(13 Jul 2026, 10:05 pm)Busadvocate wrote For details of what is proposed for handling cross boundary services and internal services of various obscure types that would be outside the franchise under a permit scheme,  see the North East Franchising Scheme Assessment, page 364 onwards.

Basically, it is proposed a Permit Scheme will allow some non-franchise services, but in most cases with conditions about fares and vehicle emissions (but not timetables or routes). It also envisages some of the franchised contract services will run outside the area (into Darlington etc) - the powers allow that, just like any other subsidised service, so long as they do not have a "disproportionate" effect on competition in those areas.

Quoting the draft scheme, the permit scheme would cover:
(b) any Local Service which:
(i) operates 50% or more of its total timetabled route outside the North East
MSA Area; or
(ii) is procured by a neighbouring local transport authority.

So your theoretical  Hartlepool - Metrocentre - Newcastle service would be far less than 50% outside NEMSA, so would not be eligible to run as a Permit (UNLESS it was under contract to Tees Valley !). 
The current X10 is only roughly 30% outside NEMSA, so that would not be eligible for a permit either.
685 is likewise mostly in NEMSA, so presumably it's envisaged to be in a franchise contract (unless radical thoughts about buses feeding trains ...)?

The 50% rule means there would be scope for Arriva (or others) to seek a permit for a service to Darlington from Newton Aycliffe (a truncated 5?) or from Bishop Auckland (a truncated 1?) but I would have thought the whole of those services would be in the franchise. Otherwise it is hard to see much scope for significant Permit services.

This is all great but like you say the X10 is only ~30% outside the NEMSA area … which means to continue running it would have to be an NEMSA franchised service - do they necessarily need an express to Teesside that mainly (not entirely but maybe 70% of the market) benefits Tees Valley residents travelling to Newcastle rather than the NEMSA residents that are paying towards it? They could truncate it at Peterlee, save a fair bit of cash and not worry 95% of the NEMSA users. 

This is one of the worries I have.