Labour pledges to ‘take back control’ of bus services and accelerate franchising
Labour has pledged to end the “postcode lottery” of bus services by speeding up the franchising process.
Since de-regulation in 1985, the party said services outside of London have “collapsed”.
Shadow transport secretary Louise Haigh said the plan would kickstart a revival of bus services across England.
The plan aims to create 250 million more passenger journeys per year and allow local transport authorities to “take back control”.
The key word is obvious - it's "control". Based on financial year 2022/2023, 250 million more passenger journeys per year in England would be an increase of approximately 7.4%. They probably don't expect Labour voters to check that.
In the financial year 2022/23, the number of passenger journeys on local bus services in Great Britain amounted to 3.7 billion trips, a year-on-year increase of around twenty percent. During the same period, nearly 3.4 billion bus passenger journeys were reported in England.
In the financial year 2022/23, the number of passenger journeys on local bus services in Great Britain amounted to 3.7 billion trips, a year-on-year increase of around twenty percent. During the same period, nearly 3.4 billion bus passenger journeys were reported in England.
9 comments:
Certainly, if you don't have access to rail or your own car, and live miles from where you need to work, shop, or socialise, it must be miserable without a decent bus service. But those areas lack buses for a good reason - if it were profitable to run buses there, the companies would be there before you could say "any more fares please!"
So I wonder what positive changes Labour envisage. Subsidies? OK, but forking out to take a small number of pensioners into town with a frequent, reliable service is going to cost a lot. The greater the need, the greater the expense.
It would be interesting to know when was the last time any of these representatives of the working class was on a real bus. Not counting photo opportunities or airport plane links.
Franchising? Is that not what some Nutritious Quick Sustenance companies do? Or Royal Post Offices?
I feel a whole new layer of Civil Service bureaucracy being created. With a Minister of.
After all who else is going to ensure that both staff and customers are of the approved Alphabet Soup mix. And sustainable propulsion?
Whatever, nothing is ever so bad that politicians can surely make worse.
Do not be surprised if your bus is run by Bulgarians as are the busload of invisible, virtual, concession passengers all around you.
End of rambling rant.
Sam - yes that's the key, if routes are profitable they survive. Round here bus companies have problems retaining drivers because once they are trained, many go elsewhere for better money. There is a problem retaining mechanics for the same reason, and buses having to crash their way through potholes all day doesn't help.
Higher wages would mean higher fares though and they have to remain competitive. How Labour expects to wave a wand and improve things I don't know, but neither do they. It's electioneering stuff.
Doonhamer - I also feel a whole new layer of Civil Service being created. It seems to be how Starmer's mind works - hand government over to those he thinks of as professionals. Judiciary, Civil Service, Quangos, expert committees, transnational bureaucracies and so on. He could be worse than Blair.
They're just trying to continue existing policy and stop us scruff owning our own transport. If you're so selfish as to want to travel independently at a time of your own choosing you may have noticed this policy at work.
Jannie - many decision makers probably live in cities where they travel by hopping in and out of taxis and think hopping on and off buses is much the same.
Most MPs live in towns and particularly London. If they are used to working they will treat the availability of 'public' transport as a given. Underground, Overground, Docklands Light Railway, commuter trains, buses, taxis, and even a few cars and suicidal cyclists. The provision of transport arises from the density of City passengers.
Out in the sticks you only have to live about 5 or 6 miles outside a town to have much poorer bus services (if any). It always struck me as perverse that city dwellers are usually 'excused' congestion charges but country dwellers, who must use private transport, are charged.
DJ - yes and if MPs live in towns they are likely to have a place in London where they work and socialise. We live in a smallish town with good bus services, but it is easy to see that villages only a few miles away would be far less convenient places to live without a car.
‘take back control’: how reactionary progressives tend to be.
Ages ago I worked on Teesside and sometimes my job would take me out driving during the working day. I got into the habit of counting the number of passengers on the buses at those non-peak times. The usual answer was two.
dearieme - yes they do tend to be reactionary. We see quite a number of buses during non-peak times and most are virtually empty. Only certain routes seem to be busy, mostly those in and out of cities at certain times of day.
Post a Comment