Agenda item

To consider and endorse, or make recommendations to the Cabinet Member for Planning, Highways, Transport and Waste on the proposed decision to update the Cabinet Decision of June 2015 to:

1.         reduce the subsidy to the standard YPTP pass by £60;

2.         introduce an option to pay by instalments, the costs of which to be funded by the charging of a modest £10 administration fee;

3.         maintain the cost of the pass to students from low income families at £100;

4.         maintain the provision of free passes to those in care and care leavers; and

5.         maintain the current offer that those families purchasing more than two standard cost passes will only pay for the first two.

Phil Lightowler (Head of Public Transport) was in attendance for this item

1.    Mr Lightowler introduced the report that set out the proposed changes to the discretionary Young Persons Travel Pass (YPTP) scheme for the year 2019-2020 which sought to reduce the subsidy to the standard YPTP by £60; introduce an option to pay by instalments, the cost of which would be funded by the charging of a modest £10 administration fee; maintain the cost of the pass to students from low income families at £100; maintain provision of free passes to those in care and care leavers; and maintain the current offer that those families purchasing more than two standard cost passes would continue to only pay for the first two.

2.  The officer responded to comments and questions from Members, including the following:

(a)  In response to comments regarding the £20 inflationary uplift element and the calculation used to justify the additional cost, Mr Lightowler said that the inflationary element included was based on anticipated increases for the whole scheme.  On being challenged re the rate of increase, Mr.Lightowler did inform the committee that  bus fares had been ahead of inflation rates for the past four years and varied between a 4.5% to 7% inflation rate across the country. The national bus survey highlighted a range of aspects including overall customer satisfaction which Kent operators scored highly against, however, a key area of concern was the ratings captured against value for money. Mr Lightowler acknowledged Members points and agreed to provide an explanation around the calculation of costs in future reports.

(b)  With regard to value for money for parents, Mr Lightowler said that there was not a standard journey that could be used to benchmark the benefit of the pass against commercial bus fares. However, Mr Lightowler stated that a good benchmark would be to judge the cost of the YPTP against what KCC pay on average per annum for scholar season tickets.  He pointed out that the YPTP would rise to £350 and the average for scholar tickets was £725, therefore the YPTP still presented good value to parents.).

(c)  Mr Lightowler said that the word ‘modest’ was used to define the £10 administration fee for the payment by instalment plan as it mirrored what a number of organisations across the UK had introduced in order to support the administrative processes required.  Mr Lightowler said that the option to pay by instalments was only applicable to those purchasing the annual £350 Young Persons Travel Pass and said that the scheme had been designed to ensure cost neutrality to Kent County Council. He assured the Committee that the YPTP scheme would continue to be reviewed to assess the impact of the subsidy reduction and to determine whether further alterations to the cost needed to be made to ensure best value for money.

(d)   Members queried whether the increased charges would dissuade students from using public transport and as a result, increase the number of cars on Kent’s roads. Mr Lightowler said that 7.5 million journeys were made using the YPTP and informed the Committee that a number of Local Authorities across the country had removed free travel schemes for schools and failed to provide alternative arrangements. Kent County Council recognised the importance of the pass and the role it played in supporting sustainable travel to school, supporting school selection and inclusivity of choice and continued to deliver a scheme that benefited a substantial number of users.

(e)  Mr Lightowler confirmed that the anticipated date of the first monthly instalment would be 28^th August 2019. For parents who miss the payment deadline, the instalment cost would be adjusted over a period of months. Mr Lightowler informed the Committee that the instalment period would run over eight months to protect the income of the scheme against potential cancellations in the April - June period.

(f)   In response to queries regarding the Equality Impact Assessment, Mr Lightowler said that the scheme was initially designed to deliver simplicity in terms of the administrative process. The existing Transport Management System could not capture equalities data. As a result of this, Mr Lightowler said that further engagement with service users would be done through an external market research company to collect sample data around the issues raised by the Committee. The anticipated start date of the brief was April 2019, however, the start date of the market research was dependent on the advice received from the Communications Team.

(g)  Members raised concern around the proposal to withdraw the half-yearly option and questioned the advantages of the decision, Mr Lightowler advised the Committee that the half-yearly option was initially introduced to improve affordability, however, concerns around affordability would be eradicated through the implementation of the proposed eight-month instalment plan. There was some evidence  that parents would buy a half-yearly YPTP for the beginning of the year but not the second half as their child would be on exam leave and would therefore only purchase a standard operator bus ticket for the days in which they intended their child to be in school. Mr Lightowler demonstrated the benefit of the £350 annual YPTP, in this scenario and said that the scheme, split over 160 days, offered parents a daily price of £1.09 for a single trip and £2.18 for a return trip.

(h)  Members commended the work of the officers and were pleased to see that Kent County Council were continuing to provide the discretionary travel scheme.

3.    RESOLVED that the proposed decision (19/00021) to be taken by the Cabinet Member for Planning, Highways, Transport and Waste to update the Cabinet Decision of June 2015 to:

1.    reduce the subsidy to the standard YPTP pass by £60;

2.    introduce an option to pay by instalments, the costs of which to be funded by the charging of a modest £10 administration fee;

3.    maintain the cost of the pass to students from low income families at £100;

4.    maintain the provision of free passes to those in care and care leavers; and

5.    maintain the current offer that those families purchasing more than two standard cost passes will only pay for the first two,

be endorsed.