School and hospital bus services in Brighton and Hove hit by cuts (From The Argus)

HJarrs wrote:
Labour group leader Gill Mitchell said: “The Greens are now cutting bus services at the same time as massively increasing parking charges in the city.

But why are they doing this? Could it be that desperate measures are now required due to Labour and Conservative conniving to prevent a small council tax rise? The council is down £5million by my reckoning. Of course, if these services were to be continued the political opportunists would point of the high level of subsidy! I level these cuts at Labour and Conservative doors. Otherwise, what would they cut?

Another comment that could be attributable to Jason Kitkat, but the punctuation of the article is confusing (please clarify Argus);

"Commercial companies cannot use profits from popular routes to fund loss-making services." is not true. Commercial companies choose not to cross subsidise and generally maximise profits.

Had B&H buses been retained in the public sector, or a not-for-profit company, it would have been able to reinvest its £5million+ profits back into the local network and cross subsidise loss making routes without relying on the public purse. Instead profits pay dividents and super-fat salaries and pensions for the Go-ahead board members.

ray ellerton wrote:
Private enterprise bus services should take the good with the bad...profit/loss should be calculated on total of ALL routes....why should they pick and choose. There is a recession and i have had to take a hit in last couple of years, so why shouldn't they?

lorrie1 wrote:
Funny how there cutting bus services, Would this have anything to do with brighton buses moving to crowhurst rd? I
read in the paper the other day that they are creating loads of new jobs, two projects that will cost 2m each, I smell something fishy,
Whats really going on Mr french???

Nathan_Adler wrote:
Just who voted for these "Greens"?

It defies belief, it really does.

Sarah Booker wrote:

HJarrs wrote:
Labour group leader Gill Mitchell said: “The Greens are now cutting bus services at the same time as massively increasing parking charges in the city.

But why are they doing this? Could it be that desperate measures are now required due to Labour and Conservative conniving to prevent a small council tax rise? The council is down £5million by my reckoning. Of course, if these services were to be continued the political opportunists would point of the high level of subsidy! I level these cuts at Labour and Conservative doors. Otherwise, what would they cut?

Another comment that could be attributable to Jason Kitkat, but the punctuation of the article is confusing (please clarify Argus);

"Commercial companies cannot use profits from popular routes to fund loss-making services." is not true. Commercial companies choose not to cross subsidise and generally maximise profits.

Had B&H buses been retained in the public sector, or a not-for-profit company, it would have been able to reinvest its £5million+ profits back into the local network and cross subsidise loss making routes without relying on the public purse. Instead profits pay dividents and super-fat salaries and pensions for the Go-ahead board members.

All quotes are attributed.

The line "commercial companies cannot use profits from popular routes to fund loss-making services," is not a comment or quote by Coun Kitkat but taken by Tim from the 1985 Transport Act.

HJarrs wrote:

Sarah Booker wrote:

HJarrs wrote:
Labour group leader Gill Mitchell said: “The Greens are now cutting bus services at the same time as massively increasing parking charges in the city.

But why are they doing this? Could it be that desperate measures are now required due to Labour and Conservative conniving to prevent a small council tax rise? The council is down £5million by my reckoning. Of course, if these services were to be continued the political opportunists would point of the high level of subsidy! I level these cuts at Labour and Conservative doors. Otherwise, what would they cut?

Another comment that could be attributable to Jason Kitkat, but the punctuation of the article is confusing (please clarify Argus);

"Commercial companies cannot use profits from popular routes to fund loss-making services." is not true. Commercial companies choose not to cross subsidise and generally maximise profits.

Had B&H buses been retained in the public sector, or a not-for-profit company, it would have been able to reinvest its £5million+ profits back into the local network and cross subsidise loss making routes without relying on the public purse. Instead profits pay dividents and super-fat salaries and pensions for the Go-ahead board members.

All quotes are attributed.

The line "commercial companies cannot use profits from popular routes to fund loss-making services," is not a comment or quote by Coun Kitkat but taken by Tim from the 1985 Transport Act.

Sarah, thankyou. I stand corrected.

It seems then that the 1985 Transport Act is responsible and at fault, however, I think this is so that large companies can't subsidise routes in order to bankrupt competitors. However, the large companies have continually done so. This is the pervesity of deregulating the buses and creating a market which results in the tax payer subsidising loss making routes while the bus companies can skim off the profit from profitable routes! Its worse than I thought! Clearly, the first step is to re-regulate the buses.

HJarrs wrote:
Labour group leader Gill Mitchell said: “The Greens are now cutting bus services at the same time as massively increasing parking charges in the city.

But why are they doing this? Could it be that desperate measures are now required due to Labour and Conservative conniving to prevent a small council tax rise? The council is down £5million by my reckoning. Of course, if these services were to be continued the political opportunists would point of the high level of subsidy! I level these cuts at Labour and Conservative doors. Otherwise, what would they cut?

Another comment that could be attributable to Jason Kitkat, but the punctuation of the article is confusing (please clarify Argus);

"Commercial companies cannot use profits from popular routes to fund loss-making services." is not true. Commercial companies choose not to cross subsidise and generally maximise profits.

Had B&H buses been retained in the public sector, or a not-for-profit company, it would have been able to reinvest its £5million+ profits back into the local network and cross subsidise loss making routes without relying on the public purse. Instead profits pay dividents and super-fat salaries and pensions for the Go-ahead board members.

D5 wrote:

HJarrs wrote:
Labour group leader Gill Mitchell said: “The Greens are now cutting bus services at the same time as massively increasing parking charges in the city.

But why are they doing this? Could it be that desperate measures are now required due to Labour and Conservative conniving to prevent a small council tax rise? The council is down £5million by my reckoning. Of course, if these services were to be continued the political opportunists would point of the high level of subsidy! I level these cuts at Labour and Conservative doors. Otherwise, what would they cut?

Another comment that could be attributable to Jason Kitkat, but the punctuation of the article is confusing (please clarify Argus);

"Commercial companies cannot use profits from popular routes to fund loss-making services." is not true. Commercial companies choose not to cross subsidise and generally maximise profits.

Had B&H buses been retained in the public sector, or a not-for-profit company, it would have been able to reinvest its £5million+ profits back into the local network and cross subsidise loss making routes without relying on the public purse. Instead profits pay dividents and super-fat salaries and pensions for the Go-ahead board members.

Your post is utter rubbish.
How can B&H be "retained?" the entire industry was de-regulated during the thatcher era. Like all the utilities,BT etc
Don't vote tory.

Ps- my go-ahead pension isn't fat cat by the way -can you make sure i get more though being an employee perhaps?

BB1975 wrote:
What is this council trying to achieve? On the one hand massively increasing parking charges and then cutting public transport routes. On top of that Brighton and Hove buses increased their fares, for the second time in 6 months in April, to extortionate rates. The council say they want to discourage people from using their cars but how does this help make that happen? I’ve no time for the Conservatives and Labour didn’t do a great job of running this council but the Greens seem to be completely clueless, making the most contradictory and ridiculous decisions ever. It seems to me it’s always those who can least afford it that pay the price during times of recession. While Brighton and Hove Buses continues to rake in profits those of us who have no choice but to use their bus services suffer.

The Heretic wrote:
The 56 service would be a lot more useful to Knoll and Hangleton residents (many elderly and plenty with young families) at it's western end if it served Hove Polyclinic and the Co-op superstore instead of bowling straight along Old Shoreham Road, half the length of which, from Holmes Ave to Hove Park tavern is served by 5/5A.

B&H Bus Co say it's a council issue, the council say it's to serve all but non-existant use at two stops near the cemetaries, which would be easily accessible by 2/2A 5/5A from either end if the council would just open the entrances back up!

So a potentially even more useful service is effectively prevented from being developed by hidebound myopia on the part of the council (and before anyone jumps on the present incumbents, this has been the case for years).

Dealing with idiots wrote:
If your MP is Dr Lucas then don't bother. She is a lovely person but it would seem has absolutely zero influence with the gang of four, Kitcat, Davey, West & Duncan. They have their own totalitarian vision for the city. No wonder she has started to distance herself as an act of political self preservation.

Morpheus wrote:
I've read some rubbish in my time but some of the comments here sum up why the country is in the mess it is. The bus company is a private company that has to make a profit to pay staff and invest in new buses. It cannot run in the way many people are suggesting. The council funds unprofitable routes. If it decides to cut the funding the loss of these routes is nothing to do with the bus company. Get used to the cuts and increasing travel costs because it will only gets worse as the money runs out and the government borrowing and debt continues to increase.

sussex12 wrote:
I have to hold my hands up and say I was one of the people who voted the Greens in. Cant wait to get them out now. At the time they seemed like a breath of fresh air and couldnt I thought do a worse job than the conservatives or labour . How wrong I was. As other people say making it difficult to use a car in town and yet cutting bus services and increasing fares. My children go to Blatchington Mill and I used to live in Westdene, if they cut that bus then theres no option but to use cars otherwise the kids will have to take a bus into town and then out again a couple of hours journey, and the bus service was always unreliable in Westdene (apart from the park and ride which has gone I believe) so you had to have a car. Greens are spending our money on digging up roads all over the town to make green cycle lanes....do they not realise how much fuel and pollution we are using/creating sitting in traffic jams all day. Thats not very green in my book.

mimseycal wrote:
Surely this is going beyond mere ineptitude? I seriously think we need to start thinking in terms of civil disobedience.

ray ellerton wrote:
Private enterprise bus services should take the good with the bad...profit/loss should be calculated on total of ALL routes....why should they pick and choose. There is a recession and i have had to take a hit in last couple of years, so why shouldn't they?

john newman wrote:
Why does the council not run its own bus service like it used to years ago. Competition please!

St Peters wrote:

lorrie1 wrote:
Funny how there cutting bus services, Would this have anything to do with brighton buses moving to crowhurst rd? I
read in the paper the other day that they are creating loads of new jobs, two projects that will cost 2m each, I smell something fishy,
Whats really going on Mr french???

It's smoke and mirrors and bad reporting lorrie. They don't actually create 100's of jobs. 50 jobs a year is natural wastage for drivers at B&H. Once again 'Sir' Roger has spun the story to his own advantage. Let's not forget that Rog the dodge has a large personal financial interest in the Conway street development.

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
I have been asking for weeks
Why there is a number 25 bus every five minutes along the Lewes Road to the unis and in the morning sometimes there are literally four bumper to bumper completely empty.
I suggested that this huge impact on the environment be investigated before any work was
Allowed to be carried out on creating an unnecessary bus lane in this route.
Now I read an allegation that B&H buses are possibly doing this to drive a competitor out. And this council still wants to put a lane in for a monopoly provider.
This is a serious allegation and I will be contacting my MP and the tax payers alliance.

Blatchington Mill Parent wrote:

ray ellerton wrote:
Private enterprise bus services should take the good with the bad...profit/loss should be calculated on total of ALL routes....why should they pick and choose. There is a recession and i have had to take a hit in last couple of years, so why shouldn't they?

Will someone from B&H Bus Company or the Council please tell me how the children who were sent from Patcham and Westdene to Blatchington Mill and Hove Park Schools as a result of the last school catchment area rearrangement will get to school when the 96 service is cut? This will particularly affect the pupils at Hove Park's lower school campus because of the distance involved. There is no other direct public transport from Westdene and Patcham to these schools. This cut has not been thought through and should be urgently reconsidered.

Westdener wrote:
The first round of school catchment changes in 2009 resulted in Westdene/Withdean areas included within the Blatch/Hove Park Catchment hence the relevancy of the No 96. The change to catchment to include these areas within Patcham was imposed by the Council in 2010. Therefore the service remains essential for these kids to get to and from school, of which the vast majority are not siblings.

chilliman wrote:
If the bus depot gets moved to Crowhurst Road we can presumably look forward to no buses running when we get any snow. I live in Patcham which is just abandoned, with buses either stopping at Preston Circus or maybe just going up to the A23 roundabout and then back into town.

Maybe we can have some road clearance at last.