|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Nov 5, 2021 3:02:29 GMT
Then there is no point having a consultation if the majority are going to be ignored. As a transport provider, if 70% say they disagree with a change, is it any wonder why there is a decline when you simply plough on despite the opposition. Honestly do you ever expect a consultation to show a majority in favour of cuts? That's not a passenger-focused mindset. If you're not serving the passengers then who are you serving? |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 5, 2021 3:30:16 GMT
Then there is no point having a consultation if the majority are going to be ignored. As a transport provider, if 70% say they disagree with a change, is it any wonder why there is a decline when you simply plough on despite the opposition. Honestly do you ever expect a consultation to show a majority in favour of cuts? That's not the point - if you think ignoring the majority is acceptable, then it's no surprise people don't use public transport. Your usually on here talking about transport providers should listen to passengers but yet your now more worried about the expectation of a consultation? |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 5, 2021 6:46:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 5, 2021 6:47:18 GMT
Honestly do you ever expect a consultation to show a majority in favour of cuts? That's not a passenger-focused mindset. If you're not serving the passengers then who are you serving? Well what is a passenger focused mindset? I think the point being made is that the only people who are likely to respond to consultations are those who are opposed so they're hardly going to give a balanced view. And as I mentioned previously the Croydon and Sutton consultation got less than 1,000 responses, bit like a local by election with a 1% turnout. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 5, 2021 7:00:37 GMT
That's not a passenger-focused mindset. If you're not serving the passengers then who are you serving? Well what is a passenger focused mindset? I think the point being made is that the only people who are likely to respond to consultations are those who are opposed so they're hardly going to give a balanced view. And as I mentioned previously the Croydon and Sutton consultation got less than 1,000 responses, bit like a local by election with a 1% turnout. So how would you feel if there was no consultation process regardless of how you feel about it and TfL just cut your route in half tomorrow and you were left without a connection to a station. Just withdrew it, no replacement and you didn’t know because they had no obligation to try and work with the public or local councils to retain in? Just for the record there was a lit of local noise about informing the public in the area about the Sutton/Croydon consultation, mostly from the local MPs. At the end of the day though you can’t force people to participate, remember Sutton has one of the capitals oldest populations. Besides this whole conversation is moot because unless there is a change in the law or TfL is abolished and we end up with commercial routes there is a requirement to consult. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 5, 2021 7:13:22 GMT
Well what is a passenger focused mindset? I think the point being made is that the only people who are likely to respond to consultations are those who are opposed so they're hardly going to give a balanced view. And as I mentioned previously the Croydon and Sutton consultation got less than 1,000 responses, bit like a local by election with a 1% turnout. So how would you feel if there was no consultation process regardless of how you feel about it and TfL just cut your route in half tomorrow and you were left without a connection to a station. Just withdrew it, no replacement and you didn’t know because they had no obligation to try and work with the public or local councils to retain in? Just for the record there was a lit of local noise about informing the public in the area about the Sutton/Croydon consultation, mostly from the local MPs. At the end of the day though you can’t force people to participate, remember Sutton has one of the capitals oldest populations. Besides this whole conversation is moot because unless there is a change in the law or TfL is abolished and we end up with commercial routes there is a requirement to consult. I think TfL should have done exactly that with the 414 north of Marble Arch, if it had just been cut with a few weeks notice I doubt many people would have batted an eyelid, they would have just used the 6 instead. But the 414 has had to lumber on carrying little more than fresh air for a year or so whilst a rather pointless consultation dragged on. I guess most people in Croydon and Sutton either weren't aware of the consultation or they just weren't interested, either way the system clearly isn't working. Or maybe a consultation should only be required about proposals to leave an area with no bus service at all as in the case of the R7? Ultimately if anybody isn't happy with what TfL are doing they get their say in the mayoral election. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 5, 2021 7:33:47 GMT
So how would you feel if there was no consultation process regardless of how you feel about it and TfL just cut your route in half tomorrow and you were left without a connection to a station. Just withdrew it, no replacement and you didn’t know because they had no obligation to try and work with the public or local councils to retain in? Just for the record there was a lit of local noise about informing the public in the area about the Sutton/Croydon consultation, mostly from the local MPs. At the end of the day though you can’t force people to participate, remember Sutton has one of the capitals oldest populations. Besides this whole conversation is moot because unless there is a change in the law or TfL is abolished and we end up with commercial routes there is a requirement to consult. I think TfL should have done exactly that with the 414 north of Marble Arch, if it had just been cut with a few weeks notice I doubt many people would have batted an eyelid, they would have just used the 6 instead. But the 414 has had to lumber on carrying little more than fresh air for a year or so whilst a rather pointless consultation dragged on. I guess most people in Croydon and Sutton either weren't aware of the consultation or they just weren't interested, either way the system clearly isn't working. Ultimately if anybody isn't happy with what TfL are doing they get their say in the mayoral election. There were tweets from MPs, councillors, the local councils, assembly members, there was even articles in the local guardian. Besides many would have been represented through stakeholder comments. I’ll admit not every consultation should be necessary like the minor change to the 633 but there is merit in working with the public and stakeholders. We cannot wait once every 4 years to vote or voice concerns at an election. What system would you propose to ensure TfL can be held accountable in real time for any detrimental affects on the bus network? |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 5, 2021 8:21:22 GMT
I think TfL should have done exactly that with the 414 north of Marble Arch, if it had just been cut with a few weeks notice I doubt many people would have batted an eyelid, they would have just used the 6 instead. But the 414 has had to lumber on carrying little more than fresh air for a year or so whilst a rather pointless consultation dragged on. I guess most people in Croydon and Sutton either weren't aware of the consultation or they just weren't interested, either way the system clearly isn't working. Ultimately if anybody isn't happy with what TfL are doing they get their say in the mayoral election. There were tweets from MPs, councillors, the local councils, assembly members, there was even articles in the local guardian. Besides many would have been represented through stakeholder comments. I’ll admit not every consultation should be necessary like the minor change to the 633 but there is merit in working with the public and stakeholders. We cannot wait once every 4 years to vote or voice concerns at an election. What system would you propose to ensure TfL can be held accountable in real time for any detrimental affects on the bus network? Well I guess it's where to draw the line on what should and shouldn't have a consultation. If TfL were proposing to withdraw a route leaving an area with no bus service at all then I'd certainly say it's worthy of consultation but not in a case like the 414 where there is an alternative although if anyone does feel that strongly they can contact TfL or their local MP about it. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 5, 2021 9:09:10 GMT
There were tweets from MPs, councillors, the local councils, assembly members, there was even articles in the local guardian. Besides many would have been represented through stakeholder comments. I’ll admit not every consultation should be necessary like the minor change to the 633 but there is merit in working with the public and stakeholders. We cannot wait once every 4 years to vote or voice concerns at an election. What system would you propose to ensure TfL can be held accountable in real time for any detrimental affects on the bus network? Well I guess it's where to draw the line on what should and shouldn't have a consultation. If TfL were proposing to withdraw a route leaving an area with no bus service at all then I'd certainly say it's worthy of consultation but not in a case like the 414 where there is an alternative although if anyone does feel that strongly they can contact TfL or their local MP about it. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree. I see where you’re coming from but I see the merit in having a transparent consultation system that allow the public to comment directly without having to involve a third party. Yes, it needs updating and any guidelines or rules should be updated but it is absolutely the best way to raise concerns or support positive changes. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 5, 2021 10:20:26 GMT
That's not a passenger-focused mindset. If you're not serving the passengers then who are you serving? Well what is a passenger focused mindset? I think the point being made is that the only people who are likely to respond to consultations are those who are opposed so they're hardly going to give a balanced view. And as I mentioned previously the Croydon and Sutton consultation got less than 1,000 responses, bit like a local by election with a 1% turnout. How passenger focused do you want it to be. Public bodies have financial responsibilities. Would you rather they were reckless and went bust like Croydon Council ... Then you would see many cuts implemented without consultation. Yes you are a customer focused body .... but you have to survive financially or there will be no TfL. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 5, 2021 10:48:29 GMT
Honestly do you ever expect a consultation to show a majority in favour of cuts? That's not the point - if you think ignoring the majority is acceptable, then it's no surprise people don't use public transport. Your usually on here talking about transport providers should listen to passengers but yet your now more worried about the expectation of a consultation? What is the point then. If you run a consultation, you giving something people are likely to vote for it, you take something away people are likely to vote against it. So the results will be biased by what is being asked. Just look how many people respond to TfL consultations. Nowhere can it be said the the responses of a vocal few are what 'should be' done. Being a politician is about having to make unpopular decisions as well as the popular ones ... but many bodies have been frightened of making unpopular decisions for a long time which is why much of our public finances and the world today are in such a bad way. We had an LTN consultation where we were advised by the Councillor leading it the they would respect the residents wishes and if most of them wanted it taken out it would be. The consultation offered 3 options, keep unaltered, remove totally, and use ANPR. Now there was a 26% response rate, which is the highest ever for a Croydon lead consultation, with 63% voting for the removal. Obviously giving 3 options they were hoping to split the votes so no single option got a majority ... they could say the majority were against it. They then claimed as only 26% responded it did not provide a mandate (although previous consultations gave them strong mandates with single digit responses) so were going for the least popular option, the council raking it in option of ANPR. When it was pointed out to the Councillor that the turnout at his election was only 20%, and did he feel he has a valid mandate to be a Councillor ... well that was different. This was something which costs the council nothing and they ignored the consultation result .... public consultation are a sham ... especially when there are external influences such a biased personal influences and finances are concern which creates little wiggle room. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 5, 2021 11:32:05 GMT
Yes, one document states they consult on bus changes, but does not define it as a statutory consultation, the other really defines the statutory consultion process. TfL can and do carry out consultations that are non-statutory. Still not convinced there is a legal obligation to consult on bus route changes, more something TfL have said they would do. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 5, 2021 12:42:59 GMT
So how would you feel if there was no consultation process regardless of how you feel about it and TfL just cut your route in half tomorrow and you were left without a connection to a station. Just withdrew it, no replacement and you didn’t know because they had no obligation to try and work with the public or local councils to retain in? Just for the record there was a lit of local noise about informing the public in the area about the Sutton/Croydon consultation, mostly from the local MPs. At the end of the day though you can’t force people to participate, remember Sutton has one of the capitals oldest populations. Besides this whole conversation is moot because unless there is a change in the law or TfL is abolished and we end up with commercial routes there is a requirement to consult. I think TfL should have done exactly that with the 414 north of Marble Arch, if it had just been cut with a few weeks notice I doubt many people would have batted an eyelid, they would have just used the 6 instead. But the 414 has had to lumber on carrying little more than fresh air for a year or so whilst a rather pointless consultation dragged on. I guess most people in Croydon and Sutton either weren't aware of the consultation or they just weren't interested, either way the system clearly isn't working. Or maybe a consultation should only be required about proposals to leave an area with no bus service at all as in the case of the R7? Ultimately if anybody isn't happy with what TfL are doing they get their say in the mayoral election. You don’t pick and choose what to consult people on because as usual, it doesn’t go along with your own agenda, thank goodness your not in charge |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Nov 5, 2021 14:05:44 GMT
IIRC, there are obligations under the Greater London Authority Act to consult. I will have to see if I can find the reference. Until recently, this was interpreted fairly narrowly with councils and London TravelWatch being consulted as representing passengers. Now there is a consultation on almost everything.
The purpose of a consultation is to find out whether you've missed something in your considerations or underestimated its impact. Some consultations do change on that basis. If many did, it would indicate something going awry in the planning process and would be a bad sign. I would agree that consultation can sometimes make the process of change too sclerotic.
|
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Nov 5, 2021 18:24:32 GMT
I've long since wondered what the point of consultations is, less than 1,000 responded to the Croydon and Sutton proposals suggesting that the vast majority of people either aren't aware of them or they're just not interested. Having said that I suspect there will have been a lot of opposition to the R7 proposal which would cause a lot of pain for very little gain. Unfortunately unless there is a change to the law public bodies like TfL are required to consult on any structural transport changes like route restructuring or extensions. It’s a good system in my opinion as it allows for stakeholders like councils to be involved to an extent. I do wish that the process didn’t take as long though for relatively small things like the change to the 633. What I'm going to say is maybe don't consult on pure extensions like the 324 or 633, but on changes to routing (such as 92), shortening of routes (such as R7 or 414) and withdrawals/mergers (such as 88/C2). |
|
