Issue - meetings

Bus Subsidies

Meeting: 01/09/2011 - Delegated Decisions by Cabinet Member for Transport (Item 33)

Bus Service Subsidies

Forward Plan Ref: 2011/068

Contact: Tim Darch, Assistant Public Transport Officer, Tel: (01865) 815587

 

Report by Deputy Director of Environment & Economy – Highways & Transport (CMDT6E).

 

The information in this report is exempt in that it falls within the following prescribed category:

Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information)

 

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Cabinet Member for Transport considered (CMDT6E) a review of:

 

-                      subsidised bus services in the Wantage, Faringdon and Didcot areas which would, if awarded, be effective from 11 December 2011;

-                      other bus subsidy contracts elsewhere in the county.

 

Councillor Turner on behalf of Councillor Patrick welcomed the level of support recommended and asked what the expected target saving was for this review.

 

Mr Field advised that there was an annual savings target but no specific target for each review, which would be considered individually.  2 reviews had exceeded budget but there had been no cutbacks to level of service.  This review offered a considerable saving with little reduction in service and an increase in some areas.

 

Mr Howell added that severe pressures would be placed on future public transport  budgets and any savings which could be achieved now would help offset that loss.

 

Having regard to the arguments and options set out in the documentation before him, the representations made to him and the issues set out above the Cabinet Member for Transport APPROVED:

 

(a)       subsidy for the services described in the report CMDT6E on the basis of the tender prices (and the periods of time) as set out in Supplementary Exempt Annex 2 to that report;

 

(b)       record that in his opinion the decisions made in (a) above were urgent in that any delay likely to be caused by the call-in process would result in service discontinuity and in accordance with the requirements of Scrutiny Procedure Rule 17(b) those decisions should not be subject to the call in process;