APPENDIX 13
Memorandum submitted by The Portsmouth
Society
INTRODUCTION
The Portsmouth Society is the local Civic Society
for the City of Portsmouth and is registered with the Civic Trust.
We subsist solely on members' subscriptions and donations which
allows us to be a genuinely independent body. We take an active
interest in transport matters and welcome the opportunity to comment
on the provision of bus services in the UK.
Our submission is based on local knowledge and
experience. Our city has many elements in common with other cities
throughout the country and we hope that our comments will help
the Committee in its inquiry.
BACKGROUND
Portsmouth is a compact city on the south coast
of England having a population of 187,000 and relatively low car
ownership. It is administered by a unitary authority which has
responsibility for transport policy.
Portsmouth forms the hub of a much larger travel-to-work
area known as South East Hampshire for which transport policy
is split between Portsmouth City Council and Hampshire County
Council. Along with the (unitary) City of Southampton, some 20
miles distant, the whole Solent region is home to over a million
people.
Prior to bus deregulation in 1986, services
within Portsmouth were operated by a municipal undertaking working
jointly with a subsidiary of the National Bus Company. Together
they delivered a stable set of services with co-ordinated fares,
routes and timetables.
Following deregulation, the municipal undertaking
was sold, a series of new operators arrived and they were subsequently
merged or were taken-over. Large vehicles were replaced by tiny
and inaccessible mini-buses which were uncomfortable and unpopular.
Larger buses returned and the current state of play is that First
Hampshire operate the majority of city services plus those to
the neighbouring western boroughs whilst Stagecoach South operate
buses to the eastern side of the city and to the adjoining boroughs
to the north and east. Stagecoach and First are competing operators.
More recently we have seen evening services
operated by First Hampshire dwindle after 9 pm and the bringing
forward of the departure times of the last buses. The busiest
urban route—17/18—has a last service departing at
just after 11 pm from Gunwharf Quays—the principal leisure
complex in the area.
Other bus services include inter-urban shuttles
to Southampton operated by Solent Blue Line (a Go Ahead company),
various long distance coaches by National Express and daily services
by Stagecoach Megabus to London.
Portsmouth is also served by trains and ferries.
The rail network is well used for local, regional and long-distance
travel. Ferries perform vital links with Gosport, the Isle of
Wight and the continent (Le Havre, Caen, Cherbourg, St Malo, Channel
Islands, Bilbao)
Transport policy in Portsmouth and South Hampshire
has received a major setback with the cancellation of the South
Hampshire Light Rapid Transit (SHRT) scheme by central government.
SHRT would have provided relief to severe traffic congestion and
would have been the catalyst to economic regeneration in this
area where employment in defence establishments is in decline.
Has deregulation worked?
In a word, No.
From the perspective of the bus user in Portsmouth,
deregulation has brought no significant benefits.
Fares are significantly higher than in 1986.
The network of routes is operated by two competing
companies who determine the routes, fares and frequencies of services.
They do not co-operate. They do not connect their services to
form a comprehensive network. They do not offer through ticketing.
There is little sign of innovation. For example,
most fares are purchased using cash which is time consuming and
can cause delay—no-one will introduce smart ticketing or
even pre-pay ticket machines at busy stops.
Each bus route is a profit centre. Services
which do not make a profit are axed unless a subsidy is arranged.
Profitable services do not subsidise unprofitable ones.
First and Stagecoach are also rail franchisees
who operate in Portsmouth, yet there is little evidence of cross-promotion
with their bus operations. It is not possible to purchase a ticket
on a bus which includes rail travel although South West Trains
(a Stagecoach company) do offer a £1 add-on allowing passengers
to use Stagecoach buses on arrival in the city.
Are priority measures having a beneficial effect?
Yes, but they are limited.
Two key routes are part of a quality bus partnership
scheme (one in conjunction with Hampshire County Council).
Bus lanes have been introduced but their spread
is patchy and implementation is half-hearted.
Bus lanes and bus stops are often blocked by
other, unauthorised, vehicles.
Policing of the bus lanes is non-existent. Politicians
have avoided attempts to introduce Red Routes on key bus routes.
We now have some smart bus stops with real-time
information and Internet connection. Their effectiveness is marred
by their poor design (you cannot read the screens in bright light),
and by no means all the buses have the necessary equipment to
transmit the real-time information to the displays.
Is financing and funding for local community services
sufficient and targeted in the correct way?
Yes and No.
Portsmouth City Council have worked to ensure
that services are maintained during the evenings and at weekends
through the use of subsidies. We believe that they are doing the
best that they can with the limited resources available and within
the framework within which they are allowed to operate.
There is a perception that, once a service is
subsidised (hence paid for), no active marketing of it is required
on the part of the operator. It is much like a Portsmouth Society
bus trip where we simply hire the bus and do all the marketing!
Little is done to promote the use of subsidised services and,
gradually, they tend to be withdrawn.
Many services cross the boundary between Portsmouth
and the neighbouring boroughs and for these subsidies have to
be provided by the two transport authorities. Negotiations can
be complex requiring agreements between all parties which is expensive
and time-consuming.
A partnership of local transport stakeholders,
Solent Transport, has been created in our region. Their major
achievement to date has been the Solent Travelcard enabling bus
travel throughout the area for £5.50 a days' unlimited travel.
The Portsmouth Society would like to see single
transport authorities created for urban areas such as South Hampshire
with responsibilities for determining routes, fares, provision
of information and strategy. This should not be confined to buses
but also to include trains, trams, taxis and ferries.
Concessionary fares
Concessionary fare schemes introduced in April
2006 have varied between adjoining authorities and the cause of
confusion among the operators and resentment by those enjoying
less favourable schemes. In South Hampshire, Fareham allows free
travel only within the borough's boundary after which half-fares
must be paid. East Hampshire allows free travel throughout South
Hampshire at all times. Portsmouth offers a similar package, but
for travel only after 9.30 am. Criticisms aside, we applaud the
fact that the authorities in the Solent Transport area have allowed
general freedom of travel—the situation could have been
a lot worse.
By contrast, qualifying residents of London
can travel anywhere within the boundaries of the Greater London
Authority at no charge and by bus, overground and tube. There
is great inequality in provision between the capital and the provinces.
Portsmouth residents are offered the choice
between a free bus pass, tokens (for use on buses and taxis) or
a limited number of free parking permits for Southsea Seafront.
The last option does nothing whatsoever to encourage bus travel
but, as a council official commented, it is a cheaper for the
city since they control all parking on Southsea Seafront and can
avoid payments to bus operators.
Why are there no quality contracts?
Quality contracts transfer the financial risks
from the operator to the local authority, Most authorities are
unwilling to take them on for fear of losing money. London's buses
were never fully deregulated and the proceeds from congestion
charging have been used to offset the financial risks of the bus
contracts.
We would support any initiative that enables
quality contracts to be introduced.
Are the powers of the traffic commissioners sufficient
and targeted?
We recognise that the traffic commissioners
have a part to play and are pleased that they have recently investigated
timekeeping and cancellations in our area.
The traffic commissioners have powers which
the transport authorities do not. In addition to registering routes,
we would like them to question why a route needs to be withdrawn,
changed or added.
A recent example in Portsmouth was the route
12 which was truncated by Operator First Hampshire and made to
operate in a clockwise loop. The changes brought hardship to many
users, principally those with a need to travel to destinations
in the anticlockwise direction. First Hampshire initially refused
to change, but after much bad publicity, they agreed to run in
both directions. Someone should have had the authority to prevent
this stupidity and, possibly, this could have been the traffic
commissioners.
Traffic commissioners are organised regionally,
but their regions do not map those of the regional assemblies
and Government regional offices. Portsmouth is in the South East
region which is administered in Guildford (30 miles distant) yet
the traffic commissioners are based in Bristol (90 miles distant).
We would like the traffic commissioner's regional boundaries to
match those of regional government.
Is London a sound model for the rest of the UK?
London has through ticketing, not just on buses
but between all public transport modes.
London has smart ticketing with the Oyster card
system.
London has modern, low-floor buses as standard
(many buses in the provinces are London cast-offs).
London has one transport authority controlling
routes, co-ordinating operations, providing consistent source
of information.
We applaud the successes of other localities,
namely York, Oxford and Brighton who have achieved success with
quality bus partnerships. The first two have succeeded primarily
with their park-and-ride operations. Portsmouth has been very
slow to implement Park and Ride although there are good intentions
which we fully support.
Brighton is fortunate in having one principal
bus operator which is also the principal rail operator. Together
with a forward-thinking authority and vibrant bus management,
it has produced arguably the best bus operation outside London
using quality partnerships. By contrast, Portsmouth has multiple,
competing bus and train operators and a local authority which
has only recently begun to shake off the "car is king"
mentality. Brighton and Portsmouth have many similarities (congested
roads, low car ownership, lower than average incomes, high proportion
of retired people) and the same level of success could be achieved
with a good regulatory framework and the political will to succeed.
We believe that the London model has many
merits and that something like it should be implemented in the
rest of the UK.
What is the future for the bus?
We have no doubt that buses are a vital form
of transport throughout the United Kingdom. It is well understood
in our city that the private car is not the answer to everyone's
transport needs because we do not have the space to provide the
road capacity without widespread demolition of homes at great
financial and social cost. We appreciate that when everyone drives
to the various commercial centres then there is gridlock, indeed
we have traffic gridlock on several occasions every year.
Bus transport is one of the answers to our transport
needs, but as long as control is in the hands of private
companies then provision cannot be relied upon. We appreciate
that the private operators have great strengths in control of
costs and that they are able to provide reliable services to match
those of provider in pre-deregulation times. We believe that the
answer lies in a regime where routes and fares are determined
by a transport authority and operation conducted by commercial
companies operating under contract.
23 May 2006
| 
