The long and bumpy road to franchising in Greater Manchester has continued with a demand to operators for data – and if they fail to comply with the requirement, they will be reported to the TC
Operators have reacted with dismay to demands from Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) to provide it with what has been described as “commercially-sensitive data”, to help in the preparation of an assessment of a proposed bus franchising scheme.
Franchising has long been favoured by the Greater Manchester Combined Authority (GMCA), of which TfGM is an executive body, although it does not rule out exploring alternatives.
GMCA confirmed on 30 June that it intended to prepare an assessment, three days after enactment of the Bus Services Act’s powers that enable it to do so, it says.
Authority to carry out the work has been delegated to TfGM. In the first of two letters sent to operators, dated 10 July, Chief Executive Dr Lamonte says: “This process will assist GMCA in assessing the alternative options for bus reform available to it now that the Bus Services Act has commenced.”
The Transport Act 2000 (as amended) allows local transport authorities to require operators to provide various information relation to passenger numbers, fares and vehicle mileages, but there are strict conditions surrounding what it may be used for.
Dr Lamonte tells operators that they are required to provide TfGM with all of the information that they hold, or is held on their behalf, relating to their local bus services that falls within a list of defined categories.
If operators fail to supply TfGM with the information that it is entitled to under the provision of the Bus Services Act, it has a statutory obligation to report them to the Traffic Commissioner. One saving grace may be where TfGM says that operators “are only obliged to share information in the format that they already hold it.”
Huge detail
TfGM requires five years of highly-detailed data concerning passengers; revenue; fares; vehicle distances; staff information; and forecasts.
Ticket machine data is required that covers passenger volumes, ticket types used, fares collected, and the location of boarding and (if available) alighting to give a comprehensive overview of each service.
The data required concerns both commercial and tendered routes, despite TfGM acknowledging that it already has access to the specified information for supported services.
In addition to individual passenger journey data, details of period tickets offered since July 2012 are also required by the body, as is information related to smartcard use.
Additionally, data is required pertaining to all staff, from front-line members to management, and covering rates of pay, grade progression, pension schemes, and employment conditions.
Operators’ questions
Dr Lamonte’s letter has been sent to all bus operators that work into Greater Manchester, including those that are based some distance away but which run cross-border services.
The proposed franchise scheme covers the whole GMCA area and provision is made for cross-border routes in the Bus Services Act.
Inquiries made by routeone show that many of the operators involved – both large and small – have expressed consternation over the amount of data that TfGM requires, and whether they even have it for the whole of the five-year period.
Dr Lamonte has also written separately to operators requesting additional data, acknowledging that responses to that letter will be made voluntarily. In both cases, six weeks has been given to comply.
It is understood that a number of operators have already met TfGM to express their concerns in a bid to bring about changes to the volume of information that it is seeking.
All data is to be supplied on encrypted storage devices supplied by TfGM, but no financial contribution will be made to operators despite, in some cases, many days of work being required to pull the figures together.
TfGM’s view
TfGM has clarified a number of points surrounding its data requirements in a statement to routeone.
“We are keen to ensure that our assessment takes account of as wide a picture as possible, and the information requested reflects this,” says Executive Director Michael Renshaw.
“The information that we are seeking is for the sole purpose of gaining a more detailed understanding of the local bus market to inform our assessment. It cannot be used for any other purpose without the information owner’s consent.
“In preparing the assessment, we will engage with bus operators to consider and assess other realistic options available to us to improve bus services, including new types of partnerships.”
The Bus Services Act makes no provision for financial recompense for operators’ time occupied in gathering the data required, adds TfGM.
Read more about franchising at bit.ly/2uc3EKo
routeone comment
It’s no surprise that TfGM wants data from operators, but less expected is the extent of what it requires. It remains to be seen how many operators complete the non-compulsory section, but as many have expressed concern about being able to furnish the body with even the mandatory data, it’s likely that few will elect to.
It’s difficult to question operators’ motives in railing against TfGM’s demands. Manchester suffers badly from congestion, yet in many cases its bus services are provided to a high standard with investment from operators large and small alike.
Despite that, they are now being asked to potentially aid the confiscation of their businesses, so neither is it a surprise that TfGM has received a frosty response.
