Memorandum submitted by Strathclyde Partnership
for Transport
1. WHAT IS
SPT
— Strathclyde Partnership for Transport
was created out of the Transport (Scotland) Act 2005. It is the
Regional Transport Partnership covering the west of Scotland.
— It assumed most of the powers and
responsibilities of Strathclyde Passenger Transport Executive
and as such remains similar to the English PTE's with the following
exceptions.
— The Partnership Board comprises elected
members from each of the constituent authorities (as in the English
PTAs) but also has non-elected members with restricted voting
rights.
— Responsibility for delivering franchised
rail services transferred to Transport Scotland although SPT retains
an involvement in the development of the rail network.
— Responsibility for the delivery of
the Concessionary Travel Scheme transferred to Transport Scotland
with the creation of the Scotland wide scheme.
— SPT assumed a responsibility for
Strategic Roads issues.
2. BUS SERVICES
IN THE
SPT AREA
— The main regulatory framework governing
local bus service provision in Scotland comprises the Transport
Act 1985 and the Transport (Scotland) Act 2001.
— The Transport (Scotland) Act 2001
mirrors the UK Transport Act 2000 with the following exceptions:
(i) Bus strategies are not a mandatory requirement
in Scotland.
(ii) Minimum frequencies (but not fares) can
be included in a Statutory Quality Partnership in Scotland.
(iii) A statutory quality partnership should
be between three and seven years in Scotland but up to five years
in England/Wales.
(iv) Quality Contracts (QC) may be promoted
if judged to be "necessary for implementing relevant general
policies" in Scotland, but must be "the only practical
way of implementing policies and strategies" in England/Wales.
(v) When English/Welsh authorities make a QC
scheme, it can only come into effect 21 months later (minimum).
Scottish LA must enter into a contract for services within 12
months of making scheme, thereafter scheme can become effective
a minimum of six months later.
(vi) English/Welsh QC's must not exceed 10 years.
Scottish QC's must be between three and seven years duration.
(vii) English/Welsh tenders for services must
not exceed five years duration. Scottish tenders must not exceed
seven years.
— The role of the Traffic Commissioner
is not devolved and is the same in Scotland as in the rest of
the UK.
— Within the SPT area the largest operator
is First Glasgow operating 21% of services. Stagecoach and Arriva
have significant operations in Ayrshire and Renfrewshire respectively.
In addition around 100 other operators provide registered local
bus services.
— The smaller operators form two main
groups. In the more rural areas many services are provided by
small local bus operators often under contract to SPT. In urban
areas, primarily in Glasgow, a number of small companies operate
routes often in direct competition with First Glasgow. By and
large these services do not operate in the evening or on Sundays.
— Although unsubsidised services still
predominate (83% of all services) recent years have seen a gradual,
but significant, withdrawal of commercial services leading to
some communities losing their unsubsidised services for all or
part of the day.
— A current example of this is that
First Glasgow has withdrawn all night services from Monday to
Thursday.
— This thinning out of commercial services
has put an increasing strain on SPT's Subsidised Bus budget. Generally
some level of service has been maintained by increasing the budget
and by spreading the amount available ever more thinly across
the network.
3. THE NEED
FOR CHANGE
— There are no Statutory Quality Partnerships
or Quality Contracts in the SPT area.
— This does not reflect satisfaction
with local bus services any more than is the case in the conurbations
elsewhere in the UK.
— Rather there is a growing view that
bus services need to be changed in the following ways if they
are to deliver a crucial part of our Regional and Local Transport
Strategies:
(i) The network needs to more accurately meet
the needs of different communities at all times of the day and
week. The current emphasis on maintaining profitability in the
face of increasing costs has led operators to concentrate on profitable
areas and times of the day leading to overprovision in some places
and underprovision elsewhere. Competitive pressures make it increasingly
difficult for large operators to cross-subsidise.
(ii) Service quality needs to be better and
more consistent. Many operators strive to provide high quality
but are hindered by poor quality operators who compete for their
business in a market where the customer will always choose the
first bus to come along.
(iii) Passenger information needs to be improved
and made more consistent. Again there is huge variation between
operators. Poor information is exacerbated by frequent service
change, driven more often by short-term profit than by changes
in underlying demand.
(iv) Bus services need to be better integrated
with other forms of public transport and with car, walking and
cycling.
— In seeking to achieve this transformation
SPT has several guiding principles:
(i) It seeks a clear road map and milestones
which will ensure that bus services deliver what is required in
our Transport Strategy.
(ii) Where we are not able to deliver the bus
services required in our strategy there needs to be sufficient
regulatory measures to bring delivery back into line.
(iii) SPT does not seek regulation for its own
sake. Rather regulation should be sufficient to achieve the ends
identified in policy and strategy.
(iv) SPT does not at this stage seek renationalisation
of bus services.
— Specifically it is our view that
the following changes need to be made:
(i) The Traffic Commissioner needs to have sufficient
power and resources to ensure that the services operate as registered.
(ii) It is likely that achieving the integrated
outcomes identified above will require franchising of bus services
on the London model in most conurbation areas. The process of
moving from a deregulated framework to a franchised network will
not be easy and the regulatory regime must positively drive forward
this change rather than simply permitting it to happen.
(iii) Significant sums of public money are already
being provided to bus companies through service subsidies, Bus
Service Development grants, Rural Transport Grant, Bus Service
Operator Grant and, arguably, Concessionary Travel reimbursement.
Too much of this money is paid in an undiscriminating manner whether
or not the bus services are contributing to overall transport
strategy. Where services are clearly not aligning with strategy,
there should be provision to redirect subsidy to bring services
back into line.
19 June 2006
| 
