Some of the same problems and solutions may exist in either a franchise or non-regulated model, writes Confederation of Passenger Transport President Ralph Roberts
I have heard it said that there is never a sleeping moment in the coach and bus industry. This came to mind with more restructure news breaking recently. It got me thinking about the pros and cons of a regulated (franchised) or non-regulated marketplace, the structure of businesses under each model and the drivers of change within those businesses.
I have worked in both marketplaces and have a reasonably good understanding of the philosophies and practicalities of both environments. There are many perspectives involved depending on where you are in the chain. This was brought home to me again over a brief social media exchange with a strong supporter of the publicly controlled or publicly owned option, where only one part of the equation is recognised, the ownership.
I know that both models can work. Indeed, there are plenty of examples where they do and where they have done. The modal shift from bus to private car since the 1950s was always going to take its toll on the ability of the bus industry to provide an essential public service whilst being mostly funded by commercial demand – a tipping point would come.
I am not the only voice that has predicted what would happen if public policy excluding bus didn’t change. I believe that we are at a tipping point in many areas where the commercial demand is such that the social need is not being met.
So, if the end result is that franchising delivers more bus services to more people then surely it is the right thing to do? Perhaps. The way it is achieved is important, though. With more and more privately owned businesses and council-owned operators all voicing concerns about business confiscation, we must find an equitable solution to business owners having their business disappear overnight through no fault of their own.
If franchising is where we are heading, the journey to it must be a morally just and fair journey. I do not see the current system as morally just and fair. It is the opposite.
Another factor concerns me and that is geography. In urban areas, franchising can be made to work due to there being a level of commercial revenue that will support a bus network. Authorities should be managing top-up funding and complementary measures as standard.
This could then enhance the offering enough to change the dynamic and cause the market trajectory to reverse. All good, but all possible under the current system. Let’s move on, though, and accept that an authority needs a bigger incentive to do what is right.
In rural areas though, there would be insufficient farebox revenue and no budget within the authority to fund it, meaning rural areas could lose out again. In the clamour to take control in the metropolitan areas, the rural areas are being forgotten in my view. As are the reasons why we are where we are.
We need to have grown-up discussions that recognise the realities and steer clear of dogma and philosophy. Only then will bus users get the best solution.
