1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136 
N ew bus
Page 7
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
not easy
'HE new bus grant of 50 per cent made luying new vehicles an artificially :heap option, and tended to distort udgment about the best balance betveen capital and maintenance expendiure, it was claimed last week in the .ords.
The most important objective for the rant had been the rapid introduction of 'uses suitable for one-man operation, said .ord Mowbray. Other objectives had been he modernisation of operators fleets, the nprovement of passenger comfort, and a neasure of vehicles standardisation.
In the 12 years the grant had been in !xistence single manning had increased rom around 10-20 per cent to 70 per cent, Ind even 100 per cent with some operators low.
The Government accepted that there vere socially necessary bus services which ieeded financial support to survive. An ndiscriminate capital subsidy was not the )est way of achieving this.