(31 May 2024, 9:24 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Well Labour has commited that the ban on municipals is going, so I'd hold them up to that bargain. Labour mayor and Labour government.
Ideally, assuming munipals are allowed, personally I'd just like to see Nexus (not a mistake) buy a massive share in Stagecoach Busways, but still let Stagecoach have a small share - maybe 80/20%? Then franchise the rest of the network out with the ultimate aim that the new municipal above takes over Riverside and Deptford aswell.
It's the best of both worlds, have a publically owned bus network for the main urban routes but with a small share from a company who actually can run buses, rather than going all gung-ho and having the likes of Gammon playing real life Bus Tycoon.
The rest of the network will never be massively profitable, so lowest cost will probably be the best option for those routes being cross subsidised from the routes above so just franchise them out maybe controlled by Northumberland and Durham respectively rather than an office in Newcastle who doesn't get nor never will get Berwick. I don't see why you'd want to have a no growth network on the likes of the 39/40/62/63 and at the same time pay a premium to do so.
It's basically the model in Nottingham and they've arguably got the best public transport in the country outside of London and I can't see Stagecoach being unhappy over keeping a share of something that makes a massive profit rather than potentially losing everything. I'd imagine Arriva and GNE would happy to wash their hands of their depots though.
Press release on the Labour buses btw: https://labour.org.uk/updates/press-rele...-services/ - Quite hard to back down now.
Again, my question is why?
Any operator would have very limited say, not to mention control, if they only had a 20% share. It'd do nothing, other than entitle them to a share of profit or dividends, rather than that being reinvested back into the network. I'm also not sure why any operator would sell their business to the local authority for this purpose, knowing that it's in a position to win lucrative contracts for service delivery. If NECA went down the route of creating a municipal (and I think they should!), it will have to be from scratch.
There's another point, though. Normally you create a public-private partnership, when you feel that the private sector can deliver some value in what you're trying to achieve. This could be with technology projects, for example, where it requires a set of expertise that normally aren't found in great numbers in the bus companies. Whereas a private sector partner can utilise existing staff and knowledge. Similar to bus operators running buses for the local authority, given that it's their bread and butter.
I just don't see, from a strategic level, what bus operators can bring to the table outside of service delivery, to warrant a share of the business. We're in this position because nearly 40 years of deregulation, and a lack of creativity, has failed us. Leaving LAs/MCAs with a 'do nothing' and let it sink, or 'do something different' choice. Yes, there are some excellent people working for private operators, but there's more than enough opportunity to work within the public sector. I dare say they'd be better looked after too.
(01 Jun 2024, 10:26 am)DaveFromUpNorth wrote [ -> ]Could Riverside become a "SuperDepot"
Aka you have riverside as the main hub to fix and repair etc ... but CPO part or even a third of the Metrocentre overflow car park to increase capacity and house say another depot with a possibility of Say overflow on an evening in Metrocentre bus station
It could potentially say house 350-400 buses within a mile radius.
Percy Main depot to sadly close and relocate to Walkergate some services and (Snowdon /Megabus) move.
If services aim to terminate at Newcastle Gateshead Metrocentre it is easier to run empty to the Metrocentre
Services can also run up and down the A1 effectively
It also means there is a possibility of making it into an electric hub
Some of if not all of Slatyford could be moved and a park and ride site be created
Blyth arriva services ( the services to Newcastle ) other blyth services move to Ashington and GCT could be also be moved over to the new site
A lot of interworking would be needed to reduce lost mileage but I don't see why say service 100 reintroduced and if a service terminates in newcastle they operate the 100 to Metrocentre then off to depot same as X66 at Gateshead
And when services leave the depot they operate X66 and 100
Personally don't agree with Riverside, the depot is just in the wrong place and always has been. Personally if we're going on a depot program I'd look at something like this with these routes moved around into them, anything not listed isn't moved rather than shoving everything in one place with delays caused because of dead running. The area badly needs more depots in certain areas as they're uncovered, Blyth badly needs to move and there's no need for 3 depots in close proxmidity in Sunderland with routes in bizarre triangle routes via South Tyneside or passing another depot (Belmont). All this is only 1 depot gained (or 0 if you want to count Darlington which is a problem).
NEW: Bishop Auckland
GNE: X21
Arriva: 1/5/6/8/8A/56/X75/X76
Other: Subsidised Local Routes
Belmont
ANE: X12 (All Boards)
GNE: 20/X20/65
GCT: All Durham Services
NEW: South Tyneside
GNE: 5/9/24/26/27/50
SNE: E1/E2/E6/X24/X34/All South Shields
NEW: Washington / CLS Area
GNE: X1/2/2A/4/8/78/21/25/28/29/34/Washington Locals
Other: CLS Locals
Wheatsheaf
GNE: 33/35/39/39A/39B/56/60/700/701
NEW: East Durham
GNE: 61/X6/Peterlee Locals
Arriva: 22/23/24/58/X22
SNE: 59
NEW: Sandy Lane Area
Arriva: 43/44/45/47/X7/X8/X9/X10/X11/X30/553
GNE: 352/353/354/355/Q3
GCT: 342/X46
SNE: 35/37/38/X63
Walkergate
GNE: 1 (Whitley Bay to Newcastle Only)
Percy Main
Arriva: 306/308
GNE: 41/41A/307/309/317/327
GCT: 19/335/351/359
Others: Whitley Locals
Riverside
GCT: 67/69
GNE: 1 (Newcastle to Metrocentre Only)
SNE: 6/7
Closed: Deptford, Chichester, Blyth and Washington
(01 Jun 2024, 5:26 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Again, my question is why?
Any operator would have very limited say, not to mention control, if they only had a 20% share. It'd do nothing, other than entitle them to a share of profit or dividends, rather than that being reinvested back into the network. I'm also not sure why any operator would sell their business to the local authority for this purpose, knowing that it's in a position to win lucrative contracts for service delivery. If NECA went down the route of creating a municipal (and I think they should!), it will have to be from scratch.
There's another point, though. Normally you create a public-private partnership, when you feel that the private sector can deliver some value in what you're trying to achieve. This could be with technology projects, for example, where it requires a set of expertise that normally aren't found in great numbers in the bus companies. Whereas a private sector partner can utilise existing staff and knowledge. Similar to bus operators running buses for the local authority, given that it's their bread and butter.
I just don't see, from a strategic level, what bus operators can bring to the table outside of service delivery, to warrant a share of the business. We're in this position because nearly 40 years of deregulation, and a lack of creativity, has failed us. Leaving LAs/MCAs with a 'do nothing' and let it sink, or 'do something different' choice. Yes, there are some excellent people working for private operators, but there's more than enough opportunity to work within the public sector. I dare say they'd be better looked after too.
Honestly I don't disagree with your points and wouldn't be against a fully public municipal company, personally I just thought it would be easier to purchase it under those terms. 20% will be a greater value than the margin which they'd gain from the same contracts (which they're not guaranteed to win anyway).
You're probably right on the comments about whether they deserve it, to be honest, but I do think a good starting block would be to try and get most of the Stagecoach Busways management team as part of the municipal company, they're network is stable and there's no real issues from them hence the lack of threads about Stagecoach on here.
I would like to offer my congratulations to Lady Kim (perhaps a distant relative of the Kims I've encountered in a far away Kimdom) and her new deputy mayor, the glorious and indefatigable leader of Gateshead Council, the one, the only, Martin Gannon.
Through their combined experience and leadership, transport in the region will undoubtedly improve and we will all be reaping the benefits in years to come.
(01 Jun 2024, 6:48 am)DeltaMan wrote [ -> ]There isn't enough profit being made to cross-subsidise anything meaningful - something decision makers need to get a grasp of fast.
Operators will never admit it, but they effectively do that now anyway, certainly on a route by route basis. I've been on enough late evening Stagecoach trips to know they ain't making the £40+ an hour to break even on them and they don't go cap in hand to the local authority for cash either. So they must be using the money made during the day to run the evening services.
What I do think is that I have an amount of empathy for Stagecoach as they do actually provide a relatively comprehensive network at very little cost to thr taxpayer (ENCTS is a subsidy for the user, not the bus company). We do need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water.
At the end of the day, if a politician is elected on the basis they will bring in franchising, then it's thier obligation to follow through. But they also need to be open and honest about the challenges and costs.
Of course Stagecoach have what has always been the North East’s best bus network - the Newcastle City services with high density housing. They likely prop up South Shields and Sunderland.
Arriva and GNE have mainly inter urban routes which, apart from a few, would seem to carry a lot fewer passengers per mile. Haswell, Tantobie and South Hetton won’t generate anything like the passengers that Chapel House, Walker and Heaton do.
(31 May 2024, 11:59 am)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Whilst I agree that working with TfGM / Andy Burnham would be a good move, and indeed any area should do the same, I think it's worth adding some context around the reliability statistics.
There's no getting away from that they're poor, that's accepted, but I think it's well worth pointing out that TfGM (along with TfL) are one of the few that publish this level of data. Campaign groups have requested it from commercial operators for years, but it's never been forthcoming. All we get is the single encompassing figure for Tyne and Wear ITA that the Govt publish annually.
Why, what's the alternative then? You're saying that two of the main operators aren't fit for purpose, but you're not keen on a different model?
People are quick to jump on TfGM for the Bee Network, but we're forgetting that it's early days, and it's the first reversal of privatisation since the 80s. In taking everything in house, they're inheriting years of issues that haven't been left to fester. It was never going to be fixed overnight. There has to be a long term plan and ambition, and I think Manchester have that.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think franchising alone is the complete answer. I think a fully integrated network is the key, but also the ban on municipals has to be reversed too. Without that, you can never achieve the best value for money. Labour have supposedly committed to it (for what that's worth these days), but I will believe it when I see it.
Regarding your point on 'the big funding black hole', when referring to London. I think you'll always get this point raised, but we shouldn't be ashamed to spend money on infrastructure, when it's there to be used by and for the benefit of everyone. It's no different to £5 billion being allocated to paying a private company to deliver (and make profit on) fibre broadband, or the billions we give to private water companies, to sell us back our water. Personally speaking, I'm happy that my taxes contribute towards public services.
The local authorities do, of course, have access to operators reliability statistics through the “analyse bus open data” service, so will know exactly how reliable each operator and I understand each route is.
(01 Jun 2024, 6:48 am)DeltaMan wrote [ -> ]There isn't enough profit being made to cross-subsidise anything meaningful - something decision makers need to get a grasp of fast.
Operators will never admit it, but they effectively do that now anyway, certainly on a route by route basis. I've been on enough late evening Stagecoach trips to know they ain't making the £40+ an hour to break even on them and they don't go cap in hand to the local authority for cash either. So they must be using the money made during the day to run the evening services.
What I do think is that I have an amount of empathy for Stagecoach as they do actually provide a relatively comprehensive network at very little cost to thr taxpayer (ENCTS is a subsidy for the user, not the bus company). We do need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water.
At the end of the day, if a politician is elected on the basis they will bring in franchising, then it's thier obligation to follow through. But they also need to be open and honest about the challenges and costs.
Of course Stagecoach have what has always been the North East’s best bus network - the Newcastle City services with high density housing. They likely prop up South Shields and Sunderland.
Arriva and GNE have mainly inter urban routes which, apart from a few, would seem to carry a lot fewer passengers per mile. Haswell, Tantobie and South Hetton won’t generate anything like the passengers that Chapel House, Walker and Heaton do.
(09 Jun 2024, 3:03 pm)busmanT wrote [ -> ]Of course Stagecoach have what has always been the North East’s best bus network - the Newcastle City services with high density housing. They likely prop up South Shields and Sunderland.
Arriva and GNE have mainly inter urban routes which, apart from a few, would seem to carry a lot fewer passengers per mile. Haswell, Tantobie and South Hetton won’t generate anything like the passengers that Chapel House, Walker and Heaton do.
The local authorities do, of course, have access to operators reliability statistics through the “analyse bus open data” service, so will know exactly how reliable each operator and I understand each route is.
Of course Stagecoach have what has always been the North East’s best bus network - the Newcastle City services with high density housing. They likely prop up South Shields and Sunderland.
Arriva and GNE have mainly inter urban routes which, apart from a few, would seem to carry a lot fewer passengers per mile. Haswell, Tantobie and South Hetton won’t generate anything like the passengers that Chapel House, Walker and Heaton do.
Comparing apples and pears there mind. 1 road former pit villages vs sprawling housing estates...
Could compare Gateshead, Low Fell and the Metrocentre that are just 3 examples of a GNE near monopoly area that probably do generate more passengers Chapel House, Walker and Heaton. But again, that would be like comparing apples and pears.
(10 May 2024, 11:59 am)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Getting rid of the chocolate teapot that is Cllr Gannon, should be seen as the number one priority, and take Hughes and Lewis with him.
It's all good they have just by promoting him to deputy mayor instead.
Couldn't make it up, don't expect anything from this now and expect it to be a complete failure while costing the tax payer a fortune in the process.
Put idiots in charge, get idiot results.
He was the only viable option. Newcastle’s leader was close to being removed by the local Labour councillors last month, South Tyneside has no end of issues, Sunderland have just been forced to change leader by Labour’s National Executive Committee, North Tyneside’s Mayor has announced she’s retiring, the leader of Northumberland County Council is a Tory and the leader in Durham is a Lib Dem. It’s ended up being Gannon by default.
(15 Jun 2024, 12:54 pm)Rob44 wrote [ -> ]Mcguiness and Gannon sorting out the region after only a few weeks in command!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9rre7zy9vlo
You mean McGuinness rehashing old news and claiming it as her own? Unless police commissioners deal with transport I'm not sure what involvement she had in the ZEBRA 2 and Levelling Up bids.
Doesn't exactly fill you with confidence that they're now rushing contracts through because they left it to a deadline and claiming as it as something the Mayor done when she had no involvement - at all.
Next she'll be taking credit for getting the new Metro trains in service which should've been in service long before she was anywhere near the job.
(15 Jun 2024, 8:36 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]You mean McGuinness rehashing old news and claiming it as her own? Unless police commissioners deal with transport I'm not sure what involvement she had in the ZEBRA 2 and Levelling Up bids.
Doesn't exactly fill you with confidence that they're now rushing contracts through because they left it to a deadline and claiming as it as something the Mayor done when she had no involvement - at all.
Next she'll be taking credit for getting the new Metro trains in service which should've been in service long before she was anywhere near the job.
There is no need for McGuniness to get involved in public transport issues as according to the campaign leaflet for my local labour candidate for 24 July elections, Emma Foody has a plan for a fresh start and one of them is "Upgrades to out transport network and a reliable bus service"
https://emmafoody.com/
Job sorted then!
One of the things for me that I think need sorting as a priority and really should've been in place prior to the Tyne Bridge Works starting is a Park & Ride site at A19 Testo's Roundabout in order to reduce congestion/wait times coming in/out of Newcastle, looking at Google Maps it already has a small car park on the site used for the A19 Flyover Upgrades which could easily be expanded.
The Park & Ride Service would be operated jointly by the Independents Operators across the region at a regular frequency and I would also have the Go North East X10 & Stagecoach X24/X34 also serving it.
The service itself would be as follows:
PR1 - Testo's Roundabout Park & Ride - Central Station - Newgate Street - St Mary's Place - John Dobson Street - Testo's Roundabout Park & Ride
PR2 - Testo's Roundabout Park & Ride - Newcastle Quayside - Testo's Roundabout Park & Ride
Another I have had is for National Express, Megabus & Flixbus Services to serve Newcastle Airport in order to make it more accessible from elsewhere in the country, seems to work well for other Airports so why couldn't it here in the North East and in turn it would encourage economic growth and hopefully bring Airlines back to Newcastle to operate services across the world.
(16 Jun 2024, 9:05 pm)Malarkey wrote [ -> ]One of the things for me that I think need sorting as a priority and really should've been in place prior to the Tyne Bridge Works starting is a Park & Ride site at A19 Testo's Roundabout in order to reduce congestion/wait times coming in/out of Newcastle, looking at Google Maps it already has a small car park on the site used for the A19 Flyover Upgrades which could easily be expanded.
The Park & Ride Service would be operated jointly by the Independents Operators across the region at a regular frequency and I would also have the Go North East X10 & Stagecoach X24/X34 also serving it.
The service itself would be as follows:
PR1 - Testo's Roundabout Park & Ride - Central Station - Newgate Street - St Mary's Place - John Dobson Street - Testo's Roundabout Park & Ride
PR2 - Testo's Roundabout Park & Ride - Newcastle Quayside - Testo's Roundabout Park & Ride
Another I have had is for National Express, Megabus & Flixbus Services to serve Newcastle Airport in order to make it more accessible from elsewhere in the country, seems to work well for other Airports so why couldn't it here in the North East and in turn it would encourage economic growth and hopefully bring Airlines back to Newcastle to operate services across the world.
No-one will use a P&R there, there's already one at Heworth which has a Metro every 6 minutes which beats the traffic completely unlike the bus which sits in the same traffic anyway. P&R's are generally a complete waste of money unless they're connected to a metro or tram system or there's absolutely no parking at all for staff which isn't the case in Newcastle.
Same again with getting to Newcastle Airport, it's a regional airport unlike other airports, it'll never compete with the likes of Manchester, there's no where to fly to anyway pretty much unless you like a bucket and spade holiday.
Unless you are travelling long haul. You can get anywhere in the world using Emirates and we have flown to San Francisco and Oslo KLM via Amsterdam. I would use NCL over Manchester any day.
(17 Jun 2024, 8:46 am)RMF1254 wrote [ -> ]Unless you are travelling long haul. You can get anywhere in the world using Emirates and we have flown to San Francisco and Oslo KLM via Amsterdam. I would use NCL over Manchester any day.
Aye no arguments there, but can't imagine someone getting a coach outside the region to use those airlines when you could go to somewhere more local. Believe, or it used to be anyway, Emirates and KLM are cheaper from Manchester aswell.
The flights might be cheaper but NCL is much more pleasant to use than MCR. Plus you may need an expensive TPE ticket or a hotel which add to the cost.. You don’t want to be driving back from MCR after a long overnight flight.
Aye no arg
(17 Jun 2024, 11:56 am)RMF1254 wrote [ -> ]The flights might be cheaper but NCL is much more pleasant to use than MCR. Plus you may need an expensive TPE ticket or a hotel which add to the cost.. You don’t want to be driving back from MCR after a long overnight flight.
Aye no arguments there, that was on reference to coaches though. If your using a National Express coach then it's likely you'll be heading outside the region. Anyone local has the Metro, it's really not a badly connected airport let's be honest unlike the likes of Leeds which is the middle of nowhere.
Given the General Election outcome, do people think the NECA will move quicker to franchise bus services and or.....setup a publicly owned operator and buyout of all depots (with maybe franchising to smaller independents still happening for the more 'local' routes)
They can’t move quicker until the legislation changes. May as well wait for that to happen.
This obviously applies to other regions too, but new bus powers have been announced in the King's Speech, so we should start see a bill passing through Parliament this year:
"The King’s Speech is also expected to feature a Better Buses Bill to deliver the government’s manifesto commitment to reform the bus system by delivering new powers for local leaders to franchise local bus services and to lift the restriction on new publicly owned bus operators.
This will help bring an end to the postcode lottery of bus services and will give local communities throughout England the power to take back control of their bus services. It will mean local leaders can decide to introduce better bus networks, at pace, which reflect the needs of the local communities that rely on them."
Source:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/kings...ff-britain
It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out. All the fanfare with the 'Bus Back Better' under the Tories, ultimately suffered from a climb down on the lack of funding that was originally promised.
The move to finally remove the ban on Councils running bus services is a big step forward imo.
I don't think it's a one size fits all solution, but what it does introduce is a level playing field compared to other services that are considered for outsourcing. It's never been right that operators could charge what they want, as councils were prohibited from delivering the service in house.
(17 Jul 2024, 7:41 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]This obviously applies to other regions too, but new bus powers have been announced in the King's Speech, so we should start see a bill passing through Parliament this year:
"The King’s Speech is also expected to feature a Better Buses Bill to deliver the government’s manifesto commitment to reform the bus system by delivering new powers for local leaders to franchise local bus services and to lift the restriction on new publicly owned bus operators.
This will help bring an end to the postcode lottery of bus services and will give local communities throughout England the power to take back control of their bus services. It will mean local leaders can decide to introduce better bus networks, at pace, which reflect the needs of the local communities that rely on them."
Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/kings...ff-britain
It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out. All the fanfare with the 'Bus Back Better' under the Tories, ultimately suffered from a climb down on the lack of funding that was originally promised.
The move to finally remove the ban on Councils running bus services is a big step forward imo.
I don't think it's a one size fits all solution, but what it does introduce is a level playing field compared to other services that are considered for outsourcing. It's never been right that operators could charge what they want, as councils were prohibited from delivering the service in house.
Did any of the other metro mayors have buses as high of a voting point as the NE? If not we might be the ones getting this sooner than others. It'll be interesting to see how it comes together.
(18 Jul 2024, 2:51 am)deanmachine wrote [ -> ]Did any of the other metro mayors have buses as high of a voting point as the NE? If not we might be the ones getting this sooner than others. It'll be interesting to see how it comes together.
It was a big part of Burnham's campaigns in Manchester.
Although they've already awarded contracts for all three tranches, it gives them another option for when contracts expire.
Of course, its a different story up here, and we could well see it included in the plans being drawn up.
(18 Jul 2024, 10:19 am)Adrian wrote [ -> ]It was a big part of Burnham's campaigns in Manchester.
Although they've already awarded contracts for all three tranches, it gives them another option for when contracts expire.
Of course, its a different story up here, and we could well see it included in the plans being drawn up.
Aye, but Manchester already has significant franchising, whereas we have none at all, so I'm curious to see if we'll be the guinea pigs on how this new system will work, or whether Manchester still will be.
(18 Jul 2024, 12:34 pm)deanmachine wrote [ -> ]Aye, but Manchester already has significant franchising, whereas we have none at all, so I'm curious to see if we'll be the guinea pigs on how this new system will work, or whether Manchester still will be.
Aren't both West Yorkshire and Merseyside further ahead than us?
I believe both of those were strong on the campaigning aswell
(18 Jul 2024, 1:08 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Aren't both West Yorkshire and Merseyside further ahead than us?
I believe both of those were strong on the campaigning aswell
That's what I was asking basically. I'm wondering who'll be the guinea pigs to the new system, as long as we don't get put on the back burner, I just hope something will happen relatively soon.
(18 Jul 2024, 2:26 pm)deanmachine wrote [ -> ]That's what I was asking basically. I'm wondering who'll be the guinea pigs to the new system, as long as we don't get put on the back burner, I just hope something will happen relatively soon.
If I was being sarcastic, I'd suggest Halton Council as guinea pigs for council ownership....
(18 Jul 2024, 2:26 pm)deanmachine wrote [ -> ]That's what I was asking basically. I'm wondering who'll be the guinea pigs to the new system, as long as we don't get put on the back burner, I just hope something will happen relatively soon.
Probably one of them two I'd say, they're quite a bit ahead of us and Merseyside is 2026.
Have we started any form of consultations up here yet?
Whatever they want to do they need to act imo, or get some bollocks like Merseyside have done and ban any vehicles over 15 year old on any routes with any subsidies as GNE and Arriva wouldn't half s**t thereselves as they're taking the piss right now.
https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/news/tra...-the-buses
Seen this was posted the other day and one real big highlight is they're now doing an 'assessment' which is expected to take 2 YEARS and 8 MONTHS...
Looks like this won't be in until the end of the decade and since the operators have pretty much shut down, can't see much success coming any time soon. Maybe and just maybe it might have been a good idea for the councillers to keep their mouths shut until the assessment was done rather than overcommitting. Any sensible company isn't going to invest any real money in an area they might lose next year, 5 years, 7 years or whenever they decide to 'take control'.
Uncertainity is the worst thing for any company to plan around.
(21 Jul 2024, 7:25 am)Storx wrote [ -> ]https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/news/tra...-the-buses
Seen this was posted the other day and one real big highlight is they're now doing an 'assessment' which is expected to take 2 YEARS and 8 MONTHS...
Looks like this won't be in until the end of the decade and since the operators have pretty much shut down, can't see much success coming any time soon. Maybe and just maybe it might have been a good idea for the councillers to keep their mouths shut until the assessment was done rather than overcommitting. Any sensible company isn't going to invest any real money in an area they might lose next year, 5 years, 7 years or whenever they decide to 'take control'.
Uncertainity is the worst thing for any company to plan around.
At least we have some new electrics coming to the region, and the infrastructure part of the BSIP funding should help improve things for some passengers.
There’s also the North East Bus Charter (
https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/passengercharter) to hopefully hold operators accountable to minimum standards, so you’d hope the operators won’t give up completely.