(09 May 2024, 9:59 pm)busmanT wrote Hi expect that Kim will be getting plenty of advice from the officers at NECA and from Nexus - plus Cllr Gannon who holds the Transport Portfolio on NECA.

She'll be taking on board what they are saying, but she is also clever enough to know that if you're looking at franchising you go to people who've got it in place as they have proper experience and data to give on the system which NECA and Gannon don't.

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.

I've no doubt there are some good people at what was TNE, but the leadership has been god awful and aimless for years. The Enhanced Partnership, aside from the watered down day tickets, has achieved little but to top up the pockets of operators. Interestingly, they've never once published the performance data that the scheme commits to. I wonder why...

Adrian wroteGetting rid of the chocolate teapot that is Cllr Gannon, should be seen as the number one priority, and take Hughes and Lewis with him.

I've no doubt there are some good people at what was TNE, but the leadership has been god awful and aimless for years. The Enhanced Partnership, aside from the watered down day tickets, has achieved little but to top up the pockets of operators. Interestingly, they've never once published the performance data that the scheme commits to. I wonder why...

He’ll still be in the NECA cabinet, chaired by Kim of course, but he won’t be taking a portfolio as it were. And Kim is the one ultimately responsible for public transport,  so whilst most NECA decisions require majority consent from the cabinet, she and her office will be taking the lead on this. In the short term, the cabinet will be continuing with the pre-existing arrangement of NEXUS dealing with Tyne & Wear, with decisions re: Northumberland and County Durham delegated to the local authority. However, I’d be amazed if this arrangement stays longer term and equally amazed if NEXUS still exists in its current form by the end of her Mayoral term.

I was surprised TNE was folded into the new authority, at the very least it could have been the public facing brand for their passenger transport responsibilities, like the Metro brand in West Yorkshire.

I think a first thing that could be done to get a head start on franchising is to get the ticketing right straight away. Get rid of the operator only tickets, simplify the lot.

(10 May 2024, 3:52 pm)markydh wrote He’ll still be in the NECA cabinet, chaired by Kim of course, but he won’t be taking a portfolio as it were. And Kim is the one ultimately responsible for public transport,  so whilst most NECA decisions require majority consent from the cabinet, she and her office will be taking the lead on this. In the short term, the cabinet will be continuing with the pre-existing arrangement of NEXUS dealing with Tyne & Wear, with decisions re: Northumberland and County Durham delegated to the local authority. However, I’d be amazed if this arrangement stays longer term and equally amazed if NEXUS still exists in its current form by the end of her Mayoral term.

Where has that decision came from? There's 7 portfolios and 7 council leaders, which I was led to believe would be allocated portfolios at the next meeting. This was to allow all Councils to hold their AGMs first.

Kim arguably knows less about public transport than Gammon. I don't think she's been on a bus or Metro without a film crew there?

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Did Manchester have very many independents operating contracts before franchising came in? I'm curious to what will happen to the likes of GCT after we get it up here. I imagine they might keep scholars and workers runs similar to what it is now, but I can see them wanting to bring the minibus stuff into the larger depots.

(22 May 2024, 12:54 pm)deanmachine wrote Did Manchester have very many independents operating contracts before franchising came in? I'm curious to what will happen to the likes of GCT after we get it up here. I imagine they might keep scholars and workers runs similar to what it is now, but I can see them wanting to bring the minibus stuff into the larger depots.

Yes, quite a few independents running contracted services in GM pre franchising; all have lost their entire business except Vision Bus who have some Tranche 1 schools.

(10 May 2024, 5:17 pm)solsburian wrote I was surprised TNE was folded into the new authority, at the very least it could have been the public facing brand for their passenger transport responsibilities, like the Metro brand in West Yorkshire.

I think NETravel would be a better suited name.

NEBus
NEMetro
NERail
NEFerry
NEParkAndRide

(23 May 2024, 8:22 pm)L469 YVK wrote I think NETravel would be a better suited name.

NEBus
NEMetro
NERail
NEFerry
NEParkAndRide

It’s not that simple as delivery of public transport is in the hands of the individual Local Authorities-Northumberland CC, Durham CC and Nexus (on behalf of the 5 Tyne & Wear authorities). 
Metro is a Nexus responsibility.

(23 May 2024, 8:22 pm)L469 YVK wrote I think NETravel would be a better suited name.

NEBus
NEMetro
NERail
NEFerry
NEParkAndRide

NEBus sounds like the current situation on the Coast Road!

(24 May 2024, 6:16 pm)busmanT wrote It’s not that simple as delivery of public transport is in the hands of the individual Local Authorities-Northumberland CC, Durham CC and Nexus (on behalf of the 5 Tyne & Wear authorities). 
Metro is a Nexus responsibility.

Have the LTA functions not been assumed by NECA? https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024...le/19/made

Nexus is also under the management of NECA, having assumed the JTC functions?

(23 May 2024, 8:22 pm)L469 YVK wrote I think NETravel would be a better suited name.

NEBus
NEMetro
NERail
NEFerry
NEParkAndRide

Transport North East is a better name imo.

If they had any sense - which they don't. Then the best thing would be just to use the Nexus blocks which have been used for years instead of some absolute bollocks Tyneside nonsense like 'Angel'.

You don't go to London and get the Lion Bus or Paris and the Girafe Bus, it's just complete nonsense.

(24 May 2024, 6:29 pm)Adrian wrote NEBus sounds like the current situation on the Coast Road!


Have the LTA functions not been assumed by NECA? https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2024...le/19/made

Nexus is also under the management of NECA, having assumed the JTC functions?

NECA have delegated transport responsibility in Durham and Northumberland back to the County Councils - see the minutes of the cabinet meeting on 7th May
https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/governance/cabinet

(26 May 2024, 10:25 am)busmanT wrote NECA have delegated transport responsibility in Durham and Northumberland back to the County Councils - see the minutes of the cabinet meeting on 7th May
https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/governance/cabinet

If it's delegated, it can just as easily be centralised with agreement of a quorate meeting.

It'd have to be with franchising (which let's not forget, Kim has committed to), but I can understand why they'd want to run the status quo in the interim.

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

(09 May 2024, 9:59 pm)busmanT wrote Hi expect that Kim will be getting plenty of advice from the officers at NECA and from Nexus - plus Cllr Gannon who holds the Transport Portfolio on NECA.

Can I just clarify….as a professional, do you think this is a good thing? 

Because if you do, this explains why the network is utterly dead on its arse, GNE an unloved joke and arriva ne running itself into the ground

(26 May 2024, 9:23 pm)Ambassador wrote Can I just clarify….as a professional, do you think this is a good thing? 

Because if you do, this explains why the network is utterly dead on its arse, GNE an unloved joke and arriva ne running itself into the ground

I personally wouldn't take advice from Cllr Gannon about how to make a cup of tea, nevermind run a bus service.

I do think you raise a good point though, and I think the Mayor has to be looking beyond the officers at NECA about how to run this thing. Maybe TfGM would be a good start, but I think ex-professionals, no longer tied to a Party likely to bid for work, would be another good source of advice.

It's a massive task here, and simply painting all the buses a different colour isn't going to sort it.

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

(27 May 2024, 12:46 pm)Adrian wrote I personally wouldn't take advice from Cllr Gannon about how to make a cup of tea, nevermind run a bus service.

I do think you raise a good point though, and I think the Mayor has to be looking beyond the officers at NECA about how to run this thing. Maybe TfGM would be a good start, but I think ex-professionals, no longer tied to a Party likely to bid for work, would be another good source of advice.

It's a massive task here, and simply painting all the buses a different colour isn't going to sort it.

Sent from my SM-S916B using Tapatalk

Imo they need to be building a team to actually run the show rather than just taking advice and in my opinion that team should be totally independent so Gannon should be nowhere near it. 

Politics and running a successful business never works because you end up with decisions based on political gains rather than what actually should be done. 

Kim hasn't half been vocal about the Northumberland Line being delayed but it's strange there's nothing said about the absolute farce with the new Metro trains which are delayed even longer. 

Wonder why that might be...

TfL and TfGM aren't actually run by the politicians are they? That's surely the first step, to create a transport executive for the region to take over Nexus and the other councils responsibilities.

(27 May 2024, 1:43 pm)deanmachine wrote TfL and TfGM aren't actually run by the politicians are they? That's surely the first step, to create a transport executive for the region to take over Nexus and the other councils responsibilities.

Don't believe TFL is bar the board which is appointed by the mayor. 

TFGM is just the equivalent to Nexus, unless things have changed recently? Obviously not an issue when you don't have 2 council areas outside of it.

(26 May 2024, 9:23 pm)Ambassador wrote Can I just clarify….as a professional, do you think this is a good thing? 

Because if you do, this explains why the network is utterly dead on its arse, GNE an unloved joke and arriva ne running itself into the ground

Definitely not a good thing -- as few of the people involved in NECA/Nexus have any experience in running large scale bus networks, nor has Cllr Gannon.

Clearly Kim should take advice from her opposite number in Manchester as to what the issues are with setting up a franchised network, what to copy and what not to copy.

And find out the issues that have arisen in actually running a franchised network - the published Bee Network reliability statistics are very poor (even after adding 20 buses into Tranche 1), and the whole transfer of depots, staff and buses between operators has, apparently, gone far from smoothly for Go Ahead or Stagecoach.

https://tfgm.com/ways-to-travel/bus/punc.../19-25-may

https://democracy.greatermanchester-ca.g...tteeId=442

Might be just me, but is it just me that would rather we didn't bother with franchising at all, 2 of the main operators have pretty much proven their not fit for purpose anyway and go for the full public approach instead.

Starmer has already commited to it, or has reletively recently mentioned it, and unless something spectacular happens he's going to be in charge in just over a month anyway.

Obviously you'd need to get the right people in charge, but on paper most the GNE / Arriva Northumbria team will be out of a job - whether you judge them to the right people anyway is another question mind. Franchising in Manchester so far hasn't exactly been the glory of success some want to shout about, especially with transitions. It's all good giving GoAhead somewhere like Walkergate but if the place is full of ex GoNorthEast driver's then you can see where the problems start.

Not to mention everyone likes to discuss how great buses are in London but forget to the mention the big funding black hole behind them (massively cross subsidised by the Underground)

Heck you could even argue for a dual model and have a public operator operating Stagecoach's network (maybe with them having a small share like Transdev do with Nottingham City Transport) possibly with other areas added in (Gateshead / rest of Sunderland?), and franchise out other areas which are more rural / intercity and never have the scope to really return massive profits.

(30 May 2024, 9:14 pm)busmanT wrote Definitely not a good thing -- as few of the people involved in NECA/Nexus have any experience in running large scale bus networks, nor has Cllr Gannon.

Clearly Kim should take advice from her opposite number in Manchester as to what the issues are with setting up a franchised network, what to copy and what not to copy.

And find out the issues that have arisen in actually running a franchised network - the published Bee Network reliability statistics are very poor (even after adding 20 buses into Tranche 1), and the whole transfer of depots, staff and buses between operators has, apparently, gone far from smoothly for Go Ahead or Stagecoach.

https://tfgm.com/ways-to-travel/bus/punc.../19-25-may

https://democracy.greatermanchester-ca.g...tteeId=442

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.

(31 May 2024, 6:26 am)Storx wrote Might be just me, but is it just me that would rather we didn't bother with franchising at all, 2 of the main operators have pretty much proven their not fit for purpose anyway and go for the full public approach instead.

Starmer has already commited to it, or has reletively recently mentioned it, and unless something spectacular happens he's going to be in charge in just over a month anyway.

Obviously you'd need to get the right people in charge, but on paper most the GNE / Arriva Northumbria team will be out of a job - whether you judge them to the right people anyway is another question mind. Franchising in Manchester so far hasn't exactly been the glory of success some want to shout about, especially with transitions. It's all good giving GoAhead somewhere like Walkergate but if the place is full of ex GoNorthEast driver's then you can see where the problems start.

Not to mention everyone likes to discuss how great buses are in London but forget to the mention the big funding black hole behind them (massively cross subsidised by the Underground)

Heck you could even argue for a dual model and have a public operator operating Stagecoach's network (maybe with them having a small share like Transdev do with Nottingham City Transport) possibly with other areas added in (Gateshead / rest of Sunderland?), and franchise out other areas which are more rural / intercity and never have the scope to really return massive profits.

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.

(31 May 2024, 11:59 am)Adrian wrote 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.

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.

(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.

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.

(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.

Yeah totally agreed if I had to be honest, it's why the 2 model would be the best try and grow the routes which do actually make money by running them thereselves, then getting the rest of the network as low cost as possible as whatever you do it won't be making money - ever.

Agreed with the Stagecoach sentiments aswell, it's why I kind of like the idea of them being part of the municipal company similar to Nottingham City Transport who have Transdev as their partner. Surely having someone with the systems and experience of running buses long term will be a massive benefit - especially when ordering buses as everyone knows anything government tender is open for taking the piss.

Btw on Kim, I don't believe she ever did actually pledge franchising, it's always been 'bring buses back under public control' so there's nothing stopping a municipal company.

(01 Jun 2024, 8:04 am)Storx wrote Yeah totally agreed if I had to be honest, it's why the 2 model would be the best try and grow the routes which do actually make money by running them thereselves, then getting the rest of the network as low cost as possible as whatever you do it won't be making money - ever.

Agreed with the Stagecoach sentiments aswell, it's why I kind of like the idea of them being part of the municipal company similar to Nottingham City Transport who have Transdev as their partner. Surely having someone with the systems and experience of running buses long term will be a massive benefit - especially when ordering buses as everyone knows anything government tender is open for taking the piss.

Btw on Kim, I don't believe she ever did actually pledge franchising, it's always been 'bring buses back under public control' so there's nothing stopping a municipal company.

I agree with all that. I just can't see it as GNE and Arriva would no doubt ask why they are being franchised and Stagecoach not. Maybe a look in the mirror would be needed. But legally, it seems like dodgy ground.

(01 Jun 2024, 8:30 am)DeltaMan wrote I agree with all that. I just can't see it as GNE and Arriva would no doubt ask why they are being franchised and Stagecoach not. Maybe a look in the mirror would be needed. But legally, it seems like dodgy ground.

Yeah that's true on the legal side, shame really as it would be the best way. Arriva would be easy to deal with as you could just argue that Durham and Northumberland aren't part of it hence the franchsing. Go North East is the minefield though but the fact that they're making a loss - I wouldn't be too surprised if they actually want shot of it, assumption there of course though.

(01 Jun 2024, 9:04 am)Storx wrote Yeah that's true on the legal side, shame really as it would be the best way. Arriva would be easy to deal with as you could just argue that Durham and Northumberland aren't part of it hence the franchsing. Go North East is the minefield though but the fact that they're making a loss - I wouldn't be too surprised if they actually want shot of it, assumption there of course though.

I certainly think the case for doing something with both GNE and Arriva is there to be made as they are already using public money to prop up the 43/44/45 and 56 services to provide the service level they were doing before the "driver shortage", but with nothing really in return for the tax payer. I fear Stagecoach are just going to be collateral damage for the mismanagement of others.

(01 Jun 2024, 9:19 am)DeltaMan wrote I certainly think the case for doing something with both GNE and Arriva is there to be made as they are already using public money to prop up the 43/44/45 and 56 services to provide the service level they were doing before the "driver shortage", but with nothing really in return for the tax payer. I fear Stagecoach are just going to be collateral damage for the mismanagement of others.

Honestly totally agreed, it's a shame really. I just have little hope in everything being done by franchising aswell as Gannon and co are bloody awful. It's just going from one extreme to the opposite extreme and the model isn't exactly miles away from the exact same model that's just been scrapped on trains for being a mess.

Not to mention we live in a country who loves a bit of austerity with both parties commiting to it at the next election to some extent. Where's the money going to come from long term to fund this network? I certainly can't see this money coming from central government, you just have to look at the complete lack of interest in actually funding the Metro already and all it takes is someone to cut the Major budget or commit less and the whole thing is snookered.

I'd be interesting to see how much Arriva and GoNorthEast are really losing between them, if you removed Stockton and Darlington from Durham and all the contracted services and freebies which are already being given to them such as the two you mentioned there.

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