UK Bus Privatization Expensive, Unreliable and Dysfunctional, Concludes New Report

TRANSPORT - Privatization of the bus sector in England outside London, Scotland, and Wales has delivered a service that is expensive, unreliable, and dysfunctional, said New York University human rights expert, Philip Alston, in a new report. The former UN Special Rapporteur criticized the government’s new national bus strategy for England, which he said merely tinkers with the existing system, offering ineffective half measures that fail to address the structural cause of the country’s bus crisis.

The 38-page report finds that many people have lost jobs and benefits, faced barriers to healthcare, been forced to give up on education, sacrificed food and utilities, and been cut off from friends and family because of a costly, fragmented, and inadequate privatized bus service that has failed them.

“Over the past 35 years, deregulation has provided a master class in how not to run an essential public service, leaving residents at the mercy of private actors who have total discretion over how to run a bus route, or whether to run one at all,” said Philip Alston, who authored the report with Bassam Khawaja and Rebecca Riddell, Co-directors of the Human Rights and Privatization Project at NYU’s Center for Human Rights and Global Justice. “In case after case, service that was once dependable, convenient, and widely-used has been scaled back dramatically or made unaffordable.”

The UK government imposed an extreme form of privatization and deregulation on the bus sector in England outside of London, Scotland, and Wales in 1985, arguing a year earlier that competition would deliver “a better service to the passenger at less cost.” More than three decades later, the promised benefits have not materialized, and the current service is grossly inadequate.

Researchers spoke to passengers in England, Scotland, and Wales who described a broken system of fragmented services, disappearing routes, reduced frequency, poor reliability, falling ridership, limited coverage, inefficient competition, and poor information. Average fares have skyrocketed, rising 403 percent in England since 1987, while ridership has plummeted, falling an estimated 38 percent in England outside of London between 1982 and 2016/17.

“Private companies understandably prioritize profits rather than the public good, extracting money from the system while cutting unprofitable but necessary routes,” said Khawaja. “The public has effectively become an insurer of operator profits, propping up private services with considerable subsidies.” Despite privatization, the government provides billions of pounds in funding for bus services annually, accounting for more than 40 percent of funding for bus services in England, and has allocated hundreds of millions more to support private operators during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Bus service failures have restricted access to work, education, healthcare, and food. This has been especially severe for low-income people or those in poverty, as well as those in rural areas, older people, women, and people with disabilities. Inadequate transport systems also jeopardize individuals’ ability to take part in society and cultural life. And because bus services are operated by effectively unaccountable private companies, those impacted often have little meaningful recourse.

“The absence of a strong public bus system affects a great many people’s economic opportunities, but also their means to participate in their communities, travel to football matches or libraries, and visit family and friends,” Alston said.

Buses provide an essential service and account for some 4.5 billion journeys per year in England, Scotland, and Wales—the majority of all journeys on public transportation. More people commute to work by bus than all other forms of public transportation combined. They also boost economic growth, enable access to basic rights, alleviate poverty, and reduce congestion and greenhouse gases.

The United Kingdom has international human rights obligations directly related to transportation. Physical accessibility is an essential component of many economic and social rights, but also civil and political rights such as the right to vote, to freedom of religion, and to assembly. Many residents’ ability to exercise these rights is directly contingent on access to a reliable and affordable bus service. Parliament should legislate minimum standards of transportation that UK residents can depend on, instead of leaving it up to the vagaries and predations of the market, Alston said.

Alston and his co-authors called on the governments of England, Scotland, and Wales to cease relying on private actors and market forces to determine access to such a vital service, adopt public control of bus transport as the default system, and provide the necessary financial and political support to local authorities pursuing public control or ownership of bus services.

“Unlike the current system, public control or ownership would allow for reinvestment of profits, integrated networks, more efficient coverage, simpler fares, consistency with climate goals, and public accountability,” said Riddell. “It’s also a more cost effective approach.”

“The United Kingdom is one of the wealthiest countries in the world, and can afford a world-class bus system if it chooses to prioritize and fund it,” Alston said. “Instead, the government has outsourced responsibility for a vital public service, propping up an arrangement that prioritizes private profits and denying the public a decent bus.”

Image: UK Bus Service 

ABC Note: On 6th November 2018, the University of Bristol Law School hosted a meeting with Professor Philip Alston, UN Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, and eight organisations. This was his only meeting focussing specifically on extreme poverty in rural areas in the UK. A short (21 pages) final report on his mission to the UK has now been published. 

Here is a summary of the report: 

"The Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights, Philip Alston, undertook a mission to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from 5 to 16 November 2018.

Although the United Kingdom is the world’s fifth largest economy, one fifth of its population (14 million people) live in poverty, and 1.5 million of them experienced destitution in 2017. Policies of austerity introduced in 2010 continue largely unabated, despite the tragic social consequences. Close to 40 per cent of children are predicted to be living in poverty by 2021. Food banks have proliferated; homelessness and rough sleeping have increased greatly; tens of thousands of poor families must live in accommodation far from their schools, jobs and community networks; life expectancy is falling for certain groups; and the legal aid system has been decimated.

The social safety net has been badly damaged by drastic cuts to local authorities’ budgets, which have eliminated many social services, reduced policing services, closed libraries in record numbers, shrunk community and youth centres and sold off public spaces and buildings. The bottom line is that much of the glue that has held British society together since the Second World War has been deliberately removed and replaced with a harsh and uncaring ethos. A booming economy, high employment and a budget surplus have not reversed austerity, a policy pursued more as an ideological than an economic agenda."

A few key paragraphs of the Overview are: 

"II. Overview 

3. The United Kingdom, the world’s fifth largest economy, is a leading centre of global finance, boasts a “fundamentally strong” economy and currently enjoys record low levels of unemployment. But despite such prosperity, one fifth of its population (14 million people) live in poverty. Four million of those are more than 50 per cent below the poverty line3 and 1.5 million experienced destitution in 2017, unable to afford basic essentials. Following drastic changes in government economic policy beginning in 2010, the two preceding decades of progress in tackling child and pensioner poverty have begun to unravel and poverty is again on the rise. Relative child poverty rates are expected to increase by 7 per cent between 2015 and 2021 and overall child poverty rates to reach close to 40 per cent. For almost one in every two children to be poor in twenty-first century Britain would not just be a disgrace, but a social calamity and an economic disaster rolled into one.
4. But statistics alone cannot capture the full picture of poverty in the United Kingdom, much of it the direct result of government policies (unless otherwise indicated, “Government” in the present report refers to the United Kingdom Government). Official denials notwithstanding, it is obvious to anyone who opens their eyes. There has been a shocking increase in the number of food banks and major increases in homelessness and rough sleeping; a growing number of homeless families – 24,000 between April and June of 2018 – have been dispatched to live in accommodation far from their schools, jobs and community networks;7 life expectancy is falling for certain groups; and the legal aid system has been decimated, thus shutting out large numbers of low-income persons from the once-proud justice system. Government reforms have often denied benefits to people with severe disabilities and pushed them into unsuitable work, single mothers struggling to cope in very difficult circumstances have been left far worse off, care for those with mental illnesses has deteriorated dramatically, and teachers’ real salaries have been slashed. The number of emergency admissions to hospitals of homeless people (“of no fixed abode”) increased sevenfold between 2008–2009 and 2017–2018.9
5. In the past, the worst casualties of these “reforms” would have received at least minimal protection from the broader social safety net. But austerity policies have deliberately gutted local authorities and thereby effectively eliminated many social services, reduced policing services to skeletal proportions, closed libraries in record numbers, shrunk community and youth centres, and sold off public spaces and buildings including parks and recreation centres. It is hardly surprising that civil society has reported unheard-of levels of loneliness and isolation, prompting the Government to appoint a Minister for Suicide Prevention. The bottom line is that much of the glue that has held British society together since the Second World War has been deliberately removed and replaced with a harsh and uncaring ethos.
6. The Special Rapporteur also witnessed tremendous resilience, strength and generosity, and heard stories of deeply compassionate work coaches, local officials and volunteers; neighbours supporting one another; councils seeking creative solutions; and charities stepping in to fill holes in government services. People across the United Kingdom made it clear that they want to work, and are taking hard, low-paying and insecure jobs in order to put food on the table. They want to contribute to their society and communities, support their families, live in safe, affordable housing and take control over their lives.
7. In the face of these problems, the Government has remained determinedly in a state of denial. While local authorities throughout England and Wales are outsourcing or abandoning services, and devolved authorities in Scotland and Northern Ireland are frantically trying to “mitigate” or counteract the worst features of the Government’s policies, ministers insist that all is well and running according to plan. Despite some reluctant policy tweaks, there has been a deeply ingrained resistance to change. The good news is that many of the problems could readily be solved if the Government were to listen to people experiencing poverty, the voluntary sector and local authorities, acknowledge their grievances and implement the recommendations below."

The report’s conclusions and recommendations are:

95. The philosophy underpinning the British welfare system has changed radically since 2010. The initial rationales for reform were to reduce overall expenditures and to promote employment as the principal “cure” for poverty. But when large-scale poverty persisted despite a booming economy and very high levels of employment, the Government chose not to adjust course. Instead, it doubled down on a parallel agenda to reduce benefits by every means available, including constant reductions in benefit levels, ever-more-demanding conditions, harsher penalties, depersonalization, stigmatization, and virtually eliminating the option of using the legal system to vindicate rights. The basic message, delivered in the language of managerial efficiency and automation, is that almost any alternative will be more tolerable than seeking to obtain government benefits. This is a very far cry from any notion of a social contract, Beveridge model or otherwise, let alone of social human rights. As Thomas Hobbes observed long ago, such an approach condemns the least well off to lives that are “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. As the British social contract slowly evaporates, Hobbes’ prediction risks becoming the new reality.
96. The United Kingdom Government should:

(a) Introduce a single, multidimensional measure of poverty;
(b) Systematically measure food security;
(c) Request the National Audit Office to assess the cumulative social impact of tax and spending decisions since 2010, especially on vulnerable groups, with a view to identifying what would be required to restore an effective social safety net;
(d) Reverse particularly regressive measures such as the benefit freeze, the two-child limit, the benefit cap and the reduction of the Housing Benefit, including for under-occupied social rented housing;
(e) Restore local government funding needed to provide critical social protection and tackle poverty at the community level, and take varying needs of communities and differing tax bases into account in the ongoing Fair Funding Review;
(f) Initiate an independent review of the efficacy of changes to welfare conditionality and sanctions introduced since 2012 by the Department of Work and Pensions;
(g) Train Department staff to use more constructive and less punitive approaches to encouraging compliance;
(h) Eliminate the five-week delay in receiving initial UC benefits;
(i) Ensure that the benefit truly works for individuals, including by facilitating alternative payment arrangements and reviewing the monthly assessment practices;
(j) Review and remedy the systematic disadvantage inflicted by current policies on women, as well as on children, persons with disabilities, older persons and ethnic minorities;
(k) Re-evaluate privatization policies to ensure that the approach adopted achieves the best outcomes for the citizenry rather than for the corporate sector; transport, especially in rural areas, should be considered an essential service and the Government should ensure that all areas are adequately and affordably served.

97. Brexit presents an opportunity to reimagine what the United Kingdom stands for. Legislative recognition of social rights should be a central part of that reimagining. And social inclusion, rather than increasing marginalization of the working poor and those unable to work, should be the guiding principle of social polic

ABC Comment, have your say below: