Ah yes.... the old "buses should be in public ownership" debate. Usually peppered with references to Lothian and London but fewer references to Newport or Halton. And, of course, the obligatory issue of franchising and centralised control/planning (rather than direct operation).
The theory being that a centralised regime of planning will improve integration and will remove wasteful competition, a single provision of information, etc etc.
Now the reality.
I have no confidence that PTEs and local authorities are fit for purpose in managing and coordinating bus operations. Let's look at Glasgow as our OP refers to that. Bus patronage has fallen but why? The clear inference would be through mismanagement and under-investment by First leading to the retraction on some routes and cutting of others. It cannot be denied.... there's truth in that. However, are these the only factors....?
Glasgow has become one of the most car centric cities in the UK. Look at the developments in the last 25 years...
- M74 extension - cost £700m and massively improved commuting times
- M77 extension - the Newton Mearns development (1997) and the extension in 2003 south - again making it easier for car travel
- M80 Stepps extension - cost £320m
It might also be wise to consider the issue of on street parking in Glasgow that a) promotes public car usage whilst b) removing footprint that could be used for bus priority. GCC could remove some of this but like many councils, car parking charges are an important revenue stream; GCC made nearly £22m from it in 2018/9. This is typical and it's one of the main issues during the Covid crisis for local authorities....their parking revenues are massively down.
So you have a lack of road space and bus priority because as a society, we have become very car dependent. Whoever runs (or plans) the buses is irrelevant if they are going to be stuck in traffic. Local authorities could solve that NOW and you know what, the best local authorities (Brighton & Hove, Nottingham) ARE doing that. It's no surprise that the cities that are focusing on that (with good operators in partnership) are (or were) seeing patronage grow. Glasgow could do it tomorrow....if they had the political will.
Again, back to Glasgow (or Strathclyde in general), we are seeing the ongoing decline of our high streets. That is pretty undeniable and represents a substantial issue across the UK. The issue is more pronounced though for those secondary towns or locations (unlike the big city centres and towns). Glasgow still has a critical mass for shopping (irrespective of your own views on how good it is) so a 10% drop in footfall still means it's quite busy and so support a bus service whilst that might be the difference in a service in Clydebank or Motherwell being sustainable or not.
There are other macro-economic issues that are outside the control of bus operators or even local authorities. These aren't going to be changed by altering whoever runs or plans the buses. In the last 25 years, we've seen a welter of different legislation in respect of drivers hours/tacho regs, driver CPCs etc that have pushed up operator costs. Also, there have been taxation and other changes that have seen operator costs increase, such as stakeholder pensions, reduction of BSOG etc. At the same time, operators have had concessionary passes pushed onto them on a "no better no worse" basis yet clearly, the remuneration formula is such that it leads to a position that penalises the casual passenger. At the same time, the cost of running a private car has reduced in real terms with the freezing of fuel duty increases over the last 10 years. So you have bus operations having to lower income and higher costs whilst their main competition (the car) is ever cheaper.
The other competition, other than online shopping and the private car, comes from other public transport. Now, I'm pro PT so happy to see new rail and light rail. However, let's not be blind to the fact that when you develop rail lines etc, you are going to abstract patronage from buses. You can see the clear correlation in Greater Manchester where bus patronage falls in relation to the phases of Metrolink opening. It's entirely to be expected; it would be far more surprising if you opened the Borders Railway and 100% of the traffic came not from existing users of public transport (bus) and instead came from private car users.
Then you have the question of the competence of local authorities. Well, if the experience of Nexus/Cornwall Council/Dorset County Council is a guide, then it's a concern. Take Cornwall, who have traditionally been pro public transport and indeed, financed and owned some fleet that was operated by First to improve the quality of services in the county. They've recently been awarded a chunk of money to invest in improving buses in the county, allied to the changes to the main rail line. So what can go wrong? Well, they've awarded the contracts in a single package to a consortium headed by an operator that had no operations in most of the county so that was always a tough ask. That operator (Go Ahead) had three months from award to service commencement.... three months from nothing to a full countywide operation. CC have also introduced a number of new services.... the usual stuff of bold new links that get enthusiasts excited. However, these are links that in many instances were either already subsidised (so a two hourly tender becomes an hourly tender.... why?) or are totally new links based on seemingly no actual research but the whim of whatever PT Officer or (worse still) the lobbying of local politicians. Then, in the midst of the pandemic, they proposed a reduced fares experiment to stimulate patronage when the advice was to avoid all but necessary travel....it was crazy (and dropped before implementation).
Or returning to Scotland, the idea of pedestrianising Union Street in Aberdeen to meet Covid social distancing and so relegating bus services from the single busiest stops to a motley selection of back streets; shame they didn't think of regulating bars and football teams more closely??
So am I arguing that all is rosy in the bus world? Of course not. There is a clear need to improve integration and ticketing and that should be done via partnership in the first instance with the recourse that there is some form of legislative means should the children not play happily. However, if you believe that moving from the current market driven model to a franchise model will miraculously restore the high street, see the car centric policies not only pause but be reversed, and see some fantastic dividend from removing wasteful competition (that actually rarely exists outside of West Lothian and a few other selected spots) and sticking it to the man (aka Brian Souter), then it's a case of self delusion. The oft quoted London success came at a huge financial cost; that is demonstrable fact and again there is a clear correlation. Buses should have more spent on them (and it's heartening yet disappointing to see the amount being spent in these Covid days).
The argument of public vs. private is trying to ascertain a medical resolution when you haven't fully understood the true cause of the ailment.