º£½ÇÊÓƵ

Last month Welsh Government laid its bus services revolution (consistently supported by this column) before the Senedd with the Bus Services (Wales) Bill and the accompanying analysis of operating options, costs and benefits.

It has fallen to the Senedd and Welsh Government to create a passenger oriented integration of the network, timetable and ticketing simply because the operators themselves seem unable to work together. Not even when most non-municipal bus services in Wales were owned by state-owned National Bus Company (1969- 1988).

The government have presented three options for franchising buses:

• Status-quo - retaining the much-derided 1985 º£½ÇÊÓƵ bus legislation where demand-side market competition was seen as the base for public bus services. This has not served the travelling public well;
• Statutory partnerships - agreements on bus operations between local authorities and bus companies. In general these were unsuccessful as many bus companies wished to make too many of the decisions; and
• Bus reform - outlined in Welsh Government’s Our Roadmap to Bus Reform providing a ‘public need’ basis for decisions on funding and operating bus services. However, can it be achieved at an acceptable cost, and also by the government’s hoped for 2030 deadline?

Bus reform follows the principles of one network, one timetable and one ticket, a concept successfully used in countries such as the Netherlands, Denmark and Estonia similar to Wales in size and population density.

The bill’s principles were originally written by this columnist in 1997 as an integrated transport policy for Wales – the short-term possibilities and the long-term vision. This was a part of the transport legacy for Wales commissioned by Peter Hain(now Lord Hain) when º£½ÇÊÓƵ minister for transport.

Competitive franchising in Wales will involve private and publicly-owned bus companies competing for the routes offered by corporate joint committees (CJCs which cover local authority areas in Wales), or the national bus authority in Transport for Wales (TfW). Its principles are:

• The route(s) contractor will not face on-street competition;
• Choice of the lowest tender (often unwise for quality or unfair tendering) or the best service level within a budget;
• A reasonable (preferably five-year) contract period fitting into an operator’s investment programme;
• Revenue risk taken by the operator (often seen as encouraging demand growth) or by the transport authority;
• The franchise areas would be small enough to enable local operators to bid;
• Garages may be provided by the operator or by the transport authority;
• Bus infrastructure would be provided by the CJC; and
• One national bus ticket system throughout Wales.

Its benefits are interconnecting bus timetables (and rail services through government-owned TfW Rail services) and stability in the market with all-services information from one source. The all Wales bus routes over-60’s pass and London’s Oyster card has shown how multi-use tickets can work.

The government forecasts a 22% increase in patronage in urban areas (eg Cardiff, Newport, Swansea), 12% in towns (Wrexham, Llanelli, Aberystwyth) and 17% in rural areas by 2040. However, with no increase in bus mileage, the present peak period bus capacity is insufficient to accommodate those passengers.

In March Transport Secretary Ken Stakes said in the Senedd that in rural areas poorly served by deregulated bus services with a limited interest in a franchise, local authorities may provide those services.

This is a very optimistic view as those services not attractive to private franchisees may not be affordable for local councils. It could therefore lead to cuts in rural services as cross-subsidy between urban south-east Wales and the remainder of bus services in Wales is not included in the bill.

However we may find a repeat of Bws Gwynedd of the 1980’s where the county council set the brand and routes for 80% of services and commercial services accepted the Gwynedd Rover ticket.

The overall cost has been a concern though many would argue that it is expenditure to improve bus services outside south-east Wales balanced against Valley Lines electrification costs. New expenditure criteria in the HM Treasury Green Book putting the strategic case first and a benefit/cost ratio of 17.5:1 encourages bus reform.

The existing companies will have to review their activities as they may lose some profitable routes, but may gain others. They may also retain their buses and depots requiring the government to fund replacements.

Welsh Government expenditure to make the system work, but not in the analysis, covers for example bus priority lanes, better quality bus stops (TrawsCymru style) and obtaining the highest quality passenger demand research and management expertise drawn from the bus industry, and local council public transport teams.

• Professor Stuart Cole CBE is Emeritus Professor of Transport (Economics and Policy) at the University of South Wales.