Bus Reform Workshops Summary

Moving Britain Ahead

November 2015

The Department for Transport has actively considered the needs of blind and partially sighted people in accessing this document. The text will be made available in full on the Department’s website. The text may be freely downloaded and translated by individuals or organisations for conversion into other accessible formats. If you have other needs in this regard please contact the Department.

Department for Transport Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London SW1P 4DR Telephone 0300 330 3000 General enquiries https://forms.dft.gov.uk Website www.gov.uk/dft

You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0. To view this licence visit http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government- licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected].

Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

Contents

1. Introduction 4 The 'Buses Bill' 4 Bus Reform Workshops 4 2. Workshop summaries 6 Franchising 6 Enhanced partnerships 8 Open data and bus registration 8 Smart ticketing 9 Other key issues 10 3. Next steps 11 Annex A - List of participating organisations 12

1. Introduction

The 'Buses Bill'

1.1 The Government has agreed a number of Devolution Deals with local authorities in which we have committed to providing a more effective route to franchising than is currently offered through the Quality Contract Scheme legislation. To fulfil this commitment we intend to introduce a 'Buses Bill'. 1.2 The main aims of the Bill are to:

• Enable local authorities in England, outside London, to franchise their local networks, where they have agreement from Government. • Preserve the commercial and innovative strengths of private sector operators. • Ensure there is a good package of measures to improve local bus services in areas that may not wish or feel able to move to franchising.

1.3 The Bill aims to provide a more effective set of tools for local transport authorities to use to address inefficiencies in their local bus markets and provide better local bus services for passengers. Alongside franchising and partnership proposals, the Bill aims to improve the provision of data about services so that passengers have access to better information.

Bus Reform Workshops

1.4 The Department for Transport (DfT) held a series of seven Bus Reform Workshops, in five locations (Birmingham, London, Leeds, Manchester and Bristol) across England, in September and October 2015. 1.5 The workshops aimed to give local authorities, bus operators and other interested stakeholders an opportunity to share their views on bus franchising, the Buses Bill and alternatives to franchising. The focus of the events was on bus services in England, outside London. 1.6 The workshops were not intended to be a forum for general discussions around bus services or funding for concessionary travel, nor were they regional workshops in the sense that each workshop was identical and did not seek to address local issues. 1.7 Ahead of the workshops the Department published a Bus Reform Workshops Background Document to stimulate discussion at these events. This document is published on the Department's website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/bus-reform-workshops- background-information

1.8 The workshops, most of which were over-subscribed, were attended by over 400 stakeholders. A list of the key stakeholders represented at these workshops is given at Annex A. 1.9 Each workshop followed the same format. The first half of the workshop contained DfT presentations on franchising and partnership working, a presentation from Transport Focus and a brief question and answer session. The second half was made up of interactive sessions to allow attendees to express their views on franchising, enhanced partnership, open data, registration and smart ticketing. 1.10 The presentations given at the workshops have been published on the Department's website at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/bus- reform-workshops-background-information 1.11 This document is a brief summary of the discussion points that were raised at the workshops, and in the email comments submitted following the workshops. It is not intended to reflect every individual comment received. 1.12 The Department would like to thank everyone who participated in the workshops and/or sent additional feedback. Your comments helped to bring to our attention the wide range of issues and will help to ensure the policy is developed with input from those involved in the delivery of bus services.

2. Workshop summaries

Franchising

2.1 The presentation given on franchising covered the following policy areas:

• The background to the announcement of the Buses Bill, including the Devolution Deal process. • The general principles upon which the franchising policy was being developed. • The mechanisms through which local authorities could access franchising powers. • The process an authority might follow before using franchising powers. • How franchising might work in practice, including an outline of a potential permit system. • The potential impacts on small and medium-sized operators. • Whether statutory guidance would be helpful in implementing franchising. • The transition process and safeguarding provisions that could be put in place.

2.2 The franchising breakout sessions focused of three key aspects of the policy: • The decision-making process that should be put in place before a local authority decided whether or not to move to a franchising model. • How franchising could work in practice, and the day-to-day operations. • How the transition period could be managed and the safeguards that would need to be put in place.

Decision-making process 2.3 The decision-making process as proposed in the background document and explained in the presentation material was discussed in detail by the majority of the breakout groups. Both local authorities and operators seemed content with the principles of a 5-case business case model being used to inform decision- making. There were some concerns about how the business case would work in practice, and how local operators, interest groups and community members could input and scrutinise proposals. 2.4 There was a strong view at the workshops, from both operators and local authorities, that independent scrutiny of any business case should be required, but there were differences in opinion expressed about how the independent scrutiny would be applied. Some workshop attendees advocated that the ultimate decision on whether or not to move to franchising should be taken by

an independent panel or individual. Others proposed that independent scrutiny should be there to provide assurance to the local authority that the business case had been developed robustly. 2.5 The issue of compensation was also mentioned during the workshops with some workshop attendees advocating that incumbent operators who did not win franchise contracts to deliver services should be compensated for the loss of business. 2.6 The issue of sustainability was also discussed by several of the break-out groups. Several attendees highlighted that local authorities that move to a franchising model cannot expect to be able to return to a deregulated system if the franchising model was found not to be sustainable as the market will have changed substantially. Franchising in practice 2.7 The proposals for a permit system was discussed in some detail by the majority of the break-out groups and many stressed the need for cross-boundary services to be accommodated. There were mixed views on the need for central guidance relating to the operation of a permit system. Some attendees stressed the need for consistency and fair rules for operators while others suggested that franchising authorities should be able to use their discretion in determining how a permit system should operate in their local area. 2.8 The break-out groups also discussed the impacts of franchising in one area on surrounding local bus services and local authority areas. Some attendees stressed that end-to end bus services may only be commercially viable because of patronage and revenue from certain parts of the route, and that this should be considered when thinking about cross-border services. Other attendees explained that depots situated outside franchising areas may serve routes that fell within a franchising areas as well as services wholly outside the franchised area, and that the impact of franchising in one area could adversely affect services in another. 2.9 There were also a number of queries and questions around the practicalities of franchising including the possible geographic limits to the size of contracts, and how the contracts would be procured by franchising authorities. Views on statutory guidance were mixed, with some local authorities seeing it was unnecessary and against the spirit of devolution, with others feeling that it would be useful. Operators and passenger groups generally saw it as important. 2.10 Attendees also queried how SMEs could participate in a franchising system, and how impacts on their businesses could be minimised. Some operators expressed concern about the powers a franchising authority would have to require information from an incumbent during the franchising process, reflecting that some information was felt to be commercially confidential. Transition and safeguards 2.11 Many workshop attendees agreed that they could see difficulties in the transition period and that it had the potential to cause disruption for passengers. Operators and local authorities felt there could be a threat to investment during a transition process and wanted to know how services could be safeguarded. Attendees at all of the workshops stressed that the threat of franchising in particular areas could deter operators from investing in staff and services, and

that certainty of the approach to be adopted in particular areas should be provided as soon as possible. 2.12 Attendees also agreed that mechanisms should be put in place to protect those working in the bus industry in the event that an area moves to a franchising model.

Enhanced partnerships

2.13 DfT's presentation on enhanced partnerships included the following policy areas:

• The existing partnership framework. • A potential new model for partnership. • Competition law.

2.14 During the breakout sessions the proposals for new enhanced partnership powers were discussed and feedback was mostly positive. Generally, the equality between bus operators and local authorities, coupled with the independent input of non-executive members, was seen as useful in building consensus. However, some concerns were expressed that the process should not be overly bureaucratic. 2.15 A number of questions were raised, including how partnerships could work in two-tier authorities, how agreements could be enforced and the timescales for agreements. 2.16 The main points raised in discussion included the following:

• The bus strategy was seen as a useful tool. • A number of authorities expressed concern that existing QPSs must deliver ongoing infrastructure improvements that may not be the best option locally. However, others felt the removal of the link would disincentivise new infrastructure. • The extension of the quality standards that can be applied to vehicles operating in a partnership area was welcomed by local authorities as a way to ensure all operators provide modern ticketing and information to customers. Operators felt SMEs should not be disadvantaged by additional burdens. • The network plan and ticketing arrangements for enhanced partnerships were seen as broadly positive measures, offering outcomes that would otherwise only be available under a franchised network. • Measures to ameliorate the perceived threat of action by the competition authorities was seen as essential to the success of further partnership working.

Open data and bus registration

2.17 Open breakout sessions discussed the aim of achieving full digital bus registration to secure journey planning benefits. The policy aims to ensure that

route, timetable, punctuality and fares data is provided in an open access format that not only meets the requirement to register services but can also provide rich enough data to support online journey planners. 2.18 There was broad support for the principle of open data, although operators did raise some concerns about how commercially sensitive data would be handled. A standard, centralised system with a clear purpose was favoured. 2.19 Operators expressed concerns that the existing Electronic Bus Service Registration system was too costly and complicated for some, particularly in the need for mapping data. There was support for a web based system that was more accessible for smaller operators. It was agreed that the system needed to be simple, easy and cheap. 2.20 It was acknowledged that electronic data submission reduced the scope for errors through double-keying where separate information had to be provided for journey planning. The workshop groups were keen that any new system of open data should build on existing repositories of information, including Traveline, and there was interest in seeing whether these could be incorporated into the process. 2.21 There were mixed views on whether local authorities should handle bus registration. While some were supportive, others expressed concern that local authorities were not equipped to assume this role. However, there was more support for passing the role to local authorities in enhanced partnership areas as it was seen as key to making these partnerships work effectively. It was felt that, where this is done, there should be some consistency in the information required by each authority.

Smart ticketing

2.22 Smart ticketing discussions considered options for simpler fares and ticketing with more clarity for passengers around value for money. 2.23 In the breakout sessions feedback on the nationwide smart payment mechanism was positive. Many suggested that any future scheme could also be delivered at either a local or regional level, but that this would require some level of DfT involvement. This could include, mandating operator participation and/or setting standards in order to bring about a step change in the delivery of ticketing to passengers. 2.24 The main points raised in discussion included the following:

• Operators were keen to see cash fares retained as some bus passengers do not have bank accounts. • Operators were keen to see some of the cost barriers to participation in smart ticketing schemes removed for SMEs. • Concerns were expressed about price capping for multi-operator ticketing, although there was less unease about an appropriate formula based approach. • It was acknowledged during discussions that passenger expectations for more advanced ticketing continue to rise. There is therefore a need to consider how contactless bankcards and other modern forms of ticketing technology can be introduced.

• The workshop identified that, regardless of the delivery model, there was a need to ensure co-operation between ticketing schemes for the benefit of passengers.

Other key issues

A number of issues and ideas were raised during the breakout sessions. These included:

• Funding issues were raised, as local transport authorities will need to consider the costs of any changes and the longer term funding needed to sustain new ways of working.

• The role of SMEs was discussed and raised a number of concerns including the role these organisations play in any changes and the protections and guarantees that could be offered to them.

• All groups were keen to see a better outcome for passengers. For passengers with disabilities, the issues of audible and visual displays and priority over wheelchair spaces were raised.

• The importance of integration with other modes of transport and the future of Plusbus were also discussed.

• All groups were keen to know how the proposed changes would work in rural areas.

• There were frequent requests to keep any changes simple, easy to understand and implement.

• Political change was a key concern. Many asked if there would be a process for reversing any changes.

3. Next steps

3.1 We are continuing to work with Ministers as we develop proposals for inclusion in the Bill. We will consult formally on a draft Bill if the Parliamentary timescale allows. 3.2 We will, as far as possible, keep you informed of progress. Any comments should be sent to: [email protected].

Annex A - List of participating organisations

Abellio Abus of Bristol ALBUM Arriva Arup ATCO Atkins ATWEST Avon Buses Barnsley Council Bath and North East Somerset Council Bedford Borough Council Birmingham Chamber of Commerce Birmingham City Council Blackburn with Darwen Council Blackpool Transport Bond Dickinson LLP Borough of Poole Bracknell Forest Council Bradford Council Brighton & Hove Bus & Coach Company Brighton and Hove City Council Bristol City Council Buckinghamshire County Council Cambridgeshire County Council Carmel Bristol CBT Central Buses CentreBus Centro Chalkwell Cheshire East Council Cheshire West and Chester Council Citistar City of York Council Coast to Capital LEP Community Action Dacorum Community Transport Association UK Connect Tees Valley

Connexions Buses CPT Crawley Community Transport Crosville CTA Cuckmere Buses Cumbria County Council D&G Buses DAC Beachcroft Darlington Council Delaine of Bourne Derby City Council Derbyshire County Council Devon County Council Doncaster Council Dorset County Council DRM of Bromyard Dudley Council E P Morris East Riding of Yorkshire Council East Sussex County Council ATCO Ensign Bus Essex County Council EYMS Group (East Yorkshire) Faresaver Buses First Gateshead Council gfirst LEP Go North East Go South Coast Go-Ahead Greener Journeys Guide Dogs for the Blind Halton Transport Hampshire County Council Hansons Buses HCT Group Heart of South West LEP (Consultant) Hertfordshire County Council Hornsby Travel Hull and Humber Chamber of Commerce Hull City Council iGo/WMSNT Group Institute for Public Policy Research Integrated Transport Planning Limited Ipswich Buses ITO World ITSO JMP Johnson's Coaches Kinchbus

KPMG Lancashire County Council Leeds Civic Trust Leicester and Leicestershire LEP Leicester City Council Leicestershire County Council LGA Lincolnshire Council Luton Borough Council MCL Merseytravel Midland Classic Milton Keynes Council Moorbus Community Interest Company National Express Network Warrington Nexus NIBS Buses Norfolk County Council North East Combined Authority North Somerset Council North Yorkshire County Council Northamptonshire County Council Northumberland County Council Norwich Door to Door Nottingham City Transport Nottinghamshire County Council Novacroft Group Nu-Venture Omnibus Oxford Bus Company Oxfordshire County Council Peterborough Council Portsmouth County Council Pteg RATP DEV RMT Rossendale Borough Council Rossendale Transport Rotala Rotherham Council Safeguard Buses SEM LEP Sheffield City Council Sheffield City Region Shropshire Council SiGNAL Training & Consultancy Services Ltd Somerbus South Somerset Association for Voluntary and Community Action South Yorkshire PTE Southampton City Council

Staffordshire County Council Stagecoach Steer Davies Gleave Stephensons of Essex Stockport Council Stockton on Tees Borough Council Stoke on Trent City Council Stone King Sunderland City Council Surrey County Council SWSAL Talking Buses TAS Partnership Tees Valley Unlimited (LEP) TfGM Thamesdown TM Travel Torbay Council Tower Transit Traffic Commissioners Transdev Transition Fleet Transport Scotland Transport Service Solutions Travel De Courcey TravelWatch Trent Barton Tyne and Wear Public Transport Users Group UNITE University of Leeds Uttlesford Community Transport Walsall Council Warrington Borough Council Warwickshire County Council Wellglade (Trent Barton) West Berkshire Council West of England LEP West Yorkshire Combined Authority Wiltshire Council Wokingham Borough Council Wolverhampton City Council Worcestershire County Council WSP Group Yellow Buses