(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.