Meeting documents

Return to Items for Decision

Delegated Decisions by Cabinet Members: Cabinet Member for Transport – 6 October 2006

Statement of Decision

Bus Service Subsidies

Present:

Also in attendance:

Documentation considered:

Copies are attached to the signed copy of this decision.

Summary of representations in person

Mr Cooper presented a petition containing 514 signatures, signed entirely by residents who were over 18 and from within the parishes of Whitchurch on Thames and Goring Heath which he suggested indicated overwhelming support for retention of the 142 service. There was concern that the report seemed to address only that part of the service in Oxfordshire when in fact the service was cross border with much of the service going into Reading. He referred to timing anomalies and the importance of the service to local residents as a valuable means of transport for shopping, train connections and business. He asked the Cabinet Member for Transport to retain the service at its current level.

Councillor Fooks referred to the importance of the Water Eaton Park & Ride service 500 and her support for a 15 minute frequency service.

Councillor Moley spoke in support of Service PT V79 and its importance in the context of rural services and expressed concern that any reduction in levels of service might lead to discontinuation of services. In this case surrounding villages looked to Wantage to provide many services and he suggested that proposed changes to the health service structure would increase that need.

EXEMPT ITEMS

RESOLVED: that the public be excluded for the duration of item 10E (since it was likely that if they were present during that item there would be disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended) and specified below in relation to that item and since it is considered that, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information on the grounds set out in that item.

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

PROCEEDINGS FOLLOWING THE WITHDRAWAL OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC

Mr Darch advised the following changes to the figures in the financial summary on page 18 of the exempt Annex:

Section A - Saving of £47,714

Section B as per report

Total saving from A & B to read £33,670

With regard to Contracts PT/W3, PT/W6 and PT/W10 he advised that the 5% discount for joint award with other contracts no longer applied.

With regard to Contract PT/W10 he advised that financial contributions from Swindon Borough Council and Gloucestershire County Council meant that Option B could be awarded with a subsequent saving to the County Council of £2037.

With regard to PT/O18 Mr Field advised that an alternative offer had been received from the Oxford Bus Company which would allow for a 15 minute frequency service at peak times and Saturdays at a cost of £108,000 compared with the cost of £140,000 for a full 15 minute service.

Cabinet Member’s Comments

Councillor Robertson thanked the officers for their full and comprehensive report.

With regard to PT/V79 he highlighted the consequences to the County Council’s Public transport budget when other organisations withdrew support.

Decision

Having regard to the arguments and options set out in the documentation before me, the representations made to me and the further considerations set out above, I confirm my decisions on this matter are as follows:

1. to note the financial information contained in the introduction to the report CMDT10E;
2. to note the comments of Parish and Town Councils and Parish Transport Representatives and others made in response to the consultation exercise as part of the review as detailed at Annex 1 to the report CMDT10E;
3. to agree subsidy for the services described in the report CMDT10E as set out in the attached Schedule of Decisions (download as .doc file); and
4. to record that in the opinion of the Committee the decisions made in (c) 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.

Signed

Cabinet Member for Transport

Date ………………………2006

Return to TOP