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!
It was something I mentioned elsewhere that the Ripon to Leeds service still follows the same route as always. When I travelled on it, the timetable was largely unchanged in 1991 than it had been in 1981,
The Harrogate-Ripon section use to head north east out of Harrogate town centre to then head north west on the A59 to join to the A61. Some peak journeys ran direct via the A61 as did the extras when the through Leeds-Ripon service was upped from hourly, numbered 36A, leaving just a hourly service on the old route. A series of bus stop improvements (raised pavements) were implemented for the revamped service with the Gemini 1s only for the decision to be taken shortly after to solely use the direct A61 route with the new improvements thereafter abandoned, for example;
More recently services from Leeds have been permanently diverted so as not to serve Pier Head (Bettys) turning east on Victoria Avenue (the road the 3, 6, 24, 36 to Ripon, X6 and X59 use in the opposite direction from the bus station) so as to gain the route of the 1's and 7 to the bus station pass Asda.
Then the question becomes who pays, how much is to be spent and what represents good value for the taxpayer? East Riding Council published a review of all their subsidised bus services pre-covid, following which the bulk of them were cut, (I’ll try to find the link) and I recall some services having subsidies equivalent to £35+ per passenger journey. Clearly someone was using that bus, but is that a good use of money? To that passenger it may have been vital, but in the grand scheme of things it’s hugely wasteful. Who should win?
Cant help but think as the most basic of benchmarks no subsidy should be greater than the equivalent taxi fare.
It undoubtedly seems harsh but as money is a finite supply there must be far better uses for that money than subsidising that service.
There seems to me to be a supreme irony in the huge number of cars on the road going hither and thither with spare seats that arent used, including many cars making the same or very similar journey that is being subsidised at such a huge rate. Car sharing and formal and informal lift schemes have to be a way forward. The power of facebook through the internet surely can be harnassed to match demand and supply.
The arguments here are a bit similar to those about railway privatisation. There's a big danger of assuming that nothing would have changed if deregulation had never occurred and that the municipal and nationalised bus companies were somehow incapable of innovation.
The municipal survivors in England, in Reading and Nottingham, are often put forward as leaders in both service and innovation. London is London, and unlike anywhere else in the UK so it's a difficult place to use for comparison. What I do remember is that, back in the day, its bus information for passengers was streets ahead of nearly everywhere else. Others have caught up since, but I'm not sure whether that was driven by the local transport authorities or by the operators.
Some overheads have increased at an above-inflation rate, others have increased at a below-inflation rate. It’s certainly not an exact science, but when the Tyne and Wear Day Rover price increased by more than 100% in real terms it is abundantly clear that someone is extracting the Michael. And by someone I specifically mean Huntley and Conroy.
Yes, but the majority of overheads have increased by much more than inflation. It isn't like it evens out as you seem to suggest. Fuel has increased much more than CPI, so has insurance. That you might be able to source uniforms a bit cheaper is chicken feed.
It should also be noted that bus companies managed to obtain decent margins not by fleecing customers, as you seem to think, but through driving through efficiencies, selling off assets etc. Northern had a depot at Wallsend for about 30 vehicles... It was 2.5 miles from Percy Main. That's crazy, and that sort of inefficiency was commonplace before deregulation. United had two depots in Newcastle when they could be accommodated in one. Then you have the legions of back office staff, and facilities that were from a different age. Souter is often quoted as saying that many companies he bought were so poorly set up, they didn't know if/how they made money, wasted money on non-core activities, and maintained facilities like central works where the cost of an engine rebuild was much more expensive than getting a third party specialist in to do things.
In fact, I look back at the 1970s and 1980s and wonder if the bus industry had faced into those questions and others, could the massive drop in passengers in that period been staunched?
Things have changed. What I was railing against was the bus industry creaming off billions in the time of plenty and the expecting the taxpayer to pick up the bill in the time of famine. That’s not business, that’s privatising profit and nationalising losses. Something we see a lot of from privatised industries- look at the water industry.
In simple terms, if Stagecoach are about to go bust that should not be a taxpayer problem, that should be an Ann Gloag problem. She could always sell her castle.
Except it is a tax payer problem, much as a failing bank is. Stagecoach and others made money in the good times, and whilst in Stagecoach's case it went, in part, to the two founders, it also went to pension funds and institutional investors. All very good to say let them fail... bit different when it actually does happen? There are many instances where businesses go under and we don't feel the need to intervene as, quite simply, the failure doesn't create hardship (if Wilko goes bust, you shop at B&M) or the impact is limited (bad for the former Wilko staff but generally limited to them).
In the case of bus companies, I'm fairly certain that when plotting out their strategy and undertaking SWOT and PEST analysis, global pandemic didn't appear on their radar. They were all in a massive commercial problem, and remember, there was aid for publicly owned TfL, as well as the whole hospitality industry. In fact, the whole economy was being propped up.
The reality of business is that they are dependant on share holder funds to grow, floating on the stock exchange. Those investors want a return on their money; they aren't going to expect companies to retain those funds on the off chance of a once in a lifetime event.
The bus industry is shocking at serving anything out of town. You could tell Stagecoach, 'put a bus from here, to here, we will guarantee you 70 paying passengers' and they will happily turn it down. The only time anyone wants to serve out of town employers is if the trips are fully funded, they want the business to fund the trips and then they want the revenue too. Out of town retail I've seen a number of cuts 'to improve reliability' which is funny as it's such backwards logic. Buses get delayed serving a large retail park the best option is to remove the buses, not to get more people onto those buses! I know councils and the retail parks don't help this at all but it's such backwards logic.
That said, I know there was a situation in St Helens though when I spoke to the operator and the land owner (Langtree) demanded Merseytravel and the bus operator to pay "extortionate fees" to have a bus stop on their land which is also just as backwards and so to this day, the large Tesco Extra in St Helens, has no bus (Source for this claim is in my emails, not an online source)
Massive generalisations and whilst there's examples to support your view, I can think of many other examples that don't. I also know a number of senior Stagecoach managers and they would happily say yes.
The fact is that you have these alleged honeypots to out of town distribution parks and even when they are funded by employers/property firms, look at the loadings. Take somewhere like Pineham in Northampton (that I know well as I worked on a project there) that has some large employers like Morrisons, Sainsburys, Carlsberg among others. The Sainsbury's one is the largest with about 600 staff but that's over a 24/7 period. How many are on site at any one time? Where do they live, and what are the traffic flows? How do you get the critical mass required when you have people living in disparate locations? How many are actually car sharing?
For retail parks, it is slightly different but often it is case that developers (and local authorities don't push back on this) prioritise the car user as they simply spend more money per capita. They also want to get max return on the land so things like access for buses is painful. One example mentioned before was Arnison Centre in Durham, which is served by the main 21, the local 64 and the Langley Park service (20) that runs through from Sunderland. On the run up to Christmas, it is appalling for buses to get in/out, and this is a place that IS well served by buses.
That may be the case in the smaller unitary authorities and shire counties but the big city transport authorities with mayors impose a levy on each of the component district based on population. Birmingham has gone "bust" but is still going to pay what is expected of them in terms of TfWM funding. Wolverhampton and Coventry shouldn't suffer because of mismanagement in Birmingham. Capital investment relies almost entirely on central government. Greater Manchester bus franchising wouldn't have happened without it.
Central government now knows it has to fund buses more directly and fare capping is a clear indication of that.
You clearly haven't experience working with government or can't readily compare it with the public sector. The level of bureaucracy and lack of expertise in our public sector (having been lost to hollowing out of local authorities) is evident.
Also, fare capping has nothing to do with central government knowing that it has to fund buses. If it were, there would be a long term funding package put together over many years. Instead, it goes to the next election which is the bigger clue.
Apologies - I know the 36 route has been tweaked but it is substantially the same. It's not as if it is now diverted round Lead Lane in Ripon or Jennyfield in Harrogate, unlike many inter-urban services that get diverted to replace a local service.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
There's a big danger of assuming that nothing would have changed if deregulation had never occurred and that the municipal and nationalised bus companies were somehow incapable of innovation.
I'd counter that there was little evidence in much of the country of innovation from the nationalised and municipal companies. My local NBC operator's innovation in the period in the 1970s/early 1980s was a move to autumn gold moquette in about 1982 from brown vinyl, and the introduction of Almex A ticket machines (but only to some depots - others retained Setright until after dereg).
Aside from Tyne and Wear, I'm struggling to think of much innovation except stuff like Tracline 65 guided bus in Birmingham, the spin-off from the Metro in T&W etc, and perhaps some of the ticketing moves in the Metropolitan counties.
Yes, but the majority of overheads have increased by much more than inflation. It isn't like it evens out as you seem to suggest. Fuel has increased much more than CPI, so has insurance. That you might be able to source uniforms a bit cheaper is chicken feed.
Fuel is up, but driver wages are down. From what was a very well paid job in the 1970s, bus driving is now barely any more highly remunerated than stacking shelves in Tesco.
It should also be noted that bus companies managed to obtain decent margins not by fleecing customers, as you seem to think, but through driving through efficiencies, selling off assets etc
Initially, yes, but that mostly raised the capital for the big companies to fund their further acquisitions.
It wasn’t the shareholders who pumped the capital in. Stagecoach asset-stripped a bus company and then used the proceeds to buy another one. So did Badgerline, so did Cowie, so did Yorkshire Rider. Entrepreneurial spirit my foot.
Operational profit was about cutting costs and jacking up fares. Nothing wrong with either of those things in moderation, of course, but when it results in it costing £18 for a couple to get public transport to the big shopping centre then something is badly out of whack.
I think Newcastle Busways in the 2000s was all about cutting corners and ramping up fares, which is why they were making 20%+ margin. Double deckers replaced with single deckers and to hell with the overcrowding, schedules tightened and to hell with the delays. Repeated above-inflation fare rises. Grim grim grim. I lived 20 yards from the bus stop and I worked in the centre of Newcastle but the second I could buy a car I did.
My antipathy towards Stagecoach comes from my experiences of relying on Busways to commute to work from Newburn in the west end of Newcastle- 45 minute waits for a 22 which (allegedly) ran every 10 minutes were not uncommon.
Obviously I don’t like Souter’s politics but that’s irrelevant to the company- I don’t like the politics of Tim Martin or Simon Wolfson either, but that doesn’t affect my opinion of Wetherspoon or Next.
It’s pretty much impossible to play what-if. The single biggest innovation in the last 25 years- Oyster- was driven entirely by the public sector. Go Ahead were still messing around with dodgy magstripe cards for bus season tickets in the north east long after London had moved to smartcards.
In fairness, First trialed them in Bradford- and even trialed Busmiles loyalty card points in the same scheme- but, as always, did a half-arsed job and wandered off bored half way through.
I think things would have naturally improved as the NBC would undoubtedly have stopped being tied to Leyland.
The NBC managers became the privatised bus managers, after all, unless you’re seriously trying to claim that someone like Moir Lockhead was a complete dunderhead when he was employed by the council but magically became an amazing innovative entrepreneur the second he bought GRT off the council.
British Rail in the late 80s/early 90s had moved on. Municipal operators in places like Hamburg are on a level, if not ahead, in terms of on-board comfort.
For all the wibble about Arriva Sapphire/MAX or Stagecoach Gold, it was still an Esteban Civic in a 2+2 layout. The buses where I lived in Muswell Hill, supposedly all crappy TfL spec crappiness, had Esteban Civics in a 2+2 layout. I don’t see where this fabled innovation is. Maybe it’s because Arriva specified their seats in vinyl- sorry, “E-Leather”.
Fuel is up, but driver wages are down. From what was a very well paid job in the 1970s, bus driving is now barely any more highly remunerated than stacking shelves in Tesco.
Initially, yes, but that mostly raised the capital for the big companies to fund their further acquisitions.
It wasn’t the shareholders who pumped the capital in. Stagecoach asset-stripped a bus company and then used the proceeds to buy another one. So did Badgerline, so did Cowie, so did Yorkshire Rider. Entrepreneurial spirit my foot.
Operational profit was about cutting costs and jacking up fares. Nothing wrong with either of those things in moderation, of course, but when it results in it costing £18 for a couple to get public transport to the big shopping centre then something is badly out of whack.
I think Newcastle Busways in the 2000s was all about cutting corners and ramping up fares, which is why they were making 20%+ margin. Double deckers replaced with single deckers and to hell with the overcrowding, schedules tightened and to hell with the delays. Repeated above-inflation fare rises. Grim grim grim. I lived 20 yards from the bus stop and I worked in the centre of Newcastle but the second I could buy a car I did.
My antipathy towards Stagecoach comes from my experiences of relying on Busways to commute to work from Newburn in the west end of Newcastle- 45 minute waits for a 22 which (allegedly) ran every 10 minutes were not uncommon.
Obviously I don’t like Souter’s politics but that’s irrelevant to the company- I don’t like the politics of Tim Martin or Simon Wolfson either, but that doesn’t affect my opinion of Wetherspoon or Next.
It’s pretty much impossible to play what-if. The single biggest innovation in the last 25 years- Oyster- was driven entirely by the public sector. Go Ahead were still messing around with dodgy magstripe cards for bus season tickets in the north east long after London had moved to smartcards.
In fairness, First trialed them in Bradford- and even trialed Busmiles loyalty card points in the same scheme- but, as always, did a half-arsed job and wandered off bored half way through.
I think things would have naturally improved as the NBC would have stopped being tied to Leyland. British Rail in the late 80s/early 90s had moved on. Municipal operators in places like Hamburg are on a level, if not ahead, in terms of on-board comfort.
For all the wibble about Arriva Sapphire/MAX or Stagecoach Gold, it was still an Esteban Civic in a 2+2 layout. The buses where I lived in Muswell Hill, supposedly all crappy TfL spec crappiness, had Esteban Civics in a 2+2 layout. I don’t see where this fabled innovation is. Maybe it’s because Arriva specified their seats in vinyl- sorry, “E-Leather”.
I travelled on a Harrogate 36 to Leeds Bus Stn, then a 110 to Wakefield. Both premium routes, I would have thought. But the quality of the Arriva Max compared to the bus on the 36 was miles apart. The Arriva offering was dirty inside, the fittings were all scuffed, no USB, no announcements of stops. Maybe they should bring the trams back between Leeds and Wakey!
It’s pretty much impossible to play what-if. The single biggest innovation in the last 25 years- Oyster- was driven entirely by the public sector. Go Ahead were still messing around with dodgy magstripe cards for bus season tickets in the north east long after London had moved to smartcards.
In fairness, First trialed them in Bradford- and even trialed Busmiles loyalty card points in the same scheme- but, as always, did a half-arsed job and wandered off bored half way through.
The post-1986 operators even rolled back on ticket innovations such as the Almex card cancellation machines used in Greater Manchester and West Yorkshire, giving 10 trips for the price of 7/8/9 or 12 for the price of 10. So not only did that mean an automatic fare rise of 11% to 42% but also meant more cash payments to the driver.
Having travelled fairly extensively in Germany, much of it on local public transport, I think I can confidently say that their seat comfort is generally a bit lower than it is in GB! Hard plastic seats are not uncommon. Information systems are generally much better, as is the reality of integrated transport and comprehensible fare structures.
The Transdev 36 buses are genuinely nice pieces of kit- upstairs, anyway. Downstairs is still the Esteban Civic on 2+2. Credit where it’s due on the 36.
I’m not sure what you mean? Nicer seats and that they use the Citaro rather than a bag of spanners such as the StreetLite? The buses of the Hamburger Hochbahn or the Berlin BVG are just nicer than most of ours.
They don’t tend to use plastic seats. They’re often the standard Citaro low-backed seats rather than the standard Citaro high backed seats, but that’s about it. Rural areas and smaller cities will see more variation, and more plastic. I’ve not really travelled outside the main cities in Germany.
And, in the interests of balance, you go to rural France or Austria, or places like Ibiza, and it’s fair to say they’re not as nice as ours.
Having travelled fairly extensively in Germany, much of it on local public transport, I think I can confidently say that their seat comfort is generally a bit lower than it is in GB! Hard plastic seats are not uncommon. Information systems are generally much better, as is the reality of integrated transport and comprehensible fare structures.
I was driving old buses in 1985 that were smoother and more comfortable than most modern UK buses are now. Take any decent Bristol RE, the build quality is way better than a modern Streetlite..
The big operators choose to have buses that bang and rattle, suspension that doesn't exist, gearboxes that change up and down like a shuggy boat, boiling hot in summer, freezing cold in winter.
Just a quick reminder that this thread was set up to discuss "Deregulation and the Passenger Experience". Please bear this in mind when posting. Thanks
I was driving old buses in 1985 that were smoother and more comfortable than most modern UK buses are now. Take any decent Bristol RE, the build quality is way better than a modern Streetlite..
The big operators choose to have buses that bang and rattle, suspension that doesn't exist, gearboxes that change up and down like a shuggy boat, boiling hot in summer, freezing cold in winter.
Hang fire... I remember travelling on plenty of bad REs. The glass plate behind the driver that used to rattle like a machine gun, or sliding windows wedged shut with a screwed up ticket. What about VRs that were awash on the bottom deck as there was water ingress through the rear wheel arches, or were warm on the bottom deck but freezing upstairs? Nationals where your feet were cold but your head had a sweat, and let's not forget about the fantastic, uplifting interiors... In fact, the caption for this photo mentions that the NBC moved from this spec to another called Spice Brown, a harder wearing, colder and more uncomfortable experience. The early Leyland Nationals with their insufficient anti roll bars, Bristol LHs - what can you say about them other than spartan.
Not saying that I've not experienced bad modern vehicles - I hated the Arriva Daf Prestiges, the urban 90 seats and First's rockhard seats (esp on B7Ls) are notable ones to my mind - but let's not think it was some halcyon era of unsurpassed quality.
Just a quick reminder that this thread was set up to discuss "Deregulation and the Passenger Experience". Please bear this in mind when posting. Thanks
I think bus quality and the purchasing decisions of the bus operators post deregulation is a very significant part of the "mix" - it isnt all about fares, frequency and routes.
What about all the bread vans beloved of operators in the 1980s and the purchase of large numbers of life expired double deckers?
For that matter what about the Routemasters used by Strathtay? and Routemaster Bournemouth with conductors to name but two
Fuel is up, but driver wages are down. From what was a very well paid job in the 1970s, bus driving is now barely any more highly remunerated than stacking shelves in Tesco.
Hang on - you're conflating things. It is one thing to say that compared to retail, the value of drivers has declined, rather than the overall impact on costs.
If you look at what a driver was paid in Darlington in 1986 compared to now, the hourly rate is very slightly below. Of course, the real change has been the reduction to stuff like minimum hours payments, paid breaks etc. Many aspects, such as early start payments, late premiums etc was actually changed ahead of and in readiness for de-reg. Much more pertinent was the stripping out of back office costs and middle management - partly through technology, partly through getting read of non jobs, partly through pulling out of activities like coaching.
It's really telling to see how bus company margins declined from the mid 2000s. The fact was that the easy benefits of cashing in on property and cutting costs had been done.
Initially, yes, but that mostly raised the capital for the big companies to fund their further acquisitions.
It wasn’t the shareholders who pumped the capital in. Stagecoach asset-stripped a bus company and then used the proceeds to buy another one. So did Badgerline, so did Cowie, so did Yorkshire Rider. Entrepreneurial spirit my foot.
Operational profit was about cutting costs and jacking up fares. Nothing wrong with either of those things in moderation, of course, but when it results in it costing £18 for a couple to get public transport to the big shopping centre then something is badly out of whack.
I think Newcastle Busways in the 2000s was all about cutting corners and ramping up fares, which is why they were making 20%+ margin. Double deckers replaced with single deckers and to hell with the overcrowding, schedules tightened and to hell with the delays. Repeated above-inflation fare rises. Grim grim grim. I lived 20 yards from the bus stop and I worked in the centre of Newcastle but the second I could buy a car I did.
My antipathy towards Stagecoach comes from my experiences of relying on Busways to commute to work from Newburn in the west end of Newcastle- 45 minute waits for a 22 which (allegedly) ran every 10 minutes were not uncommon.
Obviously I don’t like Souter’s politics but that’s irrelevant to the company- I don’t like the politics of Tim Martin or Simon Wolfson either, but that doesn’t affect my opinion of Wetherspoon or Next.
Give over. They bought a load of bus companies that were horrifically inefficient, and in many cases, commercial basket cases. Take Greater Manchester Transport - ahead of deregulation (i.e. Feb 1986), they were able to close three depots at a stroke. Wasting money for years.
Yes, those share offerings were used to fund acquisitions. That is where the share dividends went - I'm not certain what your point is?
Stagecoach did essentially pay for Hampshire Bus by selling Southampton bus station. However, they were still borrowing money in the first instance, and were investing in new vehicles in 1989 (which many weren't doing) as well as buying firms. That is what capitalism is.
As for Stagecoach buying Busways, it was apparent to Eric Hutchinson that Busways could not undertake the fleet replacement it needed to make. Remember that the staff not only sold their shares to Stagecoach but they also later accepted a buy out of their terms and conditions. I lived in Newcastle at the time and remember that whilst the 1 had newish Scanias, the 38/39/40 was operated by Atlanteans that were 15 years old or more. Oh, and it should be said that Busways before Stagecoach bought many more single deckers than doubles - aside from the 10 Scanias and 10 (?) Olympians for Sunderland, they bought only some newish secondhand Olympians ex Bexleybus. All the rest were singles - Lynxes, N113/PS, Darts plus a preponderance of old REs. In fact, the first thing Stagecoach did was to order 40 Olympians!
In fact, it is actually fair to say that the post de-reg world saw minibuses initially before firms began buying many more single decks, so hardly confined to Stagecoach who actually bought more deckers than most. Remember West Midlands buying 250 Lynxes? How about London Buses (Centrewest) replacing Routemasters with Merc 811s? Mind you, that was nothing new - remember that in the 1970s, many operators were faced with replacing crew operated deckers. Trade union agreements were often difficult so that either deckers were banned as one man (!) vehicles, which is why United on Teesside had so few deckers. In other areas, like Bristol, they were only permitted with massive supplements to drivers, which is why the standee single decker appeared in such numbers.
It’s pretty much impossible to play what-if. The single biggest innovation in the last 25 years- Oyster- was driven entirely by the public sector. Go Ahead were still messing around with dodgy magstripe cards for bus season tickets in the north east long after London had moved to smartcards.
In fairness, First trialed them in Bradford- and even trialed Busmiles loyalty card points in the same scheme- but, as always, did a half-arsed job and wandered off bored half way through.
I think things would have naturally improved as the NBC would undoubtedly have stopped being tied to Leyland.
The NBC managers became the privatised bus managers, after all, unless you’re seriously trying to claim that someone like Moir Lockhead was a complete dunderhead when he was employed by the council but magically became an amazing innovative entrepreneur the second he bought GRT off the council.
British Rail in the late 80s/early 90s had moved on. Municipal operators in places like Hamburg are on a level, if not ahead, in terms of on-board comfort.
For all the wibble about Arriva Sapphire/MAX or Stagecoach Gold, it was still an Esteban Civic in a 2+2 layout. The buses where I lived in Muswell Hill, supposedly all crappy TfL spec crappiness, had Esteban Civics in a 2+2 layout. I don’t see where this fabled innovation is. Maybe it’s because Arriva specified their seats in vinyl- sorry, “E-Leather”.
The National Bus Company was so prescriptive, it stifled innovation.
It took someone like Harry Blundred to suggest the experiment with minibuses in Exeter, and that because he argued the threat of deregulation and what they'd seen in the trial areas. Many of the leading dereg figures - Roger French, James Freeman, etc were NBC graduates who were hamstrung by what they had to deal with.
As for Moir Lockhead... well, I think you already know my view of him
An interesting question is how we go into this era of regulation without losing at least some level of innovation. Over on t'railway LNER seems to have managed a combination of being nationalised and being innovative (even though that innovation isn't to everyone's taste). But I don't think Transport for Greater Manchester or Merseytravel really have much of that culture, while Transport for London do but only in specific ways.
On the other hand, there's relatively little innovation takes place in the big groups either. There was at dereg, but there isn't now.
One of the reasons why bus patronage tanked in the 1960s and esp 1970s was because service reliability was appalling. That was partly because of related industrial relations issues - strikes at suppliers meant extended delivery times so that elderly vehicles had to soldier on for longer, and when they failed, there were a shortage of spares. However, there were also massive staff shortages with platform staff and engineering staff; Hants & Dorset notably struggled in Fareham/Eastleigh because of the large Ford plant simply outpaid them.
By the early 80s, that had changed because of the mass unemployment of the time. 1.5m in 1975, 3.2m in 1985, and what that allowed was the introduction of large scale minibus networks in many provincial towns. That was one of the main features of the deregulated era - staff being employed on minibus rates, typically 80% of the conventional hourly rate.
A partial recovery was followed by another recession in the early 1990s, yet an unemployment rate of 10.35% in 1991 was less than half that in 2001 https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/GBR/united-kingdom/unemployment-rate. With dereg era minibuses requiring replacement, disability legislation promoting a move to more expensive and larger vehicles, and fewer available staff, it led to an increase in wages overall and rendered the high frequency minibus model largely redundant
I like how everyone compares London to the Provinces. The same city that has brought congestion and ULEZ charging. The price of a parking permit makes it uneconomical to own a car. My mates van permit has gone up to £1020 a year in Islington.
I like how everyone compares London to the Provinces. The same city that has brought congestion and ULEZ charging. The price of a parking permit makes it uneconomical to own a car. My mates van permit has gone up to £1020 a year in Islington.
You might have a point regarding central/inner London but outer London is a different beast where car use is the norm. The effect of ULEZ is hugely exaggerated by the media.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
