| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Thundersley Green Belt
10.15 pm
Bob Spink (Castle Point) (Con): The people of Thundersley who live around a site for a proposed assault course near Rivenhall in Thundersley are rightly deeply concerned about the implications of that proposal for their quality of life and their green-belt land. Mr. Stokes and the residents of Rivenhall are worthy people seeking to defend their community and green belt from inappropriate development and exploitation, and they do a great community service in bringing this matter before the House.
“The Petition of the residents of Benfleet and others,
Declares that the petitioners oppose the proposed development of a military style ‘assault course’ near Rivenhall, and in the Thundersley green belt, which would be up to five metres high and would cause undue and inappropriate alterations to the green belt. In addition, this development would cause extra traffic, noise and loss of privacy and would be detrimental to local residents’ enjoyment of their homes.
The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons call upon the Government to refer the matter to Castle Point Borough Council and urge the Council to reject the application.
Bus Services (Dorset)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn. —[Mr. Michael Foster.]
10.16 pm
Annette Brooke (Mid-Dorset and North Poole) (LD): I am going to concentrate during this debate on the bus services in my constituency, although the problems do cover a wider area, as reflected in the vast number of letters in our local paper, the Daily Echo, and Saturday’s front-page headline: “Bus Rage!”
My constituency is a mix of urban and rural areas and is served by a number of councils. For the purposes of this debate, the relevant councils are Poole unitary and Dorset county council. The main bus company is Wilts & Dorset, which, has been owned by the Go-Ahead Group since 2003. The current outrage among my constituents occurred after the interruption of a new bus timetable on 4 June. I have in fact received few representations from the most rural parts of my constituency, simply, I believe, because the services for places such as Bere Regis were already so infrequent that it was impossible to cut them any further.
The recent problems have occurred in the less rural parts of the eastern end of the county council area, and in the adjoining north Poole part of my constituency: Corfe Mullen and Upton, in the county council area; and Merley, Broadstone, Creekmoor and Alderney, in north Poole. Where we used to have a poor bus service for many people, we now have a dire or non-existent one. As elderly people are saying to me time and again, “What is the point of a free bus pass if there are no buses that we can use?” Of course, it is the most vulnerable who have been severely affected: elderly people who do not have a car; people who travel to work who cannot drive, perhaps because of visual impairment; the young; and those who cannot afford a car. People who cannot now travel to work are saying, “Shall I move, change my job or perhaps not work at all?”
My constituency is already an area of very high car ownership, particularly because of the existing difficulties associated with travelling by public transport, but I now know of some families who have purchased a second car because of the current situation. It makes a mockery of the Government’s national policy to encourage more people to use public transport and to reduce car travel. It is of great significance to young people—how can they have things to do and places to go if there is no transport to get them there?
Wilts & Dorset bus
company’s new owners introduced their first route revision in
2004, another in 2005, and in June this year, a complete recasting of
the network. The service revisions have been designed to improve the
efficiency of the company by reducing costs, as the bus company tells
me, or possibly, I suppose, by increasing profits. From Poole’s
perspective, the company’s strategy has been the simplification
of the network, which is intended to make services more direct and
reliable to compete with a private car. Bus services have been diverted
off side roads that penetrate estates to run down prime transport
corridors at an increased frequency. The use of modern, bright and
air-conditioned vehicles aims to
offer comfortable, accessible and safer travel, in an attempt to attract
the motorist.
In terms of overall passenger growth, the company increased its patronage in the borough of Poole by more than 30 per cent. between 2004 and 2006. Unfortunately, the strategy of route simplification is fundamentally at odds with Poole’s accessibility goals, as many elderly or disabled passengers cannot access the new direct services. They simply cannot walk to the main road bus stop or return with shopping bags. The most recent route revision in June saw approximately 10 per cent. of Poole’s 850 bus stops left potentially without any form of bus service. That included what would once have been considered good bus-operating territory—large housing estates and tracts of what I would call “bungalow land”. The county council concurs that the overarching feature is the withdrawal of services from parts of routes not considered to be part of the core network, and that the focus is now on fewer high-frequency routes on main roads, with less emphasis on penetrating residential and rural areas. I believe that that has happened in other parts of the country, but our area started from such a low base, with poor provision.
One could easily think that the route changes had been triggered by the free bus pass for elderly citizens—the cuts came about more or less at the same time—as the areas with the biggest cuts are typically where senior citizens might live. I have questioned the bus company at great length about whether it is satisfied with the negotiations over free bus pass travel. I have been assured that it is satisfied at the moment with the amount of money that councils are paying it, so we must assume that it is a sheer coincidence.
I appreciate that the Minister does not want to sit through a long catalogue of details about particular bus services affecting communities of which she has probably never heard. However, I want to describe the situation in just one community that, I believe, is the worst hit.
Corfe Mullen is right on the edge of the Poole conurbation and is served by Dorset county council. It has a population of 10,000 people and had an estimated 80,000 bus trips per year. It had five buses per hour, allowing residents to travel to Poole, Bournemouth and Wimborne to access a wide range of services. With very little notice, Wilts & Dorset bus company announced that it was ceasing all services from 4 June. As one might imagine, the local community was devastated by that news, and I have received hundreds of representations just from that community. As a temporary measure, the county council has managed to transfer £27,000 from subsidising evening and weekend services to subsidise a skeleton service until September. That means that there are now only two buses per hour, plus some limited peak-time direct buses to Bournemouth, with the previous service to Wimborne not running at all.
Corfe Mullen has limited facilities, so the loss of the route to Wimborne, a nearby market town where the administrative offices of East Dorset district council are sited, has created great difficulties. Access to Poole main hospital is difficult, as is access to the local college. It is basically impossible to travel by bus to various industrial estates.
The current situation is difficult, as has been illustrated by residents. One writes
“I am chronically ill, disabled, and living on the minimum pension, I rely totally on buses. We no longer have a direct service to Wimborne which is our nearest town centre and to which we need to travel regularly for doctor, hospital, dentist and shopping. Until June 4th the direct bus from my home took8 minutes, now there are only 2 indirect routes, one takes47 minutes, the other takes anywhere between 15 and 35 minutes and if a connection is missed possibly 2 hours and 5 minutes.”
“Please restore our local bus service, so we can get to work, college, school, banks, doctors, hospital etc. Why should Wilts and Dorset take away my right to work. I work full time and3 evenings a week, I will be a pensioner soon but cannot live on a pension alone.
My son works in Bournemouth and is finding getting to work very difficult indeed.”
“My son is a student at Bournemouth and Poole College and relies on public transport—he has almost been thrown off his course due to the unreliability of the buses.”
Travelling to the college is a complex process. A change of buses is necessary. There are a number of courses for young people with special needs at the college. Many could cope with one bus, but coping with more than one is difficult.
Poole hospital workers and patients have been affected. There are whole areas of housing where people purchased their properties because they were served by a bus route. Now a long walk is needed for people to gain access even to limited services. The evening bus services are very limited, and people feel that they are prisoners in their own homes.
That is the situation now. What will happen in September, when the current arrangement ends? Wilts & Dorset could refuse to continue to operate the current skeleton service, and give notice of its intention to stop. At that point, what could Dorset county council do? It could consider tendering services in Corfe Mullen for the first time, but it tells me that its bus subsidy budget was overspent last year. That means that funding is not currently in the base budget, and cuts in other areas would be required if the base budget could not be increased. The council has not generally gone along with subsidising routes other than Sunday and weekend services, and I believe that it is concerned about achieving value for money, given the dominance and power of Wilts & Dorset. It has suggested to me that the current review of all the services might be able to identify possible savings, and that there might be consultations with Poole borough council; but I fear that the problem will simply be pushed from one council to another, and that no overall solution will be found.
Another option suggested by Dorset county council is that it could rework the whole scheme, and—using subsidy initially, and perhaps purchasing a vehicle—could work with another company and eventually convert the service into something commercially viable. Potentially 80,0000 passenger journeys could be regained, but the process would take time and involve up-front costs.
Poole has given lifelines to
several communities by subsidising additional routes with another much
smaller company. The borough’s limited budget for
subsidising bus services has also traditionally been targeted at
providing evening and Sunday services. However, since the radical June
2006 network revision, it has been seen to be necessary for officers to
let numerous contracts for additional services to cover gaps in the
commercial network during the day.
One of those services has been a great success, wending its way through residential areas, stopping off at Poole hospital and calling at Tesco. It is performing above expectations, and is already carrying more than 100 passengers a day, although at present it runs only three times a day. I have had the most wonderful letters from elderly people who thought that they had no bus service, and then discovered the small bus service subsidised by Poole council. They say that the driver is wonderful and so kind, and that it is saving their lives. Their one request is for more than three buses per day. Currently they reach a place, and then have to return within 40 minutes. That looks as though it will be possible. I am not sure that the county council is prepared to take such an approach.
Why are we in this mess? Obviously, there is the general strategy, but there is also the fact that, without a doubt, the bus company has faced the rising costs of drivers’ wages, fuel in particular and insurance, which are undermining profit margins. That is its argument for taking that action. At a Local Government Association meeting in December, it was flagged up to councils that contract prices would increase significantly and that budget provision would have to be made. Increases in the price of the tenders of between 10 and 20 per cent. were expected, I believe, so how much do my local councils spend on subsidising bus services? These are interesting figures. I will look just at the figures on subsidising buses, not taking on board the provision of bus shelters, advertising and school transport.
In 2003-04 the borough of Poole spent about £564,000; in 2004-05, its expenditure approached £600,000; and in 2005-06, it was £653,000. The improvement in resources falls back in 2006-07, just when it appears that more money is needed, to just over £611,000. Obviously, therefore, there is an issue here. What sort of figures does the Minister think will be necessary to support bus services, given that the commercial bus companies, which since the Transport Act 1985 do not have to provide any social routes, are moving forward in terms of hoping to increase their passengers, but backwards in terms of vulnerable residents?
We should bear in mind the fact
that the population in the county council area as a whole is
approaching 400,000, whereas the population of Poole is about 140,000.
We are looking at bus subsidies going straight to the bus operators. In
2003-04, the spend by Dorset county council on subsidised bus services
was around £900,000; in 2004-05, it was only £838,000; in
2005-06, it was over £1 million; and in 2006-07, it was
over£1 million. When I asked how much was spent in the
eastern part of the county, which is more densely populated for the
most part, the figure for 2005-06 was only £116,000. The figures
that I have been given show that that is a change of 315 per cent. on
the previous year. That shows that the county council has had a
different approach to supporting bus services, using its rural grant in
possibly innovative ways, but now we are facing this crisis, there is a
problem with the level of funding.
Are my councils allocating enough? Is it so difficult to work in partnership when one company is dominant? People are concerned that perhaps Corfe Mullen is being used almost as a ransom by the bus company. The figures from the bus company this morning make it clear that it was making massive losses on the services that were provided, but it is unsustainable for the community to be left in this position.
The bus company is responding a little—perhaps it could respond more—by saying that perhaps it got that bit wrong. It is important that I keep on making representations to the bus companies. There are other issues across my constituency. For example, tokens are given to those elderly people who are too disabled to use the bus in the Dorset county council area but not in the Poole area. That is causing some unrest. If there are buses, elderly people can use their bus passes earlier in the day in the Dorset county council area than they can in the Poole area.
The main point that I want to raise with the Minister is: are the councils allocating enough of their resources? My councils would say that they cannot allocate any more because the Government do not give them sufficient funds. The county council in particular is reviewing all its expenditure and proposing many cuts, because its expenditure commitments are rising at a rate of 7 per cent., but its projected income is rising at only 5 per cent. The county council will not find it easy, therefore, to allocate more resources to address that serious problem. What advice can the Minister give to the councils and what help can the Government give them, financially and in the provision of support for partnership working? I hope that the Minister will be able to help my constituents who are upset and outraged by the situation.
10.35 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Gillian Merron): I congratulate the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke) on securing this debate and providing an opportunity for the House to discuss the important subject of bus transport in her constituency. I agree that buses are a crucial element in meeting the nation’s transport needs. With public sector support for bus services now totalling more than £2 billion a year, they clearly have a very high ranking in our transport priorities, for many of the reasons that the hon. Lady mentioned.
Over the past few years, with the industry and local authorities working together, we have made some good progress in many respects, with record levels of investment by industry and Government, and new initiatives and partnerships that have increased bus use in many areas. The Government’s massive increase in our provision for concessionary fares for older and disabled people has also been a part of that.
Of course, there
is room for further improvement. What has been happening in the hon.
Lady’s constituency is an example of the more mixed picture
nationally. In parts of the constituency, in particular Poole, we have
seen investment by the bus operator, leading to significant increases
in bus use. But the other side of the picture is the difficulty in
sustaining local services and ensuring access for all, especially in
the more rural areas of the constituency. Operators and local
authorities always have faced, and always will face, decisions on how
best to allocate
resources.
As the hon. Lady said, in parts of the area there has been a good local bus network supported by the Go Ahead Group. It has invested £11 million in new buses and launched the award winning More bus network. Bus patronage rose on those routes by 30 per cent. across Poole last year, as the hon. Lady acknowledged, and the local authorities have played their part by providing new bus stop infrastructure to raise the general standard of services.
Bus patronage growth in rural Dorset has outperformed the south-west regional average, and that of England. We welcome those positive trends. However, I recognise that there have been difficulties, including the problems elderly people have in accessing some bus services. I also understand that following a review of local services some destinations have had services withdrawn. Indeed, I am aware that both Dorset county council and the borough of Poole have had many letters from constituents concerned about recent changes.
As is always the case, difficult challenges have to be faced in maintaining rural public transport servicesin the face of competing priorities for funding. I understand that Poole council has taken prompt steps to restore services to a number of destinations that no longer had a service, and that it is also carrying out a thorough review of its bus subsidy provision. What priority to give to supporting bus services is of course a local decision, and I know that the council has had some interesting debates about the reductions in funding for supported services in the borough.
I want to make direct reference both to the considerable Government funding for buses in the hon. Lady’s constituency and to the role of local authorities. For our part, we have for some time recognised the particular needs for bus support in rural areas, which benefits from the main Government sources of funding for buses—the bus service operators grant—and the Government’s revenue support grant to local authorities. Both represent major investment.
The bus service operators grant provides a rebate of about 80 per cent. of the duty paid by bus operators on the fuel they use; in the case of environmentally friendly fuels, the rebate is 100 per cent. That contributes to the financial viability of many rural services. However, conventional bus services are not always the most cost-effective way of meeting rural public transport needs. Community transport makes a significant contribution to meeting those needs.
As well as the
benefits of that general support, we have long recognised the
particular needs of rural communities by providing separate specific
funding for rural bus services. Since 1998, they have benefited from
the rural bus subsidy grant. In its first year, the grant provided
£32 million to local authorities for new bus services in rural
areas. Since then, the grant level has been increasing and it is now
more than £54 million across England, providing for 2,000 rural
services and
more than 30 million passenger journeys a year. I am sure that the hon.
Lady will acknowledge that that is a considerable support to our rural
communities. Funds are allocated on the basis of the number of people
living in rural areas within each
authority.
Since 1998, Dorset has received just under £7 million of the grant for rural bus services and Poole council has received about £89,000. Dorset receives almost£1 million a year, which provides more than 30 services in the county. The grant can be used not only for conventional buses but for a wider variety of flexible or demand-responsive services. The local authority is of course best placed to decide how to use those funds and which services to support. In addition to that grant, all authorities can use their own resources to support bus services, and the bulk of local authority support for buses comes from the Government’s revenue support grant.
I draw the hon. Lady’s attention to the rural bus challenge and Kickstart funding that we have provided to support innovative schemes in rural areas.Between 1998 and 2003, challenge funding provided £110 million for 301 schemes, and those financial resources enabled many local authorities to try out more innovative schemes to address rural transport needs.
In Dorset, the rural bus challenge funded the Blackmore Vale accessible community transport scheme, which was awarded nearly £500,000. The award-winning Jurassic coast links service, developed in partnership with Devon county council, also benefited, with £665,000 of rural bus challenge funding.
Since 2003, we have used a new approach called Kickstart, which provides pump-priming funding for services that have the potential to become self-sustaining after three years. I am sure that the hon. Lady and her constituents would agree that it is disappointing that Dorset was not able to submit more successful bids during the six years that the rural bus challenge funding was available, and similarly that its bids for Kickstart funding have not been successful.
Annette Brooke: Will the Minister give way?
Gillian Merron: Yes, although there is only a short time left for the debate.
Annette Brooke: Can the Minister give some advice about the future for the community of Corfe Mullen, where 10,000 residents face having no bus services whatever? The county council says that it has no extra money to save the situation. What can be done?
Gillian Merron: I refer the hon. Lady to what I have already said. The local authority failed to submit successful bids for funds that were available to it, and are available up and down the country. It is important that she and her constituents should be aware of the extra Government funding that could have been available. The local authority could have successfully applied for that funding, but did not. I refer her to all the points that I have made about the level of financing that is available.
I also refer the hon. Lady to concessionary fares. They will have a direct impact on the experience of many bus users. We are going to see an increase in bus patronage. It is worth noting that some 22,000 free bus passes have been issued to the over-60s and disabled people in Poole alone. If her constituency is anything like mine, I imagine that they will be very well received.
Having outlined the
Government support that has been, and is, available, I urge the hon.
Lady, who is hearing directly of problems with access to public
transport in her constituency, to bring those issues to the attention of
her local authority. Many authorities are already working hard to try
to address such issues as part of their local transport plan, for which
they are funded well. It is important that local authorities work
closely with local bus operators to get things right. I hope that the
hon. Lady will urge her local authority to do so.
Adjourned accordingly at fourteen minutes to Eleven o’clock.
| Index | Home Page |