Better Transport

1 August: The New Economics Foundation warned today that we have 100 months before we reach the tipping point for runaway climate change. We have about three months to persuade MPs that the Local Transport Bill must help stop us from reaching that tipping point.

100 months to save the world is a dramatic news story. When I tell people my work is about buses and the Local Transport Bill, it doesn't always sound like a whole lot of drama.

But the truth is that local transport is a key piece of the jigsaw; if we don't sort it out, we won't stop the ice from melting.

The transport sector accounts for over a quarter of all UK carbon emissions, and it's the fastest growing source of these emissions.

The Government wants local authorities to sort out local transport problems. But all of that local transport currently adds up to a lot of carbon at the national level. It doesn't make sense to ignore it.

Currently the Local Transport Bill doesn't even mention the words 'climate change'. We're lobbying MPs about this: the Bill must make sure local authorities produce a strategy for reducing carbon emissions from transport.

If you want to be kept up to date on how you can help, sign up to our e-bulletin.

Three months and counting...

23 July: People are always telling me about bus cuts and the bad impact they have. So we've created an online guide which explains how you can stop cuts and get the bus you need.

Buses are underfunded and low down the list of political priorities. It can be difficult for people to influence bus companies and local authorities. But with our guide you'll have the information you need to get started, and with enough determination you can turn things around.

It's always great to get an email about a bus that's been saved because of hard work by the people who use it. I'm looking forward to getting more of them!

7 July: Our efforts to improve the Local Transport Bill continue, but there's not much time left because the bill will soon undergo its report stage at the House of Commons. Very soon, the bill will become an act. Before it does, we're working hard to secure some changes so that:

• Climate change is tackled through the bill
• Quality contracts become a realistic option for all local authorities
• The new bus passenger watchdog is effective

19 June: We keep telling Government to invest in reducing bus fares around the country.

Statistics published today on the number of people using buses show that we are right.

Bus use in London has increased by 5% since the year before, and the explanation given is the cut in Oystercard bus fares from £1 to 90p last September.

Reducing fares gets people back on buses, increasing them makes people drive instead.

London buses are well funded which is why Transport for London can afford to reduce fares. Outside London, buses are underfunded by Government, leading to fare increases and bus cuts.

Bus fares have increased by 13% in real terms in the last 10 years. We think this is unfair on bus passengers, especially as travelling by bus can produce only a third of the carbon produced from car travel.

We're campaigning for fairer bus fares and more funding for buses. Can you help by giving a donation?

5 June: Today we told the Government that changes to bus funding must get people out of cars and onto buses - that will help us tackle climate change.

We responded to the Government's consultation on bus funding by asking them to look at the bigger picture. We recommended that:

• Government needs to look at funding, taxation and pricing of all modes of transport: bus, rail, car, plane and so on. It should see whether changes are needed to promote low carbon transport.
• Buses can help us tackle climate change. Although it's important to encourage bus companies to buy low carbon buses, it's more important to encourage people to switch from car to bus. We need more and better bus services that provide a real alternative to driving. 
• Government should provide more funding for buses, possibly through ringfencing any increases in fuel duty. Rural buses in particular need more funding.
• Government should make sure changes to bus funding don't cause bus cuts which reduce people's travel choices.
• Government should invest in low carbon buses and provide incentives to bus companies which buy these buses.

29 May: Spending more on improving buses is the most popular way to reduce carbon emissions from transport, according to a Government survey published today. The majority of people agree with us that buses are key in tackling climate change. Now it's time for Government to ringfence fuel tax increases and show us the money.

The survey showed that almost 60% of people would like to see more investment in buses and trains, while safe routes to school, better public transport information and more cycle tracks are also popular policies for reducing carbon emissions.

Two thirds of respondents thought individuals should try to limit their own car use.

At a time when high petrol prices are putting the Government under political pressure, this is evidence that many people would welcome ringfencing of fuel tax increases (and windfalls from increasing oil prices) for investment in alternatives to the car. Richard, our roads and climate campaigner, argued for this in his blog yesterday.

Let's take an example of how this might work. After only 6 weeks of increased oil prices, the Government had received a windfall tax to the tune of £505 million, according to the British Chambers of Commerce. Compare this to the amount the Government spends on the Rural Bus Subsidy Grant - just one-tenth of the windfall tax, £56 million a year.

Ringfencing this windfall tax for rural buses would almost double their funding for the next 10 years. This would be a huge boost for rural buses. It would reverse bus cuts happening throughout the country, kickstart new services and offer people a real alternative to driving.

The fact that improving buses is people's top policy for reducing carbon emissions from transport should make the Government take notice. Tackling climate change and appeasing motorists at the same time will require some imaginative thinking.

22 May: I've written to Transport Minister Rosie Winterton to explain what we think is needed to make the new bus wing of Passenger Focus work for passengers.

Our letter argues that the new bus watchdog must have: an appeals role; regional offices; the power to access performance data from bus companies; and a duty to look at integration between different kinds of public transport. To do this it will need enough funding - at least as much as the £5 million Passenger Focus currently receives to defend rail passengers' interests.

14 May: We've been telling Government to invest more in buses, and to enable local authorities to plan bus networks that meet people's needs. A new report looking at why more people take the bus in London shows we are right.

Low fares and lots of services are major reasons why Londoners use buses more. We think Government needs to invest in buses outside London to reduce fares and increase services levels.

But the report also shows that other major cities could copy London's success to some extent by providing bus networks that are easy for passengers to use and understand. That means simple fares, clear information, stability (not too many timetable changes) and good evening and Sunday services.

The Local Transport Bill should make it easier for local transport authorities and passenger transport executives (PTEs) to follow London's example. Through quality contracts, they can plan bus networks (in a similar way to Transport for London) deciding which routes, fares, frequencies and timetables people in their area need. Quality partnerships offer another way to work with bus operators to achieve similar results, and the Bill also allows bus operators themselves to cooperate more to improve bus networks.

However, the current Bill will make it far too difficult for transport authorities to use some of these powers. Quality contracts in particular are not going to be a realistic option for most transport authorities. Unless Government takes action - both by investing in buses more and by giving local authorities the tools they need to plan bus networks - the London success story won't be repeated anywhere else.

18 April: Next week the Local Transport Bill will be debated by a Committee of MPs. We've asked them to make sure climate change is top of the agenda.

Transport is the fastest growing source of carbon emissions. Yet the Local Transport Bill doesn't even mention the words 'climate change'.

Government is trying to act on climate change at the national level through the Climate Change Bill. But at the same time, it is encouraging local transport authorities to solve the transport problems in their areas - without asking them to take account of national targets for carbon reduction.

The Local Transport Bill gives local authorities responsibility for improving bus services and introducing road pricing, but no responsibility for reducing carbon emissions.

We've suggested an amendment which would give them that responsibility, and we hope it will be supported at the Bill Committee meetings.

8 April: The Department for Transport announced today that Passenger Focus (the national rail watchdog) will become the new bus user watchdog.

We didn't mind who got this job, as long as they could do it well. Passenger Focus is good at researching passenger priorities and lobbying Government and companies at the national level.

But we have to make sure that the watchdog has well-staffed regional offices (possibly TravelWatches) that have the local knowledge needed to improve things for passengers.

And if Passenger Focus is going to do a good job, its 'bus wing' (especially its regional offices) must be well funded by the Government. About 4.7 billion journeys are made by bus pasengers every year, compared to just over 1 billion by rail passenger. The funding provided for the watchdog must reflect that fact.

2 April: Today I argued in a blog for the Guardian that all bus users should be rewarded with low fares, for choosing to travel in a low carbon way.

28 March: Starting Tuesday, people over 60 and people with disabilities will be able to use their free bus pass to travel on buses anywhere in England during off-peak hours.

While this should make it easier for people to leave their cars at home when they go on holidays and shopping trips around the country, the scheme will in fact only be of use if there are buses for people to use! Worryingly, there is some evidence that free bus passes have in the past resulted in cuts to bus services - because bus companies and local authorities haven't been sufficiently subsidised by the Government for transporting free passengers - and that this national expansion of the programme may result in more cuts (I recently spoke to the Guardian about this issue.)

If the Government is serious about improving public transport and ensuring people have real travel choices, it must provide adequate funding and a workable bus pass scheme. It should follow the example set by Scotland and Wales; both have more straightforward schemes in place already.

Have there been bus cuts in your area recently? Do let me know about them.

25 March: MPs will start the debate on buses, road user charging and transport governance in the House of Commons tomorrow.

The Local Transport Bill aims to give local authorities the tools they need to provide sustainable transport solutions.

We've already won victories with this Bill - we've persuaded the Government to create a new bus passenger watchdog, and to change competition law so that bus companies can cooperate to make buses better.

But there are still really big issues that need to be tackled:

• 'Quality contracts' (franchising buses as in London) need to be a realistic option for local authorities, to enable them to plan bus networks - at the moment the Bill makes this too difficult
• Local authorities need more options for partnerships with bus companies, especially in rural areas
• Carbon emissions from the transport sector need to be reduced. Local authorities must have a duty to reduce carbon emissions, in line with the targets agreed in the Climate Change Bill. And revenue from road user charging must go towards public transport, walking and cycling - not building more roads

6 March: We've responded to the Department for Transport's consultation on how a new bus passenger watchdog should work. And we've created a web form which you can use to quickly and easily respond too.

We've argued that a new bus passenger watchdog must have regional offices as well as a national office. Decisions about bus services are taken locally and regionally as well as nationally - bus users need to be represented at all of these levels.

We've also argued that the watchdog must deal with passengers appeals - Passenger Focus represents rail passengers when they complain and aren't happy with the response they get. Bus users also deserve a watchdog that can take their side when problems arise.

Finally, this watchdog must be statutory, independent and funded by Government.

Two thirds of public transport journeys are made by bus - let's make sure bus passengers have a real voice.

6 February: We support the local campaign to keep the Bristol-Bath cycle path. A current proposal to put a guided busway on or alongside this path is completely misguided.

The Bristol-Bath cycle path gives people in the area real travel choices, by providing a quiet, off-road route for people to cycle and walk on. It is one of the most popular routes on the National Cycle Network.

Bristol City Council and the West of England Partnership are considering creating a guided bus route on the cycle path because they are finding it politically difficult to get priority for buses in the city of Bristol. Destroying a cycle path looks like an easy solution.

Local authorities need to realise that they don't have to choose between two wheels and four wheels - there are different ways to travel sustainably. It is entirely possible to run a good public transport network in the Bristol area, by investing properly in the local rail network and the Greater Bristol Bus Network.

As Pip Sheard from the Greater Bristol Transport Alliance has said: "The path is a fabulous example of green sustainable transport - a transport success story" and it must stay. Thousands of local people - and we - agree.

30 January: Yesterday Campaign for Better Transport ran a seminar together with the Department for Transport, to discuss how to create an effective new watchdog to promote the interests of bus passengers. The department has agreed a watchdog is needed and is currently consulting on how the new watchdog (or 'champion') should work.

The seminar brought together a range of experts on consumer representation and buses, to discuss the issues. We talked about whether the watchdog should have regional branches; whether it should deal with complaints; how it should interact with existing organisations. I think the event went really well, there was a lot of consensus amongst the people there about what's needed, and I hope the conclusions we came up with will be useful to the department.

15 January 2008: The Local Transport Bill goes into Report Stage tomorrow at the House of Lords. The Bill looks at buses, road pricing and transport governance. Campaign for Better Transport has produced a briefing which explains how we think the Bill needs to change so that local transport can improve.

5 December: The Local Transport Bill is going into 'committee stage' in the House of Lords tomorrow. We're working to secure some amendments to the bill so that it leads to serious improvements in the provision of sustainable local transport.

4 December: The Government today published its consultation on a new watchdog for bus passengers. Well done to us for getting bus passenger representation on their agenda!

However, there's still work to be done to make sure the watchdog we get is effective...

The consultation says that the watchdog 'should focus and operate primarily at the the national rather than a regional or local level'. We disagree. Buses are local services and passengers need to be able to contact regional watchdogs which understand what's going on in the area and can lobby for improvements.

The consultation also says the watchdog should not deal with complaints from passengers. Complaints would continue to be dealt with by Bus Users UK and the Bus Appeals Body. These organisations do excellent work but they don't cover complaints about fares, and they're not statutory.

Passenger Focus deals with complaints from rail passengers - don't bus passengers also deserve a statutory watchdog which deals with their complaints?

3 December: Tomorrow morning the Government will release its consultation on a new watchdog for bus users. We've been pushing for a watchdog for some months now and we're delighted that the Government has taken our advice and started talking about representation for bus users.

But will the consultation document recognise that an effective watchdog needs powers, funding and regional offices all around the country? Buses are a local service and a national watchdog based in London won't be able to protect bus users' interests. The watchdog has to be government-funded and it has to have teeth i.e. it must be statutory.

Let's wait and see what the Government comes up with... 

3 December: Our efforts to make sure competition law works in the interests of bus passengers are bearing fruit. Last week we brought together the Office of Fair Trading, the Department for Transport and barristers to discuss what needs to be done to make sure bus companies can cooperate to provide better bus services.

Earlier this year, barristers John Swift QC and Gerry Facenna wrote an opinion (pdf 132K) for us on competition law, concluding that there needs to be clearer guidance for bus companies to encourage them to cooperate when this benefits passengers. For example, they might be able to join together to make sure their timetables are regular, or to provide integrated ticketing.

At our meeting, we hammered out the issues and presented the OFT with evidence from passengers on disjointed bus services, and quotes from Bus Users UK and First Bus about current problems - which they were pleased to receive. 

The next step? Getting bus companies in a room with the OFT, so they can work out exactly what needs to change in the wording on competition law.

28 November: The parliamentary petition for a strong bus passenger watchdog is growing. Already, 44 MPs have signed the petition. 

27 November: I’ve just got back from a fact-finding mission in Leeds, Sheffield and Manchester where I investigated what’s going on with trains, trams and buses in the area.

In Leeds I heard that the Government (the National Audit Office) has rejected the idea of a Leeds Supertram, despite its high benefit-cost ratio. The Government changed its mind after First suggested an ftr bus (a high class bus with some priority) would be a better option. As I’ve mentioned before, Leeds is the biggest city in Europe without a tram. A tram has rails, it is a permanent, visible piece of infrastructure with a fixed route and clear priority over other vehicles. Leeds Supertram would revive the city centre, relieve congestion on the rail network and provide economic and environmental benefits beyond what a high class bus could manage.

I was packed in like a sardine on the 4.25pm train from Leeds to Manchester - I had to stand for half an hour. More and longer trains are desperately needed to stop this overcrowding.

The Manchester tram was fantastic, although even more overcrowded than the train! There were no railings to hold on to where I was standing, but luckily we were wedged so tightly together that most people managed to stay upright! One woman had left her car behind to use the tram (20% of tram users have switched from the car compared to around 5% of bus users) but our sardine tin experience was making her think twice about her decision.

The popularity of the Manchester tram was clear, and it had clearly revitalised the city. A new tram link is planned which will link the BBC in Manchester to the city centre and railway station.

In Sheffield, I saw England’s first Statutory Quality Partnership bus route which opened just last week (where there is a formal agreement between the PTE, Council and bus operators to improve services). The bus shelters and real time information were great, and there were some good bus priority measures in place, although residents’ parking rights had clearly come first in many places – and obviously frequencies and fares cannot be covered within the current framework for statutory partnerships. Nevertheless, well done to South Yorkshire PTE for managing to agree a statutory partnership with the bus operator – let’s hope patronage increases, and buses in the area keep improving…

20 November: The Local Transport Bill is now at the Second Reading stage in the House of Lords.

We believe the Bill needs to be changed in several key ways, and we've been talking to Lords to encourage them to see things our way...

12 November: The Local Transport Bill was published last week: the Government's attempt to solve the congestion problem by devolving it. So, has it given local authorities the tools they need to improve buses, introduce road-pricing and create new PTEs?

On buses:

There's some good stuff in the Bill. We're really pleased the Government has decided to create a bus passenger watchdog - now we just need to make sure it has the funding and regional offices it needs.

The Bill gives local authorities some new tools for improving bus services, which will make partnerships with bus operators more workable. However, the Bill waters down proposals in the draft bill to widen partnerships to incorporate frequencies and fares, which can now only be added if all bus operators agree. This could completely torpedo any beefed-up partnerships if low-quality operators can object to area-wide agreements on, say, smartcards or regular interval and interconnected services. There is also no framework that would allow local authorities and bus operators to work together to plan bus services over a longer period of time, for example in areas with lots of housing or commercial developments. And ideas that council officers have put forward for 'tendered network zones' which would allow areas where most services are subsidised by councils to be co-ordinated properly don’t appear to have made it into the bill.

Furthermore, we are convinced that Quality Contracts schemes (where the local authority plans and franchises its bus network) will be needed in some places and must be a realistic option for councils when part of strategies to cut traffic, tackle social exclusion and address climate change. The Bill still puts several obstacles in the way of local authorities wanting to introduce Quality Contracts. There's a contradictory approach here: when it comes to road pricing schemes, the Government argues that local authorities need 'freedom and flexibility' to do as they like, as long as they consult local people. Fine - but why do they then insist that if a local authority wants to franchise its bus network after consulting local people, it has to jump through endless hoops? An unelected 'Approvals Board' will decide whether local authorities can do this, and a 'Transport Tribunal' will deal with appeals. Apparently local authorities have a democratic mandate to make decisions about road pricing, but not about buses. 

The bill says nothing about funding, but our recent rural bus report pointed out that rural buses were seriously underfunded and that high quality bus networks cost money. Will the Government back new powers with new funding? This remains to be seen.

On road pricing:

The Bill says the revenue from road pricing schemes can go into 'transport measures' of any kind - including road-building - which simply creates more demand from drivers. Instead, we think the revenue should be ringfenced for public transport if we're going to tackle congestion and traffic growth in the long term.

On transport governance:

The Bill doesn't allow for strong backstop powers that would enable national government to take squabbling local authorities presiding over terrible public transport, bang their heads together and make them set up a passenger transport authority. Devolution is great, but regional transport authorities are the way forward, and maybe the Government needs to push local authorities on this when necessary.

On climate change:

Last but not least, it's important to note that this Bill really is all about congestion - not climate change. Since the draft bill, the Government has watered down legislation that could have helped cut carbon emissions. It has replaced a local authority duty to take account of government guidance on climate change with a duty to take account of environmental policies in general. Will this new duty make any difference at all? This will entirely depend on guidance that is mentioned and of course on implementation – and on present form I’m not optimistic.

19 October: Yesterday we met Rosie Winterton (Minister of State for Transport) together with other NGOs and two 'case studies' to highlight the problems bus users face, and show there is wide-ranging support for a passenger watchdog.

Carol Woodhouse from Lakenheath highlighted the problems people have had since her bus service to the nearest city of Ely was cut. Peter Gould, a longstanding transport campaigner, explained why the buses are so bad in Bristol and what needs to be done.

Representatives from the Community Transport Association, the National Youth Agency, Bus Users UK, the National Consumer Council, RNID, the Women's Institute, Guide dogs for the blind, DPTAC and Campaign for Better Transport West Midlands met with Department officials and Rosie Winterton to explain what's wrong with bus services, what is needed from the Local Transport Bill, and why a passenger watchdog is important.

We expect the next step will be a seminar with the Department for Transport to decide what a passenger watchdog would look like.

16 October: 14 other leading organisations have joined us in signing a statement calling for a passenger watchdog for bus users. We've sent the statement to the Department for Transport with our response to the government's consultation on the Traffic Commissioners. We've used the consultation as an opportunity to make the case for a watchdog, to explain how it should work and to show the strength of support for creating this new organisation.

12 October: Cuts to South Birmingham bus services are hitting people hard. Kevin Chapman explains what's going on there and wonders why bus users are so often treated as second class citizens...

 Kevin's article

Campaign for Better Transport is calling for a passenger watchdog for bus users, which might put buses higher up the political agenda. 

8 October: A long-time, hard-working local campaigner in Leighton Buzzard has told us she was able to secure a massive investment in public transport in connection with a new development. The start of real sustainable communities? Congratulations, Victoria!

8 October: After the publication today of a legal opinion on competition law and the bus industry, we want to hear from you. Give us examples of disjointed bus services, so we can share them with bus companies and the Government.

5 October: 'Adult Oyster single bus fares have been cut from £1 to 90p. Hop on and enjoy the ride,' says Transport for London. That’s great for London, but the rest of the country has to put up with ever-increasing bus fares. In Bristol, for example, single fares can be as high as £2.60. That’s nearly three times higher than in London – no wonder people are driving instead.

In our website survey, most people are voting to ‘make public transport cheaper’. Cost matters.

If we’re going to make buses cheaper, local authorities or regional transport authorities must plan bus networks and specify fares. Ken’s fare reductions must happen everywhere.

We also need a re-evaluation of government priorities. In Belgium, 30% of bus revenue funding comes from fares, compared to 90% here. If the government really wants to stop congestion, it must get people onto buses by investing in cheap bus fares. Maybe it could take the money from its road building budget and £9 billion aviation subsidy.

25 September: Gordon Brown mentioned buses in his first speech to the Labour Party conference yesterday. He talked about 'change to strengthen local democracy with new powers for economic development and bus services'.

It makes a welcome change to find buses so high up the political agenda. The Government seems to recognise that local authorities need real powers over bus services, to ensure that transport networks meet people’s needs.

The Local Transport Bill will give Gordon the chance to show his commitment to buses. The bill has the potential to improve public transport by bringing us closer to European best practice: regional transport authorities; bus franchising; political commitment to integrated public transport networks. Will our Prime Minister rise to the challenge?

7 September: We handed in our final submission on the Local Transport Bill today – phew, what a monster of a document! If the Government follows our suggestions, local authorities will have the powers they need to improve bus services across the UK. If that’s going to happen, it needs to be easy for local authorities to regulate buses when the free market is failing. Bus users need a passenger watchdog which they can complain to, and which will lobby on their behalf. And competition law needs to work in favour of bus users.

We also want local road pricing schemes – and then a national scheme – which will provide the funding needed to improve bus services dramatically.

Buses need to be a real alternative to cars, and that means we have to put bus users at the very top of the Government’s agenda.

5 August: The Transport Select Committee has responded to the Draft Local Transport Bill. It has recommended that...

• An independent, publicly-funded complaints body should be set up for bus users (as suggested by Transport 2000). Rail passengers have a complaints body, bus passengers deserve one too!

• Transport authorities who want to introduce more bus regulation (in the form of ‘Quality Contracts’) need to be protected from ‘sabre-rattling bus company lawyers’ demanding compensation. Transport authorities should be able to buy depots, and operate buses if necessary. ‘This would also have the benefit of giving a public sector benchmark for competing bus operators‘, they point out.

• Partnerships between local authorities and bus operators should be genuine partnerships. This means bus frequencies and timetables are set by both parties together. It also means that, where there is an agreement, the bus operator can’t just withdraw or change services. PTAs should be given powers to fine operators for this kind of behaviour.

24 July: Today the Liberal Democrat Shadow Transport Minister, Susan Kramer, asked the Secretary of State for Transport how many bus services have been withdrawn and how many added to service since 2004-5. The DfT’s reply was: “The information is not available without incurring disproportionate costs.”

Not impressive. The fact that this information is not available shows lack of interest in buses, and lack of respect for the thousands of people who use them every day.

17 July: The DfT today revealed that the cost of travelling by private car has fallen in real terms by 10% since 1997, while the cost of travelling by bus has risen by 13% and by train has risen by 6%.

It is too expensive to travel by bus (and train) compared to the cost of travelling by car. How can we solve this problem?

In the short term, we can campaign locally for councils to raise revenue through parking charges. This revenue can be used to subsidise cheaper fares or better services on public transport. Nottingham City Council is currently consulting on whether to introduce workplace parking levies. All councils have the ability to introduce these kinds of measures – campaigners can push them to get on with it.

In the longer term, the costs of driving and public transport need to reflect the level of carbon emissions produced by each mode (and other environmental impacts). We will need a fair carbon rationing system. This would mean people will simply not be able to travel quite so much, and certainly not so much by car.

5 July: At a Draft Local Transport Bill seminar with local government and the Department for Transport, I met someone who works in a local authority, who argued that the Bill doesn’t go nearly far enough. Better buses and road user charging will not be achieved in her – very conservative – area unless central government compels her local authority to act. Unfortunately, politicians both locally and nationally are unwilling to stand up to the car-owning majority in their constituencies. But bold transport policies can have benefits for everyone. Many people who are currently dependent on their cars would be happy to reduce their use or give them up if they felt there was a realistic alternative.

‘What does the Bill offer for rural areas?’ someone from a rural area asked. Not a lot, was the implication. This Bill is not about giving all bus users the services they need, or about climate change. It’s about Government trying to solve the congestion problem by devolving it.