Bus operators axing routes.
West Yorkshire mayor Tracy Brabin has hit out at bus operators for pulling more services across the region, despite the government extending support funding.
Mayor Brabin revealed she’d had “robust conversations” with Arriva and others and urged companies to “hold their nerve” and avoid hurting passengers further.
The government recently announced a further £130m would be poured into protecting bus services across the country until next March, following extensive lobbying from regional mayors.
Covid support money for the industry was due to be pulled this month, before that announcement, leading to fears that around 10 per cent of West Yorkshire’s buses would be axed.
But despite the bus companies receiving more taxpayer handouts to cover the next five months, there have been more rounds of cuts in recent weeks.
Speaking at a meeting of West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) meeting of regional leaders on Friday, Mayor Brabin said: “There are real challenges in the bus network, but having worked really hard with other mayors to press government to extends the bus recovery grants, it’s really frustrating that some operators are pressing ahead with service reductions.
“Myself and (Bradford Council leader) Susan Hinchliffe, who chairs the (regional) transport committee have had some quite robust conversations with operators.”
West Yorkshire is due to receive a new £70m package to improve buses at some point early next year. That however, has been earmarked for things like vehicle upgrades and subsidising fares, with leaders reluctant to spend it all on simply propping up routes that otherwise be cut. It is not known exactly when that cash will come through, with Mayor Brabin blaming Westminster “chaos” for the lack of clarity. But the government said it will not hand over the cash until political leaders in West Yorkshire and operators agree a plan to deliver the Bus Service Improvement plan.
She added: “The challenges are there for the bus operators and we’re not blind to those. The challenge of recruitment of drivers is very real for them. So I’m not undermining the challenge, but I hope bus companies share our optimism for the opportunity to enhance and expand our bus network.”
Concerns raised over the future of the X84 bus as services cut
FORMER Labour MP for Keighley and Ilkley John Grogan has drawn attention to further cuts in the X84 service between Ilkley and Otley and warned that the service to Ilkley may be cut all together.
He said: “From October 2nd the number of commuter services on the X84 route from Ilkley to Leeds before 9am has been cut from four to three and the first arrival in Leeds is now 7.33am compared with 6.55am previously.
“On Saturday the first arrival into Leeds on the X84 is now 7.55am compared with 6.44am previously. There are only three arrivals from Otley on Saturdays on the X84 into Leeds before 11am compared with 9 previously. There is a massive gap in departures on the route from Otley into Leeds on Saturdays between 8.15am and 9.50am.”
Mr Grogan warned that there could be much worse to come. The Government announced on August 16th that they would be extending additional subsidies to West Yorkshire Combined Authority to fund bus services for the period October 1st to March 31st. However, the bus companies are receiving more taxpayer handouts to cover the next five months (see above). Let’s not forget, leaders (the West Yorkshire Mayor and transport committee chair Cllr Hinchcliffe) had previously stated that they’re “reluctant to spend it all on simply propping up routes that would otherwise be cut.” This raises a simple question, would services that would otherwise be cut, be allocated any of the transport grant?
Mr Grogan added: “Shortly before the Government made their announcement First Bus registered with the Transport Commissioners their intention to cancel the X84 service to Ilkley all together. The starting point of the service into Leeds would instead be Otley. It was only after the extra money was made available that they withdrew their proposal.
“The problem is the money will run out next Spring and with Government expenditure cuts on the horizon the same ideas could be back on the table soon. In February 2020 the then Prime Minister Mr Johnson promised more buses for the nation including at weekends and evenings. Since then Ilkley has lost direct services to Harrogate and Leeds Bradford Airport with a diminished service to Skipton. I fear that the main X84 service from Ilkley into Otley and Leeds is far from safe.”
A spokesperson for First Bus offered the following clarification: “Ilkley to Leeds pre-0900 there are 6 services. Otley arriving in Leeds on Saturday pre-11:00 is 4 services. (admit the 4th of these is 11:02). There had been 9 previously but this was done during the pandemic on some routes to keep Saturday same as Mon-Fri for simplicity but was always a temporary situation.”
January 19th, 2023 update.
West Yorkshire has been awarded funding from the Levelling Up fund to improve bus services in the region.
According to the government, the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) will receive exactly £41,248,832 to improve bus services across the county. This is one of 100 projects across the country to receive part of the £2.1 billion of funding. See https://www.examinerlive.co.uk/news/local-news/west-yorkshire-40-million-make-26014203
February 10th, 2023 update.
Earlier this week, it was revealed that seven services are likely to be withdrawn by operators in April, if the government subsidies they’ve been receiving since 2020 are cut off next month as scheduled. This appears a strange statement given that in the month before, WYCA would receive an additional £41.25 million subsidy.
A further 35 bus routes are likely to be altered, partially cut or have their timetables slashed if the funding is pulled.
The full reported story is at https://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/news/23314301.claims-government-dithering-bus-routes-face-axe/
Passenger numbers not back to pre-pandemic levels.
It’s very interesting to hear that bus passenger numbers are still below pre-pandemic levels, as indeed are train passenger numbers. There is however something here that’s not being properly reported to us, and that’s the decline in bus patronage. This isn’t something new, it has been happening since 1997! See https://www.westyorks-ca.gov.uk/media/2766/appendix-c-evidence-of-wy-trends.pdf
Decline in bus passenger numbers.
Having commented above, we must be blunt, passenger numbers have been in decline for several years, and the pandemic hasn’t helped matters. If we pause and think about events post COVID, is it really surprising to see that passenger numbers are still in decline? We now have a situation in which many people are hybrid working at home 4 out of 5 days a week.
Council’s continue to urge companies to return to office working, whilst at the same time, many council’s continue operate hybrid working practices for a majority of its employees.
Graphic and information source. Bus use in 2014/15 was around 11% lower than in 1997 and that trend continues. (Source West Yorkshire LTP).
The overall patronage decline masks a number of other trends
While the general picture on patronage is one of decline there are some significant trends underlying the overall bus passenger numbers.
After many years of decline in the number of senior and disabled users the introduction of free concessionary travel in 2005/6 reversed this trend providing free travel for those of pensionable age within their local authority area. A second, smaller, increase can be seen in 2007/8 which coincides with the expansion of the concessionary scheme to cover travel nationally by bus for those of pensionable age. A reduction in usage is evident from 2010 which coincides with later age at which passes can be acquired, as result of state pension policy changes. (This downward drift is likely to continue at least through to 2020.)
This increase in senior and disabled travel has helped ameliorate the full impact of what has been a significant period of decline in young people and non-concessionary (full fare) patronage for much of the period up to 2010/11.
Unlike the non-concessionary travel which, as already noted, has seen a recent levelling off and small increase in usage, travel by young people has declined almost continuously – falling by more than 25% since 1997/8. When viewed in combination with the decline in non-concession (full fare) passengers more than 10% lower in 2014/15 than in 1997/8 – the declining use of the bus by these future passengers represents a severe challenge to the bus system in West Yorkshire.
Looking ahead, the demographic trends are also likely to be challenging. The population of West Yorkshire is forecast to rise by 8% from 2.3 million to almost 2.5 million between now and 2031 but the number of young people is expected to grow by just 7%, while those 60 and over are likely to rise by 31%, though much of this increase is amongst older seniors who will probably be less mobile.
The implication is that unless the bus industry can reverse its long term patronage trend of decline in journeys per head by driving up growth amongst young people the revenue earned by bus operators will be limited by the degree to which fares can be raised.
Yorkshire and the Humber, rail use.
Figure 3.4 Yorkshire and the Humber had 51.5 million journeys in the latest year Passenger journeys, Yorkshire and the Humber, annual data, 1 April 1995 to 31 March 2022 (Table 1590).
187 Stations
The total number of journeys for the Yorkshire and the Humber region was 51.5 million between April 2021 and March 2022, which equates to 70% of the 73.8 million journeys two years ago.
The increase in April 2008 to March 2009 was due to the introduction of new estimates of rail travel in PTE areas, which affected both South Yorkshire and West Yorkshire.
The 30.6 million journeys within Yorkshire and the Humber equate to 69% of the 44.5 million journeys made two years ago.
Yorkshire and the Humber recorded 20.9 million journeys to or from other regions, the equivalent of 71% of the 29.3 million journeys made two years ago. Most of these journeys were made to or from the North West (34%), London (24%), the East Midlands (17%), or the North East (13%).
Yorkshire and the Humber has four sub-regions (International Territory Levels (ITL2)) with West Yorkshire accounting for the most (8.2 million) journeys to or from other regions.
Bringing buses back into public control.
Tracey Brabin said, “I will bring buses back under public control, introduce simpler fares, contactless ticketing and greener buses.
As the MP for five years for towns and villages I know the bus system isn’t working. It’s expensive, unreliable and disconnected. Buses should be publicly controlled, putting people before profit. In my first 100 days I will start to make this a reality.“
This will all be done using the £70 million of government funding, which pressumably has to come from taxpayers. That however, has been earmarked for things like vehicle upgrades and subsidising fares, with leaders reluctant to spend it all on simply propping up routes that otherwise be cut.
Principal Towns, Local Growth Centres and buses
So the question I’m going to raise, is why is Wharfedale continuing to become increasingly isolated as a rural community? This simply doesn’t happen elsewhere in the district, indeed this was addressed by council in the Local Plan (see below). Ilkley is a Principal Town, Burley in Wharfedale is a Local Growth Centre, both of which require excellent transport infrastructure to be able to succeed. It would appear that our communities are ‘being thrown under the bus‘, punn intended, by our local politicians.
I always recall the wording from planning applications like Sun Lane, Greenholme Mills, and the Generous Pioneer, about Wharfedale’s excellent transport connectivity. Going forward, that will need to be challenged, and I did warn Bradford Council in my response to the Local Plan consultation back in 2018, and it appears that common sense didn’t prevail:
- Policy SP1: Delivering Sustainable Development.
The Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development
Quite clearly there is a disconnect between housing and infrastructure delivery. That is, although transport infrastructure is at the planning stage, with no defined outcome, many transport policies will be at risk of failure because of the outbreak of COVID, including rail transport. In essence, the lack of a well-established and coherent transport policy would indicate that the Local Plan does not conform to the NPPF sustainability policy, as defined in Section 2, paragraphs 7 to 14 inclusive.
- SP7: Planning for Sustainable Transport
“3.7.4 This policy framework confers a high degree of priority – and some urgency – to projects which enable cycling, seeking to integrate all parts of the District with high-quality, segregated cycling routes conforming to the latest standards.”
This policy, although perfectly reasonable, fails to solve the need to travel across the district – “in too many places in the District, people are excluded from travel if they do not have access to a car, creating transport poverty.” Electric bikes are part of a much more confined local solution, but I doubt whether many people will travel by bike in adverse weather conditions, like rain, snow and ice.
“3.7.5 The transport policies in this plan also confer a high priority to strategic transport projects which enable better regional agglomeration for the purposes of economic growth at the same time as encouraging more people and goods to travel by rail.” Once again, a good forward-thinking strategy, but this relates to regional rather than district travel. The district’s travel infrastructure should be the Council’s priority and needs to be the focus of transport policy, this then needs to align with regional systems.
“3.7.12 Location of Development – The Council will attempt to focus future development growth in areas with greatest levels of accessibility to sustainable transport modes, including public transport, walking, and cycling. Where these do not currently exist, provision will be prioritised for delivery and identified within the Local Infrastructure Plan (LIP) which accompanies the Local Plan, the emerging Bradford Transport Strategy and other corporate and WYCA investment programmes.” As I have seen elsewhere, the transport policy is not defined, has no set budget and no timetable for delivery, in Burley in Wharfedale or throughout the district. So how do Council expect to respond to the ‘rapid change’ required in the NPPF if basic targets and budgets have not been decided, agreed or ring-fenced?
