Government replies to the recommendations made by the Transport Committee in relation to the Bus Services Bill were published last week. There are a few among them of note as the Bill progresses
The Bus Services Bill continued its journey to becoming an Act last week when the government’s response to recommendations from the House of Commons Transport Committee was published.
The Bill has won few friends in the industry, but the government’s replies will make reasonably reassuring reading. Inclusion of smaller operators within franchising processes remains a priority, while the objection mechanism against Enhanced Partnership will soon progress.
Keeping BSOG administration out of the hands of local authorities (LAs) is also a key element of the response, while there remains strong opposition to LAs setting up municipally-owned operations.
The industry will be happy to see an expectation placed upon franchising authorities and partnerships to monitor congestion’s effects on services, and moreover that these bodies will be expected to devise measures to mitigate it.
Protection for SMEs
Both the Transport Committee and the government agree that ensuring that small- and medium-sized operators can compete in franchising processes remains a centrepiece of the Bill.
In particular, the government “intends to reiterate this message in guidance currently being produced for LAs to consider when introducing franchising,” and such LAs will be required to show how they will facilitate the involvement of smaller operators.
A more far-reaching response from the government concerns the franchising process as a whole.
It suggests that there “may be a case… for reinstating the secondary requirement for the Secretary of State’s consent before any individual authority other than a mayoral combined authority can franchise [services],” although it also accepts that any policy for granting franchising consent must be stated clearly.
Where franchising goes ahead, consultation with affected employees’ representatives is seen as essential. However, the Transport Committee’s recommendation that this be extended to Enhanced Partnerships is rebuffed by the government.
No appetite for BSOG devolution
The Transport Committee recommended that BSOG administration should be devolved to LAs that implement Enhanced Partnerships or Advanced Quality Partnerships.
The government’s response testily dismisses this suggestion, although it says that it will still consider requests for devolution of BSOG other than when franchising is in place on a case-by-case basis.
“Decision made by one local transport authority can have significant implications for the overall viability of a wider network,” says the response.
“Devolving BSOG automatically could easily lead to perverse and unlimited outcomes for local bus services over which affected passengers could have little or no influence.”
It also points out that not all LAs wish to have BSOG administration devolved to them, and that doing so could impose increased costs on LAs and greater bureaucracy on operators.
Dismissal of the recommendation is complete when the government points out that partnerships could be limited in size to as little as one corridor.
“A ‘one size fits all’ policy… would not reflect the reality of local circumstances. The government would have been happy to have given further detail on this issue had Ministers been invited to give evidence,” it says.
No municipal comeback
Establishment of municipally-owned operators is likely to interest few, if any, LAs. Nevertheless, the Transport Committee recommended that the government produces guidance setting out the measures it would expect to be put in place to ensure that an arm’s length relationship is maintained by LAs that may opt to establish their own operation.
In its response, the government points out that no LA has indicated that it will pursue this route, and that private sector operators are best placed to deliver services. In particular, the final paragraph is telling:
“We believe that the commissioning and provision of services are best kept separate, and that LAs should not be able to set up new companies to run bus services.”
Finally, the government agrees with the recommendation that it should assist LAs wishing to draw up performance and reporting frameworks. Indeed, it will expect all franchises and partnerships to “consider… what measure should be taken to minimise the effects of congestion on services.”
Operators will no doubt appreciate a tougher stance on congestion, a scourge that has been described by one source as killing services in some areas.
The government says that it would like to see LAs and operators include journey time or congestion-related outcomes or targets as part of Enhanced QPs and franchising process assessments. It’s long overdue, but is just a start. Even so, the fact that congestion now appears to be on the official radar will be welcome.
routeone comment
The government’s response to the Transport Committee has the air of a parent calming an exuberant child. It seeks to rein in some of the Committee’s recommendations while accepting that other points are valid.
What the response does not do is slow the insatiable appetite for franchising among certain politicians, including one MP who sits on the Committee. Franchising will come to some areas, there can be no mistaking that.
But welcome is the recognition of congestion’s deleterious effect on services, and how it requires much more attention from LAs. This official consideration of ‘real world’ problems must continue.
Read the government’s response in full: bit.ly/2jz8DmH
