Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2024 22:25:34 GMT 1
The way the whole thing about Bradford Interchange has been handled, has been nothing but a disgrace, total lack of communication to the public. Who's going to hold Brabin and co to account? Is there not any danger of the WYCA ever going bankrupt?
|
|
mattb7tl
Forum Member
Streetlites 🛐
Posts: 748
|
Post by mattb7tl on Mar 12, 2024 22:44:12 GMT 1
The bus companies employed a proper opinion poll which showed a small majority against franchising WYCA had a self selected group with in built in favour of francishing, given union activism on this. In Leicester and the North East CA the unions branches backed the bus companies. Franchising is awful for staff as they are just units as are bus users Incorrect I haven't seen any survey or poll which shows the public wants an EP+ I've only seen surveys and polls which say they would prefer for the financial risk to stay with operators as well as quicker results for service but that doesn't mean they want an EP+ It means they want stuff done cheaper and faster but it isn't a deciding factor, if you notice the actual question was left out, for the public campaign it isn't and people overwhelmingly want public ownership.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2024 22:49:52 GMT 1
Are people willing to pay the price of public ownership? People are resenting of paying the 5 percent increase of Council Tax in Wakefield as it is in April.
|
|
mattb7tl
Forum Member
Streetlites 🛐
Posts: 748
|
Post by mattb7tl on Mar 12, 2024 22:57:01 GMT 1
Are people willing to pay the price of public ownership? People are resenting of paying the 5 percent increase of Council Tax in Wakefield as it is in April. Franchising is a long term system. An EP+ is a poorly thought out short term system that falls apart as soon as the BSIP funds run dry, or one company decides not to cooperate. What improvements have they seen in Sheffield? They've seen the opposite, partnership in action! No world class private bus network exists and that won't change. They are all public or franchised. We spend billions on subsidising cars yet franchising is too much to ask? Bring it on
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 12, 2024 23:37:12 GMT 1
Wonder what they will do with the 164, as you have some journeys that stay in West Yorkshire, but then you have those cross into North Yorkshire into Sherburn and Selby and the evening 164 terminates at Sherburn too.
|
|
|
Post by stephen01 on Mar 12, 2024 23:41:59 GMT 1
Wonder what they will do with the 164, as you have some journeys that stay in West Yorkshire, but then you have those cross into North Yorkshire into Sherburn and Selby and the evening 164 terminates at Sherburn too. you've also got Flyer A2 and TDH's 7 & 36 too let alone Coastliner.
|
|
|
Post by shelf81 on Mar 13, 2024 0:23:37 GMT 1
If it's similar to the Manchester approach, 164 & A2 will be covered as they are run by West Yorkshire depots, with routes run by NY depots such as the 7,36 & 840/3 routes having to gain a permit to operate into WY.
How the X98/9 & Connexions routes will work will be interesting, being routes fully within WY but operated by NY depots unless they 'do a 184' & get moved back to a Leeds depot on the launch date.
|
|
lucyp
Forum Member
Posts: 142
|
Post by lucyp on Mar 13, 2024 2:46:13 GMT 1
The depot location doesn't matter. It's where the route is based that matters. Neither Transdev nor Connexions have a Leeds depot. The only way they would move to a WY depot is if the franchise is bid for and won by a company who have a Leeds depot.
Franchising will be a disaster, just like it was with the railways. It's just a left-wing mayor who wants bus services back in public ownership, because that's a left-wing thing to do. There is no thought to the cost, or the practicality. It is no good asking the public, because 90% of them have no idea what a franchise is and wouldn't understand and couldn't explain a franchise agreement if they were given it to read.
What practical difference is franchising going to make? What did it do to rail? All the companies went bust. All the demands for run an East Coast train from London to all sorts of provincial towns was pointless. The passenger numbers are available online. They show that LNER running a direct train from Bradford to London is pointless.
Take the X98/9 that you mention. Are they going to offer routes individually or package them into bundles so that if you want that route, you have to bid for it together with 20 others in your franchise application?
If it's a bundle, it will just go back to First Leeds who didn't want it when they had it. No one else will be in a position to bid for a bundle.
If it's individual, the cost and administration of the process will be enormous, and for what? Presumably Transdev and no one else will then bid for a service that they cannot run reliably at present.
The franchising agreement presumably won't alter the frequency of the route. First reduced it. Transdev claimed to have all sorts of ideas from pimped up buses to different routes, but in the end, they are basically just doing what First did, but with longer journey times and much older buses.
Presumably the franchise won't call for an increased frequency or earlier or later services, because in the last 10 years, 2 different operators have demonstrated that that is unsustainable, so why would a franchise agreement waste public money on that?
So what benefits will franchising bring to the X98/9?
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Mar 13, 2024 11:55:30 GMT 1
If it's similar to the Manchester approach, 164 & A2 will be covered as they are run by West Yorkshire depots, with routes run by NY depots such as the 7,36 & 840/3 routes having to gain a permit to operate into WY. How the X98/9 & Connexions routes will work will be interesting, being routes fully within WY but operated by NY depots unless they 'do a 184' & get moved back to a Leeds depot on the launch date. I don't think the depot that currently runs the service is at all relevant. (In particular, the Flyer services are ambiguous, as they depot is in Idle but is registered as part of Yorkshire Coastliner based in Malton). What matters is whether the service is principally a West Yorkshire service that nudges outside the area, or principally a North Yorkshire/South Yorkshire/Lancashire/etc service that extends into WY. The 36 and Coastliner routes are very clearly NY services that run into Leeds, so I would expect those to continue to be run by Transdev with a permit, likewise the 412 only just cuts into WY at Wetherby so would be on a permit basis. Other Connexions services and the X98/X99 that are entirely within WY would unquestionably come under the remit of franchising. I would expect the Transdev 7 to do so as well, as the majority of the route is in WY and it provides the only bus to several communities in WY, but surprisingly it appeared to be missing from the proposals.
|
|
lucyp
Forum Member
Posts: 142
|
Post by lucyp on Mar 13, 2024 12:54:09 GMT 1
In the latest accounts that are available, Transdev Blazefield lost nearly £11 million. It has net assets of only £100,000. At present that is their problem, and their shareholders problem, who received no dividend. When that happens under franchising, is that the tax-payer's problem?
What happens when a company hands back a franchise, or has it taken away, as has happened in the rail industry?
|
|
mattb7tl
Forum Member
Streetlites 🛐
Posts: 748
|
Post by mattb7tl on Mar 13, 2024 13:06:33 GMT 1
In the latest accounts that are available, Transdev Blazefield lost nearly £11 million. It has net assets of only £100,000. At present that is their problem, and their shareholders problem, who received no dividend. When that happens under franchising, is that the tax-payer's problem? What happens when a company hands back a franchise, or has it taken away, as has happened in the rail industry? Keighley is rumoured to be one of their best performing operations. Team Pennine was reported as being 'better than ever' from the previous owner which seems to be true from my observations. One of their only commercial routes as an example filling up to the point where it needs a frequency increase at peak times post-COVID. Flyer seems to be the only dodgy one, but that could easily be cross subsidised
|
|
|
Post by rwilkes on Mar 13, 2024 13:16:45 GMT 1
Under franchising losses go to the taxpayers, but profits remain with the shareholders, but are hidden in the leasing costs The public are being told people before profits but the truth is that they go together. We are being lied to! The Transport Focus report today seems to show that public satisfaction is highest in partnerships Read www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-Buses-Chris-Cheek/dp/1898758166 for a full explanation of the finances of buses
|
|
|
Post by rikki85 on Mar 13, 2024 13:58:24 GMT 1
Under franchising losses go to the taxpayers, but profits remain with the shareholders, but are hidden in the leasing costs The public are being told people before profits but the truth is that they go together. We are being lied to! The Transport Focus report today seems to show that public satisfaction is highest in partnerships Read www.amazon.co.uk/Understanding-Buses-Chris-Cheek/dp/1898758166 for a full explanation of the finances of buses Sorry but we have had EPs before, they don't work, your statement of we are being lied to speaks very much of tin foil hattery. Absolute Frith and flim flam. Franchising allows cross subsidising of lower earning services, you dont see arriva or folirst doing that. From what I understand the profit goes to TgFM who pay a managemenent fee butbI am wrong. Not sure where transport focus gets its info but from what I have seen and read, most people want public control of the buses. They have been in private hands for 40 years nearly and it is a mess - operators have carte blanche to do as they please leaving communities cut off. Buses are a public service not a shareholder cash cow, they shouldn't be in private hands entirely.
|
|
|
Post by sharksmith on Mar 13, 2024 15:31:30 GMT 1
Honest question for the pro franchise people with no agenda, I'm just curious.
What makes you think that the funding for franchising will be available to achieve and maintain all of the improvements you are expecting.
Almost all central government departments have seen cuts to their budgets for years now. Local councils are running out of money for essential services such as social care and childrens services. The UK has debts close to the levels seen at the end of the last world war which will have to be addressed no matter which political party is in power next year.
Buses are flavour of the month at the moment but when it comes to a choice between the NHS, police, defence and transport do you really believe this funding will be protected long term?
If, as I suspect will happen in the future, the funding is squeezed which do you think will happen first.
Service and infrastructure cuts Fare rises or Large Council tax rises
Even assuming a sustained upturn in bus use is achieved,which I think is highly doubtful, I suspect we may see a combination of all three while the private companies you loathe will continue to provide profits for their shareholders, which are mainly our pension funds, by building their profit margins into their bids.
|
|
mattb7tl
Forum Member
Streetlites 🛐
Posts: 748
|
Post by mattb7tl on Mar 13, 2024 15:37:51 GMT 1
Honest question for the pro franchise people with no agenda, I'm just curious. What makes you think that the funding for franchising will be available to achieve and maintain all of the improvements you are expecting. Almost all central government departments have seen cuts to their budgets for years now. Local councils are running out of money for essential services such as social care and childrens services. The UK has debts close to the levels seen at the end of the last world war which will have to be addressed no matter which political party is in power next year. Buses are flavour of the month at the moment but when it comes to a choice between the NHS, police, defence and transport do you really believe this funding will be protected long term? If, as I suspect will happen in the future, the funding is squeezed which do you thing will happen first. Service and infrastructure cuts Fare rises or Large Council tax rises Even assuming a sustained upturn in bus use is achieved,which I think is highly doubtful, I suspect we may see a combination of all three while the private companies you loathe will continue to provide profits for their shareholders, which are mainly our pension funds, by building their profit margins into their bids. All the points you make are even worse for an EP+ Franchising at the very minimum has the CHANCE to generate income to fund the improvements. We have the biggest chance since our PTE is one of the best performing in the country, funding the minor increases in frequency that were demonstrated in the documents will not be an issue. An EP+? You give, give, and give and receive nothing in return. Once you have nothing to give, you see no improvements and the network will revert back to normal or worse (Sheffield)
|
|
|
Post by sharksmith on Mar 13, 2024 16:05:36 GMT 1
Honest question for the pro franchise people with no agenda, I'm just curious. What makes you think that the funding for franchising will be available to achieve and maintain all of the improvements you are expecting. Almost all central government departments have seen cuts to their budgets for years now. Local councils are running out of money for essential services such as social care and childrens services. The UK has debts close to the levels seen at the end of the last world war which will have to be addressed no matter which political party is in power next year. Buses are flavour of the month at the moment but when it comes to a choice between the NHS, police, defence and transport do you really believe this funding will be protected long term? If, as I suspect will happen in the future, the funding is squeezed which do you thing will happen first. Service and infrastructure cuts Fare rises or Large Council tax rises Even assuming a sustained upturn in bus use is achieved,which I think is highly doubtful, I suspect we may see a combination of all three while the private companies you loathe will continue to provide profits for their shareholders, which are mainly our pension funds, by building their profit margins into their bids. All the points you make are even worse for an EP+ Franchising at the very minimum has the CHANCE to generate income to fund the improvements. We have the biggest chance since our PTE is one of the best performing in the country, funding the minor increases in frequency that were demonstrated in the documents will not be an issue. An EP+? You give, give, and give and receive nothing in return. Once you have nothing to give, you see no improvements and the network will revert back to normal or worse (Sheffield) Conversely once the bus company has won their franchise and locked in their profit margins for seven years they have absolutely no incentive to do anything more to attract passengers above their contractual obligations. Meanwhile we will have gone through this huge upheaval, paid off the consultants with their millions of pounds for a CHANCE of minor improvements? What happens if public transport usage continues to decline and because the losses are now the responsiblity of the public purse and we can't afford to pay someone to run the next set of franchises without major cuts. There is no magic bullet, only significant bus priority improvements and a change of public attitude to public transport can really make a difference.
|
|
mattb7tl
Forum Member
Streetlites 🛐
Posts: 748
|
Post by mattb7tl on Mar 13, 2024 16:13:07 GMT 1
All the points you make are even worse for an EP+ Franchising at the very minimum has the CHANCE to generate income to fund the improvements. We have the biggest chance since our PTE is one of the best performing in the country, funding the minor increases in frequency that were demonstrated in the documents will not be an issue. An EP+? You give, give, and give and receive nothing in return. Once you have nothing to give, you see no improvements and the network will revert back to normal or worse (Sheffield) Conversely once the bus company has won their franchise and locked in their profit margins for seven years they have absoltely no incentive to do anything more to attract passengers above their contractual obligations. Meanwhile we will have gone through this huge upheaval, paid off the consultants with their millions of pounds for a CHANCE of minor improvements? There is no magic bullet, only significant bus priority improvements and a change of public attitude to public transport can really make a difference. Our main companies fail to attract customers in the first place, remember the last non taxpayer funded service improvement from FWY? Me neither! It's not like they can win a contract and put their feet up. They have to maintain the standards set in the contract. If they don't they will be fined. You mention bus priority, what motive does an authority have to build priority in a private network? Theres so much more of an incentive in a public network, and that has been demonstrated over in Manchester. They are doing all sorts of infrastructure improvements because they actually have a profit incentive
|
|
|
Post by sharksmith on Mar 13, 2024 16:21:21 GMT 1
Conversely once the bus company has won their franchise and locked in their profit margins for seven years they have absoltely no incentive to do anything more to attract passengers above their contractual obligations. Meanwhile we will have gone through this huge upheaval, paid off the consultants with their millions of pounds for a CHANCE of minor improvements? There is no magic bullet, only significant bus priority improvements and a change of public attitude to public transport can really make a difference. Our main companies fail to attract customers in the first place, remember the last non taxpayer funded service improvement from FWY? Me neither! It's not like they can win a contract and put their feet up. They have to maintain the standards set in the contract. If they don't they will be fined. You mention bus priority, what motive does an authority have to build priority in a private network? Theres so much more of an incentive in a public network, and that has been demonstrated over in Manchester. They are doing all sorts of infrastructure improvements because they actually have a profit incentive Obviously only time will tell and even in 10-15 years time we will probably still disagree over whether it has been successful or not. I'm certain now that franchising will happen and you will get your way, you seem to be an idealist and a positive person whereas I'm more of a realist and pragmatist. My gut feeling is that we will get a service which is somewhere between slightly better and slightly worse than we have now but I don't think there will be a huge shift no matter which route we take. The big winners as usual will be the consultancy firms who take and take money out of every sector of the world, depriving the customer of funds which could be better used on the actual services we receive.
|
|
deerfold
Forum Member
Posts: 2,370
Member is Online
|
Post by deerfold on Mar 13, 2024 17:04:52 GMT 1
All the points you make are even worse for an EP+ Franchising at the very minimum has the CHANCE to generate income to fund the improvements. We have the biggest chance since our PTE is one of the best performing in the country, funding the minor increases in frequency that were demonstrated in the documents will not be an issue. An EP+? You give, give, and give and receive nothing in return. Once you have nothing to give, you see no improvements and the network will revert back to normal or worse (Sheffield) Conversely once the bus company has won their franchise and locked in their profit margins for seven years they have absolutely no incentive to do anything more to attract passengers above their contractual obligations. Meanwhile we will have gone through this huge upheaval, paid off the consultants with their millions of pounds for a CHANCE of minor improvements? What happens if public transport usage continues to decline and because the losses are now the responsiblity of the public purse and we can't afford to pay someone to run the next set of franchises without major cuts. There is no magic bullet, only significant bus priority improvements and a change of public attitude to public transport can really make a difference. If the contracts are reasonably written, payments will be dependent on running high %ages of contracted mileage, running to time, having tracking buses - with bonuses or fines for the operators. The trick is making the contractual obligations something that will attract passengers. There also needs to be flexibility in the contracts to increase service frequency for a known price.
|
|
|
Post by rwilkes on Mar 13, 2024 17:47:34 GMT 1
Because of the fines for late running, with franchising contracts the bus companies pad the timetables with extra buses which puts up cost and slow down journeys Transdev thought franchising such a high risk they did not bid soe Rochdale got First instead of Transdev. Is this what people want in W Yorks?
When buses were run by WYPTE, the Tories were in control for a few years and they doubled fares on October and doubled them again the followign April. Lots of people stopped using buses. WYCA could easily go Tory once the franchising costs start puttng council tax up and the same thing will happen.
Most of the places showing high passeenger satisfaction int he Transport Focus report were places with partnerships.
|
|
|
Post by steve440 on Mar 13, 2024 17:50:09 GMT 1
Conversely once the bus company has won their franchise and locked in their profit margins for seven years they have absolutely no incentive to do anything more to attract passengers above their contractual obligations. Meanwhile we will have gone through this huge upheaval, paid off the consultants with their millions of pounds for a CHANCE of minor improvements? What happens if public transport usage continues to decline and because the losses are now the responsiblity of the public purse and we can't afford to pay someone to run the next set of franchises without major cuts. There is no magic bullet, only significant bus priority improvements and a change of public attitude to public transport can really make a difference. If the contracts are reasonably written, payments will be dependent on running high %ages of contracted mileage, running to time, having tracking buses - with bonuses or fines for the operators. The trick is making the contractual obligations something that will attract passengers. There also needs to be flexibility in the contracts to increase service frequency for a known price. Precisely, it won't be the bus companies' job to attract new passengers, it will be WYCA's job to implement attractive timetables and do something about road congestion.
|
|
|
Post by shelf81 on Mar 13, 2024 18:05:40 GMT 1
The depot location doesn't matter. It's where the route is based that matters. Neither Transdev nor Connexions have a Leeds depot. The only way they would move to a WY depot is if the franchise is bid for and won by a company who have a Leeds depot. Franchising will be a disaster, just like it was with the railways. It's just a left-wing mayor who wants bus services back in public ownership, because that's a left-wing thing to do. There is no thought to the cost, or the practicality. It is no good asking the public, because 90% of them have no idea what a franchise is and wouldn't understand and couldn't explain a franchise agreement if they were given it to read. What practical difference is franchising going to make? What did it do to rail? All the companies went bust. All the demands for run an East Coast train from London to all sorts of provincial towns was pointless. The passenger numbers are available online. They show that LNER running a direct train from Bradford to London is pointless. Take the X98/9 that you mention. Are they going to offer routes individually or package them into bundles so that if you want that route, you have to bid for it together with 20 others in your franchise application? If it's a bundle, it will just go back to First Leeds who didn't want it when they had it. No one else will be in a position to bid for a bundle. If it's individual, the cost and administration of the process will be enormous, and for what? Presumably Transdev and no one else will then bid for a service that they cannot run reliably at present. The franchising agreement presumably won't alter the frequency of the route. First reduced it. Transdev claimed to have all sorts of ideas from pimped up buses to different routes, but in the end, they are basically just doing what First did, but with longer journey times and much older buses. Presumably the franchise won't call for an increased frequency or earlier or later services, because in the last 10 years, 2 different operators have demonstrated that that is unsustainable, so why would a franchise agreement waste public money on that? So what benefits will franchising bring to the X98/9? The Leeds depots won't belong to First once Franchising begins, as they are to be franchised alongside the Category A lots so the unless Transdev/First/Connexions bid & win then it doesn't matter who currently owns/operates what. I'm assuming it's too early to know what they will do with the X98/9 at the moment, but as you don't seem to like Transdev's operation of it surely it should be seen as a improvement to you that they might not be operating it for much longer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2024 18:08:37 GMT 1
Because of the fines for late running, with franchising contracts the bus companies pad the timetables with extra buses which puts up cost and slow down journeys Transdev thought franchising such a high risk they did not bid soe Rochdale got First instead of Transdev. Is this what people want in W Yorks? When buses were run by WYPTE, the Tories were in control for a few years and they doubled fares on October and doubled them again the followign April. Lots of people stopped using buses. WYCA could easily go Tory once the franchising costs start puttng council tax up and the same thing will happen. Most of the places showing high passeenger satisfaction int he Transport Focus report were places with partnerships. and if Brabin doesn't get elected, she's going to make herself look right stupid.
|
|
deerfold
Forum Member
Posts: 2,370
Member is Online
|
Post by deerfold on Mar 13, 2024 18:21:41 GMT 1
Because of the fines for late running, with franchising contracts the bus companies pad the timetables with extra buses which puts up cost and slow down journeys Transdev thought franchising such a high risk they did not bid soe Rochdale got First instead of Transdev. Is this what people want in W Yorks? When buses were run by WYPTE, the Tories were in control for a few years and they doubled fares on October and doubled them again the followign April. Lots of people stopped using buses. WYCA could easily go Tory once the franchising costs start puttng council tax up and the same thing will happen. Most of the places showing high passeenger satisfaction int he Transport Focus report were places with partnerships. and if Brabin doesn't get elected, she's going to make herself look right stupid. Why? She's enacting the things she promised in her manifesto. If people don't like them, they'll vote her out. I'm not sure why that would make her look stupid.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2024 18:24:38 GMT 1
and if Brabin doesn't get elected, she's going to make herself look right stupid. Why? She's enacting the things she promised in her manifesto. If people don't like them, they'll vote her out. I'm not sure why that would make her look stupid. Isn't it too late to be doing this sort of thing with the election coming up? This should have been done as soon as she got into office
|
|