In a bid to square its budget circle, Hampshire council has announced 1,200 job losses. Though this is estimated to save £55mil, the pressure’s still on here and at local transport authorities across the land. Will they have the wherewithal to increase expenditure on bus services should operators make commercial deregistrations?
Though Southampton is only part of Hampshire for ceremonial purposes, the *city* council is facing a raft of withdrawals to be made by First Hampshire. Can it or will it react? But, does it need to?
Thus far, public reaction towards the changes has been bafflingly acidic. An excuse to bash First, in fact. It’s not as if the 30th January First proposals are significant, in a little over a week’s time. The paper’s headline is somewhat misleading, too. “First Hampshire to cut 100 bus services in Southampton”. This is actually 100 journeys… a week!
Most withdrawals affect later evening or early morning journeys, some only on Saturdays or Sundays. Yet, there’s been a furore. Looking at the before and after timetables, and the sort of changes First proposes seem nothing other than sensible. For example, the 1/1A (Woolston/Weston Estate) operates every half hour in the evenings at the moment. First proposes hourly after 2117. This may not be ideal but neither is it the end of the world as we know it.
As usual, campaigners fear for older people. Isn’t it interesting how they tend to assume the voice of other people in the community, as if older people cannot speak up for themselves. In reality, what older person is likely to want to travel on a Saturday morning at 0623 from Southampton city centre to St Denys or Bitterne? Or to Woolston after 2117 of an evening?
What’s really interesting is that Tim O’Toole implied that he was reversing the previous First cut-and-cut-gain approach made popular by First. But, personally, I don’t view these changes as going against the drift of this new philosophy. Frequencies are still maintained and the network retains its cohesion.
Bluestar was quick to reassure the world that it won’t be making any cuts. That as done the operator quite a good turn, in spite of its far thinner Southampton network. The earliest Bluestar operates to Bitterne on a Saturday morning, for example, is 0723.
Thursday, 20 January 2011
Predictable, I Suppose
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
There have been reductions this month in various areas e.g. around Glasgow ("it will result in a number of services being reduced in frequency or, in a few cases, will see the withdrawal of a route.") and in the Lothians.
But if, as they say, passenger numbers are down, there is not much choice; profits have to be maintained, and TO'T will not be popular if they are not.
"In reality, what older person is likely to want to travel on a Saturday morning at 0623 from Southampton city centre to St Denys or Bitterne? Or to Woolston after 2117 of an evening?"
Well, my parents used to visit the theatre or concerts in Southampton city centre occasionally, even when my father was over 80, and they would have wanted to be able to get back home (admittedly, not to one of those districts specified) after 2117. The problem, of course, is that if the event comes to an end at 2220, waiting until 2317 is unlikely to be acceptable, whereas waiting until 2247 might be. I understand that one cannot generalise, but service intervals of an hour or more in densely populated urban areas are probably so unattractive that they will be a deterrent to passengers. In the theoretical circumstances I referred to above, a fit person could have walked the distance to my parents' home before the bus at 2317 had departed, though there are, of course, other considerations to take into account when walking at such times of day. A low-frequency (i.e. long intervals) bus service at those times of day will undoubtedly reinforce the perception that buses are no longer useful for social activities.
Agree with the blog post that halving frequency to hourly in the later evening is not a problem. Just look at the local authorities cutting ALL evenings services!
I'd much rather have cuts, down to hourly if necessary, rather than total withdrawal at certain times.
"Just look at the local authorities cutting ALL evenings services!"
Yet there are evening services around that are subsidised, but may well actually be commercially viable, at least for the smaller operators that are taking some of the "pocket money" tenders. But as it's conventional to subsidise these routes, nobody will do them commercially. It's a catch 22.
This is one reason why I think we should either be completely regulated or completely deregulated; the hybrid doesn't work as it allows bus companies to hold Councils to ransom, effectively. But it will be interesting to see if anyone does fill these gaps.
Neil said...
'Yet there are evening services around that are subsidised, but may well actually be commercially viable, at least for the smaller operators that are taking some of the "pocket money" tenders. But as it's conventional to subsidise these routes, nobody will do them commercially.'
I'm sure you are right in that respect - it's an unfortunate fact of life, but wherever there are subsidies, grants, benefits, etc, available, somebody will try to claim more than their fair share. It applies to welfare benefits, tax allowances (for businesses or individuals), and even bus subsidies. Today, just by way of an example, there is a report on the BBC about £1.1bn of benefit overpayments - this apparently due to 'errors' in the claims.
I recall in the initial stages of deregulation, a neighbouring operator had not registered one of their services a few miles outside the main operating are of my employers, and we won the tender from the LA. However, our joy was short lived, as the original operator decided that they could, after all, run it commercially and registered it a few days later. I seem to recall that we may have done the same thing with one of our marginal services, possibly involving the same neighbouring operator.
Of course the system of deregulation with some local authority support available through tenders is a compromise, but I guess that is inevitable with the nature of political decisions today. The problem is that the politicians do not seem to accept responsibility for managing the systems that they setup properly, and keeping a proper control on spending - in this case, ensuring that the subsidies really are needed. It might involve doing things like monitoring the use of the tendered services. If the services are well used, then perhaps the tender is unnecessary; on the other hand, if the service is poorly used, and the loads could be adequately catered for by a taxi, then that alternative should also be examined.
Post a Comment