For the first time the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has said in its annual minimum income study that for families with children owning a car is essential. The section on transport commences on page 16.

Public transport was seen as being inflexible. For parents who had to take children to school or childcare and then get to work at a certain time, buses were not a realistic option as they could not accomplish the journey in the time available. Groups also cited examples of emergencies when it would not have been possible to use public transport, or affordable to use a taxi. Bus fares were universally considered very expensive and taxis prohibitively so. Discussions suggested that, although there were costs involved in owning a car, it offered better value for money than public transport.

As well as travelling to and from work and school, the car would be used for shopping trips and would mean that families could do a weekly shop in oneouting and take advantage of bulk-buying economies. It meant that there was no need for a separate budget for taxi use, and it also replaced the 2008 and 2010 use of coach travel for the family holiday.This change in the decisions about transport reflected a qualitative shift in perspective rather than a complete change of opinion. In earlier MIS research,the requirement for a car had been hotly debated by urban groups but it wasdecided, on balance, that minimum needs could be met by using buses with occasional taxis. In 2012, however, the balance of opinion had tipped theother way.

The report cites that bus fares have become much more expensive relative to the cost of running a car. In the past 15 years, for example, the cost of motoring has risen 50 percent but the cost of bus travel has increased by 100 per cent, according to the RPI.