"But there is no government policy to make use of coach services to fill gaps in the train service or boost transport to remote areas, which would help those without access to a car."
If a coach doesn't add up, isn't profitable, what's the utilisation of that, and is it more or less cost or energy efficient than a taxi? I make use of rural buses sometimes and the morning buses have high demand from children going to school, people going to work. The rest of the day, they're about empty.
And at what point do we say, maybe people living in a hamlet in rural Somerset have made a choice and can pay the costs of it, and can sort out their lives? If you want to have public transport move to a town of 10,000 people like Wells, Shepton Mallet or Glastonbury that can support it. Or pay for your own taxis.
Fascinating piece. I read a book by George Monbiot several years ago that searched for policies that drastically deduced carbon emissions. I seem to remember him concluding that coaches were crucial.
It depends on how well utilised they are. I've been on rural buses going through Oxfordshire and there's 3 of us on it. That's not a green form of transport. A car carrying us would be more efficient.
It's why, if you want green transport, you mostly just get government out of the business. As long as there's a carbon tax, the market will find the optimal solution. National Express, Flix have about zero government involvement, yet coach travel is the greenest form of transport (according to DOT stats). Because unlike subsidised buses and trains, they aren't running inefficient, taxpayer-subsidised, low-utilisation services.
"But there is no government policy to make use of coach services to fill gaps in the train service or boost transport to remote areas, which would help those without access to a car."
If a coach doesn't add up, isn't profitable, what's the utilisation of that, and is it more or less cost or energy efficient than a taxi? I make use of rural buses sometimes and the morning buses have high demand from children going to school, people going to work. The rest of the day, they're about empty.
And at what point do we say, maybe people living in a hamlet in rural Somerset have made a choice and can pay the costs of it, and can sort out their lives? If you want to have public transport move to a town of 10,000 people like Wells, Shepton Mallet or Glastonbury that can support it. Or pay for your own taxis.
Before the 1985 Transport Act deregulated bus services, the 1980 Transport Act had deregulated coach services.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/dec/05/comment.politics
Fascinating piece. I read a book by George Monbiot several years ago that searched for policies that drastically deduced carbon emissions. I seem to remember him concluding that coaches were crucial.
It depends on how well utilised they are. I've been on rural buses going through Oxfordshire and there's 3 of us on it. That's not a green form of transport. A car carrying us would be more efficient.
It's why, if you want green transport, you mostly just get government out of the business. As long as there's a carbon tax, the market will find the optimal solution. National Express, Flix have about zero government involvement, yet coach travel is the greenest form of transport (according to DOT stats). Because unlike subsidised buses and trains, they aren't running inefficient, taxpayer-subsidised, low-utilisation services.
I think this is the piece you were thinking of, now almost 20 years old.https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2006/dec/05/comment.politics