stephen to Appleby has to pay full fare. And both Kirkby Stephen and Millom are virtual bus deserts. Many services on what looks like a comprehensive map are only served once or twice a week and hardly any services run late evening. But I agree with the point that single fares are ramped up to maximise the percentage-based remuneration from ENCTS passes - the elderly passenger does not pay so does not care, the occasional unwary local or tourist will just say "bloody hell, that's expensive" but will pay up the once.

I am a councillor for Shap where, to add insult to injury, the bus only runs twice a week but locals can see trains roaring through their long-closed station every few minutes. If the small WCML stations in Cumbria had been on the coast they'd still be open but have been sacrificed for operational ease. I am hoping that the proposed two unitary authorities in Cumbria will take public transport seriously.

 

[ChrisC]

I will be 66 in 9 months time, reaching the current state pension age, and will therefore be eligible for an ENCTS pass in England. When I took early retirement with a work pension back in 2014, it was something that I never expected to get in its current form. In these forums there were numerous comments that it was unaffordable. I fully expected that by the time I reached state pension age it would be cut back to something like half price travel or just valid in your own local authority. Does anyone here have any views about whether it will be likely to remain in its current form for the foreseeable future.

If I am correct, in England, the ENCTS pass was always linked to the female retirement age, which pre 2010 was 60. Since then it has slowly risen and is now currently 66 and will soon rise to 67. Retirement age for men and women is now the same. Therefore before 2010, men who didn’t retire until they were 65 were entitled to a pass at 60 even though they could be working full time for at least another 5 years.

Since I retired 7 years ago, whenever I have been going away on holiday in other areas of England, I have researched the availability of bus day and weekly tickets and especially multi operator tickets. I’ve got quite used to paying for weekly bus tickets when I’m on holiday and it’s taking quite a bit of getting into my head that from October I will actually have the equivalent of a free multi operator ticket for the whole of England.

 

[Wolfie]

I will be 66 in 9 months time, reaching the current state pension age, and will therefore be eligible for an ENTS pass in England. When I took early retirement with a work pension back in 2014, it was something that I never expected to get in its current form. In these forums there were numerous comments that it was unaffordable. I fully expected that by the time I reached state pension age it would be cut back to something like half price travel or just valid in your own local authority. Does anyone here have any views about whether it will be likely to remain in its current form for the foreseeable future.

If I am correct, in England, the ENTS pass was always linked to the female retirement age, which pre 2010 was 60. Since then it has slowly risen and is now currently 66 and will soon rise to 67. Retirement age for men and women is now the same. Therefore before 2010, men who didn’t retire until they were 65 were entitled to a pass at 60 even though they could be working full time for at least another 5 years.

Since I retired 7 years ago, whenever I have been going away on holiday in other areas of England, I have researched the availability of bus day and weekly tickets and especially multi operator tickets. I’ve got quite used to paying for weekly bus tickets when I’m on holiday and it’s taking quite a bit of getting into my head that from October I will actually have the equivalent of a free multi operator ticket for the whole of England.

I may be wrong but l seem to recall that the ENCTS pass was originally linked to retirement age (i.e. men at 65, women at 60) until successful litigation on the grounds of sex discrimination. The litigation may have been on a different issue albeit with the same principles.

 

[RT4038]

The problem with this is that in Cumbria the subsidised rail service only goes to certain points, and ENCTS pass holders don't get to use it for free, so an elderly person wishing to make an occasional journey from Kirkby Stephen to Appleby has to pay full fare. And both Kirkby Stephen and Millom are virtual bus deserts. Many services on what looks like a comprehensive map are only served once or twice a week and hardly any services run late evening. But I agree with the point that single fares are ramped up to maximise the percentage-based remuneration from ENCTS passes - the elderly passenger does not pay so does not care, the occasional unwary local or tourist will just say "bloody hell, that's expensive" but will pay up the once.

I am a councillor for Shap where, to add insult to injury, the bus only runs twice a week but locals can see trains roaring through their long-closed station every few minutes. If the small WCML stations in Cumbria had been on the coast they'd still be open but have been sacrificed for operational ease. I am hoping that the proposed two unitary authorities in Cumbria will take public transport seriously.

Ah well. The ENCTS scheme is an entitlement for free travel on the bus services that are in operation. No entitlement to a bus service that is close or convenient.

 

[Busaholic]

I may be wrong but l seem to recall that the ENCTS pass was originally linked to retirement age (i.e. men at 65, women at 60) until successful litigation on the grounds of sex discrimination. The litigation may have been on a different issue albeit with the same principles.

You're right, it was because of litigation but, as you hinted, it was before the ECNTS had been invented by Gordon Brown's advisors.

 

[geoffk]

I wonder how sustainable the ENCTS pass scheme really is. Quite apart from the fact that the Treasury always under-funds schemes such as this, reimbursement rates vary widely between local transport authorities. Although different rates will apply in urban and rural areas, huge differences may be the result of a council tailoring payments to fit a budget rather than ensuring operators are "no better and no worse off" as the law requires. While some reimbursement rates are in excess of 50%, a County Council in the north of England I'm aware of was recently offering as little as 28.4%. In rural areas and small towns this is perhaps the greatest challenge facing operators as pass holders can make up 80% or more of total passengers.

Apart from raising the qualifying age, Governments tinker with this scheme at their peril as older folk like me are usually keen to go out and vote. While some pensioners rely solely on the state pension others are relatively affluent and have no real need for travel concessions (or free prescriptions, eye tests) but then we are into means testing, which is outside the scope of this thread. I freely admit I've used my pass to travel around Devon and just over the border "just for the ride" - to Bude, Launceston, Tavistock and other destinations but surely the real purpose of the concession was to give less well-off pensioners the chance to get out of the house once in a while.

 

[Ken H]

Maybe pensioners should be asked to contribute. An annual fee perhaps or a £1 fare.
Oh. And i get my bus pass in June.

 

[ChrisC]

Apart from raising the qualifying age, Governments tinker with this scheme at their peril as older folk like me are usually keen to go out and vote. While some pensioners rely solely on the state pension others are relatively affluent and have no real need for travel concessions (or free prescriptions, eye tests) but then we are into means testing, which is outside the scope of this thread. I freely admit I've used my pass to travel around Devon and just over the border "just for the ride" - to Bude, Launceston, Tavistock, Sidmouth and other destinations but the real purpose of the concession is to give less well-off pensioners the chance to get out of the house one in a while.

There’s quite a large percentage of pensioners, especially outside of the large urban areas, who never use their bus pass. Lots of people I know say they have never used theirs. People who live some distance from a bus stop or in rural areas where buses are infrequent will continue to use their car as they have always done. The majority of people in the village where I live are retired and rarely do you ever see anyone at the bus stop. However, the people I’m describing are the more affluent home owners who are not just living off the basic state pension.

I get my state pension and bus pass in October. To be quite honest I don’t really need them. I’m not super rich but do own my own house, own a car, worked hard all my life and have a good pension from work and have savings that I built up for my retirement. If there was means testing I certainly wouldn’t qualify for a bus pass, winter fuel payments, free prescriptions etc which many who are only living of state pension desperately need. However, having worked hard all of my life I have paid out considerable Income Tax, National Insurance, Council Tax etc and so perhaps I do now deserve getting something back. I almost certainly won’t use my bus pass for day to day essential travel for shopping etc as the bus service where I live is not regular enough for me to give up using my car. I will, however, use my bus pass for leisure purposes for days out and especially when I am away on holiday.

 

[S&CLER]

Maybe pensioners should be asked to contribute. An annual fee perhaps or a £1 fare.
Oh. And i get my bus pass in June.

An annual fee would be better I think; if you had to pay a small fare, that would mean carrying change, which some of us no longer do as a regular thing, or else producing a contactless card as well as the bus pass, which could delay boarding. I would have no objection to paying a fee of £50 or even £100 for my bus pass, provided that the income from the fees was used exclusively on public transport. But the opportunity for that was lost when the national scheme came in (2008), and to introduce it now would be very unpopular, as people will complain more if they lose an existing "free" benefit than they would have grumbled at having to pay a modest charge when a new benefit was introduced.
For the record, I have had an ENCTS bus pass since they began in April 2008. I was 60 in January 2008, and fell seriously ill with sepsis at the end of July; it was my indignation at having only had 4 months use of my bus pass that kept me determined to stay alive.

 

[RT4038]

I wonder how sustainable the ENCTS pass scheme really is. Quite apart from the fact that the Treasury always under-funds schemes such as this, reimbursement rates vary widely between local transport authorities. Although different rates will apply in urban and rural areas, huge differences may be the result of a council tailoring payments to fit a budget rather than ensuring operators are "no better and no worse off" as the law requires. While some reimbursement rates are in excess of 50%, a County Council in the north of England I'm aware of was recently offering as little as 28.4%. In rural areas and small towns this is perhaps the greatest challenge facing operators as pass holders can make up 80% or more of total passengers.

Apart from raising the qualifying age, Governments tinker with this scheme at their peril as older folk like me are usually keen to go out and vote. While some pensioners rely solely on the state pension others are relatively affluent and have no real need for travel concessions (or free prescriptions, eye tests) but then we are into means testing, which is outside the scope of this thread. I freely admit I've used my pass to travel around Devon and just over the border "just for the ride" - to Bude, Launceston, Tavistock and other destinations but surely the real purpose of the concession was to give less well-off pensioners the chance to get out of the house once in a while.

The 'under-funding' is merely resulting, inter alia, in fewer and fewer bus services. There may be an entitlement to a free bus pass, but no entitlement to any bus service to use it on.

 

[Dai Corner]

An annual fee would be better I think; if you had to pay a small fare, that would mean carrying change, which some of us no longer do as a regular thing, or else producing a contactless card as well as the bus pass, which could delay boarding. I would have no objection to paying a fee of £50 or even £100 for my bus pass, provided that the income from the fees was used exclusively on public transport. But the opportunity for that was lost when the national scheme came in (2008), and to introduce it now would be very unpopular, as people will complain more if they lose an existing "free" benefit than they would have grumbled at having to pay a modest charge when a new benefit was introduced.
For the record, I have had an ENCTS bus pass since they began in April 2008. I was 60 in January 2008, and fell seriously ill with sepsis at the end of July; it was my indignation at having only had 4 months use of my bus pass that kept me determined to stay alive.

If you're willing to pay £50 or £100 a year, why not pay normal fares until you've spent that much, then start using your pass? Perhaps pay on lightly used services which are probably unprofitable or marginal and use your pass on busy, profitable ones?

 

[carlberry]

I wonder how sustainable the ENCTS pass scheme really is. Quite apart from the fact that the Treasury always under-funds schemes such as this, reimbursement rates vary widely between local transport authorities. Although different rates will apply in urban and rural areas, huge differences may be the result of a council tailoring payments to fit a budget rather than ensuring operators are "no better and no worse off" as the law requires. While some reimbursement rates are in excess of 50%, a County Council in the north of England I'm aware of was recently offering as little as 28.4%. In rural areas and small towns this is perhaps the greatest challenge facing operators as pass holders can make up 80% or more of total passengers.

Apart from raising the qualifying age, Governments tinker with this scheme at their peril as older folk like me are usually keen to go out and vote. While some pensioners rely solely on the state pension others are relatively affluent and have no real need for travel concessions (or free prescriptions, eye tests) but then we are into means testing, which is outside the scope of this thread. I freely admit I've used my pass to travel around Devon and just over the border "just for the ride" - to Bude, Launceston, Tavistock and other destinations but surely the real purpose of the concession was to give less well-off pensioners the chance to get out of the house once in a while.

The Treasury only funded this for a few years, that's now long gone. The funding pain is felt by local authorities and operators both of which are required to go along with it wheras the pain if it was changed/stopped would be felt by the national governemnt so, given that it costs them nothing, it'll carry on. Overall it's had a negative effect on bus services as they become less viable however, again, it's a local authority issue.

 

[lachlan]

The bus pass serves an important purpose in discouraging people from driving (especially important for pensioners until we have mandatory retesting to ensure people are still fit to drive). In Scotland bus passes are now available to under 22s and will hopefully do the same, discourage young people from driving (or even learning to drive).

Taking away bus passes may lead to increased car use including by those not fit any more to drive, resulting in fewer using bus services and increased likelihood that subsidies are withdrawn due to low patronage. The answer should be that central government increases funding available for subsidising bus services while doing more to encourage people to actually use them.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The bus pass serves an important purpose in discouraging people from driving (especially important for pensioners until we have mandatory retesting to ensure people are still fit to drive). In Scotland bus passes are now available to under 22s and will hopefully do the same, discourage young people from driving (or even learning to drive).

Taking away bus passes may lead to increased car use including by those not fit any more to drive, resulting in fewer using bus services and increased likelihood that subsidies are withdrawn due to low patronage. The answer should be that central government increases funding available for subsidising bus services while doing more to encourage people to actually use them.

That and that we find a way to include rail and tram in the passes too, on a wider basis than at present. This is not necessarily simple but would be of benefit. There's no point in effectively subsidising buses to run alongside trains; a better approach is an integrated system using each mode for what it's good at, and it's unfair that someone who doesn't have a bus service but does have a rail service has to pay "full whack" for it even for a local trip, and indeed that those who have no option at all but taxi or car also receive no benefit.

 

[AM9]

The Treasury only funded this for a few years, that's now long gone. The funding pain is felt by local authorities and operators both of which are required to go along with it wheras the pain if it was changed/stopped would be felt by the national governemnt so, given that it costs them nothing, it'll carry on. Overall it's had a negative effect on bus services as they become less viable however, again, it's a local authority issue.

On the other hand, any government (including the current motorist friendly Conservative brand) would tinker with bus passes in ways that directly affect the uisers at their peril. Part of the current decarbonisation thrust is to reduce not only carbon generation by persoanl transport but also reduce traffic levels altogether. Restrictions on free bus travel for the elderly is likely to drive (pun I know) them back to their cars which are more likely to be petrol fuelled and driven in a style that the more impatient younger drivers find frustrating to say the least.
I note that @lachlan above has also just commented on this issue whilst I was typing this.

 

[lachlan]

That and that we find a way to include rail and tram in the passes too, on a wider basis than at present. This is not necessarily simple but would be of benefit. There's no point in effectively subsidising buses to run alongside trains; a better approach is an integrated system using each mode for what it's good at, and it's unfair that someone who doesn't have a bus service but does have a rail service has to pay "full whack" for it even for a local trip, and indeed that those who have no option at all but taxi or car also receive no benefit.

Agreed on this. I have the partially sighted person's pass which includes rail, but the under 22 bus pass doesn't for some reason (nor does it include the Subway). It makes even less sense when you consider that ScotRail is effectively being nationalised and so we're paying bus companies to carry young people and pensioners when they could be travelling on our nationalised railway network.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Maybe pensioners should be asked to contribute. An annual fee perhaps or a £1 fare.
Oh. And i get my bus pass in June.

Officially speaking, have any Governmental statements been made concerning the ENCTS scheme continuation or user cost contributions?

TfGM, the Labour bastion of public transport in Greater Manchester once allowed the holders of ENCTS passes issued by them free travel outside an 0930 start on buses, trains and trams Monday to Friday and all day Saturday, Sunday and Bank Holidays in the TfGM administered transport area, but from 2020, users of such passes still wishing to travel on trains and trams in the TfGM administered transport area are now already subject to an annual charge of £10.00 if they still wish to avail themselves of tram and rail travel within the area of the TfGM empire,

 

[farwest]

In Cornwall you can use your ENCTS pass at any time. Plus from next month you can travel all day on any Company bus in Cornwall for £5.

 

[Ken H]

In Cornwall you can use your ENCTS pass at any time. Plus from next month you can travel all day on any Company bus in Cornwall for £5.

Is that cornwall residents only?

 

[Tetchytyke]

The government's statistics factsheet for 2019, the most recent relevant year, is interesting reading here.

What's especially interesting is the usage data. 80% of pensioners with no car have a pass and 62% use their pass once a week or more. For pensioners with two or more cars, this drops to 66% take-up rate and only 21% use their pass once a week or more. There are similar discrepancies between the poorest pensioners (77% have a pass, 49% use it at least once a week) and the wealthiest pensioners (66% and 33%).

The evidence suggests that bus passes don't tempt people out of their cars, and don't reduce the number of car journeys.

The cost of ENCTS is a net £1.1bn for 2019. But this is largely on a reimbursement rate (79% of the total cost goes to bus operators, and a big chunk of the rest goes to tram/train/light rail/ferry operators), so those who don't use the pass don't really cost very much. The cost goes on people who do use it- predominantly poorer pensioners without access to a car. And, in turn, this means means-testing it would be pointless; the people using the passes are the ones who'd qualify for it under means-testing. ENCTS is benefitting many of the poorest pensioners, which is a good thing.

The problems come because local authorities have to pay ENCTS reimbursements but they don't have to subsidise bus services. So the buses that can operate commercially swallow up the money. The lightly-used buses that serve the absolute most vulnerable people- the rural buses and the housing estate hoppers- can't run as there's no money to pay a subsidy. But it is local authorities and bus operators that get the abuse when bus services get canned, so central Government aren't going to change this any time soon.

 

[Ken H]

The government's statistics factsheet for 2019, the most recent relevant year, is interesting reading here.

What's especially interesting is the usage data. 80% of pensioners with no car have a pass and 62% use their pass once a week or more. For pensioners with two or more cars, this drops to 66% take-up rate and only 21% use their pass once a week or more. There are similar discrepancies between the poorest pensioners (77% have a pass, 49% use it at least once a week) and the wealthiest pensioners (66% and 33%).

The evidence suggests that bus passes don't tempt people out of their cars, and don't reduce the number of car journeys.

The cost of ENCTS is a net £1.1bn for 2019. But this is largely on a reimbursement rate (79% of the total cost goes to bus operators, and a big chunk of the rest goes to tram/train/light rail/ferry operators), so those who don't use the pass don't really cost very much. The cost goes on people who do use it- predominantly poorer pensioners without access to a car. And, in turn, this means means-testing it would be pointless; the people using the passes are the ones who'd qualify for it under means-testing. ENCTS is benefitting many of the poorest pensioners, which is a good thing.

The problems come because local authorities have to pay ENCTS reimbursements but they don't have to subsidise bus services. So the buses that can operate commercially swallow up the money. The lightly-used buses that serve the absolute most vulnerable people- the rural buses and the housing estate hoppers- can't run as there's no money to pay a subsidy. But it is local authorities and bus operators that get the abuse when bus services get canned, so central Government aren't going to change this any time soon.

But there is a lot of ENCTS usage in tourist areas. Probably by the better off. Places like Cumbria, the Yorkshire coast, Devon etc. The local councils in those areas are struggling to pay for journeys from people from outside their area. I dont understand why the pass issuing council cant pay for the journeys where their passes are used. Either that or more services will be designated 'scenic' (so outside ENCTS) like the DalesBus network is.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

But there is a lot of ENCTS usage in tourist areas. Probably by the better off.

What is the source for the final part above?

 

[AM9]

What is the source for the final part above?

Maybe it is suggested by the level of non-residential use being directly related to the demographics of the local visitors. Takene simply, maybe it happens more in areas where wealthier seniors holiday.

 

[philthetube]

But there is a lot of ENCTS usage in tourist areas. Probably by the better off. Places like Cumbria, the Yorkshire coast, Devon etc. The local councils in those areas are struggling to pay for journeys from people from outside their area. I dont understand why the pass issuing council cant pay for the journeys where their passes are used. Either that or more services will be designated 'scenic' (so outside ENCTS) like the DalesBus network is.

What is the source for the final part above?

not a source but the average holiday maker in the lakes is not going to be someone on the poverty line.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But there is a lot of ENCTS usage in tourist areas. Probably by the better off. Places like Cumbria, the Yorkshire coast, Devon etc. The local councils in those areas are struggling to pay for journeys from people from outside their area. I dont understand why the pass issuing council cant pay for the journeys where their passes are used. Either that or more services will be designated 'scenic' (so outside ENCTS) like the DalesBus network is.

It was because when the scheme was first introduced and passes were just inspected visually there was no practical way to actually do that.

Now the passes are scanned, it would be practical for the home authority to pay, and so I would advocate changing it to that approach. It wouldn't cost a huge amount to have a clearing house to handle it, so the bus company would claim by providing the data to them and the clearing house would sort out billing each local authority. This would avoid the unfairness where a tourist area local authority with a lowish Council Tax income gets whacked with a huge bill. The other option would be to apply a tourist tax to accommodation, which could go towards paying for free travel for all in those areas (not just passholders), as is done in Switzerland, serving as a disincentive to use the car even if you arrived in one.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Now the passes are scanned, it would be practical for the home authority to pay, and so I would advocate changing it to that approach. It wouldn't cost a huge amount to have a clearing house to handle it, so the bus company would claim by providing the data to them and the clearing house would sort out billing each local authority.

One interesting take on this is the Greater Manchester area, where the Mayor has set forward plans to put franchising for buses in place. How would this particular matter affect your idea?

 

[geoffk]

it's unfair that someone who doesn't have a bus service but does have a rail service has to pay "full whack" for it even for a local trip, and indeed that those who have no option at all but taxi or car also receive no benefit.

Exactly this point was made in Plymouth a few years ago, citing the Tamar Valley line which, because of the local geography including river crossings, offers a much more direct service than buses ever could from the settlements along the line. Elsewhere in Devon, Yeoford gets a train every hour but only two buses a week. There must be many other similar examples but only the UK could have come up with a concession scheme for buses only, rather than local transport. This is perhaps typical of the compartmentalised, "separate networks" approach taken by national politicians and Civil Servants.

Travel concessions offer wider benefits to society which are never included in the “balance sheet”. If I spend, say, £3.50 saved on a bus fare in local shops, the government gets 70p in VAT (more if I spend it in the pub!) There are also benefits for road users (fewer cars) and the NHS (fewer people suffering from isolation and related health issues).

 

[Wolfie]

It was because when the scheme was first introduced and passes were just inspected visually there was no practical way to actually do that.

Now the passes are scanned, it would be practical for the home authority to pay, and so I would advocate changing it to that approach. It wouldn't cost a huge amount to have a clearing house to handle it, so the bus company would claim by providing the data to them and the clearing house would sort out billing each local authority. This would avoid the unfairness where a tourist area local authority with a lowish Council Tax income gets whacked with a huge bill. The other option would be to apply a tourist tax to accommodation, which could go towards paying for free travel for all in those areas (not just passholders), as is done in Switzerland, serving as a disincentive to use the car even if you arrived in one.

The only way that could conceivably work would be to have a standardised repayment basis nationally. Currently each local authority negotiates a rate with its local transport providers. How likely is it that a council the other end of the country will just accept that figure having had no input to it?

 

[S&CLER]

But there is a lot of ENCTS usage in tourist areas. Probably by the better off. Places like Cumbria, the Yorkshire coast, Devon etc. The local councils in those areas are struggling to pay for journeys from people from outside their area. I dont understand why the pass issuing council cant pay for the journeys where their passes are used. Either that or more services will be designated 'scenic' (so outside ENCTS) like the DalesBus network is.

Are you sure about this? I recently travelled on my pass from Oxenholme to Sedbergh, Sedbergh to Dent and back to Oxenholme station on a Woof's bus advertised as Western Dales Bus.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Are you sure about this? I recently travelled on my pass from Oxenholme to Sedbergh, Sedbergh to Dent and back to Oxenholme station on a Woof's bus advertised as Western Dales Bus.

It depends, most of the all-year services will accept ENCTS but some of the summer-only direct services from East and West Yorkshire don't accept it.

What's noticeable with the all-year services is that many now only operate once or twice a week. Places like Sedbergh never used to have an amazing bus service, but it used to be much better than a weekly shoppers' bus to Kendal, same with routes like Kendal-Shap-Penrith.

Much of the DalesBus network is now also propped up with charity funding, they even have a JustGiving page, which shows where it's got to.

The local councils in those areas are struggling to pay for journeys from people from outside their area.

It's not so much that they're struggling to pay the reimbursements, it's that the reimbursements mean there's nothing in the pot for subsidised services. So the commercial stuff in the Windermere-Ambleside-Grasmere corridor runs with plenty of reimbursement revenue, and there's nothing left elsewhere. There's now no evening buses from Keswick to Penrith or Grasmere, and there's only four buses a day from Carlisle to Keswick.

I do think changing it to a flat fare, e.g. 50p single/£1 day ticket, would still protect the poorest pensioners and also take the pressure off councils. There are 860 million journeys a year using ENCTS costing £1.1bn. Even £200m extra revenue for subsidised buses would be a game-changer.