Jump to content


South Yorkshire Bus Service Needs Improvement

Recommended Posts

51 minutes ago, RollingJ said:

 

How many PTE's are headed by people from the transport world?

Hopefully very few-particularly if the background is buses.

The British "transport world" is not a model for success and has been mainly managing decline for decades.

Even if market share of public transport is considered, buses have done worst. 

The failure of so many operators to survive without public subsidy should be a warning of how bad things really are and how blinkered  the view of operators is. Shareholders rule. 

 

The failure of Local Councils to work with providers to prevent withdrawal of Sunday services in for example Lincolnshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Cheshire East is particularly significant as they have all failed to work with former partners. Increasingly town like Gainsborough and Shrewsbury are  loosing all their services.

 

There are exceptions like Derbyshire and Derby Councils and some of the 'PTEs'. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Hopefully very few-particularly if the background is buses.

The British "transport world" is not a model for success and has been mainly managing decline for decades.

Even if market share of public transport is considered, buses have done worst. 

The failure of so many operators to survive without public subsidy should be a warning of how bad things really are and how blinkered  the view of operators is. Shareholders rule. 

 

The failure of Local Councils to work with providers to prevent withdrawal of Sunday services in for example Lincolnshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Cheshire East is particularly significant as they have all failed to work with former partners. Increasingly town like Gainsborough and Shrewsbury are  loosing all their services.

 

There are exceptions like Derbyshire and Derby Councils and some of the 'PTEs'. 

 

 

As opposed to the view that it costs tuppence ha' penny to run the service held by the public?

There are a LOT of costs that add up to running service, some people don't realise such as the charges the PTE levies for passing/stopping at bus stops & interchanges. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

Hopefully very few-particularly if the background is buses.

The British "transport world" is not a model for success and has been mainly managing decline for decades.

Even if market share of public transport is considered, buses have done worst. 

The failure of so many operators to survive without public subsidy should be a warning of how bad things really are and how blinkered  the view of operators is. Shareholders rule. 

 

The failure of Local Councils to work with providers to prevent withdrawal of Sunday services in for example Lincolnshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Cheshire East is particularly significant as they have all failed to work with former partners. Increasingly town like Gainsborough and Shrewsbury are  loosing all their services.

 

There are exceptions like Derbyshire and Derby Councils and some of the 'PTEs'. 

 

 

You are a depressing person these days - I used to enjoy your very informative posts about the rail industry in the past.

IF you don't  use people with experience in the field you are almost certainly stoking up trouble - you wouldn't get a window cleaner to repair a jet engine, would you?

 

 

So which country(s) are  'a model for success'?

Public transport relies on the public to use it - if they don't, then it is wasteful to run it - private operators won't, and throwing 'public' money at it is wasteful and misguided.

 

I agree in part with the bolded bit above - but again this is 'political ineptitude'.  And the Derby/Derbyshire model is a good one, nearly as wide-ranging as that in the area I have mentioned before.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RollingJ said:

You are a depressing person these days - I used to enjoy your very informative posts about the rail industry in the past.

IF you don't  use people with experience in the field you are almost certainly stoking up trouble - you wouldn't get a window cleaner to repair a jet engine, would you?

 

 

So which country(s) are  'a model for success'?

Public transport relies on the public to use it - if they don't, then it is wasteful to run it - private operators won't, and throwing 'public' money at it is wasteful and misguided.

 

I agree in part with the bolded bit above - but again this is 'political ineptitude'.  And the Derby/Derbyshire model is a good one, nearly as wide-ranging as that in the area I have mentioned before.

 

An engineer would respond by fixing the jet engine as that is what they are trained to do.

The window cleaner would stood back and said "Why are we using jet engines on trains, buses and trams?"

 

In Western Europe public and private companies transport are often seen operating  the same and connecting services but not competing.

Very long term contracts are set between the region/state/canton and an operator which specifies level of service.

Sometimes this means that a state railway and a local bus company have equal obligation to provide connectivity.

Sometimes a group of services form a contract.

Sometimes the investment is through obligations placed on local companies.

Sometimes levels of competition are controlled to improve viability of local companies.

 

An example could be a contract that would involve Rail, Bus an Tram.

In return for sole running of the potentially very profitable 52 bus route, the winner of a 20+ year contact would also be required to run a separate but linked bus route that would link the Broomhill hospitals, NGH and Meadowhall. The 52 bus would be extended to Oughtibridge. Connections and ticketing would be guaranteed (including Woodhouse trains, Meadowhall tram and train, as would late/early/night services).

The Council and or Developer would be responsible for maintaining and periodically upgrading infrastructure.

Our 'soft' contract laws would need to be substantially hardened and monitoring and punishing for breaches of service would need to be punitive on all sides.

Small local bus/minibus/taxi/delivery companies benefit hugely as it provides them with a substantial guaranteed income on which to build other local services. 

 

This kind of set up is currently illegal in England, and is opposed by the large bus companies.

Historically vested interests and  Conservative  Government have seen creeping socialism in this. Labour are scared of everybody. 

Local Councils, big and small, fear being saddled huge financial liabilities.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, Annie Bynnol said:

An engineer would respond by fixing the jet engine as that is what they are trained to do.

The window cleaner would stood back and said "Why are we using jet engines on trains, buses and trams?"

 

 

 

Exactly - you would send a trained engineer to fix the jet engine - not an untrained window-cleaner. Similarly, you don't send a politician to run a transport undertaking - unless of course, said politician has trained and qualified individuals to actually do the job, and lets them get on with it without interfering for political reasons.

 

And the window cleaner will be well aware that we are not using jet engines on trains, buses and trams, so wouldn't ask such a stupid question.

Edited by RollingJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, RollingJ said:

Exactly - you would send a trained engineer to fix the jet engine - not an untrained window-cleaner. Similarly, you don't send a politician to run a transport undertaking - unless of course, said politician has trained and qualified individuals to actually do the job, and lets them get on with it without interfering for political reasons.

 

And the window cleaner will be well aware that we are not using jet engines on trains, buses and trams, so wouldn't ask such a stupid question.

First's current MD is Jeanette Bell, formerly a commercial director for P&O Ferries.
Stagecoach's current MD is Carla Stockton-Jones, formerly a director of retail at Sky. 

Bizarrely Stagecoach declared that CSJ was the first woman MD of a major UK public transport company, despite JB being appointed a month prior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let us therefore hope that the people who actually matter at Stagecoach have a better understanding of the passenger transport industry, although I have my doubts.

 

I must admit to not knowing who is who on the MD roundabout these days, but as they are usually just 'figureheads' appointed by the shareholders, maybe we shouldn't care too much, so long as they are intelligent enough to recruit competent individuals to actually do the job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Private companies have but one aim to maximize profits simple - but poachers can become gamekeepers

 

personally though I do believe that expertise and knowledge is an advantage in an "overseeing role" indeed this this goes right to the top where there is a marked lack of knowledge in the Dept for Transport and in the ministerial team which is mirrored in the PTEs.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of the issues with the PTE is really the nature of how public sector funding works. An issue was identified in the South Yorkshire bus review with Sheffield City Council who are responsible for city planning and highways but because SYPTE are responsible for public transport there is no joined up thinking and the council don't seem to have a culture of including good bus infrastructure in new developments or City regeneration or much priority in enforcing bus priority measures that do exist whilst at the same time they have given planning permission to lots of City Centre multi storey car parks and promote the use of them.

 

I'd like to repeat a point I previously made though. The government have made a bag of cash available for local authorities to invest in improving bus services on the condition of it being done either via an enhanced partnership or franchising model. Would you rather that money is spent on restructuring public sector organisations like SYPTE or on funding actual bus service improvements that the passengers will benefit from such as more bus services, more bus lanes/gates, expanding multi operator/modal ticketing offers, better travel information etc?

 

I'd say leave the PTE alone and spend the money on the actual bus service!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or get rid of the PTE - other areas seem to manage very well without them - but then they have intelligent administrations that look a bit further than their own backyard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Andy C said:

A lot of the issues with the PTE is really the nature of how public sector funding works. An issue was identified in the South Yorkshire bus review with Sheffield City Council who are responsible for city planning and highways but because SYPTE are responsible for public transport there is no joined up thinking and the council don't seem to have a culture of including good bus infrastructure in new developments or City regeneration or much priority in enforcing bus priority measures that do exist whilst at the same time they have given planning permission to lots of City Centre multi storey car parks and promote the use of them.

 

I'd like to repeat a point I previously made though. The government have made a bag of cash available for local authorities to invest in improving bus services on the condition of it being done either via an enhanced partnership or franchising model. Would you rather that money is spent on restructuring public sector organisations like SYPTE or on funding actual bus service improvements that the passengers will benefit from such as more bus services, more bus lanes/gates, expanding multi operator/modal ticketing offers, better travel information etc?

 

I'd say leave the PTE alone and spend the money on the actual bus service!

Trust me, SYPTE is self-serving. They farmed out running of interchanges & stop maintainence to a 3rd party, Noonan. A quick Google into the company does NOT paint a good picture. Claims of under & non payment of wages, lack of training given & poor working conditions/terms. Any organisation worth it's salt would at least look into these claims yet SYPTE simply ignore it. 

 

Interchanges are falling apart, including the recently refurbished Rotherham interchange. Potholes a plenty on the bus runways and showing no interest in repairing them. 

SYPTE even farmed out the replacing and building of bus stops to an advertising company (Alight Media). I wouldn't be surprised if there's a link between AM and the management of SYPTE outside of the contract. 

It all begs the question of what is SYPTE doing with the money they're given by the council, income from bus company levys & the AM contract? 

You mention the bag of cash that central government handed to SYPTE for improvements to services. Where are these improvements? There's not even a plan so where's the cash?

The SYPTE needs disbanding, as I said, it's self-serving and has no interest in managing better or improving public transport. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Totally agree, @Resident - but I doubt you'll be listened to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.