Deregulating the bus industry in Britain: a rejoinder

In our critique for the Buses White Paper, we argued that ‘competition for licences’ could achieve most of the benefits of competition without the major disadvantages of ‘competition on the road’. In response to the comments of Beesley and Glaister, we explain how comprehensive franchising of good and bad routes alike would encourage effective competition, whilst providing conditions for the transparent continuation of cross‐subsidy where that was the choice of the local authority in question. We correct their misrepresentation of our arguments on the desirability of cross‐subsidy and on the case for minibuses, and explain why we believe that such cost savings as are achieved will be mainly at the expense of staff or customer service. Finally, we restate the case for believing that a unified planned timetable will provide a better service for a given level of resources than will uncoordinated competitive services.