Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 27, 2017 21:59:25 GMT
Seriously dire implications for buses in Kent
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 27, 2017 23:31:48 GMT
Seriously dire implications for buses in Kent The "Buses Beeching Cuts" continue - started by Gordon Brown with the underfunded national concessionary travel scheme and continued by the last two Conservative governments as they carry on their destruction of local government finances and services. If it was train services that were subject to these cuts there would be riots in the streets and MPs would be living in fear of their constituencies. So few politicians have any idea about bus services - they know nothing about their local buses and never use them. It's a national scandal and deserves much more publicity than it gets.
|
|
|
Post by planesandtrains on Nov 28, 2017 20:34:55 GMT
This wants to make me fume... absolutely disgraceful. Neither KCC or any other council and the government are making any effort to reduce car usage, instead it's the same old retric 'buses are dirty polluting giants'. But not the cars, ohhh noooo..... All this phaff about making buses cleaner and not a thing is done about car usage. If you can't pay for it, increase the taxes.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 28, 2017 21:24:44 GMT
This wants to make me fume... absolutely disgraceful. Neither KCC or any other council and the government are making any effort to reduce car usage, instead it's the same old retric 'buses are dirty polluting giants'. But not the cars, ohhh noooo..... All this phaff about making buses cleaner and not a thing is done about car usage. If you can't pay for it, increase the taxes. The reality is that many of these services are very poorly used, particularly in the evening.
|
|
|
Post by N230UD on Nov 28, 2017 23:16:46 GMT
This wants to make me fume... absolutely disgraceful. Neither KCC or any other council and the government are making any effort to reduce car usage, instead it's the same old retric 'buses are dirty polluting giants'. But not the cars, ohhh noooo..... All this phaff about making buses cleaner and not a thing is done about car usage. If you can't pay for it, increase the taxes. The reality is that many of these services are very poorly used, particularly in the evening. Many of the services on the Kent County Council "cull list" are well used. For example, the 541/2/4 group of services in the Dover/Sandwich area are well used. These are market day services, operating one journey one day a week. They are one of the most expensive KCC routes. They are well used, but pretty much everyone is a concessionary pass holder. They serve villages which have lost all their shops, pubs and any community buildings. The bus is often the only place they get to talk to people, and their lives would be badly affected by the withdrawal. Its not just 'nice' to have a bus service, but is neccessary in my opinion. Without a bus service, they would rely on family or taxis to transport them, which might not be possible for everyone. Many would then stay indoors, getting less exercise and less mental stimulation - which could affect health, and in turn cost more for healthcare. Thats just an example. Any saving from cutting bus services, could see an increase in costs elsewhere. In some of the items i've read, KCC say many journeys may instead be run commercially by operators. Well, Stagecoach have done that previously (for example, the evening service on the Canterbury-Sandwich-Deal route is commercial now). But, this is a period when Stagecoach East Kent have cut routes, would they really want to take on more risk?. Other independents are unlikely to operate commercially. For example, Regent Coaches operate a large number of routes in east Kent, but none of them commercially, and I don't think they have ever operated commercially in their 30+ year history. Why would they now? This does make me very angry. Kent is seeing huge amounts of development, mostly thanks to London overspill, across the county, so we shouldn't be losing bus services. If bus services are unattractive, people will just stay in their cars (if they are lucky enough to be able to use a car, that is). The thing that makes me most angry, is how badly the bus cuts across the UK are, but few people seem to be noticing or caring. Few politicians care, as most of their voters are car users, and they don't have a clue about buses anyway.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 29, 2017 10:17:38 GMT
The reality is that many of these services are very poorly used, particularly in the evening. Many of the services on the Kent County Council "cull list" are well used. For example, the 541/2/4 group of services in the Dover/Sandwich area are well used. These are market day services, operating one journey one day a week. They are one of the most expensive KCC routes. They are well used, but pretty much everyone is a concessionary pass holder. They serve villages which have lost all their shops, pubs and any community buildings. The bus is often the only place they get to talk to people, and their lives would be badly affected by the withdrawal. Its not just 'nice' to have a bus service, but is neccessary in my opinion. Without a bus service, they would rely on family or taxis to transport them, which might not be possible for everyone. Many would then stay indoors, getting less exercise and less mental stimulation - which could affect health, and in turn cost more for healthcare. Thats just an example. Any saving from cutting bus services, could see an increase in costs elsewhere. In some of the items i've read, KCC say many journeys may instead be run commercially by operators. Well, Stagecoach have done that previously (for example, the evening service on the Canterbury-Sandwich-Deal route is commercial now). But, this is a period when Stagecoach East Kent have cut routes, would they really want to take on more risk?. Other independents are unlikely to operate commercially. For example, Regent Coaches operate a large number of routes in east Kent, but none of them commercially, and I don't think they have ever operated commercially in their 30+ year history. Why would they now? This does make me very angry. Kent is seeing huge amounts of development, mostly thanks to London overspill, across the county, so we shouldn't be losing bus services. If bus services are unattractive, people will just stay in their cars (if they are lucky enough to be able to use a car, that is). The thing that makes me most angry, is how badly the bus cuts across the UK are, but few people seem to be noticing or caring. Few politicians care, as most of their voters are car users, and they don't have a clue about buses anyway. There is a phone in right now on BBC Radio Kent on this subject. ** It was a very interesting phone in with plenty of informed and balanced comments rather than people trying to score cheap political points. The general feeling seems to be that there is some brinkmanship here and things aren't likely to be anywhere near as bad as some people think. There was a particularly interesting call from Go Coach, who I think are an excellent operator, and their policy is very much to work with KCC rather than fight the cuts, they readily accept that changes need to be made and realise that KCC cannot continue to pay for buses that in some cases nobody uses. Often savings can be made with more efficient operation, interworking of services and such like. Radio Kent seem to think that the 431 between Sevenoaks and Orpington, which of course is a part replacement for the 402, is at risk although the Go Coach spokesman wasn't aware of this, can anybody confirm? Also a very interesting call from somebody from Chalkwell Coaches, another very good operator.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 29, 2017 15:08:15 GMT
There is a phone in right now on BBC Radio Kent on this subject. ** It was a very interesting phone in with plenty of informed and balanced comments rather than people trying to score cheap political points. The general feeling seems to be that there is some brinkmanship here and things aren't likely to be anywhere near as bad as some people think. There was a particularly interesting call from Go Coach, who I think are an excellent operator, and their policy is very much to work with KCC rather than fight the cuts, they readily accept that changes need to be made and realise that KCC cannot continue to pay for buses that in some cases nobody uses. Often savings can be made with more efficient operation, interworking of services and such like. Radio Kent seem to think that the 431 between Sevenoaks and Orpington, which of course is a part replacement for the 402, is at risk although the Go Coach spokesman wasn't aware of this, can anybody confirm? Also a very interesting call from somebody from Chalkwell Coaches, another very good operator. I didn't hear the phone-in but I wonder if operators were minded to ring in solely to ensure they are not in the firing line from passengers? A clever bit of self preservation of saying we're not responsible for any cuts - "it's the council who decides but we will try to be helpful in coping with the cuts". I assume a list of target routes does exist and I'd not be shocked if the 431 was on there. The service level is pretty poor and I can't imagine the buses are carrying decent loads on a x120 min M-F only service. It was also an "emergency tender" in the face of public complaint over the 402's loss so it must be a target for loss or further rationalisation. Oh and unfortunately this is *all* down to politics so cheap or otherwise comments are to be expected.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 29, 2017 15:30:55 GMT
There is a phone in right now on BBC Radio Kent on this subject. ** It was a very interesting phone in with plenty of informed and balanced comments rather than people trying to score cheap political points. The general feeling seems to be that there is some brinkmanship here and things aren't likely to be anywhere near as bad as some people think. There was a particularly interesting call from Go Coach, who I think are an excellent operator, and their policy is very much to work with KCC rather than fight the cuts, they readily accept that changes need to be made and realise that KCC cannot continue to pay for buses that in some cases nobody uses. Often savings can be made with more efficient operation, interworking of services and such like. Radio Kent seem to think that the 431 between Sevenoaks and Orpington, which of course is a part replacement for the 402, is at risk although the Go Coach spokesman wasn't aware of this, can anybody confirm? Also a very interesting call from somebody from Chalkwell Coaches, another very good operator. I didn't hear the phone-in but I wonder if operators were minded to ring in solely to ensure they are not in the firing line from passengers? A clever bit of self preservation of saying we're not responsible for any cuts - "it's the council who decides but we will try to be helpful in coping with the cuts". I assume a list of target routes does exist and I'd not be shocked if the 431 was on there. The service level is pretty poor and I can't imagine the buses are carrying decent loads on a x120 min M-F only service. It was also an "emergency tender" in the face of public complaint over the 402's loss so it must be a target for loss or further rationalisation. Oh and unfortunately this is *all* down to politics so cheap or otherwise comments are to be expected.
There may have been an element of self preservation but I think the operators were just trying to explain things to listeners, most callers were keen to avoid political comments/point scoring. I think most passengers know the situation, operators can only provide what KCC will pay for in certain areas.
|
|
|
Post by planesandtrains on Nov 29, 2017 16:08:30 GMT
The issue was bought up in pmq's, and the answer was 'we have to live within our means' Living within our means not being able to go to places? I am no Labour supporter, but this is just stupid. Maybe had the county council not decided to give themselves the 15% pay increase then there would be some money for buses.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 29, 2017 18:23:14 GMT
The issue was bought up in pmq's, and the answer was 'we have to live within our means' Living within our means not being able to go to places? I am no Labour supporter, but this is just stupid. Maybe had the county council not decided to give themselves the 15% pay increase then there would be some money for buses. Don’t worry, we’re all supposedly “in it together” except we aren’t because in the budget, money is being given to the Northern Powerhouse towns to spend on public transport whilst down in the south, everything is being cut back. I get they want to create the Northern Powerhouse project to get the northern economy going but don’t start neglecting us down here - we don’t all drive and have bucket loads of money after all like some northern politicians would have you believe and end up brainwashing their constituents!
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 29, 2017 18:30:04 GMT
The issue was bought up in pmq's, and the answer was 'we have to live within our means' Living within our means not being able to go to places? I am no Labour supporter, but this is just stupid. Maybe had the county council not decided to give themselves the 15% pay increase then there would be some money for buses. Don’t worry, we’re all supposedly “in it together” except we aren’t because in the budget, money is being given to the Northern Powerhouse towns to spend on public transport whilst down in the south, everything is being cut back. I get they want to create the Northern Powerhouse project to get the northern economy going but don’t start neglecting us down here - we don’t all drive and have bucket loads of money after all like some northern politicians would have you believe and end up brainwashing their constituents! I think it might be a case of them being able to get away with neglecting the south a bit because of all the investment put in London which is in the south. I know there was a recent flare up when some funds were made available for London's transport but nothing for the north (I think it was to do with Crossrail) and people in the North started complaining the south takes all the money. As for increasing the taxes as mentioned earlier on in the thread, I don't see that happening much. This conservative government is on its last legs and a tax raise could well take them down completely at the next general election.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 29, 2017 19:48:21 GMT
Don’t worry, we’re all supposedly “in it together” except we aren’t because in the budget, money is being given to the Northern Powerhouse towns to spend on public transport whilst down in the south, everything is being cut back. I get they want to create the Northern Powerhouse project to get the northern economy going but don’t start neglecting us down here - we don’t all drive and have bucket loads of money after all like some northern politicians would have you believe and end up brainwashing their constituents! I think it might be a case of them being able to get away with neglecting the south a bit because of all the investment put in London which is in the south. I know there was a recent flare up when some funds were made available for London's transport but nothing for the north (I think it was to do with Crossrail) and people in the North started complaining the south takes all the money. As for increasing the taxes as mentioned earlier on in the thread, I don't see that happening much. This conservative government is on its last legs and a tax raise could well take them down completely at the next general election. The problem, though, is that when it comes to a straight evaluation of benefit vs cost then the South will win on rail investment by virtue of the simple fact that it has, and has long had, the highest level of rail usage in the country. Therefore more revenue is raised in the South from fares and more people will benefit from improvements. What the North and elsewhere forget is that London long ago gave up carving up its houses and factories to build roads therefore you have to do something else to get people around the area. In the Home Counties they have the dubious ability to still get road investment thus creating more congestion and pollution and also get rail investment on routes into London. I've lost count of the utterly biased, inaccurate and borderline hysterical reporting about the "impoverished" North when it comes to transport investment. Oodles of money is spent on roads which London never sees - in fact the cost of maintaining TfL's roads now has to come out of any surplus earned from people using TfL tube, DLR and rail services. The government has cut all road tax monies for London so TfL get no grants for roads. Nowhere else in the country is in that position. I am a Northerner by birth and am very happy to see money go to Bristol or Liverpool or Manchester or West Yorkshire for better trains and buses. I'm equally happy that Norwich or Nottingham or Carlisle also get a fair share. However we need to stop pretending that this is some sort of stupid "reward or punishment" game and that London should have its transport neglected just to benefit elsewhere. The Northerners who whinge seem not to see the endless miles of dual carriageways and widening schemes in Tyne and Wear nor the 10 year expansion of Manchester Metrolink or the hundreds of millions going into bus priority in Bristol at the moment. They need to get a sense of proportion and realise that if they want London levels of investment that they have to raise a lot more from fares locally - that ignores buses which are priced at commercial levels way in excess of what Londoners pay.
|
|
|
Post by towerman on Nov 30, 2017 12:32:31 GMT
The same thing is likely to happen in Northamptonshire the CC are threatening to withdrawn bus subsidies.
|
|
|
Post by tony4387 on Nov 30, 2017 13:18:33 GMT
If they decide to go ahead with these cuts then maybe I think we could see some smaller companies either selling up or pulling off the contracted services
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Dec 13, 2017 13:55:56 GMT
There is a phone in right now on BBC Radio Kent on this subject. ** It was a very interesting phone in with plenty of informed and balanced comments rather than people trying to score cheap political points. The general feeling seems to be that there is some brinkmanship here and things aren't likely to be anywhere near as bad as some people think. There was a particularly interesting call from Go Coach, who I think are an excellent operator, and their policy is very much to work with KCC rather than fight the cuts, they readily accept that changes need to be made and realise that KCC cannot continue to pay for buses that in some cases nobody uses. Often savings can be made with more efficient operation, interworking of services and such like. Radio Kent seem to think that the 431 between Sevenoaks and Orpington, which of course is a part replacement for the 402, is at risk although the Go Coach spokesman wasn't aware of this, can anybody confirm? Also a very interesting call from somebody from Chalkwell Coaches, another very good operator. I didn't hear the phone-in but I wonder if operators were minded to ring in solely to ensure they are not in the firing line from passengers? A clever bit of self preservation of saying we're not responsible for any cuts - "it's the council who decides but we will try to be helpful in coping with the cuts". I assume a list of target routes does exist and I'd not be shocked if the 431 was on there. The service level is pretty poor and I can't imagine the buses are carrying decent loads on a x120 min M-F only service. It was also an "emergency tender" in the face of public complaint over the 402's loss so it must be a target for loss or further rationalisation. Oh and unfortunately this is *all* down to politics so cheap or otherwise comments are to be expected. Sorry for the late reply (I rarely venture into this part of the forum) but I saw one of the morning 431s at the Orpington War Memorial stop a couple of weeks ago and was surprised at the length of the queue waiting to board. Obviously, this is a tiny snapshot of the service and the queue did look to contain mostly Concessionary Pass holders but it does show the service appears to be being used. I agree that it's probably first on the chopping block for any cuts though
|
|