My proposal for the UK bus network to be nationalised

[busman2000]

is there any plans to re-nationislise the uk bus services ? . personally i would hope so at the momnet except for london our local livererys have all gone .

 

[RT4038]

is there any plans to re-nationislise the uk bus services ? . personally i would hope so at the momnet except for london our local livererys have all gone .

Bus services - yes, except there is no funding
Bus companies - no.

 

[Richard Scott]

is there any plans to re-nationislise the uk bus services ? . personally i would hope so at the momnet except for london our local livererys have all gone .

Problem is everyone looks on nationalised companies with Rose Tinted Spectacles, I can remember them and they were neither cheap nor regular.
Whilst there is no Eutopia some kind of cap is the best way to try and increase usage.

 

[stevieinselby]

is there any plans to re-nationislise the uk bus services ? . personally i would hope so at the momnet except for london our local livererys have all gone .

Not a chance. Nationalising the bus industry would be horrifically expensive, and there's no great demand for it from the public.
What we are likely to see is more franchising (which is the model used in London, and also now Manchester), where the council or regional authority takes greater control over organising the network and contracts out all routes to various operators.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Nationalising the bus industry would be horrifically expensive, and there's no great demand for it from the public.

This is YouGov in July 2024:

Returning to public transport and we can see that support for nationalising bus companies has also risen, with 66% now saying they should be run in the public sector, up from 50% in 2017.

Support for nationalising utilities and public transport has grown significantly in last seven years | YouGov

Large majorities of Britons now want to see water, energy, railway and bus companies nationalised

yougov.co.uk

Agree with you on cost though.

 

[busman2000]

Bus services - yes, except there is no funding
Bus companies - no.

shame i would like to see the bus companies re-nationalised

 

[Eyersey468]

shame i would like to see the bus companies re-nationalised

What in your view would renationalising companies achieve?

 

[busman2000]

What in your view would renationalising companies achieve?

local identity not universal . i used to live in the cotswolds where the local bus company was stroud valleys green in colour ,now its just stagecoach nationwide & another company called cotswold green used to be ebley coaches

 

[Djgr]

What in your view would renationalising companies achieve?

Two main benefits:

a)Co-ordination is better than wasteful competition
b)Stops money leaking from the industry to fund castles and islands

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think in reality you wouldn't nationalise but rather you would municipalise, creating more arms-length municipal operating companies along the lines of Blackpool, Cardiff, Edinburgh, Nottingham etc. Buses are generally a very local thing, so I can't see much sense in a National Bus Company and a one-size-fits-all approach, nor can I see much sense in nationalising National Express and Flixbus nor creating a nationalised competitor. Though smaller authorities would probably prefer, even in a situation of full re-regulation, to tender operations for economies of scale.

If we continue with a Labour Government into another term, I wouldn't be surprised to see the likes of Andy Burnham and Sadiq Khan moving operations back into the public sector as existing contracts expire. Particularly Burnham as the structure of the Manchester re-regulation makes it considerably easier.

 

[Eyersey468]

Given that a number of the NBC companies lost money hand over fist that says to me they can't have been very efficiently run

 

[camflyer]

shame i would like to see the bus companies re-nationalised

London has the best bs services in the country and the bus operators aren't publicly owned. The model of local government controlling the branding, routes, fares etc and private operators running day to day services seems to work well there.

 

[Mike Machin]

London has the best bs services in the country and the bus operators aren't publicly owned. The model of local government controlling the branding, routes, fares etc and private operators running day to day services seems to work well there.

Absolutely, and it should be the same with rail too. If private contractors underperform they can be given the boot. They are also responsible for most of the capital equipment, so that liability isn't piled onto the national debt. It also ensure that liabilities for wages and other expenses is not within the direct remit of the government and it allows the government to take a relatively hands-off approach to industrial relations.

having multiple employers also lessens the chances of national industrial disputes.

Transport capital spending will always be near the bottom of the list of priorities for governments, when faced with demands for money for healthcare, education, policing, prisons, defence, social care and welfare. One only has to look at the enormous amount of money that has been made available through private finance initiatives from within the private sector for transport equipment replacement to see that in the modern international economic world, private sector involvement is essential.

 

[busman2000]

London has the best bs services in the country and the bus operators aren't publicly owned. The model of local government controlling the branding, routes, fares etc and private operators running day to day services seems to work well there.

i agree london does . i would only wish we had a london style bus service elsewhere in the uk speacially in chester & northwales

 

[RT4038]

Absolutely, and it should be the same with rail too. If private contractors underperform they can be given the boot. They are also responsible for most of the capital equipment, so that liability isn't piled onto the national debt. It also ensure that liabilities for wages and other expenses is not within the direct remit of the government and it allows the government to take a relatively hands-off approach to industrial relations.

In theory, yes, but this has been shown as to not actually work in practice, certainly on the railways but it an issue elsewhere too. Private contractors can only be given the boot if there are suitable replacements (at the same or similar price). Contractors won't accept responsibiliity for the capital equipment if there is no ready market for it after being given the boot or losing the contract on expiry. Wage costs become the responsibility of the organisation letting the contract unless they are happy for them to spiral out of control, or happy for contractors to go bust (in which case they'll find no replacement contractor is willing)

 

[Bletchleyite]

In theory, yes, but this has been shown as to not actually work in practice, certainly on the railways but it an issue elsewhere too. Private contractors can only be given the boot if there are suitable replacements (at the same or similar price). Contractors won't accept responsibiliity for the capital equipment if there is no ready market for it after being given the boot or losing the contract on expiry. Wage costs become the responsibility of the organisation letting the contract unless they are happy for them to spiral out of control, or willing for contractors to go bust (in which case they'll find no replacement contractor is willing)

Plus TUPE means you can't easily get rid of bad staff by changing supplier - that jobs are protected can be both a good and bad thing.

 

[RT4038]

Plus TUPE means you can't easily get rid of bad staff by changing supplier - that jobs are protected can be both a good and bad thing.

Really you should be getting rid of bad staff through the disciplinary process. Possibly have some kind of accepted staff register so a different contractor can't bring them back?

 

[deltic]

Really you should be getting rid of bad staff through the disciplinary process. Possibly have some kind of accepted staff register so a different contractor can't bring them back?

We know what happened in the construction industry with private registers of workers not to be employed circulated amongst companies. Dont want to see that type of attitude returning

Two main benefits:

a)Co-ordination is better than wasteful competition
b)Stops money leaking from the industry to fund castles and islands

Should the same apply to supermarkets - all that wasteful competition and dividends paid out?

 

[Djgr]

We know what happened in the construction industry with private registers of workers not to be employed circulated amongst companies. Dont want to see that type of attitude returning


Should the same apply to supermarkets - all that wasteful competition and dividends paid out?

No, because the real competition to buses (and other public transport) is the car.
There are also societal systems benefits to bus (and other public transport) coordination that are not applicable to supermarkets.

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, because the real competition to buses (and other public transport) is the car.
There are also societal network benefits to bus (and other public transport) coordination that are not applicable to supermarkets.

An interesting question is what would happen if all competition law provisions were removed from public transport operations. I suspect you might get a fair bit more collaboration. It's of note that the German Verkehrsverbuende didn't come about as statutory organisations but rather as cartels of operators.

 

[RT4038]

We know what happened in the construction industry with private registers of workers not to be employed circulated amongst companies. Dont want to see that type of attitude returning

Doesn't have to be a private register - maintained by the Contracting Authority.

No, because the real competition to buses (and other public transport) is the car.
There are also societal systems benefits to bus (and other public transport) coordination that are not applicable to supermarkets.

To keep costs down, the contracting Authority may well view the bus network not as competition to the car, but merely a barest minimum provision safety net for those who can't have a car, to get to the nearest shops once a week, school etc.

An interesting question is what would happen if all competition law provisions were removed from public transport operations. I suspect you might get a fair bit more collaboration. It's of note that the German Verkehrsverbuende didn't come about as statutory organisations but rather as cartels of operators.

what kind of collaboration would you be envisaging? There may well be fewer buses on those small number of routes where competition exists, and fares would probably be higher. Can't see area joint ticketing being any easier to achieve - they'd still individually jealously guard their revenues and put nothing at risk.

 

[Bletchleyite]

what kind of collaboration would you be envisaging? There may well be fewer buses on those small number of routes where competition exists, and fares would probably be higher. Can't see area joint ticketing being any easier to achieve - they'd still individually jealously guard their revenues and put nothing at risk.

I'm not sure the latter is actually true and do think we would see more ticket interavailability and general co-operation in return for not treading on each others' toes. Interestingly I recall Stagecoach and First had to withdraw the old Greater Manchester PTE-era joint tickets for competition reasons though they existed for some time.

 

[Djgr]

Doesn't have to be a private register - maintained by the Contracting Authority.


To keep costs down, the contracting Authority may well view the bus network not as competition to the car, but merely a barest minimum provision safety net for those who can't have a car, to get to the nearest shops once a week, school etc.


what kind of collaboration would you be envisaging? There may well be fewer buses on those small number of routes where competition exists, and fares would probably be higher. Can't see area joint ticketing being any easier to achieve - they'd still individually jealously guard their revenues and put nothing at risk.

There are environmental benefits associated with reducing car usage so that it is not the refuge of the poor (the European rather than the American approach).

Given the issues with voluntary collaboration you have to force the issue with nationalisation or bus franchising.

 

[RT4038]

I'm not sure the latter is actually true and do think we would see more ticket interavailability and general co-operation in return for not treading on each others' toes. Interestingly I recall Stagecoach and First had to withdraw the old Greater Manchester PTE-era joint tickets for competition reasons though they existed for some time.

But I think that was a case of an inherited existing (former PTE) ticket. The two companies had not got together in the post PTE era and collaborated to introduce the ticket, and then withdrawn it.

Even if there was no law to prevent it, I don't think Arriva and Stagecoach would suddenly introduce a joint MK area ticket (or MK and environs?), for instance?

 

[JamesT]

Some may find https://www.urbantransportgroup.org...ord Smartzone_FINAL Feb 2015 with annexes.pdf an interesting read about the introduction of interoperable ticketing that hasn’t required nationalisation or franchising.
My device won’t let me copy from the document, I do note section 3.7 where it says an exemption from competition law was required to allow this.

 

[RT4038]

Some may find https://www.urbantransportgroup.org/system/files/general-docs/pteg Oxford Smartzone_FINAL Feb 2015 with annexes.pdf an interesting read about the introduction of interoperable ticketing that hasn’t required nationalisation or franchising.
My device won’t let me copy from the document, I do note section 3.7 where it says an exemption from competition law was required to allow this.

Since deregulation interoperable ticketing has always been permitted, but only on the basis of each operator accepting each others tickets without recompense and no price collusion on those tickets. Save in exceptional circumstances [mostly individual routes or parts of routes], bus operators have not wanted to do such a thing, for understandable reasons . Local Authorities have been able to broker interoperable ticket schemes with the prices being fixed, but this has to be on the basis of reimbursement according to use (which historically operators have often not been able to determine exactly). In these schemes there had to be no discrimination as to who can take part, and no collusion on timetables or routes. Generally each operator would have their own tickets (undercutting the interoperable ones) in order to try and corner the most market for themselves, and would lobby for the interoperable tickets to be as expensive as possible to deter use.

In about 2010 (?) the Government of the day did allow the 'Oxford' type arrangement - effectively a legal cartel - but this was only really going to work where there was only two similar sized operators who were both keen on reducing their resource level and trusted each other, with only limited Local Authority involvement. Individual tickets, undercutting the interoperable rate, were also retained. I don't think it really happened anywhere else.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

at the momnet except for london our local livererys have all gone .

I'm rather let responding to this point, but it might be worth remembering that when the (England and Wales) buses were last nationalised in the National Bus Company, liveries were essentially uniform - your bus was green, or it was red. The explosion of different liveries only came about with privatisation.

 

[RT4038]

I'm rather let responding to this point, but it might be worth remembering that when the (England and Wales) buses were last nationalised in the National Bus Company, liveries were essentially uniform - your bus was green, or it was red. The explosion of different liveries only came about with privatisation.

except the locally nationalised (municipal) buses, and there were numerous private companies running local bus services (more in some areas than others).

 

[Fawkes Cat]

except the locally nationalised (municipal) buses, and there were numerous private companies running local bus services (more in some areas than others).

Fair point. At the time I was in Slough so everything (bar the LT 81 route) was NBC - either Alder Valley (red) or London Country (green), and I seem to have been generalising from my experience.

 

[Tomos y Tanc]

Buses have to be a mixed ecology, I think. The surviving municipal services are pretty good on the whole - but the capital cost of establishing new municipal fleets would be huge. Where the municipal companies have disappeared, franchsing is probably the best way forward.

As for long distance services, where the free market works, leave it alone. Where subsidy is required (as on the Traws Cymru network, for instance) contracting private companies seems to work okay.