Did someone say that our industry was *deregulated*? We may be on the verge of celebrating 25 years of market freedoms but the bus business has more regulation now than it had a quarter of a century ago, not less.
Now, not all of the requirements & regulations imposed upon the bus industry hinder it. Some are either neutral or beneficial. But the rise in red tape is enough to make you feel quite blue, at times. In something of a surprise, however, it’s interesting that the Competition Commission’s newly published proposals do not feature universal re-regulation or franchising.
So, what *has* the Competition Commission provisionally proposed? There are three main areas . It’s something that’s very indigestible at the first read (at nearly 200 pages) and it will take some unravelling. Nevertheless, the Competition Commission proposes:
Reduced Barriers to Entry
- Giving LTAs more powers to introduce and, where necessary, modify multi-operator ticketing. A victory for The P.T.E.G., that one. Favours smaller rather than larger operators.
- More transparent ways to ensure access to bus stations, especially for new entrants. How many operators still own stations, these days? Other than in Wiltshire & Dorset, of course. Bus stations are better off under LTA control.
- Limiting the practice of over-bussing as a short-term expedient to undermine competitors, by extending registration periods and by modifying the way in which “frequent service” registrations apply. A tricky one. There’s still a balance to be struck between predation and business protection. And, certainly, the proposals come with a loss of flexibility.
- Local transport authorities should have powers to gather revenue & patronage data on deregistered services to assist their retendering. Is this already happening in any case, especially regarding passenger numbers?
- Best practice guidance to be drafted and available for LTAs.
- The OFT to accord even greater importance than currently to mergers between competitors including smaller mergers it would otherwise leave alone. Does this mean that smaller operators will find it more difficult to sell, should they wish to?
- Partnerships are the way forward for ridership growth. But there should be care in placing the bar too high such that new entrants cannot come in. This needs considerable thought but, on first, reading is contradictory.
- The CC proposes BSOG reforms to ensure participation. Some might just take the view that BSOG is no longer worth it, especially since it’s due for reduction in six months.
i Competition Commission provisional decisions on remedies
7 comments:
Giving LTAs more powers to introduce and, where necessary, modify multi-operator ticketing. A victory for The P.T.E.G., that one. Favours smaller rather than larger operators.
Wouldn't that depend on how it is run? In south east Wales, we have one called a Network Rider, which are issued and accepted by nearly all operators in the area (there are a few operators who won't accept the weekly tickets). Each operator keeps the fare when they issue one.
Veolia had the monopoly on the evening runs, operating many routes run by Stagecoach (in particular) during the day, but there are other smaller operators who do similarly. They accept far more Network Riders than they issue.
I wonder if multi-operator tickets are popular in other parts of the country? I purchased a Network Rider from a Stagecoach driver last week and he told me he hadn't issued one for months. He's not the first driver to have said something similar, and that includes drivers from other operators.
Is it a case that passengers don't know what such a ticket is? Cardiff Bus advertise their Day to Go and Weekly tickets, Stagecoach advertise their local explorer and megarider tickets, others do the same, but there's little to no mention of the Network Rider anywhere to be found on any vehicles. Or is it that there isn't much demand for it?
"They accept far more Network Riders than they issue."
That can be taken into account on the price of a tender, though. All Milton Keynes tendered routes are tendered on the basis of acceptance of Arriva daily/weekly/monthly tickets, from which I'm sure the tendered operator does not see a penny. Presumably the Council sees this as cheaper than having to administer its own ticketing scheme and deal with people moaning about Arriva tickets not being valid (it used to, but hasn't for some years).
The downside to this is that Arriva won't accept day/period tickets issued on these services.
To be honest, I think for shared ticketing schemes to become really popular (outside PTE areas where they always were, and you've got a rail network to provide an anchor for them) they would have to come with a ban on operators' own schemes.
And that can only happen with re-regulation and a change to Council revenue risk, otherwise you end up in the same unfair situation you have with free passes. (By that I mean that it's unfair if an operator has to take revenue risk but cannot set its own fares).
"To be honest, I think for shared ticketing schemes to become really popular (outside PTE areas where they always were, and you've got a rail network to provide an anchor for them) they would have to come with a ban on operators' own schemes."
You can already see the outcome of this with free passes, country (or less frequent) buses filling up in urban areas by virtue of turning up ahead of city buses. Great if you operate a really comprehensive network, not so great for ex-municipals which have cut non-core routes.
Neil, I don't necessarily agree that a ban on operators' own tickets needs to co-incide with a multi-operator ticket. It doesn't in PTE areas where PTE tickets and operator-only tickets exist happily side-by-side.
In most provincial towns it doesn't really much matter, as one operator runs pretty much everything (Cumbria excluding the limited Reays network in Carlisle is a good example). But there are a good few towns and cities- Durham being an excellent example- where one part of the city is covered by one company and the other part is covered by the other company. A multi-operator ticket would benefit everyone as a lot of people won't use the bus if they have to use more than one operator.
What I don't understand is where the operators get together for a day ticket (e.g. Explorer North East) but they won't get together for a period ticket.
Re: David at 15:03
It's perhaps a shame that, as you can do with trains, you can't purchase a single or a return from one place to another.
As an example, Arriva and FGW both run on the main line in South Wales. I buy a ticket to go from Cardiff to Swansea and it doesn't matter whose trains I use. I can even get off along the way and complete my journey later on with the same ticket (I often find kids trying to do exactly the same thing with buses, unaware that they can't).
Trains don't usually offer rider tickets for unlimited travel within certain boundaries, though.
"That can be taken into account on the price of a tender, though"
I have the opposite concern.
In our area there is an operator running tendered rural services who keeps campaigning for MOTs so his customers can use our commercial urban services for free while he pockets the loot...there seems little incentive for traffic in the opposite direction (I'd guess that market is largely concessionary by nature anyway) so this could be something of a nightmare for us...
Post a Comment