Report Strategic Director, Development and Deputy Chief Executive

This report provides a brief overview of the operation of the current bus service network including gaps and issues relating to these services. The report also provides a summary of the powers brought about by the recent introduction of the Bus Services Act (The Act).

The Committee considered a report of the Strategic Director (Development) and the Deputy Chief Executive, which provided a brief overview of the operation of the current bus service network and gaps and issues relating to these services. The report also provides a summary of the powers brought about by the recent introduction of the Bus Services Act.

The Head of City Policy referred to the main points and themes within the report, which included:-

·                The role of buses in Manchester;

·                Public transport journeys across Greater Manchester (GM);

·                How people travelled into the City Centre during morning peak hours;

·                How bus services were currently delivered in Manchester;

·                The provisions of the Bus Services Act (2017) and Bus Reform, which included;

·                Advanced Quality Partnerships (AQP)

·                Enhanced Partnerships (EP)

·                Bus franchising; and

·                Advanced Ticketing Scheme and Information Availability.

·                Key issues and opportunities for Manchester’s bus services, which included a GM wide review of bus services, identifying key gaps in the overall provision of services that should be addressed through any form of bus service reform.

Some of the key points that arose from the Committee’s discussions were:-

·                It was felt that the Committee should be included in any future debate around the possible model of bus reform in the city and that as part of this debate, the Committee needed to look at the demographics of people who used buses and the reasons why they use them;

·                As part of the review of bus service networks, it would be useful to look at routes that have either been removed or reduced in frequency in recent years to the detriment of service levels previously enjoyed by local residents;

·                It was felt that public authorities should have the ability to specify ticket prices and compel operators to provide particular services;

·                Was it necessary to identify/explore AQP’s and EP’s before considering the franchising of bus services;

·                There was a need to consider the types of buses in operation and whether they were suitable on all routes;

·                There was also a need to consider appropriate ticketing and fare levels and provide better value for Manchester residents, especially those who lived on the periphery of the city centre, in the poorest communities, who often faced higher per mile bus fares;

·                The issue of “over – bussing” of some services within the city centre needed addressing;

·                There was a need to understand bus users’ origins and destinations when building a suitable bus network;

·                There was concern that current bus operators had not always operated in good faith and it was questioned, in light of this, whether AQP’s or EP’s would work or provide any advantages;

·                How could Elected Members raise specific concerns and contribute to the proposed consultation;

·                There was a degree of surprise amongst Members that TfGM did not already have some form of plan in mind for the future delivery of bus services;

·                Had consideration been given to collecting real time data in relation to the timeliness and reliability of bus services;

·                It was suggested that TFGM should be looking at a similar way of travel across Greater Manchester for bus services akin to the Metrolink network; and

·                While routes on main radial routes in and out of the city centre were generally well provided for it was apparent that there was gap in the current bus network service if residents were trying to make l east to west and vice versa across the city.

The Head of Policy for Transport for Greater Manchester (TfGM) explained the process that the Bus Service Act required Greater Manchester to go through and in doing so advised that TfGM were preparing a Business Case for bus reform which required obtaining a large amount of data from current operators.  As this was the first time the powers of the Act had been implemented, there was a need to proceed in a careful and steady manner through the process that the Act set out.  The Business Case would need approval by the Combined Authority (CA) before it was subject to public consultation.  It was commented that it would probably be appropriate following approval by the CA, that the overall case for reform be re – considered by the Scrutiny Committee.

It was reported that in terms of the decline of bus services and the loss of routes, Greater Manchester was not alone in this with a lot of other Local Authorities experiencing similar cuts, to the extent that the service in London provided the same number of bus trips than the rest of the country combined.  This decline had been as a result of a number of factors, including congestion, the bus network and complexity of the fare offer in Greater Manchester.  It was commented that the AQP and EP proposals would require negotiation and reaching mutual agreements with operators but these would not be binding and it would not possible to enforce these arrangements. Bus franchising provided more certainty in terms of outcome.

The Head of City Policy acknowledged the issues that had been raised by Members.  He explained that the Council was being asked by TfGM to identify the areas that it felt needed improving in the current bus service provision and network, in order to provide some key principles that needed to be included within the business case for change.

The Head of Policy (TfGM) reported that in relation to farer ticketing prices a franchising model could deliver a simpler pricing system for residents across Greater Manchester. 

The Executive Member of Highways Planning and Transport noted the valid comments that had been made by Committee Members.  She proposed that as all Elected Members would likely have a view on the areas that needed improving in the current bus service provision and network she would arrange for meetings in the North, South and Central areas of the city for Members to raise their concerns/ issues.  She also added that TFGM had a wealth of data on current bus services, but in order to form suitable proposals, Members were being asked to identify what was important to them and their residents

The Head of Policy (TfGM) advised that the proposed consultation needed more assessment work before a date could be identified for its launch and the Committee would be advised as soon as possible.  In relation to origin and destination data he reminded the Committee that TfGM was not a network specifier and its purpose was to fill gaps in the network which was largely defined by the bus operators at present.

Officers also advised that TfGM did collect data on the punctuality of services but did not collect real time data at present.  It was also reported that TFGM were not able to affect commercial services that were delivering poor performance, as this was outside the organisation’s remit.

Decision

The Committee:-

(1)          Notes the options that the Bus Services Act present to Combined Authorities with an elected mayor;

(2)          Welcomes the offer from the Executive Member of Environment and Transport to arrange meetings in the North, South and Central areas of the city for Members to raise their concerns/ issues and that these be arranged in areas that are and are not served by the Metrolink.

(3)          Suggests the following issues be considered by TfGM in developing its business case for the reform of bus services:-

·           Concerns that assessments are being undertaken based on existing service levels and that this should also include an assessment of where enhanced levels of service are required;

·           An more detailed assessment should be undertaken of the demographics of bus users and a fuller analysis of the journey purposes of users and potential users;

·           The future procurement options of services and a concern that bus operators needed to show good faith in negotiations;

·           The need to develop imaginative solutions to serve neighbourhoods away from main radial routes and address current concerns about the excessive numbers of buses on some city centre streets; and

·           Consideration be given to an integrated ticketing offer and greater equality of fares provision across the city.

(4)          Requests were made for information including a summary of data that has been used to date to underpin current findings, including information on frequencies of services and services that have been removed or reduced in the last three years.