NEXUS take-over ?

[Tetchytyke]

However, I think that all of the bus groups have bought businesses in good faith, all sold by the authorities in the full knowledge of what they were doing. Do you think that people who bought their council houses in good faith should have the ownership of them taken off them because of a change in the regulatory system? Or all of the other state assets that have been sold over the last 30 years?

Remember that BET Group was financially compensated when the government created the NBC in 1968.

But BET Group had their businesses bought by the Government, though. Which is different.

Quality Contracts won't be taking anybody's business, they will simply be restricting access to the market to people who sign up to it. That's not really any different to how it currently is in London: if you don't get a contract in London you can't run a bus, regardless of how big your business is or who sold it to you. Go-Ahead don't get bonus points in the London market because they own London General, for instance.

I don't think Quality Contracts will come in because I don't think Nexus have the money or the skills required to run a regulated TfL-style bus operation. But I hope the threat of a QC will force the likes of Arriva and Stagecoach to up their game.

Busways, in particular, was the under-invested cash-cow that bankrolled more competitive markets for the 12 years I lived in Newcastle. If things have changed in the 18 months since I left then it's long overdue- and credit to Stagecoach for finally putting wifi on their buses- but doesn't get rid of the decade of under-investment.

 

[radamfi]

But I hope the threat of a QC will force the likes of Arriva and Stagecoach to up their game.

I remember the first 'threat' many years ago when Travel West Midlands were perceived as running a poor service in Coventry, so Coventry City Council threatened a QC, back in the days when they were virtually impossible to set up. This led to various improvements, including the creation of the 'Travel Coventry' brand. So the council dropped their threat.

There has been a rerun of this in various other places, but I would guess the bus operators have become wise to this. There's only so many times you can cry wolf before people stop believing you.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

But BET Group had their businesses bought by the Government, though. Which is different.

Quality Contracts won't be taking anybody's business, they will simply be restricting access to the market to people who sign up to it. That's not really any different to how it currently is in London: if you don't get a contract in London you can't run a bus, regardless of how big your business is or who sold it to you. Go-Ahead don't get bonus points in the London market because they own London General, for instance.

Yes but the amounts that were paid by Stagecoach, Go Ahead etc reflected that environment.

QCs will take people's business away from them. Firms in London do lose routes, don't they? So if a TfL style environment came in to T&W, then Arriva could lose something like the 44-46 group of routes. However, I agree - I don't see it happening as Nexus neither have the skills nor the money to do it

In fairness, I did say that Stagecoach didn't invest in T&W for a period (though it wasn't 12 years) when they had their American episode. After the purchase, they did spend quite a lot with a 40 new Olympians, B10Ms and replacing old minis with 709s, and then the introduction of low floor vehicles such as Darts and MANs. Then came the fallow years and I fully get what you're saying - investment stalled. However, as you know, from 2007 there was a substantial fleet investment in Enviro 400s (these are the oldest deckers there) plus e200s and e300s. Yes, there were R reg Darts on some of the less major, suburban routes but that is the same with any business.

 

[Tetchytyke]

QCs will take people's business away from them. Firms in London do lose routes, don't they? So if a TfL style environment came in to T&W, then Arriva could lose something like the 44-46 group of routes. However, I agree - I don't see it happening as Nexus neither have the skills nor the money to do it

They could lose those routes, just as they could lose the many tendered routes that seem to be keeping Jesmond depot going. I don't think that it means a business should be compensated for not meeting the necessary standard for a contract. But it is all pie-in-the-sky, Nexus won't follow thorugh.

Then came the fallow years and I fully get what you're saying - investment stalled.

Investment didn't stall, it regressed. The Tridents were moved away, replaced by T-reg MANs, and the Scanias and step-Darts were kept on major routes far beyond their use-by date (indeed the use of step-Darts was a big reason why Stagecoach lost the Quaylink contract). Capacity on what is now the 39/40 and 62/63 corridors was a nightmare until the E400s arrived in 2007. I've not been back since March but when I was there last the T-reg MANs were still in regular operation on the 30/31, which is not exactly a suburban backwater route.

Things did get better from about 2011 with the last step buses disappearing off the 22, and with it becoming mostly decker-operated. But I don't think that Busways have ever really caught up after the lack of investment from 2000-2008, the overworked 51-plate MANs were in a disgusting state the last time I was there.

 

[ChathillMan]

To be fair to them a lot of street infrastructure improvements needed to be made before they even entertained brand new deckers. Take the number 1. Getting around Heaton with the narrow streets in a step decker was "interesting" as a passenger, never mind as a driver. As soon a changes were made to road layouts the 1 got brand new deckers.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

They could lose those routes, just as they could lose the many tendered routes that seem to be keeping Jesmond depot going. I don't think that it means a business should be compensated for not meeting the necessary standard for a contract. But it is all pie-in-the-sky, Nexus won't follow thorugh.



Investment didn't stall, it regressed. The Tridents were moved away, replaced by T-reg MANs, and the Scanias and step-Darts were kept on major routes far beyond their use-by date (indeed the use of step-Darts was a big reason why Stagecoach lost the Quaylink contract). Capacity on what is now the 39/40 and 62/63 corridors was a nightmare until the E400s arrived in 2007. I've not been back since March but when I was there last the T-reg MANs were still in regular operation on the 30/31, which is not exactly a suburban backwater route.

Things did get better from about 2011 with the last step buses disappearing off the 22, and with it becoming mostly decker-operated. But I don't think that Busways have ever really caught up after the lack of investment from 2000-2008, the overworked 51-plate MANs were in a disgusting state the last time I was there.

Firstly, I agree that nothing will happen with Nexus, but the tendered services are totally different from commercial services. Arriva/Cowie bought those routes with British Bus who in turn bought from Proudmutual who in turn bought them from the government. To remove part of their business without compensation isn't right.

Also, I do agree that Stagecoach's investment stalled and wasn't good enough in the early 2000's. However, there's some areas that you're not being fair on.

The Quaylink services did see step floor Darts, but only because the Nexus owned hybrid junk that was supplied had such jawdropping levels of unreliability. It wasn't for that reason that you suggest that the contract passed to GNE. Nexus knew that the Olympus hybrids were junk and got left with them!

The removal of Tridents was, as you know, a retrograde step but was prompted by the high level of anti-social behaviour. Those got swapped with MANs of a similar vintage (a few months difference of V to T reg) and I didn't agree with it, but it wasn't about age profiles for the fleet. Rather more about avoiding a repeat of a Trident nearly getting torched beyond repair as happened on the Shields Road IIRC.

The 30/31 is something we've discussed before. Loadings are dropped on that route mainly because of empty properties on Montagu Estate but remember, even in the days of Busways in the mid 1990's when the 1 had 5 year old Scanias and the 38-40 had 1986 Olympians, that service still depended on S reg Atlanteans. The T regs have now gone largely, heading to Lincoln to see out their final days.

 

[radamfi]

Arriva/Cowie bought those routes with British Bus who in turn bought from Proudmutual who in turn bought them from the government. To remove part of their business without compensation isn't right.

Do you only consider operators that are directly descended from state owned operators worthy of being compensated? What about long standing independents like John Fishwick and Delaine, who operated as private companies before deregulation?

Of course, there were many small coach firms that started operating buses when they had the opportunity after 1986. There were also large scale deregulation upstarts like the related Bee Line and Zippy operations in south Manchester and Preston. If they were still around today and not bought out, would they qualify?

There are probably a lot of small firms who have only ever operated tendered services, and many more who run mostly tendered services. They would probably welcome the whole network becoming tendered, as long it was route by route tendering rather than area wide tendering.

There are also borderline cases like Stagecoach Oxford, which took over Thames Transit which didn't really exist before deregulation. However, you could argue that it was merely an extension of territory from Devon General, which of course was ex-NBC. Complicated further by the fact that Thames Transit bought out South Midland, formerly part of NBC.

I think there has been so many takeovers, mergers and chopping and changing of territories that making a moral case for compensation because the majority of the bus industry was state owned at one time is pretty lame. Aside from the fact that the privatisations were done so long ago.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Do you only consider operators that are directly descended from state owned operators worthy of being compensated? What about long standing independents like John Fishwick and Delaine, who operated as private companies before deregulation?

I think there has been so many takeovers, mergers and chopping and changing of territories that making a moral case for compensation because the majority of the bus industry was state owned at one time is pretty lame. Aside from the fact that the privatisations were done so long ago.

Fair question. Even if a firm hasn't bought their services from the government in the mists of time, they should be compensated. In fact, there's even more case for it.

For instance, say you're Mark Howarth of Western Greyhound. You've created a business from scratch. You've worked with the public money in terms of subsidy for non commercially sustainable routes but have also taken commercial risks including taking on work discarded by others and created a network far better and with higher frequencies than in regulated days. And you think it's morally right for him to lose that without compensation? The same for Norfolk Green, Konectbus et al.

You mention Oxford. Take the 66 Oxford to Swindon. A service that for years wandered along. Stagecoach worked with Oxfordshire to improve it, with better infrastructure being supported by Stagecoach increasing the frequency with new vehicles. However, Stagecoach have continued to develop it with conversion to Gold deckers from standard singles and a further frequency increase. Yet your thought is to say "well done, you've invested, developed it yet you'll lose that to Heyfordian who've submitted a lower franchise price".

Better transport NEEDS investment and the Nexus plan doesn't deliver that. Now limp along!

 

[radamfi]

It is easy to quote areas where deregulation has been reasonably successful, as they are regularly mentioned by the industry. But the vast majority of people don't live in these areas. That is where action is urgently required. Good areas could be left alone.

However, just because one company is doing a good job now, or at least better than it was done previously, doesn't mean someone else could do a better job. It is hardly unusual in public service procurement for a good performing company to lose a contract.

 

[bussnapperwm]

It's typical of a PTE having ideas above its station...

 

[Kryten2340]

From Go North East and published today.

http://www.simplygo.com/news/go-north-east-urges-the-combined-authority-to-work-in-partnership

Go North East urges the Combined Authority to work in partnership

Date: 20 Oct 2014

For three years, Nexus has been using public money to try to produce a convincing argument to change the way buses are provided in Tyne and Wear. During that time, bus companies have given them a partnership proposal that would deliver all of the benefits they’re looking for.

Bus services in Tyne and Wear are already amongst the best in the country. The annual survey by Passenger Focus, the independent watchdog, gave Tyne and Wear a 90% satisfaction rating and a further recent survey gave Go North East a 92% rating – the highest ever. Almost one in four of Go North East’s frontline vehicles provide free wifi and ‘talking bus’ stop announcements for the visually and hearing impaired. Go North East’s ‘key’ smartcard is the largest smart ticketing system outside London.

A partnership would make this even better. There’d be 50 extra buses on ‘kickstart’-style services to provide new links and beef up existing services. We’ll talk to local people and local councillors to work out where the kickstart buses should go.

A partnership will provide cheaper fares for 16-18 years olds and new ‘Bus2Bus’ tickets for people who use the buses of more than one company but don’t use Metro. We’ll make these ‘smart’ tickets and we’ll make Tyne and Wear’s Network One tickets ‘smart’ early next year. We can give passengers these benefits early next year, through a partnership.

The contract scheme will take another two and a half years to deliver any passenger benefits, and then it will run at a loss. Nexus will need to build up a huge £80 million fund to cover the losses. If they go ahead with the scheme, it will rapidly run out of money in its later years.

Last year, the contract scheme promised 18 extra buses. These have been removed to save money. Last year, the scheme was supposed to save £7 million a year; this has been scaled back to £5 million. The partnership would deliver £2 million in savings; Nexus has other means of saving the £3 million difference if it so chooses, without damaging your bus services.

The contract scheme would mean that your local council must commit to finding at least £51 million to prop it up every year. In the current climate of funding cuts, this is unlikely to be achievable.

The scheme would allow local councillors to cut bus services and increase fares to balance the books. This is not protecting your bus services as they claim.

Go North East has written to our local MPs to point out the deficiencies in the scheme. You can read that letter here.

Go North East has written to the North East Combined Authority readers pointing out that they can’t afford this scheme. You can read this letter here.

David Brown, chief executive of the Go-Ahead Group, has written to The Journal to draw attention to the flaws in this scheme. You can read the text of this letter here.

The partnership way is the best way forward for your local buses. It will give your local councillors an unprecedented say in how your buses are provided, without giving them any of the risks. It would set up proper an effective means of working together to give people the improvements and better connections when they want them.


Kevin Carr
Managing Director, Go North East

 

[Jonny]

QCs will take people's business away from them. Firms in London do lose routes, don't they? So if a TfL style environment came in to T&W, then Arriva could lose something like the 44-46 group of routes. However, I agree - I don't see it happening as Nexus neither have the skills nor the money to do it

Strictly speaking, they don't lose the assets - they can deploy them elsewhere or 'dispose' of them (bearing in mind a duty to the shareholders to get full value) so from a compensation-payable standpoint it isn't the loss of a business.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And now for my first main point - the number of buses attempting to squeeze through the Monument area (as in the single-lane section past Monument Metro station*) is ridiculous and many of them are not cross-city services but come from over the Tyne and/or the outer areas. As an aside, Newcastle has far too many buses from a pedestrian safety standpoint (it only takes one mistake, and not necessarily from the bus driver, for something bad to happen), worse still is that many of the buses are trying to compete with rather than complement Metro and/or Heavy Rail.

* Officially called Blackett street

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Strictly speaking, they don't lose the assets - they can deploy them elsewhere or 'dispose' of them (bearing in mind a duty to the shareholders to get full value) so from a compensation-payable standpoint it isn't the loss of a business.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And now for my first main point - the number of buses attempting to squeeze through the Monument area (as in the single-lane section past Monument Metro station*) is ridiculous and many of them are not cross-city services but come from over the Tyne and/or the outer areas. As an aside, Newcastle has far too many buses from a pedestrian safety standpoint (it only takes one mistake, and not necessarily from the bus driver, for something bad to happen), worse still is that many of the buses are trying to compete with rather than complement Metro and/or Heavy Rail.

* Officially called Blackett street

On your first point, not certain what you mean but if you're referring to just the vehicles, then yes, they can be redeployed or disposed of as in London. However, they also lose the goodwill and revenue/profit associated with those routes. That's the loss of business.

Also, I do appreciate the milling about of pedestrians on Blackett St but how many people have been killed by a bus in Newcastle city centre in the last 25+ years?

 

[Jonny]

On your first point, not certain what you mean but if you're referring to just the vehicles, then yes, they can be redeployed or disposed of as in London. However, they also lose the goodwill and revenue/profit associated with those routes. That's the loss of business.

Also, I do appreciate the milling about of pedestrians on Blackett St but how many people have been killed by a bus in Newcastle city centre in the last 25+ years?

I'm not sure about killed outright but they were averaging about a collision per month between buses and pedestrians for several months, thankfully they usually survived but with injuries. It's detailed here in an interactive article http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/pedestrians-hit-buses-newcastle-city-6937156 for the two years up to April this year (2014)

Article quote

19 people have been hit by buses in Newcastle city centre

That article covers a two year period.

 

[Robertj21a]

I'm not sure about killed outright but they were averaging about a collision per month between buses and pedestrians for several months, thankfully they usually survived but with injuries. It's detailed here in an interactive article http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/pedestrians-hit-buses-newcastle-city-6937156 for the two years up to April this year (2014)

Article quote
That article covers a two year period.

Admittedly, 19 accidents in 2 years sounds a bit high but then I reckon it's not very different in many busy centres. Most are probably through no fault of the bus driver. Many people nowadays are more concerned with using their mobile phone to ring, text or play games - or wearing headphones etc - to remember that they have to use various senses to safely cross any road. Why should the bus users and operators have to suffer inconvenience for the sake of those who won't concentrate ?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I'm not sure about killed outright but they were averaging about a collision per month between buses and pedestrians for several months, thankfully they usually survived but with injuries. It's detailed here in an interactive article http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-east-news/pedestrians-hit-buses-newcastle-city-6937156 for the two years up to April this year (2014)

Article quote
That article covers a two year period.

That is actually worse than I had expected. Perhaps as Robert has suggested, it is a reflection of peoples' obsession with smart phones etc?

However, I don't think truncating services short is the answer. We've already seen areas such as the top of Northumberland St pedestrianised. Perhaps some more of that, a 20 mph zone, and better street furniture might be better?

 

[radamfi]

There should be a presumption against filling up city centres with lots of buses. We have already mentioned the increased pedestrian accident risk. There is the local pollution issue and associated health risk with having lots of diesel buses in a particular area. That's one of the reasons why it is more normal for public transport in city centres to be run using trams or trolleybuses, with diesel buses restricted to the suburbs. Some cities like Antwerp and more recently The Hague have put their trams in a tunnel in the city centre to create a near metro-like service, increase capacity and further improve the street level environment and pedestrian safety.

 

[ChathillMan]

Astonished that NEXUS don't plan to add any additional buses despite promises of using excess profit to improve services, basically telling the people of the North East that the bus service is not that bad after all

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

There should be a presumption against filling up city centres with lots of buses. We have already mentioned the increased pedestrian accident risk. There is the local pollution issue and associated health risk with having lots of diesel buses in a particular area. That's one of the reasons why it is more normal for public transport in city centres to be run using trams or trolleybuses, with diesel buses restricted to the suburbs. Some cities like Antwerp and more recently The Hague have put their trams in a tunnel in the city centre to create a near metro-like service, increase capacity and further improve the street level environment and pedestrian safety.

I wonder, after all of the bad press associated with Edinburgh, whether there's the appetite for many new tram projects. Not saying it's right but there's no doubt that it's damaged the credibility of such projects

I'd point out that Tyne and Wear has some of the cleanest buses going with all three major operators running hybrid vehicles in Newcastle, along with Sunderland having a large number of gas buses.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Astonished that NEXUS don't plan to add any additional buses despite promises of using excess profit to improve services, basically telling the people of the North East that the bus service is not that bad after all

I said this months ago. Look at the profits that Stagecoach and Go NE are posting in T&W then reduce that 20% (or whatever) to 10% to see what the saving actually is. Then ask yourself can Nexus do what they suggested.... the maths don't add up!

 

[radamfi]

I wonder, after all of the bad press associated with Edinburgh, whether there's the appetite for many new tram projects. Not saying it's right but there's no doubt that it's damaged the credibility of such projects

I'd point out that Tyne and Wear has some of the cleanest buses going with all three major operators running hybrid vehicles in Newcastle, along with Sunderland having a large number of gas buses.

In the case of Tyneside, they already have an underground light rail system so they are in the same position of Antwerp and The Hague in having sufficient light rail/metro to be able to remove many buses from the city centre. That's an advantage they have over West Yorkshire as there is greater scope in the North East for redeploying buses that are currently duplicating the Metro.

The UK is probably at the cutting edge of hybrid bus usage, but that is because the UK is so dependent on buses even on high demand corridors which would typically be undertaken by tram/metro in most other countries. Given the volume of buses in our city centres, even if all of them were hybrid there would still be pollution issues, and hybrids make little different to noise and other environmental indicators. There should at least be a commitment to having buses running in zero emission mode in places where large numbers of buses congregate in city centres and major bus corridors such as Oxford Street or Putney High Street.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

That's as may be. However, we are where we are and I don't see many major
Tram projects appearing. Little money and bad press! And remember, not so much duplicates the Metro. Unless the idea of truncating Blyth services at Regent Centre and the like.

 

[Kuyoyo]

That's as may be. However, we are where we are and I don't see many major
Tram projects appearing. Little money and bad press! And remember, not so much duplicates the Metro. Unless the idea of truncating Blyth services at Regent Centre and the like.

Funny you should bring up the Blyth/Morpeth/Ashington/Alnwick/Berwick express runs - as they mainly run outside Nexusland, if the QCS does happen (it's still not set in stone - still many huddles and legal challenges to stop it) they would remain commercially operated as would Arriva's 85/685, 308 and X2 services into Newcastle and their 22/23/X21 into Sunderland. Likewise Go North East's X9/X10 and X7 along with services into Nexusland from Consett and Stanley wouldn't be included due to the majority of the route (or the routes' operation) lies outside the boundary. One oddity is that their 21 which spends about 50/50 in Durham and Nexusland yet it's part of the scheme.

 

[radamfi]

There are tram schemes in Nottingham and Manchester that are progressing well enough. An extension to The Trafford Centre is likely. The issues in Edinburgh are primarily related to project management. Project management problems have plagued other modes, such as Cambridgeshire Guided Busway, Amsterdam North South Metro and the Fyra fiasco.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

There are tram schemes in Nottingham and Manchester that are progressing well enough. An extension to The Trafford Centre is likely. The issues in Edinburgh are primarily related to project management. Project management problems have plagued other modes, such as Cambridgeshire Guided Busway, Amsterdam North South Metro and the Fyra fiasco.

Yes but bad news lives longer in the memory so don't think you're seeing many appearing, merely the execution of planned schemes. Edinburgh may be PM issues - that's still an argument for many.

Besides, I think it's all academic. No money and no ambition anyway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Funny you should bring up the Blyth/Morpeth/Ashington/Alnwick/Berwick express runs - as they mainly run outside Nexusland, if the QCS does happen (it's still not set in stone - still many huddles and legal challenges to stop it) they would remain commercially operated as would Arriva's 85/685, 308 and X2 services into Newcastle and their 22/23/X21 into Sunderland. Likewise Go North East's X9/X10 and X7 along with services into Nexusland from Consett and Stanley wouldn't be included due to the majority of the route (or the routes' operation) lies outside the boundary. One oddity is that their 21 which spends about 50/50 in Durham and Nexusland yet it's part of the scheme.

Exactly why I chose that example.

Suspect the 21 is chosen because it has a lot of local traffic thru Birtley?

 

[radamfi]

Infrastructure spending is looked on favourably by most governments, even by our current one. The perception is that kind of spending boosts the economy so pays back in more quantifiable terms than straight forward subsidy. Governments can be persuaded to spend vast sums of money if a good BCR is obtained in the scheme appraisal.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Infrastructure spending is looked on favourably by most governments, even by our current one. The perception is that kind of spending boosts the economy so pays back in more quantifiable terms than straight forward subsidy. Governments can be persuaded to spend vast sums of money if a good BCR is obtained in the scheme appraisal.

The argument on infrastructure is fair enough (and indeed, Christian Wolmar suggested that more light rail was preferable to some heavy rail projects). However, I think it'll be a long time before such a plan (on street trams) comes to fruition on Tyneside.

 

[radamfi]

The bus industry must surely be against tram building, and presumably lobby against it. Perhaps not so much of the higher speed, heavy rail replacement of Tyne & Wear Metro, but more of the street-running variety. The bus operators are now more dependent than ever on core routes into city centres, which are the sort of routes which are particularly appropriate for tram conversion.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

The bus industry must surely be against tram building, and presumably lobby against it. Perhaps not so much of the higher speed, heavy rail replacement of Tyne & Wear Metro, but more of the street-running variety. The bus operators are now more dependent than ever on core routes into city centres, which are the sort of routes which are particularly appropriate for tram conversion.

Of course, the routes that you mention as being particularly appropriate were often originally tram routes anyway in the mists of time. I can think of a couple of examples where bus companies have actively lobbied against schemes.

However, the Edinburgh debacle has undoubtedly damaged light rail and bad news always last longer in the minds of individuals (as well as providing a great story for the media). You may consider it unfair (and it probably is) but light rail will now need to undergo a bit of rehabilitation. However, this bit is the bus and coach section so probably need to stop going off topic

 

[radamfi]

When will the QC Board meet to discuss the scheme?

 

[Deerfold]

Infrastructure spending is looked on favourably by most governments, even by our current one. The perception is that kind of spending boosts the economy so pays back in more quantifiable terms than straight forward subsidy. Governments can be persuaded to spend vast sums of money if a good BCR is obtained in the scheme appraisal.

The Leeds Tram proposals weren't looked on at all favourably (though they were originally approved and only later cancelled).

There are tram schemes in Nottingham and Manchester that are progressing well enough. An extension to The Trafford Centre is likely. The issues in Edinburgh are primarily related to project management. Project management problems have plagued other modes, such as Cambridgeshire Guided Busway, Amsterdam North South Metro and the Fyra fiasco.

Manchester's going well with the Airport extension opening over a year in advance. Nottingham's has been delayed - and had a lot of negative publicity over the amount of disruption to businesses along the route.