Strathclyde SPT Bus Reform / Franchising

[numtot12345]

Hot off the press - SPT vote in favour of bus franchising: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68576448

Bus services in the west of Scotland are set to be brought back under local control under radical plans.

The current deregulated network could be replaced with a franchise system like the ones in London and Manchester.

This means fares, routes and ticketing would be controlled by a local public body such as Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT).

However, SPT has said it could take seven years to set up and would need at least £45m in extra funding every year.

In the meantime, Bus Service Improvement Partnerships (BSIPs) will be introduced, where contracts are put in place with bus firms to run services.

This could allow more local control and enable operators to be judged on performance.

Could Glasgow return to the orange buses of the 80s?
Locally controlled bus network back after 37 years
Reform recommendations were approved at an SPT meeting earlier. It said it would consult widely on the recommendations over the next few months.

Under the planned franchise system, bus firms would have to bid for contracts within an approved network.

A public body, such as SPT, would set the precise routes, the timetable, the frequency and take in fares.

It means that routes with lower patronage are subsidised by busier, more popular routes.

But bus operator McGills has warned that introducing a franchise system will create a "funding black hole for taxpayers".

Deregulation, which was introduced by Margaret Thatcher in 1986, was meant to drive down fares and improve services amid competition, but has led to complaints about fewer services, punctuality and higher costs.

Plans will be consulted on over the coming months.

 

[BobbyBKinross]

I think it would be a much better idea for them to explore setting up an arms-length organisation like Lothian rather than franchising. No real benefit to the local authority or its people in the case of franchising.

 

[numtot12345]

Can't quite tell if that was considered in the Consultant options list. AFAIK, the Edinburgh council don't actually dictate the routes and level of service Lothian buses operates? Franchising I think would, therefore the local authority would have control over the network.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Can't quite tell if that was considered in the Consultant options list. AFAIK, the Edinburgh council don't actually dictate the routes and level of service Lothian buses operates? Franchising I think would, therefore the local authority would have control over the network.

With Glasgow having an extensive rail network, it probably does make sense to centralise control. Lothian is somewhat different, it doesn't really need to plan around a lot else bar the tram service it operates anyway (though notably it fails miserably at integrating with it!).

 

[numtot12345]

With Glasgow having an extensive rail network, it probably does make sense to centralise control. Lothian is somewhat different, it doesn't really need to plan around a lot else bar the tram service it operates anyway (though notably it fails miserably at integrating with it!).

And looking into the future with Clyde Metro, central control to plan around the Clyde Metro network is surely critical so routes, services and modes aren't competing with but working together for a cohesive and integrated system...

 

[sannox]

I think it would be a much better idea for them to explore setting up an arms-length organisation like Lothian rather than franchising. No real benefit to the local authority or its people in the case of franchising.

I can't see how you manage that. From scratch that's a huge undertaking and are you going head to head with current operators who no doubt will respond? Even if you buy an existing operator at cost to set up a company, how do you help improve fares and coordination Strathclyde wide?

Franchising at least brings wider integration and control to routes and fares whilst letting private operators continue.

 

[Spsf3232]

Would like to know just how they will fund this, the damage done with entitlement cards is extreme already as operators don't get the full percentage of the fare and has caused the decline in services throughout Scotland that are no longer viable to run!

 

[Trainman40083]

Would like to know just how they will fund this, the damage done with entitlement cards is extreme already as operators don't get the full percentage of the fare and has caused the decline in services throughout Scotland that are no longer viable to run!

I remember in England, the days when OAPs paid 1/2 the full fare. I bet it is well below that these days.

 

[NIT100]

Would like to know just how they will fund this, the damage done with entitlement cards is extreme already as operators don't get the full percentage of the fare and has caused the decline in services throughout Scotland that are no longer viable to run!

The 2024/25 reinbursement rates, extracted from the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee 5 March 2024, are:

The evidence that is required to produce a
refreshed YPS model is still emerging, as the
scheme is still in its relative infancy and travel
behaviours are continuing to develop. Accordingly,
it was agreed with the CPT that the
reimbursement rates for the young persons
scheme for the current year will be retained for
2024-25. For the young persons scheme, the
proposed reimbursement rates are 43.6 per cent
of the adult single fare for journeys made by
passengers aged five to 15, and 81.2 per cent of
that fare for journeys made by 16 to 21-year-olds.
As in the past year, a budget cap has not been set
for the young persons scheme in 2024-25.

The proposed reimbursement rate in the
financial year 2024-25 for the older and disabled
persons scheme has been amended from 55.9 per
cent to 55 per cent of the adult single fare, and the
capped level of funding will be £203.5 million. A
realistic level has been set, which takes into
account patronage levels and recovery in the
scheme since Covid-19.

 

[317 forever]

As there are already quite a lot of electric buses in the area, most notably First and McGills but also Stagecoach in Kilmarnock, I wonder whether these will be mandated to continue in service, even with changes of operator?

The return of wider multi-operator tickets will be welcome.

 

[Glasgowbusguy]

Franchising is desperately needed but SPT are not the ones to lead it. We need a new public body for the Glasgow area as we all know SPT are about as useful as a chocolate fireguard.

It would also be the perfect opportunity for a total recast of the bus network based on a few simple rules.
1.Provide a direct link to the local hospital
2.Provide a consistent 7 day a week service with a 30 minute minimum frequency
3.Provide multi modal tickets as standard
4. Clear consistent route numbering with less variations of numbers i.e. 38,38A,38B,38C,38E and the ones
5. Proper use of the city center for interchange Inc more shared terminus.

 

[stevenedin]

I doubt that First Group or McGill’s Group would want to give up their electric buses unless they got a really good price for them. They will probably move elsewhere in their operations.

 

[Mollman]

Franchising is desperately needed but SPT are not the ones to lead it. We need a new public body for the Glasgow area as we all know SPT are about as useful as a chocolate fireguard.

It would also be the perfect opportunity for a total recast of the bus network based on a few simple rules.
1.Provide a direct link to the local hospital
2.Provide a consistent 7 day a week service with a 30 minute minimum frequency
3.Provide multi modal tickets as standard
4. Clear consistent route numbering with less variations of numbers i.e. 38,38A,38B,38C,38E and the ones
5. Proper use of the city center for interchange Inc more shared terminus.

All very well but there probably needs some population based rules. Not everywhere can have a direct link to the nearest hospital, however it could be time based instead (e.g. no more than 45 minutes journeys including changes). Some places can't justify a 30 minute 24/7 service but could justify a 60 minute 20/7 service.

In regards to route numbering, what would you do with the 38s etc.? Would you just have them all as 38; have them as 38,39,40 etc. or 38,138,238 etc.; or have a core high frequency cross-city route as the 38 and split the other parts off as separate routes?

 

[roadierway77]

McGill’s have released a strongly worded article aimed at SPT's intent to pursue franchising.

McGill's boss fires warning to SPT over bus franchising

Speaking to the Glasgow Times, in the latest Times Talks series, Sandy Easdale, fires warning to SPT over bus franchising. Read more here.

www.mcgillsbuses.co.uk

McGill's boss fires warning to SPT over bus franchising​

Today Fri 22nd Mar 2024

THE Easdale brothers are ready for a fight.
Having spent the last quarter of a century building up McGill’s, they fear it is under threat from a decision to pursue bus franchising, taken by SPT.
Speaking to the Glasgow Times, in the latest Times Talks series, Sandy Easdale, one half of the successful fraternal partnership with his brother James, explained the lengths to which they will go to protect their assets.
In the firm’s Greenock office, where the transport company is headquartered, he is passionate and even emotional on what he sees as a public body attempting to take away his business.
Mr Easdale said SPT will not have it all their own way and roll his firm over.
He said: “We're in the process now of getting a real heavyweight legal team, heavyweight institutions, mega expensive people and brains to now fight this.
“I will fight it with every breath I've got and I will fight it with every penny I've got.”
Given that the brothers have a combined wealth estimated at around £1.4 billion by the UK rich list, that's a lot of pennies.
Buses are not their only interest – with property and other businesses adding to the resources available to them.
He added: “And if that means bringing money in from the rest of your group, that's what I'll do, because the principle of this is so wrong. That’s how I feel about it.”
Under the franchising system, which could take up to seven years to put in place, SPT would set fares, frequency and determine what routes need to be served.
It would also decide who gets to run the buses on the routes.
Mr Easdale feels this means another firm could swoop in and be handed his business.
He said: “From an operator's point of view, what they're asking us to do is actually bid for our own business and everybody else can bid for my business.”
Having taken over the firm as a small enterprise, it has become one of the biggest independent bus operators in the UK.
The scale of what is at stake is outlined when he says: “We've invested more than £200 million in this business in the last 20 to 25 years.
“In infrastructure, buses and training. It's all documented, the money is there.
“We're building a bigger and better business.
“We are not into big dividends. We believe in investment and that's what we've done.”
Following the decision to pursue franchising, SPT said: “Franchising is a proven model for delivery of local bus services across Europe and beyond and provides the greatest certainty of making significant improvement to the network to achieve passenger growth, better accessibility for all and deliver wider public policy outcomes.”
Mr Easdale disagrees.
Not only does he disagree, he is scathing in his assessment of the organisation that would oversee the process.
“Power,” he said, is the reason SPT has pursued this particular agenda – and he suggested that “they are using socialist dogma that the buses will be better off in public hands”.
“I have no doubt,” he added, “that SPT is on a power grab to safeguard SPT itself”.

Honestly, in my opinion it's a rather embarrassing article, they don't attempt to prove how continuing with the status quo will provide a better experience for passengers than with franchising and it reeks of desperation. You're 'building a bigger and better business' but are you improving experiences for passengers? I don't denounce the excellent investment in electric vehicles but in terms of timetables there's been little meaningful improvement in recent years, rather the opposite. It's clear the Easdales care far more about profit than customer satisfaction, and the 'socialist dogma' point is rather laughable.

 

[Spsf3232]

I can see exactly where they are coming from, can't expect someone who's invested millions into a business to just expect to hand it over to someone else. The industry is all about making profit and sadly that means low demand services are cut.

It's not an ideal situation for passengers but that's what's been handed since regulation, then with poor percentages returned with the entitlement cards by the government have made it even harder for services to make a profit.

What needs to be done is for SPT to get there act together regarding subsided services they currently run and that will fill in those gaps instead of going after profitable routes.

 

[318266]

Never thought I'd see the day "mega expensive people" becomes a phrase used by billionaires in press releases...

 

[Stan Drews]

It's clear the Easdales care far more about profit than customer satisfaction, and the 'socialist dogma' point is rather laughable.

However, they make the point that they take very little in dividends, with any profits being largely reinvested in new buses.

 

[Trnsprt4Sctlnd]

Public services in the hands of the private sector, no thanks.

 

[Steve440]

I can see exactly where they are coming from, can't expect someone who's invested millions into a business to just expect to hand it over to someone else. The industry is all about making profit and sadly that means low demand services are cut.

It's not an ideal situation for passengers but that's what's been handed since regulation, then with poor percentages returned with the entitlement cards by the government have made it even harder for services to make a profit.

What needs to be done is for SPT to get there act together regarding subsided services they currently run and that will fill in those gaps instead of going after profitable routes.

But that's exactly what has happened with Stagecoach, First etc in Manchester, why is this any different?

 

[Stan Drews]

Public services in the hands of the private sector, no thanks.

Provided those public hands aren’t grossly underfunded.
Ownership and regulation change will make relatively little difference. However, any option properly funded has the ability to bring about noticeable changes.

 

[Trnsprt4Sctlnd]

However, they make the point that they take very little in dividends, with any profits being largely reinvested in new buses.

At one point only a couple of years ago they did take £2.8m

 

[158756]

But that's exactly what has happened with Stagecoach, First etc in Manchester, why is this any different?

First and Stagecoach are massive businesses with lots of operations not affected by franchising and the experience/money to do well in a franchised system. You can see why the owners of McGill's would be unhappy at being forced out of their business they've spent so much time and money on. There weren't any major independent operators in Manchester, but it looks like those there were will be almost completely wiped out, they just don't have the money to make a fuss about it like McGill's do.

 

[318266]

You can see why the owners of McGill's would be unhappy at being forced out of their business they've spent so much time and money on.

...minus Flixbus, the vast majority of Midland Bluebird, Xplore Dundee...

Meanwhile, the family also own:

• "Glensanda" taxi company (probably a holding firm)
• Gourock Taverns
• Arranglen (miscellanous equipment leasing)
• Inverdev (real estate investment)
• Seil Investments (real estate investment)
• Slate Island Developments (real estate investment)
• Accident Repair Centre (Scotland, often referred to as ARC)
• Kylemuir (Hairdressers)
• "Glenaden" taxi company (probably a holding firm)
• Inverclyde Taxis

...as per Companies House, for officers with addresses registered to the McGill's depot at 99 Earnhill Road.

They have many things to fall back on if half of their bus company is sold, to say the least - and the money from having to sell the depot to the state would probably be very useful to purchase other bus depots, if they wished for that path!

 

[JKP]

Public services in the hands of the private sector, no thanks.

At the end of the day it makes little difference to most. Everyone has to work within a budget and a significant proportion of income now comes from carrying the over 60s, disabled and under 22s. Unfortunately if publically owned politicians get involved which often means buses serving only one or two folk whilst neglecting the fact that that bus would be better used bolstering a better used route.

 

[WestCoast]

First and Stagecoach are massive businesses with lots of operations not affected by franchising and the experience/money to do well in a franchised system. You can see why the owners of McGill's would be unhappy at being forced out of their business they've spent so much time and money on. There weren't any major independent operators in Manchester, but it looks like those there were will be almost completely wiped out, they just don't have the money to make a fuss about it like McGill's do.

For sure but I do think equally McGill‘s also have those same resources to be potentially very successful at securing those contracts to be a dominant player. They could even end up expanding their operations if they bid competitively. They’ve gone up against all the big players haven’t they First, Lothian, Citylink, NX, who haven’t they competed with / taken over some operations from? They are not the operator in the region I’d worry about in any potential franchising….

 

[sannox]

If I was a bus company I'd probably welcome some idea of franchising. Run your business with fixed income. It wouldn't depend on fare box income, roadworks or changes in passenger flows if something closes etc.

 

[Stan Drews]

If I was a bus company I'd probably welcome some idea of franchising. Run your business with fixed income. It wouldn't depend on fare box income, roadworks or changes in passenger flows if something closes etc.

I don’t think it’s the operational side of it that is the major issue, but more about the acquisition/confiscation of the business that many operators have built up over many years, often with significant investment. If that was done using appropriate market value rates, then I suspect there would be far greater acceptance from operators.

 

[overthewater]

I think most people unhappiness with this plan is, it's SPT suggesting the plans, and no one has every said anything positive about them. Nor are they good value for the public purse or even have decent ideas for a decent network.