You (twice) missed out answering whether bus companies and their managers should take responsibility for the effect of deregulation.
Only because I thought it was some rhetorical point; I didn't think it was an actual question. Let me answer that point, so handsomely and fulsomely, so that you feel I have given it its full attention.
Deregulation was a political initiative. It was born of free market economics against the background of high levels of direct and indirect subsidy and collapsing passenger figures from the mid 1950s until the early 1980s. As you are doubtless aware, passenger figures had declined markedly since the 1950s for a number of reasons. Many were socio-economic - people were wealthier so cars were more affordable, the onset of television (albeit only on 2/3 channels) saw evening travel decline as cinemas closed, and even the sale of refrigerators and growth of supermarkets impacted the frequency of shopping trips. Arguably, bus companies were slow to react to this but in many ways, they were hamstrung by the licensing system of the time.
So by the 1980s, you had a largely nationalised bus industry either via the National Bus Company, Scottish Bus Group and the various PTEs and municipalities, with archaic ways of working and a declining passenger base. So the Conservative Government decided that deregulation would be enacted following some trial areas in Hereford and Cumbria, via the 1985 Transport Act. Therefore, you had bus companies that were being forced into a brave new world. However, especially with the NBC, this was compounded by the fact that at the very time of deregulation, they were also being privatised by open sale; even the SBG companies had only a relatively short window before the privatisation process was forced on them.
Undoubtedly, mistakes were made then by bus company managers but also by the very politicians who were involved in the process at the time. Unfortunately, whilst you had management teams and purchasers who were good custodians, as well as Caldaire or Trent or Stagecoach or East Yorkshire, you had ATL Holdings or Drawlane who were less so. Since then, it is again fair to say that mistakes have been made, notably by First but also as we're seeing now with Arriva.
However, these things don't take place in a political or social vacuum. Firms don't want to lose money nor lose customers. However, think of the things that have happened... well, fuel prices going up after a Gulf War or two (which incidentally saw VAT go up), increases in insurance taxes, the legislation on DDA, the imposition of ENCTS and then the reduction in spending on both remuneration of those to operators coupled with the swingeing austerity cuts to local authority budgets.
And you think that the problem sits squarely with the operators....and that more political intervention is required?
As far as I can see, Brighton still has deregulation and the council has no say in the routes, fares etc.
You clearly have a bias against a publicly accountable system along the lines of TfL and you haven't put forward an alternative for London, or other cities where they don't currently have deregulation.
Brighton is actually the model that does work. You have a local authority that has brokered a deal with operators that says "we will give you the access and priority to operate effectively". They reduce on-street parking and use that space for improved bus priority. In return, the companies respond with continued investment and service development. That can be underpinned by legal means as we've seen in Leeds where bus priority and new vehicle investment are linked.
I have no bias against public accountability and recognise the role of central and local government. As I've said about Brighton (but it also holds for Bristol, Nottingham and Reading) that they have a clear role to play. However, it takes enlightenment from both sides.
Instead, you have this classic "class war" rubbish of "sticking it to the man" and "we own this" that solves nothing. A publicly owned bus is no better than a privately run bus if the underlying issue of road congestion isn't solved.
Now, I think I've answered that pretty comprehensively so please, no more straw man arguments.
www.intalink.org.uk
