Policy I: reasons for agreement or disagreement
Why do you agree with Policy I?
Base: All those who agree with Policy I (578)
| wdt_ID | Key themes | % |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ease of use/convenience/simplicity is important (especially around ticketing validity/pricing) | 15 |
| 3 | Generally positive/supportive | 10 |
| 12 | Integrated across different modes/operators would be good | 9 |
| 13 | Two bus companies with different tickets and overlapping timetables is unhelpful and expensive | 8 |
| 14 | Would increase likelihood to travel via public transport | 6 |
| 15 | Digital/contactless (tap in tap out)/app-based solution is good (TfL/Oyster frequently mentioned, Stockholm, Nottingham, Nexus, other European cities generally) | 6 |
| 16 | Reduce fares generally/make it affordable | 5 |
| 17 | Ensure value for money/always get cheapest fare/flexible options/consistency | 4 |
| 18 | Much needed | 4 |
| 19 | Accessibility e.g. non-digital options need to be retained, co-create with those with lived experience | 2 |
| 20 | Sceptical about implementation | 2 |
| 21 | Multi-ticket options e.g. Solent Go need to be advertised more | 1 |
| 22 | Combining planning and purchase is good | 1 |
| 23 | Public transport needs improving more generally e.g. joined up timetables, better routes and frequencies, reliable | 1 |
| 24 | Consider zonal payment system with daily/weekly price caps | 1 |
| 25 | Don't spend too much money developing it/keep it simple | 1 |
| 26 | Other e.g. publicly-owned transport would be better, how will it fit with existing disabled or pensioner bus passes, all operators need to be onboard, can it include bike/scooter rental, incentivise people to join up | 2 |
| 27 | Na/no comment | 50 |
Please could you tell us why you disagree with Policy I?
Base: All those who disagree with Policy I (48)
| wdt_ID | Key themes | % |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sceptical about implementation | 23 |
| 3 | Fares will still be too expensive | 19 |
| 12 | Expensive to develop/waste of time and money | 13 |
| 13 | Other priorities/not needed | 8 |
| 14 | Make public transport free for residents/children in education | 8 |
| 15 | Bus companies need to have shared ticketing | 4 |
| 16 | Other e.g. use TfL system as a starting point, should already exist, deals don't work for hybrid working, not good for pensioners, bad idea | 10 |
| 17 | Na/no comment | 27 |
Please could you tell us why you neither agree nor disagree with Policy I?
Base: All those who neither agree nor disagree with Policy I (147)
| wdt_ID | Key themes | % |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sceptical about implementation | 11 |
| 3 | Already available/not needed/low take-up | 7 |
| 12 | Type of payment system comments e.g. app-based, contactless payments, base on TfL system, expand bus pass system nationally for other age groups, have one bus company operating in Portsmouth | 3 |
| 13 | Multi-tickets are too complicated and don't always work | 3 |
| 14 | Other priorities are more important e.g. accurate information on journeys, better service and infrastructure, too many people | 3 |
| 15 | Cost is main issue | 3 |
| 16 | Accessibility comments e.g. non-digital options, ensure works for the visually-impaired | 2 |
| 17 | Low awareness of Solent Go | 1 |
| 18 | High cost of new system | 1 |
| 19 | Other e.g. won't work outside local area, delays might lead to overcharging, need good refund system | 3 |
| 20 | Na/no comment | 67 |
