(16 Jul 2026, 11:07 am)Adrian wrote It's not a suggestion that they will or would, it's a suggestion that they could - big difference!

There's been some blurring of this over a couple of posts now, and tbh I get why, but this is my reading of it:

• Cross-boundary services are generally in-scope based on a core test of over 50% of timetabled mileage being within the franchise scheme area.
  
• This is unless including it in the franchising scheme risks an adverse impact on the commercial network in the neighbouring LTA area(s).
  
• The external portion of that route still needs to be registered per the Transport Act
  
• The 50% test is a policy, not a hard rule or legal cap. There'd be nothing preventing NEMSA from securing a service that was say 30%/70% in/out of the franchise area, if they thought it was important enough and it met the tests of a secured service, i.e. that the service wouldn't otherwise be provided, and the competition test in the Transport Act 2000.
  

So going back to the 23, that's probably a good example of something that NEMSA will be in a position of needing to save, unless Arriva think there's merit in continuing it commercially when they'd no longer have a wider network out of Peterlee.