Summary of Comments - Lets Talk About Supported Transport

APPENDIX C(1) Summary of comments - Lets talk about Supported Transport

Aim of the consultation

The consultation sought to engage a range of stakeholders in a debate about the savings the council needs to make with its spending on supported transport services and the opportunities to reconfigure these services following a tendering process and a reflection on some of the recent changes e.g. concessionary bus passes for older people.

The consultation ran from 1 March 2011 and closed on 11 May – a period of just over 9 weeks.

How was the consultation conducted The council used multiple channels to get the message out that it was seeking to engage people on these issues. The channels used were:

• Press release • Leaflets on all buses, community transport vehicles, in doctors surgeries and newsagents • Posters at Park & Ride sites • A listing on the council’s Consultation Finder which details all the council’s consultation in one place on the internet: www.bristol.gov.uk/consultationfinder • Twitter • Facebook • Informed existing operators of supported transport services • Emails to equalities fora / letter to Bristol Older People’s Forum • Posters and information packs to all the council’s libraries

In order to have an informed public debate about these issues, the ASK Bristol discussion site was used which gave an overview of the challenge and opportunities facing the council with these services. The site also allowed people to access detailed passenger, expenditure and subsidy information to help participants make an informed contribution to the debate. This information can be seen at: http://askbristol.wordpress.com/2011/03/02/lets-talk-about- supported-transport-services/

Access for those people NOT online For those people without internet access, paper copies of a briefing paper were sent to the council’s libraries along with a paper feedback form. These were publicised in the libraries by a poster and on the leaflets. We also set up a dedicated telephone line for members of the public to request a paper copy. People responding to the consultation offline could also use a freepost address.

Responding to the consultation Various options were available to suit respondents’ needs for how people could take part: • Leave a comment on the online public discussion forum • Complete an online private response form • Complete a paper survey – large print / specific needs also catered for

In order to facilitate a dialogue between participants, councillors and council officers – the latter two were encouraged to join the public discussion and answer people’s queries and help inform the debate. Cllr Gary Hopkins and the Passenger Transport Team took part.

Overview of the response to the consultation

Appendix 1 shows a complete list of all respondents comments and readers of this report are encouraged to study this. This is a summary table:

Number of views on Ask Bristol 1,552 Number of comments on Ask Bristol 109 Number of questionnaires sent to libraries 580 Number of queries on dedicated answer phone 15 Number of paper questionnaires sent out 48 Number of responses to questionnaires (paper and online) 75

Ask Bristol statistics – breakdown of views

Popular comments/ideas for saving money (Ask Bristol and survey monkey)

Whilst accepting this is a qualitative exercise, the Consultation, Research & Intelligence Team has read all respondents’ comments and identified common themes and recorded how many times these themes were mentioned. Inevitably, this is an inexact science, so you are recommended to read people’s comments in their own words in appendix 1

Supported Transport - most popular comments for saving money

Severn Beach Line - improve ticketeting and reduce subsidy 42

Invest in a local light rail network for both the centre and suburbs. 41

Don’t subsidise or stop commuter ferry services (retain cross ferry) 40

Oyster card to work on buses and trains 38

Night buses- don’t subsidise 26

Park and Ride - remove subsidy and get residents/surrounding LAs 23 to contribute to cost

Re-introduce environmentally friendly trams 22

Shopper services - remove subsidy and/or get big retailers to 18 contribute Stop wasting money on showcase bus routes and works to kerb 16 sides etc

Use Cycling City funding to subsidise public transport 13

Local bus/train services being run by the local council 12

Orbital services - remove subsidy/need support and funding from 12 surrounding councils

Smart card system, subsidised by other big employers 12

Need overall vision and plan for tackling public transport 11

Prioritise services which help get people to work and college 11

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 number of comments Survey monkey results

People completing the offline and online private response form were asked to categorise their comments in this question:

“In Supported Transport Services, we need to save at least £600,000 in 2011/12 alone. Please indicate which category your comment is going to relate to:” This produced the following table:

Let's talk about : Supported Transport Services

50.0% 45.0% 40.0% 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% How can we do How routes Opportunities Who should Are there more for less? could be for improving receive these services which changed to how we do services? no longer serve increase things the community passengers and can be cut. and grow the For instance services? where two similar routes serve the same community?

Comments relevant to equalities groups

These services are often used by people from the equalities groups. We read all the responses and attempted to identify comments relating to these groups. Comments relating to disabled people and older people were identified and have been reproduced here in their entirety.

Disabled people

As a caring society we should support the more vulnerable. Transport for people with disabilities should be subsidised to give the same oppotunities available to society as a whole.

As a country, we cannot afford to offer everyone everything. Those who are MOST vulnerable who need door to door services should get this, later evening services, and services that make Bristol the amazing city it is, should continue.

Also bcc tell me what the eligibility criteria currently is for dial a ride / demand responsive services? This should be for registered disabled only as ive heard in some communities anybody can get in.

Subsidies should be applied to early morning, late evening and Sunday services, park and ride, rail and the travel subsidies for pensioners and disabled (community transport). Subsidies such as orbital subsidies, ferry services, shopper services, night buses are lower priorities. As such they should be the first to be affected by any cuts. a) The Bristol Disability Equality Forum believes that, as the DDA became law in 1995 it is time that operators are required to provide accessible transport as a condition of the contract; b) Many Disabled people cannot use the Severn line trains, even tho’, for many, they are the most suitable public transport, because stations are not accessible and require one to book a day in advance. It really is time that the stations and trains are accessible. Freedom of movement, after all, is meant to be a basic human right! This would be very simple to arrange as each train has a ramp on it so all that is required is to give staff the key to the ramp as a matter of course. Also, platforms could be changed a little to ensure the gap between train and platform is not too great. Bristol Disability Equality Forum

We, the two Angelas, use the Bugler’s Easy Rider bus every Tuesday morning so that we can go to Broadmead. We are picked up at our doors and brought back safely. We are both elderly and disabled, one of us is in a wheelchair with leg extensions and the other about to make use of Shopmobility when we arrive. We would be absolutely lost without this service. We would not be able to shop, meet friends, visit the post office and banks, or have a civilised coffee and snack before being taken home. In effect, we become second class citizens. Dial-a-Ride is, sadly hopeless…if you can every get through to them they don’t seem to be able to help. Likewise, if the subsidised services 517, 518, 584 and 585 were taken away it would have a catastrophic effect on the many other elderly and disabled people in Coombe Dingle who rely on these buses. These buses are our only way to get fairly easily to Southmead and Frenchay Hospitals. It is very hilly and a long way to the nearest Firstbus service and many would not even make it there. Those in previous posts who are advocating scapping these services are shortsighted and selfish. They will probably be elderly and/or disabled in the future…..what then? I was, and am, very concerned that I only found out about the consultation when the chief executive replied to my letter, a matter of days before the end of the consultation time-frame. I suspect that the vast majority of DialaRide users were, and probably still are, unaware that there even is a consultation in process. I myself use the internet to order, and have delivered, not only my food but also many other items. This means my 'need' to use the service is reduced to hospital and dental appointments, one-off 'special' shopping and social events. Many DialaRide users do not have access to the internet and would be utterly unable to buy essential/basic food. Many of the DialaRide users I have met are far from frail or elderly, yet would be housebound without it. Thanks to DialaRide and the internet, I have a life despite effectively being housebound. However, the biggest problem with being housebound is that one is out of touch with what is going on locally, such as this consultation. Whilst many users may have no interest in providing information, IF your 'consultation' is to be genuinely and fully informed, perhaps serious consideration should be given to extending the time frame for the consultation. I believe there are in the region of 15,000 'users' registered with DialaRide, although the numbers using the service on a regular basis is much smaller. IF the consultation time-frame were extended, this could allow time for a copy of the consultation form to be sent to all those who do regularly use DialaRide. Sadly some users do regard the service as a 'right' and use it as if it were a personal taxi service provided free by the council. Bringing to their attention that there is a consultation may help them to recognise what a privilege it is to have a service like this. Saving money by reducing the holiday or sick pay of drivers would be to take advantage of those who are doing the work because it is providing a service, several of whom are not permanent full-time employees. So far as I am aware, all the drivers and escorts who facilitate the DialaRide day trips are voluntary. It would be a sad comment on the state of this 'civilized' country if we begin to take advantage of volunteers in order to save money. Mrs Suaad Walker grateful DialaRide user

The dial a ride is an important service but irs organisation needs improvement to make it easier to book and reduce the number of journeys which are duplicated with only one or two passengers on each. With the supportted bus servie changing contractors they come in or quit being able to use first day rider, this needs sorting. Also, more publicity for these services to increase riders. It would help if bus drivers were instructed to always pull into the raised kerb and wait for people to be seated before setting off.

Stop wasting money on showcase bus routes and works to kerb sides etc

Comments from Dial-a-Ride passengers: Mrs R – “I’m blind, so I wouldn’t go out if it wasn’t for Bristol Dial-a-Ride” Mrs B – “I wouldn’t manage without them and would have to stay in. I couldn’t use taxis as they are too expensive” Mrs Bagshaw – “I wouldn’t be able to visit my husband in the care home” Mrs Buston – “I couldn’t get out on my own due to being partially sighted” Mrs Vivian – “Incredible service, I don’t know what I would do without it, the drivers are absolutely fantastic” Mrs Wheeler – “I couldn’t get the shopping without Bristol Dial-a-Ride, taxis are very expensive” Mr Thomas – “I couldn’t cope with public transport” Mr Smethurst – “I rely on Bristol Dial-a-Ride for everything” Mrs Davies – “Very good door to door service” Mrs M – “Invaluable due to my blindness, I would rather have Dial-a-Ride drivers than taxi drivers” Mrs Shaw – “invaluable, I can’t get to my local bus stop or carry shopping back” Mr Barnes – “Bristol Dial-a-Ride is most important to me” Mrs Bagshaw – “It’s a fantastic service” Mrs Wills – “Out of this world door to door service” Mrs Southcott – “door to door service is brilliant, they help me into my home” Escort for Master T – Dial-a-Ride is “helping him to build his confidence” Please do not cut our Dial-a-Ride service.

Statistics – In a recent survey of Dial-a-Ride, members said: • 73% of members had made a new friend on a Bristol Dial-a-Ride vehicle. • 98% of members felt Bristol Dial-a-Ride helped them maintain their independence. • 92% of members wanted to speak to a Councillor to support the service • 98% of members had no access to this online survey and would require transport with Bristol Dial-a-Ride to attend a meeting with their local Councillor to take part in this discussion

I am very concerned that I only found out about this consultation in response to a letter sent to Adele Hayley Dial-a-Ride chief executive as well as councillors, Dr Mark Wright, Dr Jon Rogers, Simon Crew, Mike Wollacot. I suspect that the vast majority of Dial-a-Ride users are completely unaware that this vital service is under threat. The Dial-a-ride day trips are a wonderful bonus yet are priced way below the figure charged by commercial coach operators for similar trips. Below is the text of the letter sent (to save space in this electronic format, I have eliminated the paragraph breaks). Re Dial-a-Ride service: I have been a grateful user of Dial-a-Ride since ill health forced me to give up driving. I have been concerned to hear of possible cuts to this vital service. Whilst I am aware of the straightened financial times that necessitate cuts I am concerned that the nature of the cuts proposed may not be the most efficient way of protecting this valuable provision. I do not know if the way the service is run is solely due to Dial-a-Ride management, Bristol City Council constraints, or a combination of the two factors working together so am writing to both. I am unsure of the most appropriate councillor so have written to several. All the Dial-a-ride drivers I have met are, without exception, helpful and caring. A number are technically retired. All give the impression they are doing this job precisely to be part of providing a service. To take advantage of that good-will and community spirit by implementing cut-backs through holiday and sick pay is surely un-necessary when far greater savings could be made by improving the efficiency of the current, computerised booking system. Originally the service was run with vehicles being largely operated in specific areas of the city, when all bookings were organised by hand/head. Passengers could be ‘doubled-up’ within an area enabling vehicles to provide the service to around 30/35 people in a single day, yet only driving 55/60 miles. Since introduction of the computerised booking system the majority of vehicles now routinely cover the whole city. This often involves not only back-tracking on their own routes in the course of a single day, but also carrying far fewer passengers (around 16/18 or less) as well as driving far more miles, closer to 85/90. Driving more miles, coupled with the current high price of fuel, can only have a seriously detrimental impact on the cost of running the service. Whilst I am immensely grateful for the service I have personally received I have become increasingly concerned that I am often the only passenger in a 4/6/8 seat vehicle. Although I am in receipt of Disability Living Allowance at the higher mobility rate, it simply does not cover the cost of taxis to/from doctors, dentists, hospital appointments, having a social life etc etc. I regularly carry food, water and a puzzle book so I can happily sit for an extra ½ hour or longer to accommodate an earlier drop-off or later pick-up than that I have requested. To me that is a small price to pay for a service that enables me to NOT be housebound. I wrote last year when I felt another service user was failing to recognise what a privilege it is to have a service like this. Perhaps if all service users were aware of the threat to the service, more might support changes to the booking that enabled users to continue to benefit, without cost to the supportive drivers. All users need to be reminded: the service is a charity providing door-to-door transport. It is NOT a personal service provided by a paid-for taxi. It is a resource shared with other members of the community, who have an equal right for their needs to be met. I hope Dial-a-Ride and the City Council can work together to achieve the necessary cuts by improving the efficiency of the service, but without affecting the holiday or sick pay of the drivers.

As co-Chair of a local Disability organisation, I would like to see all public transport accessible to all disabled people. However, in the meantime it is essential that Dial-a Ride carries on being funded in order that disabled people who do not have their own transport are able to be involved in their local community. I am a disabled person with Multiple Scleroris, people like me do not want services cut as we rely on public transport. I still have to get from home to work and work to home, I also have to be able to get to the shops, essential services like doctors and hospitals. People like me who cannot drive rely soley on Public Transport to get around and if services were cut we would be in real trouble.

Keep dial a ride and services that are taylored to disabled/old people. Reduce/Scrap services that cost more than £1 per person per journey. eg Sunday's.

Dial a Ride is a complete waste of money looking at the breakdown of cost the others who provide community transport are better value.

The dial a Ride services need to be provided in a more cost effective way.

My parents looked at the Dial-a Ride service. It did not take them where they needed to go. They had to catch a taxi instead. Attendance allowance covers taxi cost, so Dial-a-Ride is actually not necessary. Or at least charge the Attendance Allowance for use of the service.

Stop Dial & Ride these services are extremely expensive, other service providers looking at the breakdown of support are more cost effective and are providing the same service at a much reduced cost. My family members are unable to get through and book a trip with DAR, they are fed up with the music played for in excess of 20 minutes or more only to find that they are fully booked! It begs the question on exactly who are they providing the service for? Most vehicles are seen around empty at all times of the day. Or with the driver parked on the roadside reading the paper. The community bus service that my grandmother uses on a regular weekly basis now provides exactly what she requires, they also provide trips out in the better weather at a very reasonable cost and from what I believe the community transport fund the trips from other services they provide. One solution is to provide more community bus services such as the whitehall WASP community bus service that my gran uses, this would save much more money for the council, and cut out a lot of wastage with the Dial a ride.

Older people

I cannot see how much of the costs provided are covered by providing free bus travel for the over 60′s are we double counting the cost of travel.

As for services like the 500, which I see driving around the city empty most of the time, and when it does have passengers, they are usually elderly, so I would assume using free travel passes. I understand that some services are essential for the most vulnerable in society, however I strongly believe that these services MUST either break even or be profitable. If the current route is not, then tweak it until it is, or cancel the service.

Community Transport is an essential part our lives, especially in Lawrence Western. Public transport only serves Long Cross. One side is virtualy flat, while the other is uphill, where U thibnk I can safely say most of the bus users live. LWCT allows these people some quality of life, be elderly, disabled, socialising. The volanteers who staff the bus are very helpful, polite and give their services free. Passengers are transported to various places, Dr's surgeries, clinics, lunch club and other things provided by rock, Public transport would not provide any of these services. Community transport DO NOT LET PEOPLE DOWN. Public transport do not run a reliable service, their attitude to people leave a lot to be desired, fares are far too high compared to other cities and are not realistic for the majority of people. So please, do not penalise the community transport in favour of public transport who show huge profilts at the end of the finanical year. Community transport does not.

It's essential that the council continues to support bus services at weekends, on bank holidays and in the evenings as much as it possibly can. To withdraw these services would mean that people who have no car, eldery people, and the disabled , would not be able to go out at all at these times, and would be reduced to the status of second-class citizens: They do no deserve to be discriminated against in this way, as they were not responsible for the banking crisis, one possible solution might be for each passenger to pay part of the subsidised cost of their fare: for instance if it costs The Council £1.91 to provide each seat in the 36 bus, in the evenings then each passenger might pay at least half otf that ( In addition to their ordinary fare, of course: Those people with a free pass might pay a flat rate £1). This would be far preferable to withdrawing the bus service altogether. Please consider such an idea.

Lawrence Weston Community Transport is a godsend to people who can't carry shopping. I happen to be one of them picked up at home e brought back. We do have a 40 bus service but seldom go into twn ( broadmead)... route is far too long... Therefore No 40 to the Mall is much more convenient. We did have a small yellow bus which whipped us along the Portway. This service was much appreciated. I'm sure if free buspass holders were approached they wouldn't mind a small contribution to their fare.

We do need transport in The Headley Park Area! ( Headley Lane and Durville Road). Lots of older people. A need to advertise the service more. It would be a Help for service to imperial Park and Hospital when built. We do have a Community Bus 2 days a week which is a great help.

Henleaze used to be served by a No.23 bus which ran along Henleaze Road and directly down to the Bristol Eye, Infirmary and Children's Hospitals, Redland School, St Mary Redcliffe and into Broadmead and across to Ashton passed the Bristol General Hospital. First took the service off because they said it was under-used. That was because it didn't start until after 9.00am and finished at 4.30pm. This meant that school children couldn't use it nor people with 9.00 to 11.00am appointments at the hospitals and it finished before their treatment ended if it went on after 3.30pm. Can this service be revised as we have number of retirement and sheltered housing places in the area?

Younger people

More schools should receive yellow bus services, rather than just Henbury School. This could lead to a huge reduction in peak time traffic.

I support the suggestion that Park and Ride passengers should pay the commercial rate. This would leave £219, 060, 00 to spend on increasing the frequency of Bristol evening bus services or reducing the fares for under 18s or something spectacular such as paying for free bus travel for all Bristolian under 18 year olds during the month of August.

Black and minority ethnic groups – no comments citing this group made

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender – no comments citing this group made

Gender - no comments citing this group made

Faith groups – no comments citing this group made

Response to Equalities questions

Where respondents stated equalities information – in the offline / private online response form, the following statistics were compiled.

What is your gender ?

Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Female 52.1% 25 Male 45.8% 22 Prefer not to say 2.1% 1 answered question 48 skipped question 27 How old are you?

Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Under 18 0.0% 0 18-65 63.6% 28 65+ 29.5% 13 Prefer not to say 6.8% 3 answered question 44 skipped question 31

Ethnicity

Response Response Answer Options Percent Count White British background 75.0% 33 Other White background 6.8% 3 Black and minority ethnic group 0.0% 0 Prefer not to say 15.9% 7 answered question 44 skipped question 31 Are you disabled?

Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Yes 31.0% 13 No 52.4% 22 Prefer not to say 14.3% 6 answered question 42 skipped question 33 Do you have a religion or belief?

Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Yes 53.8% 21 No 30.8% 12 Prefer not to say 15.4% 6 answered question 39 skipped question 36 Sexual orientation

Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Lesbian, gay or bisexual 0.0% 0 Heterosexual (straight) 70.0% 28 Prefer not to say 30.0% 12 answered question 40 skipped question 35 Transgender

Response Response Answer Options Percent Count Yes 0.0% 0 No 69.0% 20 Prefer not to say 31.0% 9 answered question 29 skipped question 46

Consultation, Research and Intelligence Team 18th May 2011

APPENDIX C(2)

Lets Talk About Supported Transport (163 comments online and private)

A. Comments on Ask Bristol discussion (109 comments)

1. Nick

Firstly, I think a congratulations are in order for Bristol City Council for actually engaging with their residents on the changes to be made to supported (ie. subsidised) services in the city. Two particular things of note stuck out to me when reviewing the figures, firstly the subsidy to Park and Ride services and then the commercial subsidy in the evenings and weekends.

Firstly, Park and Ride services there seems to be quite a big difference in Subsidy between the 904 and 903/2 services, of particular interest was route 902 which has the highest subsidy. I couldn’t help considering the subsidy already given to the Severn Beach Line, to which I have no objections to, could perhaps be used to encourage Severn Beach services to call at the nearby Shirehampton station to replace the 902 service which would according to your figures save £380,000 per annum so well on the way to reducing the overall budget as required. I’ll admit to not have much knowledge of the area but when savings are needed to be found, surely making better use of assets already available (and being subsidised) offers a good opportunity to encourage Severn Beach Ridership (and thereby reduce its subsidy?) whilst also saving money on a high subsidy (£1.04 per journey) Park and Ride service. Obviously theres scope for replacing the bus stop with a platform for a Portway P&R, I suspect the capital outlay of this is beyond Bristol City Council at the moment.

Finally, the most striking thing to me was the cost of subsidising services in the evenings and at the weekends, while it doesn’t take a genius to realise that passenger use is lower at these times and thereby a subsidy is required, why is cross subsidy not being used by the commercial operators to run these services? I appreciate since the 1986 Bus Deregulation the City Council has very little power to get First and Wessex to do this it does however have powers in the Local Transport Act 2008 for Bus Quality Partnerships. The Greater Bristol Bus Network has seen the former Avon counties alongside the DfT and First invest significantly into capital infrastructure for buses, isn’t it time that as a return for using the improved bus infrastructure the operators meet quality partnerships to ensure that passengers gain?

Whilst the one thing that blocks an Avon ITA is the lack of agreement, there is no reason why Bristol can’t go it alone and become an ITA, just as Nottingham has done. The main objection I can see to this is the argument that the a lot of Bristol’s bus services start and end outside their political boundaries. However my counter argument is that they are all heading to one place, Bristol City Centre, and so if the operators want to run their services to there why shouldn’t they meet Bristol City Council’s partnership agreements. I can see very little reason for services such as the 70, 71, 72, and 73 suddenly

1 stopping at the boundary line with Bristol from South Gloucestershire if this was introduced as no-one would use the service, there is demand and so the commercial operators will run to Bristol if they introduced Quality Bus Partnerships. Going back to my original point, my main opportunity presented to Bristol City Council is that a way to reducing the bus subsidy to commercial operators for running important evening and weekend services would be a way of agreements with the main operators for Quality Bus Partnerships if they want to operate in the city. Within these agreements for not only age of buses, emission standards, frequency and use of bus stops there could be scope for Bristol-wide integrated tickets. The scheme has been successful in many other parts of the country in PTE areas and also as mentioned Nottingham which isn’t. I really believe that Bristol City Council, at a time of cut-backs when they have made significant investments in improving the city’s bus infrastructure why they shouldn’t ask for something back, especially when many other cities do. In my conclusion, I can’t help but hope that Cllr Hopkins looks at other cities, including Nottingham and considers the powers his authority have granted to it in the Local Transport Act 2008 to introduce Quality Bus Partnerships (and or Contracts) with local operators as a return for their (ie. the Council) commitments to providing clean bus shelters, bus lanes and bus priority measures. Isn’t it time Bristol for once made a brave decision, confident that others would follow instead of waiting for a consensus that will never happen between the former Avon counties due to political indifference? I hope Bristol City Council work closer with operators using its powers to prevent service cuts at a time when subsidies have to be cut to secure the residents a good quality public transport system that is a viable alternative to the car.

2. on May 11, 2011 at 14:37 Colin

Re the 500 service I and my partner who live in Hotwells find it completely invaluable. When we use it means that we can leave the car where it is, so it also cuts down on congestion/pollution in the City Centre. If a fare increase is proposed then it should go to £1.20 or £1.50 so as to make the money handling easier for both passengers and driver.

3. on May 11, 2011 at 10:27 Members of Bristol Dial-a-Ride

We do not have access to computers or the Internet, therefore we have requested that Bristol Dial-a-Ride submit the following comments on our behalf:

Mrs R – “I’m blind, so I wouldn’t go out if it wasn’t for Bristol Dial-a-Ride”

Mrs B – “I wouldn’t manage without them and would have to stay in. I couldn’t use taxis as they are too expensive”

2 Mrs Bagshaw – “I wouldn’t be able to visit my husband in the care home”

Mrs Buston – “I couldn’t get out on my own due to being partially sighted”

Mrs Vivian – “Incredible service, I don’t know what I would do without it, the drivers are absolutely fantastic”

Mrs Wheeler – “I couldn’t get the shopping without Bristol Dial-a-Ride, taxis are very expensive”

Mr Thomas – “I couldn’t cope with public transport”

Mr Smethurst – “I rely on Bristol Dial-a-Ride for everything”

Mrs Davies – “Very good door to door service”

Mrs M – “Invaluable due to my blindness, I would rather have Dial-a-Ride drivers than taxi drivers”

Mrs Shaw – “invaluable, I can’t get to my local bus stop or carry shopping back”

Mr Barnes – “Bristol Dial-a-Ride is most important to me”

Mrs Bagshaw – “It’s a fantastic service”

Mrs Wills – “Out of this world door to door service”

Mrs Southcott – “door to door service is brilliant, they help me into my home”

Escort for Master T – Dial-a-Ride is “helping him to build his confidence”

Please do not cut our Dial-a-Ride service.

Statistics – In a recent survey, members said:

73% of members had made a new friend on a Bristol Dial-a-Ride vehicle

98% of members felt Bristol Dial-a-Ride helped them maintain their independence

92% of members wanted to speak to a Councillor to support the service

98% of members had no access to this online survey and would require transport with Bristol Dial-a-Ride to attend a meeting with their local Councillor to take part in this discussion

on May 11, 2011 at 00:41 Christina Biggs (FOSBR)

3 Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways welcomes the emphasis in this article on the success of the Severn Beach Line, and suggests that the £200,000 saved in the new contract with First Great Western should be reinvested in Bristol’s local rail network.

One priority is to improve the Severn Beach Line’s evening service, by filling the gap between the 20.34 and 22.16 weekday departures from Temple Meads, and having a later last train. Earlier and later trains on Sundays are also needed.

Further afield, a half-hourly service is needed at Parson Street, Bedminster, Lawrence Hill, and Stapleton Road, to produce the Bristol Metro service envisaged in the West of England Partnership’s Joint Local Transport Plan. Better cross-Bristol journeys are especially needed in the evenings. There is also a need to consider a new station at Shirehampton to serve the park and ride site there, a new service for the Henbury loop, and a station for Ashton Gate on the Portishead line.

On the figures used in the article, the average cost per passenger journey given for the Severn Beach Line (£1.65) is based on the ticket sales for 2009–10 (673,000), minus the ticket sales for 2007–08 (421,000, the pre-subsidy passenger figures used as a baseline). The total cost to the council of £420,000 is divided by the difference between these two figures (252,000) to give £1.65.

However, there are three reasons why the real cost per passenger journey is now much lower than this. First, ticket sales for 2010–11 have risen to 754,000. Secondly, the annual cost to the council is about to fall to £200,000. And thirdly, it is arguable that the cost per passenger should relate to the total number of passenger journeys on the line, not only the additional journeys, since all passengers benefit from the improved service funded by the council. On this basis, the average cost per passenger journey, from June 2011 onwards, will be about 27p.

Another way of looking at the figures is to compare, for each transport mode, (i) its percentage share of the total number of passenger journeys across all modes with (ii) its percentage share of the total budget. This gives a better idea of how effective the funding for each mode has been in attracting passengers in comparison to the other modes. For example, orbital bus services take up 23% of the budget (the largest share), but carry only 15% of the passengers. The Severn Beach Line also carries 15% of the passengers (if we use the total number of ticket sales in 2010–11, 754,000), but costs only 7% of the budget. When the new contract comes into effect in June 2011, the cost will fall to 3.5% of the budget.

This suggests that investing in local rail services is one of the most effective ways of encouraging people to use public transport: trains are fast and reliable, and do not get held up in traffic. The council’s pump-priming investment in the Severn Beach Line has been a great success, which should be built on by reinvesting the money back into the local rail network. Such investment will

4 attract more passengers and revenue, producing a virtuous circle by which we have further improvements in the local rail service for the same funding.

4. on May 10, 2011 at 10:14 Bernard

Part of the problem with transport is the lack of integration. By considering Bristol alone, the majority of journeys in the area are ignored e.g. those that begin and end outside Bristol such as Filton, Frenchay, Pill etc. What is needed is an Integrated Transport Authority which has teeth to demand local services from providers which meet needs e.g. regular, from 6am to 10 pm and at an affordable price. Nottingham has an ITA and it runs at a profit. Perhaps Bristol could employ Nottingham’s transport supremo. Integrated ticketing is vital and getting First GW to take fare collection seriously – I have yet to see a ticket check at local stations in the last 5 years.

5. on May 10, 2011 at 00:14 Ian

Firstly, I think it’s good these questions are being asked, and hopefully our views will be listed to.

My points: * We need an Oyster type system for local rail and bus – many buses are painfully slow due to fare collection, and many trains run without all passengers paying. * Train subsidies are clearly working. They need to be increased and widened – providing a more frequent service, reopening the Portishead line and Henbury loop. * In the longer term: forget the ‘rapid’ bus routes. They’re slow and artificial. Invest in a local tram/light rail network for both the centre and suburbs. * Scrap the shopper and commuter ferry services. They’re poorly used and very expensive. * Operators who run buses (i.e. mostly First) need to run a frequent service at the less-profitable times – in return for the revenue the rush-hour buses generate.

6. on May 7, 2011 at 09:51 W. J. Hall

How can we do more for less? Choose the right things for initial investment, so that they become self sustaining. For example the investment in the Avonmouth train service has pushed up passenger numbers, so that the funding can already be cut from 420k to 220k per year, so that funding per journey is now halved. Funding further service improvements, such as an enhanced evening timetable, should encourage further increases in passenger numbers and should aim to push the

5 funding per journey down further by taking advantage of the high system capacity to get usage up.

This example also shows that funding is most successful if put into standard high capacity structural services like the rail network, where initial high capital cost is rewarded by high use leading to low unit cost. Bristol is particularly fortunate to have a local rail network that encircles the city, covering the NW, E, N and S suburbs and reaching out into the satellite towns, and this is provides an ideal opportunity to use funding to create a high capacity, fast urban transit system using proven technology that will become self sustaining.

The council should aim to leverage external investment by negotiating with central government and agencies to ensure that they address Bristol problems in national schemes like railway electrification. Unfortunately, this currently provides an example of how the council is failing, because the Bristol local network is not on the electrification programme, presumably because the council and local politicians forgot to ask, whereas Cardiff has successfully negotiated the electrification of its local rail network.

Bus based Park and Ride has limited potential for high usage and consequently passengers should pay close to the the commercial rate from the start.

Novelty, or innovative technology schemes should be treated with scepticism. The failure of the ferry is a good example of the fact that low capacity and low speed leads to low usage. The failure over decades to obtain a working tram network also demonstrates the dangers of pursuing technology for technologies sake, with a combination of irrelevant ultra-something schemes and tendency to put these schemes where they will be out of the way rather than where they will be useful, with a particular failing in regarding the local rail network as a disused, out of the way place, for all kinds of wild ultra-light and innovative technologies.

It is also worth noting the difficulties and expense incurred by Cambridgeshire County Council in their innovative busway scheme, in particular there persisting with it against all advice, and the fundamental error of putting a large capital expenditure (fixed guideway), into a low capacity (bus) system, with the probably additional problem that the guideway solution ignores technical lessons learnt in two centuries of road and railway construction.

Park and Ride should preferably be based on outlying rail stations (Yate, Nailsea, Yatton, Severn Beach, Henbury, Pilning) rather than buses, making use of high rail capacities and speeds and obtaining the benefits of maximising the reduction in car journeys. Nevertheless the anomaly of the vacant park and ride station site at Avonmouth should be considered, since this has easy motorway access. In this context it is interesting that Severn Beach line stations are used for access to the Montpellier area by people driving down the A370. The advantage over the Ashton P&R is that the service runs into East Bristol.

7. on May 6, 2011 at 16:13 The Bartonhillbum

Service 8/9

From my personal experience, I address the question, from a different angle. How to cut the ‘support’ to services that are viable and are able to stand alone – by the bus operator spreading the costs –v- revenue across the whole service; and not just cherry pick the ‘best’ part of the service. For example the council department responsible for supported services could telephone Bristol Zoo, and enquire the best days of the week for attendances of the general public. I know that the answer will be, weekends and bank holidays, (except Christmas day when it is shut – and there are no buses at all). So why is the service 8/9 supported on Saturdays & Bank Holidays, yet receives no support for the Sunday service ? A Saving of £20,017.00

The Service 8 could be curtailed to terminate at Downside/Pembroke Road Junction after 7pm Mon – Sun as the rest of the route is within a short walking distance of Whitladies Road. The Service 9 could be curtailed at Whitladies road and turn at Blackboy Hill roundabout. (The joint services could also run a part journey prior to 07:00 Mon- Fri) On Mon-Fri cut out the 06:10, 06:40 & 07:00 Journeys As well as the 23:15, 23:30 services On Saturdays cut out the 06:50 and 07:20 supported service (ex Temple Meads) From 19:15 make the service a 30 min service with shortened journeys as discussed above.

The Park and Ride Service 902 & 904 As the 902 & 904 are a distance from the ‘cost’ of the 903, why not supplement the service with a ‘Match Day’ P&R service to the Football/Rugby grounds thereby offering a service that has the possibility of alleviating some of the traffic congestion and parking problems around Ashton & Horfield ? At Christmas why not open up the P&R to operate on Sundays ?

Service 500 As an infrequent user of the service, I think the service would benefit from going up the slope of Temple Meads, so turning the service around to operate in opposite direction, or have two buses on the service in the summer months. The service could also benefit from a hop on off ticket, perhaps working with the ‘Sightseeing Bus’ operator. Also offer integrated tickets for the @Bristol, SS Great Britain etc.

7 Service 584/585 Having used the service to and from Lawrence Hill to Southmead Hospital, I find this a very useful service but find that I am the only passenger until the bus enters Easton, and Lockleaze when people board for Tesco’s at Eastville or the Hospital. At Lawrence Hill why can not the bus use the same stop as the other services ? At present the bus stop is tucked around the corner in Croyden Street.

Service 920/921/922/923/924 Looking at the figures of 5,960 passengers = 22 per day on a 5 day week, how is this support sustainable? Would it not be more cost effective to get a fixed price deal with a taxi company to run people to the shops within a specific time frame 10:30 – 3pm a time slot when few taxis are busy. (People would have to register for the service).

Night Flyers Increase the fare to £3.00 single per passenger. Inbound into the City offer a discounted £1.00 single fare (early morning workers). This move has the potential to increase the passenger numbers on an otherwise empty, return service bus, if advertised, in the hospitals, University etc.

Severn Beach Rly Way Line As a regular user of the train service between Lawrence Hill & Clifton Down, I can say without fear of counter argument that the onboard staff do not always collect fares, sometimes because of shear weight of numbers of passengers making it very difficult for them to progress through the train between stations. But, I can also state that in the early evening staff seem reluctant to pass through the train to check all passengers have tickets, I often travel in both directions free of payment. Perhaps the Council could do spot checks on trains, without prior notice to the company, on fare collection, a sort of mystery shopper exercise?

8. on May 1, 2011 at 23:16 Brendan Biggs

On the Severn Beach Line subsidy, it’s worth pointing out that the figure of £1.65 given as the “average cost per passenger journey” is based on the ticket sales for 2009–10. If the figure for ticket sales for 2010–11 is used, the average cost per passenger journey falls to £1.26 per head. In 2011–12, the lower cost of the new contract with First Great Western will reduce this to £0.79, assuming the same number of ticket sales as in 2010–11. The subsidy per passenger is likely to fall further as passenger numbers continue their consistent upward trend.

This indicates that investment in local rail services can produce significant passenger growth. I’d like to see the money saved by the new contract used to fund an improved evening service on the Severn Beach Line, and a half-hourly service at Parson Street, Bedminster, Lawrence Hill, and Stapleton Road. This would be a pump-priming investment, like the council’s funding of the two-

8 train service on the Severn Beach Line. Such improvements will make Bristol’s rail network more attractive, and lead to a further increase in passengers.

9. on April 27, 2011 at 16:47 Peter Gould

The subsidy to the Avonmouth/Severn Beach Branch line plainly led to increased usage and revenue.

The moral is that a better service attracts more passengers.

Investing the surplus in an enhanced service: evening on the SB branch and cross city (Parson St – TM – Stapleton Rd) ought to increase usage therefor revenue.

Likewise, a passenger service on the Henbury freight line serving recent development in Southmead and proposed development in Charlton (Catbrain) would be a wise investment

We cannot afford parochial arguments about which side of an artificial political boundary a rail route may be. The real economy does not recognise the fine lines within the Bristol Travel to Work area.

on April 28, 2011 at 13:08 Chris Tovey

Clearly if BCCC rate payers subsidised all bus routes to reduce the cost as low as the subsidy for the Severn Beach service more people would use it. Not sure the rest of the population who do not use the service would be happy paying for it.

on May 3, 2011 at 00:44 Joe Patrick

Chris,

The Severn Beach line fares are not subsidised by Bristol City Council; they are set commercially by First Great Western.

As part of their franchise agreement with the Department for Transport any fare increases are limited to RPI+1% (increasing to RPI+3% from 2012) for all of their Off-peak return (former ‘Saver’) and Anytime return tickets, outside of the London area. This is balanced in a basket for ALL of their fares outside the London area. So the low fares on the Severn Beach line is a result of a commercial decision by FGW, not subsidy from Bristol City Council.

9 Even before the subsidy from Bristol City Council started, fares on the Severn Beach line were low.

on May 3, 2011 at 11:29 Chris Tovey

Sorry Joe you appear to have missed the point. Based on the low price being charged for using the Severn Beach line there is no need for BCCC rate payers to support this line by increasing the fares. You can stop the payment and if the line is not economic to run for FGW then they have to go back to the regulators and ask for the price increase to be allowed.

Its nonsense that the line has to be subsidised to keep the price low due to some government department ruling.

When are we going to run our public transport services using common sense and normal business procedures.

on May 10, 2011 at 23:30 Brendan Biggs

I sympathise with the point about common sense and normal business procedures, but the complex way in which the railway was privatised has made this difficult! The train operating companies work to a detailed franchise agreement made with the Department for Transport, and Network Rail, the Office of Rail Regulation, and local authorities also have a role to play.

The funding from Bristol City Council does not reduce the fares on the Severn Beach Line. What it does is to pay for a second train to run on the line, additional to the franchise specification. This has produced a reliable 40-minute-interval service instead of the unreliable hourly service we had until 2008. The second train was introduced because BCC made the decision to fund it. Over the three years that it has run, passenger numbers have increased by 80%.

It is this success that has enabled BCC to renegotiate the contract. From 2011 onwards it will pay £200,000, rather than £420,000, per annum for the second train. This reduction has been possible because of the increased fare income that the improved service has generated.

As I have said in my comment above, once the new contract comes into effect, the council’s funding will fall to approximately 79p per passenger journey. But even this figure doesn’t relate to the total number of passengers on the line. Because BCC only pays for half the trains that run (the other half being included in the franchise specification), the figures in the council’s document above relate only to the additional passengers that the improved service has attracted. But all passengers benefit from the two-train service because of its greater frequency. If we use the total number of passenger journeys on the line (754,000 in 2010-11), the council funding per passenger journey, from May 2011, is about 27p.

10 The consistent upward trend in recent years strongly suggests that passenger numbers will continue to rise if an attractive service is provided. This is why re-investment of the money saved into local rail services is desirable: it will encourage further growth and so make the local rail network more sustainable.

1. on April 25, 2011 at 22:15 G. Peewit

What would be the impact of adopting the national weekday 9.30am start time for concessionary pass users?

At present, Bristol and the other West of England Councils are generous in allowing a 9am start, but I wonder if that generosity comes at a price?

2. on April 21, 2011 at 12:50 Graham Starmer

As a frequent user of the Severn Beach line and the 500 Bus Service I would be more than happy for the fares to be increased. As a caring society we should support the more vulnerable. Transport for people with disabilities should be subsidised to give the same oppotunities available to society as a whole. The same argument cannot be used to justify subsidising late night transport, although there may be other reasons to provide it. On balance I would suggest that the Night Bus service should be self financing.

3. on April 14, 2011 at 12:12 Fred

Amongst the Orbital Bus Services the route 586 is not correctly described. It starts in Hotwells before going up to Clifton via the Triangle, as does the 587.

These services are a vital link for the aged and infirm of Hotwells. The hill up to Clifton shops and services is impossible to walk up for these groups.

The 500 route is also an important link for Hotwells and the newer housing near the south edge of the harbour – it permits easy access to the two major shopping locations of Broadmead and Cabot Circus without having to negotiate difficult route changes burdened by packages and bags. There is also some tourist traffic on the 500.

The Commuter Ferry at £3.80 cost per journey is the 2nd highest in that column and the subsidy should be axed. Although a brilliant idea, it clearly hasn’t been taken up by the commuting public.

11 4. on April 13, 2011 at 16:57 chris Tovey

Ok my mistake the only station not in the BCCC area is Severn beach.

But again I make the simple point why is the line subsidised so highly when you compare a weekly ticket to Severn Beach costs less than the day return for a bus from North Bristol to the centre.

The number of people using the service clearly indicates they should pay the full cost.

I would use a bus if the weekly costs were only £6.90. if I worked in the Centre of Bristol.

on April 15, 2011 at 20:06 Ed

No Chris I pay enough for the Severn beach line

on April 18, 2011 at 19:24 Chris Tovey

Sorry I Ed just because I live in Bristol I see no reason why I should subsidise your travel costs. You make no contribution to my expenses and the service you use is grossly under charged.

on April 19, 2011 at 09:57 Sheila Smyth

And what about those people who live in areas which don’t benefit from the large public subsidies which the Severn Beach Line receives e.g. St Annes, Broomhill, Stockwood. Where is their cheap public transport? Perhaps if the Severn Beach Line was subsidised less, it might give me a cheaper option to get to work than the extortionate First Bus prices. Also, South Glos Council should subsidise the Severn Beach part of the journey – it’s not even in Bristol. We – the council tax payers of Bristol – are forever subsidising the travel for people from outside of the city e.g. the Park & Rides………

on April 12, 2011 at 10:40 Fiaz

Night Bus: You have people spending money on clothes, shoes, hair care products, going into town buying booze and fags, for them and their mates,

12 scoffing themselves with burgers and kebabs, but when it’s going home time, um… I don’t have any money can the council help pay my bus fare home. If you could afford to go out then you could afford to pay for the whole bus fare home, this subsidy shoudld be cut as it cal also be supported by the establishments that benefit from all the business coming in.

on May 10, 2011 at 00:02 Ian

I think its important that public transport exists at night though – it’s a great way to reduce drinking and driving.

5. on April 10, 2011 at 12:21 Gavin

I use supported transport service on the odd occasion. My reason for not using them more is simply because I have to pay for them. I, along with probably 1000′s of others have first bus season tickets. This costs me £76 per month. Why should anyone then have to pay to use other services to? Why can we not have a London style system where anyone with an oyster card/travel pass can travel on any service, from any company. Simplifying the system is always going to help.

6. on April 7, 2011 at 15:05 Angela B and Angela K

13 citizens. Dial-a-Ride is, sadly hopeless…if you can every get through to them they don’t seem to be able to help. Likewise, if the subsidised services 517, 518, 584 and 585 were taken away it would have a catastrophic effect on the many other elderly and disabled people in Coombe Dingle who rely on these buses. These buses are our only way to get fairly easily to Southmead and Frenchay Hospitals. It is very hilly and a long way to the nearest Firstbus service and many would not even make it there. Those in previous posts who are advocating scapping these services are shortsighted and selfish. They will probably be elderly and/or disabled in the future…..what then?

7. on March 31, 2011 at 12:41 Robin

A metro / tram type system for Bristol is a must. The advantages over buses in terms of reliability, comfort, attractiveness are huge. I recently used the metro in Newcastle and it was brilliant. Greater Bristol is, like Tyneside, in the top 10 most populous urban areas in the UK, and seventh highest population density, so why can’t we have a city wide network? Links in from WsM, Bath, Portishead, Patchway, Avonmouth and Parkway via Henbury, Filton and Cribbs are all existing. Other city centre links at street level need not be very expensive, and trains could convert to trams for those sections. The old Engine shed at Temple Meads isn’t even being used, what a great Metro station that would make! What’s stopping it?

on April 6, 2011 at 20:21 Andrew

I agree with Robin here – but look at it in terms of a long term strategic investment in mobility and choice of transport in the Bristol area. It won’t happen overnight, but I believe that Bristol should take the lead, and co-opt the other local authorities in the area to investigate a system similar to the SkyTrain/CanadaLine rapid transit in Vancouver, Canada. This provides an excellent and regular metro service across the Greater Vancouver area, linking together other municipalities and suburbs with Vancouver. In the shorter term, there are quick wins – Portishead Rail Reopening, extension of the Severn Beach Line, the four-tracking Parsons Street – Parkway (along with electrification) which the council should concentrate on, but its long term aim should be a world class rapid transit system that links the region together, and adds capacity for growth. Looking at the proposed BRT/Light Rail option could be a good place to start.

on April 13, 2011 at 09:28 Somerdfield In-Mate

14 Small-mindedness, as with every proposed development of Bristol as a CITY

8. on March 31, 2011 at 10:37 James Robertson

The medium term objective for P&R should be to make these services break even. They benefit people from outside of Bristol and are still much cheaper than city centre parking. Fares should be raised by 55p.

The orbital services, in my own experience, are slow and unreliable. They are important, but perhaps some of the route’s less popular sections could be cut. They should terminate at Southmead Hospital to improve reliability and allow interchange.

The shopper services are poorly used and should be cut outright. The main customers are older people who have free transport in any case. Services should be scrapped altogether.

Commuter Ferry Service is clearly not good value. And of little use. It should be cut entirely.

Cross harbour ferry service is cheap and provides a vital link for pedestrians and cyclists across the Harbour. No changes required.

Community Transport is expensive, however I do not know enough about these services to comment.

Add-ons to commercial services seem good value per journey, but a large amount. By allowing the main operator to run them, you add value to day- tickets and season passes. A better contract should be drawn up which allows the council to really look in depth at fare collection and passenger numbers and make the commercial operator share the cost more. They benefit from providing a better service. If this is to be cut, the night bus routes look like they provide a high % coverage on only a few routes, these routes could replace add-ons in the evening.

Severn Beach Line: Better fare collection. Operator and Council are to be commended for the passenger growth.

Yellow bus does not look value. Cut it.

Night buses should be cut. They undercut taxi services and aren’t much cheaper if there’s a taxi share.

Total Saving: 1.22m

on April 7, 2011 at 22:45 Eddie

15 Orbital services should be shortened to make them more reliable. Parkway station would be a more sensible termination point. It’s a well used route from my area. (Westbury-on-Trym/Shirehampton).

Route might cost less if the drivers always took a fare – I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve been waved on the bus without paying. Which is nice, although counter- productive.

9. on March 21, 2011 at 14:37 Laura J Welti

Dear Council

Some suggestions: a) The Bristol Disability Equality Forum believes that, as the DDA became law in 1995 it is time that operators are required to provide accessible transport as a condition of the contract;

b) Many Disabled people cannot use the Severn line trains, even tho’, for many, they are the most suitable public transport, because stations are not accessible and require one to book a day in advance. It really is time that the stations and trains are accessible. Freedom of movement, after all, is meant to be a basic human right! This would be very simple to arrange as each train has a ramp on it so all that is required is to give staff the key to the ramp as a matter of course. Also, platforms could be changed a little to ensure the gap between train and platform is not too great.

c) Ensure there is realistic competition for Firstbus. To date there has been insufficient efforts by the Council to break the Firstbus monopoly in this area.

There are a few other things to be considered but we will send those direct to you rather than insert an overly long post here.

Bristol Disability Equality Forum

on May 3, 2011 at 00:50 Joe Patrick

The only stations on the Severn Beach line which are not accessible is the Southbound (towards Temple Meads) platform at Lawrence Hill, and St Andrews Road.

There is no need to book 24 Hrs in advance, all trains carry a wheelchair ramp and guards are trained to operate these at all (including unstaffed) stations. FGW only request you to book 24 Hrs in advance to make it easier for them, but this is not essential.

16 10. on March 21, 2011 at 14:26 Cllr Gary Hopkins

Just to give some general feedback. I see positive comments about the Severn Beach line.Today we have launched the new on station ticket machines that will be fully functional later this month. Some stations will be protected by CCTV.The good news is that agreement has been reached on the service up to 2013 on a slightly improved timetable at a saving of £200K . This is possible because we successfully lobbied government to allow more of the increased revenue generated to stay local. It is very likely that some of this saving will be reinvested to improve evening and weekend services but we must of course here peoples views on that suggestion.

The other developing factor is that more bus operators are looking to come to Bristol so we have every prospect of more for less support cash there as well.

on April 15, 2011 at 19:55 Ed

Sounds good accept the CCTV bit we don’t need any more of that.

on April 19, 2011 at 09:59 Laura Devon

Well I want CCTV for my station – Lawrence Weston – as it doesn’t feel safe at the moment. It will benefit Easton as well – some of the stations are secluded and you can be trapped there.

11. on March 21, 2011 at 10:02 John

Well done on Severn Beach getting a better service next station to benefit from an improved service would be Pilning

All the people who live NW of the M4, A38 could get on the train there into Parkway and Bristol

It is on the Bristol-Cardiff line so why can’t the trains stop there alleviating the traffic pressure on Aztec West in the morning/evening

There is an old school that has been knocked down a short walk from the station that could be a car park

12. on March 19, 2011 at 08:45 Chris Tovey

17 Just read the BCCC council press release on the Severn Beach line. It only costs £6.00 for A WEEKLY travel ticket.

No wonder the service is oversubscribed.

The price of the weekly ticket is now getting close to the cost of a daily return from the outskirts of Bristol to the city center by BUS.

Why are the rates payers of Bristol paying the cost of travel for the people who live outside Bristol city. And better still why not increase the fares to the actaul costs of the service.

ITS madness.

on March 21, 2011 at 20:59 Tim Weekes

Bit confused here: I thought Lawrence Hill, Stapleton Rd, Montpelier, Redland, Clifton Down, Sea Mills, Shirehampton and Avonmouth were in Bristol. Maybe I should invest the vast subsidised savings I make when I use the Severn Beach line in an up-to-date map?

on April 13, 2011 at 09:24 Somerdfield In-Mate

Severn Beach is the only stop on the entire line which lies outside the (artificial) boundary between Bristol and S.Glos (Greater Bristol)

on May 3, 2011 at 00:53 Joe Patrick

This is incorrect. Bristol City Council only subsidise the train services.

Fares on the Severn Beach line are a commercial decision by FGW, and fares regulations set by the DfT mean that fares of Saver and Anytime day returns and 7 day seasons (across the whole of the FGW network excluding London & South East) can only increase by RPI+1%, increasing to RPI+3% from Jan 2012.

13. on March 18, 2011 at 12:20 Charles

If First bus make a profit running all the lucrative services, and the council have to subsidise all the non-profitable services, why not return to all the bus local bus/train services being run by the local council, thereby they could susidise as necessary from the profitable to the non-profitable. Simples!

18 12

14. on March 17, 2011 at 19:05 judith brown

1. Supermarkets should pay for their own bus services.They make enough profit! 2. Scrap the rapid transit which was being built to stop the thousands of new homes which were going to be built before the credit crunch using cars into the city..If/ When they are built get money from the developers . 3.Put back the railway line from Portishead. 4.Re-consider the tram scheme. We are a major tourist city – we need safe simple transport. 5.Maintain supported services for people living on hills!(e.g.503) 6. Bring in Oyster cards 7. Use some common sense!

15. on March 17, 2011 at 16:43 Charlie

I agree with the comments regarding the Severn Beach line- I have no real wish to dodge fares but sometimes the conductor simply doesn’t have time to take your fare. I would suggest self-service ticket machines on the platforms allowing users to pay before they board.

16. on March 17, 2011 at 08:21 Jim Dodds

The council should prioritise spending on helping commuters and students get to school / college. Many parts of the city e.g. St Annes are served by woeful services at the moment in this regard. Expensive, infrequent and silly circuitous routes. We’ve created a public transport system in some parts of the city that only attracts people with free bus passes – the rest get a car as soon as they can.

Shopper / Orbital services and helping residents from South Glos and North Somerset get to work easily should take a back seat. Save money by getting rid of the subsidy for Park & Ride and if these outside Bristol residents don’t want to pay the 55p per journey we currently pay – then they can pay to park in the centre and help boost the city’s coffers.

Bristol residents first – we pay the council tax!

19 17. on March 16, 2011 at 17:56 sharon foster

If the council improved revenue collection on the Severn Beach line then it wouldn’t have to subsidise it so much! It’s quite common for the ticket collector not to get round to everybody at peak times – a great freebie.

Scrap the shopper services and remove the subsidies from park & ride.

18. on March 16, 2011 at 17:45 Bernard Lane

Public transport will always need a subsidy but it is worth paying as it improves life for all. Suggest the Bus Rapid Transit is scrapped and the money used to reopen the rail link to Portishead and the Link from Parkway to Avonmouth via Henbury. By running trains from Portishead to Parkway this will give a credible alternative to the car and relieve a huge amount of congestion. A regular and reliable train service is a major step to helping to get people out of cars and to make a service viable. The river service also needs to be promoted more and Oyster type card valid on all forms of public transport. Perhaps new developments, especially houses converted into flats need to have a limit on the number of cars they can park.

on March 21, 2011 at 14:33 Cllr Gary Hopkins

Oyster style cards will be fully usable across the network very shortly. The BRT is being objectively evaluated now against ultra light rail option on similar route. The money could not be switched to another project but the good news is that West of England partners have agreed to Portishead line and 4 Tracking on Filton being our next projects.

19. on March 16, 2011 at 12:56 Charlie Beaton

Improvement to the Severn Beach line demonstrates that Bristol has a suburban rail network in waiting. Cheap, frequent, local trains on Bristol’s rail network, including Bath, Yate, Weston-super-Mare, supplemented by a new, short street-level line from Temple Meads, on what used to be called the “inner circuit”, around Broadmead/Cabot Circus to the Centre, would solve traffic congestion. The network should include every existing station and new ones. This simple scheme should not suffer the calamities of the grandiose

20 pretentions that de-railed the previous tramway schemes. In comparison, it would require minimal capital and little disruption to the current road network. So, you could catch your train at Parson Street for Patchway, the centre of town or St Annes. Bring it on. Oh, and smart cards too.

20. on March 16, 2011 at 10:36 Cathy

I think we need to invest more in services like the Severn Beach line and am pleased to see that larger coaches are being planned as well as (I think) a better payment system to deal withe current problemof people not being able to pay. I think Bristol needs to deal with traffic congestion as a number 1 priority but the reality is that at the moment a lot of people don’t use public trnasport as it is not convenient or reliable and it is too expensive. If we had better, more competitively priced public trnasport that was easier to use (e.g. oyster card) then more people would use it and the roads might be emptier. I have travelled to many other large cities where public transport is very well used because it is well designed and not expensive. Why cant we get this right in Bristol? I am in favour of park and ride as it keeps cars out of the city centre and it is unrealisitic to think that all those people who work in Bristol or visit Britol could get here easily by public transport (if only!). I think the airport buses should be cheaper and can’t understand why you have to get it from the railway station. I am using Bristol airport in April and it is actually about the same cost for me and my partner to use our car and park it at the airport since we cannot get to a bus stop easily from where we live with heavy luggage and we would end up getting a taxi as part of the journey.

April 15, 2011 at 19:47 Ed

I agree with you, I use the Severn beach line but I don’t think there is going to be any change to the coaches. It gets too busy and overcrowded at peak times so it could use longer trains and the new ticket machines won’t be in sea mills so thats a shame.

1. on March 16, 2011 at 09:38 Dave

Bring in congestion charging.

21 2. on March 15, 2011 at 15:35 Charles

Bristol’s Cycling City seems to have a budget of £23 million so a much higher subsidy for many fewer people than any of the public transport areas. Maybe that should be used to pay for the public transport to help more people.

on March 16, 2011 at 09:37 Dave

The Cycling City money was a one-off capital expenditure to build new infrastructure. It can hardly be compared to the operating subsidy paid to bus companies. It’s not as if the Council paid millions for new buses. Once adequate cycling facilites are impemented they will cost next to nothing to maintain for years on end.

3. on March 15, 2011 at 14:43 patricia

From what i have just read, I understand that transport operators and authorities have been warned by thier international association that they must place the developement and urban design at the top of the agenda.

Reading the history of bristol trams was interesting and how we lost them during the blitz. St phillips bridge carried the power for the tram network with the bridge destroyed the trams could no longer work so this loss was hardly a progressive development but the end of an attractive and historical way of travel which we still have in this country but unlike what they have on the continent.

Travel needs to be attractive, secure, and fun, not only getting from one place to another, but a way of observing our city from all angles and perspectives,mentally, physically, as well as the transport being sustainable,low carbon transport.

In support of maintaining, low carbon transport in the face of contrained finance. Integrated transport-:innovation initiatives are encouraging more cycling and public transport, therefore trams would be a great way of supporting this initiative?

“Trams are an environmentally friendly way of moving large numbers of people efficiently reducing congestion and local pollution” They could be used as an alternative to cars, they could travel through open spaces and parks?they could also become a tourist attraction without causing harm to the scenery or the environment in the way of pollution.

22 trams on the continent are part of the tourist attraction, we could also build trams to be a tourist attraction while providing our local communities with leisure travel for all occassions.

Just dreaming!!!!

on March 15, 2011 at 17:22 Paul Wheeler

I agree that one of the best ways to attract more avid car users to try public transport is to offer an attractive alternative experience, which, useful as they are, buses don’t provide. Regretably, in the current financial squeeze, I cannot see the necessary capital investment being forthcoming to fund a tram or light rail system.

4. on March 15, 2011 at 10:35 Tim

When are we going to introduce ‘Oyster’ type cards for local buses and trains to cut out all the wasted time at bus stops and improve driver security/safety. It works so well all over Europe I can not see why we are not able to introduce such a system.

on March 21, 2011 at 15:11 Cllr Gary Hopkins

Simple answer. Already accepted on some buses . The rest roll out this year. The cards are already leading to lower fares.First were very resistant but have been persuaded to enable their buses. They say it has nothing to do with the prospect of greater competition.

5. on March 15, 2011 at 09:45 Neil Pirie

I would lose the Night bus service, and the Park & Ride. Park & Ride appears to have benefits, but also has a downside – increasing the number of people who drive to the Parking site, rather thanget a local bus into town.

23 6. on March 15, 2011 at 09:34 SH

Hi,

I find the P&R services essential to attract people into downtown Bristol and keep the downtown as alive & interesting as it is. Otherwise people will focus a lot more on shopping centers on the outside of the city that they can access easily and inner city shops have to give up. There are too many citys serving as scary examples with deserted downtowns already.

A major improvement would be achieved using low emission buses, e.g. electrical or hybrid ones. Usually they are less noisy, the air get’s better, living standard is raised and new buses usually have a much wider acceptance than the old carriages used by First at the moment. I don’t know a single city that regretted investment in new buses.

The fare system can certainly be improved upon. One thing that has been annoying me is that online fare payment for complete journeys on travelinesw.com is not possible; even fares are not shown. Also, the queues of people having to pay when entering the bus are an unnecessary delay. However, I am not convinced by the Oyster Card – unfortunately the card technology used for it has severe security issues. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oyster_card#Security_issues

The airport routes are miserable. No wonder that the airport remains a small scale airport for cheap holidays. The services themselves are ok but why do they only start from the rail station and sometimes the triangle? Why don’t they connect better to other bus services? Why do they have to go through small streets & stop at every corner on their way to the airport?

Could the coach station be moved to the empty lots at Temple Meads? In its current position it is hardly connected to the inner city bus network (which stop-and-gos from Anchor Road to Cabot Circus and on towards old market) nor to the Severn Beach Line nor to Temple Meads.

I do not understand how the city wants to continue economic growth without major alterations to the transport system. My experience is mostly limited to the inner city, Clifton, Gloucester Road and bits of Easton but even these areas suffer major congestion problems – have yo ever considered the productivity lost by the people spending more than an hour in the rush hour traffic jam between Bristol and Bath? I believe that the economic benefits of resolving the daily traffic jams in the city center, around the triangle & park row or on the way to bath (to name just a few places) would outweigh the costs of installing a proper system of local trains by far. Add the increasing living quality and you could get a lot of cars off the street. Look at continental Europe and you’ll see a lot of cities that – even cities with more than 100.000 inhabitants less – for whom local train or street car services are a huge success.

24 Don’t go little by little without having a big plan, design a development vision, communicate it & get it approved in a local referendum and then start spending the money.

March 21, 2011 at 15:26 Cllr Gary Hopkins

Many good points. Business has now realised that they need to contribute to the solving of their most expensive headache of congestion and will help to deliver the major transport schemes. Plot 6 next to Temple meads is being secured for a transport interchange.

7. on March 15, 2011 at 05:58 Jim Donaldson

Can the Council talk with South Gloucestershire and Bath and North East Somerset Councils in respect of the ‘orbital bus services’ in the wider East Bristol area please, before any decisions on funding or cuts are made? A number of the routes run across areas of the Cityor even just edge against the boundary, and therefore serve people who live in Bristol, but start and/or finish outside the City. I’m not clear on how these routes are supported by the various Councils, but we must have ‘joined up thinking’ please for the benefit of current and potential users across the wider area.

8. on March 14, 2011 at 22:05 Chris Ford

If I understand the information correctly the total spend on supported transport in 2010 / 11 is £5,200,000 so £1 million is approaching 20%. These cuts are going to be very painful. Various people suggest cutting the yellow bus, night buses or the harbour ferries but even eliminating these services completely would only save a little over £250,000 only a quarter of what needs to be achieved.

I don’t have the data (hopefully the council do) but I think the key factors in making decisions should be usage – retain the services that are well used and have some chance of becoming economically viable and impact – we should aim to retain services whose removal would decrease peoples quality of life substantially (for example by making them housebound).

The council should try to get a fair contribution to Park & Ride from neighbouring authorities but I think we shouldn’t knock commuters. Bristol is

25 a commercial, administrative and cultural centre and these people are needed to keep it running and economically prosperous.

I think that the cuts forced by the government are short sighted and will worsen the quality of life in the city and make it harder for it to compete with out of town facilities that offer easy access bty car and parking. They will encourage people to continue using their cars so worsening congestion and pollution.

I think it was a pity Mrs Thatcher stopped local authorities running the buses as they used to do. Now we have to trust figures provided by private companies whose duty is to maximise profit. There is no real competition to drive them to be efficient and provide a good service.

on March 21, 2011 at 15:35 Cllr Gary Hopkins

A 20% reduction in spending does not mean a 20% reduction in service. We are just announcing improved service on the Severn beach line with a huge reduction in council spending as the pump priming has ,with a better franchise,made the line more commercial. We are looking to reinvest some of the saving for further improvements. We do have data on usage and will take that into account before detailed decisions are made. The competition angle is key to better value for money.Bristol has not in the past been a good place for buses to operate.Poor bus lanes and nil enforcement were a deterrant. That is now changing and as a result we have interest from a number of major operators. This can only lead to better service and value.

on April 15, 2011 at 18:45 Ed

Hi Gary Hopkins I’m a Severn beach line user and I was wondering what improvements are being made to the line.

9. on March 14, 2011 at 21:50 rod

I just can’t see how the council can afford to support ferry services and bespoke things like severn beach railway and yellow bus. We just need a good reliable core bus service in Bristol.

I also think this raising and renewing the kerbs at bus stops is an absolute waste of money. My son is a driver with firstbus and he presses a button and the bus lowers itself, no need to raise the kerb, so save the building work money.

26 You also seem to be wasting money on bringing bus stops out into the road, away from the original kerb, this seems pointless.

The showcase thing at old market is an massive waste of money. It is so pointless.

You should urgently review your showcase bus route plans and strip out all the no added value building work. Nobody cares what the pavement or the bus stop looks like, they just want a regular reliable bus service. The only capital works needed is the white lines for the bus lane, and simple basic bus stops. Just stop all the fancy kerb work and building work, its a real waste of money. A bus stop and a bus is all that is needed.

10. on March 14, 2011 at 21:50 Nick

Often it is difficult to pay on the Seen Beach Train, even when trying quite hard to! The staff don’t have enough time when the train is full (because it’s so fantastically quick at crossing the city!). How about having ticket machines on the train that passengers can use on their own? Then there would be greater ticket sales and less subsidy needed.

11. on March 14, 2011 at 20:53 Tim Weekes

Don’t waste another second or penny on bus-based rapid transit. Buses are and always will be second-rate public transport. Wait until the money’s available for a decent rail-based system. Better spend nothing than waste money on buses.

12. on March 14, 2011 at 20:31 Barry Cash

What about the environment and climate change? Public money should not be spent subsidising empty buses. They produce huge amounts of CO2 and pollution and waste masses of irreplaceable fuel. The only scientific study I have been able to find shows that the “off-peak” bus i.e.one with 5 passsengers or less is the worst form of transport in terms of fuel useage and CO2 produced. Climate change is the most pressing problem we face. Therefore no public money should be spent on subsidising any bus that is less than half full.

27 on April 15, 2011 at 18:37 Ed

Then you should help me getting this country of oil addiction and get buses that don’t run on oil Barry.

on April 18, 2011 at 18:13 Barry Cash

you mean like ULTra?

13. on March 14, 2011 at 20:27 Patrick Kenehan

Fishponds Rd was already, due to speeding traffic, a deathtrap for the unwary crossing the Rd but since the introduction of the bottleneck bus stops and the resultant frustrated drivers stacked up behind the stationary buses, disgorging and uploading passengers , crossing the road has now become a hazard even at the pedestrian crossings. I hesitate to ask because I am afraid to hear the answer, but was there a public consultation before this debacle was decided upon?

on April 15, 2011 at 18:32 Ed

I always like using subways and bridges like are much more safer than crossing the road. I don’t understand why people don’t like subways.

14. on March 14, 2011 at 20:09 debe

think you should stop the park and ride , this isnt aimed at people who live in our area and pay our taxes. the people who dont pay council tax in bristol should be made to pay the full amount (extra 55p) why should we have to subsidise non bristol council tax payers? again the seven beach line, not aimed at bristol council tax payers,so why are we expected to pay for them? surly its reasonable to expect bristol council tax money and government money aimed at bristol residents to be spent on its own residents and not on people who dont pay bristol taxes? we shouldnt have to subsidse people from out sde of our area, money from bristol residents should be spent on people who pay the council tax. the yellow bus should also go, why only henbury school to get free travel? mine walk, 25 mins each way , its good for them.the ferry service costs alot per passengers , £3.80, it to much per person. the shopper services should also go regular buses should be used.

28 15. on March 14, 2011 at 20:02 Sarah Insole

The Severn Beach line is a very valuable service which should be extended not reduced. I do feel the revenue collection on that line could be improved. There are times when it is almost impossible to obtain a ticket especially when the trains are crowded.

16. on March 14, 2011 at 19:11 Paul Wheeler

It seems to me somewhat contradictory for the Council to try to improve competition in the provision of bus services in the city by inviting operaters to bid for “bundles” of supported transport services. Surely, this will favour the dominant operater, i.e. First Group, which has the financial strength to cross- subsidise services and thereby squeeze out the small operaters whose finances are far more limited.

I would suggest that the continuation of orbital and shopper services where the current subsidy is £2 or more per passenger should be questioned.

Whilst Bristol Dial-a-Ride undoubtedly provides a highly personalised service, at over £8 per passenger journey, it is very costly. Consequently, the cost effectiveness of that service calls for serious critical examination.

March 22, 2011 at 12:10 Regan Harris

on March 29, 2011 at 14:15 passengertransport

29 The grouping of service contracts could allow another larger company to win sufficient work to use these as a basis for setting up a depot here and hence be encouraged to also possibly set up commercial services in competition on major routes.

17. on March 14, 2011 at 18:56 Diane Jones

The commuter ferry service subsidy seems very high in cost per journey terms, if it costs that much in subsidy perhaps we should manage without it.

Shopper services and night buses should be paid for by the establishments that benefit.

Reduce the subsidy for the Severn Beach line.

Reward Bristol residents in a similar way to BANES, their residents have free entry to Roman Baths.

on March 16, 2011 at 09:34 Dave

It would be cheaper to put the ferry passengers in a taxi.

18. on March 14, 2011 at 17:24 Richard

Why are the night services being funded? These run on Friday and Saturday nights and cost £2 each way. They are always busy (unless trends have changed) and for say £15 in fuel and £10 per hour in wages this; with each bus having at least 25 customers this is £25 profit for every route per hour x 6 routes = £150 ph profit = £900 a night profit. Cleaning and wear and tear will be the same as any other normal day so it isn’t relevant and support services at say £100 a night = £800 profit).

During large events in Bristol i.e. The Harbour Festival, Balloon Fiesta, Festival of Nature and all other events that attracts large volumes of people.. there should be an extra charge for ferry services to run. The council funds these services when it’s quiet throughout the year so it’s only fair that when these services make a fortune that they pay money back to the council. At the last Harbourside Festival they had three boats running all day, every day with healthy queue’s on each side of the harbour. At £2 each way x 15 people in each boat = £30 for 2 minutes, this is surely a license to print money. Is this money being spent on the cross ferry service and if so, then how on earth do they need an extra £36k a year?

The same old question has to be asked here as well. Why is First Group still charging people far too much money for using buses in Bristol? If all trips

30 were £1.30 each way (off peak i.e. after 9.30 and before 16.00 and after 18.30 then buses will be far busier, it simply wouldn’t pay to drive in to town and routes will need far less support. We have a culture in Bristol where catching the bus is simply a waste of time and money and it’s fairly depressing offering unfriendly and inconvenient while inflexible routes.

19. on March 14, 2011 at 17:14 Daphne Costello

I would disagree with those people who want to end the shoppers services. Locally this is the only bus which travels around Brislington and Knowle to take people to shops and banks. I also think there should be an emphasis on early buses to get people to work. I would rather end the night buses, taxis are available and would question the ferry, a nice idea but too expensive? I like the idea of the P&R bus picking up passengers on the way in.

on April 15, 2011 at 18:21 Ed

People can’t afford taxis every night so thats why there are night buses.

on April 18, 2011 at 19:35 Chris Tovey

Hi Ed its me again. Once again I object to your comments I see no reason why because I live in Bristol I should be contributing to your nights out. If you can afford to travel into the town centre then you can afford to pay for the transport costs. Please don’t take this in any way as personnel attack but in my view our friends in BCCC think that the only way they can get people to use the public transport systems in to use other peoples money to pay for it. As far as I am concerned if we are worried about congestion and pollution then just stop the cars moving into the town centre and have done with it.

1. on March 14, 2011 at 17:04 Dick Clements

Park and ride services are essential and seem to be relatively economical (in terms of subsidy per journey) so we should maintain support for that.

The Severn Beach rail line could be so much better if trains actually connected with services to and from London. So many times when I arrive at Temple Meads the next service to Redland is 45 minutes away. For a viable service the trains must run every 20 minutes. If we had that you’d see passenger numbers going up in leaps and bounds. But then the trains would be overcrowded so

31 maybe the poor service is just a way of controlling numbers? But my vote would be to keep up support for the Severn Beach line and try to get the service improved.

The subsidy of the commuter ferry service seems very high in cost per journey terms. It’s a nice way to travel but if it costs that much in subsidy perhaps we should manage without it.

I don’t fully understand what “community transport” is or why it needs public support. It’s expensive both in absolute terms and in cost per journey and we could save a lot of money by stopping that subsidy. That would be my first target for savings.

on April 15, 2011 at 18:18 Ed

The Severn beach line is faster than the bus from temple meads to Redland.

2. on March 14, 2011 at 16:59 Richard Hall

Park & Rides and Severn Beach line should have major contributions from the Local Authority areas where many users reside eg South Glos,North Somerset and BANES,Yellow Bus should go(children can use standard services),Shopper services should be scrapped to encourage local shop use,Ferry service is a nice to have and is not essential and Night Buses should go,which may have the secondary benefit of reducing inacceptable behaviour late at night in the City centre locality.

on April 15, 2011 at 18:15 Ed

I agree with you on most of that Richard Hall but night buses are very important to stay so they should not go.

3. on March 14, 2011 at 16:38 Stoo

Cost per head of the Park and Ride is only 55p. Pass that back to the users – who dont even pay Bristol Council Tax – and there’s a saving of £820k at little pain to the users who are either commuters with jobs in Bristol, or shoppers with money to spend.

Severn Beach line is so popular… time to pass the cost back to the users. Halve the subsidy… there’s the other £200k.

32 The ferry subsidy seems expensive per head, but this money allows it to operate throughout the year. It has big benefits for tourism, so we should keep it.

on April 15, 2011 at 18:13 Ed

@ Stoo I can’t afford to spend more on the Severn beach line so no I don’t think that should happen. It needs to improve.

4. on March 14, 2011 at 14:00 Somerdfield In-Mate

The Portway Park and Ride is the best service I have used in Bristol (-shame it can’t extend it’s hours or run on a Sunday!!!)

on March 17, 2011 at 11:53 woodsy

A trick was missed by not enabling access to Severn Beach Line services from the Portway Park & Ride.

on March 17, 2011 at 16:32 Tim Weekes

The trouble is that the signals and track layout on the Severn Beach Line only allow for one train every 40 minutes or so; it needs a massive injection of cash to turn it into what it should be – part of a regular, city-wide rail-based rapid transit system. Then it could easily take all the park-and-ride traffic.

5. on March 13, 2011 at 13:00 Lesley Welch

The point of public transport is to make people’s lives better socially (visiting friends/family/leisure activities), economically (getting to work, getting to public offices eg. Council for benefits etc), and environmentally (getting private cars off the road). We need to sustain public transport services that allow all three – if we don’t, we’ll end up paying more for the impact on mental health, local economy and health and social care services. Cutting subsidies to getting cars off the roads will end up costing us dear. Looking narrowly into Bristol only (re discussion of park and ride) may stop money coming into Bristol’s economy from residents living nearby but outside Bristol. It seems obvious to cut shopping services as clearly the big companies can and should subsidise those. Cutting the Clifton/Hotwells ferry subsidy

33 makes sense, too, but it will be counter-productive if we cut public transport and end up with even more cars in the city (pollution etc) and if we cut orbital lines for folks who don’t have alternative transport. Many of them may already be isolated and if we increase their isolation, social care may have to pick up those pieces, which is another part of the Council budget. What a shame the Cycling City investment had so little impact!

6. on March 11, 2011 at 14:10 John Jordan

I can’t see why we spend so much money on ferry services. I see the average subsidy per journey is quite high. Surely at a time of cuts, this is not a priority. I’ve also read in The Evening Post, BCC is about to spend £240,000 on a hydrogen ferry – what a waste of money. It’s like the cuts are not happening.

Let’s think for a moment who these ferry services serve. As there is no parking in Hotwells, we can assume it’s local residents from Hotwells and Clifton. Lovely! The rest of us are paying for Cliftonites and Hotwellians to have a lovely relaxing cruise into the centre to ease away all their stresses – where to buy the best organic produce and who serves the best lattes.

BCC needs to think of the downtrodden south of the river who struggle to get to work / study on extortionate buses before giving leisure treats to the middle classes. Has anybody tried to catch a bus in from Whitchurch or Hartcliffe these days?

7. on March 11, 2011 at 12:25 Suzanne Parsons

The Yellow Bus looks a great big waste of money and should be scrapped. Children should be encouraged to use bus services and given a subsidised bus pass.

When First unilaterally decide something is unprofitable – how do we know? They could just be trying to hoover yet more public subsidy to boost profit. How much do they trouser from concessionary bus passes every year as well?

I agree with other contributors – get rid of these shopper services and let the supermarkets pay. Tescos has got more money than small African nations and the others aren’t far behind. It would be nice to have a bus to Waitrose though, as I find it a bit difficult to get to.

34 Of course, the other thing to do is introduce these residents parking zones and persuade more of the North Somerset and South Gloucester lot to use the Park & Rides. Why should Bristol provide another M32 park and ride for South Gloucestershire residents and subsidise to the same rate as the others. Let’s get the benefits of investment for Bristol residents and charge residents from outside councils more. We’ve been subsidising them for too long and can’t afford it now. Perhaps it would persuade the Republic of North Somerset to join Bristol in a PTE so we can control First bus and fares and routes.

8. on March 11, 2011 at 11:00 James Wiltshire

I think we need to switch money from these shopper services and orbital services to services which help get people to work and college.

In certain parts of the city e.g. St Annes served by the pathetic 36 service – it doesn’t work for commuters or students trying to get to their place of education. The service is infrequent, circuitous and actively encourages you to go by car.

With a shrinking budget, priority must be given to commuter services and students trying to get to school or college.

9. on March 9, 2011 at 17:25 silvia foster

The obvious area for saving are the shopper services. In this new era of free enterprise and shrinking state – let the shopping centres pay fit these services.

With the success story of the severn beach line – what’s the plan to reduce subsidy. I have to say most of the time you don’t have to pay as they don’t get round to you when somebody pays with coppers. Great free transport!

on March 29, 2011 at 13:49 passengertransport

It should be noted that the actual beneficiaries of the ‘shopper services’ are those who cannot otherwise get to the locations served. These locations include local business

35 areas like Bedminster as well as the larger shops mentioned. Whilst the majority of service users do use these for shopping they are also used for other purposes.

A new contract has just been agreed with First Great Western to reduce the required subsidy from the council for the Severn Beach rail line by £200,000. A great start in dealing with the savings that need to be achieved in 2011/12

on May 4, 2011 at 14:54 James Robertson

Can’t they use their concessionary passes / buy a day-rider like the rest of us and change in the centre?

Failing that, shop somewhere they can access by bus.

10. on March 9, 2011 at 09:42 Vanessa Martin

Why is it that Bristol City Council always picks up the tab for residents from surrounding councils for their transport services? Look at the expenditure on Park & Rides – who benefits from these residents in North Somerset (Long Ashton & Portway P&R) and BANES (Brislington). These P&R buses need to stop en-route in a couple of places (limited stop) and pick up BRISTOL residents. We should look for a greater contribution from these other councils or charge passengers extra if they can’t produce a BCC council tax card. The congestion would be minimal if the P&R sites would close and we could then charge them to park in the centre of Bristol.

We already pay for museums and festivals for these non-Bristol residents. It’s time to reward Bristol residents and make Bristol’s surrounding councils pay their fair share. Shame Avon was abolished – it’s going top have to be recreated at some stage.

on March 29, 2011 at 13:36 passengertransport

P&R keeps circa 2000 cars out of the city every day, which reduces congestion and has a positive influence on air quality. Good quality P&R services help to make Bristol an attractive place for business to operate in and for people to work in. On balance Bristol benefits more from its P&R services than do the authorities from which P&R passengers travel.

36 There is a need to provide acceptable end to end journey times for park and ride which would not be practical on the Bath Road if the P&R services had intermediate stops.

Also FIRST already operate a frequent commercial service along the Bath Rd, and the Council cannot compete directly on its P&R service without being able to demonstrate a strong and clear public interest benefit, which does not exist on this corridor. On the Portway there is no alternative reasonably frequent service and therefore the existing stops can be justified.

11. on March 9, 2011 at 09:36 Roger Smith

Can the council clarify how much is paid to First for the concessionary bus pass scheme? This needs to be considered in addition to the services First deem to be unprofitable and pull out of in search of ever higher public subsidies.

on March 29, 2011 at 14:09 passengertransport

For 2011/12 the bus companies will get paid between £0.86 and £1.01 per single journey. The amounts are derived from a reimbursement ‘model’ and are then refined through negotiation. The payment covers all the costs that the companies incur, but it is discounted to take account of the proportion of journeys which are generated by the existence of the free concession.

Community Transport groups are treated differently on the basis that they do not have the spare capacity to generate new journeys due to the free concession. Therefore they will get paid the undiscounted rate of £1.84 per single journey.

This undiscounted rate represents the average single fare across the bus network.

on March 8, 2011 at 20:11 David Redgewell

Full consultation TRANSPARENT needed route by route, time table by time table with consultation leaflets.

on March 6, 2011 at 17:34 Dr Philip J Naylor

There needs to be a standardised smartcard system in place before adding other service providers will have much impact on competition. There is no incentive for anyone with a First season ticket to use other services running along similar routes.

37 It could be worth seeing whether other big employers could be encouraged to follow the universities’ example and provide subsidised services that are also open to the public. These services could be better advertised, as non-student usage seems to be quite low. 12

on March 14, 2011 at 16:53 Dick Clements

Dr Naylor is aboslutely right about the need for a smartcard or something equivalent. I keep an Oystercard for use when I visit London even though that’s quite infrequent. It’s brilliant; quick, easy, convenient, I can get a print out of my journey history. Why can’t we have a Bristol Oystercard to work on all the buses and local trains. It would also make the buse servoces so much faster. Has anyone actually tried to calculate how much it costs the nation to keep 20 or 30 or 40 bus passengers waiting whilst those getting on the bus fumble for change and interrogate the driver and whatever. Any rational alien visiting Earth and observing our bus fare payment system would conclude we are mad!

12. on March 5, 2011 at 09:32 A Baker

I do not know a great deal about how bus services are financed so apologies if this is a stupid question but don’t understand why the Council is subsidising the less profitable times/routes of buses so that First Bus can make a profit out of the rest of it. They seem to charge a huge amount for most bus routes which is why alot of people are put off using them

13. on March 2, 2011 at 17:13 Chris Tovey

Just had another look at the figures. Some of the routes would be cheaper by Taxi. Bases on the figures for the dial a ride it would be more economic to use a taxi.

14. on March 2, 2011 at 17:02 Chris Tovey

Just remove the non essentail services, such as the ferry services. Do we really need to spend 2.27 million so people can get to the shops. If we are transporting people to ASDA for example shouldn’t ASDA be contributing to the cost.

38 I cannot see how much of the costs provided are covered by providing free bus travel for the over 60′s are we double counting the cost of travel.

Why do we sudsidies the costs for the Severn Beach line. It is out side the district of Bristol. If its now popular then the charges should go up or are we just puting money in the service providers pocket.

39 B. Private responses from the paper and online survey

(75 responses, 54 comments)

Protect 52 bus service from cuts,also 121 service to WSM. Protect service 75 on evenings, sunday / bank holidays. More trains stopping at Parson St and Bedminster. Serving WSM and across the city to Filton and Patchway etc. Low floor buses on route 36 to Withwood from St annes and protecting service from cuts including eveings/ sundays/ bank holidays.(x 3 comments). 5/17/11 10:07PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Severn Beach Line "is a shining example" (G.Hopkins). Savings made on this line must be reinvested in order to drastically improve the evening service and increase the frequency generally. More carriages are an urgent necessity in rush hour. 5/12/11 5:35PM View ResponsesCategorize As

I gather that A-bus has been able to take over running service 52 (Imperial Park - Broadmead) without using an additional bus, and I wondered whether Wessex Connect might be able to re-timetable their services such as 503/510/511/558/559 to reduce the number of vehicles and drivers required. For example, instead of all services running between, say 9am & 4pm, could some run between 9am & 1pm on some days, and 1pm & 4pm on others? 5/12/11 12:12AM View ResponsesCategorize As

The revised service 20 route from Hengrove to The Centre overlaps with the service 51 route: the M-F early morning subsidy on the service 20 is £1.21 per passenger, and on the service 51 is £0.22 per passenger, so it seems a saving could be made by reducing early morning journeys on the service 20. Anyone who wishes to travel north of The Centre can use services 75 & 76. (I declare an interest here as I live in Hengrove and use both services). It is convenient to have a service every 30 minutes on each route on Sundays and Bank Holidays, but I wonder if it would be better value to run an hourly service on each route, say for the morning and the evening, with a half hourly service between 10am and 5pm for Broadmead & Cabot Circus shoppers. I was surprised by the high level of subsidy for early morning journeys on service 90 which suggest it should be a target for reductions, but I appreciate that social & other non-financial issues may be important here. Services 75 & 76 seem to deliver good value - I think they were one of the early Showcase-type routes, and I hope that further usage can be encouraged. 5/12/11 12:05AM View ResponsesCategorize As

I was, and am, very concerned that I only found out about the consultation when the chief executive replied to my letter, a matter of days before the end of the consultation time-frame. I suspect that the vast majority of DialaRide users were, and probably still are, unaware that there even is a consultation in process. I myself use the internet to order, and have delivered, not only my food but also many other items. This means my 'need' to use the service is reduced to hospital and dental appointments, one-off 'special' shopping and social events. Many DialaRide users do not have access to the internet and would be utterly unable to buy essential/basic food. Many of the

40 DialaRide users I have met are far from frail or elderly, yet would be housebound without it. Thanks to DialaRide and the internet, I have a life despite effectively being housebound. However, the biggest problem with being housebound is that one is out of touch with what is going on locally, such as this consultation. Whilst many users may have no interest in providing information, IF your 'consultation' is to be genuinely and fully informed, perhaps serious consideration should be given to extending the time frame for the consultation. I believe there are in the region of 15,000 'users' registered with DialaRide, although the numbers using the service on a regular basis is much smaller. IF the consultation time-frame were extended, this could allow time for a copy of the consultation form to be sent to all those who do regularly use DialaRide. Sadly some users do regard the service as a 'right' and use it as if it were a personal taxi service provided free by the council. Bringing to their attention that there is a consultation may help them to recognise what a privilege it is to have a service like this. Saving money by reducing the holiday or sick pay of drivers would be to take advantage of those who are doing the work because it is providing a service, several of whom are not permanent full-time employees. So far as I am aware, all the drivers and escorts who facilitate the DialaRide day trips are voluntary. It would be a sad comment on the state of this 'civilized' country if we begin to take advantage of volunteers in order to save money. Mrs Suaad Walker grateful DialaRide user 5/11/11 5:49PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Bristol residents who are unable to use conventional public transport. 5/11/11 5:46PM View ResponsesCategorize As

How can we do more for less? Park and Ride passengers should pay the commercial rate. The service could be improved for the public by introducing limited stops. This would leave £219, 060, 00 to spend. As we don’t know the cost per mile of commercial services it’s impossible to know what this would buy. Would it pay for free bus travel for all Bristolian under 18 year olds during the month of August. If so, do that. Ever since privatization of rail and bus, Bristol taxpayers have donated about £5.2m a year to providers such as First, Wessex Connect, Buglers Coaches, No7 Boat Trips Ltd and Community Transport to supply unprofitable ‘public transport.’ Obviously transport should be run for passengers not profiteers. How routes could be changed to increase passengers and grow the services? The destinations of cross city buses such as 71, 73, 75, 76 from North Bristol should be increased and some should go to Brislington and Knowle, for example. Since Bristol taxpayers paid for raised kerbs, Showcase bus routes, ‘real’ time information etc BCC should control the timetable and fares. Boarding the bus could be speeded up by season tickets or carnet tickets Opportunities for improving how we do things. The main problem with Bristol

41 buses is the fares which deter people from benefitting from the improvements. Give passengers a flat fare of £1 and a 10 minutes frequency on all routes for a 3 month period. Then reduce those routes which fail. In the document, the Severn Beach Line (Temple Meads to Avonmouth Station) is praised by Councillor Hopkins. Since the FOSBR campaign in 2007, supported by all councillors, the increased funding for 3 years improved frequency, reliability and generated an 80% passenger increase. But the service after 7.30 pm is appalling and as the LibDems have cut the funding, improvement are unlikely. At least the blue taxis at Temple Meads Station will benefit. Are there services which no longer serve the community and can be cut? Free parking and / or travel allowances to councillors should be terminated and car keys should be removed from them on weekdays. Blue taxis, buses, walking or cycling is the transport of trustworthy councillors. Council meetings should be held at 6 pm so that working people can attend. Julie Boston 5/10/11 10:26PM View ResponsesCategorize As

How can the 500 bus service possibly cost 1.25 million over and above fares paid? Cut the bus company profits? It's my belief that public transport should be free. Then we can all use it and pay taxes with what we save from running our inefficient, polluting private cars. Think big, Bristol Council. Meanwhile, more publicity for the 500 bus route could bring in more passengers, especially tourists on the SSGB route. It was a better route when the bus went up Park St to the Triangle. And how about an anti-clockwise route? Since this route is already subsidised, why now make it free as well? 5/10/11 8:56PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Community Transport is an essential part our lives, especially in Lawrence Western. Public transport only serves Long Cross. One side is virtualy flat, while the other is uphill, where U thibnk I can safely say most of the bus users live. LWCT allows these people some quality of life, be elderly, disabled, socialising. The volanteers who staff the bus are very helpful, polite and give their services free. Passengers are transported to variousplaces, Dr's surgeries, clinics, lunch cluband other things provided by rock, Public transport would not provide any of these services. Community transport DO NOT LET PEOPLE DOWN. Public transport do not run a reliable service, their attitudetp people leave a lot to be desired, fares are far too high compared to other citiesand are not realistic for the majority of people. So please, do not penalise the communitytransport in favour of public transportwho show huge profilts at the end of the finanical year. Community transport does not. 5/10/11 12:23AM View ResponsesCategorize As

42 cuts I am concerned that the nature of the cuts proposed may not be the most efficient way of protecting this valuable provision. I do not know if the way the service is run is solely due to Dial-a-Ride management, Bristol City Council constraints, or a combination of the two factors working together so am writing to both. I am unsure of the most appropriate councillor so have written to several. All the Dial-a-ride drivers I have met are, without exception, helpful and caring. A number are technically retired. All give the impression they are doing this job precisely to be part of providing a service. To take advantage of that good-will and community spirit by implementing cut-backs through holiday and sick pay is surely un-necessary when far greater savings could be made by improving the efficiency of the current, computerised booking system. Originally the service was run with vehicles being largely operated in specific areas of the city, when all bookings were organised by hand/head. Passengers could be ‘doubled-up’ within an area enabling vehicles to provide the service to around 30/35 people in a single day, yet only driving 55/60 miles. Since introduction of the computerised booking system the majority of vehicles now routinely cover the whole city. This often involves not only back-tracking on their own routes in the course of a single day, but also carrying far fewer passengers (around 16/18 or less) as well as driving far more miles, closer to 85/90. Driving more miles, coupled with the current high price of fuel, can only have a seriously detrimental impact on the cost of running the service. Whilst I am immensely grateful for the service I have personally received I have become increasingly concerned that I am often the only passenger in a 4/6/8 seat vehicle. Although I am in receipt of Disability Living Allowance at the higher mobility rate, it simply does not cover the cost of taxis to/from doctors, dentists, hospital appointments, having a social life etc etc. I regularly carry food, water and a puzzle book so I can happily sit for an extra ½ hour or longer to accommodate an earlier drop-off or later pick-up than that I have requested. To me that is a small price to pay for a service that enables me to NOT be housebound. I wrote last year when I felt another service user was failing to recognise what a privilege it is to have a service like this. Perhaps if all service users were aware of the threat to the service, more might support changes to the booking that enabled users to continue to benefit, without cost to the supportive drivers. All users need to be reminded: the service is a charity providing door-to-door transport. It is NOT a personal service provided by a paid-for taxi. It is a resource shared with other members of the community, who have an equal right for their needs to be met. I hope Dial-a-Ride and the City Council can work together to achieve the necessary cuts by improving the efficiency of the service, but without affecting the holiday or sick pay of the drivers. 5/9/11 6:31PM View ResponsesCategorize As How can we do more for less? Add more information to existing bus stop displays and encourage bus operators to advertise services. Advertise the fact that real time bus departure times are available online for many services. This should really encourage the use of the buses, as people are no longer forced to wait at bus stops for late running buses. The URL for this service should be listed on bus stops. I would suggest displaying the URL for the relevant http://www.nextbusbristol.co.uk page for each stop on the actual bus stop. Also why not print a bar code (or QR code) of the URL on the bus stops to allow people with smart phones to quickly and easily access this URL? The http://www.transportdirect.info and http://www.travelinesw.com services should also be advertised on bus stops and buses as they are both excellent services. These will allow bus users to easily find information on additional public transport services. How routes could be changed to increase passengers and grow the

43 services? More services should route through Bristol Temple Meads station. There should be a reduction in the number of taxis waiting outside the station to allow more room for buses. Who should receive these services? Park and Ride services should be charged at cost. The Council should not pay to transport people from their cars into Bristol. People will still use these park and ride services as the time and cost of parking in the city centre would be greater than the park and ride fares. This saving would account for more than the £600,000 total saving required in 2011/12. More schools should receive yellow bus services, rather than just Henbury School. This could lead to a huge reduction in peak time traffic. Do the supermarkets contribute to the shopper services? If not surely they should do. For future supermarkets surely the funding of bus services should be agreed as part of the planning agreement. As the supermarkets are gaining from the services, it seems perfectly reasonable for them to contribute to the cost of running the shopper services. The supermarkets should advertise the bus services to their stores. For example, the 559 bus which runs to Brislington Tesco is not mentioned on the Tesco web site page for this store, as I recently found out when I needed to get to this store. 5/9/11 12:45AM View ResponsesCategorize As

Park & Ride - This would be used on Sundays especially during the summer. Possibly till 6pm as most shops and leisure places close by that time. More information on public using the University buses. More Dial A Ride buses 5/8/11 1:14AM View ResponsesCategorize As

Re: Supported Transport Services particularly Sunday services Weston-S-M to Clevedon. This service was terminated around November 2010 after it had suffered some vicissitudes among others the operator going bankrupt! I cannot foresee this service being replaced without an excessive contribution by local authorities perhaps the Cribbs Causeway shopping authority might contribute to this service as they seem to be the main beneficiary. However there are two services between Clevedon and Bristol both lightly loaded. For part of their journeys they use the A road between Bristol and W-S-M would it not to be feasible to arrange the time tables of the Clevedon bus or buses to give a connection of sort at Backwell. Most passengers, of course prefer a through service but without some such arrangment the alternative is no service an excessive subsidy going via Buckwell with almost an hour wait between buses. The same facts also apply to evening services W.SM to Clevedon. A few years ago a Saturday evening bus was operated. I feel it was a flop! But again it might be worth considering with the 362 service which runs I understand to eleven pm. Trust you find this worth consideration Yours faithfully, 5/6/11 7:29PM View ResponsesCategorize As

It's essential that the council continues to support bus services at weekends, on bank holidays and in the evenings as much as it possibly can. To withdraw these services would mean that people who have no car,eldery people, and the disabled , would not be able to go out at all at these times, and would be reduced to the status of second- class citizens: They do no deserve to be discriminated against in this way, as they were not responsible for the banking crisis, one possible solution might be for each passenger to pay part of the subsidised cost of their fare: for instancem if it costs The Council £1.91 to provide each seat in the 36 bus, in the eveningsm then each passenger might pay at least half otf that ( In addition to their ordinary fare,of course:

44 Those people with a free pass might pay a flat rate £1). This would be far preferable to withdrawing the bus service altogether. Please consider such an idea. 5/6/11 4:59PM View ResponsesCategorize As

sqsq 5/6/11 1:26AM View ResponsesCategorize As

Cross harbour ferry has established itself after 2 years and could now run without financial support. Since the inception of commuter ferries the no's have fallen. Commuter ferry no longer goes to Temple Meads and the amount of passengers it carries from Hotwells to City centre is very low. I can see no reason for subsidy for this journey day or evening. Money would be better spent improving bus services. Disablee access is non existant. 5/4/11 10:15PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Not many respondents to Ask Bristol have suggested how Bristol City Council could reduce the annual cost of £5.2m for supported transport services by £600,000. (Deadline 11 May) In reply to how can we do more for less, I support the suggestion that Park and Ride passengers should pay the commercial rate. This would leave £219, 060, 00 to spend on increasing the frequency of Bristol evening bus services or reducing the fares for under 18s or something spectacular such as paying for free bus travel for all Bristolian under 18 year olds during the month of August. P & R with a limited stop service such as provided by Portway P&R could attract more paying passengers. Until we are told the cost per mile of commercial bus services it's impossible to know what the savings would buy. The only good news seems to be for rail travellers between Temple Meads and Avonmouth Stations. Councillor Hopkins is delighted with the passenger increase on this line which is the result of Friends of Suburban Bristol Railways (FOSBR) 30 minute campaign supported by all Bristol councillors who voted in 2007 to increase funding for 3 years. This investment increased frequency, reliability and passengers. North Somerset, South Gloucestershire and BANES councillors should use this success as an argument for investment in a more frequent train service to stations in their areas. In reply to the question about services which no longer serve the community, I suggest that free parking and / or travel allowances to councillors should be terminated and car keys removed from them on weekdays. Blue taxis, buses, walking or cycling is the transport of trustworthy councillors. Council meetings should be held at 6 pm so that working people can attend. 5/4/11 10:11PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Myself and a lot of other people depend on the Lawrence Weston Community Transport Bus. It is very good. 5/3/11 11:03PM View ResponsesCategorize As

45 sure if free buspass holders were approached they wouldn't mind a small contribution to their fare. 5/3/11 11:01PM View ResponsesCategorize As

I found the question impossible as I cannot make any valid suggestions. The only suggestion I could make is that service 518 between Bristoll Parkway and Westbury is reduced and naybe Sunday services cut. I don't drive and rely heavly on buses to move around the city, so I would much rather not see all supported services cut. I understand you have to make savings but transport hurts many people and I really hope you will be able to leave a reduced service on routes that now operate under subsidy. I welcome the fact that new operators have been approached but First Bus early morning services that are subsidised are necessary and I cannot understand why a Commercial operator making huge profits should be subsidised early mornings / late evenings 5/3/11 10:39PM View ResponsesCategorize As

no comment 5/3/11 10:32PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Park & Ride: I can understand the underwriting of capital costs to keep cars out of the city centre. More advertising on approach roads to Bristol probably needed e.g. A38 & A370 for Long Ashton Park& Ride. I do feel that as I would be prepared to pay more for the bus when I go to Bath. Perhaps Bath, Bristol & S. Glos COuncils should consult over increasing fares, ( as one would not wqant to disadvantage Broadmead further against Cribbs or Bath) ? Orbital services: Not used in 30 years. Shopper services: Not used since I moved to Bristol in 1971. Why is this not part of Community Transport ? Why is it not paid for by the shops who benefit? Looking at the cost per head, not many shops benefit. Commuter Ferry Services: Subsidy per passenger is too high. Phasing in of reduced subsidy would seem sensible. Cross Harbour Ferry Service: seems acceptable Community Transport: Never used since I moved to Bristol in 1971 but I amonly 64. Is there an argument for looking at Shopper Services being moved into this category? Add-ons to commercial services: Essential as some of us work on Bank Holidays. Severn Beach Line: no comment Yellow Bus: no comment Night buses: Essential for the safety of our young people 5/3/11 10:28PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Bus timetable not easily availabble. 20 and 54 bus timetables, for example, change several time a year but buses never carry the timetables. Bus get a reputation for being unreliable because the times have been charged a person misses bus. - A book of timetables for all local services would be good. I live within 5 minutes walk of the following bus routes: 20, 54, 517/8,584,585,586,587 and U5. But 3 different regimes. I used to go to Horfield Leisure Centre before work, then Filton to work. So had to use ca: using u5+ 75 a.m. and 517/8 p.m. cost £8 whereas integrated tickets should

46 have made it circa £4, £5. You can buy any service tickets Plusbus when coming to Bristol by train but not within Bristol - Integrated / cross ticketing should be required - more seats, more bus stops - Real time bus stop into at the infrequent services not the 10 minutes 5/3/11 10:17PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Do not support commuter ferry. Could walk or Bus 5/3/11 10:00PM View ResponsesCategorize As

I use the Long Ashton park and ride two days a week and it is a fantastic service. However, because I live in Blagdon I have to drive down the A38 and through Barrow Gurney to get to it. There is no direct bus from this side of Bristol into the centre. In one of your documents you mentioned the possiblility of taking some of the circular routes in favour of two shorter bus journeys. I would like to suggest that if you could reach agreement with the other local authorities involved it would be possible to develop a bus route going straight down the A38 to say Temple Meads where connections could be made to other services. Passengers could be given access to this route using minibuses going round the villages. Another option would be to put a further Park and Ride at the old nuclear electric site on the edge of Bedminster Down. Both these suggestions would cut down traffic using Barrow Gurney and congestion in Bristol. 4/29/11 10:07PM View ResponsesCategorize As

By an ITA being set up and setting the service levels. Integrated travel card valid on all forms of public transport this would ensure fares are collected and competitive. with more passengers using services, the extra income could be used to support services that are needed but less used. 4/27/11 4:15PM View ResponsesCategorize As

The Community Bus does not run to time because people are not ready on time. Keep to a schedule even people miss it. Overall, more people would use the bus if it could be relided apon and so the people can plan their day. 4/26/11 10:22PM View ResponsesCategorize As

hh 4/18/11 8:11PM View ResponsesCategorize As

47 I do not think the value of the Wessex Connext Orbtal routes is sufficiently appreciated. They could be advertised to encourage greater use. I use them to reach e.g. Sea Mills, Coombe Dingle, Suspension Bridge, Blackboy Hill, the Zoo, Southmead Hospital, Westbury, Temple Meads Station, Eastville Health Centre, Fishponds, Cossham Hospital, Kingswood, and to make connections witrh other services to e.g. Tresham, Wotton-u-Edge. They mostly avoid traffic congestion so give a pleasing ride. A very versatile group of services which should be better known. Illustrated leaflets in the Tourist Office? If anything a section of the service should be extended into the evening to permit of visiting patients in Southmead Hospital. Timetabling could be modified to ensure a connection at Kingswood and to allow the coincidence of buses at Eastville Park stop to enable interchange of passengers between services without having to wait a full half hour if one just missed. 4/18/11 2:33AM View ResponsesCategorize As

Given the tight financial constraints, the principle for any subsidies to public transport should be encourage people out of their cars and to ensure the disadvantaged can still use it. This means subsidies should be applied to early morning, late evening and Sunday services, park and ride, rail and the travel subsidies for pensioners and disabled (community transport). Subsidies such as orbital subsidies, ferry services, shopper services, night buses are lower priorities. As such they should be the first to be affected by any cuts. 4/17/11 9:04PM View ResponsesCategorize As

The two services which I regularly use are the Severn Beach Line and the Orbital buses, especially nos. 517 and 518. I therefore support these, but recognise that the Orbital ones, as a high spender, may have to have a reduction to about £1.1M. 517 and 518 provide an essential feeder service to Parkway station. Also the Park & Ride is important as it takes cars off the road and so reduces congestion problems for buses. Otherwise I would cut night buses, and reduce funding of community transport, commuter ferry, add-on and shopper services to save the required £1M p.a. 4/13/11 11:07PM View ResponsesCategorize As

As co-Chair of a local Diability organisation, I would like to see all public transport accessible to all disabled people. However, in the meantime it is essential that Dial-a Ride carries on being funded in order that disabled people who do not have their own transport are able to be involved in their local community. 4/11/11 5:05PM View ResponsesCategorize As

For buses such as 'shoppers services' and'night services', remove the subsidy, and require that the user pays the commercial rate set by the bus operator. People choose to use these services just like the rest of us, and there's no reason why the tax payer should be contributing. 4/6/11 8:03PM View ResponsesCategorize As

no comment 3/30/11 4:46PM View ResponsesCategorize As

48 I am a disabled person with Multiple Scleroris, people like me do not want services cut as we rely on public transport. I still have to get from home to work and work to home, I also have to be able to get to the shops, essential services like doctors and hospitals. People like me who cannot drive rely soley on Public Transport to get around and if services were cut we would be in real trouble. 3/23/11 4:14AM View ResponsesCategorize As

Dial a Ride is a complete waste of money looking at the breakdown of cost the others who provide community transport are better value 3/22/11 7:19PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Keep dial a ride and services that are taylored to disabled/old people. Reduce/Scrap services that cost more than £1 per person per journey. eg Sunday's 3/21/11 9:04PM View ResponsesCategorize As

ASAP. 1. Create Severn Beach train station/halt at Avonmouth Park and Ride gaining additional driver passengers enjoying access to Clifton Down/Redland/Montpelier stations etc to all north river side to Templemeads. rather than by bus to the Centre area. Medium Term 1. install Avon Barrier and green energy turbine installation and lock gates, between Avonmouth/Portishead keeping Avon river "full" back to Cumberland basin, (would make a great tide free water sports/sailing facility) 2. Use 24/7 water buses from both sides of Barrier into Centre and possibly onwards to Bath. 3.To facilitate ex M5/Portway through south-bound vehicle traffic keep main Cumberland Basin swingbridge permanently open. 4. keep Pump House bridge permanently raised to give 24/7 docks access for larger vessels. 3/21/11 6:45PM View ResponsesCategorize As

2 a BCC also sets the taxi tariffs. If you aligned them to Liverpool or Birmingham rates you would encourage their use and discourage car use. Taxis and Mini ca rates are ridiculously expensive and poor value. 2 b Similarly lobby the government to gain regulatory power over bus fares. Travelling for one in the day is viable but if two travel I take the car because even with punitive BCC parking fees its way cheaper. 3/17/11 12:17AM View ResponsesCategorize As

The Severn Beach rail line is as stated a prime example of achievement of modal shift by using subsidy. In order to gradually reduce the subsidy the operator must be pressed to concentrate on actually collecting fares, I believe this is known as Revenue Protection. The BCC subsidy was essential to kick start the service but it is now capable of being more, but not totally, self supporting. BCC subsidises both P&R and also its own car parks. Revenue from both of these, as well as bus services generally, would be much improved, and the cost thereby reduced, if the political nettle of restricted parking in the wider centre is grasped. By this I mean both Residents Parking and Workplace parking. Only in this way will passengers be diverted onto the P&R and scheduled buses in sufficient numbers to reduce the present subsidies. As long as there is a chance of free parking within walking distance of the central area car commuting will continue unabated with continuing cost to health & wellbeing as well as the cash transport subsidy. This is a strategic City issue and should not be at the mercy of small local pressure groups. Employers could be encouraged to put car parking spaces "beyond use" by fitting permanent cycle stands to them thus escaping

49 charges and encouraging sustainable commuting in one action. Simply withdrawing subsidy and a loss of public transport services will only result in more congestion and even less revenue. It is also a mistake to withdraw late services. This will only result in a transfer to car as there is no other way to get home. For a number of people it will mean staying at home as the cost of owning and operating a car is steadily moving beyond the reach of an increasing number of people. All studies indicate that this trend will continue and probably accelerate. Good public transport will define whether a city works and thrives or stagnates and dies in the 21st century. 3/16/11 12:13AM View ResponsesCategorize As

. 3/15/11 5:10PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Why have First Bus got the monopoly? Are there other bus companies to compete? If there are, surely some form of competitive tendering would drive prices down. 3/15/11 12:56AM View ResponsesCategorize As

The dial a Ride services need to be provided in a more cost effective way. 3/10/11 5:26PM View ResponsesCategorize As

This is a long term point not really connected to any current need to save money. The Severn Beach Line if extended at Brentry, with a new loop to Cribbs Causeway, and starting at Weston Super Mare might bring in more users overall on to all points of the line [shopping, work and visiting]. Very long term a railway bridge across the river at Avonmouth to link in the Portishead line to the Severn Beach Line and with a Park and ride at the Portishead/M5 junction and an extension via Filton to Temple Meads would solve a lot of congestion problems at Portishead and give much greater passenger volumes to make things either a paying proposition or socially desirable from a planning point of view. The problem with the Severn Beach Line in the end is its lack of connections. 3/6/11 11:02AM View ResponsesCategorize As

Ideas & comments: The Bristol area can start a PTE to regulate local transport services. In this whole routes can be tendered. Prize routes may then have no cost at all to run the minimum service. Re-engineer the Bristol bus routes completely. Make the services more applicable to modern Bristol and changes in living, social & working patterns. The more relevant services are for the community, the less it will cost the council to support less popular services. Currently I do not use the local busses as they do not go to where I want them. There is also no through ticketing, making matters worse. Local ferry services are expensive but add to the tourist charm. Advertise them more and encourage these services to add additional services (eg serving food & drink) to increase revenue. Why a yellow bus service for Henbury School but not others? This only benefits a small part of Bristol. This should be reviewed or the cost transferred to the school. The Servern Beach route is a great service for people from South Gloucestershire. Should that council contribute? If not, sun the service as far as the Bristol boundary only. My parents looked at the Dial-a Ride service. It did not take them where they needed to go. They had to catch a taxi instead. Attendance allowance covers taxi cost, so Dial-a-Ride is actually not necessary. Or at least charge the Attendance Allowance for use of the service.

50 3/6/11 2:54AM View ResponsesCategorize As

The cross-centre bus journeys are always delayed - not surprising when routes are timetabled at an hour in some cases. The successful Night Flyers show that imaginative tickets CAN allow passengers to change.in the centre. There must be ticket data on how many passengers go from Clifton to Stockwood, Bedminster to Horfield. Though be mindful of how routes work in similar cities. We desperately need Oyster cards, not reinventing the wheel with yet another version of smart cards. It works brilliantly in London so just get them here. I see shopping services are heavily subsidised and I question whether retailers shouldn't be helping there? Also why can't money come back into the council through the way the tenders are set up - after the company makes a certain level of profit then the city benefits. I would look at ticket data to see how often the very early morning and very late evening services are used. Maybe aiming for a bus at 10pm then 11pm would suit many services as they are hardly packed at those times. Commuting in Bristol is dreadful with many buses sailing past stops at 8am and even 9am, plenty of reports that people never know how early to turn up just to find a space on a bus. For the Severn Beach line, if journeys are up 80% then revenue must be double so can't the subsidy be reduced with First? And why do they control everything in this city? Finally the taxis here are so expensive (and I read a further 6% increase is coming) don't forget that if a service is withdrawn then that is the only option. £10 doesn't get you far in this city and many people will simply not make the social/shopping/work journey if the cost is unaffordable, with consequent effects on other businesses. Get the buses, tacis and trains not to be so greedy please 3/5/11 10:41PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Ferry subsidy at £3.80 is wrong and should be stopped. The massive bus stop program was over the top and too expensive. More Yellow buses should be provided. NO subsidy for shopping buses, shops and supermarkets should fund their own services. 3/5/11 5:33PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Remove control of Bristol's public transport from First. I and many other people that I know will never use First buses due to the terrible service, rude nature of staff, dangerous drivers and overpriced fares. Until they have the monopoly on Bristol's public transport taken away from them Bristol's transport system in general will continue to suffer and be appalling. 3/5/11 5:13PM View ResponsesCategorize As

Reduce the subsidy for both the Severn Beach line which is a service provided by Bristol for people who live outside the area. If it is as popular as reported the fares can be increased to pay the full cost of the service. Stop subsidy for the harbour ferry service this clearly is a service is not cost effective. I note you do not include any comments on the cost of the propsed white elephant project of converting the ferry servise to use Hydrogen. 3/2/11 11:56PM View ResponsesCategorize As

51 APPENDIX C(3)

LL eett’’ss ttaallkk aabboouutt :: S upported Transport Services S upported Transport Services

Improving public transport has been a high priority for the council for over a decade. With the Greater Bristol Bus network all the 10 major corridors into the city centre will be vastly improved by £70 million government and local investment, with more bus lanes and real time information radically improving the reliability, frequency and quality of services.

There is now an opportunity to reshape supported services over which the council has control. We need to look at how some services could work better with the emerging Greater Bristol Bus Network so that they achieve more for local communities with less impact on the council tax payer. Workable solutions for local transport are not just about buses. The council is delivering an integrated transport network which includes buses, local rail, the planned rapid transit schemes, door-to-door minibus services for elderly and disabled people, car clubs, cycling schemes and attractive walking routes.

Sharing information, seeking your opinion Bristol’s approach is to be open and prepared for challenge when seeking to change services. We share data and background information with our citizens and ask for your ideas about how public services could be provided in the future. We recognise these are important decisions, where citizens’ views and ideas need to be listened to, and that we don’t have all the answers. As part of a series of conversations to help shape local public services, we would like your views on Supported Transport Services.

The difference between commercial and supported services Most of the bus services in Bristol are ‘commercial services’ run by private businesses for profit. The council has little influence over these services but works with bus companies to improve journeys through improved bus priority, bus stops, electronic real-time information and publicity. On commercial services, the council has no direct control on route, timetable or fares. The council DOES improve the infrastructure – such as bus stops and bus lanes. And it CAN help with technology such as smartcards. Examples of commercial services are the day time services on main routes into the city run by First.

The council DOES NOT pay any money towards keeping these services running except reimbursing bus companies for free travel by concessionary fare card-holders, which is a government requirement.

The council financially supports some transport services for the following reasons: • At times when commercial operators claim services or parts of services are unprofitable such as: routes with low passenger numbers, early morning services, late evening services, weekends and bank holiday services. • On routes which are deemed to be socially necessary or help connect commercially operated routes e.g. orbital services / shopper services • Demand-responsive community transport (e.g. dial-a-ride / door-to-door) which help elderly and disabled people get around • To invest in services with great potential such as the Severn Beach Line rail service and harbour ferry services • To reduce congestion in the city centre by providing park and ride for out of town commuters and visitors.

These financially-supported services are known as Supported Transport Services. They currently cost £5.2 million a year (2010/11) They are:

• Park and Ride • Orbital services including 500, 517/8 and 584/5/6/7 (around Kingswood/Parkway Station/Southmead Hospital & Shirehampton and other North and Central Bristol areas) • Local shopper services including 503, 558/9 and 510/11 (Knowle, Bedminster and Brislington orbitals) and Easy Rider services. • Commuter and cross harbour ferry services • Community transport (including Dial a Ride, Group Hire and local community transport groups) • Add-ons to commercial bus services (early morning, late evening, Sunday and Bank Holiday services) • Support for Severn Beach Line rail service • Night buses (which run from midnight on Fri and Sat nights) • Yellow school bus to Henbury school Year Cost How much do we spend on Supported Transport 2008/9 £5.1 million Services? 2009/10 £5.0 million In the last financial year, this funding has benefited over 4.7 million 2010/11 £5.2 million passengers per year. The split between the different forms of supported transport services is as follows:

Service Cost £ Park and Ride services (including site costs) 820,000 Orbital services 1,250,000 Shopper Services 190,000 Commuter Ferry Service 52,000 Cross harbour ferry service 36,000 Community transport 1,044,000 Add-ons to commercial services e.g. late night, early mornings, Sundays 1,400,000 Severn Beach Line rail service 420,000 Yellow Bus 37,000 Night buses 130,000

Total 5,380,000

NB: Breakdown of overall costs of supported transport services (Some cross boundary services receive contributions from adjacent authorities towards their costs and the Council also contributes to some services contracted by those authorities) Cost per journey to the council Service Average cost per Although passengers on most of these passenger journey services pay to use, it doesn’t cover all Park and Ride services (including site costs) 55p the costs, so the council subsidies journeys as shown in the table: Orbital services £1.62 Shopper Services £2.27 The council wants some supported Commuter Ferry Service £3.80 services to better fit modern needs. Cross harbour ferry service £0.27 Some individual services have begun to Community transport £2.81 fail because they don’t fit their Add-ons to commercial services e.g. late £0.90 communities any more. In a few cases, night, early mornings, Sundays supported services have become so Severn Beach Line rail service £1.65 underused that the council is Yellow Bus £3.17 contributing up to £10 per passenger Night buses £1.67 journey and this is unacceptable.

All residents must have access to public transport. But we believe we can make the council’s money work harder at providing the right solutions to meet a range of needs at the right price.

Tendering for a better deal and more competition We have made a start by doing one big thing a lot better – changing how we buy our supported services from the bus companies that can provide them. The council wants to introduce more competition in the Bristol bus market, which has proved effective in other cities where operators can only attract more passengers by improving the quality of services and keeping fares down.

To encourage more competition, we are advertising all our supported services at once. We hope to encourage providers to agree to run large packages of services at competitive rates.

We have to be realistic and accept that the rising price of fuel and general inflation will increase the annual costs of these services. But our actions should lead to more competitive bids to offset this rise. The process is ongoing. We should be in a position to offer contracts to successful bidders in June 2011.

We expect to get a better deal for local people by getting more supported services running once more as commercial services. And we want to invest as much as we can in securing the right supported services in the right places. We currently support some lengthy bus routes that may discourage greater use because of the time the journeys take. Perhaps some residents would rather get two quick buses on a radial and direct route, rather than sit on one bus for over an hour.

Scope to change our approach? The reductions in central government funding will be difficult. The council has to save around £1 million from the public transport budget in two years.

But in facing the issues this presents, the council and the community need to look for ways to make things more connected – better AND cheaper.

A combination of door-to-door services for people with mobility problems and conventional services (on circular routes and direct routes into town) are easier to access now we have online and mobile phone links to real bus times and bookings. We can use other budgets to help more people access online services. We need to think about how we support vulnerable people to use new or unfamiliar services.

Respond on line at www.bristol.gov.uk/supportedtransport When car clubs are introduced across the city, more people – and groups of friends or neighbours – can use public transport for most journeys and access a car for the occasional shopping trip or day trip. They are a huge success in the areas where they already operate.

Growing passenger numbers The council also firmly believes that some of the bus services it supports can be run commercially. The best way to use public money is encourage the growth of public transport. That’s why we have invested heavily in improving bus routes and stops over the last few years. We are looking for bus operators who are also prepared to invest in marketing and growing passenger numbers on their services.

It also means the council looking again at underused services / routes and finding opportunities of working with operators and supporting transport services with the potential to grow.

The result is a much more pro-active relationship between the operator and the council, using the money to make the service more popular and growing the number of passengers. An excellent example of this is the recent success story with the Severn Beach Line.

Severn Beach success Passenger journeys on the Severn Beach Line have increased by 80% over the last four years. This spectacular passenger growth is due to close partnership working – ensuring that public support is directly channelled into initiatives which encourage more people to use the service.

Councillor Gary Hopkins, Cabinet Member for Strategic Transport, Waste and Targeted Improvement, said: “When we’re talking about investment in public transport, this is the way to do it. Public money must work hard and get results. Extra trains and proper investment in safe and welcoming stations have transformed the Severn Beach Line into an attractive and cost effective travel choice for commuters, shoppers and school children. And there is more good news to come in the form of newer trains and larger carriages later this year.

“We are confident that the route will remain sustainable. The Severn Beach Line success story is a shining example which should inform the way we continue to do business in the future.”

If you have any queriies pllease phone 0117 9222936 Pllease put your comments on the attached form or respond onlliine at

www.bristol.gov.uk/supportedtransport

Background information Background information The annual quality of life survey measures a % respondents satisfied with the bus service number of transport related indicators. The 70 sample size is large (5,700 in 2009) so it is 60 57 48 47 48 possible to analyse to ward level and equalities 50 45 groups. The following graphs show the results 40 30 from this survey and reflects the feelings of 20 people across the city about all transport 10 services. 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Generally satisfaction with the bus services has % respondents satisfied with the bus improved between 2005 and 2009 and now stands at service 57% overall. In some wards satisfaction is improving (e.g. Avonmouth, Hartcliffe, Horfield, Henbury, St George East and West, Southmead, Lawrence Hill and Bishopsworth) whilst in Filwood it is falling.

% Bus usage 39.1 to 46.8 Bus usage has remained steady, although use of 46.9 to 54.6 buses for leisure trips has increased. A higher 54.7 to 62.3 proportion is taken by women. 62.4 to 70.2 70.2 to 78

Source: Quality of Life survey The responses from bus users (who responded to this Bristol City Council 2009 survey) can be analysed by the different equalities groups (older people, disabled people, Black and minority ethnic groups (BME), lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) and gender). The biggest group of users (for each trip type) is disabled people.

% respondents who travel for leisure Bus usage by reason for trip by bus 12 40 10 35 30 8 medical/clinic 25 leisure 6 20 Male shopping 4 15 work Female 10 2 respondents % 5 0 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2006 2007 2008 2009

Community transport usage This mode of transport has increased since 2006 and most trips, although still small in number are made for shopping.

When the proportion of Community Transport users is analysed by the different equalities, the biggest group of users (for each trip type) is disabled people, followed by older people. Very few BME people and men use this service.

Community Transport usage (2009) by Community Transport usage by equalities group reason for trip 10 1.8 8 1.6 6 1.4 medical/clinic 1.2 leisure 4 1 shopping 2 0.8

% respondents % work 0 0.6

% respondents % 0.4 All older disabled BME LGBT men women people people 0.2 0 work shopping leisure medical/clinic 2006 2007 2008 2009

LLeett’’ss ttaallkk aabboouutt SSuuppppoorrtteedd TTrraannssppoorrtt SSeerrvviicceess

Your comments

1. In Supported Transport Services, we need to save at least £600,000 in 2010/12 alone. Please indicate which category your comment relates to.

How can we do more for less?

How routes could be changed to increase passengers and grow the services?

Opportunities for improving how we do things

Who should receive these services?

Are there services which no longer serve the community and can be cut. For instance, where two similar routes serve the same community?

2. What is your postcode?

3. Please state your comment here.

Please turn over

Equalities monitoring enables the Council to check that everyone in the city is accessing the services to which they are entitled and that no-one is discriminated against unlawfully. Information provided will be treated confidentially and in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998 and only used to ensure that everyone is treated fairly. All questions are voluntary and it will not make any difference to the service you receive if you do not answer them. However, by answering the questions you will help us to ensure that our services are fair and accessible to all.

How would you describe yourself?

Age

Under 18 18 – 65 65+ Prefer not to say

Gender

Female Male Prefer not to say

Transgender

Yes No

Ethnicity White British background Other White background

Black and minority ethnic background Prefer not to say

Religion / Belief Do you have a religion or belief?

Yes No Prefer not to say

Disability Are you disabled? Yes No Prefer not to say

Sexual orientation Are you lesbian, gay or bisexual heterosexual (straight) Prefer not to say

I do not wish to provide any of the information requested on this form

Please detach this questionnaire and return to:- Supported Transport (CH/U15) Bristol City Council FREEPOST (SWB535) BRISTOL BS1 5BR

Or complete online at www.bristol.gov.uk/supportedtransport

If you require this form in any other format please phone 0117 9222936