Mr.
Malins: My hon. Friend represents the commuting
constituency of Wimbledon. He will know, as I do from representing
Woking, how important commuting by train and bus is. I note that the
total expenditure on Passenger Focus is something in the order of
£11 million or more per year, but I am not sure that the service
has been getting better for my constituents or those of my hon. Friend.
Does he think that Passenger Focus represents good value for
taxpayers’
money?
Stephen
Hammond: In a number of cases, the service has not been
getting better. Although there are regular and frequent services in my
constituency and that of my hon. Friend, there are clearly issues of
overcrowding. He and I would have severe differences with the Minister
about how that issue is being addressed.
There might
be some cross-party support for the view that Passenger Focus has
provided clear, independent and audited evidence of the performance of
various train companies. The relevant study is used quite often to
assess the bonus criteria of executives of those companies, and that
has had a driving effect on rail companies to perform because their
managements know that there will be an assessment and an independent
audit. Although we can argue about whether we get good value for the
£11 million, the operation of the body has led to some
beneficial
consequences. I
understand that three pilot areas are being established for
the work that Passenger Focus might do in relation to buses. When are
some of the results of those pilot area studies likely to be in the
public domain, and should we expect that prior to
the general
election? I
should like to touch on a couple of other issues. In his speech, the
Minister anticipated that Passenger Focus would take on a much more
limited role in the resolution of passenger complaints than most people
expected, because of the establishment of the Bus Appeals Body. Does he
anticipate that Passenger Focus will study the complaints and that all
appeals will go to the Bus Appeals Body? Alternatively, does he think
that most appeals will be dealt with by the companies themselves and
that Passenger Focus, or the new body, will increasingly play more of
an ombudsman’s role rather than a direct individual complaints
role? I would be grateful if the Minister gave some guidance on that,
as it is hugely
important. I
am also slightly troubled by the Minister’s comments about the
roles of London TravelWatch and the new body. If I heard him correctly,
he said that the new body can look at services that come into London,
but that London TravelWatch would not be able to look at services that
might start in London and go outwards. Is that what he said and what he
intends? If so, is that not applicable only to coach and tram services,
and should not the matter be more carefully defined?
I
also want to press the Minister on the guidance that he will give the
new body on two current issues for the bus industry that would have a
significant impact on passenger complaints and the role of the
industry. He knows that there are European Union proposals to toughen
up the compensation requirement, so that a bus operator would have to
pay in the event of an accident, whoever might be at fault. The
previous Minister of State ensured that the Government would be on the
side of the industry in relation to that issue. Does this Minister of
State intend that that significant live issue should be looked at by
the new council? Equally, will he confirm whether the recent referral
of the bus market to the Competition Commission will have any legal
ramifications for the initial workings of the
body? Bar
those few questions, I believe that the matter is non-controversial.
Given the assurances from the Minister, I will be happy to give my
party’s support to the order, which would make Passenger Focus
take on the role of representing bus, coach and tram passengers. I look
forward to the Minister’s
response. 5.3
pm
John
Hemming: The Minister is definitely right about one thing;
I share his pleasure in serving under your chairmanship, Mr.
Howarth. I
would like to carry out what I call the “No. 41 bus test”
on whether the new watchdog and the order are of any use. At times, it
is good to look at specific problems and at whether they are
likely to be improved. The No. 41 bus served part of
Birmingham and Solihull until the weekend, and its withdrawal has
caused major problems, particularly in Stockfield road, Dolphin lane
and Shirley road. We have to ask whether giving the powers to Passenger
Focus will enable something to be done for those local
residents—probably not, I would say.
Together with
local councillors, I have lobbied to keep the No. 41 bus service, but
we have just been ignored—well, “ignored” is not
exactly the right word; we have had meetings with the transport
authority and with National Express. Passenger Focus has the right to
ask for information, but not to prevent the service from being
withdrawn. As a watchdog it has a bark, but in practice it does not
have a bite. The transport commissioners may have a bite, but the bite
to retain a bus service does not exist, and that is where the matter
fails the No. 41 bus test.
Councillors
Iain Bowen and Paula Wagg proposed a circular bus route. That could
have been proposed via Passenger Focus. The National Express Group has
turned that down, and Passenger Focus would not make any difference to
that. As the market stands, we can go to another bus company and say,
“Could you do a circular bus route?” That brings us to
the really crucial point. If we are to improve bus services outside
London, we need London’s system for managing bus
services—the sector tendering system. That is the crucial
point.
As a party,
we support giving those powers
to—
Stephen
Hammond: The hon. Gentleman has just said that he supports
the system in London. Will he therefore confirm, on the record, that
the Liberal Democrats are happy to make that £680 million
spending
commitment?
John
Hemming: We need to be aware that the profits made by bus
companies are very high outside London. At the moment, a massive
subsidy—
The
Chairman: Order. The order is very specific; it is not
about bus regulation in general. The hon. Gentleman would be wise to
stick to the principles involved in the order, rather than wider
transport
policy.
John
Hemming: Thank you, Mr. Howarth. I would give
the answer that the London system would not cost anything like that
amount. It would not necessarily cost anything at all, because of the
other factors.
I was just
about to finish my comments about the order. Even though what we are
doing is giving more bark to a watchdog that has barked but not bitten,
to an extent we are happy to give it more bark—although we would
like it to have some bite as well.
5.7
pm Colin
Challen (Morley and Rothwell) (Lab): It is a great honour
and privilege to serve under your chairmanship today, Mr.
Howarth. I make no apology for prolonging the sitting for another two
minutes, as it may be my first and last opportunity to serve under your
chairmanship. I
want to ask three or four questions. I have read the explanatory notes
and have noticed the attached document that says that there will be no
extra cost involved in this development. How can that be so? The
document also states that bus passengers account for 4 billion journeys
a year, which suggests that there might be quite a work load involved
in the inclusion of bus travel.
As some of us
know, first-class rail passengers can be very articulate and powerful
people. They can make their points very well to all the appropriate
authorities. Bus passengers might not be so well served. I hope that in
taking on this extra responsibility, Passenger Focus will be able to
provide all the services for bus passengers that it currently provides
for rail passengers. In my experience as an MP, rail passengers
generally seem to have a good voice and a well-organised lobby, and I
would like to hear more about that. At a time of public restraint in
finances, if Passenger Focus cannot do its work on its current budget,
what provision is there for it to be able to get more money to pay for
the extra work?
Following on
from comments that have already been made, what will the relationship
of Passenger Focus be with bodies such as West Yorkshire Metro, which
already does a good job of representing the interests of bus and rail
passengers? How will that relationship develop? I am sure that it will
be positive, but it would be interesting to know. One of the problems
that many passengers will have is that their only acquaintance with
such bodies may be through some leaflets stashed in a rack inside an
office. A lot of this stuff simply passes over the heads of many
passengers. They would not know where to start looking if they wanted
to make representations. It will be interesting to see how the new body
will be marketed and whether it will be promoted properly and do a
good job.
The document
also states that there were only 37 responses to the
national consultation. How many of those were from private individuals
and how many were from bus companies? It would be useful to have a
breakdown of that.
These are
very important issues. I support the proposal, which makes a lot of
sense. It is another step towards the full integration of public
transport, which was promised many years ago. I welcome the proposal,
but I have concerns that some of the details do not add
up.
5.10
pm
Mr.
Khan: All the points raised have been good ones, and I
will deal with them in turn. I remind the Committee that the draft
order is needed to confer statutory duties and obligations on Passenger
Focus in relation to bus, coach and tram matters. It also sets out the
responsibilities placed on others in relation to how they respond to
Passenger Focus. It will give bus, coach and tram passengers statutory
representations for the first time, and that has received widespread
support. Passenger Focus has secured many benefits for rail passengers
through evidence-based campaigning and advocacy. We are confident that
it will be able to transfer that capability to champion the interests
of bus, coach and tram
passengers. The
hon. Member for Wimbledon asked about the pilot work of Passenger
Focus. It has been shadowing the relevant work since April 2009. In
addition to the work in the six passenger transport authorities using
the 1,200 researchers, it has piloted its own regular surveys.
Passenger Focus intends to release its initial findings shortly, and it
will also take over the Department’s bus passenger satisfaction
survey from April
2010. London
TravelWatch represents users of services that are operated, procured or
licensed by TfL, including London buses, London underground, docklands
light railway, Croydon Tramlink and dial-a-ride. Passenger Focus may
consider such matters as part of a wide investigation into services
elsewhere in England, such as those in Dartford. London TravelWatch
will continue to represent passengers making local journeys by coach
within Greater London—from Victoria to Heathrow, for
example—and people using Victoria coach station. Passenger Focus
will represent passengers making longer-distance coach journeys inwards
and outwards; my tongue may have slipped when I addressed that point
during my opening remarks. The draft order makes no changes to the
existing responsibilities of London
TravelWatch. The
issue of funding was also raised. Passenger Focus is funded by the
Department for Transport. It will receive £2.25 million in
2010-11 for its work representing bus, coach and tram passengers. We
have also been assured that it has a good reputation for value for
money in relation to its rail work. The hon. Member for
Woking is right to ask whether we are getting value for money, and I
hope that the explanation on the work of Passenger Focus in relation to
rail reassures
him. The
handling of complaints and appeals was also raised. Although Passenger
Focus deals with rail complaints and appeals, we have not given it a
similar role in relation to buses and coaches, because the Bus Appeals
Body already fulfils that role. Although Passenger Focus raised
concerns that the Bus Appeals Body does not consider complaints on
routes, timings, level of service or pricing—that point was
raised by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley—it found no
conclusive evidence that the body was not effective. Steps are being
taken to improve the Bus Appeals Body, such as inviting Passenger Focus
to sit on the board as an observer and a proposal to prepare reports on
the nature of complaints
received. A
question was asked about the traffic commissioner and whether there
would be guidance to Passenger Focus on referrals. We expect Passenger
Focus to work collaboratively and to use its powers only as a last
resort. It will be for the commissioner, as the independent regulator,
to decide whether to exercise powers.
The issue of
statistics was raised and the hon. Member for Wimbledon asked whether
we are satisfied that we will be able to cope with the methodological
differences. The short answer is that I am satisfied that Passenger
Focus recognises those differences. It has piloted regular surveys that
will compare the level of satisfaction in different areas. Moreover,
the pilot undertaken in the six passenger transport authorities will be
rolled out to the rest of the
country. The
hon. Gentleman had another important concern in relation to the
referral to the Competition Commission. The Office of Fair Trading has
referred the bus market to the commission. The OFT was
concerned that there was insufficient competition in some
areas, leading to higher fares and poor competition for
tendered services. We do not believe that the referral will affect
Passenger
Focus. On
the point raised by the hon. Member for Birmingham, Yardley, I should
say that complaints will be dealt with by the operator in the first
instance. If passengers want to appeal, they can appeal to the Bus
Appeals
Body. Passenger
Focus will have no role in dealing with the individual complaint and
will refer complaints received to the Bus Appeals Body. There is no
point in duplication and the Bus Appeals Body can deal with the
complaints that are appealed in the first
instance. Passenger
Focus fed into the consultation on the proposed EU regulation and will
carry on during the negotiation process. The proposed regulation has
now left the Council and gone to the European Parliament, and it is
important that the UK’s interests should be articulated in the
European Parliament as well. All the rights that we were asked to
secure have been secured from the Council. The important thing is to
make sure that they are safeguarded when the regulation goes through
the European Parliament.
The hon.
Member for Birmingham, Yardley also asked about franchising and the
London model. The question was ruled out of order, but I would just add
that from 11 January, local authorities can use quality contracts to
have the franchising system that London enjoys.
My hon.
Friend the Member for Morley and Rothwell raised some important points.
His question about West Yorkshire Metro being kept in the loop is
important. He will be pleased to learn that it is in one of the pilot
areas. It will work in partnership with Passenger Focus and pass on
some of its expertise. Passenger Focus has taken on some of the mystery
travellers who survey the work of different bus operators and it is
important that we do not lose their
expertise. Another
important point raised by my hon. Friend concerned leaflets gathering
dust on the shelves and people not being aware of Passenger Focus. It
is important that Passenger Focus makes passengers aware of the new
body that will come into operation in April. Finally, I will write to
my hon. Friend to tell him who the 37 respondents to the
consultation were. We do not want a situation in which bus operating
companies, which have made huge profits at the expense of commuters,
get away with there being a champion of commuters that does not look
after commuters’ interests. The balance has been a fair one,
judging by the responses to the consultation.
Question
put and agreed
to. Resolved, That
the Committee has considered the draft Passengers’ Council
(Non-Railway Functions) Order
2010. 5.18
pm Committee
rose.
| 
