Bid to save Brighton and Hove bus routes (From The Argus)

Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.........

Ask us non bus user's if we want to keep subsidising their way of life or should we let people who happen to be 60 at a time in their life when they are earning good money with fewer overheads if they should still get FREE bus travel

Could I just say that some of us are not over 60 and do pay for the bus service. These cuts are going to affect us as well. Please could someone advise if there is a petition available online as the Argus has not published the information on where to sign. Many thanks

Last week an article about Buses being cut because of changes to road modifictions, this week this article pops up.Is Mr French holding the gun to The Councils Head I wonder now The Company has the Monopoly.

These cuts are a hard pill to swallow but it's the reality of a country that's skint and is trying to live within it's means.

A Conservative arguing AGAINST cuts to buses?? Now I've seen and heard everything!

But in response to Lisa Williams' comments- if the bus is full, it will only be cut if it is making a loss. Profit making services do not need subsidies.

And maybe I'm missing something but if Jason Kitcat is saying that residents' views will be taken into account, how come we already have a list of services to be cut? Shouldn't residents have been consulted at that stage?

Here's an idea - why don't the Council pool some of their increase in parking income and Go Ahead Group pool some of the profit from their outrageous in-city bus prices and then they can use that to subsidise the routes?

I'm a tribal Labout voter and this is about the third time in succession I've agreed with Coun. Theobald. I'm off for a lie down ...

Here is a link to the petition: http://present.brigh
ton-hove.gov.uk/mgEP
etitionDisplay.aspx?
ID=331&RPID=5475449&
HPID=5475449

People might also want to use www.FixmyTransport.c
om to send a message directly to the council.

sounds like the perfect chance for BLT to compete on routes. they may find the routes "profitable"

Why shouldn't Brighton & Hove Bus and Coach company have some loss leaders. After all, they can always use them to offset some of their tax payments,

mimseycal wrote:
Why shouldn't Brighton & Hove Bus and Coach company have some loss leaders. After all, they can always use them to offset some of their tax payments,

I like the voice of reason! Mimseycal ! I would personally like to see public transport owned by the local councils that way costs would go down !(ok not immediatly but in the long term!)

Council reactivates speed camera on Lewes Road because of unquantified public demand. Council cuts bus routes despite quantified public demand. Discuss.

@caeos - yes it would be interesting to see if Big Lemon could take over the routes. Have they been asked?

diriky wrote:

mimseycal wrote:
Why shouldn't Brighton & Hove Bus and Coach company have some loss leaders. After all, they can always use them to offset some of their tax payments,

I like the voice of reason! Mimseycal ! I would personally like to see public transport owned by the local councils that way costs would go down !(ok not immediatly but in the long term!)

Because councils do such a good job at managing everything else........

Falstaff wrote:
Council reactivates speed camera on Lewes Road because of unquantified public demand. Council cuts bus routes despite quantified public demand. Discuss.

@caeos - yes it would be interesting to see if Big Lemon could take over the routes. Have they been asked?

They only have 5 buses.

Cuts in services yet the council plan to spend money on installing a bus lane on the Lewes Road.
Unbelieveable. It is not needed or wanted and it's a waste of money in a time of belt tightening.
The people involved in this should be ashamed of themselves.

ghost bus driver wrote:

Falstaff wrote:
Council reactivates speed camera on Lewes Road because of unquantified public demand. Council cuts bus routes despite quantified public demand. Discuss.

@caeos - yes it would be interesting to see if Big Lemon could take over the routes. Have they been asked?

They only have 5 buses.

So? If the maths work, they can buy more. It's how small companies become bigger companies. And help provide a challenge to the local monopoly.

They could indeed. They'll also need to replace the ones they have with low-floor vehicles within 5 years. However there's nothing to stop them leasing newer vehicles.
Even B&H drivers have been heard saying there are too many buses in Brighton (Mainly ones who don't want to do 5s all the time though)

Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit wrote:
Here's an idea - why don't the Council pool some of their increase in parking income and Go Ahead Group pool some of the profit from their outrageous in-city bus prices and then they can use that to subsidise the routes? I'm a tribal Labout voter and this is about the third time in succession I've agreed with Coun. Theobald. I'm off for a lie down ...

On the last blog about this subject the Argus clarified that the bus companies are not allowed to cross subsidise routes (presumably on competition grounds) due to the law that was introduced by Councillor Theobald's party in 1985 and upheld by 13 years of your Labour governments. This is where the main responsibility lies.

This situation results in creaming off profitable routes, (if you look at Go-ahead's accounts, you will see that they do very nicely out of it) whilst the tax payer picks up the bill for the unprofitable routes. A concession system, as happens in London, would be far more sensible and likely save the tax payer money.

The cuts are regretable, but I can imagine the "cheaper to send passengers in a taxi" headline if costs were not trimmed.

Also, Argus, what is happening in West and East Sussex where there were to be savage cuts?

Didn't B&H buses drive Big Lemon off their routes by aggressive charging and having those routes as loss leaders?
So a company that can afford to lose money on routes where there is competition is now pleading it can't afford to run routes and wants tax payers money despite consistently putting up costs.
Perhaps it should look at saving money by rationalising it's current services and reducing frequency first.One consistently sees bus after bus queuing at lights through town all on the same route.

i don't have children but i cant see why they stopping school busses. but out at night i can see why some busses should be cut from were i work in hove i see the 81 go past many times and lucky to see one person on not good for other road users or environment all that pollution for so few people

mimseycal wrote:
Why shouldn't Brighton & Hove Bus and Coach company have some loss leaders. After all, they can always use them to offset some of their tax payments,

According to Jason Kitcat, it is illegal (something else to thank the Thatcher Government for) for bus companies to run routes at a loss, so if the council do not subsidise services to outlying areas they will cease to run.
Not everyone that uses these services does so for free - many of us pay for our bus travel - and just because we live on the edge of the city, why should we be disadvantaged and have no evening bus service at all? We pay our taxes and are entitled to some services in return and as for there being no money available, the Council currently have a large budget underspend which would more than cover the cost of the bus services which will be lost, but they refuse to do so and instead propose to lend £14 million of OUR money to a private company to finance the building of the Brighton Eye(sore). Strange they can find that huge sum but can't keep a few buses running. We as the taxpayers will no doubt have to foot the bill for the Brighton Eye when the company goes bust and fails to repay the loan.

Goldenwight wrote:
A Conservative arguing AGAINST cuts to buses?? Now I've seen and heard everything!

But in response to Lisa Williams' comments- if the bus is full, it will only be cut if it is making a loss. Profit making services do not need subsidies.

And maybe I'm missing something but if Jason Kitcat is saying that residents' views will be taken into account, how come we already have a list of services to be cut? Shouldn't residents have been consulted at that stage?

Jason Kitcat claims that there was consultation - however, when asked about the areas of consultation, his reply was "I'm afraid I don't have a breakdown of which services the surveyed users were on in relation to the consultation." So - maybe they were all on town centre routes that had no proposed cuts? Hey, don't you just love democracy?

What about the Sunday 2A bus service to Steyning, this service has been stopped in the evening too, this service now only runs 9.19am from Steyning, with the last bus back to Steyning arriving in Steyning at 6.56pm. I work sundays and it's not always possible to get a lift nor can I always afford to pay £13-£15 for a cab between Shoreham & Steyning so now have to consider changing jobs, which is not easy to do!!!!

Luthienna wrote:

mimseycal wrote:
Why shouldn't Brighton & Hove Bus and Coach company have some loss leaders. After all, they can always use them to offset some of their tax payments,

According to Jason Kitcat, it is illegal (something else to thank the Thatcher Government for) for bus companies to run routes at a loss, so if the council do not subsidise services to outlying areas they will cease to run.
Not everyone that uses these services does so for free - many of us pay for our bus travel - and just because we live on the edge of the city, why should we be disadvantaged and have no evening bus service at all? We pay our taxes and are entitled to some services in return and as for there being no money available, the Council currently have a large budget underspend which would more than cover the cost of the bus services which will be lost, but they refuse to do so and instead propose to lend £14 million of OUR money to a private company to finance the building of the Brighton Eye(sore). Strange they can find that huge sum but can't keep a few buses running. We as the taxpayers will no doubt have to foot the bill for the Brighton Eye when the company goes bust and fails to repay the loan.

Illegal to run routes at a loss? Which law states that it is illegal? And please do not repeat that old stnadby of all politicians since 1990 who blamed Thatcher. We have many unpopular laws and their consequent by-products but no one blames the PM of the time when that law was introduced.

HJarrs wrote:

Jimmy Stewart's Imaginary Rabbit wrote:
Here's an idea - why don't the Council pool some of their increase in parking income and Go Ahead Group pool some of the profit from their outrageous in-city bus prices and then they can use that to subsidise the routes? I'm a tribal Labout voter and this is about the third time in succession I've agreed with Coun. Theobald. I'm off for a lie down ...

On the last blog about this subject the Argus clarified that the bus companies are not allowed to cross subsidise routes (presumably on competition grounds) due to the law that was introduced by Councillor Theobald's party in 1985 and upheld by 13 years of your Labour governments. This is where the main responsibility lies.

This situation results in creaming off profitable routes, (if you look at Go-ahead's accounts, you will see that they do very nicely out of it) whilst the tax payer picks up the bill for the unprofitable routes. A concession system, as happens in London, would be far more sensible and likely save the tax payer money.

The cuts are regretable, but I can imagine the "cheaper to send passengers in a taxi" headline if costs were not trimmed.

Also, Argus, what is happening in West and East Sussex where there were to be savage cuts?

Thank you for your reply. I wasn't aware that bus companies couldn't cross-subsidise - why on earth not? I totally agree with your analysis; it seems like GoAhead got the best of the deal: rob us blind on the profitable routes and also make us pay (via the council subsidies) for the 'community' ones. I suppose there's also a rule that the Council can't use parking fees as a bus subsidy!

Take your point about the last Labour government not doing anything to overturn the situation - personally I'd have nationalised all transport and energy companies without any compensation, but then I'm fast reverting back to my Communist teenage years!

biker brighton wrote:
i don't have children but i cant see why they stopping school busses. but out at night i can see why some busses should be cut from were i work in hove i see the 81 go past many times and lucky to see one person on not good for other road users or environment all that pollution for so few people

The 81 is a very popular service. I don't tensd to use late at night in Hove, but I do use it frequently in Brighton to go out at weekends/evenings and to carry shopping which I couldn't do without a car or without paying a fortune on taxis. My area is very hilly and many old people and families with chikldren depend on this service. In fact I would say that it's not frequent enough and that the mainly single decker buses on this route are very inadequate for the number of people who use it. I pay full council tax, don't own a car because I can't afford it, don't use a bike because it's so dangerous and the town is overcrowded with traffic as it is. This is an essential service.