Operators carrying out home-to-school services on behalf of Scottish Borders Council (SBC) have reacted with disillusion to a decision made by the local authority (LA) to terminate contracts from 23 December and retender a revised network with lower overall capacity.
The response came after they were informed of the decision in mid-October by Team Leader Transport Services Gordon Grant. Mr Grant’s letter states that data gathered by SBC on its contracted home-to-school services since January showed that while 4,000 seats are currently provided, only 3,500 pupils in the Scottish Borders are eligible for free transport.
Earlier this year the LA moved to an application-based allocation of places on home-to-school transport. It says that of those 3,500 eligible pupils, 2,700 applications for seats were made.
That represents “a material change” to SBC’s home-to-school network and it thus triggered a decision to terminate contracts, in accordance with a condition contained within them. The change will allow SBC “to implement a more sustainable school transport network.”
Mr Grant acknowledges that the development will be deeply unwelcome among affected operators at a time where they are still working to recover from the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, he says that the overhaul will present “a number of new opportunities” for operators that choose to tender for the new network.
A representative of one such business who is familiar with the changes has questioned how the tender documents for replacement services have been composed and has suggested that some routes that are used by passengers other than schoolchildren are at risk because of the exercise.
They add that the approximately 70 vehicles’ worth of work on the revised network is “considerably lower” than currently and have called into question what they describe as scheduling conflicts in the new software-generated approach.
routeone repeatedly asked SBC about the overhaul of its contracted home-to-school network and whether considerations around PSVAR have had any influence on its decision to introduce the changes. After an initial acknowledgement the LA has failed to respond to any of those questions.
