Interesting conversation on the Crewe & District Bus Users Facebook group where Laura Crane, the Vice-Chair of the Highways of Transport committee for Cheshire East Council says that D&G have made the decision to cancel the 70 to 73 Nantwich rural services and the council only found out about this a couple of days ago. Not sure why D&G would post on their own website that the axed services would be replaced by Go-Too if the council didn't even know about it.
Thanks to a wonderful thing called Freedom of Information, we now have more information on this, and it's fair to say that the councillor was lying!
Request:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/.../withdrawal_of_nantwich...
Emails between D&G and Cheshire East which relate to the withdrawal of the 70/71/72/73 - [
Link]
I won't quote the full thing as you can't copy and paste from the documents, there's a number of redactions and talks about setting up meetings too so, it doesn't make much sense. The summary of the facts though
31st May D&G asked for an additional £43,000 to run the services
4th June D&G gave 3 months notice to end the contract should additional funding not be forthcoming.
6th August 'As discussed in our telephone conversation' D&G formally withdrew their request for additional funding and committed to ending the contract
There was then back and forth while Cheshire East tried to get D&G to keep running services until mid September, which D&G refused on the basis of winning other contracts and a compromise was came to.
In short, Cheshire East knew about the situation on the 70/71/72/73 for a while. This was not a shock to them, despite what councillors may say! Isn't Freedom of Information great! Catch out councillors who want to mislead the public.
--
Something of interest though and it does back up what I've said before about D&G always wanting more money. In the emails above, there are numerous services there in which D&G want more funding. Macclesfield 3/10, Macclesfield 130, Wilmslow 312, Knutsford 88/89, Nantwich 70/71/72/73 and Crewe 85. Most of these are already full tenders meaning D&G will have put in a bid for these routes, some they will have put in bids not long ago, and now they want more and more money for contracts. The fee paid to D&G would almost always rise annually over the contract length, or if not, they would be aware and should be submitting bids accordingly. They have let their costs rise to such a level that has made these contracts unviable. Of note, D&G say about "increased overheads with them taking on Macclesfield depot", that was a CHOICE D&G made and now taxpayers have to cough up, in the middle of a contract, as D&G renegotiates because of financial decisions that they made! I've said it before and I'll say it again, D&G are taking taxpayers for a ride with dodgy practises. You gave your quote, you have risen your costs and now we have to pay for that? Don't quote a price that you can't run the services on, or quote so low that you can't handle cost increases, especially cost increases that are directly within your control (bit different with the spare parts and cost of fuel etc).