ie bus subsidy cake
Page 5
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
million may seem of small account, but the formula for deciding bus subsidies is likely to generate much political heat in many parts of the country.
If the AMA members can come to a unanimous decision on the sharing of the Transport Supplementary Grants the Environment Minister, Mr Tony Crosland, would find his task much easier. He has full discretion in approving the allocation of public money.
But if, as seems likely, there is no unanimity amongst AMA members then anything the Minister does is likely to arouse controversy.
AMA member authorities are agreed on one thing : the inadequacy of the total sum awarded in the form of Transport Supplementary Grant. Where the Authorities differ is in the limited area of bus subsidies.
The Tyne and Wear Metropolitan Authority is afraid that it will be hurt financially by a formula so far favoured by the AMA, and based on the 1973/ 74 situation. Tyne and Wear —an Authority which has been zealous in raising bus fares at the behest of the Government —wants a formula based on what is likely to happen next year. An alternative formula, favoured by Tyne and Wear, would benefit itself, West and South Yorkshire, and Greater Manchester councils, and would exclude the West Midlands and Merseyside councils.
So _strongly do Tyne and Wear feel on the issue that they have asked Mr Michael Thomas, Labour MP for Newcastle upon Tyne East, to take up the matter with Dr Gilbert.
In practical terms, the Tyne and Wear Authority may lose £300,000 of bus subsidy which they equate with El million on the County Rates Precept— around two per cent of their £56 Million budget. The Authority hopes to hold its bus fares at present levels for 12 months from last July and any shortfall in bus subsidy could mean that it will have to review its concessionary fares policy for the aged and disabled.