• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

What must be done to make buses more relevant outside London?

Status
Not open for further replies.

geoffk

On Moderation
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
3,933
Location
Exeter
Someone wrote on a different thread "Buses on the other hand, now there’s a transport mode in terminal decline (outside of London)…"

Is this actually true, and if so, what needs to be done to change things for the better?

Not sure if this "speculation" but if so please move the thread elsewhere!
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Bertie the bus

Established Member
Joined
15 Aug 2014
Messages
3,216
I can’t really say what needs to be done but what certainly shouldn’t be done is what they are doing in Preston. They are making it as difficult as possible to get there unless you use the bus.

I presume the idea is it will force people onto buses but that is just the nonsensical idea of people who have no understanding of human nature. What it will do is totally put people off shopping in Preston city centre and it will become an even more desolate and depressing place than it is currently, and it's already pretty bad with empty shops.
 

Bertie the bus

Established Member
Joined
15 Aug 2014
Messages
3,216
Basically making you drive half way round Lancashire to get out of town. Road closures, additional bus only lanes on what used to be busy through routes, etc.
 

61653 HTAFC

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Dec 2012
Messages
19,373
Location
Yorkshire
Basically making you drive half way round Lancashire to get out of town. Road closures, additional bus only lanes on what used to be busy through routes, etc.
Removing through traffic is probably a good thing in and of itself for several reasons... but only if there's a suitable alternative for that traffic. Likewise encouraging bus use is also a good thing, but only if the service is reliable, affordable and easy to navigate. This means through-ticketing across different operators (by default rather than at a premium), and proper enforcement of standards by traffic commissioners with sharp teeth.
 

PeterC

Established Member
Joined
29 Sep 2014
Messages
4,786
What should not be done is to degrade the bus service as part of wider anti-car measures.
 

Bertie the bus

Established Member
Joined
15 Aug 2014
Messages
3,216
Removing through traffic is probably a good thing in and of itself for several reasons... but only if there's a suitable alternative for that traffic. Likewise encouraging bus use is also a good thing, but only if the service is reliable, affordable and easy to navigate. This means through-ticketing across different operators (by default rather than at a premium), and proper enforcement of standards by traffic commissioners with sharp teeth.
Preston doesn't have a ring road. The only thing that could be described as a ring road goes straight through the city centre. Therefore any attempts to reduce through traffic are going to cause problems. I have no problem with "encouraging" bus use but the way it is being done in Preston isn't encouragement. It is almost "use the bus or stay out of Preston" and that, to a significant number of people including myself, will mean staying out of the centre of Preston unless I have absolutely no other alternatives, and that isn't healthy for the city centre.
 

neilmc

Member
Joined
23 Oct 2011
Messages
1,070
I'm as pro-bus as you can get but I need a car to do the shopping so in the case of Preston I would look to where there is an out-of-town shopping centre with nice free parking and go there.

What is needed is:

a) throw the Tories out of every local, county and city council in the land
b) throw the Tories out at national level whenever Boris decides he has to finally face the electorate
c) get the Labour, Lib Dems, SNP and whatever combination of authority is left and hold their feet to the fire about subsidising bus services nationwide

If we as a nation aren't prepared to do that then we are complicit with continually declining public transport and it's no good squawking when you have to get a taxi to your hospital appointment or you have to give up work because the company don't have a car park and there's no longer a bus which will get you in for 9.
 

Megafuss

Member
Joined
5 May 2018
Messages
900
Location
Spalding
There has been 70 years of pro car policy, no matter the political hue or ownership/management model. So its really about making the best of what is left as you can't undo the harm done by uncontrolled car use. It sounds defeatist, but barring removing by force people private cars, and replacing them with a bus every 10 minutes everywhere, bus use will never replace car use.
 

Ken H

Established Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,718
Location
N Yorks
There has been 70 years of pro car policy, no matter the political hue or ownership/management model. So its really about making the best of what is left as you can't undo the harm done by uncontrolled car use. It sounds defeatist, but barring removing by force people private cars, and replacing them with a bus every 10 minutes everywhere, bus use will never replace car use.
Quite. Restricting car use in any meaningful way would be electoral suicide.
 

Typhoon

Established Member
Joined
2 Nov 2017
Messages
3,540
Location
Kent
There has been 70 years of pro car policy, no matter the political hue or ownership/management model. So its really about making the best of what is left as you can't undo the harm done by uncontrolled car use. It sounds defeatist, but barring removing by force people private cars, and replacing them with a bus every 10 minutes everywhere, bus use will never replace car use.
I suspect you are right, it needed action years ago. The network in many areas has been cut back and continues to be cut back to such an extent that it will get you to work, school or college and back, and to the shops, not necessarily when you want to go, so be prepared to hang around, and not in the evening or on a Sunday. Large towns and cities will be ok (for now) but buses are too infrequent and often too indirect in much of the country and it is now imbued into most people's psyche that they have to learn to drive.
Quite. Restricting car use in any meaningful way would be electoral suicide.
To be honest I think that any government that tries to eliminate petrol driven cars is committing electoral suicide. An awful lot of people regard the car as an essential of life.
 

Andyh82

Established Member
Joined
19 May 2014
Messages
4,611
Regulation.

Or should the term be "re-regulation" as opposed to deregulation?
Why would changing the owners of the buses making more people use them?

Im presuming you are meaning regulation will lead to something else?
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
28,764
Location
Nottingham
Why would changing the owners of the buses making more people use them?

Im presuming you are meaning regulation will lead to something else?
Regulation isn't the same thing as changing the ownership - the regulated buses in London are owned by many of the same groups that operate de-regulated buses elsewhere.
 

HullRailMan

On Moderation
Joined
8 Oct 2018
Messages
442
There has been 70 years of pro car policy, no matter the political hue or ownership/management model. So its really about making the best of what is left as you can't undo the harm done by uncontrolled car use. It sounds defeatist, but barring removing by force people private cars, and replacing them with a bus every 10 minutes everywhere, bus use will never replace car use.
Exactly this. No bus network will ever be able to replicate the freedom and convenience offered by a car. That why bus usage has declined for decades, both with and without regulation.
Buses only work if you want to go where the bus is going at the times it runs. Gone are the days when work places and shipping was geographically concentrated in areas like town/city centres which is well suited to trunk bus routes. Public transport can’t cope well with flexible working hours and retail/business parks round the edge of cities.
 

Cesarcollie

Member
Joined
5 Jun 2016
Messages
835
Regulation isn't the same thing as changing the ownership - the regulated buses in London are owned by many of the same groups that operate de-regulated buses elsewhere.

ok - so perhaps the poster meant regulation. Why will re-regulating make more people use buses?
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
5,462
ok - so perhaps the poster meant regulation. Why will re-regulating make more people use buses?
Regulation should allow bus services to be operated in the commercial interests of the bus network as a whole, and thereby provide a better and more joined up service, rather than the individual operators commercial interests. A better and more joined up service should attract more users. Also, additional funding should be easier to come by (for more better services and/or fare reductions in turn attracting more users) , as its application would be easier to administer and less suspicion about the effectiveness of its use. At least that is the theory. Whether a public authority could replicate this in practice is another matter.
 
Last edited:

Dr Day

Member
Joined
16 Oct 2018
Messages
763
Location
Bristol

These types of initiative will be interesting to monitor to demonstrate how much of the lack of bus use is down to the fare, and how much due to simply the bus (or train/tram in Ireland) not going where people want to go, at the time they want to go.

I suspect much more investment is needed on ongoing funding for the latter, which is made easier in places like Ireland which have more co-ordinated centralised multi-modal planning.
 

chorleyjeff

Member
Joined
3 May 2013
Messages
677
I can’t really say what needs to be done but what certainly shouldn’t be done is what they are doing in Preston. They are making it as difficult as possible to get there unless you use the bus.

I presume the idea is it will force people onto buses but that is just the nonsensical idea of people who have no understanding of human nature. What it will do is totally put people off shopping in Preston city centre and it will become an even more desolate and depressing place than it is currently, and it's already pretty bad with empty shops.
The above is true. In adition the major shopping areas around the edge of the town - Blackpool Road, Walton le Dale - have wholly inadequate bus services and the huge car parks are usually full. The town centre retail is dieing as I have seen in the last couple of weeks. Seems the bus services are irrelevant to the future of the town centre and out of town retail shopping centres.
 
Joined
15 Sep 2019
Messages
734
Location
Back in Geordieland!
Interesting thread. Who uses the bus that doesn't need to? Kids because they can't drive, pensioners because it's " free", people consuming alcohol, people who don't own a car. Very few people who want a car don't have one now, despite all the austerity we are a remarkably wealthy country. Even at 7 quid a gallon it's cheaper to use the car you already own than to get the bus.

If I was going into my local city centre I would get the bus, parking is expensive and there is every chance I will be going to the pub. Prior to my retirement we became a single car family and I had to use the bus, 30 mile round trip commute and using the bus added well over an hour to my commute. One day a week it meant I left the house at 0615 and didn't get home until 2200 and that's assuming I got away from work on time, which I often didn't.

Plus the extra joy of antisocial behavior.

If I had a car there is no way I would have been using the bus. I travelled by bus 4 times in the last 12 months, 2 return trips into the city, half the buses I went for didn't run so I was late, one of them that I got on was a Streetlite. It was an ordeal just sitting on it.

Loadings after 6pm are dire, hard to see how the companies can keep running them much longer.
 

ChrisC

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2018
Messages
2,267
Location
Nottinghamshire
Regulation should allow bus services to be operated in the commercial interests of the bus network as a whole, and thereby provide a better and more joined up service, rather than the individual operators commercial interests. A better and more joined up service should attract more users. Also, additional funding should be easier to come by (for more better services and/or fare reductions in turn attracting more users) , as its application would be easier to administer and less suspicion about the effectiveness of its use. At least that is the theory. Whether a public authority could replicate this in practice is another matter.
Most large cities these days seem to have some form of multi operator ticketing which makes bus travel relatively easy and reasonably priced within the city boundary. The problem then comes if you need to travel outside of the city ticket area boundary.

Where I live in central Nottinghamshire there are 3 main bus companies which operate routes in the area and these are TrentBarton, Stagecoach and Nottingham City Transport. All three of these have their own day tickets which individually are not too highly priced with exception of having to travel on TrentBarton before 9am. TrentBartons prices can be slightly reduced by using their Mango App.
TrentBarton - £7 (£10.50 before 9am)
Stagecoach - £7.20
Nottingham City Transport - £6.50

The TrentBarton route through the village where I live is hourly but no evening buses or buses on Sunday. Inconvenient but I can live with that and accept that it’s not bad for rural area. The problem is so many places I would like to travel to by bus requires a change of bus onto usually a Stagecoach route or occasionally NCT. As these days most return journeys in rural areas are cheaper with a day ticket it requires two day tickets and the cost of a journey of only about 12 miles can quickly be in excess of £14.

The above example illustrates some of the problems of bus travel outside of London and other large cities. Countywide multi operator tickets are available in a few countries and are very useful for travelling within the county boundary. The problem then is if you live close to the county boundary and many of your journeys take you over the the border into the neighbouring county. The Cornwall scheme is fantastic if you live in Cornwall and all of your travel is in the county but not so good if you are on the border of Cornwall with Devon and need to make a journey in two counties.
 

geoffk

On Moderation
Joined
4 Aug 2010
Messages
3,933
Location
Exeter
ok - so perhaps the poster meant regulation. Why will re-regulating make more people use buses?
I'm generally in favour of regulation or franchising but this on its own won't solve the issues facing the industry - traffic congestion, growth of low-density suburban sprawl difficult to serve by bus, pressure on costs (wages, fuel). Outside London most bus users are in three groups - concessionary pass holders, young mothers and students. How to attract the 25 to 60 age group must be a key to increasing patronage. Franchising will mean multi-operator ticketing, interavailable return tickets etc. and better information but it is likely to come at a much higher cost than the current deregulated system.

Government has to decide what buses are for and how they should be funded. Initiatives like bus improvement plans are all very well but go nowhere near replacing the funding lost by local authorities over the last 12 years.
 
Last edited:

ChrisC

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2018
Messages
2,267
Location
Nottinghamshire
I'm generally in favour of regulation or franchising but this on its own won't solve the issues facing the industry - traffic congestion, growth of low-density suburban sprawl difficult to serve by bus, pressure on costs (wages, fuel). Outside London most bus users are in three groups - concessionary pass holders, young mothers and students. How to attract the 25 to 60 age group must be a key to increasing patronage. Franchising will mean multi-operator ticketing, interavailable return tickets etc. and better information but it is likely to come at a much higher cost than the current deregulated system.

Government has to decide what buses are for and how they should be funded. Initiatives like bus improvement plans are all very well but go nowhere near replacing the funding lost by local authorities over the last 12 years.
The title of this thread is ‘What must be done to make buses more relevant outside London?’
Outside London it isn’t just about attracting the 25-60 age group, but also now the 60-65 age group who no longer receive an ENCTS pass until they are 66. I’m in that group, and was fortunate to be able to take early retirement, and if buses were more convenient, with a reasonably priced multi operator day ticket, I would happily give up using my car for local day trips.
 

Llandudno

Established Member
Joined
25 Dec 2014
Messages
2,754
Location
Matlock
The title of this thread is ‘What must be done to make buses more relevant outside London?’
Outside London it isn’t just about attracting the 25-60 age group, but also now the 60-65 age group who no longer receive an ENCTS pass until they are 66. I’m in that group, and was fortunate to be able to take early retirement, and if buses were more convenient, with a reasonably priced multi operator day ticket, I would happily give up using my car for local day trips.
Good point about the ENCTS pass, free passes only available in most parts of England when you reach 66, shortly to become 67.

Is it fair that over 60s in London get free travel and the rest of England has to wait until 66/67?

Could be a quick way of being seen to be ‘levelling up’ the north?
 

RT4038

Established Member
Joined
22 Feb 2014
Messages
5,462
Good point about the ENCTS pass, free passes only available in most parts of England when you reach 66, shortly to become 67.

Is it fair that over 60s in London get free travel and the rest of England has to wait until 66/67?

Could be a quick way of being seen to be ‘levelling up’ the north?
The Government wants retirement dates pushed back and back (as we are living longer, the ageing population means fewer younger workers and therefore workforce shortages, and pensioner benefits more and more difficult to fund). Reversing this by giving workers free travel from 60 is highly unlikely. 'Levelling up' by changing the London age is far more likely.
 

Titfield

Established Member
Joined
26 Jun 2013
Messages
3,250
I think a more "economic theory" approach should guide the debate.

Why do people choose to travel by car rather than by bus?
Cost? Convenience? Comfort? - a mix of all these factors perception of which is unique to each consumer,

To persuade "some" people to change their choice from car to bus the competitive position of travel by bus has to be improved.
Cost - reduce the fares
Convenience - increase the frequency / serve previously unserved destinations / speed up journey times
Comfort - offer wi - fi, better seating, better climate control on vehicle.

Additionally / Alternatively the competitive position of the car can be eroded:
Cost - increase car parking charges / reduce amount of free car parking / introduce work place parking levies
Convenience - increase journey times by bus prioritisation schemes, ban cars from some roads
Comfort - ??? Not sure about that one but more stop start running, slow speeds seem to make journeys less pleasant.

It is worth noting that for a consumer to make a comparison / choose a mode of transport they have to be aware of the competing products and their "features".
In my experience few bus companies have the marketing reach required to encourage consumers to even consider making a comparison and thus choice.
 

Ken H

Established Member
Joined
11 Nov 2018
Messages
6,718
Location
N Yorks
I think a more "economic theory" approach should guide the debate.

Why do people choose to travel by car rather than by bus?
Cost? Convenience? Comfort? - a mix of all these factors perception of which is unique to each consumer,

To persuade "some" people to change their choice from car to bus the competitive position of travel by bus has to be improved.
Cost - reduce the fares
Convenience - increase the frequency / serve previously unserved destinations / speed up journey times
Comfort - offer wi - fi, better seating, better climate control on vehicle.

Additionally / Alternatively the competitive position of the car can be eroded:
Cost - increase car parking charges / reduce amount of free car parking / introduce work place parking levies
Convenience - increase journey times by bus prioritisation schemes, ban cars from some roads
Comfort - ??? Not sure about that one but more stop start running, slow speeds seem to make journeys less pleasant.

It is worth noting that for a consumer to make a comparison / choose a mode of transport they have to be aware of the competing products and their "features".
In my experience few bus companies have the marketing reach required to encourage consumers to even consider making a comparison and thus choice.
I had a bus ride round Leeds the other week. On the 7 much of the route had speed bumps which were quite unpleasant. And it seemed so slow compared to the 70 of my youth(1). And the 50A down Burley Rd found every kerb gulley, all of which had dropped. So every 30 yards, 'Bang - Rattle!'
I used First buses most of the day but got back to Primley Park on a Transdev 36. Didnt rattle, leather seats, only 3 across seating. But it stayed on a main road.
 
Joined
15 Sep 2019
Messages
734
Location
Back in Geordieland!
The Government wants retirement dates pushed back and back (as we are living longer, the ageing population means fewer younger workers and therefore workforce shortages, and pensioner benefits more and more difficult to fund). Reversing this by giving workers free travel from 60 is highly unlikely. 'Levelling up' by changing the London age is far more likely.
I thought London's freedom pass age was set by local government?

No mayor who wants to be re elected is going to change that. Just as Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their eligibility age set by their devolved assemblies.

It's only England (outside London) who have it set by central government and 66/67 is some how ok for us.

The majority of the UK's population for what it's worth. Not sure why a bigger fuss isn't made about this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top