It was 15 years ago today that John Prescott signalled “the end of the road for two-car families”, as the Telegraph then put it. It was New Labour’s early consultation document on transport and, in reality, it asked more questions than it answered (but that was the intention). Prescott was also at pains to point out that neither he nor his government were anti-car but pro-public transport.
We had to wait 334 days before the answers to the 21st August 1997 questions emerged. As a precursor to what would be the ten year transport plan, we got the daughter policy document entitled “From Workhorse to Thoroughbred” (FWTT), one that foresaw buses taking a central role in defeating congestion.
The backdrop was plummeting bus journeys. Transit reported that between 1983/4 and 1993/4 the number of bus passenger journeys in the deregulated metropolitan city regions fell by 34 per cent. This was highest during the hiatus of 1986/7, when 12 per cent fewer journeys were made. Some stability followed, though the annual loss was always at least double the pre-deregulation rate and often more. Outside the Mets, patronage slid by 22 per cent over the same 10 year period. In regulated London, there was a three per cent growth.
FWTT looked at how buses could contribute towards easing congestion. Buses emerged strongly in the white paper and this prompted Arriva’s chief executive to say that these were “the most tangible opportunity…for… several years” and “I am confident we can get people out of their cars and on to public transport” (Guardian, 21/7/1998). Pressa’s measures included:
- Statutory quality partnerships to include junction priorities, bus lanes and so on. Given a firm footing under the Transport Act 2000, they have nevertheless been slow to take off but have renewed impetuous under the current government.
- Quality contracts. Some viewed this as measures where partnerships failed; others an immediate remedy for the decline in passengers. Pioneering work on these by the P.T.E.G. and by PTEs such as Merseytravel proved these were by no means as straightforward as they first seemed. Even now, expect considerable opposition and challenge. Merseytravel PTE has veered away from them and, recently, SYPTE, too, leaving Nexus and Metro PTEs at the vanguard.
- A maximum £5 bus pass for pensioners to gain a minimum half-fare. Largely forgotten in an age of free travel, we shouldn’t minimise the £5/half-fare contribution. Not all local authorities offered half-fare. Some offered next to nothing in the form of a handful of tokens only.
- Higher penalties for using bus lanes illegally, including buses equipped with enforcement cameras.
“I will have failed if in five years’ time there are not...far fewer journeys by car. It's a tall order but I urge you to hold me to it”,when it came to it, there was nothing other than bus lane enforcement to restrain car use. While many (all?) local transport authorities signed up to the principle of congestion reduction, passing significant roadspace over to buses was challenging for them.
And, even now, motorists hate the thought that they might get themselves filmed using a bus lane. This has resulted in some enforcement cameras being switched off or even bus lanes reverting to space for all roadusers.
The legacy of the announcements made 15 years ago today? Significant funding improvement for rural & urban services, Kickstart funding plus cash for infrastructure. These persuaded a number of operators to invest in their own, commercial services. Later, ridership increases that followed the introduction of free travel. And, with the introduction of Better Bus Funding Areas, who knows what’s possible in the future.
25 comments:
But 15 years is quite a long time to achieve what has been actioned so far. It's all very well making promises about future plans but they often fail to get implemented.
To my mind it's the bus companies themselves that have made the biggest effort in the past 15 years, despite numerous problems along the way. The likes of Stagecoach, Brighton & Hove, Western Greyhound and Trent have done a lot of good for the industry as a whole.
"Melissa the undergraduate stripper" seems far more interesting! Don't suppose your archive runs to that? I wonder what happened to her over the last 15 years.
No doubt the intentions were good but not enough thought went into it.
I was forced into a car by deregulation and that expense had to be recouped.
This is yet another example of politicians trying to adopt an 'all change' idea. The only organisation that has not been 'reformed' in this country is the UK parliament (excepting the Welsh and Scottish changes). Just about everything they touch turns to dust because our model of government hasn't evolved. They even take most of the summer off from parliament despite Joseph Bazalgette fixing the Great Thames stink in the 1870s. Expect more of the same nonsense from Cameron and Co.
Interesting to note there is also a piece about the PFI Skye toll bridge on the same page. Another disaster for the taxpayer devised by idiot politicians.
I worry what will happen when more government spending is withdrawn from bus subsidies, fuel tax rebate etc. followed by what looks like the withdrawal of many bus passes.
That's only about 5 years away!
Clive C said...
"I worry what will happen when more government spending is withdrawn from bus subsidies, fuel tax rebate etc. followed by what looks like the withdrawal of many bus passes.
That's only about 5 years away!"
Interesting one, that. When Leon Daniels finished at First, he made an impression on me with an interesting comment in his blog dated 21st April 2011 that : "the non-London market still feels as if the industry is stuck in the halfway house between being a utility and a retailer." He cited various issues around finance and control and further commented: "The big issue therefore is - does the bus industry want to be a proper retailer? "
I think Leon Daniels was right and I also think Clive C is right. So maybe in time we will see the industry finally standing on its own feet and then having more opportunity to determine its own future.
As another commenter today said, "But 15 years is quite a long time to achieve what has been actioned so far."
I was a senior officer in local government with highways and transport responsibilities back then. To me, the ten year plan was a nice idea, but you somehow knew at the time that the politicians wouldn't follow it through.
"does the bus industry want to be a proper retailer?"
I think bits of it do. A friend applied for a fairly senior position at COMS (Go Ahead) and he said that was made very prominent in the application pack - they considered themselves not to be a transport operator, but the largest retailer in Oxford.
Neil
Hmmm...retailer sounds a bit like a corner shop or WH Smith.Perhaps 'cash and carry' might be more apposite !
The industry should get much more top-end,and sell itself as a 'personal movement option'.
More down to earth would be to keep banging the drum about the real cost of motoring...the link between one's pocket and one's brain is very strong.
I think the problem is short-termism all round.
It's always been a problem in politics because MPs/Ministers/PM always have an eye on the next election and have to be seen to achieve something during their term of office. Few want to set something up for their successor(s) to be able to take the credit for irrespective of whether it's for the good of the country or not, so they tinker with things that are easy but to all intents and purposes are inconsequential in solving the longer-term issues.
Exactly the same happens in businesses and whilst I've got no experience in the bus industry, I have no doubts that it's the same. Top people are moved around so often and with performance related pay/bonuses etc they feel that they have to be seen to be doing something and making an impact. Planning for the long-term barely comes into it as they'll have moved onto something else before anything beneficial happens as a result.
This is why there is so much change in general - people want to be seen to be doing something and take the credit for it.
To be fair, pressure from the City on the quoted groups doesn't help as the City doesn't do long-term either.
I'd like someone to tell me I'm wrong but I won't hold my breath!
Anonymous said...
"I think the problem is short-termism all round."
I suppose that may be a part of the problem, but it's too simplistic to suggest that is the only problem.
To my mind the politicians are saying things that they believe certain people want to hear, when in truth they have no commitment to the ideas at all. In this case it's so blatantly obvious that it's almost laughable. "Prescott signals the end of the road for two-car families". Right. That's the same Prescott who became known as "Two Jags Prescott" (for the uninitiated, "Jags" are a marque of car - a relatively expensive type). Need I say more?
I'd like to tell Anon at 16.39 that he's wrong - but he isn't.
We don't have any real plans for public transport in the longer term [say, 20-30 years]. What is worse is that we don't even have a system whereby such plans might get formulated. Who precisely would actually set up such plans ? - How would there be some form of reasonable guarantee that a body will actually see it through ?
We have a very disjointed bus network, owned by loads of private companies, operating in areas with varying levels of co-ordination between other bus companies - or railways - or the highway authorities.
Realistically, there isn't a hope in hell until someone ensures proper longer-term planning is instigated, and then maintained.
Perhaps what we need is a sort of 'National Bus Company'!
To make long term planning work it would be really nice to have some cross party agreement as to the value and role of public transport. This is what is lacking in this country - you either get extreme policies like deregulation or you get grandiose regulatory organisations.
The French seem able to sit down and say "we need metros, trams, buses and railways to work in the national good". They then get on and improve things and build and extend systems. I know there are exceptions in France where bus coverage can be very patchy as with bits of the rail system but they do seem to get more done than we do.
The bus industry needs some stability and it would behove the politicians of all the parties to sit down and work out a common policy that they'll stick to. This is essential on things like BSOG, concessionary passes and funding and the role of ITAs or other bodies. This will help commercial businesses understand their risks and help councils and authorities plan and budget.
People think of Switzerland as just one country but it's actually a series of individual Cantons.
Despite all that individuality, they have managed to develop world class, highly integrated, bus and rail transport systems.
It's not just a question that we're in the opposite corner, we've not even got into the boxing ring (or understood the rules).
As several have said its about looking good before the next election - at both national and local level.
In my Borough two parties collaborated for some years to maintain control (heard that one before?). With local elections three out of every four years they were 'desperate' for initiatives each time to retain control - which usually had to be in place within six months. The marginal majority did however mean that control could change and each time it did former plans would be rubbished and replaced by new ones so that they not the former controlling party would get the credit.
There also was a growing reluctance to listen to the advice of officers. Once the politicians had convinced themselves that something could be done (and told the press it was happening) they did not expect to be told otherwise......
Then there is the supermarket attitude being shown by many politicians that everything can be done cheaper without any effect on service or quality - just shout louder.....
Yes I do worry about what happens in the future - and on very short time scales.
You need a system of government that allows incremental improvement through informed democracy. The current system was probably adequate 100 years ago, but not any more.The problem is that the politicians are only interested in their own security in power. Look at the mess that has got us to.
I think that Prescott did some good work. He made a commitment (that he did not achieve), that gave operators the confidence to look forward. On a national level, there may not have been fireworks, but the funding was made available for a lot of local improvements. The level of bus priority increased markedly.
Politically, there was never real support elsewhere for bus priority. Indeed I recall Lance Price (former Labour spin doctor) commenting on the M4 bus lane fiasco. This despite the positive outcomes for journey time for road users.
Yet bus priority is so often done wrong. Bus gateways and traffic light overtakes are the best form of it used to great effect in Germany and the Netherlands. Vast swathes of bus lanes that end just before junctions are often worse than useless, and are at best sub-optimal.
Even London rarely does it properly.
Perhaps the bus industry should take the initiative and show politicians what should be done. It seems to me that most features of bus rapid transit are deliverable by operators. Limited stop, cashless boarding, next -stop announcements etc. All within the means of multinational transport groups. For inspiration think Spondon Flyer and build on that. I'd forget local authorities and just get on with it.
iwledgewiSimple fact is that bus services are woefully inadequate so people of necessity have to use cars. If you life in a large town or city you may have an adequate service Monday to Saturdays. If you want to travel at other times forget it as you can if you want to get to retail parks. Industial estates or business parks or even railway stations.
Most people no longer work in town centres or work9 till 5 but this fact seems to have been missed by bus companies hence 90% of their passengers are pensioners or children.
Anonymous @ 1855
Oh Mr Glum, where have you been for the past few weeks? Well, not to worry, trotting out the same old statements, and as usual, without any evidence.
Apart from railway stations, all of the places you list usually have free car parking in abundance. Prescott's paper recognised this, and for a while, reducing car parking was all the rage in planning authorities up and down the country.
Not every authority was enthusiastic, especially those that used to take "commuted payments" i.e. a sum of money for each parking space not built, and often used to finance P&R instead.
FWTT can also be seen as the progenitor of Travel Plans, but in the end, as usual, developers got the upper hand and car parking standards have gradually increased again.
There you go Mr Glum @ 18:55 - one of those crap bus companies failing to run services that people want to use:
...bus timetables for the Autumn
Ahoy, Mr Glum!!
The fact is that many services now have their best ever frequencies, especially on Sundays. This reflects the increasing importance in retailing on Sunday.
Conversely, the decline of pub drinking (notice the number of derelict pubs) and fragmentation of the opening hours means that evening patronage has taken a real dive. Not only that, these have been the very services that have often bitten the dust because local authorities have pulled funding, leaving passengers to the local taxi trade.
Wonder where Mr Glum lives?
"Apart from railway stations, all of the places you list usually have free car parking in abundance."
Including railway stations in the Sarfeast, though it's expensive.
"Prescott's paper recognised this, and for a while, reducing car parking was all the rage in planning authorities up and down the country."
The problem with that was that in most cases it was the stick before the carrot. All very well in city centres (where there is normally a shortage of parking anyway) but no good in a retail/science/business park on the edge of town with crap public transport.
In those cases, a planning requirement to provide and maintain adequate shower and locker space to encourage cycling might be a better investment.
As for housing estates, not providing enough parking just moved it onto the roads, as unlike other European countries we don't tend to operate on the basis of no on-road parking in estates. And few families would buy a house with only one parking space anywhere near it.
But I've long thought the battle against the ownership of the car is lost, which is why the price of petrol is so relevant despite people often trotting out 45p/mile. What the bus industry needs to do, and has been doing successfully in a lot of places, is to persuade people that for given journeys it's best left at home.
Neil
Post a Comment