(08 Jan 2019, 5:07 pm)James101 wrote Agreed; he should research support available and try to live within his means. As we all should. 

As the article states, his appointments are changing to fortnightly rather than weekly. If Jobseeker’s Allowance or it’s equivilant is around £144/fortnight that means he’s expected to save just 2.5% of this for his half price return bus ticket. He is welcome to use his bi-weekly visit to Huntingdon to do whatver else he likes; regardless of shopping habits, do you not agree there’s probably something else he can do in town to bolster the efficiency of his travel spend?

It’s the sign of a decent society that we help those fallen on hard times. What do you suggest is the best thing the state could do to help Mr Taylor?

2.5% sounds like a drop in the ocean.
Having claimed JSA in the past, I know the reality. I only 'got by', by having a few quid squirelled away.
JSA was nowhere near enough to run a car to get to/from the JCP+, eat, socialise, use public transport, pay utility bills, mortgage etc. That's without a sanction. 
My JCP+ was within reasonable walking distance. So I saved money by walking.
I used the £3 fare that was saved, to supplement my JSA.

I was confident enough (my esteem hadn't been eaten away completely) to ask for support to get to an interview in Manchester.
I was fortunate enough to live in an area where public transport is still accessible and also have the option of having the car. 
I was able to get on and search for the cheapest way to get to/from a city on the other side of the country and find accommodation for the three day programme.
I was fortunate enough to find employment and be in a position to pay back the JCP+ funds for that trip.

I was however, a month from running out of those pennies squirreled away. 
The £3 I saved each time I went to sign on might only be 2.5%, but it made a huge difference to my life over that period.

https://www.kenilworthweeklynews.co.uk/n...ssion=true

The residents are not happy!

(17 Jan 2019, 1:06 pm)Andreos1 wrote https://www.kenilworthweeklynews.co.uk/n...ssion=true

The residents are not happy!

The child ticket situation is pretty poor. It seems there’s a term ticket available but even that’s fairy expensive for a child fare.

Regarding the service cuts more generally I don’t understand what planet the councillors are on by hauling Stagecoach to a meeting to explain why they’ve withdrew services the Council decilned to contribute to.

The councillors need to be lobbying government for reform of how supported bus services are ran, not blaming the operator.

(18 Jan 2019, 12:03 am)James101 wrote The child ticket situation is pretty poor. It seems there’s a term ticket available but even that’s fairy expensive for a child fare.

Regarding the service cuts more generally I don’t understand what planet the councillors are on by hauling Stagecoach to a meeting to explain why they’ve withdrew services the Council decilned to contribute to.

The councillors need to be lobbying government for reform of how supported bus services are ran, not blaming the operator.

What I find interesting about it, is that neither of the parties appear to be budging.
For all the finger pointing and accusations, what is already a poor, expensive network, is going to get worse. 
The cycle continues and the network is left with what? 

If the opposite was to happen and rather than axe routes, improvements were made, the network has the potential to grow and numbers increase.

(18 Jan 2019, 7:28 am)Andreos1 wrote What I find interesting about it, is that neither of the parties appear to be budging.
For all the finger pointing and accusations, what is already a poor, expensive network, is going to get worse. 
The cycle continues and the network is left with what? 

If the opposite was to happen and rather than axe routes, improvements were made, the network has the potential to grow and numbers increase.

Well, it paid off when arriva made that sort of investment into the 22 and 24. They doubled the frequency and more paying passengers used it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47045872

Huge drop in passengers according to latest report.

(30 Jan 2019, 12:53 pm)Andreos1 wrote https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47045872

Huge drop in passengers according to latest report.

Less than 2% is hardly huge in the context of lost patronage. GM has lost more than 2% a year every year for many years and historically has only seen a couple of "blips" in 32 years when it has either stabilised or increased. Typical BBC to use stills from Manchester where their stories are often inappropriate and always inaccurate. Doubtless the original caption said "this hybrid bus is killing your child - not the unregulated 15 year oid diesel taxis clogging up the city; not the 44 tonners crawling through every junction on the M60 8, 10, 12 hours a day - its Euro4, 5, 6 and hybrid buses, used by lobbyless oiks".

(30 Jan 2019, 12:53 pm)Andreos1 wrote https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-47045872

Huge drop in passengers according to latest report.

"It's nearly impossible for councils to keep subsidising free travel". 

Well here we have the same old problem - ENCTS. Councils are forced to pay for the bus travel of all pensioners, regardless of if they can afford it or not. The only result can be marginal services are cut for the entire population.  

(30 Jan 2019, 9:13 pm)Tamesider wrote Less than 2% is hardly huge in the context of lost patronage. GM has lost more than 2% a year every year for many years and historically has only seen a couple of "blips" in 32 years when it has either stabilised or increased. Typical BBC to use stills from Manchester where their stories are often inappropriate and always inaccurate. Doubtless the original caption said "this hybrid bus is killing your child - not the unregulated 15 year oid diesel taxis clogging up the city; not the 44 tonners crawling through every junction on the M60 8, 10, 12 hours a day - its Euro4, 5, 6 and hybrid buses, used by lobbyless oiks".

Not wanting to repeat a previous conversation; but is Manchester not slightly different in that there's been a modal shift to Metrolink? I maintain I'd rather be a bus user in a PTE area than a non-PTE area. When changes occur TFGM produce a 91 page document to asses the impact and any necessary action to be taken [ https://www.gmcameetings.co.uk/meetings/...-committee ]. Conversely, Stoke-on-Trent city council respond with 'Not our problem, guv'.

(30 Jan 2019, 10:34 pm)James101 wrote "It's nearly impossible for councils to keep subsidising free travel". 

Well here we have the same old problem - ENCTS. Councils are forced to pay for the bus travel of all pensioners, regardless of if they can afford it or not. The only result can be marginal services are cut for the entire population.  


Not wanting to repeat a previous conversation; but is Manchester not slightly different in that there's been a modal shift to Metrolink? I maintain I'd rather be a bus user in a PTE area than a non-PTE area. When changes occur TFGM produce a 91 page document to asses the impact and any necessary action to be taken [ https://www.gmcameetings.co.uk/meetings/...-committee ]. Conversely, Stoke-on-Trent city council respond with 'Not our problem, guv'.

Metrolink is a complicated one as yes, it does skew the figures a bit, but the decline in GM has been more constant than just coinciding with Metrolink extensions/abstractions. Of course, the irony is that only a tiny minority of people can readily access the system.

TBH, the TFGM document is overkill in that the vast majority of commercial changes are minor (odd journeys withdrawn or retimed earlier) or outside their remit anyway (10 minute service reduced to 12, but first and last buses roughly the same times), so rather than repeating "No further Action at this stage" for dozens and dozens of services, they should just list minor commercial changes

ENCTS is another example of conditions varying drastically between areas. In purely financial terms it is much less of a problem in GM because the gap between Retirement Age and Life Expectency is closing rapidly. And that's before you get into "Active Life" Expectancy. Also, arguably its not that much of a perk; On weekdays, Concessionary holders can't really travel very far with off-peak running speeds often in single figures (mph) and wanting to get home before the schools finish at c.1415-1430.

(31 Jan 2019, 9:10 pm)Tamesider wrote Metrolink is a complicated one as yes, it does skew the figures a bit, but the decline in GM has been more constant than just coinciding with Metrolink extensions/abstractions. Of course, the irony is that only a tiny minority of people can readily access the system.

TBH, the TFGM document is overkill in that the vast majority of commercial changes are minor (odd journeys withdrawn or retimed earlier) or outside their remit anyway (10 minute service reduced to 12, but first and last buses roughly the same times), so rather than repeating "No further Action at this stage" for dozens and dozens of services, they should just list minor commercial changes

ENCTS is another example of conditions varying drastically between areas. In purely financial terms it is much less of a problem in GM because the gap between Retirement Age and Life Expectency is closing rapidly. And that's before you get into "Active Life" Expectancy. Also, arguably its not that much of a perk; On weekdays, Concessionary holders can't really travel very far with off-peak running speeds often in single figures (mph) and wanting to get home before the schools finish at c.1415-1430.

I dare say Metrolink abstraction from bus ridership will continue for years to come, if the GM Transport Plan is realised. For summarise for anyone that's not seen it - the plan is to turn every lamppost in Greater Manchester into a tram stop. The counter argument to your concern Metrolink stops are less accessible than bus stops would be the greater appeal of trams over buses. It's been proven time over that passengers will walk further from their origin to reach a tram than they would tolerate walking to a bus stop. Of course there is a legitimate concern about passengers with mobility restrictions, in this situation I think the fairest use of resources is a limited mini-bus or local-link feeder service into Metrolink. 

The expansion of Metrolink seems to be the best way to please the majority of the people. Public transport passengers may have to walk a but further, but they get a more consistent (if not always faster) journey time to the city. This can be achieved with less visible impact to the road network for the motorist, keeping that lobby happy. I'd love to see greater bus priority in the city, but realistically what can be done?

I think Stagecoach can see this coming and this is demonstrated by the recent 168/150 changes. They're trying to remove the necessity for a city centre change (and a temptation to switch to tram over the X50) from the east of GM to Trafford on this new direct route before Metrolink Trafford Park opens, to hell with the local links provided by the previous set-up.

(01 Feb 2019, 12:38 am)James101 wrote I dare say Metrolink abstraction from bus ridership will continue for years to come, if the GM Transport Plan is realised. For summarise for anyone that's not seen it - the plan is to turn every lamppost in Greater Manchester into a tram stop. The counter argument to your concern Metrolink stops are less accessible than bus stops would be the greater appeal of trams over buses. It's been proven time over that passengers will walk further from their origin to reach a tram than they would tolerate walking to a bus stop. Of course there is a legitimate concern about passengers with mobility restrictions, in this situation I think the fairest use of resources is a limited mini-bus or local-link feeder service into Metrolink. 

The expansion of Metrolink seems to be the best way to please the majority of the people. Public transport passengers may have to walk a but further, but they get a more consistent (if not always faster) journey time to the city. This can be achieved with less visible impact to the road network for the motorist, keeping that lobby happy. I'd love to see greater bus priority in the city, but realistically what can be done?

I think Stagecoach can see this coming and this is demonstrated by the recent 168/150 changes. They're trying to remove the necessity for a city centre change (and a temptation to switch to tram over the X50) from the east of GM to Trafford on this new direct route before Metrolink Trafford Park opens, to hell with the local links provided by the previous set-up.

Triumph of style over substance and power of lobbies to damage the lives of those that don't conform if ever I saw it. 
More particularly, I suspect you have a much stricter definition of "mobility restrictions" than I have. 

There are so many reports and strategies floating around at the moment. There seems to be GM transport for Strategy for both 2037 & 2040 as well as a new one detailing things in 5 year stages. Then there is Bus Reform, CleanAir, Spatial Framework etc. Besides, how much would all this Metrolink expansion cost (financially?) Only this evening the MEN remind us that the Trafford Centre extension alluded to will cost over £100 million a mile.

(01 Feb 2019, 12:38 am)James101 wrote It's been proven time over that passengers will walk further from their origin to reach a tram than they would tolerate walking to a bus stop. Of course there is a legitimate concern about passengers with mobility restrictions, in this situation I think the fairest use of resources is a limited mini-bus or local-link feeder service into Metrolink. 

> Have you got evidence for this? Specifically, in low car ownership areas, or is this "proof" based on middle income, physically fit, 21-35 year olds travelling in areas that get the most political/media attention?


The expansion of Metrolink seems to be the best way to please the majority of the people. Public transport passengers may have to walk a but further, but they get a more consistent (if not always faster) journey time to the city. This can be achieved with less visible impact to the road network for the motorist, keeping that lobby happy. I'd love to see greater bus priority in the city, but realistically what can be done?

> I would also question this - both from the point of view of the public transport user and the tax-payer in general. Metrolink is nowhere near as popular with the GM public as is painted and if you dig beneath the headlines made by the most populist and vociferous of (mainly Labour) politicians, the "quieter" MPs are also concerned that it is being seen as a panacea. It won't surprise you to know that I don't use Metrolink; except occasionally within the city centre (using a Rail ticket). Based on those journeys, I'm not convinced they do get a more consistent journey time. If that was the case, why aren't trams across the city much more evenly spaced and why is RTI usually wildly optimistic?
As for "bus priority..n the city". Again, you would need to be more specific. What form of bus priority, and (yawn) where do you mean by "in the city"? 


I think Stagecoach can see this coming and this is demonstrated by the recent 168/150 changes. They're trying to remove the necessity for a city centre change (and a temptation to switch to tram over the X50) from the east of GM to Trafford on this new direct route before Metrolink Trafford Park opens, to hell with the local links provided by the previous set-up.

> The 168/150 change is weird. Yes, intu want better bus services for their staff, especially, and this might slightly help there. However, the idea of removing the necessity of changing contradicts not only the argument for multi-modal integration itself, but the fact that its one of the few things GMBOA & GMCA supposedly agree on. "On paper", the 150 is slower than X50/201* at all times of day, based
on Stagecoach's own Journey Planner. There is then the question of vehicle type and routing. Again, the "perception" argument is being thrown at me all the time, but the 150 is 70, 80 or even 90 minutes winding your way through less than scenic south Manchester wheras the X50 is Limited Stop on does feel like it in comparison to virtually every other Stagecoach Manchester service. Obviously, Hyde Road in general is not fast in any way, shape or form, but the 150 covers the slowest, most frustrating section of the corridor. 
Perhaps the strangest thing of all, is indeed the decision to run the 150 all the way to Hyde, costing 2 peak buses compared to terminating in Gorton (a bit unweildy, but 168/9 shorts have done it in the recent past). Maintaining headways on long established, hevavily loaded, Hyde Road services seemingly hasn't justified 2 PVR in the last decade or two. Similarly, and more pertinently, the 7 which has supposedly been "enhanced" to slightly mitigate headway/capacity between Droylsden and Gorton. Yes, two am peak round trips have been introduced, but nothing has been done in the afternoon where (incl. Sats)  the 7 has been reduced from a straight 30 minute service to a dog's breakfast of a 40/50 minute service. There was also a suggestion that the service would be converted to 100% decker operation - aided by the transfer of three E400s to Stockport depot - but the only pm peak journey I've come across was the usual E200, running 10 mins late on Friday when earlier Snow/Ice had meant many motorists not going to work and so lighter than normal peak traffic.

*201 is generally every 10 minutes running parallel with 150 from Hyde through Denton to Gorton and on to Piccadilly (Portland Street). Other services have shorter parallel sections.

Check out @LonTravelWatch’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/LonTravelWatch/statu...57792?s=09

Interesting hashtag to watch/follow.
It's as though making things attractive for passengers (old, new and potential) is something that hasn't been at the forefront before.
'Blue sky thinking' and all that jazz.

'remove barriers and make bus travel attractive'. 
Works for me!

Check out @TASPartnership’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/TASPartnership/statu...36449?s=09

An interesting tweet and discussion. 
Nothing to counter the actual savings made when reducing fuel costs, obtaining handouts (*checks out if eezypeazy is lurking in the background*) and boasting about how they're saving on insurance costs.

Nice of them to acknowledge that fare increases can reduce the number of bums on seats though and that obviously means more cars on the road, which leads to delays and an extra bus being fitted in to the pvr and fares increasing and extra cars on the road and...

(28 Feb 2019, 2:08 pm)Andreos1 wrote Check out @TASPartnership’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/TASPartnership/statu...36449?s=09

An interesting tweet and discussion. 
Nothing to counter the actual savings made when reducing fuel costs, obtaining handouts (*checks out if eezypeazy is lurking in the background*) and boasting about how they're saving on insurance costs.

Nice of them to acknowledge that fare increases can reduce the number of bums on seats though and that obviously means more cars on the road, which leads to delays and an extra bus being fitted in to the pvr and fares increasing and extra cars on the road and...

All very well but it doesn't explain why fare rises are much lower on routes getting more resources and the Operator then whingeing that that is one of the routes hit by the worst congestion?

https://www.transportfocus.org.uk/resear...ple-think/

Young passengers think services are designed for them, older passengers are being priced out of the market due to ever increasing fares... Where will it end?

(04 Sep 2019, 8:59 am)Andreos1 wrote

https://www.transportfocus.org.uk/resear...ple-think/

Young passengers think services are designed for them, older passengers are being priced out of the market due to ever increasing fares... Where will it end?

The thing is, a lot of the new things that have been introduced are what older people think young people want. For instance, the new 5 to 25 fares that they have introduced, making the monthly ticket app only means I won't use it. If I'm going to be paying £70 a month, I don't want to have to buy another ticket when my battery dies and I cant load the app up. They seem to think that we want everything to be on our phones, but the issue with that is, phones can only be used a limited amount on a charge, and if literally everything relies on a phone, it isn't going to last as long. It's all well and good having charging points on the bus, but if I have to have battery on my phone to get on the bus, they're useless (unless of course the driver is kind enough to let you on and charge your phone for a bit before showing them your ticket. Which has happened to me a couple times when the GNE app crashes)

Then of course there is the point they bring up about quality of buses. One of the reasons I absolutely hate travelling Arriva is because the buses are shocking, especially in Durham. There seems to be absolutely no consistency to the allocations.

Plus, in my experience at least, GNE drivers are far nicer than Arriva's. Most of the Arriva drivers seem miserable (as you would be if you worked for Arriva!). And I've been on a fair few Arriva buses where the driver can barely speak or understand English. That isn't to say I don't want foreign drivers, but they should at least be able to speak the language fluently!

(04 Sep 2019, 1:57 pm)streetdeckfan wrote

The thing is, a lot of the new things that have been introduced are what older people think young people want. For instance, the new 5 to 15 fares that they have introduced, making the monthly ticket app only means I won't use it. If I'm going to be paying £70 a month, I don't want to have to buy another ticket when my battery dies and I cant load the app up. They seem to think that we want everything to be on our phones, but the issue with that is, phones can only be used a limited amount on a charge, and if literally everything relies on a phone, it isn't going to last as long. It's all well and good having charging points on the bus, but if I have to have battery on my phone to get on the bus, they're useless (unless of course the driver is kind enough to let you on and charge your phone for a bit before showing them your ticket. Which has happened to me a couple times when the GNE app crashes)

Pssst! You need to invest in a power pack.

(04 Sep 2019, 6:19 pm)BusLoverMum wrote

Pssst! You need to invest in a power pack.

I have a drawer full of them, trouble is I always forget to charge them!

(04 Sep 2019, 1:57 pm)streetdeckfan wrote

The thing is, a lot of the new things that have been introduced are what older people think young people want. For instance, the new 5 to 15 fares that they have introduced, making the monthly ticket app only means I won't use it. If I'm going to be paying £70 a month, I don't want to have to buy another ticket when my battery dies and I cant load the app up. They seem to think that we want everything to be on our phones, but the issue with that is, phones can only be used a limited amount on a charge, and if literally everything relies on a phone, it isn't going to last as long. It's all well and good having charging points on the bus, but if I have to have battery on my phone to get on the bus, they're useless (unless of course the driver is kind enough to let you on and charge your phone for a bit before showing them your ticket. Which has happened to me a couple times when the GNE app crashes)

Then of course there is the point they bring up about quality of buses. One of the reasons I absolutely hate travelling Arriva is because the buses are shocking, especially in Durham. There seems to be absolutely no consistency to the allocations.

Plus, in my experience at least, GNE drivers are far nicer than Arriva's. Most of the Arriva drivers seem miserable (as you would be if you worked for Arriva!). And I've been on a fair few Arriva buses where the driver can barely speak or understand English. That isn't to say I don't want foreign drivers, but they should at least be able to speak the language fluently!

Saw this earlier. Appropriate!

I

(04 Sep 2019, 1:57 pm)streetdeckfan wrote

The thing is, a lot of the new things that have been introduced are what older people think young people want. For instance, the new 5 to 15 fares that they have introduced, making the monthly ticket app only means I won't use it. If I'm going to be paying £70 a month, I don't want to have to buy another ticket when my battery dies and I cant load the app up. They seem to think that we want everything to be on our phones, but the issue with that is, phones can only be used a limited amount on a charge, and if literally everything relies on a phone, it isn't going to last as long. It's all well and good having charging points on the bus, but if I have to have battery on my phone to get on the bus, they're useless (unless of course the driver is kind enough to let you on and charge your phone for a bit before showing them your ticket. Which has happened to me a couple times when the GNE app crashes)

Then of course there is the point they bring up about quality of buses. One of the reasons I absolutely hate travelling Arriva is because the buses are shocking, especially in Durham. There seems to be absolutely no consistency to the allocations.

Plus, in my experience at least, GNE drivers are far nicer than Arriva's. Most of the Arriva drivers seem miserable (as you would be if you worked for Arriva!). And I've been on a fair few Arriva buses where the driver can barely speak or understand English. That isn't to say I don't want foreign drivers, but they should at least be able to speak the language fluently!

5 to 25 (with ID) you must mean?

(05 Sep 2019, 9:37 am)Stanleyone wrote

I

5 to 25 (with ID) you must mean?

Yes, that is what I meant

https://www.sunderlandecho.com/news/peop...ive-496947

Even the mackems are getting involved now!

https://twitter.com/passtrans/status/117...56897?s=09

An interesting thread from Passenger Transport.

(30 Sep 2019, 5:30 pm)Andreos1 wrote

https://twitter.com/passtrans/status/117...56897?s=09

An interesting thread from Passenger Transport.

Is this new funding or money that has been re-announced at a convenient time? It's a much needed initiative in the areas mentioned. We have no idea how good we have it for provincial public transport, in most parts of this region, really.

(30 Sep 2019, 7:40 pm)BusLoverMum wrote

Is this new funding or money that has been re-announced at a convenient time? It's a much needed initiative in the areas mentioned. We have no idea how good we have it for provincial public transport, in most parts of this region, really.

No idea.

Either way, I'll believe it when I see it!

(30 Sep 2019, 7:40 pm)BusLoverMum wrote

Is this new funding or money that has been re-announced at a convenient time? It's a much needed initiative in the areas mentioned. We have no idea how good we have it for provincial public transport, in most parts of this region, really.

The only real issue I have with the public transport up here is the lack of multi-operator tickets for reasonable prices outside of Nexus areas. As I keep bringing up, there is no weekly or monthly ticket that you can use on both GNE and Arriva services in County Durham.

(01 Oct 2019, 5:27 am)streetdeckfan wrote

The only real issue I have with the public transport up here is the lack of multi-operator tickets for reasonable prices outside of Nexus areas. As I keep bringing up, there is no weekly or monthly ticket that you can use on both GNE and Arriva services in County Durham.

Yeah, the cost of travel and lack of multi operator ticketing outside the nexus area is the weak point. The cost of daily explorer tickets has skyrocketed for adults, too.

Www.ibyd.com/Middlesbrough

A survey for those who travel by bus 3 times a week or less.

https://twitter.com/alextransdev/status/...07169?s=19

An interesting thread regarding Sunday services within Harrogate.