Agenda item

The Board was asked to consider and approve the draft Scrutiny Report on 'Bus Provision and Community Transport Provision'. The Chairman, who was also the lead member of the Scrutiny Task Group (Task Group) and  thanked all those involved.

In introducing the report the Chairman suggested that the Scrutiny had been very revealing and had involved discussions with bus operators. The report was critical of current levels of bus services although some positive aspects had been highlighted and the report reflected what the Task Group believed to be the way forward. The Task Group had found that issues with reliability put people off using buses and there was a need to get to grips with how to connect public transport, which was reflected in the report's recommendations.  A Wychavon District Cabinet Member had made valuable points about the economic impact of bus services. A big issue was the lack of incentive for bus operators to increase passenger numbers.

The report's first recommendation addressed the need for a strategic approach to bus services which had been lacking in recent years, for example links to investment sites and accessing funds from Section 106. While it was important to note that the Council was in a very different position now in terms of staff numbers, staff were capable and there were a lot of positive things which the Council could do; the report was an important starting point and intended to be helpful and constructive.

The Vice-Chairman (also a member of the Task Group) endorsed the report and agreed the way forward was about how the Council stepped up to the challenge of changing attitudes about bus services, communicating better and being more strategic. She suggested that the report be sent to District Council Leaders, and advised that Wychavon District Council was thinking of committing investment to supporting public transport in view of its contribution to supporting the economy. She also highlighted the approach of other councils such as Cornwall, which was very different to Worcestershire.

Board members were invited to comment on the report and the following main points were made:

·         All Board members praised the report and the detail included.

·         A member referred to his work to support bus projects in his local area of Upton, and the core issues of isolation for the young and elderly and for those with learning disabilities, some of whom faced a difficult walk to the bus stop. Isolation was the problem, but also tackling congestion.

·         A member flagged up issues around the Concessionary Fares Scheme referred to in the report. This was a national issue and he suggested that the £5m budget could be better spent to support transport in rural areas and that he would like to encourage the Local Government Association and other networks to look at the impact of the Scheme on the delivery of public transport in rural areas.

·         It was suggested that the report should be sent to the Parliamentary Rural Economy Committee, which was looking at public transport options for young people in rural areas.

·         The Council and Executive needed to take the report on board and try to reverse the consequences with public transport which had crept up over a ten year period, without the Council understanding the full implications.

·         The lead Task Group member acknowledged that the wording around minimum baseline services and definitions of category 1 villages could be tighter, however the report was intended as a starting point.

·         It was agreed that a more strategic approach to public transport and expenditure of the budget (£21m approximately) was needed.

·         The recommendation for a joined up approach to funding opportunities through the planning process (S106) could be very exciting, and should be pursued, however several members were aware of issues with accessing funds for health services and stressed the need for S106 requests to be very specific, because of legislation involved.

·         Several members pointed out that getting people out of cars would also contribute to targets for climate change and air quality.

·         Regarding the problems with withdrawal of services to the Habberley estate, the lead Task Group member advised that the problem had been made worse by the fact that local members had not been involved in conversations taking place about this.

·         The potential to make more use of school routes and driver capacity was welcomed.

·         The Board Member who chaired the Economy and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Panel welcomed the support for community transport, which his Panel viewed as essential and which only received £90,000 funding.

·         A member pointed out that many villages in the Wychavon area would not come under a category 1 type and included many older residents who could not shop without help from neighbours and did not have the ability to use online services. The feedback he received was that residents wanted minibuses and community transport, and not 52 seater buses.

·         The problem of how to get people to use buses was highlighted, when many people had got used to the lack of buses and so did not look to use them, or were deterred by low quality, high pollution buses. The lead Task Group member acknowledged problems with quality and pointed to improvements such as contactless payment and electric buses, which were achievable. What was needed was more incentive for bus operators, but in his view also more capital investment from the Council.

·         Members praised Wychavon District Council's work to transport workers to key investment sites.

·         The report's recommendation for more marketing and information for bus users was endorsed by a member who used buses and Board members agreed that parishes may be able to contribute towards timetable information.

·         It was agreed that community transport had a role in bridging the gap, although some people could be deterred from using what could feel like a small 'club', something which a more standardised branding could improve.

·         It was confirmed that District Councils had been advised about the Scrutiny, with Wychavon District Council responding positively. Engagement with parish councils and user groups had been excellent.

·         It would be helpful for the report to reference contributions from individual councillors' divisional funds for bus services, although it was acknowledged that these were one-off contributions.

Comments were invited from other councillors present and the following main points were made:

·         A member of the Task Group highlighted the implications for health, both physical and mental from a lack of bus services and increasing pollution. He also highlighted the need to get people out of cars and using buses, even if only occasionally, and urged the Council to look to areas which had been successful in achieving good services, for example Oxfordshire, Brighton and Chester. A contributory factor was discouraging town centre parking and increased parking charges.  

·         A member reiterated the point that action by the Executive was needed to take things forward. He hoped the bus companies would make use of the report, and the level of detail about its market which few companies would have available to them. He also referred to bus services on the Channel Islands, which would merit a visit from the bus operators. The lead Task Group member reported that he had felt encouraged by the openness of the bus operator representatives in discussing the issues and possible solutions, which indicated a desire to work with the Council.

·         A member who represented a rural area, felt the starting point should be to look at how people accessed services they needed, not just buses. Community transport should be an integral part of the Strategy, since although it may not be for everyone, she could not see another way. The Council needed to enable things to happen, which may need a different and flexible approach, for example buying minibuses and paying drivers. She also suggested that the Council could pressure central government to amend legislation which currently prevented local authorities from directly running buses.  The lead Task Group member pointed out that the community transport sector had said it could not replace bus services due to lack of confidence in continued funding but also lack of drivers, although obtaining minibuses was not necessarily a problem. He reiterated concerns about the fragmented nature of community transport, although the sector was something the OSPB wanted to look at again.

·         Other Board members agreed that community transport was a key element which needed to be looked at and that the appropriate public transport may not be buses.

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility (CMR) for Economy and Infrastructure commented that in respect of contributions received through the planning process, they were very much one-off rather than continued support. He cautioned about use of public funds, however well-intentioned, for bus routes, recalling financial support for a service from County Hall to the hospital which was insufficiently used. He also referred to potential legal issues regarding volunteer drivers when they were perceived to be running against commercial operators, although a change in the legal situation may help. Although not the same as a bus service, community transport did make a contribution.

The Chairman acknowledged the need for care when spending public money but also felt it was important to give people the opportunity and as a Council, to lead. At this point he also made reference to use of technology which was an area of interest for Cllr Kent who had expressed an interest in being involved. The Vice-Chair explained that she had shared her information about Cornwall Connect with Cllr Kent.

Arising from the discussion, the Board agreed the draft report, subject to additions to recommendations 1,2,3 and 6, and also an additional recommendation that Scrutiny Members meet with Members of Parliament to ask them to support amending the Concessionary Fare Scheme, to avoid unintended consequences. References would also be made in the report to financial contributions to bus services from the Councillors' Divisional Fund.