The Benefits of Providing New Public Transport in Deprived Areas`
Posted by: Andrew Brown on: 9 July, 2008
via Tory Troll
The JRF have produced a new report on the benefits of providing new public transport in deprived areas.
One of the conclusions the authors draw from their research is:
Improving public transport information and helping with the cost of fares was as important as improved bus services in helping people on low incomes move from welfare into work.
I don’t know what Boris Johnson’s doing about information, but I think we have a fair idea what’s going on about fares for London’s poorest.
Looks like the recommendation to local policy makers will fall on the stony ground, at least as far as Mayor Johnson is concerned:
Provide help with the cost of transport to make travel more affordable for people on low incomes, e.g. the newly introduced Transport for London scheme for people on income support (and/or set low standard fares generally).
3 Responses to "The Benefits of Providing New Public Transport in Deprived Areas`"
9 July, 2008 at 5:05 pm
Well, at a national level we at least have some form, whether that’ll get extended I’ve no idea.
As for tax, didn’t you see?
9 July, 2008 at 5:50 pm
not much use that if your poor and not disabled/over 60 though i’d imagine (and given the thrust of the part of the rowntree report you quoted was the connection between making transport cheaper/more accessible and moving from welfare into work, i’m not sure labour can claim much credit in that respect)
as for tax, i wasn’t aware the remaining 1.1 million who lost out on this had been fully compensated, nor had i heard the compensation package for the 4.2 million who were fully compensated has been agreed for anything more than this current financial year. anyway regardless of detail the sentiment behind the initial cutting of the 10 pence rate is clear for all to see, and the claims from some of the most astute & financially aware people in the brown treasury team that they did not realise the impact that the change would have are frankly one of the most dishonest and galling things i’ve heard from labour in a long time (and that say’s a lot!) – if said claims were actually genuine and they were being honest however it doesn’t say much for the financial acumen of brown and his cronies that they can’t even get the math right in their budgets
mind you i’m sure purnell, freud & co have much more efficient ways of getting people back to work
(incidently only about £600m out of the total cost of £2.7bn for brown’s u-turn on this will go to compensate those who actually lost out in the first place, i.e. low earners – the remaining £2.1bn will benefit more higher paid people who hadn’t been impacted by the change in the first place, nice wee backdoor bribe for middle england there, although you would have thought at least some of that could have went to the remaining 1.1m lower paid people who are still out of pocket)
Leave a Reply
The people have spoken
 | Jack on A Break, I Guess |
 | Ernesta on Lewisham 10th Most Violent Pla… |
 | Lawrence Q on Songs I’ve Downloaded Th… |
 | Should politicians b… on Politics, Policy and the … |
 | natalie on beef and pearl barley ste… |
Widgets and Stuff
9 July, 2008 at 3:29 pm
any labour plans afoot for such a help on a national scale perhaps?
between johnson doubling fares for the poorest and brown doubling the tax that they pay it does indeed look like the policy recommendations will fall upon deaf ears