Would you still buy a new EV?

[gasgas]

Have you ever seen a Fiat Multipla or a Nissan Joke - oops sorry, Juke?
These Crowns remind me of the Lexus front which I have always thought not very attractive.
And this one has a flag pole on the front wing - so you can hang the Pakistani Embassy flag from it (see Italian Job where Michael Caine gets out of prison if you don't know what I am referring to)

 

[Geek]

This looks lovely, aToyota Crown

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Toyota really know how to make good hybrids and reliable vehicles. It's a shame they make them so ugly.

Yes, Japanese imports are the way to go. But be very sure that any import is well rustproofed when it first arrives, before rust can take a hold. They don't use road salt in Japan, so cars for their domestic market are not enough well protected for UK's corrosive roads.

 

[GeoffL]

We do have a bus service. But it's less than once an hour and doesn't go where people want to travel to.
They say the other road is too small for a bus, though huge tractors find it OK.

I live in a town of about 10,000 and we have a bus that stops about a hundred yards from my door. Buses are about every ten minutes during the day. However, they don't go where I want to go. The road is big enough for double-decker buses, but for most destinations a bus trip starts with a five-mile detour in the wrong direction. All too often, there won't be bus back the same day -- and there's still the issue of the amount of gear I often need to carry.
FWIW, Jan and I went to a jam session at a nearby village last night. It took us about quarter of an hour by car. We took a guitar, bass, fiddle and a battery-powered amp in the boot. I've just checked the situation by public transport. The village is graced by an active train station, which is probably why there are very few buses. To go by bus would first need that five mile detour in the wrong direction and a total trip of over thirty miles (it's only about eight miles by car) and about two hours. According to Google Maps, the best public transport route is a bus to take me miles out of the way to visit every village along the coast to a town that's about fifteen miles beyond the village, then a walk of over half a mile to the train station, then a train to the village and finally a walk of about 700 yards to the venue. The jam ended at about 23:30. According to Google Maps, there isn't any buses or trains until about 07:00 the following morning. I'm not the only person with such requirements (the pub was packed with musos last night, and most came from far enough away to face the same issue as I would have). Basically, no personal transport = no social life for thousands upon thousands.

As for numbers, you are just plain wrong. If we even had the per capita subsidy that London gets, we'd have a superb service.

According to Brave AI, the London transport subsidy for last year was £105.80 per capita. So, for a village with just 100 people, that's £10,580 pa. Non metropolitan average subsidy was just £35.91 per capita -- so about £7,000 less than London for a village of 100. Even the London rate isn't going to pay for a single bus. Now even in London (where the buses are well used, and so more viable), the total expenditure was over £2k per capita, and most of that came from fares. The per mile running costs are about the same for both metropolitan and rural areas but the rural distances tend to be much longer and with more empty seats -- so the per capita total expenditure will need to be even greater than London's in rural areas. This means that your "superb service" will never be affordable or practical 'out in the sticks'. It just isn't going to happen -- even if London per capita subsidies were to be granted!

 

[gasgas]

Surprisingly the CO2 emissions of that Toyota are zero. According to gov.uk. So the annual road tax is £20.

 

[Geek]

According to Brave AI, the London transport subsidy for last year was £105.80 per capita

That's the joy of AI. In reality, the subsidy of public transport across Greater London was about* £2,300 per capita.

*The figure is correct, but I don't recall which year it applies to.

 

[GeoffL]

That's the joy of AI. In reality, the subsidy of public transport across Greater London was about* £2,300 per capita.

*The figure is correct, but I don't recall which year it applies to.

Ah the joys of seeing something and jumping to the wrong conclusion! I saw that figure (actually £2,237) -- but that was the total expenditure per capita rather than just for transport. Government spending per capita for transport for London in that year was £1,313 -- but again, that was total expenditure on transport rather than just the subsidy. However, by the same measure, the national average was £687 per capita, some £626 less. Multiply that by 100 and it's still not enough to provide the utopian service you seem to think possible.

https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN04033/SN04033.pdf

UK transport spending per capita by region 2024| Statista

In 2023/24, transport spending in London was 1,313 British pounds per capita, compared with just 368 pounds per head in the East Midlands, indicating a significant regional disparity in public spending on transport.

www.statista.com

 

[Geek]

Surprisingly the CO2 emissions of that Toyota are zero. According to gov.uk. So the annual road tax is £20.

Sadly not. If that Toyota is an import from Japan, yes the emissions are zero, but the road tax is £360 per year. Not £20.

 

[gasgas]

Hmmm. I thought that was a bit cheap! I tried putting the reg number in gov www but all it says is that it is taxed and won't say what the annual cost is. That's why I looked up the tax for a zero emissions car and thought it was £0.
I also think that the emissions are not zero. But what do I know? It's still a lovely car I would like to own . . .even at £360 / yearit's cheaper to run than a new all electric car.

 

[Geek]

Government spending per capita for transport for London in that year was £1,313 -- but again, that was total expenditure on transport rather than just the subsidy.

Can you explain this distinction?
If the government spends £1,313 per person 'for transport for London', what is it if it isn't subsidy?

That figure doesn't include fare or season ticket income. I don't know if it includes pensioner bus pass payments (a few tens of pence per passenger carried) or similar stuff like school travel.

I doubt my figure was from 23/24, assuming some lag in reporting, because I've remembered that number from many months ago.

 

[Geek]

Hmmm. I thought that was a bit cheap! I tried putting the reg number in gov www but all it says is that it is taxed and won't say what the annual cost is. That's why I looked up the tax for a zero emissions car and thought it was £0.
I also think that the emissions are not zero. But what do I know? It's still a lovely car I would like to own . . .even at £360 / yearit's cheaper to run than a new all electric car.

The emissions are indeed zero.

This is something to do with databases, not exhaust pipes.

The DVLA descriptor will say something like 'Petrol Hybrid (clean)' and it's OK for ULEZ and all other LEZs.

Check insurance premiums too. Many insurers are terrified of them.

 

[GeoffL]

Government spending per capita for transport for London in that year was £1,313 -- but again, that was total expenditure on transport rather than just the subsidy.

Can you explain this distinction?
If the government spends £1,313 per person 'for transport for London', what is it if it isn't subsidy?

To me, "spending per capita for transport" is for everything transport-related, including infrastructure for all forms of transport (cycleways, road repairs, etc), while subsidies include only funds specifically spent on public transport.

 

[Geek]

That's not my understanding of it Transport for London is not responsible for any of those things.

 

[GeoffL]

That's not my understanding of it Transport for London is not responsible for any of those things.

Maybe not -- but transport spending in London includes more than just TfL...

 

[Geek]

The figure was specifically 'on Transport for London' not for 'transport-related things in London.'

 

[GeoffL]

The figure was specifically 'on Transport for London' not for 'transport-related things in London.'

You're mistaken. I even posted a link, which explicitly states that figure is for "transport spending in London". I've repeated the link below for your benefit together with a screen dump of a relevant graphic -- note the heading, which doesn't mention "Transport for London" (the organisation)...

No matter how you try to spin it, it's highly unlikely that buses can ever be an affordable and convenient transport solution for much of rural UK.

UK transport spending per capita by region 2024| Statista

In 2023/24, transport spending in London was 1,313 British pounds per capita, compared with just 368 pounds per head in the East Midlands, indicating a significant regional disparity in public spending on transport.

www.statista.com

 

[Geek]

I looked at that link. It confirms what I stated. Not what you stated. Do we speak the same language?

 

[GeoffL]

I looked at that link. It confirms what I stated. Not what you stated. Do we speak the same language?

Obviously not. That report is titled "UK Transport spending per capita" and clearly states, "In 2023/24, transport spending in London was 1,313 British pounds per capita, [...]" and not "Transport for London". Additionally, that report convers much, much more than just London and TfL don't have responsibility for (say) the Midlands and so any conclusion that the figures are only for TfL makes zero sense.

Back to EVs, and I note that (thanks to EVs and according to National Highways) the M5 Southbound remains closed between junctions 28 and 29 following the fire early Wednesday morning. That's the major route between the Westcountry and Wales/Midlands closed for at least three days due to a single fire incident that took eleven fire stations to put out -- and even then they couldn't confirm the burned out vehicles were safe.

 

[Geek]

The basic problem is a different approach. I read those figures (or their predecessors) some years ago, and I generally like to base my beliefs on facts.

You seem to be trying to massage the figures (and what they cover) to account for the disparity between what you believe and the facts the figures present to you.

Seems to me that the figures in London were for TfL and don't cover public money spent on (see, I avoided "subsidy") other forms of public transport.

AFAIK TfL do buses and the underground but not school transport, elderly transport or commuter rail services. Or ambulances, but they really live in health, not transport.

So that might explain the £1k per person* difference between your figures and my recollection.

I think main line rail services break even, but that's just a guess. It's over a decade since I knew anyone involved in rail franchising.

*There are a lot of people in London, so this is a huge sum, which would transform PT nationally if rolled out everywhere.

 

[GeoffL]

It's not me who's trying to massage the figures! I did a little more research:

According to TfL's own website, their gross expenditure for 2024/25 was £9.6 billion, of which £5.3 billion came from "passenger income", so that's a maximum subsidy (i.e. the difference) of £4.3 billion. According to Worldometer, the population of Greater London is approx 9 million, which means the maximum subsidy 2024/25 works out to be only £478 per capita.

Transport for London

TfL is by some distance the largest of the Mayor’s functional bodies.

www.london.gov.uk

U.K. Population (2025) - Worldometer

Population of the United Kingdom: current, historical, and projected population, growth rate, immigration, median age, total fertility rate (TFR), population density, urbanization, urban population, country's share of world population, and global rank. Data tables, maps, charts, and live...

www.worldometers.info

 

[Geek]

Clearly you know nothing of business accounting