Memorandum submitted by the Community
Transport Association
I am responding on behalf of the Community Transport
Association (CTA) to the recent press notice that invited evidence
on a series of issues that are subject to an enquiry by the Transport
Committee. CTA is pleased to have this opportunity to suggest
improvements that can be made to the current systems of regulating
and financing bus services in the UK.
CTA is a rapidly growing national charity giving
voice and providing leadership, learning and enterprise support
to over 1,500 member organisations across the UK which are delivering
innovative transport solutions to achieve social change.
We promote excellence through providing training,
publications, advice, information and events on voluntary, accessible
and community transport.
Voluntary and community transport exists to
meet the travel and social needs of people to whom these would
otherwise be denied, providing accessible and affordable transport
to achieve social inclusion.
Has deregulation worked? Are services better,
more frequent, meeting passenger need? Are bus services sufficiently
co-ordinated with other forms of public transport; are buses clean,
safe, efficient? If not, can deregulation be made to work? How?
In short, no. There is evidence that frequency,
accessibility and use are improving in London, but outside the
capital there is little or no improvement that can be attributed
to de-regulation. Free competition has merely resulted in a commercial
monopoly while local authorities and community organisations struggle
to ensure mobility and access for socially excluded groups. Despite
the good work of agencies such as the Disabled Persons Advisory
Committee and the Mobility and Access Committee for Scotland,
less that a quarter of bus services outside London are estimated
to be accessible.
The lack of co-ordination has resulted in a
continued reduction of provision in rural areas which has further
contributed towards increases in the use of the car. Bus services
are increasingly viewed as a last resort for those who cannot
afford to run a car and the costs of traveling by bus has continued
to increase at a greater rate than car running costs. DfT targets
for increasing bus patronage effectively rest wholly on performance
in London, where regulation exists.
Is statutory regulation compromising the provision
of high quality bus services?
It is the CTA's view that statutory regulation
does not compromise high quality services. Indeed, regulation
can be used to govern service quality as well as network design.
Are priority measures having a beneficial effect?
What is best practice?
Priority bus measures do, in general, have a
beneficial effect, although it is probably true to say that this
effect is not as marked as planners had hoped. One issue which
arises for CTA members is the understanding by some local officials
and enforcement agencies of which services are allowed to utilise
bus priority measures. In some areas these are restricted to registered
local bus services, whereas allowing community services to access
these measures in all areas would improve the level of service
they could operate.
Is financing and funding for local community services
sufficient and targeted in the right way?
The funding and finance of community run services
should be considered in relation to the regulatory regime under
which they operate. These services comprise a vital element of
the overall public transport network and they need to be encouraged
and permitted to develop more sustainable business models. This
means encouraging a social enterprise approach and reducing the
grant dependency culture. In order to achieve this, government
and local and national funding authorities need to embrace a number
of key concepts:
Funding terms—grants, service level agreements
and contracts with community operators need to be let over appropriate
time periods. There is a need to move away from the more common
one to three year cycle and towards cycles of five to seven years.
Full cost recovery—within these finance
cycles the contracting/funding authority needs to recognise their
obligations to pay for 100% of the cost of the service they are
buying (ie including core running and management costs).
Regulation—There is a need for a comprehensive
review of the Section 19 and Section 22 permit regime which governs
the operation of most community services. This topic was the subject
of a detailed submission to the Department for Transport in June
2004 (copy of the text of that submission is attached for reference).
CTA was informed that this submission would form the basis for
a consultation of potential changes to the current system, but
this has yet to happen.
Concessionary fares—what are the problems
with the current approach? Does the Government's proposal to introduce
free local bus travel across the UK for disabled people and the
over 60s from 2008 stand up to scrutiny? Should there be a nationwide
version of London's Freedom Pass—giving free or discounted
travel on all forms of public transport?
Concessionary travel is the topic of the CTA's
first policy paper of 2006. It sets out the key stakeholder groups
and the difficulties encountered with the current approach. In
particular, the current arrangements are potentially discriminatory
as they allow concessionary travel scheme administrators the discretion
to maintain a system where some travellers can utilise their concessionary
entitlement whilst others cannot. Scheme administrators should
be compelled to ensure that every eligible passenger can make
use of the concession to which they are entitled.
One mechanism far achieving this objective is
to make much wider use of community transport services in delivering
concessionary travel. Changes are required to the regulatory regime
in order to make best use of concessionary travel schemes (see
response to previous question above) and by doing so enabling
a much wider use of community transport.
Is London a sound model for the rest of the UK?
The London model demonstrates that regulation
can and does deliver an effective public transport network. It
is likely that similar results can be achieved in other areas
whose nature is not dissimilar to London. However, can it work
in other areas? One of the areas in the UK which bears the least
resemblance possible to London is the Western Isles. Due to the
sparse and distributed nature of the population there are no commercial
services in the Western Isles. As such, all services are subsidised
under contract by the local authority, which enables it to design
a network to meet the needs of the communities it serves.
It is the CTA's view that, at the very least,
UK Government should embark on one or more pilot projects which
will assess the ability of the bus network (which must include
the funding and regulatory regime changes for community transport
mentioned above) to deliver effective and accessible services
to an increased number of passengers.
What is the future for the bus? Should metropolitan
areas outside London be able to develop their own form of regulated
competition? Would this boost passenger numbers? If not, what
would? Does the bus have a future? In addressing rural railways,
the Secretary of State has said that we "cannot be in the
business of carting fresh air around the country"; is the
same true for buses?
Yes, metropolitan areas should be able to develop
their own regulated networks (but within a common framework for
the whole country). It is vital that they also receive the support
and encouragement to develop a local brand as well. The bus network
outside London suffers from an image problem; it is seen as a
safety net for poor, disabled and older people. This issue should
be addressed so as to increase modal shift. Also, it is important
to move away from just looking at a bus network and to start looking
at an integrated public transport network. Local networks should
be designed by local authorities and should include buses, trams
and community transport. They need to include a mix of fixed route
and demand-responsive services. Vehicles need to be clean and
accessible and services reliable.
24 May 2006
| 
