The future of the bus
services across the UK
Introduction
It is welcoming that the committee is looking at
provision of bus services in the UK, and it is correct to ask
the question as to why bus usage is declining outside of London,
and to ask if London is a sound model for the rest of the country.
Section .03 About
the Author.
The author of this document is a regular transport
user and enthusiast, with knowledge of the bus industry. The content
within this document are my own views and contain no authority
for any organisation.
Section .04 Local
Government Policy
Local government policy is highly variable, in particular
to the behaviour towards the car driver. The Mayor of London has
a distinctly "anti-car" policy; it is considered acceptable
to degrade the journey of car drivers in order to improve the
journey of bus passengers. In many cases the road space available
to cars and similar vehicles has decreased by 50%. In addition
considerable cash has been made available for the building of
bus stations and similar facilities. In London traffic measures
mean that a journey by bus is as fast (and sometimes faster) than
that by car. The Mayor also has the advantage that the voters
do seem to be behind him.
Outside of London it is a different matter. Local
authorities in general do not wish to degrade the car driving
experience, thus bus priority is either placed in areas where
it provides little benefit since there wasn't a problem, or requires
expansion of existing road space. We have also seen many pedestrianisation
schemes push buses out of the city centres without sufficient
new provision for buses in compensation. In particular it is often
not possible to schedule any layover time in the city centre since
there isn't any room for the buses to park. Only in certain areas
such as Oxford and Cambridge is car use actively discouraged.
In most places providing improved bus priority is
a vote loser, since car users who make up the majority think the
money would be better spent on them, they certainly don't wish
to be hurt by any bus priority schemes.
(i) Examples
- In Coventry for the "Primelines" project
dual carriageways have been expanded to add an extra lane for
the bus, while the associated works in London would most likely
have simply converted one of the existing lanes to a bus lane
accepting the reduction in road space for cars. Where such works
can not be performed no bus priority is installed. There may have
been much money spent on bus lanes, but there is little evidence
to show that any of it has fed into significant improvements in
reliability or decreased running times.
- In Birmingham the "Tyburn Road" bus
priority project followed London's example and used existing road
space for the bus lane. This was successful in increasing bus
usage, and did pull in investment from Travel West Midlands, however
it has been considered to have an adverse effect on the car traffic
flow and as such as been removed, along with the increased bus
use it had provided.
- Also in Birmingham the lack of road space for
buses means that buses often have to travel for over 1hr before
there is an opportunity for a layover, if buses have bunched on
the way into the city centre they remained bunched on the way
out.
Section .05 Geographical
Distribution
The bus network of most major cities is primarily
concerned with the travel to or from the city centre, this is
increasingly not where people want to go. In London the public
transport network is dense enough that almost any journey can
be performed by a combination of bus/train/tube/tram without the
need to time the journey perfectly, this is simply not possible
in any other city. The rise of business parks on the outskirts
of cities near to their ring roads and motorway connections is
increasingly meaning that jobs are moving away from the bus network.
In the past many cities had several large employers, these employers
justified their own mini bus network to get employees to and from
work, such large employers and hence such mini networks are now
largely a thing of the past. The increase in car ownership also
means that people are prepared to travel further to work, and
the longer the journey the less likely it is that a reasonable
public transport alternative will be available.
For the bus network to be best used the jobs must
be where the bus network goes, this means decreasing the number
of out of town business parks and reusing unused offices in town
centres.
(i) Example
In my place of work I would estimate that around
2% of people catch the bus, a further 8% walk or cycle and the
remaining 90% travel by car. My office is inside the Coventry
city boundary, right next to a primary bus route, but most of
the 90% don't actually live in Coventry, they live in Warwickshire
or Leicestershire, and using the bus is simply not practical from
those places.
Section .06 Bus
travel information
Transport for London do a very good job at ensuring
that information about bus routes is easy to come by. Nearly every
bus stop has high quality up to date information about the bus
services provided, including a map and frequency guide (or a timetable
on infrequent services). When changes are due to occur information
is posted on all relevant bus stops, notices within the buses
and may often be found through your letterbox!
Outside of London bus stops often contain no timetabling
or frequency information at all, bus stop flags often mention
services that stopped years ago or no longer go that way. Changes
to services are often promoted only by notices on the bus near
the driver which are ignored by most passengers in their rush
to get on the bus.
There often seems to be an issue about who is actually
responsible for keeping this information correct, is it the local
council, PTE or the local bus company? Most bus stop flags seem
to be owned by the local bus company, while most shelters are
the responsibility of the local council or PTE. The country is
littered with bus stop signs on roads no longer served by bus,
or that are served by different bus routes than mentioned on the
bus stop! When a bus company alters or deregisters a service there
is no incentive for a bus company to tidy up, and nobody seems
to have any powers to ensure they do. Even PTE's are not immune;
the Centro website still shows the old details for Coventry's
bus network more than 1 month after the entire network was altered!
I believe that the rest of the country must follow
London practice here, with all bus stops owned by the local council/PTE
with a duty to provide up to date information on them.
Section .07 Concessionary
passes
The concessionary pass community is influential voice
on the bus network, often to the detriment of the network as a
whole. The primary want of many OAP's is a bus outside their doorstep,
this leads to more bus routes at lower frequencies that wind around
local roads, while it is widely recognised that a smaller number
of bus routes running more direct at higher frequencies increases
bus usage. The average OAP may be prepared to wait 25 minutes
because they have just missed a bus, the businessman or the mother
coming home from work is not. The large numbers of OAP's on the
network also present an image problem, is it cool to travel on
the old folks network?
Within London this is not a problem, simply because
of the density of the network and the high usage means that both
communities may be catered for. Also the mayor's policy of promoting
travel for younger generation reduces the stigmatism of travelling
by bus.
However the concessionary pass community does provide
a useful benefit in filling seats that would otherwise be unused
in the middle of the day, thus increasing the revenue of bus operators
and allowing for services that would otherwise be unprofitable.
However the use of concessionary passes during the morning and
evening rush hours is in general detrimental the network as a
whole, since the network is at maximum usage at these times, and
extra usage will simply require more buses that are to be used
for a very short period.
Section .08 Deregulation
Deregulation is often seized upon as the root of
all evil; however its actual effect is harder to quantify. It
is obvious that deregulation has produced efficiencies within
the bus operators, and has produced new ideas; however there have
certainly been some undesirable effects. In many country areas
the bus service has decreased significantly as local authorities
have been unwilling or unable to replace bus services that were
uneconomic. The quality of bus services has been highly variable,
in cities there have been many attempts to "cream" traffic
off existing routes by new operators using second hand worn out
buses, while existing operators have discovered the benefits of
low floor easy access buses and the increased custom that they
bring.
Of particular worry is the range of operator specific
bus passes and tickets within many cities. This is confusing to
the average bus passenger, the number of occurrences of "your
bus pass isn't valid on this bus" is quite astonishing! Even
where an "all operator" ticket is available it is normal
practice for operators to sell their own tickets in preference
to the all operator ticket. There would be significant benefits
if operators could be compelled to give up their operator specific
tickets/passes in exchange for all operator versions.
Experience shows that the traffic commissioner is
in general successful at punishing those who do not keep to the
appropriate standards; however it can take quite a considerable
amount of time for such action to occur.
I also believe that bus companies should have an
explicit duty of consultation with the local authority/PTE before
any request is made to the traffic commissioner and that the traffic
commissioner should be allowed to take the disapproval of the
local authority/PTE into account when deciding if to permit a
new registration.
Section .09 24
Hour Travel
The bus has the potential to play a significant part
late at night, and in the early morning, but this role is only
used in a few cities most notably London. This market is important
for the future of the bus primarily due to the age of the customers,
if the young will use the bus when returning from the dance club
they are more likely to use it to get to work. It also has the
benefits of reducing drink driving and problems due to unlicensed
taxi cabs. However for this market to be fully realised issues
of security must be addressed.
Section .10 School
buses
The use of school buses has decreased in recent years
due to what is best described as "parent paranoia" and
the increase in the use of cars for the school run. This market
is important for the future of the bus since it introduces children
to the concept of travelling by bus at an early age. It is recognised
that the increase in cars is causing safety problems outside schools,
and the solution to this problem has to be to get children to
walk or catch the bus to school.
I believe that all schools and local authorities
should have an explicit policy to discourage the use of the school
run. This should be backed up with no stopping and no parking
areas of a significant distance around schools during school arrival
and departure times, with proper enforcement, plus incentives
for those inside the free bus zone to catch the bus. Those parents
who really do have a need to take their children by car could
be given permits to allow parking in a safe designated place within
or near the school.
Section .11 Marketing
The biggest problem for the bus is a marketing problem.
Outside of London, in general people travel by bus, because they
can't for some reason use the car, this creates a stereotype of
bus passengers as somehow being poor. Bus companies marketing
reinforces this stereotype by constantly focusing on price. Without
breaking this stereotype people will reluctantly travel by bus
rather than choosing to. Other opportunities for marketing include
the green credentials of the bus, its central stopping points
in the city centre, talking to your neighbours, no worries about
drink driving and how much easier it is to get a pushchair into
town. Sometimes people simply need the push to actually try the
bus, and realize that it can actually be quite a pleasant experience.
Most importantly somebody has to counteract the Jeremy Clarkson
attitude.
Section .12 The
future for the bus
For this country to tackle congestion it is obvious
that public transport must play a significant part, however for
this to occur the environment must be so designed as to play to
its strengths. The bus is most strong in medium traffic corridors,
corridors with not enough traffic for a train or tram, but with
significant traffic to enable a 10 minute service. On high traffic
corridors train or tram is in general more appropriate (since
they have a better image and are more reliable), while in low
traffic corridors low frequencies reduce the pulling power of
the bus.
Bus companies should be allowed to get on with the
business of running the buses, with appropriate incentives to
ensure a reliable bus service. On frequent services incentives
should be concentrated on average customer waiting times rather
than on keeping to the timetable, while on infrequent services
the timetable should be king.
However the biggest let down in recent years has
not been with the bus companies but with local authorities, who
need to do more that simply say the right words, but act correctly
too. City planning needs to take account of the needs of bus operators,
and the facilities required to provide a reliable bus service.
Brian Blackmore
Ref: Press Notice 35/2005-06
Sunday 21st May 2006
| 
