First Group: General Discussion

[Robertj21a]

Plus Germany, France, Sweden, Denmark etc

Not really when you do the sums. The UK has always been a net contributor to the EU - we've always paid more in than we've got back - so it can be legitimately argued that it's only our own money handed back !

 

[Ianno87]

Not really when you do the sums. The UK has always been a net contributor to the EU - we've always paid more in than we've got back - so it can be legitimately argued that it's only our own money handed back !

Plus a whack-load of trade and economic benefits over and above this, which benefit employment and tax receipts.

 

[richw]

Plus a whack-load of trade and economic benefits over and above this, which benefit employment and tax receipts.

Less obvious benefits such as the savings in not needing A visa for a holiday at whatever cost they’d be.

 

[radamfi]

Radamfi is sadly misinformed. We've done this loop on previous threads but the reality is that most people on this board are absolute pro-public transport. The idea that people aren't is laughable but, hang on to your hat, we're not exactly typical of the population.

There have been surveys taken in the past and, not surprisingly, transport scores very low in the requirements of the electorate. The areas that the public want money to be spent on are, quelle surprise, the NHS and education, welfare and housing, military etc. I might point out that when Manchester proposed a congestion charge with the monies ploughed into public transport, the electorate in every single council area rejected it. Fact is - there are no votes in it.

By continually pointing to difficulties in getting proper funding, you immediately shut down the argument as if it gives you comfort that funding will never rise to a sufficiently high level that the end of deregulation becomes a possibility.

 

[Mwanesh]

There will never be proper funding .Most people think there is money in buses. Reading Buses was bailed out by the council a few years ago. How many of the bus companies are swimming in cash .

 

[Jordan Adam]

There will never be proper funding .Most people think there is money in buses. Reading Buses was bailed out by the council a few years ago. How many of the bus companies are swimming in cash .

Lothian... Albeit because they charge £20 per person to sit on a decker in the city centre for 45 minutes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would be interesting if anyone could find any recent statistics for Park & Ride use in the UK, certainly from my personal experience in Aberdeen the park and rides are effectively dead, two of the three are now down to a half hourly frequency and there's no dedicated park and ride routes anymore. On the other hand it seems the sites in Fife are now at max capacity.

And possibly as a result Aberdeen stinks of fumes. It's like a less nice version of Edinburgh new town.

 

[overthewater]

Isn't Nottingham and Cambridge park n ride the only decent ones left?

 

[Man of Kent]

By continually pointing to difficulties in getting proper funding, you immediately shut down the argument as if it gives you comfort that funding will never rise to a sufficiently high level that the end of deregulation becomes a possibility.

Government statistics show that the rate of decline in passenger numbers reduced after deregulation. From 1970 to 1985/86, 20% of passengers were lost in Great Britain (and in London, 15%). By 2000, the number was back up to 1970 levels (and higher still in London). Currently, taking out London, the number of passengers is just over 99% of 1986 levels. Not such a failing mode, is it?

And as TGW points out, who wants to put more public money into the system? Not the general populace, that's for sure. When questioned there is generally support for extra taxes for the NHS, but when the opportunity to pay some, in the form of hospital car park charges arises, there is almost always a huge outcry. Never believe anyone who claims they are willing to pay higher taxes!

 

[Bletchleyite]

And as TGW points out, who wants to put more public money into the system? Not the general populace, that's for sure. When questioned there is generally support for extra taxes for the NHS, but when the opportunity to pay some, in the form of hospital car park charges arises, there is almost always a huge outcry. Never believe anyone who claims they are willing to pay higher taxes!

Car park charges at hospitals are a rather unfair way of doing it, given that they are making the sick pay rather than making everyone pay on the basis of affordability, so of course they are opposed.

 

[Man of Kent]

Isn't Nottingham and Cambridge park n ride the only decent ones left?

Oxford, Canterbury, Bath, York...

 

[Jordan Adam]

And possibly as a result Aberdeen stinks of fumes. It's like a less nice version of Edinburgh new town.

Once they get Union Street shut to cars it will be a massive improvement, that's the real major downside at the moment.

 

[Man of Kent]

Car park charges at hospitals are a rather unfair way of doing it, given that they are making the sick pay rather than making everyone pay on the basis of affordability, so of course they are opposed.

Only a minority of people at hospital are "sick". There are many visitors to in-patients, staff, drivers who are not patients but acting as a taxi and so on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Only a minority of people at hospital are "sick". There are many visitors to in-patients, staff, drivers who are not patients but acting as a taxi and so on.

I still think income tax is the fairest way. Anyway...I doubt FirstGroup are paying!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Once they get Union Street shut to cars it will be a massive improvement, that's the real major downside at the moment.

Agreed.

 

[Driver362]

Lothian... Albeit because they charge £20 per person to sit on a decker in the city centre for 45 minutes.

Jordan , excuse my stupidity been a long day . What service charges £20 for 45 mins in city centre ?

 

[radamfi]

Government statistics show that the rate of decline in passenger numbers reduced after deregulation. From 1970 to 1985/86, 20% of passengers were lost in Great Britain (and in London, 15%). By 2000, the number was back up to 1970 levels (and higher still in London). Currently, taking out London, the number of passengers is just over 99% of 1986 levels. Not such a failing mode, is it?

https://assets.publishing.service.g...loads/attachment_data/file/774572/bus0103.ods

shows annual bus passenger journeys in England outside London falling from 3.6 billion in 85/86 to 2.1 billion in 17/18. In London over the same period went up from 1.2 to 2.2 billion. I could add in Scotland and Wales but they have both fallen dramatically too.

From 91/92 to 17/18, annual per capita usage in England outside London went down from 68 to 46, and in London went up from 168 to 252.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Jordan , excuse my stupidity been a long day . What service charges £20 for 45 mins in city centre ?

The tourist buses.

 

[Jordan Adam]

Jordan , excuse my stupidity been a long day . What service charges £20 for 45 mins in city centre ?

Tours, albeit i think it's down to £18 now.

 

[oldman]

Nearly there, Jordan - it's £16, and a 24 hour ticket. Just a wild stab in the dark, but do you have something against Lothian?

 

[carlberry]

By continually pointing to difficulties in getting proper funding, you immediately shut down the argument as if it gives you comfort that funding will never rise to a sufficiently high level that the end of deregulation becomes a possibility.

Why is your required end point the end of deregulation instead of just better bus services?

 

[radamfi]

Why is your required end point the end of deregulation instead of just better bus services?

My only requirement is the reduction of private car trips. Whether that is by bus, bike, tram or some other greener mode.

Other people want to preserve deregulation at all costs.

 

[overthewater]

Your badly mistaking.

 

[Jordan Adam]

Nearly there, Jordan - it's £16, and a 24 hour ticket. Just a wild stab in the dark, but do you have something against Lothian?

They've reduced it, having just checked i was right in thinking it was £20 in 2018.

Don't have anything against Lothian, albeit i dislike some of their recent ventures especially wasting money on those Streetairs and the managements "bullying" nature both with the workforce and the way they sometimes operate (forcing others out the way). i have however said many times that Edinburgh probably has the best bus network coverage in the UK and on the whole Lothian's maintenance is above par. The comment was partially sarcastic.

 

[Andyh82]

Oxford, Canterbury, Bath, York...

Bristol, Norwich, Truro, Leeds, Plymouth, Exeter...

 

[Man of Kent]

https://assets.publishing.service.g...loads/attachment_data/file/774572/bus0103.ods

shows annual bus passenger journeys in England outside London falling from 3.6 billion in 85/86 to 2.1 billion in 17/18. In London over the same period went up from 1.2 to 2.2 billion. I could add in Scotland and Wales but they have both fallen dramatically too.

From 91/92 to 17/18, annual per capita usage in England outside London went down from 68 to 46, and in London went up from 168 to 252.

My analysis is of Table 0108 (Passenger journeys on local bus services by region: Great Britain, annual from 1970) - not sure why the outcomes are apparently so different.

 

[radamfi]

My analysis is of Table 0108 (Passenger journeys on local bus services by region: Great Britain, annual from 1970) - not sure why the outcomes are apparently so different.

I don't see any difference. Maybe you didn't subtract the London column.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Sorry but I'm not seeing anyone on this board being particularly dogmatic about deregulation and its retention. The vast majority of people on this board are passionately pro public transport but this is a self selecting quorum; people on a public transport message board being pro public transport is hardly representative of the population. The argument of deregulation vs a regulated environment is a red herring - you can certainly make investment in public transport in a deregulated world as we saw in the 2000s whether that be via travel for particular elements of the population, Kickstart schemes, support for tendered services etc. However, I mentioned to you in 2012 (?) that the cuts to public expenditure were coming and that has come to pass. Of course, the government has done so rather covertly by cutting BSOG (placing the onus onto the farebox) and through cutting the grant to local authorities.

When you look at the patronage of bus services, there was a steady and consistent fall from the mid 1950s through to the 1980s and for a number of reasons such as the arrival of TV reducing evening travel to places like clubs and cinemas, the increasing affluence of the working class, the staff shortages of the 1960s/1970s that meant services were unreliable or cut back. Deregulation was a massive upheaval and yes, that earthquake had a massive impact on ridership. However, there is a clear correlation between the money provided to public transport and ridership - London spends a massive amount on supporting bus services but as TfL's grant is being cut, then services are also being cut and ridership is now falling. It's not the only reason as congestion is massively impacting service speed and reliability and there is the impact of high street footfall as in the rest of the country as shopping habits change.

We are drifting badly from the thread purpose here so in order not to incur the wrath, I'll try to get back onto topic First or Arriva could potentially sell their bus operations but local authorities simply do not have the available funds to do much for public transport; they don't have enough for their statutory responsibilities rather than the nice to haves because of years of the austerity in funding public services that people believe was essential. So even were it not legally prohibited by the Bus Service Act 2017, they haven't got the funds to purchase First's Manchester operations.

 

[radamfi]

London spends a massive amount on supporting bus services

This shows how low our expectations are. Operationally, city transport in London is very poorly funded compared to other European cities. It may well be the least subsidised transport system for a big city in the developed world, excluding the rest of the UK. Yes, there are big ticket items like Crossrail and Thameslink, but the operating costs of London's transport are mostly met by fares. As a result, London has one of the highest, if not the highest, fares in the world. A single fare in Zone 1 including a bus and tube ride costs a minimum of £3.90.

 

[Rod Harrison]

Sorry but I'm not seeing anyone on this board being particularly dogmatic about deregulation and its retention. The vast majority of people on this board are passionately pro public transport but this is a self selecting quorum; people on a public transport message board being pro public transport is hardly representative of the population. The argument of deregulation vs a regulated environment is a red herring - you can certainly make investment in public transport in a deregulated world as we saw in the 2000s whether that be via travel for particular elements of the population, Kickstart schemes, support for tendered services etc. However, I mentioned to you in 2012 (?) that the cuts to public expenditure were coming and that has come to pass. Of course, the government has done so rather covertly by cutting BSOG (placing the onus onto the farebox) and through cutting the grant to local authorities.

When you look at the patronage of bus services, there was a steady and consistent fall from the mid 1950s through to the 1980s and for a number of reasons such as the arrival of TV reducing evening travel to places like clubs and cinemas, the increasing affluence of the working class, the staff shortages of the 1960s/1970s that meant services were unreliable or cut back. Deregulation was a massive upheaval and yes, that earthquake had a massive impact on ridership. However, there is a clear correlation between the money provided to public transport and ridership - London spends a massive amount on supporting bus services but as TfL's grant is being cut, then services are also being cut and ridership is now falling. It's not the only reason as congestion is massively impacting service speed and reliability and there is the impact of high street footfall as in the rest of the country as shopping habits change.

We are drifting badly from the thread purpose here so in order not to incur the wrath, I'll try to get back onto topic First or Arriva could potentially sell their bus operations but local authorities simply do not have the available funds to do much for public transport; they don't have enough for their statutory responsibilities rather than the nice to haves because of years of the austerity in funding public services that people believe was essential. So even were it not legally prohibited by the Bus Service Act 2017, they haven't got the funds to purchase First's Manchester operations.

I agree with your comments and especially about London with financial support falling so is ridership. Turning to First, I could see Stagecoach moving into areas such as West Yorkshire and maybe pick up a garage around Glasgow and elsewhere. Other smaller groups (Rotala, McGills etc.) might also would be interested in expansion. However, it depends on whether First would be happy to sell parts, as in Manchester or go for an IPO or giving existing shareholders the firm. Can’t see the CMA being a problem with a breakup. Arrival is more likely to be sold asa group as DB need cash relatively quickly.