Written evidence from the Save Our 6-7
Buses Campaign (BUS 136)
1. SUMMARY
Residents have been campaigning for a full year since
our 6-7 bus route within the city of Bath was, and still is, severely
affected by cuts from three sources: the bus company, (First);
the Council, (Bath and North East Somerset Council, B&NES)
and central government cuts. Negotiations with First and the council
have stalled. First claims they need subsidy. The council
says it cannot afford to subsidise it because it has to provide
funds to prevent loss of other services, such as those crossing
county lines from neighbouring Somerset Council and Wiltshire
Council which have withdrawn bus funding due to central government
cuts. We see the council's lack of response to our community's
need as a direct effect of those cuts. We recommend that
central government approves transport funding for the Bath region
and stipulates—or at least strongly recommends—that
an additional bus is allocated to serve the 6-7 route.
2. INTRODUCTION
This submission is made on behalf of 235 bus passengers
in north east Bath who responded to a survey circulated less than
two weeks ago by the "Save Our 6-7 Buses" campaign for
your committee. Ours is a grass-roots campaign begun May 2010
when our route was literally cut in half by First, leaving us
now with the worst frequency in Bath, 40 minutes—half the
former frequency—in a very hilly, densely populated
area. Thus the submission is also made on behalf of our whole
community, shops, schools, health centre, etc. suffering from
inadequate bus service linked to central government cuts. We are
not seeking to regain our old frequency of 20 minutes, appreciating
the economic constraints, but are asking for a 30-minute frequency,
requiring the return of one of the two withdrawn buses.
3. BACKGROUND
Prior to May 2010, the Fairfield Park/Larkhall area
was served by five buses on a 20-minute frequency. First Bus
then severed the route between two halves of the local area
over a steep hill. This meant each half went separately into Bath
centre rather than connecting them as before. At the same time,
it reduced the number of buses travelling the route to three.
After intense campaigning, the connection was re-instated on 1
August, 2010, but without replacing either of the two lost buses.
This has left us with a confusing 40-minute timetable which is
totally inadequate to serve this large area.
4. THE SAVE
OUR 6-7 BUSES
CAMPAIGN
The campaign team has been made up of ordinary citizens:
a physiotherapist, retired civil servant, artist, cycle ride organiser,
psychotherapist/nurse, retired office manager, and a journalist.
We attended meetings with First and the council from the beginning,
attempting to explain the damaging effect on our community, and
learning a lot about bus transport. We called a public meeting;
submitted a petition with more than 2,000 signatures to First
Bus; mounted several high profile demonstrations; established
"Adopt-a-Stop", a unique communication system with bulletins
emailed to residents around the route to post on all the bus stops;
letter-writing campaigns and created an email list of 200 people
who have opted to stay informed. We were chosen by the Bath Chronicle
as "Campaign of the Year" for 2010, but the fight goes
on. Since re-instatement of the connecting loop, there has been
no progress in improving our frequency because of the National
Spending Review and subsequent cuts.
5. ENVIRONMENTAL
FACTORS IN
NORTH EAST
BATH: PHYSICAL
Bath is plagued with traffic congestion which impacts
on punctuality. These delays, compounded with the infrequency,
result in times when the buses do not even make it around or are
so full when they finally appear that they cannot take any more
passengers and leave people behind waiting at bus stops. The topography
is very hilly, with essential services, post office, local
shops and schools in the lower Larkhall area, the Health Centre
on a steep hill in Fairfield Park, and no amenities at the top
of the whole area, making it very difficult for less ambulant
residents and those without cars.
"Grinding to a halt: Mounting fears over
gridlock in Bath" Headline
(Bath Chronicle, 30 September 2010)
6. ENVIRONMENTAL
FACTORS: SOCIAL
The 6-7 route serves an area with approximately 9,000
residents in three council wards, approximately 10% of the population
of the city of Bath, (84,000) with young families, students, the
whole range of residents. In spite of Bath's reputation for being
affluent, there are some council estates and relatively deprived
neighbourhoods here. There is a slightly larger elderly population
than in other areas of Bath.[54]
Many pensioners use their "Diamond Card" for free
bus travel after 9:30am, which are subsidised at £.61p/journey
so areas with more younger bus users would be more lucrative from
the bus company's perspective. Our route offers a clear instance
of the damaging effects of the chronic under-funding of this scheme,
and this must have been a factor in First's perception of our
route as not sufficiently profitable.
7. COMPETITION
FOR DIMINISHING
FUNDS, OUTGOINGS
B&NES is using a proportion of its Transport
Budget to support services coming into the area cut by Somerset
Council, (bordering B&NES) such as Sunday, evening and
Bank holiday services on the 173 route between Bath &
Wells, affecting ten B&NES wards, and also the 376
between Bristol & Wells, affecting three wards. Wiltshire
Council's 265, 231, 231 and 272 are likewise
being cut and will draw on B&NES' budget. Since B&NES
is funding these and possible future cuts, it has not been willing
to pay the £80,000 quoted by First Bus as the full cost of
the return of one bus. (We question this figure. Is full cost
needed?
"The problem is we don't have the buses we
need, and from April 17 we will lose a lot of passengers because
funding cuts by Somerset County council have affected Sunday and
evening services."
Norman Browne, of the South West Transport
Planning Network (South West Business, 8 April 2011.)
8. DIMINISHING
FUNDS, INCOME
A possible factor in the downgrading of our route
has been delay in the approval of the Bath Transport Package (BTP)
and threat to its funding. The BTP formed the basis of a Major
Scheme Business Case (MSBC) bid to the Department for Transport
in 2006. "Programme Entry" for the BTP was confirmed
in October 2007, meaning that government funding for the scheme
was provisionally secured through its Major Transport Scheme funding
process. If the BTP is approved, we hope a small amount could
fund a "de minimus" arrangement with First to make up
any shortfall they incur with a returned bus, rather than the
full £80,000 … but this remains to be negotiated.
"Nonetheless, it is important to remember
that it is reductions to funding from central Government that
are the root of the vast majority of bus cuts facing the country".
(Campaign for Better Transport website,
Buses blog, 8 March 2011)
9. FUEL COSTS
& BUS SERVICE
OPERATORS GRANT
(BSOG): THE BIGGER
PICTURE
BSOG reimburses 67% of the £.5895 per litre
excise duty on fuel for registered bus operators. It is being
cut by 20% in phases between 2012 and 2015. Combined with any
changes over funding pensioners' free travel, there will be a
big impact on bus companies, in spite of the optimistic tone of
Jeff Carr, First's Finance Director, in his "Pre-close trading
update" Friday 11 March 2011. "…we expect to
manage the impact of the Government's Comprehensive Spending Review,
in particular the reduction of Bus Service Operators Grant from
April 2012, through mitigating actions including increased efficiencies."
Exactly what these efficiencies entail is spelled out in First's
UK half-yearly interim report to Sept 2010 by Tim O'Toole, First's
Chief Executive: "In this lower revenue growth environment,
we continue to prioritise cost reductions and network management
on a route by route basis. Where we have seen changes in passenger
demand we have responded promptly with targeted frequency or mileage
reductions which will enable the business to deliver an improved
operating margin." (Page 5). He observes how the company's
performance supports the board's policy of delivering at least
7% per annum increase on dividends to shareholders and says: "We
have continued to take advantage of the flexible operating model
in UK Bus which we can adjust to match supply with demand and
during the period we reduced mileage year on year by approximately
6%." (Page 7) So it is clear that any reduction in BSOG
will convert straight into cuts to less profitable routes, leaving
millions of people stranded, impairing local economies, detracting
from quality of life and increasing carbon emissions from cars.
"The industry has been hit by a series of
issues: increased fuel duty, increasing fuel pump prices and a
reduction in concessionary fare reimbursements."
Mr Pickford of Faresaver Buses, a local
rival of First, (Bath Chronicle, 10 March
2011.)
10. FIRST'S
RESPONSE LOCALLY
In our meetings last year with First's managing directors,
it became clear that the UK's "flexible operating model"
was being utilised and that the reason given for cutting our service
was not "to improve punctuality and reliability," as
originally stated in the service change registered with the Traffic
Commission or in the minimal local publicity before the cut, but
was instead due to the company's perception that our route was
not sufficiently profitable.
11. THE PEOPLE'S
RESPONSE
Over 10 days recently, we distributed a questionnaire
based on your
committee's areas of interest, specifically to gain data for this
submission.
| Questionnaire 9-19 April 2011, 235 returned, not all answered all questions, many included comments
| Yes | No |
| 1. Is the No 6 & 7 bus service important to you?
| 221 | 1 |
| 2. Have you been affected adversely by the cut from 20 minutes to 40 minutes in the frequency of the 6/7 bus?
| 220 | 1 |
| 3.[55] Would you be in favour of free bus pass holders being asked to pay something towards bus tickets if this would generate funds for improved services?
| 109[56]
| 115 |
| 4. Do you think the views of bus users are taken into account when companies such as First Bus plan changes to services?
| 5[57]
| 225 |
We staffed a stall in the shopping area for the busiest four hours
on Saturday 16 April. We invited 18 local council candidates to
attend from the three affected wards and nine attended, as well
as a press photographer for the article in the local paper.
12. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
ACTION
Our primary recommendation is that central government approves
transport funding for the Bath region and stipulates—or
strongly recommends--that one of the two buses taken off be returned
to serve the 6-7 route, to approximate a 30 minute service.
Since we have shown that our route is affected by problems in
the larger context such as central government cuts leading to
cuts elsewhere which impact on our council budget and First, we
recommend that:
— 1. That
no urban area should provide a bus frequency below 30 minutes.
— 2. That
the Department of Transport should issue clear guidance to local
authorities to ring fence moneys for buses.
— 3. That
local authorities be instructed to allocate parking fines to local
transport.
— 4. That
any bus service reductions or improvements be subject to full
consultation with all users.
— 5. That
West of England Partnership with Somerset, Gloucestershire, Wiltshire,
Swindon and Greater Bristol be made to work together in an Integrated
Transport Authority or transport partnership with powers to regulate
fares and frequencies, tender and improve bus, rail and ferry
services.
— 6. That
there should be no cuts in budgets to improve bus shelters, real
time information, bus stations, interchanges with rail and investment
in bus priority measures or new low floor vehicles.
13. COMMENTS
FROM THE
QUESTIONNAIRES
A small selection
"Our bus service is now the worst in Bath. Government
policy should be to increase bus services in our attempt to lessen
carbon emissions."
"I am a non car user so the 6/7 bus is very
important."
"Try standing at the bus stops with a hyper
five year old and a screaming baby for 40 mins to see how users
feel about the service!"
"As a student living in Fairfield Park area
the bus service has proved detrimental to my schedule and I would
nor recommend students moving to that area."
From Fairfield Park Health Centre: "The service
changes were implemented without any consultation with local residents
or service users, and with no consideration for the impact on
the local community, businesses and residents. For example, a
large number of the patients of Fairfield Park Health Centre are
elderly and/or have limited mobility, therefore they rely on the
6/7 service to get to the surgery from Larkhall. The journey from
Larkhall to Fairfield Park includes a significant incline which
many elderly patients would not be able to manage on foot. Having
a regular, reliable service that operates between Larkhall and
Fairfield Park is essential for the continued success and future
development of these thriving communities."
"It is crucial that local communities have good
public transport links."
"Because the service is less regular I am far
more likely to use the car and hence the roads are more congested."
"This bus is useless if you have an appointment
or need to catch a specific train, just too irregular and unpredictable,
so I have to use a taxi or persuade someone to drive in, which
is crazy when we are trying to get traffic down. Need more regular
service."
"The reduced service has made it very difficult
for Larkhall residents. The timing (every 40 mins) makes the timetable
difficult to relate to - even a half hour service would be more
understandable."
"By cutting the buses it damages the community
- it damages local shops."
"As a very elderly disabled pensioner I am in
a constant state of anxiety when going into town for the return
journey:
Will the bus come - I can't stand & wait for the next one
Will I be able to get on it room-wise
When or where can I sit as I travel with a 3 wheeler walking aid
and I am very limited that way. I never had this problem when
the service was every 20 mins."
"It's a long wait when the bus is every 40 mins.
I use the car more - which goes against my principles. Bus fares
are wicked in Bath - much higher than elsewhere."
"A reduced bus service leads to even less passengers
making it less and less viable. A better service should encourage
more bus use."
"The worst sort of publicity for First is to
have the bus sail past at the bus stop. Do they realise this?"
"This service is grossly inefficient; the buses
never appear to run when scheduled and 40 minutes is too long
to wait for a bus."
April 2011
54 Bath and North East Somerset Pharmaceutical Needs
Assessment Consultation Document, 27 October, 2010, pub. by B&NES
and Bath and North East Somerset NHS, chart p.14 Back
55
The campaign team feels strongly that the free travel for over
60's is a socially inclusive measure and we would not like to
see it eroded. It is also one giant step towards getting people
out of cars and onto public transport. Back
56
Most favourable comments included a proviso that the contribution
should be small and affordable (30-50p) and that there was a danger
that this might be the "thin end of the wedge" Back
57
These five commented that first responded after the campaign persuaded
First to reinstate the route on August 1st. Back
| 
