And we are back once more of "let's do consultation to make us look like we listened"

This times its for 

"Huh let me see this again"

The 10/10A/10B/12

https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/share-your...ce-changes

Really we need a consultation that is whatever the timetable changes are

(08 Jul 2026, 3:50 pm)Nerd4321 wrote And we are back once more of "let's do consultation to make us look like we listened"

This times its for 

"Huh let me see this again"

The 10/10A/10B/12

https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/share-your...ce-changes

Really we need a consultation that is whatever the timetable changes are

Literally impossible to improve reliability on these services let's be honest with all the major works i.e. Tyne Bridge Restoration, Gateshead Flyover Demolition, Traffic Diversions pretty much all via Redheugh Bridge causing severe gridlock at peak times with diversions via Centrelink cutting off services to Askew Road West. 

Central Station is a nightmare particularly if there has been disruption on the Rail Network resulting in pick ups and drops off exceeding capacity limits to the short stay car park. Then you have Ubers that think they can park up wherever they bloody like blocking access to bus stops need I continue to go on with this one. 

At this point probably the only thing I would do is rather than have them all interworking is I would have them all as standalone services which may increase PVR/Driver Required.

(08 Jul 2026, 4:41 pm)Malarkey wrote Literally impossible to improve reliability on these services let's be honest with all the major works i.e. Tyne Bridge Restoration, Gateshead Flyover Demolition, Traffic Diversions pretty much all via Redheugh Bridge causing severe gridlock at peak times with diversions via Centrelink cutting off services to Askew Road West. 

Central Station is a nightmare particularly if there has been disruption on the Rail Network resulting in pick ups and drops off exceeding capacity limits to the short stay car park. Then you have Ubers that think they can park up wherever they bloody like blocking access to bus stops need I continue to go on with this one. 

At this point probably the only thing I would do is rather than have them all interworking is I would have them all as standalone services which may increase PVR/Driver Required.

imo if you're increasing the PVR, it'd be better to restore the 11/604 in some of form and having the 10B and 10A extension as part of it. 

Means less buses by the MetroCentre and a clean 2 BPH on the 10/10A. The 12/24/24 or 24/36 timetables and the 10A variants around Greenside are messy and confusing imo.

So what are Go North East proposing to do?

They have to consult. It's part of the BSIP charter. This is not a consultation though. I don't know how they can expect you to respond to a consultation without telling you what the actual changes they're making are?

That's what you call a treasure hunt - not a consultation.

It's silly how they've done it

(09 Jul 2026, 3:39 pm)Adrian wrote They have to consult. It's part of the BSIP charter. This is not a consultation though. I don't know how they can expect you to respond to a consultation without telling you what the actual changes they're making are?

That's what you call a treasure hunt - not a consultation.

I’ve not got very far through the franchising documentation but consultations that were nothing of the sort (Arriva’s “you can either have the X21 or the X22” also comes to mind, here) have been mentioned a few times, already, in what I have read.

(09 Jul 2026, 7:17 pm)BusLoverMum wrote I’ve not got very far through the franchising documentation but consultations that were nothing of the sort (Arriva’s “you can either have the X21 or the X22” also comes to mind, here) have been mentioned a few times, already, in what I have read.

The sham consultation process is referenced somewhere in the Franchising Scheme Assessment. From people I've spoken with, I know that NEMSA are well aware of the frustrations with it.

It was part of the charter that was brought in with the Bus Service Improvement Plan a couple years ago. You know, the 'new way of working' that was supposed to turn things around *rolls eyes*

Charter is here: https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/passengercharter

It is what they did in March....

If anyone with OCD you need to scrutinise an existing timetable with a proposed timetable and find the faults....

I recall (only because I use the service) that early morning and last bus are the major changes but we must remember last buses need to be kept as if there is a football match or event it aids getting people out of the city

(09 Jul 2026, 7:51 pm)Adrian wrote The sham consultation process is referenced somewhere in the Franchising Scheme Assessment. From people I've spoken with, I know that NEMSA are well aware of the frustrations with it.

It was part of the charter that was brought in with the Bus Service Improvement Plan a couple years ago. You know, the 'new way of working' that was supposed to turn things around *rolls eyes*

Charter is here: https://www.northeast-ca.gov.uk/passengercharter

I dont agree with the choices in that consutlation, but why was it a sham?

The operator wanted to reallocate resource, asked the public its thoughts and got the feedback it needed to make a decision. 

I guarantee 100% that at some point in the new world , NEMSA will need to make a similar choice of reallocating resource where they think its best needed- Happens all the time in TfL. In fact, its happening right now! 
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transpor...89075.html

I'm genuinely looking forward to how they communicate what may be percieved as bad news regarding buses, as so far theyve had it very very easy.

(11 Jul 2026, 5:02 am)Kimlfixit wrote I dont agree with the choices in that consutlation, but why was it a sham?

The operator wanted to reallocate resource, asked the public its thoughts and got the feedback it needed to make a decision. 

I guarantee 100% that at some point in the new world , NEMSA will need to make a similar choice of reallocating resource where they think its best needed- Happens all the time in TfL. In fact, its happening right now! 
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transpor...89075.html

I'm genuinely looking forward to how they communicate what may be percieved as bad news regarding buses, as so far theyve had it very very easy.

I think you're attempting to put words into my mouth. If you scroll up slightly, you'll see my phrasing was "The sham consultation process is..." not "This consultation is a sham". I did however describe it as a treasure hunt, and I stand by that.

However, as you want to compare it to TfL, let's take a look at their latest bus consultation: https://haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/bus-424-putney-fulham:

• Clear and concise information about the changes
  
• Detailed maps provided
  
• Rationale explained in detail
  
• Equality impact assessment carried out
  
• Encouragement to ask questions during the period, prior to submitting a consultation response
  
• Additional formats of the consultation available, including easy read and audio format
  
• Multiple channels to take part in the consultation
  

Compare that to the August service changes 'consultation' by Go North East: https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/share-your...ce-changes:

• Impacted services quoted but no information about the actual changes
  
• Proposed timetable provided for you to go treasure hunting
  
• No real rationale provided
  
• No equality impact assessment carried out
  
• No invitation to ask questions or FAQ section
  
• No additional formats available / only an MS Forms link to take part
  

Consultation is supposed to be a two-way dialogue designed to gather ideas, concerns, or advice before a decision is made. 

I agree though, NEMSA will have to consult on changes. Let's hope they take a lead from how TfL do it though, not from how Go North East avoid it.