Written evidence from R Drever (BUS 56)
I only very recently found out about this enquiry.
So sorry I am responding one month late. Hopefully, the brief
nature of my comments will allow you to at least give them a little
consideration.
I write as a disabled, non-driving bus user.
1. What is the point of providing free bus
passes if there are going to be no buses to use them on.
2. Bus-use "fees" should be made
up of two elements:
— 2.1 A
"service membership" style fee which a user has to purchase
in advance—on a monthly/quarterly/annual basis. If a user
does not possess this permit then they would have to pay a premium
fare.
— 2.2 A
usage or travel fare which is paid according to how far the journey
is. This is paid in addition to the "membership" charge
mentioned above.
— 2.3 As
an alternative to the above two-element fare, it should be possible
to purchase a "roaming" pass for unlimited weekly or
monthly use.
3. The principle behind the above fare system
that the users don't just pay for service usage, but also have
to pay something towards the existence of the service. It is quite
unsatisfactory for a would-be traveller to say they only need
the bus once a week or month and expect the service to be there
for their rare benefit. There has to be a fare element that helps
assure the existence of the service.
4. In terms of the free passes for the 60s+
and the disabled, only one or the other of 2.1 or 2.2 above should
be provided free. They should pay for the other one.
5. I don't know what percentage of the cost
of providing the free bus pass goes towards covering its national
benefit, but this has to feature in the cost somewhere. I believe
this is the most stupid and wasteful part of the facility. It
is one thing to provide a pass for going about my daily living
needs, but there is no justification for providing free national,
ie holiday, travel.
6. Still on the subject of the free passes,
why should the disabled be getting a free pass anyway when they
most likely get Mobility Allowance thru Disability Living Allowance.
7. Much as I like having my evening bus
service (which I probably use once a month), it is doing the planet
no good having two tons of bus driving around with none, one,
or maybe two passengers on it. At the end of the day, if people
want to travel at "unusual" times they will just have
to walk, cycle, or take a taxi. My father and grandfather walked
five miles each way to get to their work. If they coped, why can't
the people of today?
8. More thought should be given to use of
mobile phones in time-tabling of bus services outside peak times.
Instead of buses running at fixed times outside peak times, the
service providers should commit to run a minimum of say one, two
or three buses at a time to be determined by service requests
from customers. Customers will have to rely on their phone to
find out when the bus is scheduled to run.
9. Looking at my own bus area (Guildford
in Surrey) I would say there is good scope for realistic rejigging
of some routes during off-peak times, eg where there are clockwise
and anti-clockwise services running on the same route. I am sure
there will be other ways in which routes can be fine tuned to
reduce cost but still keep a service running.
10. It has long been an argument of mine that
it is the punctuality and reliability of a service that really
matters, not the theoretical frequency. People should be able
to plan their affairs round a reliable timetable rather than expect
buses to turn up at a time most convenient for them.
January 2011
| 
