SWWITCH JOINT COMMITTEE MEETING
Friday, 6 September 2013 – 1300hrs
At Neath Civic Centre
AGENDA
Page No.
1. Welcome, Introductions and Apologies.
2. Minutes of Last Meeting and Matters Arising. a) To Approve the Minutes of the Meeting held on 7 June 2013. 1 - 5 b) Matters Arising from the Minutes. 6 - 10
3. City Regions Update (Verbal)
4. Bus Services Funding Review and Regional Network Strategy 11 - 71 Development.
5. SWWITCH Rail Strategy Development. 72 - 79
6. SWWITCH Programme Management. 80 - 83
7. NHS Re-configuration and Access and Transport Issues. 84 - 86
8. SWWITCH Annual Progress Report. 87 - 92
9. Consultations. 93 - 98
10. Partner Updates. 99 - 104
11. For Information Only: - a) SWWITCH Newsletter. 105 - 108 b) Chair's Activities Since Last Meeting. 109 c) Ministerial Statements on Road and Rail Priorities. 110 - 114
12. A. O. B. • Date, Time and Venue for Next Meeting.
Agenda Item 2a
Minutes of the Meeting of the SWWITCH Joint Committee - Friday 7 June 2013
PRESENT: Councillor Robert Lewis (Chair) (Pembrokeshire County Council) presided Voting Councillors: Colin Evans - Carmarthenshire County Council June Burtonshaw - City and County of Swansea Sandra Miller - Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Non-voting Councillors: Paul Lloyd - City and County of Swansea Paul Meara - City and County of Swansea Officers: Richard Workman - Carmarthenshire County Council Simon Charles - Carmarthenshire County Council Steve Pilliner - Carmarthenshire County Council John Flower - Neath Port Talbot County Council Brian Biscoe - Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Chris Vinestock - City and County of Swansea Ceri Rees - Pembrokeshire County Council Sue Miles - SWWITCH Co-ordinator Jeremy Parkhouse - City and County of Swansea Partners: Margaret Everson - Bus Users UK Cymru Michael Vaughan - Arriva Trains Wales Richard Crawshaw - SWWEF John Pockett - CPT and First Great Western
1. WELCOME The Chair welcomed all attendees to Llanelli Town Hall and commenced proceedings.
2. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Simon Cursio, First Group, Betsan Caldwell - Community Transport Association, David Beer - Passenger Focus, Ian Westley - Pembrokeshire County Council and Ben George - City and County of Swansea.
3. ELECTION OF SWWITCH CHAIR AND VICE-CHAIR FOR THE 2013/2014 MUNICIPAL YEAR The Chair thanked everybody involved with SWWITCH for the support and work during the previous 12 months and he wished the incoming Chair the very best for his forthcoming term of office.
RESOLVED that: (1) Councillor Colin Evans - Carmarthenshire County Council be elected SWWITCH Chair for the 2013/2014 Municipal Year;
(COUNCILLOR COLIN EVANS PRESIDED) (2) Councillor June Burtonshaw - City and County of Swansea be elected SWWITCH Vice-Chair for the 2013/2014 Municipal Year.
Page 1 4. MINUTES RESOLVED that the Minutes of the SWWITCH Joint Committee held on 22 March 2013 be accepted as a correct record, subject to the following amendments. Minute 7 (3) – Amendment to reference from July 2013 meeting to June 2013 meeting; Minute 14 – Amendment of the title to “Review of Wales Freight Strategy”.
5. MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES Compact and the Collaboration Process
Ceri Rees reported that transport had transferred under the portfolio of Edwina Hart A.M., who was now Minister for Economy, Science and Transport. This has had a significant impact on the Compact work and at present, all collaboration work was currently on hold, pending a meeting of all Council leaders in Wales meeting with the Minister on 24 June 2013.
RESOLVED that a briefing note be drafted for SWWITCH Council Leaders on key transport issues prior to the meeting with the Minister on 24 June 2013.
6. PRESENTATION - CITY REGIONS John Flower provided a detailed and informative presentation on City Region Regeneration, Tourism and Transport Links. Details provided included: • Transport Links SWTRA motorway and trunk roads; • Transport Links - passenger and freight rail routes; • Regeneration areas; • Major road schemes to developed areas; • Tourism areas - Neath Port Talbot, Swansea and Pembrokeshire.
It was acknowledged that the mapping was a work in progress and that further detail had yet to be added.
It was recognised that the Minister Portfolio Change would result in City regions and the transport links within them being a priority. The importance of having the governance in place and engaging with the private sector was emphasised. This would enable the region to react and be prepared for any funding/organisational issues that may arise.
The Committee discussed the information provided in the presentation.
RESOLVED that: (1) the progress to date by the City Regions Task Force be noted; (2) Joint Committee proactively engages the further development work necessary to create a joined up approach to the City Region.
7. WALES BUS SERVICES FUNDING REVIEW Steve Pilliner provided a progress report on the Wales Bus Services funding review. It was outlining that considerable progress had been made over the last three months and it was pleasing to note that there appeared to have been a reasonably smooth transition between the former payment systems and a new
Page 2 regional system. This was due to the concerted efforts of the passenger transport managers from each Council and the support and expertise of the part time regional officer working with SWWITCH.
Progress was provided with regard to funding, validating mileage claims, terms and conditions for bus operators and regional bus and community transport strategy.
It was added that there were a number of important tasks to be completed which included an agreement methodology for validating mileage, finalising the SWWITCH legal agreement for the bus funding and developing the draft regional strategy for consultation. In addition, despite the reduction in funding for bus operation from the public sector purse, there had to date been no changes to the bus network. However, it was likely that there will be changes as some services will become unsustainable and operators will withdraw their registrations and some new services may be registered which in turn, will lead to a reduction in the Km rate paid by SWWITCH to operators. SWWITCH passenger transport managers will continue to meet regularly to review the regional bus market and to share information. This should ensure that any significant changes can be managed through the emerging strategy.
The Committee expressed concern with the workload of SWWITCH Passenger Transport Managers. Concern was also expressed in relation to the effect on rural bus services.
RESOLVED that:
(1) the progress made to date on the new bus funding regime be noted; (2) the proposed approach to the development of the network strategy be endorsed; (3) a further update be reported to the net Joint Committee meeting.
8. SWWITCH PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT Richard Workman provided an update on the SWWITCH position at the end of the 2012/13 financial year. He also reported the Welsh Government Response to 13/14 delivery plan and how SWWITCH programme management group was going to management the delivery of the new regional funding within the year.
It was outlined that at the start of the 2012/13 financial year, SWWITCH local councils were awarded a total of £4.014m for the delivery of RTP schemes as set out in the delivery plan. In addition to RTP capital, a total of: • 0.934m road safety capital; • 0.584m road safety revenue funding was made available within the region.
These allocations meet in full with SWWITCH submitted bid. Towards the end of the financial year, additional funding became available and SWWITCH was able to take advantage of this as follows: • 1.456m for RTP; • 144.5k for Road Safety Capital; • 7.5k for Road Safety Revenue.
Page 3 This meant the total allocation for the region in 2012/13 increased by approximately 30% to 7.23m. There were also a number of changes to allocations within the year, caused by overspent projects from previous years, under spends on 12/13 projects where barriers to delivery arose and an ability to make further progress on some projects. The final breakdown by RTP scheme was provided at Appendix A of the report.
The guidance provided by the Welsh Government for the 13/14 delivery plans submissions, set out a ring-fenced minimum which have to be allocated to active travel bill scheme (walking and cycling). For SWWITCH this represented £1.66m out of the indicative allocation of £5.239 or 32%. The delivery plan as submitted, complied fully with the guidance and exceeded the required minimum for active travel bill projects and details were provided within the report.
It was added that the new Regional Transport Consortia grant must be claimed quarterly in arrears and the responsibility was on City and County of Swansea as host council for SWWITCH, to submit claims on behalf of the region. The proposals of the SWWITCH programme group were outlined along with the details of the development of a three year programme for RTP delivery.
RESOLVED that:
(1) the 2012/13 spend and the regional flexibility that allowed extra money to be absorbed be noted; (2) the funded programme for 13/14 as set out in the delivery plan be approved; (3) the process for managing the regional grant as endorsed by SWWITCH management group be approved; (4) the development of a three year RTP programme be noted and progress report be provided to the next Joint Committee Meeting.
9. CONSULTATIONS Ceri Rees reported on current consultations involving SWWITCH. These included: • Response to the Commission on devolution in Wales - Transport Issues. • Network Rail Long Distance Market Study. • Other Network Rail consultations including: - Regional Urban Market Study. - Freight Market Study.
RESOLVED that:
(1) the Regional Response submitted to the Commission on devolution in Wales be noted; (2) the draft Regional Response to the Network Rail long distance market study be approved; (3) responsibility be delegated to the SWWITCH Management Group to prepare and submit responses to the Regional Urban and Freight Market studies by 26 July 2013.
Page 4 10. SWWITCH REVENUE BUDGET Sue Miles reported that as part of the 13/14 Delivery Plan, SWWITCH bid for and received a revenue grant allocation from the Welsh Government of £205,000. This will support the employment of a small team, employed by Swansea, on behalf of the Consortium. The Budget supports direct or indirect staffing costs, pays rent and insurance and covers the cost of IT support, translation and printing. It also provided a small pot to allow SWWITCH to let small scale commissions or to purchase materials. Details of the proposed spending of the revenue funding within the 20/13 financial year were provided.
RESOLVED that:
(1) the use of a capital monitoring budget to retain the Monitoring Officer role be approved; (2) the SWWITCH Revenue Budgets for 2013/14 as set out in tables 1 and 2 of the report be approved.
11. PARTNER UPDATES The Committee received updates from the following Partner organisations:
• Arriva Trains Wales • Welsh Local Government Association • Bus Users UK • First Great Western
12. ANY OTHER BUSINESS Next Meeting
RESOLVED that the next joint Committee meeting be scheduled for 1.00 p.m. on Friday 6 September 2013 at Neath Civic Centre.
13. SWWITCH NEWSLETTER The SWWITCH Newsletter for June 2013 was provided for information.
14. SWWITCH CHAIR ACTIVITIES The SWWITCH Chair activities were reported for information.
15. NAfW ENTERPRISE AND BUSINESS COMMITTEE - RECOMMENDATIONS ON PUBLIC TRANSPORT INTEGRATION The Integrated Public Transport in Wales May 2013 report of the National Assembly for Wales, Enterprise and Business Committee was provided for information.
The meeting ended at 3.00 p.m.
CHAIR
Page 5 Agenda Item 2b
Matters Arising from Last Meeting
Item 5 Matters Arising – Compact and Collaboration
It was resolved that a briefing note be prepared for SWWITCH Council Leaders on key transport issues prior to their meeting with the Minister on 24th June.
The Briefing Note is attached as Appendix A
Item 7 Wales Bus Service Funding Review
It was resolved that a further update be reported to the next Committee meeting
This is on the agenda at Item 4
Item 8 SWWITCH Programme Management
It was resolved that progress on the development of a three year programme (for RTP Delivery) be provided to the next Joint Committee meeting.
This is no the agenda at Item 6
Item 9 Consultations
It was resolved that responsibility be delegated to SWWITCH Management Group to prepare and submit responses to the Regional Urban and Freight Market Studies by 26th July 2013
The two responses were submitted by the deadline and copies are attached as Appendices B and C
Page 6 Appendix A – Briefing note for SWWITCH Council Leaders on Transport Issues
Introduction At the SWWITCH Joint Committee meeting on 7th June 2013, Members received progress reports on a number of strategic transport issues where clearer direction is required from the Welsh Government. Members, being aware that Edwina Hart, Minister for the Economy, Science and Transport is to meet with all Council Leaders on 24th June, proposed that a consortium briefing note be prepared for Leaders in SWWITCH so that there would be a consistent message about key barriers to progress.
The Collaboration Agenda Work on transport collaboration as part of the Compact is currently on hold for assessment of the process and progress to date. However, it is critical that some of the works streams proceed, in particular: • Long term planning process – working on the next round of national and regional transport plans to ensure a strategic planning framework for improved access is in place by 2015, when the current national and regional plans come to an end • Investigations into further collaborative working where potential savings and/or service improvements could be introduced - this is critical in the context of current financial pressures and looking forward
City Regions SWWITCH is helping to support the work of the City Regions Task force in South West Wales and is keen to continue to work with whatever future governance structure is established to drive forward the City Regions approach. Transport and access are key facilitators for encouraging inward investment and access to jobs and higher education and SWWITCH has the expertise and structure to deliver transport and access improvements, especially if extra funding is available from the next round of European Structural funds.
Three Year programmes for Delivering transport improvements Over the last three years (since the introduction of Regional Transport Grant funding), allocations have been made on a one year basis. This has created inefficiencies where a lot of effort goes into maximising spend within year whilst ensuring no over spend. This has lead to projects being delivered which are not necessarily providing the best outputs, but which can be easily delivered within a year, or easily broken down into elements spanning two or more years. SWWITCH believes that making a three year allocation (albeit years two and three may be indicative only) will support more effective and efficient working
Active Travel Bill and Consortia Delivery Plans In submitting the 2013/14 Delivery Plan, SWWITCH (like all consortia) was obliged to ring fence more than 30% of the indicative allocation for Active Travel Bill Schemes. This of course meant that less funding was available for other important schemes which can help stimulate economic development and employment. SWWITCH Councils would welcome an indication from the Minister as to whether such ring fencing for Walking & Cycling schemes is likely to apply in future years.
Other transport issues SWWITCH would also be keen to work with the Minister on other key transport issues including: • The role of Welsh airports and how we can work together with the private sector to improve them? • The roll out of electrification in Wales and how we can work with the Welsh Government to maximise the economic benefits for Wales in terms of jobs and growth? • The role of South West Wales ports, and future prospects for passenger and freight growth and how we can work with the private sector to improve them?
Page 7 Appendix B - SWWITCH Response to Network Rail Long Term Planning Process Regional Urban Market Study Consultation
Introduction SWWITCH is the South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium, a partnership of four local authorities comprising: • Carmarthenshire County Council, • Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, • Pembrokeshire County Council and • The City & County of Swansea
The Consortium is responsible for developing transport policy and programme managing the delivery of transport projects in the region, working closely with the private sector, local interest groups and the Welsh Government.
Consultation response SWWITCH welcomes the open and proactive way in which Network Rail has sought to consult on its forward programme and policies for the next thirty years. The Regional Transport Plan which determines the regional transport policy for South West Wales contained a number of rail enhancements which has been delivered during Control Period 4 for the betterment of the local rail network. Enhancements to redouble the line and replace the Loughor Viaduct west of Swansea will provide greater potential for further growth in rail, while improvements to High Street Station and the creation of a wholly new station at Goodwick, just outside of Fishguard, serve to promote better integration and passenger experience for those increasingly choosing to travel by rail. The confirmation of electrification of the South Wales Mainline is another excellent investment in rail infrastructure in South West Wales and signals a good level of endorsement for the region as an important part of Wales’ economic offer. SWWITCH has been pleased to work in partnership with Network Rail and the Welsh Government to realise these enhancements.
While these recent rail investments have been very welcome SWWITCH would wish to cite concern that Swansea has not been included in the Regional Urban Market Study at this point. We would certainly welcome the inclusion of Swansea as a commuter destination to Cardiff (42 miles to the east) and the relationship between the two cities is an important regional driver. While Swansea may not presently qualify for inclusion within the Regional Urban Market Study, the recent announcement that Swansea will receive City Regions status is expected to bring about significant investment and increased employment opportunities in and around Swansea and indeed SWWITCH as a whole. SWWITCH would therefore appreciate if the study could consider the potential for significant growth in the future and how this could be accommodated in strategies in the longer term.
SWWITCH is happy to support the proposed approach as outlined in the case study (Chapter 7) as a means of addressing the interaction between the commuter destinations and its feeder settlements.
SWWITCH welcomes the early opportunity to provide an input to the market study and would be pleased to continue to provide assistance as the process develops in the coming years. It would be very much appreciated if these two important points are considered by Network Rail in order that the strategic importance of the South Wales Mainline is maintained in order that rail growth can continue in the years to come.
Page 8 Appendix C - SWWITCH response to the Network Rail Long Term Planning Process - Freight Market Study Consultation
Introduction SWWITCH is the South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium, a partnership of four local authorities comprising: • Carmarthenshire County Council, • Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, • Pembrokeshire County Council and • The City & County of Swansea
The Consortium is responsible for developing transport policies and programmes, managing the delivery of transport projects in the region, working closely with the private sector, local interest groups and the Welsh Government. SWWITCH has not attempted to answer all the questions raised in the consultation and has concentrated instead on key issues and some key questions.
General The introduction to the consultation identified that total UK freight traffic is expected to increase by 2.1% per annum to 2043. In south west Wales it is anticipated that this will be achieved or exceeded, because of :Haven Waterway Enterprise Zone • South West Wales Port and intermodal traffic potential: • Fishguard, Pembroke Dock, Milford Haven, Swansea, Port Talbot • Llanelli Steel Works • Milford Haven Energy industries • Potential use for RNAD Trecwn
The study is divided into 10, 20 and 30 year planning horizons for: • Market Studies • Cross – Boundary Analysis • Route Studies
Freight volumes of fast moving consumer goods (especially from the Far East) have been increasing in absolute terms and relatively to bulk (coal and steel). The Electricity Supply projections show continuing decline in coal but rise in renewable and gas which is pertinent to the growth of the Haven Waterway as an energy hub and to south west Wales Ports generally.
The doubling of the line west of Swansea and electrification to Swansea open up the potential for increased freight (as well as passenger services) in south west Wales. In addition the designation of Swansea as a City Region, with the expected regeneration and growth that will arise as a result, will mean greater demand for passenger services and freight.
The rising level of intermodal container traffic provides opportunities for south west Wales ports. Planning the rail network and identifying bottlenecks is required to allow advantage to be taken of this rail freight potential. For instance the bottlenecks in the freight gauge that prevents W8, (or more frequently) W10 or W12 gauge wagons to use West Wales lines.
It is of note that increasingly rail freight traffic in recent years has been despite a recession. Deep sea containerised cargo is expected to grow at around 2% per annum to 2043. There is potential for biomass / renewable imports through the Haven Waterways which will generate substantial demand for rail freight facilities in the region. Whether this potential is realised will determine the need for freight facilities to cater for it. Containerised rail freight is increasing (as identified above) with principal routing on the TERNS including south west Wales ports to Ireland.
Page 9 SWWITCH would welcome the opportunity to continue to provide input (either directly, or though the Welsh Government which is a party to the Rail Industry Planning Group).
Consultation Questions Q. Do you agree with the overall forecasts for rail freight growth in Great Britain? The growth in rail freight based on containerisation is likely to continue with increasing trade with the developing economies of the BRICs and others. The real cost of road freight is set to continue rising which will result in rail, especially for long distance land freight, being the mode of choice.
Q. Do you agree with the individual market sector forecasts in Great Britain? As far as SWWITCH is aware the projections are reasonable. Locally, rail freight resulting from the developing energy sector and the ports are likely to be the dominant demand drivers. Some of the potential demand generators, if they materialize, will result in a substantial increase in demand against the existing network capacity. For example a biomass terminal at Waterston / Blackbridge would put pressure on the single line to Clarbeston Road.
Q. Do you have any plans which will influence the demand for rail freight movements? This has been touched on in the introduction and above but the following are some of the local enterprises that will influence the demand for rail freight movement in the future:
• The Haven Waterway Enterprise Zone • Swansea Bay Development Projects • Steel industry in Port Talbot which has benefited from substantial recent investment. • Baglan (Bay) Energy Park
Page 10 Agenda Item 4
BUS SERVICES FUNDING REVIEW AND REGIONAL NETWORK STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Joint Committee will be aware that the responsibility for public sector support for bus and community transport in Wales was devolved to the consortia with effect from 1st April 2013. At the same time the Welsh Government has asked each consortium to develop a Regional bus and community transport network strategy. This is intended to provide a framework for improvements to and integration between services in the future.
1.2 Previous reports to Joint Committee have outlined the scale of work involved and the steps taken by SWWITCH to ensure compliance with the requirements of the new funding regime.
1.3 This paper provides an update on progress to date and focuses on the draft Regional Network Strategy (RNS) for South West Wales which is currently out for consultation.
2.0 MANAGING THE BUS FUNDING SUPPORT
2.1 SWWITCH received the second tranche of bus funding from the Welsh Government in July. The funding (£959,378) was equivalent to 18.75% of the total annual funding and enabled SWWITCH to meet commitments to Bus operators to make second quarter payments by the middle of August.
2.2 All operators have claimed quarter one payments and the majority have now claimed quarter two payments. Whilst quarter one payments were based on estimated mileage, for quarter two, work within SWWITCH on extensive mapping and measuring of routes has been completed and so payments now reflect the actual mileage with reconciliation up or down for under/over payments made for quarter one.
2.3 Community Transport (CT) organisations have been much slower to claim. Some CT groups have yet to claim quarter one funding and very few groups have claimed quarter two. This reflects the lack of management and administrative capacity in many CT groups and also their different funding structures. It is also recognised that CT organisations have less regularity about their services which in many cases are demand led and so estimating and claiming mileage based payments is more time consuming.
2.4 From quarter two onwards the concessionary fare payments are also going to be managed centrally and the SWWITCH Passenger Transport Managers’ Group are currently finalising arrangements for this change.
2.5 Joint Committee will be aware that much of the work on developing a system for payments to operators and managing the interface with them at a regional level has been carried out by an Officer seconded part time from Pembrokeshire
Page 11 County Council to SWWITCH. This was always seen as a temporary measure to allow SWWITCH to determine what the longer term need for a post was and at what level the post should be. The seconded Officer has now been appointed to a new post in Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council and whilst the Council is happy that the Officer continues to help with the SWWITCH bus funding on a temporary part time basis, a longer term solution is needed.
2.6 SWWITCH Management Group has approved the advertisement of a new full time, fixed term post in SWWITCH for a Regional Transport Services Grant Officer. This post has been advertised internally by Swansea as host Council and also by the other three SWWITCH Councils. A copy of the Job Description and person specification is attached as Appendix A. It is hoped that a suitable candidate can be appointed and start as early as possible in the autumn to ensure the continuation of timely payments to operators.
3.0 REGIONAL NETWORK STRATEGY (RNS)
3.1 As reported to last Joint Committee the timescales set by the Welsh Government for the development of this strategy are extremely tight. The final strategy has to be submitted to the Welsh Minister by the 17th January 2014 and that document must be fully approved by SWWITCH. Because so much effort was necessary to ensure that the new payment system was in place, thus reducing the risk of operators going out of business and large scale service withdrawals, development of the strategy was very slow to start.
3.2 Since the last Joint Committee meeting SWWITCH has appointed AECOM consultants to help with the preparation of the Strategy and their progress to date has been as follows:
• Held a workshop for bus and CT operators and key stakeholders • Met on a one to one basis with the four largest bus operators in the region, the Community Transport Association and Bus Users UK • Met with each individual local council’s Passenger Transport teams
3.3 The draft strategy had to be issued by 26th July as set out by the Welsh Government and because of the short timescales the opportunity to do an extensive RNS draft (which examines each bus route in detail and proposes a methodology for prioritisation across the region) has not been possible. Whilst more detailed work is ongoing during the consultation phase a more strategic approach was taken for the consultation draft itself.
3.4 What AECOM produced for the draft strategy is a baseline of the services in the region at present (with the current levels of Regional Transport Services Grant (RTSG)), generally based on zones and service frequencies. The draft then examines two alternative scenarios with variations on the way the RTSG is used. The draft RNS includes models which predict the outcomes of those variations in terms of services across the region and in the zones identified as the baseline. This clearly identifies reductions in services levels across the region with varying impacts depending on which scenario is applied.
Page 12 At the consultation sessions (3.2 above) the consultants discussed with attendees scenarios whereby the future RTSG funding is either focused on tendered services (and consequently the km payment for all services is reduced) or focused on a km based payment for all services (and consequently less funding would be available for tendered services). Generally speaking the consensus from all consultation to date was that both these options would have a bad effect on services and that the status quo was preferred
3.5 A copy of the draft RNS is attached as Appendix B and Appendix C shows the accompanying letter and consultation questions issued with the draft strategy. It is acknowledged that the very strategic nature of the document will make it a challenge for interested individuals to respond to. However, it has been sent to more than 50 organisations in the region (representing the interests of people with mobility impairments; ethnicity/gender/faith groups; younger and older peoples groups; taxis and private hire representatives etc) and also all bus and CT organisations. It is hoped that these organisations will respond on behalf of their members.
3.6 The closing date for comments is Friday 13th September and the timescale for the completion of the RNS is set out in Table One below. This assumes that the consultant will complete the RNS by the end of October and that each SWWITCH Council will want to seek endorsement by their Cabinet/Executive Board or Council.
This timescale is very difficult and allows little time for extensive changes within the context of securing the agreement from all four Councils.
Table One – RNS Completion deadlines
Activity Timeline Closing date for Draft RNS comments 13th September Forward comments received to Consultant 27th September Consultants provide final draft RNS 31st October Special Joint Committee to recommend final draft to Week beginning 4th Councils November Each Council to consider/approve RNS 4th November - 5th December SWWITCH Joint Committee to approve final RNS 6th December Submission of SWWITCH RNS to Minister 17th January 2014
3.7 One part of the consultation is about quality outcomes for the RTSG. This is about using the funding support to ensure that better quality services are provided to users and also to drive up the benefits achieved from the funding.
3.8 The Welsh Government has established a sub group to look at a range of outcomes which could be applied by consortia. Although this is part of the ongoing RNS consultations by transport consortia in Wales, the group issued 21 draft outcomes for consortia consideration. None of the four consortia supported this list as it was considered the 21 outcomes:
• Were directly related to penalties, rather than incentives
Page 13 • Were too many - 21 outcomes proposed • Would create a significant burden to monitor and administer • Would drive down competition and thus increase prices
3.9 SWWITCH and other consortia all responded with alternative suggestions, mostly focused around fewer (and more easily monitored) outcomes and also clarifying the need for consortia to wait for the RNS consultation to complete and then use responses to help shape the future outcomes for their individual consortium.
3.10 There is a general consensus that some outcomes should be mandatory on operators for example:
• Punctuality • Reliability • Customer Charter and Customer Feedback
However, SWWITCH Management Group is clear that consortia should have a range of optional outcomes which are applicable to the specific regional and local market in South West Wales. SWWITCH Management Group also support incentivising operators to achieve quality outcomes rather than using penalties for non-compliance.
3.11 The response from SWWITCH to the Welsh Government on quality outcomes is shown as Appendix D attached. The next step will be to examine responses to the RNS before final proposals can be developed and approved.
Page 14
CLOSING DATE: Thursday, th 6 September 2013
J O B D E S C R I P T I O N
DIRECTORATE: PLACE
DIVISION/SECTION/UNIT: SWWITCH, Highways and Transportation
TITLE: Regional Transport Services Grant Officer
POST NO: GRADE: Scale 6, Scp 26-28
RESPONSIBLE TO: SWWITCH Co-Ordinator
1. PURPOSE OF POST
1.1. Since April 2013, Welsh Government grant funding for passenger transport services is administered through the Regional Transport Consortia. The new Regional Transport Services Grant totals £3.5 million per annum for the SWWITCH region and the Free Concessionary Travel Scheme around £15million.
1.2 The RTSG Officer will be responsible for the management coordination and administration of the Grant together with the Free Concessionary Travel Scheme on behalf of SWWITCH which will include operator liaison and development, compliance and financial management of the schemes.
2. MAIN PURPOSE OF JOB/JOB SUMMARY/OVERALL OBJECTIVE 2.1 Develop and manage financial and operating procedures for the payment of RTSG funding to bus operators, community transport providers and local authorities.
2.2 Establish and implement procedures to ensure that the audit requirements of the funding streams are satisfied.
2.3 Verify kilometre based claims received from transport operators. Calculate distances operated for each service within the region using the Council’s GIS system and compare with the claims received. Where there are differences, resolve these through negotiation with the transport providers. 2.4 Monitor changes in the transport services across the region, calculate the distances and update the kms and service operational information in the Regional Payments Monitoring System. This electronic System holds the
Page1 15
detailed information on which payments to transport providers will be made and must be accurate.
2.5 Compare service monitoring results with information provided by operators on lost/ additional kilometres,liaise with transport operators to resolve any anomalies and update the Payments Monitoring System.
2.6 Ensure quarterly grant payments are confirmed with the transport providers and are made within the prescribed timescales to ensure that the cash flow of small companies is not affected.
2.7 Prepare and Coordinate a programme of monitoring for Bus Users UK Officers to ensure that the reliability of at least 5% of public transport services are monitored across the region.
2.8 Monitor the level of claims received against the allocated budget and alert Passenger Transport Managers to any significant differences. Provide detailed information on current and predicted spend which will allow decisions to be taken on future reimbursement rates across the financial year.
2.9 Coordinate and submit regional concessionary fares claims quarterly on behalf of the 4 local Authorities in SWWITCH to the Welsh Government. Current value of claims is approximately £15m per year.
3. SUMMARY OF MAIN DUTIES/KEY TASKS OF THE POST
3.1 Develop and Implement smart key performance reports for RTSG to support the SWWITCH Annual Progress Report.
3.2 Provide timely, accurate and up to date financial reports to Passenger Transport Managers in the 4 SWWITCH councils and provide technical briefings and secretariat support at meetings.
3.3 Provide technical advice and assistance to bus and community transport operators with respect to the operation of, and claims for the Regional Transport Services Grant. Deal with new applications to join the scheme.
3.4 Work with local authority Passenger Transport Managers to identify opportunities for efficiency.
3.5 Provide technical and administrative support to ensure that all RTSG and Concessionary fares funding terms and conditions are met.
3.6 Provide data as requested in order to assist with the development of the Regional Network Strategy.
3.7 Use IT systems and packages to develop, innovate, interrogate and store information as necessary and to produce statistics, graphs, charts and forms for inclusion in reports and presentations.
Page2 16
3.8 This job description is as currently applies and may be subject to variance and you may be required to carry out any other task that can be reasonably assigned to you and which is within your capabilities and Grade.
4. GENERAL DUTIES
4.1 To assist in the development of initiatives, e.g. Investors in People; Performance Management and Appraisal; Continuous Professional Development, etc.
4.2 To ensure that all activities are operated in accordance with Equal Opportunities.
4.3 The post may be transferred from area to another dependent on need. There is no entitlement to any transfer costs or disturbance costs as there is an expectancy of movement of posts within the County.
5. HEALTH & SAFETY RESPONSIBILITIES
5.1 To undertake the Health and Safety responsibilities within the HASAWA 1974.
5.2 Employees have a duty of care;
i) to take reasonable care for the health and safety of both themselves whilst at work and of other persons who may be affected by their acts or omissions (by what they do or do not do). ii) to co-operate with the employer so as to enable the duty imposed on them to be performed or complied with. iii) not to interfere with, or misuse, anything provided for their health, safety or welfare.
DISCLOSURE AND BARRING SERVICE
The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) has been introduced as a result of Part V of the Police Act, 1997 and will replace the current system of police checking (see attached notes). It should be noted that this post does not require a disclosure. Further information about the Disclosure Scheme is available at www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agencies-public-bodies/dbs/ or by contacting the Employee Vetting Team at the Guildhall, Swansea SA1 4PE.
DATE PREPARED/ISSUED/REVIEWED: 2 August 2013
Page3 17
REVIEW DATE/RIGHT TO VARY
This Job Description is as currently applies and will be reviewed regularly as part of the Performance/Appraisal process, and may be subject to other variance. You may be required to undertake other tasks that can be reasonably assigned to you which are within your capability and grade.
SIGNATURE OF EMPLOYEE SIGNATURE OF LINE MANAGER
Signed:...... Signed:......
Name: ...... Name: ......
Date: ...... Date: ......
THANK YOU FOR APPLYING FOR A POSITION WITH THE CITY & COUNTY OF SWANSEA
Please note that this Department does not a) acknowledge receipt of application forms and b) regret unsuccessful applications
Therefore, as the normal recruitment and selection process can take up to six weeks, if you have not heard from us by this time, you should consider your application as unsuccessful.
Page4 18
P E R S O N S P E C I F I C A T I O N
Post Title: Regional Transport Services Grade: Scale 6, Scp 26-28 Grant Officer
Directorate: Place Section: SWWITCH
REQUIREMENTS FOR SAFE AND EFFECTIVE PERFORMANCE
Education 1. Educated to at least A Level standard. Qualifications 2. Proficient in the use of IT applications for the workplace especially Microsoft Excel, databases, word processing, and email.
Experience 1. Previous employment in the bus or rail industry or local authority transport. 2. Must have an excellent knowledge of financial management principles and business acumen in a transport environment. 3. Candidates must possess a good level of technical competence in work related skills involved in the post. These would include the ability to work as part of a Team but also independently, good customer care skills, and a high degree of flexibility. 4. Experience of “GIS” is desirable.
Page5 19
Skills & Candidates should already have a number of key skills and Abilities abilities which will enable them to carry out the duties effectively:
1. Ability to respond positively to changes in the working environment and to deal effectively with work pressures when they arise. 2. Financial skills in managing budgets and monitoring spend. 3. Good communication skills 4. Good interpersonal skills 5. Good organisational skills 6. High degree of flexibility 7. Good IT skills 8. Ability to solve problems logically, prioritise work and make decisions appropriate to the level of the post 9. Attention to detail when dealing with paperwork/ electronic information. 10. Ability to write reports/ technical notes 11. Able to work on own initiative and as part of a team. 12. Consultation and negotiation skills for use with internal and external organisations 13. Resilient under pressure and able to respond effectively to changes in prorities.
Commitment Candidates should have a commitment to the Council’s Equal To Equal Opportunities Policy and an appreciation of how the Policy Opportunities affects Council procedures and practices. Special 1. Ability to drive and use of own car for which the post Requirements holder must be appropriately insured for business purposes. Should the post holder have a disability and be unable to drive, then they may seek alternative means of transport/assistance, which must be an effective and cost effective method of travelling. 2. An excellent geographical knowledge of the SWWITCH region.
DISCLOSURE AND BARRING SERVICE (DBS)
No DBS Disclosure Application
Page6 20
DISCLOSURE AND BARRING SERVICE (DBS) DISCLOSURE CHECKS
The Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS), an Executive Agency of the Home Office, provides wider access to criminal record information through its Disclosure service.
This service enables organisations in the public, private and voluntary sectors to make safer recruitment decisions by identifying candidates who may be unsuitable for certain work, especially that involve children or vulnerable adults. The DBS was established under Part V of the Police Act 1997 and was launched in March 2002.
The DBS can issue 5 levels of Disclosure Certificates, depending on the position applied for, namely Standard, Enhanced, Enhanced with ISA check (children), Enhanced with ISA check (adults) and Enhanced with ISA check (children and adults)
Prospective applicants should be aware that before any offer of appointment is confirmed the successful candidate will be required to complete an application for the appropriate level of disclosure; the Authority will provide the relevant DBS Application Forms. Proof of the successful candidate’s identity will also be required in the form of the following: Passport, Driving Licence, Birth Certificate and Utility Bills.
The Authority actively promotes equality of opportunity for all existing employees and prospective applicants. Candidates are selected on the basis of skill, qualifications and experience, and their match against the Person Specification. A criminal record will not necessarily bar applicants from working with the Authority. It will depend on the nature of the position and the circumstances and background of the offence.
The Authority has a written Policy on the Recruitment of Ex-offenders, which complies with the DBS Code of Practice, and undertakes to treat all applicants fairly. The DBS’s Code of Practice; the Authority’s Policy on the Security of Confidential Disclosure information and; information on the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 is available from the Employee Vetting Team, Room 214, The Guildhall, SWANSEA SA1 4PE; Telephone 01792 637795
Further information about the DBS can also be found at www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agencies-public-bodies/dbs/
Page7 21 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft
Page 22 Page 23 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 0
Table of Contents
1! Introduction ...... 2!
2! Baseline ...... 6!
3! Consultation ...... 15!
4! Identified Options and Appraisal ...... 20!
5! Further Considerations ...... 28!
6! Next Steps ...... 31!
Page 24 1 Introduction
Page 25 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 2
1 Introduction
1.1 Introduction
This consultation draft Regional Network Strategy (RNS) has been produced by the South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium (SWWITCH), the Regional Transport Consortium (RTC) for South West Wales covering the four local authorities of Pembrokeshire, Carmarthenshire, Swansea and Neath Port Talbot. This document follows the Welsh Government’s decision, in January 2013, to replace the former Bus Services Operators’ Grant (BSOG), the Local Transport Services Grant (LTSG) and Community Transport Concessionary Fares Initiative (CTCFI), with a single funding scheme known as the Regional Transport Services Grant (RTSG). The Welsh Government intends that these new bus funding arrangements will ‘help tackle deprivation and support independent living across Wales by rewarding private companies that deliver measurable targets that passengers most wish to see rather than compensating bus operators on the basis of fuel consumption’1. Alongside this change in funding arrangements, the Welsh Government have passed responsibility for the administration of the RTSG, and decisions regarding how the funds are spent, to the four Regional Transport Consortia who are also required to produce a Regional Network Strategy considering bus, community transport and taxi provision to support their decisions from 2014. This document outlines and assesses the different options that could be pursued by SWWITCH regarding how the region’s RTSG allocation is distributed and the implications that this could have focusing on the bus network in the SWWITCH region on an area by area basis. As part of the development of this draft strategy we have undertaken consultation with key stakeholders. As a consultation document we also encourage interested parties to pass on their views to SWWITCH regarding the proposed options, and these views will be reflected in the final strategy to be submitted to the Welsh Government by 17th January 2014.
1.2 Background
Welsh Government support for buses, community transport is changing. In the past, each of the local councils in Wales received funds in the form of Local Transport Services Grant (LTSG) from the Welsh Government. They then used this money to support bus routes and community transport in their areas, alongside other transport funding from their general resources. In addition to the funding from local councils, bus companies, and some Community Transport (CT) organisations running public bus services, were able to claim Bus Service Operators’ Grant (BSOG). The amount of money paid out under BSOG depended on the amount of fuel used. BSOG was paid by the Department for Transport (central government) directly to bus operators. Since April 2013 Welsh Government has introduced a new way of supporting bus and CT operators. Instead of receiving BSOG from central government and support for non-commercial services from local authorities, there is a new Regional Transport Services Grant (RTSG). Although BSOG funding to operators in England and Scotland has also been reduced recently, some alternative sources of funding have been made available to these areas, such as Green Bus Funds (supporting the early introduction of hybrid and alternative fuel buses) or the Better Bus Areas fund. No such alternatives have been provided in Wales.
1 http://wales.gov.uk/newsroom/transport/2013/130117new-bus-funding-scheme/?lang=en
Page 26 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 3
RTSG is paid to bus operators by SWWITCH in two ways:
First, RTSG is used to support non-commercial (tendered) services. In some areas bus routes are fully commercial – the fares from passengers are enough to pay for the service. In other areas, particularly rural areas, the income from the fares is not enough to pay for the bus service. In the past in these areas, it was the responsibility of the local council to decide how much it wanted to spend to support services and to decide which services it should support. In the future, SWWITCH will share this responsibility and decide which services it wants to support, alongside the local council; and Secondly, RTSG is used to pay for a replacement for BSOG. This replacement, called Live Kilometres Support Grant (LKSG), is only paid when the bus is being used to transport passengers (i.e. ‘live’ kilometres). This is a change from BSOG, which was paid to operators for all mileage including ‘dead’ mileage, where no passengers are transported. The current financial year (April 2013 to March 2014) is a transition year between the old and new ways of working whilst SWWITCH develops its Regional Network Strategy, which will guide its decisions on what services it will support in the future, and how the distribution of RTSG within the region might change to achieve this. The other point about RTSG is that it is a fixed pot of funds. Under the old system, BSOG was guaranteed to be paid for all eligible mileage at the specified rate. Since April 2013, RTSG is limited to a fixed total decided by Welsh Government, and has reduced by about 26% from the totals for 2011/12. SWWITCH will need to make sure that all payments can be made within its budget, but it does not yet know what this budget will be from April 2014.
1.3 Development of this Consultation Draft
To inform the development of this consultation draft strategy, SWWITCH have appointed consultants AECOM working with the TAS Partnership to: Look at the current situation in the SWWITCH region in terms of the commercial tendered bus and community transport networks; Get the views of as many bus operator and representative organisations as possible on a number of different options; Draw up a draft Regional Network Strategy (RNS) taking on board the views expressed; and Consult on this draft, consider the results and recommend the best Strategy. SWWITCH and its consultants initially arranged a briefing and workshop event in Carmarthen on 15th July 2013 in order to explain the development of the RNS for SWWITCH to interested parties. Bus and CT operators, users’ representatives and taxi licensing officers were invited to this meeting, which aimed to find out the initial views of the bus and taxi industries and CT sector. About 20 people attended the workshop event to listen and give their views. Consultants then also met on a one-to-one basis with each of the four local authorities, several major bus operators in the SWWITCH area, the Community Transport Association, the Confederation of Passenger Transport and bus users’ representatives. Alongside these activities the consultants have collected data, analysed the current bus network and CT provision, and modelled the expected effects of various funding options. This work has been used to inform the drafting of this strategy.
Page 27 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 4
1.4 Objectives
SWWITCH aims to achieve the following high level objectives through the development of the RNS as defined at the scoping stage of the strategy: To support access to employment, health, education, retail and leisure - to minimise deprivation and isolation; To maximise the value of investment, taking into account variations in topography, population dispersal and journey patterns; To achieve a balance of services across the region; To maximise market growth (within the confines of the resources available and the balance of services across the region); To frame an options appraisal template that enables prioritisation of investment to meet the key objectives set out above; and To include key quality outcomes to meet the requirements of the Regional Transport Services Grant with effect from 1st April 2014. These objectives have been derived from the wider SWWITCH Regional Transport Plan objectives and highlight the sometimes competing needs which the bus network seeks to deliver across the region. SWWITCH will have to seek to achieve these objectives within the budgetary limits set by the Welsh Government. The Strategy must therefore be pragmatic and aim to enable the best public transport network possible with the resources available. The main objective of this consultation draft is to set out some options and illustrate their effects, so that you can comment on what you think is the right (or wrong) approach. These options will then be refined, taking into account your views, to help shape the final strategy.
Page 28 2 Baseline
Page 29 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 6
2 Baseline
2.1 Introduction
In order to better understand how changes to the funding of bus services might influence the bus network in the SWWITCH region, it is first necessary to understand the current levels and patterns of service provision in the area. This section first provides an overview of the historic trends in bus patronage and operating revenue in Wales before secondly, considering the current levels of service provision in the SWWITCH area including summary mapping of levels of service provision. This information will then be used in subsequent sections as the baseline against which to test the impact of different potential funding options on the levels and patterns of service provision.
2.2 Historic Trends
To better understand current levels of service provision and funding it is first necessary to understand the historic trends that have led to the present situation. Figure 2.1 shows the change in bus patronage for Wales, Scotland and England (excluding London) since deregulation of local bus services in 1986 and shows the downward trend that existed throughout much of the 1980’s and 90s in all three countries. However, since the turn of the century, Wales has tended to perform better than Scotland or England, with patronage levels in Wales stabilising over the last decade at around 75% to 80% of the level that existed at the time of deregulation. Figure 2.1: Indexed Change in Patronage since Deregulation (Source: DfT Statistics 2011/12)
Page 30 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 7
This comparatively better performance in patronage levels masks the fact that the financial performance of the bus network in Wales is the lowest in Great Britain in terms of operating revenue (fares, concessionary reimbursement, Bus Services Operators’ Grant and tender/contract revenue) per kilometre. Figure 2.2 shows levels of operating revenue by area for 2010/11 and highlights that Wales is significantly below the average for Great Britain, although this is partially a reflection of the lower population density of Wales. Figure 2.2: Operating Revenue per Vehicle Kilometre (Source: DfT Statistics 2010/11)
Across Great Britain there is currently a move both at national and local levels of government to reduce expenditure on bus services as part of wider ongoing austerity measures. However, the impacts of any cuts for Wales may be exacerbated by the lower starting point in terms of revenue per kilometre. The impacts of this for the SWWITCH region will be considered as part of this strategy. Figure 2.3 provides a comparison between the level of commercial and tendered bus mileage for each area of Great Britain. This indicates that the pattern of change in commercial mileage in Wales is comparable to that in the English Metropolitan areas, rising by around 20% in the period immediately after deregulation. However, levels have since fallen back to a position comparable to that experienced prior to deregulation. In terms of tendered services supported by the public sector mileage in Wales has increased by more than 80% to 2010/11, before falling back markedly in the last year to 2011/12. Overall levels of mileage in Wales have remained more stable than in other parts of the UK and have perhaps increased slightly since deregulation. However a significant part of this increase has been delivered through public sector support in the form of tendered services. This highlights the importance of understanding the differing impacts that the Route Network Strategy could have on both commercial and tendered services and how this could play out spatially across the SWWITCH region. Alongside the above operating context, the South West Wales region is diverse geographically, demographically and economically, with public transport provision generally reflecting the varied population distribution of the area which is illustrated later in this section. However, many common transport and accessibility problems exist and Local Authority and SWWITCH policy development over the last ten years has sought to improve the public transport offer and to provide a stable foundation for integrating public transport into wider policy objectives such as economic development, social inclusion and environmental sustainability.
Page 31 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 8
Figure 2.3: Indexed Change in Mileage since Deregulation (Source: DfT Statistics 2010/11)
2.3 Current Financial Support
The total spent by SWWITCH authorities in 2012/13 on bus and CT support (excluding concessionary fares reimbursement) is shown in Table 2.1. This shows that the two predominantly rural authorities of Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire provide significantly higher levels of both bus and CT subsidy than the two more urban authorities. Table 2.1: Local Authority Bus and CT Revenue Support in 2012/13 £000s! Bus!subsidy! CT!funding! Authority! LA! LTSG! LA! LTSG! CTCFI! Carmarthenshire!CC! 906! 848 62 109 0 Neath!Port!Talbot!CBC! 263! 476 141 82 117 Pembrokeshire!CC! 921! 461 15 96 105 City!&!County!of! 354! 715 25 64 0 Swansea! Total! 2,444! 2,500 243 351 222
The total of locally-funded expenditure (£2.68m) is very close to that for LTSG (£2.85m). In addition to this total of £5.76 million, operators in the region claimed some £3.7 million in BSOG last year. The total figure for Regional Transport Services Grant (RTSG) in 2013/14 is £5.11 million, split between LKSG and revenue support. It is also expected that the LAs will spend similar amounts to 2012/13 on revenue support. This total of around £7.5 million represents a reduction of around 20% in one year. SWWITCH also administers a capital funding programme (of £5.24 million in 2013/14) which includes expenditure on cycling, walking and roads schemes in addition to public transport infrastructure.
Page 32 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 9
2.4 Measuring Current Service Provision
To measure the current levels of service provision, data have been supplied by SWWITCH for June 2013 which records daily distances by service and by operator2 in kilometres. This information has been used to develop a baseline for a four week period average by day of the week. A matrix of all services has then been compiled into a ‘Bus Funding Model’ which will be used as part of the strategy development process to assess the impacts of the different funding options on services. The data show that across the SWWITCH area more than 1.6 million bus kilometres are operated per four- week period; almost 70% of this is delivered by First Cymru. Each operator’s services and service levels have been tabulated to establish their four-weekly financial performance. This allows analysis of the income generated by: On- and off-bus revenue totals; Concessionary reimbursement; Tender income (Local Authority / RTSG); and Other income, e.g. Community Transport funding. This provides, for a given four-week period, total distance operated and income generated, and also the amount of LKSG payable at the current rate of 13.32p/km. From this it is possible to calculate measures of performance such as income per kilometre, and input variable influencing factors, for example applying percentage changes to overall funding rates.
2.5 Baseline Frequencies by Hour
Having ascertained the total mileage and income values from the available data, the baseline frequency per hour for each service has been calculated based on typical Monday-Saturday daytime provision, as shown in Table 2.2 below. Table 2.2: Buses per Hour and Corresponding Headways
Baseline Corresponding headway value buses per hour 5 12 minutes 4 15 minutes 3 20 minutes 2 30 minutes 1 60 minutes 0.67 90 minutes 0.5 2 hours 0.33 3 hours, or four journeys per day 0.25 4 hours, or three journeys per day 0.1 One journey, e.g. each way schools service.
The scenario options outlined in Section 4 which set out the impact of changes to income or frequency will then influence the numbers of buses per hour.
2 To distinguish between head-to-head competing commercial services, and elements of other services tendered by a local authority and provided by different operators.
Page 33 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 10
2.6 Zone System
To determine the impacts of different options visually, a zone system has been developed. The Explore Wales Pass Bus Map from 2013 has been used to show the bus service provision in the SWWITCH region within 44 urban and outer zones. (Note that this map shows only the principal bus routes.) The size and scale of each area has been designed to reflect the differing densities of population and levels of service provision across the SWWITCH area. For information, a reference code has been assigned to each area consisting of one letter and then two digits – the first letter represents the county; the first digit is either 0 for an urban centre or 1 for an outer area, with the second digit being a sequential digit, for example, N01 for Neath, N02 for Port Talbot and S16 for the Gower Peninsula. This will allow comparisons between urban areas such as Llanelli and Swansea, and contrasts at county level between Neath Port Talbot and Pembrokeshire.
2.7 Baseline Levels of Service
Figure 2.4 shows the baseline levels of bus service provision for each identified zone based upon the analysis described above. This clearly highlights the differences between each of the four local authorities. Most of Pembrokeshire and Carmarthenshire have only minimal or less frequent service levels outside the key towns of Carmarthen and Haverfordwest. Swansea and Neath Port Talbot, in contrast, have much higher levels of service, particularly in the urban areas of Swansea and Neath. However, even in these more densely populated local authorities, there are areas with lower levels of service provision, such as the Gower Peninsula in Swansea and Dulais Valley in Neath Port Talbot. .
Page 34 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 11
Figure 2.4: Baseline Levels of Service Provision Page 35 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 12
2.8 Community Transport
One of the responsibilities of SWWITCH is the commissioning and funding of community transport (CT) across the region and CT is an important part of this Route Network Strategy. As is typical with CT services in many other areas, the sector has developed organically on a local basis within districts in each of the four Local Authorities. This generally reflects the perceived levels of need, available funds, and a customer focus which often involves service users (and their representatives) as part of the management board of the delivery organisations. However, when viewed strategically at SWWITCH level, the sector can appear to be piecemeal and inconsistent. Definitions of CT can also vary from area to area, but they generally have in common a not-for-profit operational model (often delivered by voluntary sector charities) and offer services that are aimed at specific sections of the community (for example, those with mobility impairments, at risk of social exclusion or geographic isolation) rather than the general public. There are many different models of CT, such as: Voluntary car schemes; Demand responsive transport; Dial-a-Ride; S22 community bus; and Group transport. There are different ways of delivering CT, for example: Using paid staff; Using volunteers; or Sub-contracting the commercial sector. There are also different ways of funding CT, for example: Funding by local / central / regional government via grants, service level agreements or contracts; Funding from users; or Funding from external charitable sources.
Analysis of CT across the SWWITCH region confirms that there are many CT schemes (over 30) of many different types (see Table 2.3 below). The impact on CT of different funding options will be considered as part of this strategy. Although not classed as CT it is also important to note the role that taxis and Private Hire Vehicles can play in the overall public transport mix, and account will be taken of this in the final strategy. These modes currently offer comprehensive coverage across the SWWITCH region, including widespread availability of wheelchair-accessible vehicles.
Page 36 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 13
Table 2.3: South West Wales Community Transport Provision
Local Council Door to Door Car Scheme Group Transport School / ASC / Shopmobility Rural District Minibus Health Contracts Bus / DRT Carmarthenshire Country Cars (Carmarthenshire Carmarthenshire Carmarthenshire Carmarthen Bwcabus County Council CC / RVS) in Ammanford, County Council CC (Social Shopmobility Llanelli, Kidwelly, Gwendraeth, (Social Services) Services) vehicles Caerfyrddin Whitland, Llandeilo, St Clears, for access to health Llanelli & Trelech, Pencader, Newcastle services District Emlyn and surrounding area Shopmobility Ystradgynlais Community Car Scheme Pontarddulais and District Community Car Scheme City & County of DANSA Ltd DANSA Ltd DANSA Ltd DANSA Ltd Swansea DANSA Swansea Pontarddulais and District City & County of Mobility Hire Ltd Community Car Scheme Swansea (Social
Page 37 Gorseinon Car Scheme Services) Gower Voluntary Transport Neath Port Talbot DANSA Ltd DANSA Ltd DANSA Ltd DANSA Ltd Neath Port DANSA County Borough Upper Amman Car Scheme Canolfan Gofal Plant Talbot Ltd Council Shopmobility Neath Port Talbot CT Tiddlywinks Childcare Centre Ystalyfera Car Scheme Neath Port Talbot CT
Pembrokeshire The Bloomfield Bus Cars for Carers The Bloomfield Bus County Council Preseli Rural RVS Pembrokeshire Country Preseli Rural Transport Cars Transport Association Association (Green (Green Dragon Bus / Dragon Bus / Town Town Rider) Rider) Pembrokeshire CT Guildhall Dial a Services Ride Pembrokeshire Theatre Mwldan Voluntary Transport Film Club (Dial a Manorbier CT Ride) Manorbier CT 3 Consultation
Page 38 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 15
3 Consultation
3.1 Introduction
SWWITCH recognises the critical importance of continued engagement with the bus industry, key stakeholder organisations and a wide range of interested parties in the development of a Regional Network Strategy that is fit for purpose and meets the identified objectives for the region. Therefore, SWWITCH has consulted with stakeholders as fully as the tight timescales have allowed in developing this draft strategy. As part of the development of this consultation draft, the stakeholder engagement undertaken has consisted of four strands: A stakeholder briefing and workshop in Carmarthen on 15th July 2013; One-to-one meetings with the four bus companies responsible for the largest number of services in the SWWITCH region; Meetings with each of the passenger transport managers from the four local authorities in the SWWITCH region; and Separate meetings with representative organisations of operators and bus users.
For the purposes of this initial consultation and to elicit views, the options presented for consideration at this stage were: To continue with the current interim funding arrangements; To move all funds to LKSG, removing all funding for revenue support; or To move all funds to revenue support, removing all LKSG funding.
An overview of the views expressed at each of the above events or meetings is presented below, separately for each strand.
3.2 Stakeholder Meeting – 15th July 2013
A stakeholder workshop was arranged for the 15th July in Carmarthen and was attended by over twenty stakeholders from the commercial and community transport, user and government sectors. Appendix A provides a list of the stakeholders who attended the event, as well as the presentation slides and key findings. The purpose of this workshop was to raise awareness of the Regional Network Strategy process and to gather initial opinions about possible proposals to be included in the full, formal, six-week public consultation to follow. A scenario approach was used to test opinion about some of the key issues (for example funding for rural areas versus funding for urban areas) that any final strategy would need to address. Some key points made at the event were that: Commercial operators were still absorbing and dealing with the changes made in April 2013 (along with other changes); Both the option of moving all RTSG to Live Kilometres Support Grant (LKSG) and the option of moving all funding to revenue support were seen as being problematical. The former because it could lead to the loss of many currently contracted services; the latter because it would result in some currently commercial services becoming unviable and requiring subsidy; and
Page 39 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 16
Service quality was seen as being important, but support for penalising failure to meet specified standards was limited. It was commented that getting the basics right (availability and reliability) was far more important to passengers.
3.3 Operator Views
One-to-one meetings were held with the four commercial operators responsible for operating most of the bus services in the SWWITCH region, namely: First Cymru, Swansea; Richards Brothers, Cardigan; Silcox Coaches, Pembroke Dock; and South Wales Transport, Neath. Whilst individual operators’ opinions varied, there was a clear consensus that uncertainty and change, without sufficient lead-time to allow businesses to adapt, would cause significant difficulty for operators and instability in services. There was limited support for adjusting the balance between LKSG and revenue support, but a warning that if this went too far (in either direction) then services would suffer, and fares would have to rise.
3.4 Local Authority Views
Meetings were held with the Heads of Passenger Transport (and other appropriate staff) from each of the four local authorities in the SWWITCH region. Lack of clarity about what is a wholly commercial service (i.e. one which could operate without any LKSG or revenue support) was believed to be a hindrance. Ideally these services would receive no SWWITCH funding, thereby leaving more money to support services that would not operate without help. There was interest in the potential for CT to ‘close the gaps’ that exist in bus provision, but some concern was expressed about the unstructured way in which CT is currently funded. Clearer guidelines, and a shared view of what CT should be doing, are important. Some flexibility was evident about the desirable balance between LKSG and revenue funding, with recognition of the pros and cons of moving the balance between these. However, the amount and timing of any changes was seen as critical. There was recognition of the synergies between home-to-school transport and local bus services. It was also agreed that the opportunities for co-ordination with health transport are interesting, as long as funding from the health sector accompanies new passengers. Concern was expressed by more than one authority about limited supply in the bus market in some areas. This results in fragility, because the withdrawal of one key operator (for whatever reason) would leave gaps which would be difficult to fill. The two rural counties to the west of the region expressed a view that they are very different from the two more densely populated authorities to the east of the region, and that the RNS needed to take these differences into account.
Page 40 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 17
3.5 Views of Representative Bodies
Four representative bodies were consulted on the draft strategy, these being Bus Users UK Wales, the Confederation of Passenger Transport Wales, the Community Transport Association Wales and the Public Transport Users’ Committee. A summary of the views of each body is presented below.
3.5.1 Bus Users UK Wales
Bus Users UK (BUUK) believed that if a choice is to be made about where funding goes, it should be on the basis of meeting social need and dealing with rurality. They were supportive of CT generally, but believed that there should be funding transparency, and better monitoring in place. BUUK could see that there are pros and cons in moving funding between LKSG and revenue support (in either direction), and felt that these should be explored further. Their view was that making significant changes by April 2014 may be impossible to achieve, and suggested that April 2015 may be a better date to make major changes.
3.5.2 Confederation of Passenger Transport Wales
Echoing the view from the commercial operators consulted, uncertainty was seen as the major concern of CPT. The timescales proposed were regarded as being very tight, indicating that local authorities will need more staff and expertise to manage a complete review of the network. Complex issues remain to be resolved, including around concessionary fares. A danger was perceived that the current close relationship between operators and local authorities could be permanently damaged by significant changes to the system. CPT believed that the kind of changes being proposed cannot happen by April 2014 and a more extended lead time is required.
3.5.3 Community Transport Association Wales
CTA welcomed a more robust approach to funding, if it incorporates more transparency over the bidding process and more effective monitoring. The piecemeal nature of the current funding arrangements was acknowledged; funding is different in each local authority area. CT services themselves also vary greatly from area to area. CTA believed that there should be more consistency in the local authorities’ approach to funding CT. CTA also expressed interest in exploring working with the health sector, and in engaging with discussions about new and innovative ways of working.
3.5.4 Public Transport Users’ Committee
PTUC welcomed the LKSG system and proposals to associate levels of payment with service quality standards. It felt that any changes should be driven by the goal of achieving benefits for passengers and that proper consultation should be undertaken with users. Balance was needed between the outcomes of different funding options and should follow policy priorities; thus preference to social inclusion and rural issues over commercial service support. CT was noted as patchy in the SWWITCH region, with good and bad examples. There is a need for enhanced standards, transparency and accountability and additional CT Officer support from authorities might be helpful, but any changes need to be ‘user driven’. They agreed that there is scope to link the RNS to NHS transport policy. PTUC also supported the concept of linking RTSG revenue support to that provided by local authorities.
Page 41 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 18
3.6 Consultation Conclusions
As part of the development of this draft strategy, consultation has been undertaken with a variety of key stakeholders in the form of a workshop event, as well as separate meetings with the key operators within the SWWITCH region, the four Local Authorities and Representative Bodies. Views varied significantly between different stakeholders. However, there was consensus of opinion that a significant amount of time and resources would be needed to review the network in detail, and that operators would need sufficient time to adapt to any change to the current funding arrangements if service instability is to be avoided. This consultation draft is now made available for much wider comment from a range of organisations and interested individuals. Please let us have your views on what is proposed within the draft. For details of how to get involved see page 31.
Page 42 4 Identified Options
Page 43 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 20
4 Identified Options and Appraisal
4.1 Introduction
This section outlines the different options available to SWWITCH for the distribution of RTSG funds and the impacts that these could have upon different parts of the SWWITCH region. The options presented in this section are radical in nature to allow the impacts of different funding approaches to be assessed and allow your views on the concepts to be ascertained. It is intended that for the final RNS a refined option will be presented which better reflects the complex needs of the SWWITCH region.
4.2 Identified Options
The final SWWITCH RNS is intended to be a comprehensive document, which guides all decisions by SWWITCH and its constituent authorities about the bus and CT services they want to shape and support. As noted before, however, the main tool they have to do this is RTSG funding, and the way that will be distributed forms the central issue for this consultation. This decision is important and can influence whether bus services survive in some areas, or the extent to which they can be controlled by the public sector. In any case, it should be borne in mind that the amount of public money available to help fund passenger transport services is likely to diminish in the next few years. If service users are not to be seriously affected, the lost funds will need to be made up from operators’ commercial initiatives and / or smarter ways of using the available funds. However, the starting point for the analysis presented in this section is that any reduction in overall income to operators will lead to reductions in services as well as higher fares. For the purposes of our modelling, we have assumed that all other forms of funding – including local authorities’ own bus subsidy funding – will remain unchanged, although we recognise this may not reflect the real world. To assess the impacts of potential changes, we have developed a spreadsheet model which includes all bus services in the SWWITCH Area, and estimates their income from all sources (e.g. passenger fares, RTSG, council revenue support). This allows us to see how income varies for each service under different conditions, and to apply realistic algorithms to the financial results to predict how operators’ reactions are likely to affect the supply of services. This approach only works with conventional bus services, of course: the funding and operation of CT services have different criteria, and are considered separately later in this draft Strategy. We have considered two main ways in which the balance between the two streams of RTSG might be altered from the current baseline: Reducing LKSG, and putting more money into revenue support (services run under contract to the councils), some of which will be needed to replace currently ‘commercial’ services which cease to be viable as a result; or Transferring money from revenue support into raising the value of LKSG, so that fewer services should need council subsidy and supporting development of successful services which can encourage modal shift. Taking forward either of these options to their extremes (i.e. all RTSG funding to provide revenue support or putting all funds into LKSG) has been rejected in the light of stakeholders’ views as outlined in Section 3. Therefore the following scenarios have been developed: Scenario 1: – Maintain the current balance between revenue support and LKSG Scenario 2: – Reduce LKSG by 70%, while RTSG revenue support is increased by 80%. Scenario 3: – Increase LKSG by 50%, while RTSG revenue support is reduced by 60%.
Page 44 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 21
4.3 Option Impacts
Scenario 1 is effectively the maintenance of the interim arrangements currently in place in relation to the balance between Revenue Support and LKSG. Therefore the information presented in the Baseline section of this report (Section 2) outlines the levels of service provision predicted with this option. The changes in the overall level of bus services anticipated resulting from Options 2 and 3 within each part of the SWWITCH area are illustrated in Figures 4.1 and 4.2. Note that these refer to the overall supply of services, and not to the frequency offered on any one particular route. It must also be noted that we have had to use generic data in our modelling of most operators’ services at this stage, so the results can only be regarded as indicative. The maps show only principal bus routes, and refer only to daytime services on Mondays to Saturdays; effects might be different on evening and Sunday services.
4.3.1 Scenario 2
Scenario 2 assumes that LKSG would be reduced by 70%, while RTSG revenue support would increase by 80%. The expected results of this (shown in Figure 4.1) would be that: Overall service levels would reduce significantly (by 10-30%) in Swansea, Port Talbot and the Swansea and Neath valleys, where current services are predominantly run commercially, but the adverse effects would be greatest in rural Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire, including the Tenby area. This may be taken as a ‘worst case’ illustration, since the model does not reallocate any ‘excess’ RTSG revenue support to other services. However, this would be balanced by the need to transfer funds to other (local authority) contracted services, which would require additional support to compensate for the reduction in LKSG. The only areas relatively unaffected would be the upper Afan Valley and Llanelli and its hinterland. This partly reflects the high incidence of RTSG-funded contracts in the latter area. This also helps to mitigate the impacts in the Swansea and Neath Port Talbot areas, where there would tend to be a transfer of services from the commercial to the contracted sectors – if they could be afforded.
In terms of SWWITCH’s high-level objectives, Scenario 2 would: Reduce access to employment, health, education, retail and leisure across nearly all settings, tending to increase deprivation and isolation; Tend to achieve a balance of services across the region; Tend to reduce opportunities for market growth; but Possibly make it easier to include key quality outcomes in service tendering processes, although this might reduce the quantity of services it was possible to support.
4.3.2 Scenario 3
Scenario 3 assumes that LKSG would be increased by 50%, while RTSG revenue support would reduce by 60%. The expected results of this (shown in Figure 4.2) would be that: Overall service levels would reduce significantly (by over 10%) across much of rural Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire, with the most severe adverse effects in the areas north-east and south-west of Carmarthen and south of Pembroke. In Swansea and Neath Port Talbot, where most services currently run commercially, risks to services would be minimal, and there should be opportunities for development of routes and extension of commercial operations. Even in the Tenby and Newport areas, services should be stable or positive.
Page 45 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 22
The worst affected areas are those most dependent on services directly supported by RTSG. It would be expected that the need for contracted services would decline in urban areas, possibly allowing some diversion of RTSG to support additional services, but this would require a regional approach and agreement. This would not be possible if individual LAs sought to retain any savings locally, even if they arose from previously ‘authority’ funded contracts. In terms of SWWITCH’s high-level objectives, scenario 3 would: Improve access to employment, health, education, retail and leisure in primarily urban settings, with some potential for modal shift and increased social inclusion; in rural areas, reduced access to facilities will tend to increase deprivation and isolation; Tend to favour the more densely populated areas of the region, while potentially freeing some resources there for redeployment to rural areas; Tend to enhance opportunities for market growth, and provide a framework for investment to meet its key objectives; and Make it possible to include key quality outcomes as a condition of receiving maximum LKSG, although this might reduce the quantity of services provided.
4.4 Quality standards
Welsh Government guidance indicates that the payment of RTSG should enable the RTC to ensure the provision of enhanced quality services, and SWWITCH is required to indicate the standards it will seek to enforce. It has indicated to the government that it agrees with proposals that certain standards should be basic conditions of RTSG payment to operators, covering: Reliability; Punctuality; Cleanliness of vehicles; Good information; and Operation of a Customer Charter. However, proposals for up to 21 separate standards to be met on a national basis are viewed by SWWITCH and stakeholder consultees as unduly onerous, and likely to reduce the supply of actual and potential bus operators to inadequate levels, especially in sparsely populated areas. The effort and cost of complying with so many standards, some of which appear to offer little if any benefit to passengers, would deter or defeat many smaller concerns. The penalties suggested for non-compliance would ensure their services ceased to be sustainable. SWWITCH proposes that a two-tier approach could be adopted to the payment of LKSG, with a premium rate payable to those operators which entered and adhered to a Quality Standards Agreement (QSA) with SWWITCH. It is envisaged that there would be a small number of templates for QSAs, enabling them to be tailored to the circumstances of the operator and area. For example, a QSA covering lightly-used rural services is likely to exclude technological features such as audio-visual ‘next stop’ announcements (which can be compensated for by personalised customer care by the driver), while one covering busy city services might well include this feature as well as other innovations, such as smart ticketing. Views are requested on the appropriateness of this approach
4.5 Community Transport
The specific characteristics of CT, both operationally and in its relationship with its users, are such that the planning and commissioning approaches used for conventional public transport services are unlikely to be appropriate or
Page 46 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 23
effective. In any case, SWWITCH will continue to dedicate 10% of RTSG to CT, in line with Welsh Government guidance, alongside varying levels of additional support from the individual LAs. The CT sector in South West Wales has developed in response to needs which are not being met by commercial providers. It typically has a different character in rural locations compared to urban areas. Some DRT services, such as Bwcabus, combine some elements of CT (advance booking; provision for passengers with reduced mobility) with delivery by conventional bus operators. The starting point for SWWITCH is to recognise that CT has a role to play in delivering the outcomes of the RNS, and that the support for CT should be targeted towards these RNS outcomes. This may seem obvious; however, this might then lead to a series of logical assumptions which could potentially have significant implications for the current CT sector. For example, the change from the status quo in both funds available for individual operators, and the kinds of service they might be called upon to deliver. If CT is to contribute effectively to the RNS, then there needs to be a regional strategy for community transport. This strategy should be based on an objective assessment of needs (demand) and an assessment of how much of this demand SWWITCH and its constituent LAs can realistically hope to meet. The other key factor is the capacity and capability of the existing CT sector. There are established methodologies for determining both the level of need, and the resources an efficient CT operator would require in meeting that need. The central role of need in deciding CT provision, highlights the fact that part of the function of CT will be to fill gaps in the conventional transport network; hence, although it will always be a dynamic situation, the desired shape of CT provision within the region can only be determined once the effects of funding changes on the mainstream network are known. In other words, there will be a time lag before it is sensible to make detailed decisions on CT. The extent to which users are able, or expected, to contribute in fares is also a matter of policy that would determine the cost base of services. All these factors need to be taken into account as part of the process of formulating a service specification. Ultimately, procurement of CT should be rationalised across the SWWITCH region in a way that demonstrates a consistent contribution to the RNS, but which also recognises the local strength of the current operations, and how a productive balance between the two might be achieved. Although the work to achieve the service specification can be specialised and time-consuming, it is only the first step. Moving from the current system of provision and support for CT to a more strategic pattern of commissioning, while simultaneously acting in a way that does not undermine or unnecessarily damage the existing CT providers, is a challenging task which will require: an understanding of the existing, baseline provision; an understanding of the individual CT operators’ business models; capacity building initiatives, where appropriate, for existing CT groups (potentially this could be carried out by the local authorities, with involvement from the Community Transport Association); consultation with a range of stakeholders and service users in each community; a view of which procurement methods are appropriate and effective in securing the services that each community needs; and an understanding of the ‘softer’ issues that relate to CT – e.g. political will, levels of volunteer input, quality standards, and community engagement. It is suggested that, to undertake this work and support other elements of the Strategy, some RTSG funds should be dedicated to funding one or more CT Development Officer to coordinate CT over the entire SWWITCH area.
Page 47 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 24
4.6 Conclusions
The options presented in section 4.2 highlight the varied impacts that different extreme positions in relation to the balance with which RTSG funds could be spent. The two alternative options for the bus network are both predicted to have significant negative consequences for some parts of the SWWITCH region, although there are also potential benefits for some areas from both, and the full repercussions of each option are not fully understood at this stage. Views are welcomed on the balance between the extreme positions represented by these scenarios, and the differing interests of the primarily rural and urban authorities; for example, despite the difficulties in planning and administration it could cause for operators, is there merit in creating different funding strategies in the eastern and western areas of SWWITCH?
Page 48 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 25
Figure 4.1: The Impact of Scenario 2 on Service Levels Page 49 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 26
Figure 4.2: The Impact of Scenario 3 on Service Levels Page 50 5 Further Considerations
Page 51 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 28
5 Further Considerations
5.1 Introduction
The intended introduction date for a wholly new, comprehensive, system for supporting both bus operations and community transport (CT) throughout the SWWITCH region, is April 2014. In the course of initial stakeholder engagement during July 2013, consultants conducted a series of meetings with local authority staff, operators and users’ representative organisations. From this consultation, it became apparent that the intended timescale is too short to allow considered decisions and responses to be made by operators or the SWWITCH authorities, if significant changes are to be proposed to existing funding arrangements. There are dangers inherent in the original timetable put forward by the Welsh Government for introducing any new arrangements. First, operations (whether bus or CT) in many parts of the SWWITCH area are fragile, and operators need to deploy their resources (vehicles, depots and staff) as efficiently as possible. Any change in funding will impact on viability and, once it is clear that a service will cease to be economically viable, the operator has little choice but to reduce or withdraw it as soon as possible, usually giving just 8 weeks notice. Uncertainty and short- notice change also undermines operators’ ability to rationally plan both their services and their investment; the latter is critical at present, as the 2015-2017 deadlines loom for ‘large bus’ services to be entirely operated by vehicles compliant with the PSV Accessibility Regulations, requiring replacement of a significant proportion of some SWWITCH area fleets. Secondly, if local authorities are forced into hasty responses to knee-jerk decisions by operators, it is very unlikely that the results will be optimal. It is therefore highly desirable for the SWWITCH authorities to have sufficient time to assess, plan for and procure appropriate services on a rational basis. The worst possible scenario is that bus services are withdrawn and a gap ensues before replacement services supported by the local authority can begin. This would inconvenience and deter passengers, undermine longer-term confidence in these services and bus travel as a whole and result in poor value for money. If SWWITCH’s objective of developing bus services to offer an alternative to car use is to be addressed, time will have to be allowed for operators and authorities to make considered decisions about their responses to any significant funding changes, and for passengers to be adequately consulted and informed in advance. Stakeholders have indicated that this would mean a minimum period of 12-15 months for this to occur. There are other reasons why a delay before any significant changes might be appropriate. The Welsh Ambulance Service (WAS) is currently undergoing a review, led by concerns over its emergency ‘blue-light’ service, and the outcome could result in an entirely new pattern of ambulance provision. However, this new pattern of provision would also extend to non-emergency patient transport (NEPT), with its own set of characteristics which relate much more closely to current CT, local authority and public transport requirements. This review of WAS also coincides with an increased emphasis on partnership working between NHS Wales and local authorities, and creates the potential for a once-in-a-generation opportunity to re-cast NEPT provision so that it is both better co-ordinated with other local transport, and better meets patients’ needs .Although it is recognised that there is a need for wider restructuring within the health service to achieve coordination it would be regrettable to lose this opportunity by drafting a RNS which failed to allow time to fully explore the potential for efficient co-ordination (not only in transport operation, but also in single-point access to transport for health) and shared service commissioning. CT may be a key component in delivering a public transport service, particularly in rural areas and for people who are unable to use conventional buses. Deciding which CT schemes are prioritised, and procuring / providing support for CT, involves tackling a different set of issues from deciding on support for buses. CT is by its very nature unconventional, varied and frequently dependent on specific local characteristics (especially the availability of interested and capable volunteers). The pattern of CT provision is therefore uneven, tailored to local circumstances and unlikely to match demand. CT operations are also more fragile than commercial operators, partly because they are often strongly tied to a particular locality, and partly because of their non-competitive nature. For example, a small change in a block grant can have a disproportionate impact on a group’s viability. These factors dictate that re- organising CT funding is a time-consuming process, requiring delicate decisions and much input from senior officers.
Page 52 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 29
Local communities, politicians and Community Councils will need time to absorb the detail of any significant changes which result from changes in the funding regime, and any reduction in the overall level of funds available (as determined by the Welsh Government). Failure to achieve buy-in to, or at least acceptance of, the consequences of any changes, might substantially damage the effectiveness and stability of the RNS. For these reasons, it is suggested that the interim arrangements in place for the current financial year (until March 2014) be extended for an additional year; that is for 2014/15. During this time, additional work can be undertaken by SWWITCH to address the issues identified above. Any revisions to the distribution of RTSG by SWWITCH, along with other complementary adjustments would, therefore, begin in April 2015.
Page 53 6 Next Steps
Page 54 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 31
6 Next Steps
6.1 Introduction
This report provides an overview of the work undertaken to date to develop a Regional Network Strategy for the bus and community transport network in the SWWITCH region following the Welsh Government’s restructuring of the previous funding arrangements and transfer of funding control to the Regional Consortia introduced in April 2013. This document is intended to provide consultees with an overview of the current bus network in the SWWITCH region, alongside the options under consideration by SWWITCH to positively influence the network through different means of distributing the available RTSG funds. This document also considers the impacts that these options could have on the network and how this could impact on SWWITCH’s objectives for the area. Further work will be required by SWWITCH, and its consultants, to refine the proposed options and develop a balanced final strategy. This will include further directed consultation, including with the taxi and private hire sector, and the assessment of any Equalities Impacts resulting from the proposals. We would therefore welcome your input at this stage to help develop the final strategy in a positive direction.
6.2 Your Views on Key Issues
We welcome any comments in relation to the consultation draft RNS, but your views on the following key points will be particularly useful in shaping the ongoing development of the strategy:
Do you agree with the SWWITCH high level objectives for the Regional Network strategy? Would you support the continuation of the current mechanism for distributing RTSG funding (scenario 1 – the baseline position)? Would you support changing the current mechanism for distributing RTSG funding so that LKSG would be reduced by 70% and RTSG revenue support would be increased by 80% (scenario 2)? Would you support changing the current mechanism for distributing RTSG funding so that LKSG would be increased by 50% and RTSG revenue support would be reduced by 60% (scenario 3)? Do you support the introduction of quality standards across the region as set out in section 4.4? Would you support the introduction of the two tier approach to quality outcomes where standards are tailored to the area and type of bus operation? Are there any other comments you would like to make about issues raised within this draft strategy?
Page 55 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 32
6.3 How To Get Involved
We would welcome any responses to this consultation draft strategy via the following lines of communication: Post: FAO SWWITCH Office, Room 201, Penllergaer Civic Centre, Penllergaer, Swansea, SA4 9GJ Email: [email protected]
Additional information about SWWITCH’s role in relation to RTSG can be found here: http://www.swwitch.net/page111450.aspx
6.4 Timescales
The deadline for responses to this consultation draft strategy is Friday 13th September 2013. A final strategy and preferred option will then be developed taking account of all responses. This final draft Strategy will then be subject to approval by SWWITCH Local Councils and the SWWITCH Joint Committee prior to submission to the Welsh Government by the 17th January 2014. The finalised SWWITCH RNS Strategy, and any proposed revisions to current funding arrangements, will then come into force on 1st April 2014.
Page 56 Appendix A: Stakeholder Workshop
Page 57 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 34
6.5 Introduction Appendix A: Stakeholder Workshop
Key stakeholders were invited to an introductory workshop to raise awareness of the Regional Network Strategy (RNS) process. It was outlined that the RNS will primarily be concerned with methods of distributing RTSG (Regional Transport Services Grant) and its co-ordination with local authority (LA) contracted services spending (and, possibly, use of some capital spending). This will aim to support a combined network of bus and community transport (CT) services which meets minimum accessibility needs, and maximises its contribution to the objectives of SWWITCH and its four constituent Local Authorities. The workshop was also an opportunity to gather opinions on certain scenarios to inform the initial development of options for the public consultation, which is scheduled to commence from the 28th July for a six week period.
Page 58 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 35
Table 1: List of Attendees
Name Organisation Craig Bell AECOM David Brown The TAS Partnership Andy Cairns The TAS Partnership Betsan Caldwell CTA Wales John Cooper Arriva Buses Wales Barclay Davies Bus Users UK Bert Dix Silcox Coaches John Godfrey The TAS Partnership Brendan Griffiths Pembrokeshire CC / SWWITCH Rhian Higgins CTA Wales Dawn Hoskins Select Bus Ron Hoskins Select Bus Peter Jackson Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Clive Johns Taf Valley Coaches Lisa Lewis Swansea Social Services Carys Miles Neath Port Talbot Council for Voluntary Service Sue Miles SWWITCH Alison Owen DANSA Steve Pilliner Carmarthenshire County Council Ceri Rees Pembrokeshire County Council Sue Reed Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Simon Richards Richards Brothers Claire Smith Neath Port Talbot Community Transport Alison Thomas Welsh Government Owen Williams First Cymru
Page 59 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 36
6.6 Programme and Presentation
The programme for the workshop was as follows: 1330 Welcome and housekeeping 1335 Presentation 1415 Discussion groups 1445 Tea / coffee break 1500 Feedback from groups 1515 Question and answer session 1545 Summary of next steps 1600 Close The presentation was delivered by John Godfrey and David Brown from The TAS Partnership Ltd (TAS) and is included at the end of this Appendix. 6.7 Discussion Groups
Attendees were split into 3 groups, each facilitated by a representative from TAS. Each group was asked to focus on the funding methodology (RTSG) and to consider a number of scenarios ranging from maintaining the status quo to moving all funding into LKSG (Live Kilometres Support Grant) or moving all RTSG into revenue support. Groups considered the impact on networks and passengers, and looked at the practicalities of various options / scenarios. Participants were also asked to consider the issues of rural versus urban services, making funding conditional on meeting quality standards and the potential for capital projects to replace revenue support. A summary of the key points from each discussion are outlined below. Group 1: Operators still unsure about what the impact of the current changes (2013/14) will have on their operations, therefore difficult to speculate on 2014/15 and beyond. Allied to this they would like to see and know what the level of funding in 2014/15 will be. This will provide more stability / certainty, thus aiding their decision making with regard to this process. Innovation is happening now, so need to capture, understand and fund these initiatives; e.g. satellite centres to avoid dead mileage (CT services to health care). Bus Users: Need to gain views of silent majority, in addition to views of vocal minority. Quality vs. service provision: Real dilemma and not resolved in this discussion. However all understood that quality does drive passenger demand. Commercial operators identified that some bus services are currently operating at the margins, so any further cuts or changes to funding could have a significant impact on some services. Would consider adjusting network between summer and winter, so that services reflect thinner traffic in the winter months. Would also consider focusing on Monday to Friday 0800 to 1800. Level of integration is reasonably good now, but realise that more could be done. Needs to be more collaboration between conventional bus and CT services, but will need to carefully manage the ’grey’ area in the middle.
Page 60 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 37
Group 2: Moving all of the RTSG funds into LKSG is not seen as desirable, as it would lead to loss of a number of contracted bus services which is unlikely to be balanced by conversions to commercial operation. Moving all RTSG funds into revenue support also seen as undesirable as clearly many currently commercial services would cease to be viable, and require tendered replacement. This could also impact on vehicle investment, with significant requirements outstanding to meet accessibility deadlines from 2015. Both of the above scenarios are seen as high risk in the current economic climate, therefore something close to the ‘status quo’ is seen as the most desirable. Urban vs. rural: Difficult to define what is rural (as discovered in redefining the Welsh Government’s Rural Development Plan). Although there are distinct differences across the region, the work required to group services in this way could outweigh any benefits. Quality Standards: Understand the benefits but felt that there is still a need to get the basics (reliability and punctuality) right first; in most cases providing a service in the first place is significantly more important than concentrating on enhancements. Struggled to find examples where capital expenditure could be used to replace regular revenue funding. This is exacerbated by the disparate nature of the SWWITCH region, which makes it difficult to apportion suitable amounts of funding appropriately. However, there may be limited examples, e.g. potential investment in management systems for CT operators. Group 3: Consensus was that a good network should provide good access to all services but realised that there is a need to prioritise. Agreed that employment and education should be at the top of any list. Important issue is to understand demand. What do people want? Currently there is limited data. Moving all funds into LKSG seen as unrealistic, particularly by CT operators who would struggle to maintain the current level of service. CT Operators and Local Authorities also use (the current) LTSG block amounts as match funding to bring in other sources of funding, e.g. European money. Moving all RTSG funds into revenue support also seen as undesirable, especially by commercial operators who are running a number of marginal services which are only operating because of the existing grant support. CT sector also believe that they would suffer as Section 19 services also benefit from funding derived from live mileage. Preferred option would be a form of the ‘status quo’ with further improvements to integration and consideration of an urban / rural split. Group also considered alternative concepts including having the level of RTSG linked to the size of the community served or linked to fare levels (operators / services with lower fares receive more support relative to those with higher fares). Felt there is some merit in establishing quality standards aligned to RTSG. However there would need to be careful consideration and agreement on what these standards are (e.g. could be different for rural and urban networks). Capital funding projects which could contribute to and / or replace revenue funding include wider use of RTPI and enhancements to security measures.
Page 61 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 38
6.8 General Questions
Q – How will cross boundary issues be addressed? A – SWWITCH officers meeting regularly with officers from neighbouring regions to understand each other’s strategic direction. This will ensure that RNS’s are aligned with each other, or where there are differences there are good reasons for any divergence. Q – Will the strategy consider best practice from across the UK and Europe? A – Yes, but different regulatory systems (Europe) and concessionary fare reimbursement rates (UK) may make this difficult. Q – Strategy will need to consider integration with school transport network. In all 4 LAs, especially Carmarthenshire and Pembrokeshire, there is a strong overlap. Any changes to the public transport / local bus network will need to ensure that there is not an adverse impact on the network of schools services. A – Yes, this is recognised, and will be taken into account as far as possible. 6.9 Next Steps
Key points from the workshop will be fed into the developing strategy. One-to-one meetings will be held with a number of key stakeholders over the forthcoming week. Draft RNS framework for consultation to be forwarded to SWWITCH on the 24th July. Formal consultation commences 28th for a six week period. Thereafter (during September / October) the RNS options will be reviewed and refined in the light of consultation responses, and AECOM / TAS will present a recommended strategy to SWWITCH by the end of October for political approval and adoption. The new RNS will take effect from 1 April 2014.
Page 62 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 39
6.10 Presentation Slides
Page 63 SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy: Consultation Draft 40
Page 64
!"#!$" %&' % ( &) ( *+',*$"# ' - ' . - ' *$* / & 0123, ( !.-4 ' ' - 56 7 , ' )&0' ' ' 0' ' ' ' "# 5 - - 5 - && - 5 80*$"#4 ' 5 ' '3 - ' - 6 5 & 37 - & 5 & 0 5 ' 5 9 - -&5 & ' -- 5-& - ' & - 5- ' &' 4 ' ' 9 - ' ' 3 , *$"1 '- 5 -- &55 -' ' &' - ' - ' &' -55 ' & :055 -:0-055 -:;45 & &9 '&' ' - - 5 8- "#' 5 *$"# ' 5 '5 ' - '&' ' ' < & -& & -. &' 055 ' '' , ( & *$"# & M
Page 65 !! " M " # $ # % & ' %( ' ( &M- - - ' - - & ' & ' -&' ' '' < & ' 5 - 5 - ' 5 & 05*$"#0' ' 9 - -& --' 5& ' -& - -&5 5 &' 0 )& ' 55 - & 5 & ' - 4' -'5' & - 5- ' & : )&& -& ' 5''''' & & ' ( ' & & 5 - - 4'&- &' 5 -& & '&' & & & & - '- 55 > & & & ' & ' '- - ' - & ' 6 ' & : ' *$"#!"1 - -& - ' &' '&&' 7 '- 5 ' - 9 4 ' - '- &&
Page 66 !! ") * +* , & $#& %- ./ ( ! .( (01 $ ! /. 23014 5 ! / 4 % $& ! % 12 # $ # %(6 " ( '' '' < & ' ? * - 55 ' & ' & &' - 3 -6& "M' 57? # - 55 &' ' & &' - 3 - ' )@ 3 - -& - A$B - 3 55 - & - C$B6& *7? 1 - 55 &' ' & &' - 3 -')@ 3- & - D$B- 3 55 - -& - +$B6& #7? D (55' -& 9--&' &11?
Page 67 + -55' -& ' 55&'9& ' -- -' -5 5 ? A 0 ' ' & - -' '- ?
Page 68
Page 69 SWWITCH Response to WG RNS outcomes sub group (submitted 13/08/13)
Introduction SWWITCH welcomes the confirmation that the RTSG outcomes are not be compulsory and that the Welsh Government continues to welcome the views from consortia as to the most appropriate way forward.
SWWITCH is committed to working with the Welsh Government and a wide range of partners to improve the quality of public transport services in the region, for the benefit of existing customers and also to try and facilitate a public transport system which is of sufficient quality and attractiveness to be the mode of choice.
However, SWWITCH is strongly of the view, that the outcomes must be linked to the Regional Network Strategy and thus be particular to SWWITCH and its public transport network and the people served by it.
It is very likely that each consortium will opt for some similar mandatory outcomes, customer feedback time and again points to the very basic elements of service being the most important. However, with the outcomes forming a part of what consultees are currently considering, until the results of the Regional Network Strategy consultations are known, it would be wrong to finalise either mandatory or optional outcomes.
It is critical that each consortium is able to secure consensus on and manage and monitor mandatory and optional outcomes which are meaningful in the context of the network within the region.
Outcomes The SWWITCH RNS consultation draft is in wide circulation and with a closing date of 13th September, it is not possible to be clear at this stage what stakeholder’s views are on the options for quality outcomes. The SWWITCH view at this stage is that the mandatory outcomes for the region should be related to:
• Punctuality • Reliability • Customer Charter and • Customer Feedback
There are all capable of effective monitoring and the first two form the basis for most complaints received by Local Councils relating to public transport. Clearly therefore, they matter to customers.
The SWWITCH view at this stage is that optional outcomes could include:
• Information • Passenger Data • Driver Training
As stated before, SWWITCH does not support the idea of a simple penalty based approach, but rather of means of incentivising improved quality. This has not yet been fully worked through in SWWITCH until it becomes clear how many outcomes SWWITCH will seek at apply in the 14/15 year. However, SWWITCH believes that the
Page 70 methodology for determining how the outcomes are achieved (penalty/incentive) will almost certainly differ between consortia, and should be subject to consortia level agreement and notification only to Welsh Government.
SWWITCH would welcome an opportunity for round table discussions on this matter.
Page 71 Agenda Item 5
SWWITCH RAIL STRATEGY DEVELOPMENT
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 At the December 2012 Joint Committee meeting, there was consideration of regional rail priorities. This was in the context of current forward planning for rail by the Welsh Government (Planning Framework for Wales) and Network Rail (Long Term Planning Process).
1.2 At that meeting it was confirmed that although the SWWITCH Rail Strategy was out of date, there was no prospect of funding to develop a new strategy. Thus a series of short, medium and long term priorities was developed for Joint Committee consideration and this was adopted by SWWITCH. A copy of the paper is attached as Appendix A.
1.3 This paper explains why the situation has changed and the progress to date on developing a new Rail Strategy.
2.0 CHANGE TO FUNDING SITUATION
2.1 Joint Committee will be aware that since the adoption and submission of the Regional Transport Plan SWWITCH revenue funding from the Welsh Government has reduced dramatically. This has meant very little research or strategy development has been undertaken in the last four years.
2.2 However, in early summer 2013 a new income stream for SWWITCH started in the context of rental from the Swansea Bus Station retail units. This is a finite resource for SWWITCH lasting only between the end of the retailers “rent free” periods and the sale of the retail units, which is imminent.
2.3 The first receipts for SWWITCH totalled approximately £60,000. Officer Working Group put a proposal to SWWITCH Management Group that this funding be used to commission a Rail Strategy for South West Wales.
2.4 This proposal was approved by Management Group and an invitation to quote was issued via the South West Wales Engineering Framework. Three responses were received to the brief and following consideration of price/quality, AECOM was appointed in early July to develop the Strategy, working with SWWITCH and engaging with a wide range of stakeholders. The quotation accepted was less than the total sum available. The completion date for the Rail strategy is the end of September 2013.
3.0 PROGRESS TO DATE ON RAIL STRATEGY
3.1 Alongside engagement with key stakeholders such as Network Rail and Arriva Trains Wales, a wider range of views and input was sought through a stakeholder workshop on 1st August, held in Carmarthen.
3.2 Members from rail lobby and interest groups from across South West Wales were
Page 72
invited to the workshop which AECOM chaired. The workshop provided an interactive opportunity for those present to offer their views on all aspects of the rail network in South West Wales.
3.3 To help guide discussions and generate debate on options the rail network was split into a number of sections. These were:
East of Swansea West of Swansea to Carmarthen Carmarthen to Milford Haven Pembroke Dock to Whitland Clarbeston Road to Fishguard Heart of Wales Line Freight New Lines / Complementary modes
3.4 The workshop was well attended by around 20 representatives and a great deal of discussion was had around a wide range of rail based themes. While some of the comments had implications beyond the scope of the strategy, there was a good level of input and it provided the Consultant with a wealth of public opinion on which to build the strategy. The notes from the workshop are included in Appendix B.
3.5 There are inevitably a huge number and variety of rail aspirations across the region and the consultants are developing an appraisal matrix to enable aspirations to be filtered depending on how they contribute to economic, social and environmental objectives.
3.6 The difficulty for the Consultants and SWWITCH is trying to “second guess” what impact the electrification programme and the forthcoming rail franchise renewals affecting South West Wales will have on services to and from the region. The Consultants are looking at a range of scenarios which will enable the SWWITCH Rail Strategy to remain relevant whatever the outcome of the rail franchises and the electrification.
3.7 An interim report was forwarded to SWWITCH in August for review and comment and SWWITCH provided constructive feedback to AECOM. A further progress meeting is scheduled for the 19th September at which stage a final draft report should be ready for discussion. It is anticipated that the commission will be concluded by the end of September and it will then be for SWWITCH to consider this internally prior to adopting a new Rail Strategy.
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 It is RECOMMENDED that: 1. Joint Committee approves the development of a SWWITCH Rail Strategy 2. Joint Committee notes progress to date in terms of engagement and progress reports 3. A final draft Rail strategy is brought to next Joint committee for approval
Page 73
Item 5 – Appendix A – Joint Committee paper December 2012
SWWITCH Long Term Rail Priorities
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 SWWITCH developed a regional Rail Study which was published in 2002 and subsequently updated by addendum in 2005. This was a comprehensive body of work, involving stakeholder engagement and aiming to set out high level aspirations for rail for a period up to 15 years.
1.2 The priorities arising from the Rail Study formed the basis for the RTP rail priorities adopted by all four Councils and submitted as part of the Regional Transport Plan in 2009.
1.3 This paper looks at progress on rail in the region and then highlights the need to review priorities for the longer term.
2.0 PROGRESS ON RAIL PRIORITIES
2.1 A number of the improvements for rail in the region indentified through the Rail Strategy have been or are being delivered, or are planned and funded for the future. The more significant schemes being: • Improved clock face timetables • Additional services to serve Fishguard • The electrification the South Wales Mainline to Swansea, • The redoubling of the line west of Swansea • The replacement of the Loughor Rail Viaduct • The renovation of Swansea High Street Station • Redevelopment of Port Talbot Parkway Station
2.2 The delivery of some of the more significant aspirations of the rail strategy along with unprecedented growth in rail patronage nationally has placed a greater emphasis on the need to refresh the aspirations for the SWWITCH region for the next twenty years. While the conclusions of the Rail Study remains largely valid it is in need of a refresh and SWWITCH rail priorities need reviewing.
2.3 The need for rail priorities is also being driven by Welsh Government and Network Rail respectively. The Welsh Government announced plans to develop a ‘Planning Framework for Wales’ which it is intended to have in draft form by March 2013. The planning framework will be an important guiding document in the development of the next round of National and Regional Transport Plans and would therefore notionally cover Control Period 5 (2014 – 2019). It is important that rail aspirations align with the Network Rail programme. Network Rail meanwhile has recently announced a Long Term Planning Process for schemes in Control Period 6 (2019 – 2024).
2.4 SWWITCH needs to agree regional rail priorities in order to effectively feed into and influence the Welsh Government and Network Rail policies. However, in the current financial constraints there is no possibility of commissioning a new Rail Strategy for the region, nor of completing such a Strategy in time to feed into the draft Planning Framework and Long Term Planning Process.
2.5 Internal discussions at SWWITCH Officer level have resulted in a list of forward priorities and these have been then fine tuned through Management Group appraisal. Proposed SWWITCH rail priorities arising from this process are outlined in the section below according to the timescales (Control Period) in which they are most likely to be delivered.
3.0 PROPOSED FORWARD RAIL PRIORITIES FOR THE REGION
3.1 Short Term (2012/14 – CP4) • Redoubling West of Swansea: The work to redouble the line commenced in late 2012 and is expected to complete in 2013. While the scheme does deliver a significant infrastructure enhancement it does not come with the commitment of service
Page 74
enhancements which would be sought in future control periods • Completion of the National Stations Improvement Programme (NSIP): This fund is being provided to deliver better stations across England and Wales. The enhancements range from large construction and renovation schemes to smaller access improvements, both of which serve to improve the rail experience for passengers • Award of the Great Western Franchise: Although now delayed by the West Coast Mainline Franchise retendering, the outcome of the tendering process for the Great Western Line is important for SWWITCH, not only to secure the future of rail services on this South Wales Mainline, but also to set the aspirations for development and improvement over the term of the franchise. • Preserve and enhance the Fishguard rail service: An improved service began in autumn 2011 followed by the re-opening of Fishguard & Goodwick Station in spring 2012. SWWITCH supports the preservation of service levels in order to maintain the behavioural change and modal shift which will have occurred as a result of the improved connectivity
3.2 Medium term (2014/19 – CP5) • Great Western Mainline Electrification: Following a period of uncertainty and a collaborative effort by Welsh Government, SWWITCH and Local Government it has been announced that the Great Western Mainline will be electrified from London to Swansea. It is expected to be completed by 2018 • Award the Wales & Borders Franchise: The franchise will be coming to the end of a 15 year franchise during the term of CP5. Welsh Government has commenced consultation with regards to the changes which might be required under the terms of the next franchise; much of the focus will be aimed to improve rolling stock and financial viability of the services • Increase rail service frequencies east of Swansea – including services to Cardiff and Bristol. Aligned with the electrification and the new Wales & Borders franchise the opportunity should be taken to ensure better integration of existing timetables and increase services east of Swansea and provide improved rail connections with key economic activity centres such as Cardiff, Bristol and London • Increase rail service frequency west of Swansea: Following the redoubling works the railway line west of Swansea (to and from Milford Haven and Pembroke Dock) has the potential for frequency enhancements. This would compliment planned improvements to stations and public transport interchanges across SWWITCH. • Increase rail service frequency on the Heart of Wales Line: The HOWL provides key connectivity to settlements to the north of SWWITCH, principally to mid Wales • Introduce integrated ticketing and/or smart card technology: It is anticipated that this may be a function which is delivered as a secondary objective of the Great Western Franchise. Integrated ticketing has been a long held aspiration as a means of providing an enhancement to the public transport network as a whole. While localised schemes have demonstrated some success with regards to integrated ticketing, a nationalised approach as facilitated by a large franchise, such as that of the Great Western Mainline, may serve to deliver the necessary step change • Review the business case for the reopening or creation of new stations on existing lines to freight or passenger use: The largely unprecedented growth in patronage on UK railways that have been experienced over the past decade may facilitate the need for a review of current rail provision and particularly whether new stations could be supported, particularly for more local movements. The outcomes of such a review would likely be sought in CP6 • Rail Freight: The sustained increase in road traffic on the UK road network of recent decades has led to increasing instances of congestion. Consequentially Rail Freight has increased by 60% in the last ten years and is expected to continue this trend. Consideration should therefore be given to whether more road freight can be transferred to rail within the SWWITCH region
3.3 Long term (2019/24 – CP6) • Open lines to passenger freight services: In association with a review of stations on existing lines, it is anticipated that should passenger growth be sustained at its current levels a review of currently disused or freight only lines may be required during the Control Period in order to take advantage of the modal shift and build for a long term transfer of
Page 75
trips to rail for areas which are currently poorly connected by rail • Light Rail Transit in Urban Areas: LRT has been often demonstrated to deliver a modal shift greater than any other public transport mode. It is therefore considered to be highly desirable, although it is also comparatively costly. LRT would be expected to provide a significant accessibility improvement for urban centres in SWWITCH • HS3: While the high speed rail link between London and Birmingham (HS2) is still the subject of debate, a major rail line improvement for the Great Western Line is considered as being needed in order to deliver significant benefits in the future. The current alignment, particularly that of the South Wales Mainline, is subject to numerous line speed limitations and a wholly new railway line would be required in order to deliver high speed rail and ensure connectivity in the long term
3.4 If these forward priorities are approved by Joint Committee they will be reported via the next Annual Progress Report of the RTP.
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 It is RECOMMENDED that:
I. Joint Committee endorses the proposal to update rail priorities for the region to ensure a consistent regional view is fed into All Wales Rail Planning processes II. Joint Committee approves the proposed short, medium and long term priorities for rail in the region
Page 76
Notes of Discussion
Project: SWWITCH Job No/Ref: 60304852
Purpose: Stakeholder Workshop Date held: 1 August 2013
Held at: Ivy Bush Royal Hotel, Carmarthen Made by: IM, CB, EM No. Item Action By Baseline Evidence base to highlight the relatively slow journey times between Pembrokeshire and stations east of Swansea Confirm principal commuting and business flows and overlay these journey patterns with the recommendations from the Regional Economic Strategy to highlight employment growth locations Five extra Fishguard trains were introduced on a trial basis (part-way through year 2 of the trial), so some datasets may not fully reflect the patronage growth which has been achieved Proposals must complement the committed investment including station improvements (Port Talbot) and electrification of the Great Western Main Line Freight issues must be considered in a holistic way across the wider network and ensure forecast growth is adequately supported Role for modal interchange must be encouraged to ensure rail aligns with bus / cycle / car Option Generation: East of Swansea Swansea station is poorly located relative to the main employment areas and the complementary transport networks are constrained. Access to the network must be improved Journey times to Port Talbot from Swansea are slow compared with other modes Significant investment in electrification and other infrastructure committed by 2018 Progression towards a clockface timetable of departures with regular half- hourly fast service. Frequency improvements for the Swanline services are essential, especially during the daytime. Scope for Swansea-Bristol electric service Significant new development at Baglan could help to strengthen the case for additional local services Length of IEP trains may be issue (are they going to be 9-car sets?). Queried whether Swansea depot would accommodate full-length sets. London trains are mostly empty arriving/leaving Swansea. Option Generation: West of Swansea to Carmarthen Bi-mode trains may be stabled elsewhere which may prevent the retention of the Carmarthen services Rolling stock quality is a concern – is there a role for bi-mode IEP trains? Station access needs to be improved Opportunities to deliver Swansea Loop West Junction improvements as part of the Port Talbot re-signalling programme Consider possible roles for the Swansea District Lines that could help to
T +44 (0) 113 391 6246 1 Callaghan Square F +44 (0)29 2067 4699 E-mail: [email protected] Cardiff www.aecom.com CF10 5BT Page: 1 of 3 Doc. FA/03 Revised: April 2009 United Kingdom C:\Users\mobbsi\Documents\SWWITCH\Stakeholder Workshop meeting notes.doc Page 77
Notes of Discussion
reduce journey times for selected flows Linked to the proposal above, examine the potential roles for new park and ride locations adjacent to the M4 (Velindre, Morriston) Extend Cardiff - London or other trains to Carmarthen via the Swansea District Line for faster journeys to Cardiff or beyond. District line is suitable for higher speeds although various restrictions currently exist. Extra platform may be needed at Swansea Option Generation: Carmarthen to Milford Haven Potential development of an enterprise zone at Milford Haven which could attract both new freight trains and employment opportunities Station improvements at Milford Haven awaiting funding Hourly service to Milford Haven operating at regular clockface intervals, but also needs to allow capacity for freight Role for limited stop early morning / evening business trains (London and back in a day) Scope for route clearance of IEP trains to Milford Haven? Requirement for selected new stations (Merlin’s Bridge) Need to consider arrival times to Carmarthen too Capacity of 2-car trains can be problematic at certain times of the day Bi-mode diesel/electric trains for Manchester-Milford service Park and ride potential at Clarbeston Road Option Generation: Pembroke Dock to Whitland Current constraints by slow journey times leads to high capacity utilisation of the single track branch Three level crossings where trains have to stop before passing over contribute to the slow timings Requirement for faster journey times to Cardiff at specific times of the day Shuttle to / from Whitland would not be supported – preference for retention of through services at least to Carmarthen Examine solutions to reduce operating costs (timetable / operating efficiencies) Rolling stock quality is poor Current timetable makes it impossible to run charter trains to Tenby. Option Generation: Clarbeston Road to Fishguard Significant increase in passenger usage following the introduction of 5 extra trains / day (circa 48,000 trips per annum) Rolling stock quality is poor Preference to through trains serving strategic destinations since station attracts a higher proportion of longer distance trips. Other than a gap affecting afternoon services, feedback suggests passengers are broadly happy with the timing of services Strong reluctance for shuttles to Clarbeston Road and interchange onto other modes even if this approach results in some timetable gaps Route offers a critical social inclusion function, especially for the 60+ groups Measures to attract additional ferry passengers should be aligned with connectivity improvements from Rosslare A route linking Fishguard and Pembroke Dock has been suggested Rail/sail market is currently the only growing market for the Fishguard ferry
T +44 (0) 113 391 6246 1 Callaghan Square F +44 (0)29 2067 4699 E-mail: [email protected] Cardiff www.aecom.com CF10 5BT Page: 2 of 3 Doc. FA/03 Revised: April 2009 United Kingdom C:\Users\mobbsi\Documents\SWWITCH\Stakeholder Workshop meeting notes.doc Page 78
Notes of Discussion
Option Generation: Heart of Wales Line Investment required to address speed constraints at level crossings – crossing closure is not always the answer but Powys provides examples of good practice Timing of trains restricts the opportunities for commuting and evening travel Long gap in northbound service in the morning Revise timetable to provide more convenient commuting opportunities into Swansea Possible commuter service to Cardiff via Swansea District line, avoiding Swansea Aspiration for higher frequencies (2 hourly from the busiest stations), faster trains, improved rolling stock Consider reducing end-to-end services to provide better out-and-back service both ends. Improve Sunday timetable, especially for leisure trips towards the Brecon Beacons National Park Review conclusions from the ongoing market research exercise to understand potential for new travel markets Examine the feasibility of developing an operating base at Llandovery Review the scope to procure improved rolling stock, possibly Class 158 for longer distance journeys Scope for infrastructure improvements to improve line speeds Package of measures to improve journey time competitiveness between Pontarddulais and Swansea (aspiration to restore the former direct route) Although the route has been used for freight in the past, it is restricted in gauge and train weight and causes track damage. Network Rail intends to continue with the current care and maintenance regime rather than undertaking large scale track renewals. Some lesser used stations could have reduced service or be closed. Option Generation: Freight Rail proposals above must consider the 2.1% long term growth covering various sectors Potential role for biomass trains Future development of waste trains Future development of inter-modal terminals and ensuring the capacity, capability robustness of the network to support these proposals Retention of the Fishguard freight loop if aspirations to serve this port are realistic Option Generation: New lines / complementary modes Discussion of the main features of the Swansea Nine Lines. The proposals also need to be considered alongside other improvements to help address sub-regional connectivity covering bus rapid transit and other modes to improve access to railway stations and local journeys within the Swansea City Region Concluding Comments Study needs to highlight the gaps identified and propose solutions linked to evidence
T +44 (0) 113 391 6246 1 Callaghan Square F +44 (0)29 2067 4699 E-mail: [email protected] Cardiff www.aecom.com CF10 5BT Page: 3 of 3 Doc. FA/03 Revised: April 2009 United Kingdom C:\Users\mobbsi\Documents\SWWITCH\Stakeholder Workshop meeting notes.doc Page 79 Agenda Item 6
SWWITCH PROGRAMME MANAGEMENT
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Joint Committee will be aware that SWWITCH Programme Management Group (PMG) was established in 2010, when the Regional Transport Consortium Grant (RTCG) replaced transport grant funding. The Group meets monthly and is responsible for overseeing progress on delivering RTP projects funded by the grant and reporting to both Management Group and Joint Committee.
1.2 This paper provides an update on RTCG spend during the first four months of the financial year and also provides a proposal for an approach to a three year programme.
2.0 RTCG PROGRESS IN 2013/14
2.1 As at the end of July 2013 (month four of the financial year), SWWITCH expenditure was as shown in table one below.
Table One – RTCG spend up to the end of July 2013 Element of RTCG Profiled Actual % of allocation spend spend remaining £k £k Regional Transport Plan capital 573 582 89 Road Safety Capital 53 49 95 Road Safety revenue 125 113 75 TOTAL 751 744
2.2 This represents good progress against profiled spend. However, with the exception of road safety revenue spend, it is a small proportion of the overall allocation. This means that there is significant projected spend during the last six months of the year, when weather disruption is likely to be worst.
2.3 SWWITCH Local Councils are well aware of the potential difficulties of a “back ended” programme and SWWITCH PMG provides a useful forum for discussing and challenging the progress of projects against the project milestones and deadlines submitted as part of the grant application process.
2.4 PMG also scrutinises any projects flagged as “Amber” or “Red” by project managers in monthly updates to try and determine the level of risk to the overall programme, to try and develop mitigation and ultimately to ensure that SWWITCH spends all the available funding in any year on improving access and transport in the region.
2.5 Comparison with other consortia in Wales is possible on a quarterly basis as statistics are collated for quarterly all Wales Programme Management Group meetings. The last such meeting was held in July 2013 and table two overleaf shows how SWWITCH performed in comparison with the three other consortia in quarter one of 2013/14.
Page 80
Table Two – Consortia 1st quarter spend comparisons Consortium forecast Q1 Actual Q1 Difference £k £k % RTP and RSG RTP and RSG SWWITCH 684 547 20% under Sewta 1,046 520 50% under TraCC 1,241 1,217 2% under Taith 319 270 15% under
2.6 There are a few key task for PMG arising from the July all Wales Programme Management Group meeting as follows:
• Each consortium has been asked to prepare 3-4 “case studies” of projects delivered using RTCG, to demonstrate how they have contributed to Welsh Government priorities on the economy and reducing deprivation. The case studies must include monitoring of outputs and (where possible) outcomes to demonstrate they have achieved what was intended. A proforma has been provided to consortia for this purpose and this is attached as Appendix A to this paper. The case studies are to be submitted by the middle of September and the chosen projects for SWWITCH are:
o Access to Kenfig Industrial estate o Swansea bus Station o Fishguard and Goodwick Station o Carmarthen to Swansea bus corridor
• Consortia are being asked to identify projects in their programmes which have potential land and compensation costs. The Welsh Government is concerned at the impact such schemes have on ongoing funding streams and is considering passing the risk for such costs to consortia • Consortia are asked to ensure their Programme Management Groups carry out peer group reviews of projects as they progress through the development stages to consider compensation issues (as per bullet point above) and also the case for “value engineering”
3.0 THREE YEAR PROGRAMME DEVELOMENT
3.1 At the last Joint Committee meeting the development of a three year RTP programme (including the current 2013/14 year and up to 2015/16) was discussed. It was agreed that SWWITCH PMG should prepare a draft for consideration by Management Group.
3.2 The context for developing a three year programme was the squeeze on public sector funding and the emergence of the City Region in South West Wales. The view was that transport improvements should support the aims of the regional regeneration strategy.
3.3 SWWITCH PMG looked at a number of options for the development of a three year programme as follows:
Page 81
• A programme which assumed that a significant portion of the annual funding would be ring fenced to Active Travel Bill schemes, so the preponderance of projects would be related to improving walking and cycling facilities • A programme which continued to focus on a wide range of projects at different stages of development, but which were broadly achievable from RTP funding (albeit over several years for more expensive projects) • A programme which supported the City Region by focusing on more strategic projects such as roads which opened up development sites, strategic rail and bus interchange projects and regional cycling infrastructure
3.4 SWWITCH Management Group considered these principles at a meeting in July 2013 and proposes that SWWITCH adopts the City Region three year programme approach. This would mean that the basis for projects (from the RTP programme pool) to be for delivered in the next two years of RTCG funding will be:
• Creating access to new job locations thus encouraging inward investment • Focused on providing access to jobs • Strategic interchanges to promote multi modal commuting and business journeys • Regional strategic cycling infrastructure
3.5 Management Group accepted that in the scale of RTCG funding available many of the larger projects may only be funded through development stages, so that they will be ready to deliver when other funding opportunities arise (for example via the City Region).
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 It is RECOMMENDED that:
1. Joint Committee notes progress to date on the 2013/14 RTCG delivery 2. Joint Committee approves the four projects proposed as SWWITCH “Case studies” 3. Joint Committee approves the principle of developing RTCG programmes for the next two years based on a “City Regions” approach
Page 82
Item 6 – Appendix A – Proforma for “Case Study” submissions to Welsh Government
Scheme name Scheme type (please select one from the following: walking and cycling, bus, highways) Brief scheme description (include description of outputs and location)
Total Scheme Cost (£ ‘000) Contribution from RTCG (£ ‘000) Match Funding (£ ‘000) please indicate sources Rationale for the scheme (what were the site specific problems and opportunities and why was this scheme a priority)
Fit with Programme for Government Priorities (in particular Sustaining Jobs and Economic Growth and Tackling Poverty)
Scheme benefits (include reference to site specific transport benefits, monitoring information etc.)
Wider scheme benefits (including reference to non-transport specific benefits)
Stakeholder Feedback (include reference to any positive stakeholder feedback e.g. from community groups and businesses)
Page 83 Agenda Item 7
NHS RE-CONFIGURATION AND ACCESS AND TRANSPORT ISSUES
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Joint Committee will be aware that major changes in the way acute health services in Wales are provided have been the subject of recent consultations and have raised considerable concerns and protests. Whilst very few people have concerns about the objectives of the reviews, which relate to creating centres of excellence for specialities, it is the detail as to which locations will lose specific services (for example A&E, neo natal and consultant led obstetrics) which is causing the problems.
1.2 In the South West Wales region there are two relevant Health Boards:
• Abertawe Bro Morgannwg (ABMU) (Swansea, Neath Port Talbot and including Bridgend) • Hywel Dda (Carmarthenshire, Pembrokeshire and including Ceredigion)
1.3 Both of these Boards have consulted on changes to the way services are delivered in future, with the Hywel Dda consultation ending last autumn and the results of that consultation having been analysed. The ABMU consultation ended in July 2013 and the responses have yet to be analysed. Whichever options for change are finally agreed, the inevitable outcome of creating fewer, but more specialised units will be that some patients, visitors and staff will have further to travel.
2.0 WELSH GOVERNMENT PROPOSALS TO MANAGE ACCESS IMPLICATIONS
2.1 Frances Duffy (former Director of Transport) and Colin Eaketts from the Welsh Government’s (WG) Health Department asked to attend SWWITCH Management Group in July 2013 to discuss the access and transport implications of the NHS re- configuration. Unfortunately both had to give apologies for the meeting and Colin Eaketts subsequently met with the SWWITCH Co-ordinator to outline the Government’s plans.
2.2 The WG wants to start working now with the Health Boards, the Ambulance Trust and the Regional Transport Consortia to try and prepare for, and address the potential access gaps, which will result from changes to clinical service delivery in Wales.
2.3 The WG proposes setting up working groups to look at each of 3 strategic health areas (South Wales, Hywel Dda and North Wales). SWWITCH would have an interest in both the South Wales and Hywel Dda working groups.
2.4 The WG is keen to move this ahead quickly and are seeking senior level nominations from consortia to the relevant working groups. The Co-ordinator confirmed that whilst SWWITCH would be interested in being part of these groups, the decision on appropriate representation would be for Management Group and Joint Committee.
2.5 The WG wants these groups to consider non-emergency patient transport and
Page 84
opportunities for more integrated planning and delivery of such services in the context of the emerging Regional Network Strategies and regional bus funding.
2.6 Within SWWITCH there has been engagement with individual health boards on transport and access over a number of years. In addition the Travel Planning team have been engaging with the Health Boards to try and encourage improved and sustainable access to major health sites for a number of years.
2.7 Based on the high level of knowledge and understanding of key issues associated with these areas it is proposed that the following Officers are nominated to represent SWWITCH on the two WG working groups:
• South Wales Programme Group – Dave Griffiths (NPT) • Hywel Dda Group – Steve Pilliner (CCC)
2.8 The first meeting of the Hywel Dda Group is planned for September and invitations will be issued by WG shortly. However, the first meeting of the South Wales Programme Group has already been held and the Co-ordinator attended as a temporary representative.
3.0 FIRST MEETING OF THE SOUTH WALES GROUP
3.1 This meeting was held on 15th August 2013 and was attended by:
• Welsh Government • Sewta and SWWITCH Co-ordinators • South Wales Programme Manager • Wales Ambulance Service representative
3.2 The South Wales Programme Manager confirmed that work by the WG is focused on the Programme Groups and not the individual Health Boards. This means that Health Boards are not tied to any recommendations of the Programme Group but will be encouraged to adopt the recommendations.
3.3 The main focus of the first meeting was to agree Terms of Reference and a Project Initiation Document. Drafts of these were circulated to attendees and comments have been sought with a view to amendments being made and (hopefully) agreement on final versions of the two documents taking place at the next meeting.
3.4 Other key messages SWWITCH/Sewta fed into the meeting were:
• The projects also needed to consider ways in which access to health services (rather than simply transport) could be addressed • The timescales for the Regional Network Strategies and the need for Health Boards to respond to the consultation • The expectation that funding for supported bus services and community transport would be under threat in the current economic climate and thus • The expectation that Health Board budgets for transport would be identified and considered as part of the project • That both SWWITCH and Sewta have decision making structures
Page 85
• If the current focus of the review (acute services) generated changes to public and community transport to address identified gaps, future reviews which looked at more general services may present different results and gaps and simply create a higher overall demand for transport • In addition SWWITCH raised the point that with two Health Boards involved in the region, great care would be needed to make sure that any changes or additional emphasis on access to meet one re-configuration did not adversely affect the other Health Board proposals
4.0 NEXT STEPS
4.1 SWWITCH Management Group considered the above at its meeting in August and was clear that the high profile of access to health issues meant this should be subject to Joint Committee discussion and decision making. MG views were that it is right that SWWITCH should be engaged as access to health care is crucial across the region and forms part of the objectives for the SWWITCH Regional Network Strategy.
4.2 However, MG believes that SWWITCH needs to make sure that this process does not end with the WG and Health Boards handing over all the responsibility without the resources and capacity to manage the expected access problems that may arise from the NHS re-configuration in Wales. MG suggested that it may be appropriate for SWWITCH to write to Frances Duffy setting out a willingness to be involved but seeking assurances that this will be a partnership approach and that Health Boards take responsibility for appropriate steps to improve their systems to support good access.
4.3 The next meeting of the south Wales Programme Group is expected to be in the second week of September and the first Hywel Dda Group meeting will be before the end of September.
5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 It is RECOMMENDED that:
1. Joint Committee notes the setting up of health and transport groups to address access issues post NHS re-configuration 2. Joint Committee approves the Officer nominations to represent SWWITCH 3. Joint Committee notes concerns about expectations that consortia can address all access issues related to NHS re-configuration
Page 86 Agenda Item 8
SWWITCH ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Following the submission and acceptance of the Regional Transport Plans (RTPs) in 2009, the Welsh Government (WG) has required Consortia to prepare Annual Progress Reports (APRs) setting out what progress they have made in each year towards achieving their RTP objectives.
SWWITCH has already submitted APRs for:
• 2010/11 • 2011/12
1.2 The guidance for Consortia for the 2012/13 APR was issued in early August 2013 and as this was later than has previously been the case, the Welsh Government has extended the submission deadline from the end of September to 18th October 2013.
1.3 This paper sets out the requirements and timescales proposed for the SWWITCH APR and proposes delegated responsibility for the final submission to SWWITCH Management Group.
2.0 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT GUIDANCE
2.1 As for previous years the main focus of the guidance is to get a concise and yet informative representation of progress made by each consortium in terms of project delivery and policy development. The APR is intended to be of use to the WG and other key stakeholders, but also of interest to residents, visitors and businesses in the region. It is critical therefore that it is user friendly.
2.2 As for 11/12 the report must include Road Safety and well as RTP spend and delivery. Unlike previous years there is no overall page limit set, albeit the Executive Summary is set at a maximum of 4 sides of A4.
2.3 The guidance is attached as Appendix A to this paper and is similar to that issued for the last two APRs. The main differences are:
• The submission on 18th October is to be bilingual – in previous years there was additional time to provide a bilingual version. In practice this draws forward the 18/10/13 deadline by at least a week
• There is a much stronger emphasis on monitoring and evidence related to what has been achieved through RTCG and match funding
• There is more emphasis on showing the RTP is helping to support Government priorities on the economy and sustainable development
• There is a requirement to include in the monitoring plan copies of the Civil Parking Enforcement Annual Reports
Page 87
3.0 PROPOSED WAY FORWARD
3.1 It is proposed that the timetable set out on Appendix B attached is adopted for the 2012/13 APR development. This represents a challenging timetable in the context of the delivery of the current year’s programme and the completion of the “case studies” for the Minister (see Item 6), but it is critical to meet the deadlines and to prove that the Regional Transport Consortia Grant is providing good value.
3.2 The main document is most likely to be of interest to stakeholders and will concentrate on headlines facts and low levels of jargon. All the supporting detail and evidence will be in appendices. It is proposed that the main APR and not the extensive appendices should be translated by the 18th October deadline. This significantly increases the time available to develop the document and the Appendices can be translated post submission
3.3 It is proposed that as for previous years SWWITCH aims at a main document of approximately 20 pages (including photographs and plans).
3.4 As the submission deadline for the APR is “between Joint Committees”, it is proposed that SWWITCH Management Group be given delegated responsibility to approve the final submission and that copy of the final document is then forwarded to Joint Committee for information.
4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 It is RECOMMENDED that:
1. Joint Committee notes the requirements of and timescales for the 2012/13 Annual Progress Report submission 2. Joint Committee delegates responsibility to approve the APR submission to SWWITCH Management Group 3. A copy of the final document be circulated to Joint Committee
Page 88
Item 8 – Appendix A – 2012/13 APR Guidance
Introduction - This guidance note sets out the content and timing of the Regional Transport Plan Annual Progress Reports for FY2012/13. The Annual Progress Report will provide details to Welsh Government on the impact of regional transport delivery, enabling this evidence to be judged both on its own terms and in relation to other Government spending areas and policy, including Programme for Government and Welsh Government economic priorities. It is intended Annual Progress Reports will form part of the evidence base in considering any future funding allocations. Regional Transport Consortia should also consider the Annual Progress Reports as a good vehicle for circulating evidence of the effectiveness and benefits of their transport programmes to the general public, service users and other stakeholders. For 2012/13, the Annual Progress Report is required to include spend on Regional Transport Plan and Road Safety schemes. Regional Transport Consortia should also consider the opportunity to fulfil monitoring and reporting requirement of the SEA (Strategic Environmental Assessment) Regulations for Wales.
Timing - The Report should be submitted to the Welsh Government bilingually no later than the 18 October 2013.
Structure of Annual Progress Report - The Executive Summary of the Annual Progress Report should be divided into three sections, on 4 sides of A4, not including Appendices, submitted as a Word document into the Transport Planning email inbox.
Executive Summary To include details on: • Regional Transport Plan schemes • Road Safety schemes • Monitoring Plans and progress against key targets and indicators.
Supporting information, including the full Regional Transport Plan Monitoring Plan should be supplied as Appendices.
Executive Summary - This should comprise of the following; • Details on indicators, red / amber / green summary progress table, and brief commentary on delivery progress and key achievements. To include the key outputs and benefits from 2012/13 Regional Transport Consortia Grant spend. • Summary table and map outlining all Regional Transport Plan capital funding allocation and spend in 2012/13 and including any match funding contributions. • Summary table and map outlining Road Safety Capital and Revenue spend in 2012/13.
• Brief description outlining Regional Transport Plan core costs revenue spend in 2012/13. • Summary of Monitoring Plan and progress against key targets and indicators.
Page 89
Supporting Information - Regional Transport Consortia should use these sections to provide the additional information required to evidence the value and benefits of their Regional Transport Grant spend.
Transport Policy and Planning Context • To include very brief summary of relevant local, regional and national policies and strategies and commentary on emerging issues and opportunities, including to the delivery of the Programme for Government. • To include brief summary on how the spend in 2012/13 links to the Regional Transport Plan vision and objectives. • To include summary of any material changes in Regional Transport Plan priorities / objectives and any significant departures from the original Regional Transport Plan programme submitted in September 2009. • To include brief summary on the relationship between the Regional Transport Plan and relevant local authority strategic plans. • To include an assessment of how the funding and projects supported have contributed to promoting Wales’ economic competiveness and any specific information on jobs created. • To include brief commentary on the role and contribution of the Regional Transport Plan to meeting the key Welsh Government commitments on sustainable development.
RTP Spend • To include supporting commentary, maps, photographs and evidence of benefits on Regional Transport Plan capital spend in 2012/13, outlining links to national and regional transport priorities, supporting Wales’ economic competiveness and setting out any match-funding contributions. • To include summary table on Regional Transport Plan capital spend changes in 2012/13 to show the final spend in comparison with the original allocations and brief explanations for the changes. • To include summary table and supporting commentary outlining details on programme and scheme progress, with particular reference to the Welsh Government Key Stage Approval process. • To include table and brief commentary on the links between the 2012/13 programme, in particular for Preparatory Works, and the approved Regional Transport Plan capital spend in 2013/14. • To include table describing 2012/13 core costs revenue spend in support of regional transport consortia functions. This should detail the main areas where it was spent, (i.e. staff, resources, travel). • To include what proportion of the core revenue grant is spent on project and programme management.
Road Safety Spend • To include table and supporting commentary, maps, photographs and evidence of benefits on Road Safety capital and revenue spend in 2012/13. This should detail the areas where it was spent, (i.e. staff, resources, training), and outline the links to national and regional transport priorities and match funding contributions. • To include summary table on Road Safety capital and revenue spend changes in 2012/13 which should show the final spend in comparison with the original allocations.
Page 90
• To include supporting commentary outlining any revenue spend implications of capital works undertaken in 2012/13.
Monitoring Plans • Full copy of your final 2012/13 Regional Transport Plan Monitoring Plan including detailed table and charts demonstrating progress against Regional Transport Plan targets and indicators, referencing key outputs and outcomes against completed schemes. • To include details on outcomes achieved on completed key schemes using evidence from before and after monitoring. • To include details on schemes to be monitored in 2013/14 and commentary on how Monitoring information is used to influence future programme development. • The table of performance against Key Performance Indicators • A statement of compliance with the Traffic Management Act, including copies of Civil Parking Enforcement Annual Reports for all relevant local authorities in your region • A review on compliance with your SEA indicators.
Monitoring Plans should be aligned with Welsh Government National Transport Plan monitoring and information on the baseline report for 2011 can be found at http://wales.gov.uk/topics/statistics/headlines/transport2012/120322/?lang=en.
Additional Information • To include a summary of the structures and decision making processes in place to oversee Regional Transport Plan and Road Safety delivery supplied as a separate Appendix. • To include any evidence of the partnership/collaboration approach taken to facilitate Regional Transport Plan and Road Safety delivery supplied as a separate Appendix. o No. starting within 3 months of the planned start date o Percentage of the original budget actually incurred on those schemes. • Number of projects planned to start in each quarter compared to actual number of projects started in each quarter. (NB: Baseline to be derived from final delivery plans.)
Page 91
Item 8 – Appendix B – Timescales for the APR submission
Time Activity
September • LAS start to gather evidence/photos etc • SWWITCH to begin preparation of outline and executive summary • SWWITCH to secure external capacity for monitoring plan • Report APR timescales and content to JC (6/9) and seek delegated powers to MG • LAs to continue to gather evidence and to submit monitoring by 23rd Sep • SWWITCH prepare outline report for MG approval (27/9)
October • LAs submit all information to SWWITCH by 4th October • SWWITCH collates and refines all information • External report on monitoring completed and provided to SWWITCH • SWWITCH circulates final documents to MG (electronically) by 10th October and seeks approval for translation • Approved document translated by 17th October • Submission to WG – 18th October • Post submission translation of Appendices by 31st October
Page 92 Agenda Item 9
CURRENT CONSULTATIONS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Enterprise & Business Committee of the National Assembly for Wales has invited evidence from interested parties to its inquiry into the Wales & Borders Rail Franchise.
1.2 The closing date for comments is Friday 13th September 2013 and this paper explains the context for the inquiry and includes a draft response for consideration.
2.0 WALES AND BORDERS FRANCHISE INQUIRY
2.1 The invitation to contribute to this inquiry has been sent to a wide range of organisations and the terms of reference and key issues are set out on Appendix A to this paper. In summary the committee is seeking to understand:
• In what ways the current franchise has worked well or not so well • How priorities can be developed to create the best level of service for users from 2018 • Is it possible to improve accessibility by rail at an affordable price and yet reduce the burden on the public purse • What are the key issues for the next franchise and how could key public sector bodies be engaged in the process
2.2 A draft response has been prepared by SWWITCH Officer Working Group. It is a concise response dealing with key strategic points and does seek to answer each and every issue raised.
2.3 This response was considered by SWWITCH Management Group on 23rd August 2013 and subject to some minor amendment following discussion. Management Group agreed that this revised response should be subject to Joint Committee consideration and discussion.
2.4 The final draft SWWITCH response is attached as Appendix B and Joint Committee views on the strategic nature of what is proposed and the actual response are sought.
3.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
3.1 It is RECOMMENDED that:
1. Joint Committee approves the response to the Enterprise and Business committee’s Inquiry into the Rail Franchise
Page 93
Item 9 – Appendix B – Proposed SWWITCH Response to consultation on NAfW Enterprise & Business Committee’s Inquiry into the Wales & Borders Franchise
Introduction
SWWITCH (South West Wales Integrated Transport Consortium) is a partnership of four local authorities comprising Carmarthenshire County Council, Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council, Pembrokeshire County Council and the City & County of Swansea.
The consortium is responsible for developing transport policy and delivering transport projects in the region, working closely with both the private sector, local interest groups and the Welsh Government.
1. What lessons can be learnt from the current franchise? 1.1 SWWITCH would wish to continue the good level of engagement enjoyed with the current franchise operator with any future franchise operator. This has been very helpful in promoting collaborative working, understanding the natural limitations of the operator and also identifying common opportunities. This open mode of working would be welcomed from the next operator of the franchise. 1.2 The current franchise model is considered to be lacking in that it presently does not incentivise the current operator to invest in the franchise, and promotes the status quo. SWWITCH thinks that the current operator has done well to adhere to the requirements of the franchise, but very little progress has been made to improve services offered over the term as a consequence of it not being a target or requirement of the franchise. 1.3 SWWITCH believes that there are likely to be a number of routes from which additional growth could be gained if served with greater frequency of services and improved quality in terms of rolling stock. The franchise operator is not however encouraged by the terms of the franchise to do this and opportunities may therefore have been missed. 1.4 Careful consideration over the length of the franchise is needed. A longer franchise would allow a franchisee to make brave and bold investment decisions, if the terms of the franchise set targets for improvement and encouraged innovation to meet growth and changing needs. A shorter period may mean there is unwillingness or inability to raise capital to secure significant improvements
2. What priorities can be identified to ensure passenger rail services in Wales and the Borders provide the best possible service for passengers from 2018? 2.1 The most common complaint in respect of current services is about the rolling stock being operated on the Wales & Borders franchise. The units are functional but do not promote public transport as being a quality alternative to private transport. SWWITCH has held public consultation events for a number of topics and when discussing rail services, it is the rolling stock which will commonly draw comment. The frequency and reliability of the current franchise is largely reported to be of an acceptable standard. SWWITCH would be very pleased to see an
Page 94
improvement to the rolling stock both in terms of the quality of the passenger environment and also in terms of capacity, especially on the longer distance services to Manchester, where three car units should be provided as standard.
2.2 SWWITCH would like to see a number of improvements to the rolling stock which would promote the benefits of rail as opposed to car travel. Rail can have a number of advantages which are not being fully utilised at present; improving the train as an environment for working primarily through the implementation of Wi-Fi would be advantageous to passengers.
2.3 As the Inquiry will be aware, the National Assembly for Wales is currently considering the Active Travel Bill. SWWITCH believes that the Wales & Borders franchise should have an important role to play in facilitating multi-modal journeys from bicycle to train in order to encourage multi modal journeys and to enable rail passengers to access areas which are not directly connected to the railway line. This endorsement would however require a much more robust policy in respect of the transit of bicycles and would also need to be accompanied by an improvement of the rolling stock to allow the carriage of greater numbers of bicycles. Anecdotal feedback from the SWWITCH region would suggest that many cyclists are unable to carry their bicycle on the train each day because of this capacity constraint and so are having to make alternative arrangements, or indeed are making the decision not to cycle at all. SWWITCH believes this is a market that could be greatly expanded although it acknowledges that the provision for cycling as something that is intrinsically linked with rail would require a brave and innovative approach in respect of future franchises. However, in the context of the Welsh Government’s commitment to the Active Travel Bill, it would seem important to address this at the franchise stage.
2.4 Rail usage and the promotion of sustainable transport modes would also benefit from increasing service frequency, reduced journey times and consideration of the opening or reopening of stations where appropriate and justified.
3. How can service delivery after 2018 deliver connectivity and value for money for passengers while reducing the burden on the tax payer? 3.1 SWWITCH would welcome the consideration of alternative franchise models. A ‘not for dividend’ franchise’ is considered to be a potential means by which benefits could be delivered while also reducing local rail costs. The potential conflicts with competition law would obviously need to be considered where such a model was being run alongside other franchises operating under more conventional means.
3.2 In 2018 the electrification of the south Wales mainline will be completed and this alongside the new franchise should allow opportunities for blue sky thinking over the next 3 years about the best way to take advantages of the quicker, quieter and faster electric trains and the potential re-configuration of the franchise, alongside the GW franchise to create the best service possible for South west Wales.
Page 95
3.3 With the announcement that Swansea Bay is the first City Region in Wales (co- terminus with SWWITCH), it is important that any model for the new franchise focuses on ensuring that rail plays it part in helping to create an accessibility and connected City Region where businesses can flourish.
3.4 SWWITCH would not welcome the introduction of any alternative model where reliability and/or frequencies are not assured to increase with increasing passenger numbers, where rolling stock is not or cannot be improved or where it does not result in the reduction of journey times.
Page 96 The Enterprise and Business Committee is undertaking an inquiry into the future of the Wales and Borders Rail Franchise.
The terms of reference for the inquiry are:
What lessons can be learnt from the current franchise? What priorities can be identified to ensure that rail passenger services in Wales and the borders provide the best possible service for passengers from 2018? How can service delivery after 2018 deliver connectivity and value for money for passengers while reducing the burden on the tax payer?
Key issues
Issues that the Committee is considering as part of these terms of reference include:
Whether the current franchise meets passenger needs and what lessons should be learnt from it; How passengers should be involved in the franchise development and delivery; How communities and local government / Regional Transport Consortia should be involved. Could they be involved in specifying the franchise or perhaps even in delivering services? The management model to be adopted, including the Welsh Government’s proposal for a not-for-dividend franchise; How the franchise specification should improve the passenger experience, including issues such as franchise length, targets / incentives and the core service standards which should be included; The routes, particularly cross-border routes, which should be included; The rolling stock needed for the new franchise. What factors need to be considered and how this should be procured? Will new rolling stock be required?
Page 97 Whether additional lines, enhancements to existing lines, new stations or other infrastructure are needed; and Whether the franchise can support an enhanced relationship between Network Rail and the franchise operator and the benefits this might bring.
Invitation to contribute to the inquiry
The Committee welcomes responses from both individuals and organisations.
Generally, we ask for submissions to be made in writing because it is normal practice for us to publish evidence on our internet site so that it becomes part of the public record. However, we are also able to accept evidence in audio or video format.
The Committee welcomes contributions in English or Welsh and will consider responses to the inquiry and hold oral evidence sessions during the autumn term.
If you wish to submit evidence, please send an electronic copy of your submission to [email protected]
Alternatively, you can write to:
Dr Siân Phipps Clerk, Enterprise and Business Committee National Assembly for Wales Cardiff Bay, CF99 1NA.
Submissions should arrive by Friday 13 September 2013 and should preferably be no longer than four pages of A4, have numbered paragraphs and in a word format. It may not be possible to take into account responses received after this date.
Page 98 Agenda Item 10
PARTNER UPDATES
1.0 ARRVIA TRAINS WALES
1.1 Train Service Performance For rail periods 1402, 1403 and 1404 (four weeks ending 26 July 2013), Arriva Trains Wales’ (ATW) Public Performance Measure (PPM) figures were recorded as 96.0% (93.9%), 95.0% (95.3%) and 92.5% (94.7%) respectively, the figures shown in brackets are the PPM figures for the corresponding periods of the previous year. The moving annual average stands at 93.2%.
These three periods have yielded satisfactory performance results and provided a high degree of consistency and reliability for our customers. There has been an improved degree of stability within the rail infrastructure and operations generally with no major incidents or prolonged disruption. All ATW employee functions have performed well and the fleet has again delivered excellent results. For the summer months, contingencies are already in place for fleet for the potential effects of hot summer weather and an agreed summer strengthening plan is being implemented for the school holidays.
May saw the opening of the new Loughor Viaduct which also reintroduced double track operation through Gowerton with a new additional platform provided at the station. This presented an opportunity to amend the train service (with no additional subsidy) and for an additional number of trains to call at the station, the enhanced calling pattern has been warmly received by customers and stakeholders. Further enhancements may be introduced in the long term but this is dependent on resource and platform capabilities at both Swansea and Cardiff Central. Train service performance effects are currently being reviewed.
1.2 Station works
• DDA - Neath: Now have NR investment letter for ATW approval along with NSIP elements of work, expected on site late 2013. Station Humps: Trial site for alternative construction method to be Builth Road expected to commence during August 2013
• ATW funded projects - Carmarthen Car Park: Site investigations are still in progress and there has been a resultant delay to the scheme. Ticket Vending Machines: Installations commenced with 36 now in place, completion of programme of 71 by end September 2013
• NSIP projects - CIS - Phase 7: The display at Llandovery is now installed awaiting final commissioning prior to going live. Neath: Subject to all parties’, this scheme is likely to commence in September 2013.Port Talbot: Further discussions have taken place around the ownership of the footbridge. The tender pre-qualification has been completed and a detailed design planned for completion Jan 2014.
1.3 December timetable changes A revised timetable commences on 08 December with no significant changes for West Wales.
Page 99
2.0 COMMUNITY TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION (CTA)
2.1 State of the Sector survey 2013 Following our 2010 survey, we have recently sent out a follow-on survey to CT providers across Wales. This second State of the Sector is more detailed than the previous one, and we hope to complete the work during the autumn. This will provide us, and stakeholder organisations, with valuable information on areas such as staff and volunteers, vehicles and service journeys, funding and future challenges.
2.2 RTSG and Regional Network Strategies (RNS) CTA Wales has been working with all four RTCs on the CT element of the draft strategies over the last few months, and has been asked to develop training packages for the CT sector as well as car scheme network projects in two of the regions. We will be holding a specific consultation event for the CT sector on the draft SWWITCH RNS in Carmarthen on Wednesday, 4 September. We are also members of the RTSG Outcomes group set up by Welsh Government.
2.3 Gower Bus Surgery CTA Wales was one of the partners attending a Bus User surgery in Penclawdd on 26 July. Issues discussed included evening transport, greater use of transport hubs, s.22 fully or semi-flexible transport across a wider service area and the lack of through ticketing arrangements with CT services.
2.4 European Paralympic Championships 2014 Following the success of our work in the lead-up to the 2012 Paralympic Games organising accessible transport for countries basing their pre-games training camps in Wales, CTA has been asked to provide similar support to the Swansea 2014 International Paralympic Committee (IPC) Athletics European Championships. This will be a bigger project than the Paralympics, with up to 27 teams arriving in the area with varying transport requirements. The new logo (below) was unveiled at Swansea University during August.
2.5 Health Transport CTA Wales continues its involvement with the national implementation board of the Welsh Government NEPT project, which has been extended to March 2014 to ensure transfer of best practice and mainstreaming of successful pilots. The board will also advise the Minister on the shape of a “mixed economy” of transport and what a future model of NEPT should look like in Wales. We are also working with the Wales Renal Network to look at the use of community transport in taking patients to dialysis. In the SWWITCH area specifically, CTA Wales has been
Page 100
working with the ABMU Health Board to further develop NEPT pilots in which the City and County of Swansea Social Services transport is involved in out-patient and patient discharge work at Singleton and Morriston, and DANSA CT and Neath Port Talbot CT are both involved with Tonna Hospital.
2.6 Staffing Following staff changes earlier this year, Rhian Higgins has been appointed as CTA Wales’ new Research Officer. She has previously worked for Pembrokeshire County Council on the Greenways project, and she will be taking forward the State of the Sector Survey as her first project.
3.0 BUS USERS UK
3.1 Regional Transport Services Grant The level of queries about the service changes and reductions following the restructured Regional Transport Services Grant has increased.
The Welsh Government funded Bus Compliance Officers have had success in achieving service amendments and improvements in punctuality and reliability. They also monitor services on behalf of the Regional Transport Consortia for RTSG purposes. The operators have welcomed the BCOs' re-appearance and much good work has been done in observing and reporting poor performance.
3.2 Regional Network Strategies Bus users are responding to all four transport strategy consultations.
3.3 Other news and updates
• Committees and working parties: PTUC; National Partnership Forum for Older People in Wales (NPF) ministerial advisory group; RTSG quality outcomes; disabled person’s passenger charter.
• Bus users will be attending in Swansea in September to hear about First Cymru’s progress on looking after passenger with disabilities.
• Surgeries held: Machynlleth, Blackwood, Caerphilly and Cardiff (350 people). Five surgeries over two days are planned for north Wales 24/25 September. Ten surgeries are planned for the Sewta area probably two a day over five non consecutive days.
• Bus Users is conducting a review into progress against our SENSE report
4.0 WELSH LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION (WLGA)
4.1 Highways and Transportation Compact There has been little feedback from Welsh Government on the future of the Highways & Transportation Compact and the various workstreams that were established. All work is currently on hold.
Page 101
However, some of the areas of work will still need to be progressed because the financial pressures have not disappeared. In relation to the preparation of the next round of Transport Plans (existing plans end 2014/15) an options report is being prepared for consideration by the Minister in the near future.
In addition the Minister made a statement in which she announced her intentions to review a range of routes with a view to including them as part of the Trunk Road network – in particular where they provide access to Enterprise Zones, business and tourist locations.
4.2 Wales Passenger Transport Users’ Committee The Minister has commissioned a review into the Wales Passenger Transport Users Committee by Viv Sugar from Consumer Futures Wales.
4.3 Active Travel Bill Progress The Active Travel (Wales) Bill places a requirement on local authorities to continuously improve facilities and routes for walkers and cyclists and to prepare maps identifying current and potential future routes for their use. The Bill also requires new road schemes to consider the needs of pedestrians and cyclists at design stage. The Bill is currently at Stage 3 of 4. Amendments to the Bill can be tabled by any Assembly Member and these will be considered by the Assembly in Plenary on 1st October. Stage 4 is a vote by the Assembly to approve the final Bill and this is expected in November. After which the Bill will receive Royal Assent with a Commencement Order scheduled for January 2014.
During Stage 2 proceedings, the Minister for Culture and Sport, John Griffiths AM, made various commitments to consider and discuss issues raised by amendments ahead of the Stage 3 debate. The issues are the promotion of active travel, providing for walkers and cyclists in highway construction and improvement works and the review of the operation of the Act.
Two sets of guidance are being prepared in time for the commencement of the Bill. Welsh Government is due to publish the consultation draft Delivery Guidance in August with a 12 week consultation period. This guidance will cover consultation methods, mapping and what is required to meet the duty of continuous improvement. The issue of funding for undertaking these duties has not featured in the Welsh Government’s discussions and we therefore await the consultation document in anticipation that funding arrangements will be covered in more detail.
The design guidance will be out for consultation in November. This guidance will contain standards for the design and construction of and a departure from standards procedure.
Although John Griffiths is the Minister responsible for the passage of the Bill, the Minister responsible for implementing and funding the Bill is Edwina Hart. The Bill was originally introduced by Carl Sargeant who was very supportive of the Bill and directed RTCs to allocate a proportion of their capital budgets to Active Travel. It is unclear whether Active Travel enjoys the same support under the new Minister and as a result, the level of funding that local authorities could expect to see directed at active travel routes also remains unclear.
Page 102
4.4 Road Casualty Reduction Partnership The Road Casualty Reduction Partnership Manager has met with the Minister, accompanied by the Assistant Chief Constable of Dyfed Powys Police and a Superintendent from North Wales Police. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss Welsh Government’s support for the Partnership and the interrelationship between WG funding and income from Speed Awareness Courses (SAC) from the police service. The Association of Chief Police Officers wants to ensure that income from SACs supplements, and does not substitute for, WG funding.
The meeting was positive but the Minister wants reassurance on the effectiveness of speed cameras and is undertaking a review of:
• The impact of speed cameras on road safety in Wales, including the value for money of their deployment • The governance of the Partnership and the nature of the Welsh Government’s relationship with it • Opportunities to secure savings and / or enable more focused speed enforcement.
A meeting of the Partnership is being arranged for early September to ensure all partners have an input to the review process.
4.5 Road Safety The Road Safety Framework for Wales was published on 19th July. You can view the published Framework at the following link: Welsh Government | Road safety
4.6 European Matters On 27 June, the UK Government announced the Structural Funds allocations (European Regional Development Fund and European Social Fund) for West Wales and the Valleys and East Wales, as well as other parts of the UK for 2014- 2020. This follows the UK Government announcement that Wales would receive €2.145bn in Structural Funds from the total UK budget of around €11bn. This announcement meant that Wales would receive a £63m reduction rather than the potential reduction of £400m.
The new announcement states that West Wales and the Valleys will receive £1.526bn (€1.783bn), whilst East Wales will receive £308.8m (€361m). This represents a reduction in funding for West Wales and the Valleys (£1.69bn for 2007-2013), and an increase for East Wales (£110m for 2007-2013). The EU will also be adjusting the allocations to 2014 prices, which means that West Wales and the Valleys will receive £1.67bn and East Wales will receive £340m, pending final approval of the 2014-2020 EU Budget by the European Parliament.
As a result of the increased allocation for East Wales, Welsh Government will seek to include and target infrastructure investments in the East Wales Programme.
Work on the preparation of Regional Frameworks, Strategies and Action Plans for the future EU funding is progressing well in each region. These will lead to the identification of emerging key interventions and activities that will inform the regional input into the Economic Prioritisation Framework (EPF) currently being drafted by WEFO.
Page 103
5.0 SUSTRANS
6.0 FIRST CYMRU BUSES
7.0 FIRST GREAT WESTERN
8.0 PASSENGER FOCUS
9.0 SOUTH WEST WALES ECONOMIC FORUM
.
Page 104 Agenda Item 11a
GG !" # $ % & ' ( ) &
( ( ( & $ ( ( $ ( & % $ ( ( &
$ ( ( &
! " * & & ( ( $ ( + & + ( $ ( , ( ( & - + ( !. & + ( # ( ( /0!.& * ( !1 # /0!2&
# $ * 3 4*35 3 435 6 7 & /0!0 /0!6& 8 ( + & 9 : # *3 4 5 ( *3 3 # *3 3 # +
( 3 ( ( ( *3<3 & + &
! ! ""! #$! % # & " &&! ' #$! #& ! & "( )**! + *& !, -)**! !$ , # $ ! .( #)**! '! . #! )**! ! Page 105 %&'( ) *+,(&+&)& - 7 & % 7 & $ + ( + & /0 ( ' !0 4 5& ( ( R ' ( & 9 3 $ % ( ' 8 ( 3 M ? $ # M % - $ 3 M ? $ @ M !0 . A 3 # M $ * ( &
& ! " - 7 2& ( 2&" # ." 4 5 3 8 $ ( ( $ BC & ( 8 ( 4!6E&/ 5 ( 4!60&1 5& ( * 3 $ F ( 8 ( ' 7 & B ( & $ 2 '' -2"& ( & $ ( & ( 3 ( ( R & 7 & 9 &
. $ + 3 % ( ( & ( ' 3 * 3 & G : :<<& ( & &< < ' ' ' ' ' ' 3 $ $ ( 7 $ % % ( & ( @ $ 3 & Page 106 & , /012314 & !6" 7 ( $ H & ( F # # # 8 @ # @ # * 3 # * 3 # 3 # 3 ?
7 8 & M : , 5 G66 - !/" - * - R A % ( * H A -( & % 4 -( ( 5 /0!"& $ 8 9 ( ' # & Q ( E & C : R& ' ( ' # # H 4 5 8$ # ( @ ( $ !/0 # + ( ( $ J6 ( ( $ $ !. ' ( + @ ( & & &
; - $ !6&/.J 3 7 !0&J6J 7 /0!.
&C&N - - ( ( /0!.$ & ( R ( /0!.& - / ( ( ( ( $ 2JK & ( $ ( ( ( + ( !.EK /2K& @ $ ( & 3( ' ' ( $ ( ( $ 7 ( 7 $ & - ( $ ( J1K * & Page 107 7 3- O 8 %P$ % 3 7 $ 8 37 ( - & 7 ( ( ( & $ & ( 1 4 $ $ 5 6 & ( ( ' ' ' ( ( 3- & $ ( :<<& & &< 7- - % ( .$ & & 7 ( & - % / : # ( ( & & # % & # ( Q 7 Q Q ( ( 7 Q ( ( 7 & # ( # @ ( + $ ( & # + . !$ + H ( & # + $ ( + + 4 5 $ + & H & # ( ( $ H ( ( ( ( + ( & # " ( H ( ( ($ ( & # H ( 6 & % ( + ( ( ( ( &
G66 7 ( $ $ % B BC ( % O % '- G % & % ( 9 $ % M ( P . 3 G6 $ * 3 * 3 ( % / & ( % ( & $ O ( $ R ( ( * % P& * 3 3 & < % & Q ' R ( 3 9 * % $ . * ( & * /2 -& J E!
SWWITCH CHAIR ACTIVITIES – FOR INFORMATION ONLY
1.0 OFFICAL OPENING OF GOWERTON STATION
1.1 Councillor Colin Evans, SWWITCH Chair represented the consortium at the official opening of the Gowerton station upgrade on the 8th July.
1.2 The “cutting of the ribbon” was performed by Edwina Hart, Minister for the Economy, Science and Transport who also spoke warmly about the opportunities the improved station would facilitate.
1.3 There were also speeches by Mark Langman from Network Rail who stressed the scale of the overall project (which included the Loughor viaduct replacement and the redoubling of the line) and the importance of the investment to improve the resilience of the rail network and provide capacity for additional services. Mark Bagshaw from Arriva Trains Wales then spoke about enhanced services levels at Gowerton facilitated by the station improvements.
1.4 As well As Councillor Evans, SWWITCH was also represented by Richard Workman, director, Carmarthenshire County Council and Sue Miles, SWWITCH Co-ordinator.
1.5 The photograph below shows the ceremony on the station platform which was followed by light refreshments and networking opportunities. (the SWWITCH newsletter includes a photo of the first train using the improved Gowerton station)
Page 109 Agenda Item 11c
MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS ON ROAD AND RAIL PRIORITIES
Edwina Hart, Minister for Economy, Science and Transport (Road) The Welsh Government’s overall aims in relation to transport are set out in the Wales Transport Strategy.
I am clear that transport has a critical role to play in improving Wales’ economic competiveness and provides enhanced access to jobs and services.
I see transport as a key enabler for many of this Government’s priorities and supporting the delivery of the Programme for Government. I recognise that in thinking about transport we must focus on how it can serve the needs of businesses, people and communities. It is my intention to ensure that Wales has excellent national and international connections, enabling access to markets, to employment, education and services. I also believe that providing affordable, effective and efficient transport systems can play an important role in helping to tackle poverty.
Since taking on the transport portfolio, I have had the opportunity to review investment in transport in light of its contribution to my wider economic development priorities. This enabled me to see new opportunities for transport solutions and consider the feedback I have had from the business community and partners. Progress in discussions with the UK Government on financing options is also opening up opportunities that we have not been able to consider up to now.
This statement highlights key road projects for delivery in the remainder of this Assembly, recognising that progress will be subject to statutory consents and funding availability. I intend providing a further update to Assembly Members before the summer recess of rail infrastructure priorities.
I have already made a written statement on 26 June on my intention to consult on a draft plan and associated assessments for the M4 corridor around Newport in September, that, if implemented, would lead to a motorway being built to the South of Newport, addressing capacity and resilience problems on this key artery widely recognised as essential to support the Welsh economy.
In addition, I intend to progress the Eastern Bay Link in Cardiff and an upgrade to Junction 28 on the M4. These projects are an important element in improving access to the Central Cardiff Enterprise Zone and enhancing connectivity within the city region.
The A465 remains a priority and I will progress the remaining phases of the dualling in view of the route’s strategic importance for the Upper Valleys, Ebbw Vale Enterprise Zone and as an national and international link.
To improve access to the St Athan - Cardiff Airport Enterprise Zone, I will fund improvements to Five Mile Lane.
Page 110
I will continue to deliver key schemes already under construction. These include improvements on the A477 St Clears - Red Roses; A470 Gelligemlyn and Maes yr Helmau – Cross Foxes; A487 Glandyfi, A465 Brynmawr to Tredegar.
I will also continue to progress the A483/A489 Newtown bypass and A487 Caernarfon-Bontnewydd where, in both cases, I have made recent announcements.
I will be setting aside funding for scheme development to ensure that we can progress the development of other schemes, this will include the next stages studies on improvements to the A494, the A40 and the Dyfi bridge.
These major projects are important but it is obvious from conversations with businesses and people across Wales that smaller, targeted improvements to tackle pinch points and improve the efficiency of the network across Wales have the potential to make a real difference. The following improvements will be delivered over the next two years:
• M4 Port Talbot Junction 40 to J 41
• A483 Newtown town centre congestion
• M4 J32 Coryton dedicated slip road
• A55 Emergency refuges
• M4 J33 dedicated slip road
In addition, further study work on certain other pinch points will continue in the next year, specifically:
• A487 Dyfi Bridge drainage study
• A55 Britannia Bridge congestion study
Further projects will follow in future years.
I will ensure that there is a clear pipeline of further projects that can be delivered as funding becomes available.
In recognition of their strategic national importance, I have also asked for consideration of additional routes and sections to be included as part of the Trunk Road Network. These routes will support a combination of enterprise zones, end to end connectivity, tourism and access to commercial and business centres as well as providing resilience for the Trunk Road Network. I have asked for discussions to begin with Local Authorities to re-define the Welsh Trunk Road Network.
I have considered carefully how transport investment can help drive the development of the Enterprise Zones.
Page 111
As noted earlier in this statement, the Eastern Bay link and improvements along the M4 have an important role to play in stimulating the Central Cardiff Enterprise Zone. Similarly, improvements to Five Mile Lane and the development of a new railway station and line extension to Ebbw Town will benefit the Enterprise Zones in St Athan – Cardiff Airport and at Ebbw Vale respectively.
Improving the A40 has been identified as a priority by the Haven Waterway Enterprise Zone Board and I intend to undertake further development of previously proposed improvements. I also intend progressing further study work on the options for improvements to the A494, which is important to the Deeside Enterprise Zone.
The development of the business case for north Wales rail modernisation and progressing improvements to the A55, including the Conwy Tunnels, will also support the ambitions of the Deeside, Snowdonia and Anglesey Enterprise Zone Boards.
More broadly I am making substantial investment in both bus and rail transport services, in road safety and in active travel measures. I am continuing to look to secure maximum value for money and impact from this investment. Further updates on rail infrastructure priorities and on the outcome of the work of the North East Wales Integrated Transport Task Force will follow before the summer recess.
I believe that these transport measures will provide a solid basis for strengthening the Welsh economy.
Rail In my Written Statement of 10 July I highlighted my key road projects for delivery and committed to update further on rail infrastructure priorities.
The railway provides an important means of connectivity to serve the needs of businesses, people and communities. While the funding of rail infrastructure is currently a matter for the Secretary of State for Transport, railway infrastructure has a role in facilitating the success of long-term economic planning and investment.
This is why the Welsh Government’s approach has been to invest to bridge the gap in funding made available for the rail network in Wales provided by the UK Government. Our investment in rail capital projects and franchise services enables rail to play its part in promoting economic growth, enabling greater access to jobs and services, and reducing poverty for the people of Wales.
Following the assessment of delivery priorities referred to in my statement of 10 July, I can confirm that I will deliver our current programme of rail capital investment which includes:
• new stations at Energlyn, Ebbw Vale Town and Pye Corner.
Page 112
• capacity enhancements and improvements at Tir Phil, Maesteg, Pontypridd, and supporting the Cardiff Area Signalling Renewal scheme (CASR).
• station improvements at Cardiff Queen Street and Central, Barry, Pontypridd and Caerphilly (in association with Network Rail’s CASR); and at Port Talbot Parkway, Aberystwyth, Ystrad Mynach, Rhyl and Llandudno (under the Wales National Stations Improvement Programme).
A significant amount of work is under way on the Valley Lines electrification project to develop the proposal from that presented in the outline business case. To secure value for money I am exploring all options for procuring the rolling stock required, including refurbished and new options, looking at whole life costs and the wider economic benefits.
By the end of this year I expect a more detailed report on the potential service timetable and rolling stock options, coupled with further work on the infrastructure costs from Network Rail. This work will inform how the electrification project is taken forward.
I will also continue to press the UK Government to ensure the maximum benefits in Wales from the electrification of the Great Western Mainline.
Electrification brings significant potential to introduce transformational change to the transport system in South East Wales. To capture this opportunity I have commissioned Mark Barry to carry out further work to develop the Metro concept.
Electrification also provides the potential for opportunities for employment and for growing supply chains through local sourcing of skills and materials, for improving our skills base in, for example, electrical engineering, and in securing community benefits. I have asked Network Rail to work closely with me to maximise these benefits in Wales.
I recognise the importance of long-term improvements to the North Wales rail network to the region’s economy, and I will press ahead with the development of the business case for its modernisation.
In the short-term, taking account of the recommendations of the North East Wales Task Force on Integrated Transport, I have asked officials to work with MerseyTravel and others with a view to improving rail connections between the North Wales coast and Liverpool.
In developing this agenda for rail, as I said in my 10 July Statement, I am seeking to maximise value for money and the impact from our investment in public transport. In that regard, I shall be reviewing the processes and decision making behind the rail infrastructure project to reduce North - South journey times and redouble the railway between Wrexham and Saltney. The Welsh Government committed to this project in 2008 and contracted Network Rail to deliver it, but the project has been significantly delayed.
I will continue to press the UK Government to commit to capital investment in our rail network, as it is required to do. Even after projects such as electrification, journey times will remain lengthy for long
Page 113
distance journeys, and in many cases line speeds still need to be addressed. Many of our stations remain dilapidated, inaccessible and could not be described as fit for the 21st Century. In the mean time I will continue to explore how other funding might become available to support investment, such as structural funds.
In addition to capital budgets being increasingly constrained following UK Government budget decisions, revenue budgets are under considerable pressure. The Welsh Government prioritised a series of rail service enhancements in 2011 on the basis of the revenue budgets being available. A consequence of the challenging economic climate and in-year revenue reductions from the UK Government is that I must be realistic about our ability to provide the funding for new or additional services.
In response I am considering whether there are more cost effective opportunities to work with local community groups to deliver new and additional services. For example, I met members of the Heart of Wales Line Forum and a number of Assembly Members recently to discuss plans they are exploring for different management arrangements and a better alignment of services with the needs of people and communities. I shall continue to work with them on that.
I am committed to improving transport services in Mid Wales. In terms of the Cambrian Main Line hourly service, the way is clear for an operator to introduce additional services though it is important to be mindful of the tough financial settlement we are facing. I have asked the Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth Railway Liaison Committee to co-ordinate work with the other rail interest groups to investigate the demand for rail services. I will also consider the strategic role of the Marches line between Newport and Shrewsbury/Wrexham. I have been clear that this should complement the work of the Local Growth Zones and be consistent with the tourism strategy.
Accordingly, initially for the Cambrian Line and the Heart of Wales Line, my tourism sector panel will provide a view on the feasibility of proposals for summer tourist trains on a trial basis. I will make an announcement for summer 2014 in due course.
It is vital that we set things right for the future. I am focusing work on securing the right arrangements and specification for the next Wales and Borders franchise. I have been clear that we can not afford to be in the same position where the terms of a franchise agreement limit our ability to react to a changing economic climate and provide services where they are required.
Page 114 SWWITCH JOINT COMMITTEE City & County of Swansea Representatives: Councillor June Burtonshaw (Voting) 20, Church Gardens, Cockett, Swansea, SA2 OFE [email protected] Councillor Paul Lloyd 2, Hafnant, Winch Wen, Swansea, SA1 7LG [email protected] Councillor Paul Meara 23, Kimberley Road, Sketty, Swansea, SA2 9DP [email protected] Phil Roberts Corporate Director (Place), Civic Centre, Swansea
Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council Representatives: Councillor Sandra Miller (Voting) 39, Pantyheol, Penrhiwdyn, Neath, SA11 2HN Councillor Ted Latham 17, Darwin Road, Port Talbot, SA12 6BR [email protected] Councillor David Williams 10 Church Square, Cwmavon, Port Talbot, SA12 9AP [email protected] John Flower Director of Environment
Carmarthenshire County Council Representatives: Councillor Colin Evans (Voting) 41, Pontamman Road, Ammanford, SA18 2HY 01269 592 582 [email protected] Councillor Peter Cooper 107, Saron Road, Saron, Ammanford, SA18 3LH [email protected] Richard Workman Director of Transport & Highways, County Hall, Carmarthen, SA31 1JP
Pembrokeshire County Council Representatives: Councillor Rob M Lewis (Voting) Stanley Villa, Landshipping, Narberth, Pembrokeshire, SA67 8BE. Phone: - 01834 891214 Bus. Email: [email protected] Councillor Huw George Parsons Lodge, Clunderwen, SA66 7NQ [email protected] Ian Westley Director of Transport & Environment, County Hall, Haverfordwest, SA61 1TP.
External Partners Representatives: Sustrans Richard Crawshaw SWWEF SWWEF Co-ordinator - C/ O Swansea University [email protected] Justin Davies First Cymru Buses Heol Gwyrosydd, Penlan, Swansea, SA5 7BN [email protected] John Pockett CPT and First Great [email protected] Western Mike Vaughan Arriva Trains Wales Stakeholder Liaison Manager, St Marys House, 47, Penarth Road, Cardiff, CF10 5DJ [email protected] Alison Thomas WAG [email protected] Tim Peppin WLGA Local Government House, Drake Walk, Cardiff, CF10 4LG [email protected] David Beer Passenger Focus [email protected] Mark Langman Network Rail [email protected] Dewi Rowlands WAG [email protected] Margaret Everson Bus Users UK [email protected] Betsan Caldwell CTA [email protected] Jane Lorimer Sustrans [email protected] 30 Copies
Page 115