|
|
Post by wirewiper on Mar 30, 2023 17:42:37 GMT
The Transport Select Committee has produced a report today (30th March 2023), Implementation of the National Bus Strategy. "The government has not matched the level of ambition it demanded of local authorities (LAs) in England in preparing Bus Service Improvement Plans (BSIPs) and ministers must now give a firm commitment to providing 'significant further funding' to support National Bus Strategy (NBS) objectives" is the headlining finding of the report, which says the Government is required to maintain its focus on buses, rather than let it slip away. www.route-one.net/news/more-national-bus-strategy-funding-vital-committee/In the wake of the report, the RMT union has called for buses to be publicly-owned. leftfootforward.org/2023/03/rmt-calls-for-public-ownership-of-buses/ |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 12, 2023 15:46:41 GMT
The TUC (Trades Union Congress) has just published a report, which calls for greater funding for bus services in England and Wales at the level provided during the Covid-19 pandemic. The report estimates that around £7.5 billion of additional funding per year is needed to increase bus use to the levels needed to address the climate emergency. Some of this would be defrayed by increased fare revenue brought about by service inprovements, although the TUC argues that there is a case for reducing fares to encourage modal shift away from car use. The report also calls for £23.9 billion of capital funding, £10.3 billion of which would be for additional buses and electrification and £13.6 billion for bus priority infrastructure. Offset against these costs would be an estimated £68 billion of benefits to the wider economy, including the creation of 617,000 new jobs both directly and indirectly. The report also recommends that a guarantee of an hourly bus service for every village be adopted. The report does acknowledge the importance of electrifying the bus network - although it does claim that reducing car use by 4% would remove more carbon emissions than electrifying the entire bus network. www.route-one.net/bus/tuc-report-calls-for-greater-funding-for-bus/Meanwhile, hopes are rising that the bus industry in England will benefit from a longer-term package of financial support, after comments from the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, Richard Holden, at a transport conference in March. www.route-one.net/news/hopes-rise-for-longer-term-bus-funding-award-in-england/ |
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Apr 12, 2023 17:23:30 GMT
The report does acknowledge the importance of electrifying the bus network - although it does claim that reducing car use by 4% would remove more carbon emissions than electrifying the entire bus network. That is a key point I agree with. If unaffordable, priority should be given to service upgrades rather than EVs. Though the issue is that EVs are much more politically salient (aka something which is easy to show off) when compared to service upgrades and thus preferable to throw money at. A launch of new shiny EVs gets a lot of more attention than service upgrades unfortunately.
|
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 12, 2023 17:46:21 GMT
The report does acknowledge the importance of electrifying the bus network - although it does claim that reducing car use by 4% would remove more carbon emissions than electrifying the entire bus network. That is a key point I agree with. If unaffordable, priority should be given to service upgrades rather than EVs. Though the issue is that EVs are much more politically salient (aka something which is easy to show off) when compared to service upgrades and thus preferable to throw money at. A launch of new shiny EVs gets a lot of more attention than service upgrades unfortunately.
It's not unaffordable - we can have both EVs and service upgrades (the two go hand-in-hand, and new EVs are also a service upgrade in their own right). It's a matter of prioritising spending and how the funds are raised. The 4% figure doesn't apply to London. London has a much stronger case for electrics as buses have a much greater modal share of passenger transport than elsewhere. |
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Apr 13, 2023 15:17:30 GMT
That is a key point I agree with. If unaffordable, priority should be given to service upgrades rather than EVs. Though the issue is that EVs are much more politically salient (aka something which is easy to show off) when compared to service upgrades and thus preferable to throw money at. A launch of new shiny EVs gets a lot of more attention than service upgrades unfortunately.
It's not unaffordable - we can have both EVs and service upgrades (the two go hand-in-hand, and new EVs are also a service upgrade in their own right). It's a matter of prioritising spending and how the funds are raised. The 4% figure doesn't apply to London. London has a much stronger case for electrics as buses have a much greater modal share of passenger transport than elsewhere. Unaffordable in the sense that there is a chronic underinvestment in public transport in this country but I very much agree with your point. |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 13, 2023 15:38:05 GMT
It's not unaffordable - we can have both EVs and service upgrades (the two go hand-in-hand, and new EVs are also a service upgrade in their own right). It's a matter of prioritising spending and how the funds are raised. The 4% figure doesn't apply to London. London has a much stronger case for electrics as buses have a much greater modal share of passenger transport than elsewhere. Unaffordable in the sense that there is a chronic underinvestment in public transport in this country but I very much agree with your point. Yes it is the underinvestment that needs to be addressed. The money is out there but it needs to be directed towards public transport - buses especially (rail gets a far bigger slice of the cake outside London even though buses are far better used). |
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Apr 13, 2023 17:08:37 GMT
Unaffordable in the sense that there is a chronic underinvestment in public transport in this country but I very much agree with your point. Yes it is the underinvestment that needs to be addressed. The money is out there but it needs to be directed towards public transport - buses especially (rail gets a far bigger slice of the cake outside London even though buses are far better used). Rail gets more media attention and is easier to boast as an achievement. It's the same in a lot of places unfortunately. Nice shiny rail infrastructure (and road infrastructure as a matter of fact) attracts a lot more eyes than service upgrades to buses for example. |
|
|
|
Post by rogerout on Apr 14, 2023 13:54:34 GMT
I suppose the difference with buses , as apposed to trains is communicating service updates.
For instance when a train is delayed or cancelled, the passengers can see this as they stand at a platform.
On buses this is quite different , as lots of people have no idea if their buses are running late or have been cancelled. Not everyone has bus apps or smart phones.
So when old Doris is stood at a bus stop in the middle of know where and it has been cancelled, she has no idea.
|
|
