The Political Cost of a Peppercorn Saving

Here's a quiz. Name one policy brought in by the Conservatives that tangibly improved the lives of the poorest people. It's difficult considering how their list of achievements was a bucket of deplorables, but there is one. And that would be the £2 cap on bus fares. When 16% of Britons don't have access to a car and most of whom among the poorest people in the country, a bus is a lifeline. The Tories' introduction of a cap meant ticket price certainty across most routes in England. It made budgeting easier, allowed for the car-less to venture further afield for work, and afford trips into town or round and about to see friends and family. But that government is gone and now we have "changed Labour", and they want to show how much they've changed by increasing the cap by 50%, unnecessarily saddling bus users with extra expense for a peppercorn saving of £50m.

Announced by Keir Starmer at his pre-budget media address, raising the cap is one of those choices the government can use to emphasise their well 'ard credentials. The cheeky Number 10 press release is written up to suggest that passengers should be grateful for the government's largesse. We're told £1bn is being invested to make "better bus services". This will guarantee that fares "remain affordable" while being "fair to the taxpayer". As if bus users and "taxpayers" are two discrete entities.

As ever with this government, scaling back support for bus services is not a technocratic exercise. The 'why?' lies in the politics. Having spent a lot of last week defending their long planned measures to levy taxes on unearned income, they think the consequent outrage and the media trouble could be offset by attacking things that poorer people depend on. Such as bus fares and winter fuel allowances. I.e. They think an 'all in it together' budget that apportions the "necessary" sacrifices evenly means there will be less of a political price to pay when those with the "broadest shoulders" are asked to cough up.

This might work with the Starmerist base in the professional and managerial sectors. To them it looks equal parts fair and fair-minded, and will fire off much-needed serious vibes after their grown up image took a knock following freebiegate. But if they're hoping to mollify the Tory press, until they retreat on unearned income and wind back the workers' right plans to nothing they will be dogged and dogged and dogged, no matter how much they axe supportive measures for the poor and most vulnerable. And so here we are. For the sake of a tiny amount of money and a barely visible perceivable political advantage, Labour is set on demobilising the support of the people they need for it to remain in office. Again.