TFL & "Managed Decline"

[duncanp]

Whilst good in principle, the headway system doesn’t work very well in practice.

If a bus has a problem (anything from a slow stop due to using wheelchair ramp, to an engine problem causing delay), then the following bus is held, that in turn causes bus behind that to also get regulated, and next bus in turn etc. If it happens near the end of a route (and some stands have capacity limits so regulating one stop before end is quite common) then can get multiple buses being held, in some cases upto a dozen might be regulated due to one bus delayed.

So all the passengers on the regulated buses, and everyone waiting at a stop for the held buses gets delayed. Might avoid the 2 buses together but at cost of slower journeys. And generally slower journeys discourage bus use which is a big negative when trying to get passenger numbers back to pre pandemic levels.

This is what happens on the Birmingham Outer Circle route.

There are various timing points along the route where buses wait if they are early, but despite that you regularly get gaps of 20 minutes (on a service that is supposed to be every 7/8 minutes) and then 2 or 3 buses turn up all at the same time.

So I think regulation of bus services can work, but over long routes or where there are difficult traffic conditions, it tends to break down after a while.

Regulation of services also happens on the tube.

When I lived in London, there was many a time a Northbound Victoria Line train would wait at Seven Sisters until the correct time to leave, which nine times out of ten was when another Northbound train had just terminated in the opposite platform. The drivers had it down to a fine art to know exactly when to close the doors just as people were running through the passage to catch the Walthamstow train.

A similar thing used to happen at Finsbury Park with the Piccadilly Line/Victoria Line interchange.

 

[Busaholic]

Whilst good in principle, the headway system doesn’t work very well in practice.

If a bus has a problem (anything from a slow stop due to using wheelchair ramp, to an engine problem causing delay), then the following bus is held, that in turn causes bus behind that to also get regulated, and next bus in turn etc. If it happens near the end of a route (and some stands have capacity limits so regulating one stop before end is quite common) then can get multiple buses being held, in some cases upto a dozen might be regulated due to one bus delayed.

So all the passengers on the regulated buses, and everyone waiting at a stop for the held buses gets delayed. Might avoid the 2 buses together but at cost of slower journeys. And generally slower journeys discourage bus use which is a big negative when trying to get passenger numbers back to pre pandemic levels.

I agree with you 100%. It's madness to make the passengers, who already have to wait longer on average to wait for a bus to arrive than before due to headway cuts, endure protracted journeys because of regulation. This is especially so for those who could formerly make their journey by one bus, but now have to take two because of route shortening. I'm talking about London only in this context: in my opinion the headway system should only apply generally when the advertised headway is twenty minutes or more.

 

[Horizon22]

I agree with you 100%. It's madness to make the passengers, who already have to wait longer on average to wait for a bus to arrive than before due to headway cuts, endure protracted journeys because of regulation. This is especially so for those who could formerly make their journey by one bus, but now have to take two because of route shortening. I'm talking about London only in this context: in my opinion the headway system should only apply generally when the advertised headway is twenty minutes or more.

But ultimately you are then delaying people further down the line after all the buses have been caught up and then there's a larger gap again.

You can't have buses all suddenly arrive in a queue because then you've got one rammed bus, and the others behind are basically empty. So you'd end up having to regulate effectively anyway because the first bus will constantly be stopping and the ones behind won't need to (alighting or boarding).

 

[Acton1991]

Perhaps TfL should try and actively stop fare evaders - that could help with their finances! Stood at Acton Town right now and 3 people have already forced through the disabled gates with a member of staff stood right there saying nothing. Ridiculous.

 

[bakerstreet]

Perhaps TfL should try and actively stop fare evaders - that could help with their finances! Stood at Acton Town right now and 3 people have already forced through the disabled gates with a member of staff stood right there saying nothing. Ridiculous.

I’m not convinced that TfL customer service staff are contracted to engage in unarmed combat with those who are determined to evade their fare but TfL revenue protection do much investigation work in the background. Perhaps you’ve seen this investigation work take place on the tv. It’s very clever.

 

[bramling]

Perhaps TfL should try and actively stop fare evaders - that could help with their finances! Stood at Acton Town right now and 3 people have already forced through the disabled gates with a member of staff stood right there saying nothing. Ridiculous.

Unfortunately the days of regular station staff being able to engage with this sort of thing are long gone. The view is now that society has become too dangerous for that sort of interaction, and sadly this is probably for the best.

Revenue will take on this work, which is best done either as specialist investigation, or heavy sting operations where there are a large number of staff present (and often either supported by BTP or with BTP close at hand).

The risk of being physically harmed is now deemed to be very high, sadly.

 

[Horizon22]

There is a slight difference though between looking proactive and nonplussed in the corner. Nobody is saying actively engage and put yourselves in harm's way but being observant and aware - so details can potential be passed on - is certainly much more helpful and can get some to think again or prevent others having a go to.

 

[Acton1991]

There is a slight difference though between looking proactive and nonplussed in the corner. Nobody is saying actively engage and put yourselves in harm's way but being observant and aware - so details can potential be passed on - is certainly much more helpful and can get some to think again or prevent others having a go to.

Totally agree. 3 people jumped the gates in about 10 minutes at one station. Multiply that across the day and the network, there is a massive issue there that needs to be addressed.

 

[Edsmith]

Perhaps TfL should try and actively stop fare evaders - that could help with their finances! Stood at Acton Town right now and 3 people have already forced through the disabled gates with a member of staff stood right there saying nothing. Ridiculous.

I don't usually see anything as blatant as that but tailgating somebody with a valid ticket through the gates is quite common. I can understand staff not getting into confrontations about it but an announcement over the PA telling them that they're on camera and that the footage is being passed on to the police might act as some sort of deterant. Quite common to see people getting on buses without paying as well.

 

[Snow1964]

TfL has seen its debt rating downgraded by ratings firm Moodys due to uncertain financial future. This will of course make it harder to get loans (or they will be priced with higher interest). Downgrade is from A3 (low risk of default) to Baa1 (moderate risk of default)

The ratings agency – which downgraded the network’s long-term unsecured debt from an A3 rating to Baa1 – also warned that additional government funding is likely to be accompanied by further “cumbersome” conditions and that service level reductions on the Tube and bus network would “prove detrimental to TfL’s long-term financial sustainability.”

The agency said weaker economic growth would also slow the return of passenger revenues to pre-pandemic levels, as would higher inflation. The firm downgraded its forecast of passenger revenue for the 2023 fiscal year to £4.3bn, down from £4.7bn.

A Transport for London (TfL) spokesperson said: “Moody’s decision to amend our long-term rating by one notch, as well as upgrade our outlook to ‘stable’ reflects a number of factors, including concerns that operating performance will be weaker than expected due to weaker economic growth and higher inflation, as well as the ongoing uncertainty around TfL’s long-term funding framework, especially for capital funding.

Transport for London debt downgraded by ratings agency due to "uncertain" financial future

A MAJOR ratings agency has downgraded Transport for London’s (TfL) debt due to the “uncertainty” of its long-term funding, in a further sign of the financial difficulty the operator finds itself in. Moody’s announced it had downgraded TfL’s long-term debt as a result of weaker economic growth...

www.cityam.com

 

[leytongabriel]

Whilst good in principle, the headway system doesn’t work very well in practice.

If a bus has a problem (anything from a slow stop due to using wheelchair ramp, to an engine problem causing delay), then the following bus is held, that in turn causes bus behind that to also get regulated, and next bus in turn etc. If it happens near the end of a route (and some stands have capacity limits so regulating one stop before end is quite common) then can get multiple buses being held, in some cases upto a dozen might be regulated due to one bus delayed.

So all the passengers on the regulated buses, and everyone waiting at a stop for the held buses gets delayed. Might avoid the 2 buses together but at cost of slower journeys. And generally slower journeys discourage bus use which is a big negative when trying to get passenger numbers back to pre pandemic levels.

Yes ! Another problem is 'regulating' the service at the bus stop before the terminus. So all the passengers who are going for trains or whatever have to sit it out so the bus isn't seen to be arriving early at the end of the journey. Very un-customer friendly.

 

[Snow1964]

The papers for next weeks TfL Board Finance committee are now available (except the Finance Report is to follow)

There are hints about loss of revenue from faulty ticket validators in a one year extension to contract for validators

Seems they have got more than expected from new building contributions

However as always, lot of the numbers are in the exempt (not public) part 2 papers

Haven’t read them all, but not seeing any obvious signs of panic, or new drastic cuts ahead of next weeks expiry of funding package

https://board.tfl.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=171&MId=680&Ver=4

 

[jumble]

The papers for next weeks TfL Board Finance committee are now available (except the Finance Report is to follow)

There are hints about loss of revenue from faulty ticket validators in a one year extension to contract for validators

Seems they have got more than expected from new building contributions

However as always, lot of the numbers are in the exempt (not public) part 2 papers

Haven’t read them all, but not seeing any obvious signs of panic, or new drastic cuts ahead of next weeks expiry of funding package

https://board.tfl.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=171&MId=680&Ver=4

I am not surprised that TFL are concerned about loss of revenue
When new all electric busses were comissioned on our local route recently the oyster readers were out of action for a week on all the ones I traveled on.
This still occurs from time to time

 

[Snow1964]

Social media is reporting a TfL funding extension of 3 weeks to 13th July. Sounds like mayor and Government are nowhere near a long term agreement

EDIT adding link to 5 page Government letter

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1085296/letter-sos-mayor-of-london-june-2022.pdf

 

[bicbasher]

The letter I've seen posted to the Mayor showed that the Tories aren't going to budge on a long-term settlement until "the relationship changes"

 

[riceuten]

It suits the government to prolong the agony, as the want to "punish" Londoners for voting for the wrong party. And, judging by social media, most people blame Sadiq Khan, even in the teeth of copious evidence to the contrary.

 

[hkstudent]

It suits the government to prolong the agony, as the want to "punish" Londoners for voting for the wrong party. And, judging by social media, most people blame Sadiq Khan, even in the teeth of copious evidence to the contrary.

Indeed, and I am also surprised to see those comments saying too many station staff are employed and suggesting one staff per gateline would be enough.
If that's the case, I wonder when things go bad, how would those people be able to pass through the barriers in timely manner.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed, and I am also surprised to see those comments saying too many station staff are employed and suggesting one staff per gateline would be enough.
If that's the case, I wonder when things go bad, how would those people be able to pass through the barriers in timely manner.

When things go bad, open the gates.

 

[bramling]

It suits the government to prolong the agony, as the want to "punish" Londoners for voting for the wrong party. And, judging by social media, most people blame Sadiq Khan, even in the teeth of copious evidence to the contrary.

This strategy might come at a significant personal cost to Johnson if it results in him losing Uxbridge.

 

[thomalex]

The letter I've seen posted to the Mayor showed that the Tories aren't going to budge on a long-term settlement until "the relationship changes"

Shapps wants to "reset the relationship" apparently but I've no idea what this means in practice

 

[Wolfie]

This strategy might come at a significant personal cost to Johnson if it results in him losing Uxbridge.

If you believe the Evening Standard that seems quite likely.

 

[Turtle]

It suits the government to prolong the agony, as the want to "punish" Londoners for voting for the wrong party. And, judging by social media, most people blame Sadiq Khan, even in the teeth of copious evidence to the contrary.

You've summed it up in a nutshell. I doubt if there's any other European capital where the national government is apparently happy to damage its economy by hampering the smooth operation of its public transport.

 

[bramling]

You've summed it up in a nutshell. I doubt if there's any other European capital where the national government is apparently happy to damage its economy by hampering the smooth operation of its public transport.

Indeed it’s madness.

 

[Edsmith]

Indeed it’s madness.

Leon Daniels sums it up very well

Leon Daniels: London now has too much bus capacity, but cuts must be sensitive and wise - OnLondon

Transport for London’s consultation on major surgery to the inner London bus network – released just before the four-day bank holiday weekend – was widely expected. But it contained proposals that strike at the heart of century-old core bus routes long familiar to us all. To understand why...

www.onlondon.co.uk

Leon Daniels: London now has too much bus capacity, but cuts must be sensitive and wise​

22nd June 2022
Route changes and reductions should respect Londoners' emotional attachments and avoid fuelling a disastrous cycle of decline
LEON DANIELS
Transport for London’s consultation on major surgery to the inner London bus network – released just before the four-day bank holiday weekend – was widely expected. But it contained proposals that strike at the heart of century-old core bus routes long familiar to us all.
To understand why requires some historical context. From 1958 until 1982, bus ridership in London dropped. A long strike, the increase in households with televisions and more widespread private car ownership contributed to consistent yearly falls. There were over 7,000 peak vehicles in service in 1958, but by 1982 there were only 4,300. The cuts further encouraged the ridership decline, which in turn led to more cuts.
But the election in 2000 of Ken Livingstone as London’s first Mayor put that trend into reverse. Simpler routes, cheaper fares and punitive measures to discourage motoring led to about a decade and a half of growth, which continued after Livingstone left City Hall in 2008. By March 2017 a new high watermark was reached, with 8,174 peak vehicles in service each weekday.
Livingstone was clear on this issue: cheap and plentiful bus services meant people could more easily get to school or work, look for jobs, and visit bars, restaurants and theatres. Each subsequent Mayor broadly supported the principle although, as might be expected, under Boris Johnson the balance between taxpayer and fare payer contributions to the bus service was shifted one way, and under Sadiq Khan shifted back the other way with a long overall TfL fares freeze.
But a softening of public transport commuting in general could be seen as early as 2016. Several rail franchises were won on the basis of infinite latent demand, but that continued growth did not materialise and a long established rule, whereby Underground ridership broadly tracked economic activity and bus demand tracked population growth, ceased to apply.
Despite there being more Londoners, demand for bus services shrank, particularly on Fridays. Working from home and on-line shopping meant many commuter journeys were lost. And just as this change was being evaluated, along came Covid, causing ridership to plummet.
The post-pandemic reawakening has seen the trends of recent years fast forwarded, so that changes that would have taken ten to 15 years have been condensed into two. Ridership has recovered but now plateaued – Underground at 65 per cent of what it was and buses at 77 per cent. Here indeed is evidence of the permanent effect of working from home and on-line shopping. The deep averages

 

[Bletchleyite]

One important thing he mentioned is Khan's fares freeze. It's fine for Khan to make that decision, but NOT for it to be funded from outside. I maintain the London bus fare needs to increase to at least £2 which would plug a considerable part of the black hole. I don't know what figure that would be, but it should bare minimum increase by inflation from when he started the freeze.

£2, notably, is the figure the re-regulating Northern cities are aiming at.

The point about well established routes is an interesting one - perhaps time for a total recast to separate modern demands from what might have worked 80 years ago and to create a simple trunk network with low numbers that can be mapped as easily as the Tube? Many German cities have done this with "Metrobus" networks to excellent effect.

 

[Wolfie]

It suits the government to prolong the agony, as the want to "punish" Londoners for voting for the wrong party. And, judging by social media, most people blame Sadiq Khan, even in the teeth of copious evidence to the contrary.

Lots of the folk on social media aren't in London though.

 

[bramling]

Lots of the folk on social media aren't in London though.

From speaking to Londoners I get the feeling many rather reluctantly voted for Khan last time, for various reasons. Not hard to see why when one looks at the utterly vile candidate the Conservatives put forward - it’s almost as though the Conservatives want to self-destruct themselves in London. I don’t think Khan is by any means popular, just regarded as least worst or that people don’t wish to vote Conservative.

 

[158756]

One important thing he mentioned is Khan's fares freeze. It's fine for Khan to make that decision, but NOT for it to be funded from outside. I maintain the London bus fare needs to increase to at least £2 which would plug a considerable part of the black hole. I don't know what figure that would be, but it should bare minimum increase by inflation from when he started the freeze.

£2, notably, is the figure the re-regulating Northern cities are aiming at.

The point about well established routes is an interesting one - perhaps time for a total recast to separate modern demands from what might have worked 80 years ago and to create a simple trunk network with low numbers that can be mapped as easily as the Tube? Many German cities have done this with "Metrobus" networks to excellent effect.

According to the Bank of England's inflation calculator, £1.50 in 2015 following inflation would rise to £1.67 by 2021, so despite the freeze at this point fares have pretty much risen by the same amount. Then this year's inflation would put it up to £1.80 or £1.85, obviously Khan won't want to do that.

It's important to note that bus users in London, often among the poorest members of society, have already been hit by years of above inflation fare rises. Using the same calculator:

£1 when the first Mayor of London arrived in 2000 would be £1.53 in 2021.
90p when Boris Johnson replaced Ken Livingstone in 2008 would be worth just £1.18.

Clearly TfL cannot break even with those sorts of fares, but increasing further is dangerous as well. Fares in most of the country are too high and have contributed to the decline in passengers to the point that bus services are nearly extinct in many places.

A total recast in central London could be very helpful, but so much of the network could already be much simpler if there was better integration and more passengers transferred to the tube or rail network where that makes sense. But if people struggle to pay the bus fare how will they pay for the tube?

 

[Goldfish62]

According to the Bank of England's inflation calculator, £1.50 in 2015 following inflation would rise to £1.67 by 2021, so despite the freeze at this point fares have pretty much risen by the same amount. Then this year's inflation would put it up to £1.80 or £1.85, obviously Khan won't want to do that.

It's important to note that bus users in London, often among the poorest members of society, have already been hit by years of above inflation fare rises. Using the same calculator:

£1 when the first Mayor of London arrived in 2000 would be £1.53 in 2021.
90p when Boris Johnson replaced Ken Livingstone in 2008 would be worth just £1.18.

Clearly TfL cannot break even with those sorts of fares, but increasing further is dangerous as well. Fares in most of the country are too high and have contributed to the decline in passengers to the point that bus services are nearly extinct in many places.

A total recast in central London could be very helpful, but so much of the network could already be much simpler if there was better integration and more passengers transferred to the tube or rail network where that makes sense. But if people struggle to pay the bus fare how will they pay for the tube?

It's never been policy that the bus network breaks even. The relatively high tube fares subsidise the bus network. As you've correctly identified, many bus users are also among the poorest residents and the bus network provides a comprehensive public transport option for them in areas that the tube doesn't reach.

The claim by some industry commentators that London bus fares are lower than equivalent major European cities doesn't stand up to scrutiny, especially when factoring in the higher tube fares and that fact that the equivalents of the Hopper fare are multimodal and often valid for two hours rather than one hour.

 

[endicomark69@g]

It often strikes me reading arguments about "paying their way" - especially when figures are broken down so well by some posters like above - that it's necessary not only to agree that facts are facts, but that Public Transport either has a social role to play in an urbanised Society like ours or it doesn't.

So much of what people vote for seems conditioned on what they are told is real, and not necessarily on what actually is real.

London, and the South East do NOT vampire up all the financial goodies meaning the people of Ramsbottom can't have a tram-system.

The Mayor of London isn't responsible for what goes on in Berwick.

Tube Workers being adequately paid for their knowledge, skills base and accountabilities aren't stopping Midwives and Cleaners from getting a decent living wage.

The economics of running a bus in London are just different from trying to run one in rural Shropshire. They just are.

If you actually had competent, fair, economically literate Govt that could accept a few such "facts" without having to view everything through the prism of selfish personal politics (selfish from their point of self interest first) it wouldn't be necessary to have to view every funding decision as a zero sum game with cheerleaders actively wanting "the other side" to lose.

But we don't have that, and haven't been anywhere near it in a Generation and more.

London doesn't "need" higher bus fares - ultimately they end up counter productive to all kinds of benefits - including environmental targets (remember those?)

London doesn't need "punishing" because they don't want to vote for mismanagement and impunity, that they vote against such "should" be viewed as a necessary rebuke to those in power that they should be forced to take account of. And strive to improve their act. But they don't.

Cutting provision only ends up precipitating a spiral of decline that ultimately costs Society as a whole - the 70s/80s actually taught us that.

TfL Bus services - like anything else in life - could be better organised and rearranged if necessary - but not just because a hostile entity with one eye on its money and the other on its opposition's throat knows the process they can force will "damage" that same opposition, and ultimately everyone else too.

Whatever your Politics, that shouldn't be something to disagree on.