(03 Jan 2018, 8:59 pm)Andreos1 wrote When Kickstart was giving support and Partnerships were launched, https://www.nexus.org.uk/news/item/south...k-launched it would be easy to assume that improvements would be made and maintained. Particularly with services that provided a social need.
Whilst I appreciate the 88 may have suffered with reliability over the last however many months, I wouldn't have guessed it would have caused so much damage that the service was no longer viable. Particularly one which has hundreds of people going in and out of the hospital building it passes on a daily basis - both before and after this H1 starts and finishes for the day.
Indeed, the excuses regarding reliability have been trotted out (despite the works at Lindisfarne being completed for a number of months), rather than any references to viability (as seen in the extract Jimmi provided regarding the 64/95).
It also looks like the H1 service is designed around scholars contracts (correct me if I am wrong).
Changes to suit GNE's agenda or one to accomodate passenger requirements?
One of the things I was wondering about when reading about the changes to the 88 and introduction to the H1, was the extent GNE went to, to analyse customer demand/trends. What reasons are there for the service to be changed? What have they done to create a positive change to those customers.
Stumbled across these links:
https://www.nexus.org.uk/news/item/impro...ay-31-july So in this article, there seems to be a demand or requirement for a service to the hospital.
In this fairly recent article, visitors to the hospital are critical of public transport to the hospital
https://www.healthwatchsouthtyneside.co....o_STDH.pdf
This article/review/audit is a few years older. http://www.southtynesideccg.nhs.uk/wp-co...080914.pdf