English bus usage continues to fall (in most places)

[Mojo]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-35244393

The number of bus passenger journeys has fallen in two-thirds of English council areas over the past six years, prompting concern over funding cuts and fare hikes.

BBC News found that out of 89 transport authority areas, just 29 reported a rise in the number of passenger trips.

Campaigners blamed government cuts and said there was a "danger of whole networks of bus services being lost".

The government said it was investing £250m into bus services this year.
The biggest percentage drop was in Redcar and Cleveland where figures showed 27% fewer bus journeys made in 2014-15 compared with 2009-10.

It meant numbers were down from 5.7 to 4.1 million journeys, according to official Department for Transport figures.

However, the figures reveal vast differences across the country. West Berkshire has recorded a 44% rise in bus journeys over the same period while Poole saw a 39% increase and North Somerset a 30% rise. London's bus use has also risen by just under 6%.
Meanwhile, bus fares have continued to rise.

In the West Midlands, bus company National Express imposed a 10p price hike on a single adult fare at the start of January, when figures showed diesel prices were at a six-year low.

Bus journeys across Birmingham, the Black Country, Coventry and Solihull have fallen from 294 million journeys in 2010-11 to 275 million in 2014-15, while the fare has gone from £1.80 to £2.30.

A National Express West Midlands spokeswoman said a quarter of passengers, such as those using smartcards or daysaver tickets had seen their fares frozen, while the company was also investing £4m in new buses.

"Fuel makes up a fairly small percentage of National Express' costs," she said.
She said the largest cost came from wages, and the company was proud to have recently become a Living Wage employer.

The spokeswoman added: "Like many companies, National Express buys its fuel a long time in advance. This enables us to plan ahead, smooth out costs and not be affected by every price fluctuation at the pumps."

The company said cheaper petrol, online shopping and the decline of the high street may have contributed to the decline.

(more on link above...)

And yet Government still makes it hard to invest in quality urban public transportation, but still allows local authorities to chuck money at nasty busway schemes :roll:

 

[Bletchleyite]

And yet Government still makes it hard to invest in quality urban public transportation, but still allows local authorities to chuck money at nasty busway schemes :roll:

They will never crack that one until they realise, as I've said on another thread, that the competition is the car. While I overall favour a German approach to these things with a more regulated setup, as a secondary option I think we could make the existing system better by exempting all providers of land public transport from competition regulation. One system, even if a cartel, is in my view almost always superior to petty spats, while competition only really improves service in areas of very high demand. Yet the law presently near enough prevents operators working together to integrate services better.

 

[northwichcat]

If services are cut then it's not surprising that bus usage falls. If the direct bus from A to B no longer exists then it's probably faster in a lot of cases to use the train via C opposed to change buses, even if the route is more direct by bus.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If services are cut then it's not surprising that bus usage falls. If the direct bus from A to B no longer exists then it's probably faster in a lot of cases to use the train via C opposed to change buses, even if the route is more direct by bus.

And the railway, for all people say about it, generally keeps improving. If people can afford the higher fares, the train often makes more sense than it did.

 

[deltic]

And the railway, for all people say about it, generally keeps improving. If people can afford the higher fares, the train often makes more sense than it did.

There are not that many cases where rail and bus are actually competing - the vast majority of bus trips are in urban areas with no alternative rail service. Bus use has stayed high in London because car ownership is low, fares are cheap and for many users free and the population is rapidly growing.

 

[northwichcat]

And the railway, for all people say about it, generally keeps improving. If people can afford the higher fares, the train often makes more sense than it did.

Well in areas where multi-operator tickets aren't available or you cross a boundary you might have to finish up buying 2 x £5 tickets to make a return journey using 2 different bus operators so the railway may be cheaper or around the same price.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well in areas where multi-operator tickets aren't available or you cross a boundary you might have to finish up buying 2 x £5 tickets to make a return journey using 2 different bus operators so the railway may be cheaper or around the same price.

Often buses are cheaper for a single journey but trains for a return journey due to the heavy discount on CDRs.

 

[Mojo]

Often buses are cheaper for a single journey but trains for a return journey due to the heavy discount on CDRs.

Indeed. This seems particularly prevalent in the West Midlands, amongst other places. Kings Norton to Birmingham for example is £2.60 single but £2.90 CDR. West Midlands charge £2.20 single and for a return after 9.30am you'd buy a £4 offpeak day pass.

 

[overthewater]

Its also because the bus has failed to keep up with the new economy. If bus companies dont provide buses to where people want to work of shop then what do you expect?

 

[SteveHFC]

Or, as in my case, there is an appropriate bus service - but it's so unreliable due to a high number of breakdowns and a timetable that makes no allowance for normal peak traffic - that as soon as I get a car again, I'll be reverting to that.

 

[ryan125hst]

Is there any wonder when they reduce the level of service or remove routes all together! I'm lucky in that both my parents have a car so we don't need to rely on buses. For those they do, the service seems to be getting worse. While the Ordsall circular and services to Worksop is quite frequent, other services seem to get a bus every couple of hours if they're lucky. I'm sure some became dial-a-ride as well recently, although I don't know if that's since been changed.

My mate commuted from Worksop to Retford to go to school and the merging of the bus routes on that service meant that his journey times were longer and services less frequent. I think they changed it again after we left sixth form as he ended up getting there a bit later then he'd planned on results day owning to another reduction in service.

The Retford to Newark via Tuxford route has also been altered. It used to pass the top of my estate but hasn't for a while (that could be due to the building of a new bridge at Elksley mind). The replacement runs every couple of hours via a different route and another bus company runs an hourly service. However, from what my Grandparents (who frequently use this route as they've never learnt to drive), it takes longer than it used to and goes around the villages. I think the hourly service (operated by Marshall's) is alright, but the less frequent service operated by Travel Wright takes ages (I think I've got the operators the right way around!). The Sunday service was cut back as well (I think it has been withdrawn- sorry my knowledge is a bit patchy- as I say, I don't use the buses and I don't know as much about them as I do trains ).

So while cities generally benefit from a frequent service with modern buses fitted with WiFi (e.g. Sheffield), the rest of the country is seeing cutbacks. The council's and bus companies will probably say it's due to decreasing passenger numbers, but if they had a frequent service with modern buses, it might be more useful to people and passenger numbers might go up. That's my theory anyway.

 

[jon0844]

And the railway, for all people say about it, generally keeps improving. If people can afford the higher fares, the train often makes more sense than it did.

The train is cheaper for me (albeit with a railcard, but there's no such thing for local buses) than the bus. Without a railcard, it's still cheaper but more comparable.

Buses here are also decimated on Sunday now, yet we have some services funded by the council until 6.30pm - which is pretty useless for me as if I'm going out and plan to return later, I can't get back. So I don't go by bus when it does run!

I am not surprised that if you cut funding and buses stop running, usage goes down.

 

[ashworth]

Bus travel is still usually ok if you are travelling within a large city or within major urban areas, and as others have already said if multi operator tickets are available. It's also often a reasonable service if you happen to live in village on the principle direct route running between two major cities.

Outside the major urban areas, even in and to/from quite large market towns, very often there are no buses after 6pm and no service at all on a Sunday or at Bank Holidays. Whole areas of most counties in the UK are now are in this situation. I live in a village that has a fairly well used hourly service during the day but has lost its evening and Sunday service. Therefore if I have to go somewhere where there is a possibility that I might not quite manage to get the last bus home I use the car.
I've been on holiday in various areas of the UK but have not been able to use the buses for days out for that same reason. The last buses can often leave as early as 4pm so that they can complete their journey and get back to the garage by approx. 6pm. You do not risk setting off by bus for a day out if there is a danger that you are going to be stranded somewhere as early as 5pm and not able to get back.

It's not really the fault of the bus companies. Local authorities are having to make cut backs and it's the subsidised services in the evenings and on Sunday's that are being cut. I think it will get worse over the next few years.

Again in major urban areas, especially where multi operator tickets are available, I usually find bus fares quite good value, especially if you are using a multi journey day ticket. However, once you leave the urban areas or stray off a principle route the fares can rise at an alarming rate. Many of these services on these routes, although busy during the day, are only really used by people travelling using concessions. I sometimes feel that I am the only person paying! Certainly on my local route fare paying passengers have almost been priced off the buses and it is certainly cheaper to drive to the local rail stations and use the train. The buses are being well used by those travelling on concessions during the day but probably one of the reasons why our evening buses were cut is that elderly people tend not to travel so much after dark.

One question I would like to ask.
How are the bus companies paid for all the free concessionary journeys?
Is there just a standard amount that they receive for each concessionary journey or if it is a rural route with high fares do they receive a larger amount?
Do they get paid more from this source each time there is a fare rise?
What I'm getting at is, are some bus companies putting up fares to a high level on some of these less profitable routes, used by lots of concessionary travellers, so that they get more money. The fares on my local route suddenly rise to a ridiculously high level once it turns off the main road and there is no longer any competition along that section of the route.

 

[W-on-Sea]

Interesting to see the 44% increase in usage in West Berkshire, which isn't far from me -as that is mostly a rural, and mostly wealthy, area (the childhood home of both the Middletons and David Cameron....) - it is from a low base. And even now the bus services there are far from extensive.

Would be really interesting to know whether the growth is due to careful management of the subsidised services, or on the (relatively limited) commercial services. But if such an increase in bus usage can occur in what really could reasonably be expected to be unpromising territory for bus services....surely there are lessons that could be applied elsewhere, too?

 

[radamfi]

Personally, I'm more interested in total non-car usage. If people are switching from buses to bikes, trams or walking, that's OK. For example, if more people are living in city centre apartments then they will have little need for buses. If people are working from home instead of getting the bus, that's also not a problem.

It people are using buses because they have no car available, that's not of great interest to me, because they are essentially captive. Some people maybe buying cars because of a poor bus service, but probably not that many. In the 80s and 90s, car ownership in the UK was quite low compared to most of mainland Europe despite lower patronage in the UK, but that gap has closed due to the UK catching up the the rest of Europe economically. I'm therefore particularly interested in the number of people leaving the car at home.

The distance driven per capita has been falling for a number of years, so the fall in bus patronage doesn't appear to be accompanied by increased car use. Indeed, licence holding has decreased markedly for the under 30s. The proportion of men in their 20s with a driving licence is now lower than in the 1970s.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/457752/nts2014-01.pdf

This trend cannot be explained by economic recession as the trend existed before and after the economic downturn. This has perplexed transport academics as until then, traffic had increased in tandem with GDP. Various theories have been put as to why young people, in particular, are driving so much less. One hypothesis is that young people see cars as "old technology" and are more interested in modern gadgets like iPhones than learning to drive. Young people are more likely to live near city centres where car ownership and use can be more of a hindrance than a help.

It will be interesting to see whether the current falls in petrol price will change this trend. We've already had significant improvements in engine efficiency so you could argue that fuel costs don't seem to made much difference up to now.

Interesting to see the 44% increase in usage in West Berkshire, which isn't far from me -as that is mostly a rural, and mostly wealthy, area (the childhood home of both the Middletons and David Cameron....) - it is from a low base. And even now the bus services there are far from extensive.

Would be really interesting to know whether the growth is due to careful management of the subsidised services, or on the (relatively limited) commercial services. But if such an increase in bus usage can occur in what really could reasonably be expected to be unpromising territory for bus services....surely there are lessons that could be applied elsewhere, too?

I wouldn't get too excited about West Berkshire. Download the spreadsheet of local bus passengers by local authority area:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/464187/bus0110.xls

In 2014/5, there were 21.4 passengers per person in West Berkshire compared to an average in England of 85.6. In school marking terminology, they have gone from a F to an E+. I'm more interested in places that are consistently good, even if they occasionally slip from an A+ to an A-. Someone at school going from a grade F to a grade C would be called 'very improved', and might even get more plaudits than the person who always got a grade A.

You do have to be careful when comparing some of the unitary authorities to the traditional shire counties, especially when boundaries are drawn in a particular way. So with these statistics, you often get publicity showing how well Nottingham or Brighton are doing.

For example, Nottingham often does well (or badly) in various surveys because the local authority (City of Nottingham) only covers the urban core of what most people would think of as Nottingham. Even Trent Bridge and Nottingham Forest football ground are not in Nottingham proper. So it does well in bus usage lists and badly in crime lists. As it happens, most people would agree that Nottingham does have a much better than average service than most other places in England, but the statistics are magnified due to Nottingham's tightly drawn boundaries. Bus usage in the outer areas of 'Nottingham' not covered by the city council may be lower.

Other areas that have famously high patronage don't show up in these statistics because they are not unitary authorities. For example, Oxford is part of Oxfordshire and Oxfordshire has a below average per capita bus usage.

What is noteworthy is that the former PTE areas have a per capita usage between 69.3 and 107.4, and so aren't much different to the average of 85.6. No wonder there is such a demand for regulatory change in these areas. Although increased rail and metro usage may be having an impact on bus use here.

 

[northwichcat]

Its also because the bus has failed to keep up with the new economy. If bus companies dont provide buses to where people want to work of shop then what do you expect?

Both operators and councils are guilty of that. In my area there was an infrequent Knutsford to Warrington bus service which had no suitably timed journeys for commuting meaning it was only suitable for leisure activities. Passenger numbers dropped as a result of the recession and the bus service got withdrawn. When it was suggested that a better timed service (one which allowed people to use it to get to and from work) might be more successful both the local operators and councils seemed uninterested. The operators are more interested in running duplicate services on routes where they know there's a lot of demand, while the councils seem reluctant to start new subsided services, even when it involves withdrawing an existing subsided service which there isn't still demand for and replacing it with a potentially more useful one.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

yet we have some services funded by the council until 6.30pm - which is pretty useless for me as if I'm going out and plan to return later, I can't get back. So I don't go by bus when it does run!

I made precisely that point to Cheshire East council who didn't seem interested despite the fact in the north of their area the trains run to other towns and cities in other council's areas much later than buses which isn't good for businesses in their area when Cheshire East residents are spending their money at restaurants and bars in Trafford, Stockport and Manchester.

 

[jon0844]

Trains come back to Hatfield until 2am on Sunday night/Monday morning so it seems odd that there are buses finishing around 6-6.30pm, and the remaining services run commercially make no attempt to connect to the trains (and have themselves reduced in frequency).

It means that with you could miss a bus and have to wait up to two hours for the next, which means it may as well not be running.

 

[overthewater]

Both operators and councils are guilty of that. In my area there was an infrequent Knutsford to Warrington bus service which had no suitably timed journeys for commuting meaning it was only suitable for leisure activities. Passenger numbers dropped as a result of the recession and the bus service got withdrawn. When it was suggested that a better timed service (one which allowed people to use it to get to and from work) might be more successful both the local operators and councils seemed uninterested. The operators are more interested in running duplicate services on routes where they know there's a lot of demand, while the councils seem reluctant to start new subsided services, even when it involves withdrawing an existing subsided service which there isn't still demand for and replacing it with a potentially more useful one.

Thats why Brain Souter "Kick start" scheme was such a great idea. A Good number of routes under this banner has seen improvements and are still ruining to this day. A few other operates have tried to do the same but have all failed.

 

[edwin_m]

Its also because the bus has failed to keep up with the new economy. If bus companies dont provide buses to where people want to work of shop then what do you expect?

That's an interesting comment because in theory bus companies aren't constrained by infrastructure, so ought to be far more able to vary their service to meet changing demand than rail or tram operators are.

There is however an argument to say this is actually a weakness of the bus. If nobody knows whether the service might change or disappear completely in 56 days time, they probably aren't going to plan a house or job move which relies on a particular bus route. Whereas if there is a train or tram it's pretty unlikely it will disappear.

My view, often expressed on this forum, is that the best public transport networks integrate the modes. So even if your bus only goes to the nearest railway station or tram stop it will offer a quick change to a faster and more reliable rail mode, at no extra fare, to make it quick and easy to travel to most places even if the details of the routes change from time to time.

 

[Busaholic]

The two places I saw with the most increased bus ridership were West Berkshire and Poole and both are places where there there have been some improvements in bus services (although, inevitably, with some cuts too) over that period, and operators trying to make the best of a bad job, given the high levels of car ownership in both places and the general air of affluence accruing to both. How many buses an hour to Sandbanks?!

 

[edwin_m]

Just watching Countryfile reporting on cuts to rural bus services.

 

[overthewater]

Just watching Countryfile reporting on cuts to rural bus services.

Another report in Countryfiles, its becoming a hot topic for them.

 

[radamfi]

The two places I saw with the most increased bus ridership were West Berkshire and Poole and both are places where there there have been some improvements in bus services (although, inevitably, with some cuts too) over that period, and operators trying to make the best of a bad job, given the high levels of car ownership in both places and the general air of affluence accruing to both. How many buses an hour to Sandbanks?!

I'm not that impressed with Poole. The caveat in my earlier post applies here because it is a fully urbanised unitary authority, so that will boost its per capita usage. Despite the advantage of being fully urban, it's per capita usage is still below average.

Car ownership is not really that much of a differentiator between areas like it used to be. Generally speaking, anyone who wants a car can afford one. That's been the case in southern England for over 20 years but the north has now caught up. Availability of parking space at the residence and/or workplace (which is probably less of an issue in the north) and low licence holding among the young are becoming important constraints on car usage and ownership.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The two places I saw with the most increased bus ridership were West Berkshire and Poole and both are places where there there have been some improvements in bus services (although, inevitably, with some cuts too) over that period, and operators trying to make the best of a bad job, given the high levels of car ownership in both places and the general air of affluence accruing to both. How many buses an hour to Sandbanks?!

http://www.morebus.co.uk/service.shtml?serviceid=3922

More buses in the summer

 

[WestCoast]

Indeed. This seems particularly prevalent in the West Midlands, amongst other places. Kings Norton to Birmingham for example is £2.60 single but £2.90 CDR. West Midlands charge £2.20 single and for a return after 9.30am you'd buy a £4 offpeak day pass.

£2.20 single now actually only applies to passengers paying with Swift pay as you go on NX West Midlands services, £2.30 in cash now. I bought a Swift card last week, I'm really not sure what to make of it - you have to ask the driver for a single ticket or a day ticket or Daytripper. There's no capping and you still have to be issued with a paper ticket, so it doesn't save much time. Centro have good intentions, but the smartcard pay as you go function seems a little half baked really. Goodness knows how they'll role it out to to the train.

 

[Via Bank]

Also worth noting that in many places, getting the bus basically hasn't changed since the 70s: you have no idea when the bus will turn up (timetables are routinely out of date, and in any case are useless in case of disruption), you often have no idea how much it's going to cost, you can only pay by cash, and the driver will get a**ey with you if you don't have the money in a suitably convenient denomination (basically impossible if, say, travelling early morning and the local cash machine's only spitting out £20s.)

Fares are also going up, and services (particularly evening and weekend services, which are crucial for leisure passengers, and flexibility for workers who might stay late or be delayed on their connecting train) are declining in many smaller towns.

So is it any wonder bus usage is declining when the bus is (far too often) inconvenient, infrequent or finishing far too early?

 

[radamfi]

timetables are routinely out of date

A good idea would be to have an end date to timetables, like the railway. Ideally, the timetable change dates would correspond to those used by trains. Much of mainland Europe manages with one change date a year. British trains have two change dates so using those plus one bus only change date in the middle of the winter timetable should be enough.

One fare change a year should also suffice. That's what TfL has.

Of course, there are bound to be excuses why the above can't be done, especially because of the existence of deregulation.

 

[northwichcat]

A good idea would be to have an end date to timetables, like the railway. Ideally, the timetable change dates would correspond to those used by trains. Much of mainland Europe manages with one change date a year. British trains have two change dates so using those plus one bus only change date in the middle of the winter timetable should be enough.

One fare change a year should also suffice. That's what TfL has.

Of course, there are bound to be excuses why the above can't be done, especially because of the existence of deregulation.

There would be disadvantages to that as well. As we've seen with trains if a problem occurs following a recast the problem can't usually be fixed until at least the next recast.

 

[341o2]

Another report in Countryfiles, its becoming a hot topic for them.

That is what is happening in my area (the New Forest), every year another round of cuts. Recently Southampton - Lymington from 30 mins to hourly (past Rushington) Lymington to Poole likewise.

Protest meetings arranged regarding the aforeasid cuts.

bus stastion in Lymington closed, formerly you could shelter and get a cuppa when the cafe was open, while waiting for connection.now no shelter

attempt to withdraw Cango service, followed by another suggestion to make it a fixed route throught in order to economise on the call centre

a few extra tourist buses during the height of the season (why do they mostly stop in September)

Ken Livingstone showed how it should be done in the 70's lat night went through my photos of RT's being repreived because of a shortage until his actions were deemed illegal

 

[A0]

The train is cheaper for me (albeit with a railcard, but there's no such thing for local buses) than the bus. Without a railcard, it's still cheaper but more comparable.

Buses here are also decimated on Sunday now, yet we have some services funded by the council until 6.30pm - which is pretty useless for me as if I'm going out and plan to return later, I can't get back. So I don't go by bus when it does run!

I am not surprised that if you cut funding and buses stop running, usage goes down.

Knowing the Hatfield area reasonably well - what level of service are you actually expecting on a Sunday?

There's an hourly service to St Albans & Hemel from 8 in the morning until after 10pm.

There's an hourly service to Stevenage until 6pm then a couple of later journeys (which given this is shadowing the ECML is reasonable).

There's a bi-hourly Green Line to Watford & Heathrow / Hertford & Harlow.

The only 'corridor' which clearly doesn't have a service is that to Luton - and to be fair, the 366 has NEVER had a Sunday service (at least not for the last 35 years). So it's not like that's been cut.