Row with First could see council take over the buses in Bristol
BUS operator First's stranglehold on Bristol's bus services could soon be at an end.
A simmering row between the council and First has finally boiled over and now transport leader Tim Kent is taking the first steps towards regulating the city's bus services.
-
The move would mean the council would be responsible for bus transport in the city and private operators such as First would have to bid for the contracts to run routes.
The cabinet councillor's strategy is a high-risk one because if the buses did not generate enough fares, any shortfall would fall on council taxpayers to pick up. But Mr Kent and his team of transport officials are so fed up with their poor relationship with First, they see no alternative but for the council to take responsibility for running the buses.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Sunday, June 30 2013
The tipping point came at Easter when First decided to pull the 20, 36 and 51 services on Good Friday and Easter Monday. They will not operate on bank holiday Monday next week.
First argued that there was no point in running them because they were not viable on a bank holiday – but they were happy to do so if the council chose to subsidise them.
But Mr Kent said First ran profitable bus services on 340 days of the year and therefore there should be more give and take.
He told the Post: "This is not some angry councillor just shooting from the hip, without giving the matter careful consideration. We realise that what we are proposing is high risk because of the possible financial penalties – but other cities are looking at the same legislation and we are going to do the same."
In a strongly-worded letter to First, Mr Kent said: "We expect the major bus company, First, which makes substantial profits in our city most days of the week and has seen real growth in passenger numbers, to run a full network and service. We expect this to occur on bank holidays as well."
Mr Kent's reference to "real growth" refers to the popular Showcase bus routes, which have been set up thanks to millions of pounds of taxpayers' money. First have invested in a fleet of new buses to run on the routes – but it is the company which takes all of the profits.
The method which could be used to effectively take over bus services would be to introduce what are known as Quality Contracts, where the council decides which services it wants to have run.
Mr Kent said in his letter to First that "decision after decision" taken by the company appeared to prioritise short-term profit, which was damaging the company's reputation with the public.
He has told First that the recent decision to cut bank holiday services had given the authority "legal justification" to bring in Quality Contracts to regulate services.
Mr Kent stressed that he believed negotiation and co-operation with bus companies was likely to achieve much more.
"But at the same time, I cannot allow for a monopoly public transport company to effectively withdraw services without notification and leave whole parts of the city with no form of public transport," he said.
A spokeswoman for First said the company had "held brief discussions" with Mr Kent over the letter.
She said that council funding for bank holiday services had been withdrawn last year as part of cost cutting and re-tendering process, which also saw subsidies cut for evening and weekend services.
"When this happened, we understood the pressure that the council faced to cut its budget, and we proactively took steps to take as many previously supported journeys on commercially, absorbing the costs of doing so," said the spokeswoman. "We took on journeys during the evenings and weekends, retaining travel opportunities for the people who needed them.
"Bank holiday service provision generally mirrors the level of service that operates on Sundays. Where we operate commercial services on Sundays, we do the same on bank holidays."
First said the 20, 36 and 51 were council-funded on Sundays but not on bank holidays. The company pledged to make sure that the areas served by the 20, 36 and 51 would have some buses on the June and August bank holidays.
On Quality Contracts, the spokeswoman said: "The process of forming a quality contract replacing existing bus operations is long, complex and potentially very expensive to the public purse."
She added that the company believed the council should concentrate on bidding for funding for measures to increase the attractiveness of bus travel under the government's Better Bus Area scheme.
"In recent years we have made a number of significant improvements to the services, increasing frequencies, investing millions in new buses and new ticket machines and creating more jobs," she said.
Comments
by DM_Fishponds
Sunday, May 06 2012, 9:22AM
“Now that the referendum for a Bristol Mayor is over and Cllr Kent can go back to his 'day job' of Executive Member for Transport . . .
. . . it is time for Cllrs Kent & Hopkins to make good on their 'promises'!”
by SpinyHedgehog
Thursday, May 03 2012, 2:57PM
“Sorry, but there's no point in a mayor foe the Bristol City Council area while Noth and South Dibley snipe from the sidelines.
Offer us a real Mayor for ALL of Bristol and I'll think of voting for the option.”
by AJT77
Thursday, May 03 2012, 1:50PM
“I agree with the councils strategy and would like to see all public transport properly regulated with ticketing including prices not set by the operators. This could reduce fares and increase passengers and make the system more viable. Just shows we don't need a mayor to improve things.”
by Chipnum
Thursday, May 03 2012, 12:58PM
“Regarding the question of an elected mayor. We don't yet know what the remit of such a being would be (the government is being very vague on this). Given that the government commisssioned a review into the bus industry, which recommended retaining the current system with only minor tweaks, I doubt elected mayors will have London style powers over buses.
Note that even the Passenger Transort Executives in the big connurbations have not yet gone down the Quality Contract route.
These organisations were set up back in the late 1960s. They had to merge all municipal bus fleets in their areas into new directly operated PTE fleets. They also took over financial support of local rail networks, and introduced integrated ticketing by varying degrees. Some even built whole metro systems (Tyne & Wear), or took over local rail services from Network Rail (Merseyside). After bus deregulation they all sold their bus fleets (by government decree), and today have no more influence over buses than Bristol City Council do, hence their persistent calls for Quality Contracts.
My point here is Bristol City Council has no experience in directly operated public transport provision so are they competent enough to do it? Also, Bristol City Council only covers part of the Bristol Urban area. First's Bristol network covers the whole urban area. If Bristol City Council 'confiscate' the part of the bus network within their boundary, what effect will that have on routes crossing into neighbouring areas. Will South Gloucestershire, North Somerset, and B&NES be happy about Bristol specifying routes and fares? Will buses terminate at the city boundary forcing passenger to change for onward travel? Will the parts of current city routes outside the city council boundary be commercially viable?”
by Chipnum
Thursday, May 03 2012, 12:38PM
“This story is being discussed on the Omnibuses Blog (a bus industry blog). Not much sympathy for Bristol City Council in the comments section I'm afraid.
http://tinyurl.com/d8czrwo
Incidently, the services that sparked this row are already council supported. The council can't afford to support bank holiday services because it recently retendered all the supported services as one large contract which none of the smaller local operators had the resources to take on. Result, only First put in a bid, and the cost to the council was more than the sum of the all the old contracts!
To clarify things for readers, buses were deregulated 26 years ago. Bristol City Council should therefore know how things work. Put simply bus companies must decide what services they wish to operate commercially at a profit. These have to be registered with the local Traffic Commissioners office (part of VOSA, a governmant agency). Bristol therefore gets approx 80-90% of its bus network for 'free' - no subsidy required. Councils must then decide what additional services they wish to purchase to extend operating hours on commercial routes (late evenings mainly), Sundays and bank holidays, and also complete routes that aren't provided commercially (usually low demand ones). They then put these out to tender and bus companies bid for the work. This system does ensure that public money is spent where it is needed and that the best value for money is obtained.
Prior to deregulation we had large teritorial bus operators (here it was Bristol Omnibus - part of the state owned National Bus Company) who cross-subsidised loss making routes with profits from busy routes. Non of this was transparent and local councils faced regular demands for more subsidies without knowing what exactly they were getting for their money. Thus the principle driver behind deregulation was to save public money. Competition was a secondary objective.”
by nglclr
Thursday, May 03 2012, 8:52AM
“Who would you use to replace First? Wessex Connect? Hope not. Their drivers spend all day chatting on the phone, while driving and while serving, it's the height of ignorance. Can they not drive for a few hours without the need to chat on the phone? Is every call that important? One Polish driver chatted on his hands free continuously for a whole hour when l was on his bus, even when selling tickets he was still chatting. Doesn't that take some of his concentration away, maybe that's why the standard of driving on there is so low. Most of their drivers are First rejects anyway.”
by georges1974
Thursday, May 03 2012, 12:50AM
“no sssshhhhhiiiiittttt!!!!!!!!!!, a bit late for that carrot, I got a big stick, I have one VOTE YES!!!”
by bristolgeoff
Wednesday, May 02 2012, 11:32PM
“good idea but it could be a story to make us vote the other way.i agree with mendip this was planned”
by simon12345678
Wednesday, May 02 2012, 11:05PM
“The fact that First are so dreadful and the fact that so many people drive are directly related.”
by Bristol_Tom
Wednesday, May 02 2012, 9:18PM
“Hoorah!
Kent is frit ( as Mrs T would have said).
All the more reason for an elected Mayor with the ability to create a
"TRANSPORT FOR BRISTOL AUTHORITY) a la Boris's TFL.
Give notice to cancel all arrangements in Bristol an invite new tenders from as many as possible.
Lots of Cos gagging for Bristol and contracting to beat Worse Bus.
Pity that the new Mayor can't manage all Avon (bar pitiful Bath, of course) so that at last this corner of England gets sorted.”