Greater Manchester Bus Franchising Assessment

[TheGrandWazoo]

It is better to amend the bus service at the same time as opening a new tram line. That's what happened when the Croydon tram system opened and buses were reorganised to provide convenient connections with it. Whereas when Metrolink opened in 1992 GM Buses tried to compete with it by running express buses. Dublin is a reminder that regulation does not necessarily mean good integration. State ownership may well be worse for integration than franchising.

You can make the argument that the best time to amend bus services, with the exception of the most obvious duplication, is after a (re)opening occurs as the demand is then established. Mind you, I seem to recall someone (not you, I hasten to add) saying that Metrolink had barely impacted bus services so then the argument would be "why change"?

The other issue is perhaps a good news story. Such schemes are often given projected ridership that is invariably conservative and so passenger figures are higher. More cynical folk than me might say that they are soft targets so that it produces a greater measure of success but whatever the truth is, the estimates are often outstripped by what actually happens.

 

[radamfi]

You can make the argument that the best time to amend bus services, with the exception of the most obvious duplication, is after a (re)opening occurs as the demand is then established. Mind you, I seem to recall someone (not you, I hasten to add) saying that Metrolink had barely impacted bus services so then the argument would be "why change"?

In the Croydon and Amsterdam examples above, it would have been sub-optimal to wait as the new tram/metro connections wouldn't have been available from day 1. When the Croydon tram opened, feeder bus routes were introduced and the 353 from Croydon to Orpington was truncated at Addington Village to enable a doubling of frequency from every 30 to every 15 minutes. When the Leigh busway opened, I'm pretty sure that other First routes in the area were altered on the same day.

 

[radamfi]

Desperate stuff from Stagecoach:

http://anotherwaymcr.co.uk/

"Passenger numbers falling"

They don't mention that per capita usage is way higher in London than in GM and has gone up massively since the 90s, unlike in GM where it has gone down.

"Bus routes being cut"

They don't mention there was a massive expansion of service in the 2000s and the current service is still way more intensive than in the 90s.

"You can already pay for bus travel by contactless payment"

Not like London where your card is the actual ticket. In GM you can only use contactless to buy a paper ticket.

But the most misleading of all

"Our average fare is 25% less than London's £1.50 standard single fare"

How on earth do they work that out? Surely they aren't including free passes and child fares?

 

[158756]

Desperate stuff from Stagecoach:

http://anotherwaymcr.co.uk/

"Passenger numbers falling"

They don't mention that per capita usage is way higher in London than in GM and has gone up massively since the 90s, unlike in GM where it has gone down.

"Bus routes being cut"

They don't mention there was a massive expansion of service in the 2000s and the current service is still way more intensive than in the 90s.

"You can already pay for bus travel by contactless payment"

Not like London where your card is the actual ticket. In GM you can only use contactless to buy a paper ticket.

But the most misleading of all

"Our average fare is 25% less than London's £1.50 standard single fare"

How on earth do they work that out? Surely they aren't including free passes and child fares?

Maybe some estimate of cost per journey on day and period tickets? So a 28 day ticket at £60 is £1.50 per journey if you travel to and from work 5 days a week, and an annual student ticket works out at less than £1 if you use it every day during term time. Of course that omits to mention that not everyone in London actually pays £1.50 per journey.

 

[ivanhoe]

Interesting stuff from the Liverpool City Region website
“
We have big ambitions for bus in the Liverpool City Region. The Bus Alliance has allowed us to make good progress in modernising our bus network but, as the ‘Big Bus Debate’ has shown, we have to go much further and faster, ensuring bus services are developed around people, supporting them getting to and from work, accessing health care and enjoying all the City Region has to offer.

Eight out of ten public transport journeys are made by bus. The network has to be robust and sustainable, otherwise we’re putting economic growth at risk. We need to put people with opportunities and deliver our commitment to air quality and health improvements.

It’s clear that whatever bus reform option is right for our City Region, there will be additional and significant cost to the public purse. We have to meet this challenge head on and work through it. Doing nothing is not an option.”
Different Cities, I know, but I’ve always thought that the Liverpool CR approach has been more pragmatic than GM. The final paragraph is so telling and there are no easy options.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Interesting stuff from the Liverpool City Region website
“
We have big ambitions for bus in the Liverpool City Region. The Bus Alliance has allowed us to make good progress in modernising our bus network but, as the ‘Big Bus Debate’ has shown, we have to go much further and faster, ensuring bus services are developed around people, supporting them getting to and from work, accessing health care and enjoying all the City Region has to offer.

Eight out of ten public transport journeys are made by bus. The network has to be robust and sustainable, otherwise we’re putting economic growth at risk. We need to put people with opportunities and deliver our commitment to air quality and health improvements.

It’s clear that whatever bus reform option is right for our City Region, there will be additional and significant cost to the public purse. We have to meet this challenge head on and work through it. Doing nothing is not an option.”
Different Cities, I know, but I’ve always thought that the Liverpool CR approach has been more pragmatic than GM. The final paragraph is so telling and there are no easy options.

Of course, Joe Anderson did something - axing a number of bus lanes!!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course, Joe Anderson did something - axing a number of bus lanes!!

Which were mostly poorly designed anyway.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Which were mostly poorly designed anyway.

Which ones were poorly designed?

 

[ivanhoe]

Of course, Joe Anderson did something - axing a number of bus lanes!!

I suspect you’re playing devils advocate which is fine. Major point I was making was that working with the Bus Companies long before the Government gave City Regions the ‘possibility’ of some sort of regulation actually gave the Region a different way forward in comparison to say GM. As I’ve already stated, different cities which will require different solutions. There is no one solution fits all.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I suspect you’re playing devils advocate which is fine. Major point I was making was that working with the Bus Companies long before the Government gave City Regions the ‘possibility’ of some sort of regulation actually gave the Region a different way forward in comparison to say GM. As I’ve already stated, different cities which will require different solutions. There is no one solution fits all.

I was being a little cheeky You're absolutely right - the success in Liverpool has been through partnership with the metro mayor https://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/abo...ty-Region-as-it-bucks-the-national-trend.aspx despite the rather disappointing move by the city mayor.

 

[ivanhoe]

To add to my post re bus lanes, we need to give car owners a real choice. Being stuck in traffic, whilst buses go by without hindrance, going to places where people now actually work, is the dream. However, don’t put in Bus Lanes to give you a half mile advantage. Think of a 15 minute advantage in rush hour and clean buses with working Wi-fi . You may not get that immediately, but you must have a plan.
My wife was a midwife for 40 years. I asked her about her starting time on early shift. She lives in Loughborough and to get there on time for a 15 minute handover from night shift, she needed to get there by 7am. The car enabled her to leave at 6.25. A bus would take over an hour to get to Leicester, plus another bus to the hospital. There are many others in jobs that involve shift work. The car is essential for a large number of people so we can’t just penalise people. We can offer choices though to a large number of people who choose to take their car on a daily basis because they can. That is more important to solve for GM in their quest for London style regulation.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which ones were poorly designed?

Almost all of the ones you find anywhere in the UK. They end before junctions so the bus still queues.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Almost all of the ones you find anywhere in the UK. They end before junctions so the bus still queues.

So just a general whinge. I can think of plenty of good design as well as the types you mention.

I'd sooner have some, albeit sub optimal, bus lanes that jack all (which is what happened in Liverpool).

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

To add to my post re bus lanes, we need to give car owners a real choice. Being stuck in traffic, whilst buses go by without hindrance, going to places where people now actually work, is the dream. However, don’t put in Bus Lanes to give you a half mile advantage. Think of a 15 minute advantage in rush hour and clean buses with working Wi-fi . You may not get that immediately, but you must have a plan.
My wife was a midwife for 40 years. I asked her about her starting time on early shift. She lives in Loughborough and to get there on time for a 15 minute handover from night shift, she needed to get there by 7am. The car enabled her to leave at 6.25. A bus would take over an hour to get to Leicester, plus another bus to the hospital. There are many others in jobs that involve shift work. The car is essential for a large number of people so we can’t just penalise people. We can offer choices though to a large number of people who choose to take their car on a daily basis because they can. That is more important to solve for GM in their quest for London style regulation.

I think we're broadly in agreement. The bus (and public transport in general) will always suffer when you're looking at the maximum flexibility of the car to go almost anywhere and at any time.

What it has to do is provide a reasonably competitive option for the main traffic flows as you say - frequent headways, modern vehicles with wifi. Where that can exist, then some penalisation of car users should be employed.

 

[radamfi]

What is so good about Merseyside? Per capita bus usage is very similar to GM and has been for the last 10 years. They have the same issues with overpriced multi-operator and multi-modal tickets.

Stagecoach's press release compares their fares to the London £1.50 single fare but many operators in GM don't even tell us what their single fares are. The Government's response to the Transport Select Committee Bus Inqiry says that they won't compel operators to tell us the most basic fare information for at least another year, and "complex fares" (whatever they are, and surely we shouldn't have complex fares anyway?) until 2023!

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

What is so good about Merseyside? Per capita bus usage is very similar to GM and has been for the last 10 years. They have the same issues with overpriced multi-operator and multi-modal tickets

Can't really cite 10 years when looking at a partnership has been going since 2013/4. From tab 109b of the DfT bus statistics

Merseyside 2013/4 - 136.5m journeys
Merseyside 2016/7 - 147.5m journeys

GM 2013/4 - 216.7m journeys
GM 2016/7 - 201.6m journeys

 

[radamfi]

Can't really cite 10 years when looking at a partnership has been going since 2013/4. From tab 109b of the DfT bus statistics

Merseyside 2013/4 - 136.5m journeys
Merseyside 2016/7 - 147.5m journeys

GM 2013/4 - 216.7m journeys
GM 2016/7 - 201.6m journeys

Table Bus0110a

LA Code Local Authority 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18
E11000001 Greater Ma ITA 83.6 81.5 76.7 77.2 79.6 78.0 74.4 72.4 69.5
E11000002 Merseyside ITA 82.1 80.5 79.5 78.6 74.4 73.8 72.7 74.5 71.3

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Table Bus0110a

LA Code Local Authority 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18
E11000001 Greater Ma ITA 83.6 81.5 76.7 77.2 79.6 78.0 74.4 72.4 69.5
E11000002 Merseyside ITA 82.1 80.5 79.5 78.6 74.4 73.8 72.7 74.5 71.3

You’re looking per capita rather than total journeys

 

[radamfi]

You’re looking per capita rather than total journeys

It is best to compare per capita to take into account different changes in population.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It is best to compare per capita to take into account different changes in population.

Little bit confused though

The population of Merseyside hasn't changed appreciably since the 1991 census and only increased by 30k between during 2013/4 to 2016/7. If the population barely changed and the number of passengers increased appreciably, what happened with the journeys per capita???

 

[geoffk]

2. Removing the congestion that's slowing buses down.
This brings continual benefit because as buses speed up they get more attractive which removes even more congestion and reduces costs which reduces fares and makes them more attractive.
Any local authority that wants to make buses more attractive has absolute control over this issue but wont do anything because it annoys motorists (and costs money).

While franchising in itself will not cut congestion, the major cause of unreliability and extended journey times for buses, it will increase the incentive for TfGM to invest in bus priority as it, rather than the operators, would benefit from lower costs and higher revenue.

 

[edwin_m]

While franchising in itself will not cut congestion, the major cause of unreliability and extended journey times for buses, it will increase the incentive for TfGM to invest in bus priority as it, rather than the operators, would benefit from lower costs and higher revenue.

There is a risk that a private operator would take the cost saving as extra profit rather than reducing fares. If so, Greater Manchester in general would benefit from more people using faster and more reliable buses, but wouldn't be able to use that money in lower fares or further improvements.