Local authorities need greater powers, such as those enjoyed by the Swiss, if the prime minister’s £5bn pledge is to help inally, after decades of disastrous, or at best feeble, bus policy, Boris Johnson’s pledge of £5bn to improve buses suggests that at long last the importance of this neglected mode of transport is being recognised. The prime minister said in parliament that there would be more services, including at evenings and weekends, and simpler, cheaper and more convenient fares, as well as more bus lanes and zero-carbon buses. But while £5bn could build quite a lot of bus lanes, it will not have much impact on fares and services unless it is accompanied by countrywide regulation of local public transport. In 1985, control over Britain’s buses passed from local authorities to private companies. Deregulation meant that instead of local authorities planning the bus network, private bus operators could decide where and when to run buses, based on which routes were most profitable. It was supposed to lead to an improvement in services, and an increase in the number of people travelling by bus. The Conservative government at the time said that “without the dead hand of restrictive regulation, fares could be reduced on many bus routes and the operator would still make a profit. New and better services would be provided. More people would travel.” But deregulation had the opposite effect: fares rose, services worsened and bus use fell. The decline was most catastrophic in the places that previously had the highest levels of bus travel. According to census data for 1981 and 2001, 41% of workers in Sheffield travelled by bus at the beginning of the 1980s, but two decades later that figure had halved to 19%. With bus operators focusing on the most profitable routes, the lack of services elsewhere was addressed in part by local authorities paying for extra “socially necessary” journeys. That worked to a degree, though it meant that bus services increasingly came to be seen as a basic safety net rather than an essential public service. Austerity cuts from 2010 meant that councils had to make impossible choices between funding for social care and funding for transport. Not surprisingly, it was budgets for buses that were cut. The result was a further slashing of services, especially in rural areas. Ironically, it was the Conservative chancellor George Osborne who finally recognised that deregulation had been a failure. Three years ago the government legislated to allow large local authorities with elected mayors to regulate their bus services again. Andy Burnham, the mayor of Greater Manchester, seems likely to be the first mayor to do that, though the process that his transport authority has to go through to get the regulatory powers has been complicated and drawn out. Local authorities outside the big conurbations were not given this power, however. Over on the continent, Switzerland embarked on a very different journey. Just two years after buses were deregulated in the UK, the canton of Zurich passed a law specifying the public transport services citizens could expect: an hourly service for settlements of 300 people; a half-hourly service for people living on main corridors; and a service at least every 15 minutes for residents of dense urban areas. All services were to run from 6am to midnight, seven days a week. The difference in the destinations reached by the respective countries is stark: the average citizen of Zurich canton makes 450 public transport trips a year, compared with about 100 trips a year in equivalent areas in England. One part of the UK did not suffer bus deregulation in the 1980s – in London, services stayed under public control. While bus trips outside London halved over the following 30 years, use in the capital doubled. Londoners now make as many local bus, Underground and local train trips each year as the citizens of Zurich canton. As a result of deregulation, the public sector can only provide capital for bus lanes, but it can’t specify what services will run on them, or how often, or at what fares. And worst of all, it can’t design a complete network. So right now, Boris Johnson’s billions will have a limited impact. The only way to improve bus travel in the UK is to reverse deregulation and provide local authorities with Swiss-style powers to regulate and coordinate their bus services, coupled with ongoing funding for a comprehensive offering that enables convenient travel any time of day, any day of the week, between any two places bigger than a small village. And so far, there are no hints of that happening. Aside from the important function of providing transport from A to B, buses now have an increasingly important role to play in tackling the climate emergency. To stand any chance of meeting the Paris climate agreement targets, we will have to cut the amount of driving we do. That implies some restraint on car use, which will only command public consent if it happens in parallel with recognition that people have a right to decent, affordable alternative ways of travelling. Action on the climate emergency doesn’t just require a few more electric buses, it requires Swiss-style public transport so that buses become not just a better form of transport, but our main form of transport. So one cheer for Johnson recognising that buses are important and that they deserve at least £5bn. But I’ll only be giving three cheers if he follows up with an announcement of Swiss-style powers to regulate and coordinate services. The UK has been travelling in the wrong direction for too long, it’s not too late to hop off.