Extend free travel, rather than discriminating against the elderly by cutting the freedom pass

Extend free travel, rather than seek to cut the benefit for the elderly There has been much public debate about suggestion that there should be restrictions placed on the freedom pass for 60 pluses. A public spat saw TV presenter Kirsty Allsop taking issue with author Michael Rosen over whether someone as wealthy as him needed free travel. There are two forms of free travel for the over 60s. The Oyster 60 plus card is available, once someone reachs 60. It gives free travel on buses and trains and is funded by TFL. This card runs till state retirement age, when a freedom pass takes over. The freedom pass is funded by London Councils, covering trains in London and buses across the country. It was this card that London Councils were looking to review. The review began in January, quickly drawing a 60,000 signature petition opposed to change. The review was prefaced on rising costs that saw the freedom passes costing £333 million last year and predicted to rise to £372 million for 2026/27. A rankerous debate, quickly developed, into an attack on the elderly. BBC London didn't waste the opportunity to contextualise the story in terms of intergenerational conflict. This involved getting younger people asking why the elderly are getting such a benefit, while they have to pay full rate for increasingly expensive public transport. Leaving aside that elderly people have earned such rights by a lifetime of work and service, the bigger question surely is why cannot the younger group also have free travel. Indeed, everyone should be eligible. This direction of travel would couch the argument in terms of reducing inequality and improving the environment, rather than stoking intergenerational resentments. In a country, as rich as the UK, such things should be possible. Something that never seems to come into these arguments is why the mass of people should subsidise the lifestyles of the very rich. This includes private planes, destructive large vehicles, private education for their children and private healthcare. These excesses and the cost to everyone else rarely comes into the debate. Cheap and/ or free travel really is a no brainer. It enables people to get out to visit loved ones as well as attending and spending at a variety of businesses and attractions across the capital. This helps keep them going. There are resulting pluses for people's mental and physical health that are not always easily quantifiable in the land of bottom line economics. Add in the fact that train and bus passenger numbers are still below pre-Covid levels, why would anyone want to restrict incentives to get people using public transport? Fortunately, it would seem plans to cut the freedom pass have receded, with the 21 Labour London councils now opposed. (It would be a suicidal thing to do in an election year). However, the argument may return, in an effort to chip away at another hard earned benefit on the altar of austerity. Everyone should be prepared.