National Consultation on Bus Franchising: Responses from Reclaim our Buses Campaign
Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to lower the consent threshold that LTAs are required to meet to prepare a bus franchising scheme assessment and why?
Yes we agree, and we think that anything that would make franchising easier and available to more authorities (not just mayoral combined authorities) is a good idea. Better buses should be available to everyone in the country not just to mayoral combined authorities. In time, legal changes should make it possible for non-mayoral authorities to begin a franchising assessment without having to go through the secretary of state.
The requirements to assess the franchising scheme are still in place, and this is a sufficient safeguard for an LTA to make a careful assessment.
Do you have any other comments on the consent threshold that LTAs are required to meet to prepare a franchising scheme assessment?
Not answered
Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to revise the approach to the option identification and why?
Not answered
Do you have any other comments on the proposal to revise the approach to option identification?
Not answered
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to reduce the content LTAs need to provide in the franchise assessment and why?
Not answered
Do you have any other comments on the proposed changes to the franchise assessment?
Not answered
Do you agree or disagree with the addition of the section entitled ‘putting people at the heart of franchising’ and why?
We agree that people should be at the heart of franchising. However, we feel that this section does not go far enough and does not provide enough detail.
The guidance mentions actively engaging with communities early on. This is good, but there should also be ongoing mechanisms for feedback and review from bus users and wider community members, which should be built in to franchise governance models. It would be good to give more of a steer on what the engagement looks like.
Driver training on disability awareness is mentioned. This is important, but in practice in our area (West of England) the biggest bus company (First Bus) only provides half a day of disability equality training, which is provided in-house. Disability awareness training should be provided by people with lived experience of Disability, by a Disabled people’s organisation. This needs to include hidden disabilities. This has been offered to First, but they have refused.
The bus driver is often the first point of contact for a passenger, and their training and awareness is essential to the passenger experience. Other forms of awareness and training are also important, including anti-racism training, as community members have reported issues with racism on buses. This is not explicitly stated in the guidance on training, which focuses on VAWG and ASB. Bystander awareness training for drivers and any other on board staff is widely available, for example the evidence-based programme by kindling: https://www.kindling-interventions.com/.
This type of training should be a key part of the role of additional staff on the bus, as the driver is often not in a position to intervene. First Bus has introduced ‘revenue protection officers’, who wear police-like uniforms and body armour. Instead, it would be better to invest in a role more similar to the bus conductor role, which includes checking tickets but also has skillful awareness to support passengers who need it.
Communications campaigns on buses encouraging bystander intervention is a good idea, and has been very successful in many places, and we welcome this suggestion.
The design of buses themselves can lead to exclusion. Having a single wheelchair space prevents two wheelchair users from travelling together, and creates conflicts between wheelchair users and parents with young children in buggies. People don’t come out of the house because they feel they can’t face this situation. More spacious standing space and folding chairs as part of bus design would enable greater versatility and capacity on buses. Need to put customers at the heart of the service and address those needs.
All communications should not be via social media, but has to include physical posters. Digital exclusion is a key aspect for equalities. A lot of people who are digitally excluded find it very difficult to find information about buses. Inclusive information includes printed timetables on buses, that are kept up to date with any timetable changes, clear accurate and up to date maps of bus routes on all bus stops, and functional live information updates on arrival times. New bus services promotion has been all online - bus timetable doesn’t give enough information. Route information should be really easy to read and follow. Bus stop locations should be specified. Having printed timetables and maps is important as well. These are all part of business as usual, but are not implemented well enough in practice. Relying on people using smart phones and accessing websites is not inclusive of many bus users who may have visual impairments, learning difficulties or be digitally excluded. What do people do if you’re standing at a bus stop and you don’t know if the bus is arriving or not, and there’s no way to find out whether the bus is coming or not? Need accountability to be able to phone up and say ‘where’s the bus?’.
Having a single point of contact for reporting incidents is a good idea, but it is important that this is accessible to people who are digitally excluded. Not just a website, but a telephone helpline with a person receiving the call. This needs to be available and visible on every bus stop.
Driver welfare is very important, and trade union collaboration is key to identifying driver needs in specific areas. Access to toilet facilities along bus routes will benefit bus drivers, but should also be made available to passengers. Lack of public toilets on bus routes is a huge problem for people to use buses e.g. older and disabled bus users. The increase in chronic conditions people e.g. colitis and crohns makes it all the more important to have funding for the public toilets. Mobility Hubs where there is an interchange needs to also have a toilet. They should also provide need information, signposting and public telephone.
What, if any, suggestions do you have on how the franchising guidance could better:
support the delivery of the government’s missions
promote the government’s objectives?
Reliability is essential for encouraging people to switch from cars to public transport in rural areas. High-quality bus services are key to making this transition viable. As these services improve and become more convenient, demand will naturally increase.
A crucial aspect of this is providing comfortable, covered waiting areas. Mobility hubs, for instance, could offer sheltered spaces for passengers, as well as secure bike storage and lockers for wet gear. These hubs would also benefit people who want to cycle but can only manage part of the way by bike and need a bus for the rest of their journey.
Cross-border buses need to be improved - we have gaps where buses are not allowed to stop along their route in a place outside of the authority area, or a cross-border bus has been cancelled, leading to lack of access to schooling.
Funding is key - local governments are scared to begin franchising, but buses are so essential that it should be funded properly. Investment is needed in routes. Franchising is one necessary step, but is not sufficient, and is meaningless without good funding for bus services. Councils may decide not to go for franchising because they dont’ have enough money to complete their statutory equalities requirements - have to be funded to do it well. And this is essential for economy. Investing in people, in great services for users, drivers need good training and support, and you can’t run buses if you can’t get people to drive them.
Do you have comments on any other parts of the guidance?
Not answered
