• While the metropolis of Lyon had buried the issue, President Bruno Bernard agreed to create a working group on free public transport.
  • Cities such as Calais, Dunkirk or Chantilly have made this choice for several years.
  • Economist Pierre-Yves Péguy, director of the Laboratoire aménagement économie transports (LAET), was asked if this was a good idea for a metropolis like Lyon.

Calais, Chantilly, Niort but also Dunkirk and soon Montpellier. These cities have one thing in common: they have established a system of free travel for all on their transport network. In Lyon, Bruno Bernard, president of the metropolis, agreed at the end of February to create a transpartisan group to study the issue while he was initially opposed to it. What would such a measure bring to the community? And for users? Pierre-Yves Péguy, director of the Laboratoire aménagement économie transports (LAET) at the origin of work on this issue, returned to 20 Minutes on the relevance of free travel for all in a metropolis like Lyon.

Is free public transport feasible in a metropolis like Lyon?

Financially, it is feasible but it has consequences. Zero fares lead to an increase in attendance. It will therefore be necessary to increase the supply, in terms of frequency and services, so as not to end up with a congested network. All this has a cost that, until now, was relatively compensated thanks to a virtuous circle experienced in Lyon. Free transport calls this strategy into question. It will be necessary to compensate for the shortfall in commercial revenues - estimated at 250 million euros per year - by contributions from employers via the mobility payment tax and those from local authorities to cover operating expenses. Currently, the operating deficit amounts to €161 million. If we move to total free in 2030, we would go to 578 million euros with 15% more demand, and to 662 million euros if we have 30% more demand. The deficit would thus be tripled in the short term.

In addition to the financial aspect, is free transport desirable?

There are three daunting problems with this measure. The first is the one I have just mentioned, that is to say, the efficiency of a network with fewer resources and an increase in attendance. Secondly, our work showed that free access was not consistent with the challenges of its application. For the Lyon metropolitan area, the purpose of this measure would be to have a modal shift, that is to say, to change the mode of travel. In the case of large cities, it is a question of moving from private cars to soft mobility in order to have a carbon-free city. According to our estimates, when a zero euro tariff is introduced, the new clientele will come mainly from walking and cycling, rather than cars and for short trips in the city centre rather than on the outskirts. Free access is therefore not the best lever if the objective is a modal shift.

The last point is a problem of fairness. If it's free for everyone, it means that regardless of your location, regardless of your status, your income, it's the same price. If we do that, we sit on the issues of fairness and we act as if we all have the same income. This is a major problem. It is necessary to take into account the different situations of each. It is therefore necessary to focus instead on solidarity pricing, which integrates the profiles of individuals. This range exists in Lyon but it could be further simplified and expanded.

Why, then, have other cities already introduced this free transport?

Comparison is not right. The stakes are not comparable. Lyon is 1.5 times more population than the ten largest networks of cities that have chosen free access - except Dunkirk -. It's also eleven times more travel and five times more operating costs. And the objectives are not the same. For Calais, for example, the strategy of such a project was to make city centres more attractive and compete with supermarkets on the outskirts. This is not the case for large cities. In Montpellier, this measure will only concern the inhabitants of the city center. In other municipalities, it only concerns weekends. And whatever the reasons for setting up and the size of the cities, the problems of equity remain and arise.

  • Society
  • Lyon
  • Auvergne-Rhône-Alpes
  • Rhône-Alpes
  • Montpellier
  • Occitania
  • Languedoc-Roussillon
  • Dunkirk
  • Hauts-de-France
  • Public transport