A new survey reveals that while concerns over safety, crowdedness, and costs persist, increasing confidence and positive sentiments among Londoners could signal a potential transport revival if services address key issues of safety, affordability, and accessibility.
A recent survey by Savanta and the Centre for London think tank reveals a complex picture of Londoners’ attitudes toward public transport, highlighting both significant concerns and potential levers for increasing usage. The data shows that nearly half of Londoners would prefer using public transport over driving if fares were reduced. This affordability aspect remains a key factor, reinforcing findings from a 2019 London Assembly survey which identified cost as a primary barrier for 32% of infrequent or non-users.
Beyond fares, over a third of Londoners cited improvements in safety, crowding, and reliability as critical for encouraging them to choose public transport. This aligns with ongoing issues highlighted by Transport for London’s recent crime data, where almost 40% of passengers reported feeling worried during their journeys, with concerns focused on drunken behaviour and anti-social conduct, particularly on buses and the Underground. Overcrowding, cited as a deterrent by 11% of Underground users and 13% of bus passengers, compounds these worries and echoes earlier research indicating that discomfort from crowding and heat remains a significant challenge.
Survey respondents also emphasised the need for increased accessibility and better amenities; 34% indicated that greater ease of access would encourage more frequent use, while 19% desired more public toilets on the network. These concerns reflect broader dissatisfaction captured in Transport Focus and London TravelWatch surveys, which show that London bus and Underground passengers are less satisfied with cleanliness and the ability to socially distance compared to passengers outside the capital, impacting perceived comfort and safety.
Despite these challenges, there are signs of growing confidence among Londoners. According to Centre for London polling, nearly two-thirds (62%) now feel comfortable visiting central London, a notable rise from 52% in September 2020. Optimism about employment prospects has also increased, with 45% of Londoners feeling positive about their job outlook over the next year. This improved sentiment could foster a resurgence in public transport use if services improve to meet the expectations of safety, comfort, and affordability.
Satisfaction levels across different modes of transport paint an uneven picture. While 52% of Londoners express happiness with rail and bus services, approval of cycle lanes and pavements lags behind at around a third each, and only a quarter feel satisfied with parking options. The rising proportion of residents unhappy with transport services and air quality highlights further areas for policy focus.
Taken together, these findings illustrate that London’s public transport system is at a crossroads. Affordability, safety, reliability, and comfort are intertwined concerns that must be addressed holistically to rebuild confidence and increase ridership. Addressing issues such as inflation of fares, enhancing safety measures to reduce crime and anti-social behaviour, improving cleanliness, and expanding accessibility and amenities could collectively unlock the potential for a more sustainable and widely used transport network, crucial for supporting London’s ongoing economic recovery and growth.
📌 Reference Map:
- [1], [2] (Evening Standard) – Paragraph 1, Paragraph 2
- [7] (Evening Standard) – Paragraph 2
- [6] (London Assembly) – Paragraph 1
- [4] (London TravelWatch) – Paragraph 3
- [3] (Centre for London) – Paragraph 4
- [5] (Centre for London) – Paragraph 5
- [2], [1] (Evening Standard) – Paragraph 6
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative is recent, published today, and presents new survey data from Savanta and the Centre for London. The earliest known publication date of similar content is 4 December 2019, based on a previous survey by Savanta and the Centre for London. ([savanta.com](https://savanta.com/knowledge-centre/poll/centre-for-london-transport-survey/?utm_source=openai)) This indicates that the current narrative is fresh and not recycled. The report is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were found. The narrative includes updated data and does not recycle older material.
Quotes check
Score:
10
Notes:
No direct quotes are present in the narrative, so this check is not applicable.
Source reliability
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative originates from The Standard, a reputable UK news outlet. The data is sourced from Savanta and the Centre for London, both established organisations. The Centre for London is a well-known think tank, and Savanta is a recognised market research firm. The narrative does not mention any unverifiable entities.
Plausability check
Score:
9
Notes:
The claims made in the narrative are plausible and supported by the data from the survey. The findings align with previous research, such as a 2022 survey by Savanta and the Centre for London, which found that 25% of respondents said transport is unaffordable for them. ([savanta.com](https://savanta.com/us/knowledge-centre/view/the-rising-cost-of-living-means-londoners-are-struggling-to-afford-basic-essentials/?utm_source=openai)) The narrative lacks specific factual anchors like names, institutions, and dates, which slightly reduces its score. The language and tone are consistent with UK English and the topic. There is no excessive or off-topic detail, and the tone is appropriate for a news report.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is recent, based on fresh data from reputable sources, and presents plausible claims without significant issues. The lack of specific factual anchors slightly reduces the plausibility score, but overall, the narrative passes the fact-checking criteria.