Manchester bus franchising

[Mayneway]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(26/01/2023 09:39)Barney Wrote:  Understandably, after years of senior UK politicians lying through their teeth, it is not surprising that there is a general cynicism with politics and a belief that honesty, openness and integrity in public office no longer exists.

However, if you have a shred of evidence that the bidding process for the first tranche was flawed and illicit deals were done "behind closed doors", for the benefit of all the unsuccessful operators, you really should put this information into the public domain.

TFGM ‘HAD’ to come away with either Bolton or Wigan depot. It’s as simple as that.

[Winston]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(28/01/2023 10:32)knutstransport Wrote:  Of course Stagecoach, Arriva and First have operations all over the country and regularly cascade vehicles, with the latter two tending to keep vehicles for as long as they can, rather than selling them when they start to get old.

While the GM operators may not want the Enviro 200s at Wigan, they'll be loads of interested parties if Stagecoach were to put them up for sale.

GNW's winning bid may well include refurbished second-hand vehicles. That's all that Queens Road has had.

[Winston]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(28/01/2023 11:32)Mayneway Wrote:  The rules haven’t charged yet. They change in one area in September. It’s no secret that several operators are unhappy with who’s won what, and the withdrawal of one of their busiest most profitable services 8 months before they are forced to hand everything over to another operator it is seen as a way of running things down while TFGM can only look on.
I’m no cynic but as a time served driver in Manchester with years of watching TFGM miserably fail at things the whole network in their hands will be a disaster. They have spent years running down the bus network with a fixation on the tram network. Sadly there will be two big losers in all this, the regular bus user and us council tax payers who will all be forced to stump up more money to keep it going.

The 163 is currently profitable, its certainly not Diamond's most profitable route. But come April when a number of services are due to be withdrawn, wages will be increasing 10%+

You may find that not all the services threatened with withdrawal in April will actually happen, you could well find that TfGM & Diamond can come to an agreement to reduce the numbers of withdrawals & reductions.

[Barney]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(28/01/2023 11:32)Mayneway Wrote:  I’m no cynic but as a time served driver in Manchester with years of watching TFGM miserably fail at things the whole network in their hands will be a disaster. They have spent years running down the bus network with a fixation on the tram network. Sadly there will be two big losers in all this, the regular bus user and us council tax payers who will all be forced to stump up more money to keep it going.

Since 1986 - outside of London - no local authority has been allowed to regulate or plan a bus network; it has been left to the whims of individual operators.

TfGM, like every area/local authority, was only allowed to fill the gaps where the private operators deemed that the bus service would not generate a profit. Over time, the funding from central government for such services has been drastically cut from their budgets to the point where many have been withdrawn completely. That's why many areas in Manchester have been left with inadequate bus services.

The reason why TfGM has "a fixation" with the tram network is simply because it it is within its remit and powers to do so, something it can't do with bus operation until franchising is fully implemented.

I'm not too sure how you conclude that the regular bus user "will be forced to stump up more money to keep it going". Hasn't Manchester recently benefitted with the introduction of the maximum £2 fare?

If a local precept of a £1 per week per household is introduced to maintain the new network I'd say that that was a bargain.

[Mayneway]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(28/01/2023 16:59)Winston Wrote:  GNW's winning bid may well include refurbished second-hand vehicles. That's all that Queens Road has had.

They had a pot of money for some new vehicles but apparently TFGM were insistent they were hybrid or electric and not diesel, which is why they brought in cascaded London hybrids.

[Mayneway]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(28/01/2023 17:13)Winston Wrote:  The 163 is currently profitable, its certainly not Diamond's most profitable route. But come April when a number of services are due to be withdrawn, wages will be increasing 10%+

You may find that not all the services threatened with withdrawal in April will actually happen, you could well find that TfGM & Diamond can come to an agreement to reduce the numbers of withdrawals & reductions.

Yes with TFGM paying them to keep services going.

[Mayneway]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(28/01/2023 23:11)Barney Wrote:  Since 1986 - outside of London - no local authority has been allowed to regulate or plan a bus network; it has been left to the whims of individual operators.

TfGM, like every area/local authority, was only allowed to fill the gaps where the private operators deemed that the bus service would not generate a profit. Over time, the funding from central government for such services has been drastically cut from their budgets to the point where many have been withdrawn completely. That's why many areas in Manchester have been left with inadequate bus services.

The reason why TfGM has "a fixation" with the tram network is simply because it it is within its remit and powers to do so, something it can't do with bus operation until franchising is fully implemented.

I'm not too sure how you conclude that the regular bus user "will be forced to stump up more money to keep it going". Hasn't Manchester recently benefitted with the introduction of the maximum £2 fare?

If a local precept of a £1 per week per household is introduced to maintain the new network I'd say that that was a bargain.

As well as driving commercial bus services in Manchester I’ve also driven tendered services and have watched time and time again as TFGM have slashed much needed subsidised services or completely altered the timings so they no longer meet up with a commercial service so passengers were forced to wait 45 minutes in the evening for the next service.

A late evening service out of one town which carried some shift workers away from work had the times changed from 22:12 to 22:46, meaning the shift workers had a long wait (finishing at 22:00) or bought cars and drove.

The reality is they couldn’t run a teddy bears picnic and with the much expected mass exodus of drivers over the next few months leaving the industry for good it puts a pretty big question mark over it all.

[Barney]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(29/01/2023 10:31)Mayneway Wrote:  The reality is they couldn’t run a teddy bears picnic and with the much expected mass exodus of drivers over the next few months leaving the industry for good it puts a pretty big question mark over it all.

No. As I have mentioned earlier, the problem with the lack of adequate tendered services is the sharp reduction in funding from central government especially since 2010 when a harsh austerity policy was implemented.

Also, the lack of people willing to work in certain sectors including bus operation has become a UK-wide issue over many years and has become critical since February 2020.

[Mayneway]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(29/01/2023 11:33)Barney Wrote:  No. As I have mentioned earlier, the problem with the lack of adequate tendered services is the sharp reduction in funding from central government especially since 2010 when a harsh austerity policy was implemented.

Also, the lack of people willing to work in certain sectors including bus operation has become a UK-wide issue over many years and has become critical since February 2020.

Absolute rubbish. About 4 years ago the company I worked for at the time suddenly won a load of evening tenders doing tiny circulars around estates with high car ownership. They ran hourly and carried fresh air. Yet a well used tendered evening service was cut because they felt there was adequate alternatives.

Go look at TFGM’s portfolio of property they own and rent out and what they get back in rent, then tell me they cut the tendered network because of austerity.

[knutstransport]

RE: Manchester bus franchising

(29/01/2023 16:02)Mayneway Wrote:  About 4 years ago the company I worked for at the time suddenly won a load of evening tenders doing tiny circulars around estates with high car ownership. They ran hourly and carried fresh air.

Tendered services should be awarded for areas where there's low bus usage but a small number of people need to make necessary journeys. If there's low car ownership then bus usage should be higher and it's less likely to need a subsidy.