Blackheath Bus Services

[richardjones210368]

If that's the case then, why didn't TfWM enforce it on the 4's? Instead oopting to go to Plan B (31/32 & 42/43) becuase operators on the 4's weren't so keen.

It had not passed into statute then Winston and so a Statutory Quality Partnership Agreement was used. I was part of the team that drafted the legislation the powers within it are huge if an authority or mayor wants an AQPS then the operators have very little say or legal redress to stop it there is a 2nd part of the act is the Enhanced Partnerships which can also be imposed whilst the 3rd part of the act is Franchising the mad idea TfGM seem to be hell bent on pushing through sadly. The AQPS however would allow the 4H to be better spaced and coordinated one of the pieces of evidence used to draw up the act was the operators refusals to allow a SQPA on the 4H so we drew into the legislation a mandatory system rather than one of agreement.                   

[richardjones210368]

I don't see how it can be imposed on an operator without choice, I don't know all the clauses in the Bus Alliance Agreements that they're signed up for, however, equally I sure they'll be get out clauses for the operators as well. I don't see how TfWM can't just simply take control of commercially operated routes & kick NXWM or Diamond off them if they won't operate them jointly. TfWM could make things more difficult to encourage them or even incentivise them to work togther....

The only way I can see TfWM ever taking control of the entire WM bus network would be to re-regulate the market and acquire all the commercial routes, depots & posisbly fleets as a compuslory purchase. Otherwise, it's not going to get off the starting blocks. Bus operators are not just going to sit back & effectively give away their businesses when they shareholders to answer to.

Additionally, not one Transport Authority has actually got far enough to impose it, NEXUS in Tyne & Wear have got the closest & we all know how that ended....

Reregulation is the 3rd part of the Act Franchising, need I say any more!other than NEXUS failed because it did not have the powers granted under the new act. I personally feel that should be a matter of last resort after the other options have failed.

[winston]

It had not passed into statute then Winston and so a Statutory Quality Partnership Agreement was used. I was part of the team that drafted the legislation the powers within it are huge if an authority or mayor wants an AQPS then the operators have very little say or legal redress to stop it there is a 2nd part of the act is the Enhanced Partnerships which can also be imposed whilst the 3rd part of the act is Franchising the mad idea TfGM seem to be hell bent on pushing through sadly. The AQPS however would allow the 4H to be better spaced and coordinated one of the pieces of evidence used to draw up the act was the operators refusals to allow a SQPA on the 4H so we drew into the legislation a mandatory system rather than one of agreement.                 

I can't argue as I'm not a legal eagle & don't know all the in's & outs. But put simply, you're basically suggesting that the Mayor (Andy Street) has the power to effectively take control of all NXWM's commercial routes, NX Group & their shareholders can do nothing about it, should they wish to use that power.

The thing I don't understand, why are the Mayor's so reluctant to use these powers?

[richardjones210368]

I can't argue as I'm not a legal eagle & don't know all the in's & outs. But put simply, you're basically suggesting that the Mayor (Andy Street) has the power to effectively take control of all NXWM's commercial routes, NX Group & their shareholders can do nothing about it, should they wish to use that power.

The thing I don't understand, why are the Mayor's so reluctant to use these powers?

Yes Winston exactly. A Conservative Mayor would not use his powers against one of the West Midlands biggest and most successfully businesses when he can get voluntary agreements well not if wants me advising the WMCA anyway its as simple as that but beware a mayor from another party.

[the trainbasher]

Personally I believe that councils and the combined authorities should be allowed to set up their own operations or force franchising on operators. What we need is a Mayor whose not obsessed with trams or Sprint and more keen to curb the powers of fat cat companies who can reduce or cancel services with only 72 days notice.

In my opinion there should be only two service change dates allowed with those tying up with the national rail timetable, with tender rounds commencing on those two dates as well, with a minimum 6 month notice period (with a 2 month consultation period as part of it.)

[richardjones210368]

Personally I believe that councils and the combined authorities should be allowed to set up their own operations or force franchising on operators. What we need is a Mayor whose not obsessed with trams or Sprint and more keen to curb the powers of fat cat companies who can reduce or cancel services with only 72 days notice.

In my opinion there should be only two service change dates allowed with those tying up with the national rail timetable, with tender rounds commencing on those two dates as well, with a minimum 6 month notice period (with a 2 month consultation period as part of it.)

When the evidence was produced to the select committies it was found that Birmingham & The Black Country had the best bus service outside London with the lowest average fares and 93% commercial with the lowest burden on ratepayers so why on earth would you want to change the status quo the current Mayor is quite right to concentrate on Light Rail & Sprint as the funding for these schemes cannot be used for bus.

[winston]

When the evidence was produced to the select committies it was found that Birmingham & The Black Country had the best bus service outside London with the lowest average fares and 93% commercial with the lowest burden on ratepayers so why on earth would you want to change the status quo the current Mayor is quite right to concentrate on Light Rail & Sprint as the funding for these schemes cannot be used for bus.

As I've said previously, extending the Metro short distances within B'ham City Centre costing hundreds of millions & creating no end of disruption to buses serving the City (from the West) benefits very few, even worse these extensions are walking distance. Introducing new Metro lines such as the Wednesbury to Brierly Hill via Merry Hill will be far more beneficial, creates new journey opportunities and has the potential to remove some cars off the road.

I know Sprint is marketed as a tram, but effectively it is just an articulated bus. 

[richardjones210368]

As I've said previously, extending the Metro short distances within B'ham City Centre costing hundreds of millions & creating no end of disruption to buses serving the City (from the West) benefits very few, even worse these extensions are walking distance. Introducing new Metro lines such as the Wednesbury to Brierly Hill via Merry Hill will be far more beneficial, creates new journey opportunities and has the potential to remove some cars off the road.

I know Sprint is marketed as a tram, but effectively it is just an articulated bus.

To be honest I agree Winston but the funding for these projects could not be used for improving normal bus services so as infrastructure projects and the employment they create they can only benefit the West Midlands in the long term.

[Steveminor]

You are incorrect about enhanced partnerships, these cannot be "imposed" on operators. There is an objection method in which operators can stop the ep if they do not agree. Basically is all about "partnerships" & we are fortunate in the West Midlands that the authority & operators have a close working relationship which allows these schemes to progress without much contention between parties. That's why imo we wont go down the franchise route in the West Midlands because as a group of individuals we're all working to the same goal.

[richardjones210368]

You are incorrect about enhanced partnerships, these cannot be "imposed" on operators. There is an objection method in which operators can stop the ep if they do not agree. Basically is all about "partnerships" & we are fortunate in the West Midlands that the authority & operators have a close working relationship which allows these schemes to progress without much contention between parties. That's why imo we wont go down the franchise route in the West Midlands because as a group of individuals we're all working to the same goal.

Yes Steve I fully agree partnerships work so well in the West Midlands and none of us want it here what TfGM are proposing and technically it can be stopped by the operators but would it be in their interest? however I am not  talking about our Mayor but if the operators object to the AQPS and EP the Mayor will most likely move on to the Franchise system that is what I meant by imposed my phrasing was poor it is not in the operators interest to object to AQPS or  EP as the Mayor can use his powers to propose the the Franchise method ultimately that is how we drafted the legislation.as a carrot and stick approach with the 3 clearly defined strategy the AQPS, EP & Franchise as I discussed with.you at the West Midlands Bus Alliance public meeting on the 21st May.

[Lukeee]

Personally I'm not a fan of these partnership routes (31/32 etc). My gut feeling is if Diamond and NX run routes together then how long till the Diamond weekly and monthly tickets will go up in value. Competition helps keep bus fares down and provides more buses for passengers to choose from.

[richardjones210368]

Personally I'm not a fan of these partnership routes (31/32 etc). My gut feeling is if Diamond and NX run routes together then how long till the Diamond weekly and monthly tickets will go up in value. Competition helps keep bus fares down and provides more buses for passengers to choose from.

I am.a big fan of compeition and unlike others feel Transport Act 1986 was the best thing that ever happeneed however we cannot get away from the fact year on year bus usership is falling across the board even London. The alliances are one way to make buses more attractive and make life simplier I always strongly argue that entry fares should be pegged at existing values hence a Diamomd Value Day & Week valid on NXWM & vice versa with Daysavers etc.

[Tony]

I am.a big fan of compeition and unlike others feel Transport Act 1986 was the best thing that ever happeneed however we cannot get away from the fact year on year bus usership is falling across the board even London. The alliances are one way to make buses more attractive and make life simplier I always strongly argue that entry fares should be pegged at existing values hence a Diamomd Value Day & Week valid on NXWM & vice versa with Daysavers etc.

Isn't praising competition, then praising quality partnerships where there is no competition a bit of a contradiction

[richardjones210368]

Isn't praising competition, then praising quality partnerships where there is no competition a bit of a contradiction

Sadly after all research into the industry we did for the drafting of the act with my heart I would be more than happy with the status quo and keep full deregulation, as a realist with bus patronage falling so heavily in England & Wales and even here in the West Midlands I have been persuaded that the customer should be offered a model that is more attractive and  personally I feel partnerships are the way forward I see what is wrong with the current system 6 days a week with constantly your 4H following a Diamond 4H up Gorsty Hill then nothing for 15 Min's that to me is  sending out the wrong message to customers of an industry incapable of organizing itself.

[richardjones210368]

An example of where a partnership agreement would work is on the Blackheath to Merry Hill a very popular route but if you just stand in bus stop at Salnsbury's the comments of a 4M stuck in front of 3 is worth standing in the stop alone for its gives a bad image of two buses to Merry Hill leaving together yes I know the 3 does Brickhouse & Saltwells but if the 3A was axed and the 14 rerouted via Stuart Rd with the 14A doing the reverse of Bell End a 20 min frequency on the 3 could coordinate with the 4M and the customer gets a 10mim frequency to Merry Hill equally get the E40Ds off the 13A and 13 & put the Omnis back on at 20 Min's frequency then the X8 & 13A would offer a 10min fitted timetable to Brum since July  the X8 & 13A are always fighting into the marketplace together at 35Min's again now the cut of the 13A has not gone down well its the image being portrayed to the customer of an uncoordinated shambles that's where I think partnerships would work on routes with no competition.