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
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144 
'One operator for urban services' plea
Page 49
Page 50
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
APPTO conference in Liverpool last week reported by Martin Hayes
• One operator must eventually provide all provincial urban bus services in each local authority area. This assertion was made by virtually all the speakers from the floor during the first session of last week's annual conference of the Association of Public Passenger Transport Operators. The session was devoted to a paper (reported in CM last week) by Mr F. Tolson, city treasurer of Leeds, who spoke on the new transportation grant system.
Presenting his paper, Mr Tolson referred to the "fundamental conflict" between National Bus Company services which had to be revenue productive and those operated by municipal undertakings and PTEs which could be regarded as social services. It was clear that negotiations concerning the rationalization of different services with the NBC could go on for years and then founder on the question of profitability.
In the future the new county councils would be able to insist on the co-ordination of bus services within their area. "There will have to be only one bus," said Mr Tolson, referring to the all-too-common situation where services were duplicated by both NBC and municipal vehicles.
'Extremely frightening' Dr Tony Ridley, director-general of Tyneside PTE, referred to the new system of public transport finance which Mr Tolson had outlined and which comes into force on April 1, 1975. Dr Ridley thought that the complexity of the new legislation was "extremely frightening". He thought that the proposals were all right in principle but queried whether. the professionals and politicians could cope with the new levels of expertise and decision-making which would be called for:
He firmly recommended local authorities to produce a policy statement before embarking on the complicated process of preparing a transportation policy and programme (T1313). While setting up his own Executive he had found the requirement to produce a policy statement in the early days a "godsend".
Vital co—ordination
The overall concept of the PTEs had proved successful, thought Dr Ridley. However, he foresaw some complications over their relations with the new Metropolitan counties, though in the long term, relations with NBC and British Rail were more important.
Dr Ridley commended Mr Tolson for his "brave and strong" words on relationships between municipalities and the NBC. Agreements between the NBC and the PTEs had not produced any great benefits so far. This was no reflection on either NBC or PTE staff but sooner or later there must be uniform control of urban services. However, Dr Ridley saw no case for selling them. He could see no reason why assets could not be transferred for outstanding debts.
Competing for funds Mr R. E. Bottrill, general manager at Edinburgh, said it was not yet clear if the new legislation would apply to Scotland but he assumed it would. He was worried about what control and criteria there would be for fares subsidies written into TPPs. He was sorry to be departing from the disciplines of the balance sheet. Inside the new local authorities, transport undertakings would have to compete for funds with other departments. "We are a new voice in this respect," he said. Mr Bottrill went on to point out that if grants for financing services were to be obtained, much better methods of costing would have to be employed. It was significant that the NBC had recently provided better facilities for examining costs.
Replying, Mr Tolson said that it would be necessary to indicate the costeffectiveness of providing a certain level of service when submitting TPPs to the DoE. Average operating cost per mile would not be adequate as a basis for judging this because such figures were always fluctuating. More research into better methods of evolving true costs was necessary.
Providing the right information for judgments to be made on financing public transport also worried Mr Leslie Smith, general manager at Leicester. TPP input would suffer if transport management figures were not produced on the same basis as those of other departments.
It was the Government's original intention, when drawing up the new grant proposals, to let the counties absorb the municipal undertakings in their areas. This was revealed by Mr G. Moseley, under secretary, urban and passenger transport planning, at the DoE. But, said Mr Moseley, the Department had changed its mind because of the expertise available at local council level. A better degree of balance could be provided, it was felt, by giving executive control to the county but leaving strategic powers to the districts.
He admitted that many municipal men evidently thought this would not happen efficiently. But he pointed out that there was a provision to enable local authorities to agree how the different functions should be carried out and the Secretary of State could intervene in cases of dispute.
Standard—bus problems
The second session of the conference was devoted to a question forum. A panel discussed a number of prepared questions which were then thrown open to speakers from the floor. The panel consisted of: Aid Norman Harris, Southend-on-Sea; Cllr. C. L. Worthington, Nottingham; Ian Cunningham, general manager, Bournemouth; W. H. Lawrence, sales manager, Metro-Canunell Weymann Ltd; D. R. Smith, general manager, Cardiff; and A. T. Webster, sales and marketing director, British Leyland truck and bus division.
The first question concerned the desirability of having a 100 per cent grant from the Exchequer for psv fleet replacements. It asked if there was a case for producing a truly national vehicle with common running units.
Mr Webster said his company realized that there were problems in producing standard -vehicles. When its Atlantean AN68 had been produced it had had to be modified to meet individual demands. Operators were still trying to demand variety from the standardized Leyland National vehicle. "We are finding that we can provide some variations to this standard vehicle but there is a limit to these", he said.
He went on to say that it was intended in the future to commonize running units on both single and double deck vehicles. The new B15 double-decker, for instance, would share common engine, transmission and steering packages with the Leyland National.
Mr Tom Marsden, general manager at Aberdeen, said he was sick and tired of hearing of fellow operators who refused to operate certain specification vehicles. If 100 per cent grants became a reality then a standardized vehicle would have to be accepted. "The sooner we get on with designing a universally accepted vehicle the better," he said.
A different view was taken by Mr G. Hilditch, general manager at Halifax. He rejected the, 100 per cent bus grant for two reasons. First, he said, it would mean the DoE taking more interest in vehicle specification than at present. Secondly, it ought to be remembered that higher bus grants would mean higher taxes which would hit everybody.
Championing choice Mr Hilditch went on to remind delegates that there had been a "national" vehicle .between 1941 and 1945. It could run all over the country and was reliable. After the war there was a huge range of manufacturers, which was not ideal, "but I do not want a truly national vehicle", said Mr Hilditch. He gave three reasons for this: i) financial — one vehicle would not mean a cheaper deal (already contracts contained open price clauses); one vehicle produced from one plant would be vulnerable to labour disputes; and if there was only one vehicle, design would stagnate. Mr Hilditch said he firmly believed that the current level of competition was an incentive for manufacturers to improve their products.
Aid Harris — who described himself as "a hardened old Tory" — said he totally disagreed with Mr Hilditch. If public transport was a vital public service then it should be treated in the same way as education, health and so on. The whole of the public transport industry should be subsidized — provided there were safeguards on efficiency.
Though he said he was a long-time opponent of too much standardization, Mr Cunningham admitted that there might be a good case for a standard vehicle.
Mr T. Lord, general manager at Leeds, was firmly opposed to the national exchequer paying for buses. It should be a local authority expenditure. He wished that more politicians accepted that public transport had a place in social service. So far as the vehicles themselves were concerned, Mr Lord pointed out that one standard bus would not be adequate. In the new South Yorkshire PTE (of which he is to be director-general) the following vehicles would be required: two sizes of double-deckers (because of low bridges), several different types of single-deckers to cope with urban, inter-urban and rural routes, and minibuses for central area services.
Mr Lawrence said he could not see that the source of funds should influence bus design. If a universal bus were available it would be bought on its merits, but operating conditions were not the same in all areas. It would be a sad day for the industry if a no-choice situation . arrived. Mr Lawrence was certain that good design promoted an increasing awareness of the merits of standardized vehicles.
Replying to the points raised, Mr Webster said that British manufacturers would always design for the British market. But the British market for single-deckers was relatively small, 1100-1200 a year compared with 24,000 worldwide. The annual 25003000 market for double-deckers in the UK was the biggest in the world though, so British requirements were in the forefront of designers' minds.
If a universally standardized bus design was approved for Europe then manufac
turers in France, Germany and Britain would approach the project in different ways. There would be nothing to prevent operators choosing the most successful result and "we would have to keep on our toes to keep the foreigners out", said Mr Webster.
Is bigger better?
The second question asked if the panel would like to see legislation introduced to produce "proper rationalization of public transport".
Aid Harris, opening the discussion, said that nothing in his 25 years' experience had shown him that larger transport undertakings were more efficient, so he was generally opposed to the wholesale merging of undertakings.
Mr V. Rigby, general manager at Chesterfield, was another of those convinced that public transport should be regarded as a public service and treated in exactly the same way as water, gas or electricity. He wished that the proposed legislation was more positive; it relied too heavily on exhortation. The county council should take over all stage carriage services within its area, said Mr Rigby, whether operated by municipalities, NBC or independents. This would remove some of the present difficulties, enhance efficiency and produce economies. The Traffic Commissioners would no longer need to license stage carriage services and could adjudicate in cases of dispute instead. The NBC would be left to operate long-distance services on a national basis.
Disappointment that the powers of the proposed legislation were not strong enough was also expressed by Mr R. C. Jenkins, general manager at Reading. He described it as an opportunity missed. Rate and fare protection was nonsense to the public. As it was, competition between the municipalities and the NBC would continue instead of the counties having full control.
The third force The third question asked if monopolies were good for the industry. 'Councillor Worthington thought the county was the optimum size for controlling public transport. Bigger units would too easily get out of touch with public opinion. For this reason it was impossible to expect the NBC to keep fares down to the same level as local operators.
Delegates were urged to remember that there was a third force in the industry: the independent operators who ran 10 per cent of stage carriage services. Mr Denis Quin, director and secretary of the Passenger Vehicle Operators Association, said that often independents had to raise their fares because municipal rates were higher.
Mr Smith of Cardiff said that it was unwise to think that there was much standardization among municipal undertakings. Minimum fares, for example, varied from 1 p to 5p. The public was concerned with having a reliable, efficient bus service that ran to time. They were not concerned with . who ran the buses or what colour they were.