What’s the right blend of public and private? Transport Committee examines ways to run bus services
Two areas of the country, London and Manchester, have adopted the ‘franchising’ model for running bus services, so could it work elsewhere? The Transport Committee will question regional transport leaders and experts to explore the pros and cons of franchising, as well as the ‘Enhanced Partnerships’ operating model introduced by the previous government.
Meeting details
In part one of this session, MPs kick the tyres of the franchising model, which gives local authorities greater control over key details such as routes, fares, service levels, and vehicle standards. Bus companies then compete for contracts to operate these services, aiming to balance competition with a well-coordinated network. The Government’s new Buses Bill proposes to give all local authorities the ability to franchise their buses.
Among the panel are representatives from Transport for Greater Manchester, which now has the Bee Network up and running under a franchising model, and from the Cambridge and Peterborough Combined Authority, which will introduce a franchised network in the coming years.
Previous witnesses have questioned whether franchising would be a good fit for all local authorities due to the extra staffing required to set up this operating model, and the highly skilled roles that would be needed in councils to plan services by analysing data on journey patterns and passenger demand. It would also require staff to carry out sophisticated financial and risk planning, with councils liable for potentially losses. The Committee will be interested to learn whether the powers set out in the Government's new Buses Bill will be supported by sufficient resources to ensure their effective implementation.
The Committee are interested to hear about the nature of these risks and to what extent franchising could be a suitable model in rural and suburban areas.
In part two of the session, MPs investigate the successes or otherwise of Enhanced Partnerships. This is a model where private bus firms retain greater autonomy, but come to agreements with local authorities to provide a certain standard of service on particular routes.
Witnesses representing areas or bus firms where these partnerships are in place are questioned on how these collaborations work in practice, and how it is ensured that routes integrate with wider transport networks. There may also be questions on whether operators would benefit from longer-term funding settlements, as seen under franchising models, and how the Government plans to strengthen the provision of ‘socially necessary’ services that may be important to communities but less cost-effective for bus firms.