Agenda item

Report of the Cabinet Member Development and Safety

The Mayor outlined the procedure for dealing with the petition and invited Mrs Doreen Spiers (Friends of Springbank) and Andy Hayes (Hesters Way Partnership) as petition organisers, to formally present the petition. 

Mrs Spiers, a resident in Springbank and a regular user of the C Service, refuted the claim that the changes had benefited any residents.  Andy Hayes commended Doreen for having initiated the petition, which had garnered over 1000 signatures.  He urged the Council to support a request that Stagecoach undertake a consultation exercise on the change to the C Service; namely the removal of the service to Springbank Way in its entirety.  Whilst Stagecoach had calculated "that most customers using the affected stops on Springbank Way will need to walk a maximum of 2 minutes further to the nearest bus”, which equated to ‘only’ 500m, the majority of people that used the C Service were not physically able to walk this distance.  The change to this service had impacted some residents’ ability to access not only the local shops, but the resource centre which housed the Doctors surgery which had over 200+ registered patients and received 60,000 visits a year, as well as a Dentist surgery, Pharmacy and childcare facility and it was noted that this building was owned by Cheltenham Borough Council.  The service had changed on the 01 May 2016, without any public consultation or Equality Impact Assessment having been undertaken by Stagecoach, they had simply advised the Transport Board of the intended changes and then implemented them.  Stagecoach cited punctuality as the reason for the change, having given no consideration to residents needs, and stated that since the change punctuality had increased by 2.37% between May and August 2016, which the petitioner did not consider as much of an improvement.  He appreciated that this council was not the local transport authority but hoped that it could put pressure on Gloucestershire County Council, to have Stagecoach review their decision in light of the petition.  

Members were aware that Rupert Cox, Managing Director of Stagecoach West, was present in the public gallery and suggested that, having expressed his willingness to answer Member questions, the matter should be debated at this meeting.  The Cabinet Member Development and Safety had been minded to refer the matter to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, but was comfortable to debate the issue at Council, if that was Members’ preference.  

Councillor Stennett formally proposed that the matter be debated at  this meeting, with Councillor Clucas as his seconder. 

Councillor Colin Hay raised a point of order.  He felt that the issue would be easier to debate at Overview and Scrutiny as the usual rules of debate could be dis-applied with the Chairman of the Committee using their discretion to allow non-committee Members to speak and ask questions.  

Upon a vote it was RESOLVED that the mater be debated at this meeting. 

The Mayor was advised that it was at her discretion to extend the time allowed for the debate.  

Rupert Cox, Managing Director of Stagecoach West gave the following responses to Member questions; 

• As outlined in the report, the problem with the service prior to the change on the 01 May 2016 was that Stagecoach were not able to deliver the level of punctuality on Service C that they or their customers would expect, with 1 in 10 of the buses running late, compared to 1 in 20 across the network.  Members were reminded that the service only ever ran in one direction and increased congestion, poor traffic light priority at key junctions and parking issues on residential streets, had all played a part in making journeys run late and these small delays regularly escalated into gaps in their timetable.  He clarified that punctuality was up from 90% to 93% which equated to 25% of the buses for that particular service.  To mitigate the walking time for some residents, the route for Service B was extended, which was actually closer for some people and this service journeyed through to the Town Centre.  The only solution for solving the punctuality problem on the Service C would have been the introduction of an additional vehicle, which would have resulted in a 33% cost increase, but there would not have been a third more users to cover this cost.  
• The C Service was carrying approximately 12,000 passengers a week, which was about the same level as before the change had been introduced, but he was aware that some people were using the Service B.  He was fairly confident that some people were using the service more and some were using it less.  
• Stagecoach was a private company providing a public service and he recognised that for this very reason, they couldn’t simply do as they wanted.  Their ultimate aim was to increase the number of people that used buses.  
• 90% of the services run by Stagecoach were run on an entirely commercial basis.  At present, Stagecoach did provide some services on behalf of the County Council.  He believed that the County Council were considering changes to this service and Stagecoach, would, at that time bid to provide that service.  

• The first phase of the Transport Plan had resulted in mixed fortunes for Stagecoach bus services.  Route B had benefited from the work to Albion Street, as it had reduced the distance it needed to travel, however, it had been unfortunate that these works had coincided with the closure of North Parade.  He had reviewed statistics for the A40, A4019 and Tewkesbury Road and commented that they did not make for comfortable reading, given that the A40 corridor was an important route for both Cheltenham and Gloucester.   The 94 Service, which used the A40 corridor was one of the most important services in the County, which over the last 15 years had seen its peak running time increase by 90%, which was the largest increase for any service in the UK which he considered was not acceptable.   Longer journeys cost more money as they required more buses and costly fuel and ultimately pushed people to use their cars, which meant less people using buses.  He was aware that there were proposals for bus priority measures and whilst he appreciated that buses were not the only solution for greener travel, any solutions would be welcome and Stagecoach were eager to discuss solutions with the County Council. 
  
  
• Unlike public bodies, Stagecoach were not required to undertake public consultation.  They had to register any changes with the Transport Board at least 56 days before the implementation date and often did so 6-8 weeks before.  In this case, Stagecoach had written to Councillors in wards that were affected and in January, they had also held a Member seminar to allow Councillors to discuss any changes ahead of the 1 May implementation.  In some cases this had led to further local debates and Stagecoach had attended Parish Council meetings. He admitted that regardless of any consultation, the fundamental issue was that the service was not commercially viable and the outcome would have been the same.  With 15 years of experience, he could guarantee that had they reduced the frequency of Service C less people would have used the service and he predicted that it numbers would reduce by 30-50%, which would impact the entire service not only the route and as a company they needed to consider the service in its entirety. Independent research by Transport Focus showed that punctuality and frequency of bus services was most important to service users. 
• Stagecoach did work closely with the Integrated Transport Department, though there was always scope to do more and he was sometimes frustrated by the speed at which improvements were delivered.
  
  
• He had been closely monitoring the JCS and whilst some of the proposed developments would provide exciting opportunities to existing routes, he had some serious concerns that some would not be serviceable, but was unwilling to go into any detail.   
  
  
• Stagecoach worked to the Transport Act 1986 following bus deregulation.  Bus operators could decide where it could run services commercially and where not and the Integrated Transport departments in that area would could decide what services it wants to subsidise.  He stressed that Cheltenham had a good commercial service, which was not replicated in other areas and those areas were being subjected to cuts.  
  
  
• Gloucestershire County Council set the rules in relation to when and where people could use concession passes and it was the County Council that had decided that a £1 charge applied to those with a concession pass that got on a bus at a Park and Ride facility.  He could appreciate why the public felt this absurd.  
  
  
• Profits meant that Stagecoach were able to keep investing in vehicles, which in Cheltenham were on average half the age of those in Gloucestershire.  An app had been developed that would allow people to monitor bus times in real time and this would be further developed in the future to allow people to buy tickets.  
  
  
• Off peak services did run in areas in the town but this was not something which could easily be replicated for Service C.
   
• There were some junctions in the Springbank area and a long section of Welch Road which was a single carriageway which had delayed the Service C.  Stagecoach were not completely inflexible and if something was to change in relation to this congestion, then the decision could be revisited.  Parking controls around the Springbank area, which were enforced and adhered to and the installation of a bus lane on Tewkesbury Road would result in journeys on this route being a minute or two quicker and allow Stagecoach to reinstate the service.  

The Cabinet Member Development and Safety suggested that rather than move into a formal debate now, the matter should now be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Members agreed that the committee should be asked to look at bus services in general and how it can be done better in Cheltenham, rather than focussing on particular services.  Councillor Malcolm seconded the motion. 

Upon a vote it was unanimously

RESOLVED that the matter be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, who be asked to review bus services in general and how they could be better provided in Cheltenham.