ITEM CMDT11E CABINET MEMBER FOR TRANSPORT– 27 MARCH 2008
BUS SERVICE SUBSIDIES
Report by Head of Transport
Introduction
1. This report and the associated Annexes deals with the following which now need decisions to be made by the Committee:-
(A) The Review of Subsidised Bus Services in the Henley, Wallingford and Didcot area, which, if awarded, will be effective from 1 June 2008. (B) Other bus subsidy contracts elsewhere in the County.
2. Background information on items (A) and (B) above are included at Annex 1 (download as .doc file) together with a summary of the relevant points from the responses received through local consultation. Information relating to the main County Council subsidy contracts is also included at Annex 1 (download as .doc file) for each service, but in some cases there are wider issues affecting particular contracts, which are discussed in the main body of the report. Section A of Annex 1 deals with services under review in the Henley, Wallingford and Didcot area, whilst Section B deals with other services elsewhere in the County.
3. Tender prices obtained for contracts specified in paragraph 1 will be contained in a confidential Supplementary Exempt Annex 2, to be circulated later.
Reasons for Exempt Annex
4. This item should be considered in exempt session because its discussion in public might lead to the disclosure to members of the public present of information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information) as a result of discussions between Oxfordshire County Council and/or other local authorities and organisations.
5. The costs contained in Annex 2 must be treated as strictly confidential since they relate to the financial and business affairs of the operator. All prices must be treated as strictly confidential until such time as the Decision Meeting decides whether or not to provide financial support for each service. Revealing operators’ prices before then would prejudice the County Council’s position if tenders or propositions had to be sought again for any of the services. Prices remain confidential after the date of this meeting for 10 days (until 6 April) under the objection period specified in the Public Contract Regulations 2006.
Subsidy Prices
6. Tender prices will not be available until shortly before the meeting and will therefore be reported separately in Supplementary Exempt Annex 2 together with my recommendations. Until all tender prices and ‘de minimis’ propositions received have been analysed, I will not know what the overall impact on the Public Transport budget is likely to be. Local Members will be advised in writing of recommendations affecting their Divisions at least one week before the meeting that considers this report and their written comments sought. Any responses received will be included as an appendix to Supplementary Exempt Annex 2.
7. If further support for any contract is not agreed at the meeting on Thursday 27 March 2008 (except where they have been replaced by alternative arrangements or contracts) then the service or journey(s) concerned will cease after operation on Saturday May 31 2008. The only exception to this may be if a settlement will be left with no other form of public transport. In such cases, I may recommend that existing contract arrangements be extended until December 2008 to allow time for alternative facilities such as voluntary community transport to be explored.
Exemption from Call-in
8. On 10 January 2006 Council agreed an amendment to the Constitution which means that the County Council’s call-in procedure should not apply to any decision on the letting of a contract arising from termination of an existing contract if the time available is such that allowing for call-in would result in service discontinuity, provided that all members of the relevant Scrutiny Committee had been informed of the circumstances of the decision to be made and had had an opportunity to make representations to the decision maker about it. Since existing subsidy contracts will inevitably end on 31 May 2008, the effect of any call-in would be to prevent introduction of any replacement contracts, thus resulting in complete withdrawal of the services concerned and a consequent service discontinuity. The 10 January 2006 amendment therefore applies.
9. With regard to that provision, local members and Environment & Economy Scrutiny Committee Members will be advised of the recommended contract awards as contained in Supplementary Exempt Annex 2, at least one week before the date of this Meeting which will allow them the opportunity to put their comments in writing or arrange to speak at the meeting.
10. The above arrangements are separate from the provisions of the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 which allow a 10 day ‘cooling-off’ period for contractors who have any grievance with regards to the tender awards or processes. Successful tenderers will be advised of the outcome as soon as is practicable after the meeting, so that they will be in a position to register services with the Traffic Commissioners before the end of the 10 day period if necessary. Because of this it will not be possible to disclose any information to the public in respect of the tender awards until before Monday 7 April 2008 (the tenth day of the ‘cooling-off’ period being the preceding Sunday).
Financial Position – Forthcoming Year (2008-09)
11. The funding available in the County Council’s bus subsidy budget will be as follows:
£000’s Bus Subsidy Budget 3,200 Rural Bus Subsidy Grant (RBSG) 1,592
This figure essentially represents a "stand still" budget when the annual inflation cost, to be applied to existing contracts, is taken in to account. The Bus Subsidy Budget has now been separated out from the overall Public Transport budget which is now under the control of the Public Transport Policy manager.
Note that this excludes budgets for public transport development, some of which are used for pump-priming bus services. It also excludes over £1 million of income from developer, partnership and service-specific Government grant funding. All of these other sources of funding are dedicated to specific services and are not available for general bus subsidy. The value of any of these other sources of funding is therefore ‘netted out’ in any references to the subsidy cost to the Council of the services concerned.
Financial Position – Wallingford and Didcot Review
12. The current annual net cost to the bus subsidy budget of the contracts under review is £1,003,919. Officers will not be recommending that the net cost of new contracts to be awarded will exceed this amount.
Contract Numbering
13. In the annexes the contracts have been ordered in relation to the three areas under review (Henley, Wallingford, Didcot) which is also generally the same order as the existing contract numbers except for those in the Didcot area (which are grouped together in order - see below). The contracts have been given a letter code in the first column of each Annex (and also in any references to the service within this report) and members are recommended to use this code for cross-reference purposes. Existing service and contract numbers are mentioned, for members’ information only, in the service descriptions. Both service and contract numbers may change following award of new contracts.
A. Review of Subsidised Bus Services in the Henley, Wallingford and Didcot Areas
Background
14. Subsidised bus services in the Henley, Wallingford and Didcot area are due for their regular four-yearly review, and tenders have been invited for new contracts from 1 June 2008 to run until 2 June 2012 in respect of Henley and Wallingford and 10 December 2011 for the Didcot area contracts. This alteration to differing contract lengths is to reduce the number of contracts within this review and to reallocate the 7 Didcot area contracts to the adjoining Wantage and Faringdon area with which they have more affinity. Some 24 contracts are currently operating in this area ands are included in this review: although this should be reduced to possibly 17 or so next time round in 2012. Two other contracts serving areas outside the review area (and both in Oxford City) are also due for consideration. These are dealt with separately in section B of this report.
15. Details of all of the services concerned together with information on the present subsidy cost and patronage data are contained in Annex 1 (Section A). A total of 66 Parish/Town Councils were consulted, along with Vale of the White Horse District Council, South Oxfordshire District Council, Oxford City Council, Reading Borough Council and West Berkshire Unitary Authority. If appointed, the Parish Transport Representative of each parish was notified of the consultation process in addition to the Parish Clerk. Numerous further interested parties also consulted in the course of this review including Bus Users UK, Transport for All, Harwell Business Park, and Culham Laboratories. Notices were placed on buses operating the routes concerned, and at major bus stops. As a result views were also received from private individuals and other representative bodies. Comments received from the consultees, including any particular requests for new services or variations to existing routes, are also summarised under the respective contract headings in Annex 1.
16. 39 responses were received from Parish, Town and District Councils as a result of the public consultation exercise. Of these, 11 responses were in the form of “transport needs” and one “Parish” surveys, and were compiled with the assistance of the Rural Transport Adviser at Oxfordshire Rural Community Council. Some made suggestions for additional journeys or variations to services, although it was made clear at the commencement of the consultation process that spare funds for significant improvements were likely not to be available at this time. However, prices have been sought for route diversions or other realistic improvements where suggested.
17. The network of services under review can best be described by reference to the respective areas that are served (although some routes serve more than one of the review areas). Full details of all the current contracts involved can be found at Annex 1 (Section A).
Services under Review
18. A number of factors have had to be taken into consideration during the course of the review. These include:- (a) Wholly or partial commercial declarations by existing operators. (b) “De minimis” prices sought for some contracts (in some cases as a result of the above declarations). (c) Cross-boundary issues relating to operations within the Reading Borough Council and West Berkshire administrative areas. (d) Discussions with Home to School Transport regarding the carriage of scholars (e) Need to take into account requirements of Abingdon/Witney College or other funders.
a - Commercial Operations 19. Commercial journeys are those which operate without any subsidy. All existing contractors were approached regarding the declaration of any route or section of route, currently supported by the County Council, that could be continued without subsidy (i.e. commercially). A number of positive responses were forthcoming is a result of this enquiry (which was made at an early stage in the review process). One contract was declared wholly commercial on an exact replacement basis from 1 June 2008, two wholly commercial but not on a like for like basis and three, partly commercial. These are:-
Wholly Commercial and an exact replacement of the current service A) PT/S 75 (ITEM O) – service 91 (Dorchester – Didcot schooldays) Current operator, Whites Coaches will run an exact route replacement but the morning journey will operate 5 minutes earlier than at present
Wholly Commercial but with changes to the current service pattern B) PT/S 65 (ITEM H) – service 130 (Wallingford – Didcot) Current operator Thames Travel has declared that they will provide an hourly service between the above towns 07.00 to 19.30hrs Mon-Fri and 08.00 to 18.30hrs Saturdays but will go direct along the A4185, not serve intermediate points on the existing 130 route (i.e. Wilding Road estate (Wallingford), Brightwell cum Sotwell village, Didcot Tesco stores and Didcot Girls School). County Council Officers have had to consider how best to continue to provide a service to these points and has put out various options under new contracts (references PT/S 65, 66 and 71 – Item H).
C) PT/V 39 (ITEM U) – service 35A (Abingdon – Didcot Sunday daytime). Current operator, Oxford Bus Company, has declared that they will provide an hourly service between the above points on Sunday daytime operating via Drayton, Steventon and Milton Park. They will cease to go round the St Michael’s Way loop in Steventon so that the service will become identical to their commercial Monday to Saturday operation on route 35A.
This will also mean a doubling of the frequency through Steventon on Sundays as presently alternate journeys on the hourly frequency go via Drayton, Sutton Courtenay and Milton village (as 35B). County Council Officers have therefore had to consider how best to continue to provide a service to Sutton Courtenay and Milton and has put out various options under new contracts (references PT/V 41 – Item U).
Partly Commercial (and acceptable as such under the bus strategy criteria) D) PT/S 30 (ITEM A) – service 151-154 (Henley Town service) Current operator Whites Coaches has declared up to six journeys on each route as commercial, and suggested a minor rerouting of route 152. De minimis price has been sought for restoration of an hourly daytime service although one evening peak journey on service 152 (at 17.26) would be discontinued (no recorded passengers).
E) PT/S 35 (ITEM C) – service 145 (Woodcote - Henley) Current operator Whites Coaches has declared three journeys on this route as commercial. De minimis price sought for one further journey each way in the off peak.
F) PT/S 76 (ITEM P) – services 91-93 (Didcot Town service) Current operator Whites Coaches has declared up to three journeys on each route as commercial, plus those journeys formerly part of contract PT/S 75 (above) that serve the town routes. De minimis price sought for retention of three off-peak journeys so as to maintain the present hourly daytime service.
b -”De minimis” prices sought. 20. Under the Bus Strategy, advantage can be taken of an exemption in the law which allows bus subsidy expenditure to be negotiated without formal tender subject to meeting specified criteria as set out in the strategy. These are sought prior to the tendering process. Such prices have been received for the following contracts and these have been considered by Officers as meeting the criteria:-
Contract PT/S 31 (ITEM B) (Arriva the Shires) – continuation of existing de minimis Sunday contract for otherwise commercial weekday service 800 (High Wycombe – Henley – Reading)
Contract PT/S 48 (and S93) (ITEM E) (Thames Travel) – The operator already provides three trips out of every four on this half-hourly service on a commercial basis (over the Wallingford – Reading section) and has therefore proposed a declining subsidy “kickstart” agreement for five years (with the last year as a nil payment) as an option for continuation of this service. Details of this proposal are contained in Exempt Confidential Annex 2. Late evening journeys are funded separately from a ring-fenced Government Rural Challenge grant until 30 Jan 2010. The present Sunday two-hourly extension from Wallingford to/from Benson has been declared as non-commercial. Tender options for a replacement facility have been included in PT/S 85 (item M).
Contract PT/S 80 (ITEM K) (Thames Travel) – This covers two evening journeys on Mondays to Thursdays only between Oxford and Wallingford via Benson (service X41). The main Oxford-Wallingford service is covered by a “kickstart” arrangement, (contract PT/S 45) supported by the Public Transport Development Officer from the “Premium Routes” allocation and awarded until 29 January 2011. This arrangement is not part of this review but contract S80 (whilst up for renewal at this time) is tied in with contract S45. A “de minimis” price has therefore been obtained from the current operator (Thames Travel) to continue contract S80 until 29/01/11. Details of this proposal are contained in Exempt Confidential Annex 2.
21. Prices were also received from the following but these deemed initially unacceptable without exploration of further prices by way of open tenders - these prices remain on the table as an option that members may wish to consider (and are detailed in Exempt Confidential Annex 2).
Contract PT/S 65 (ITEM H) (Thames Travel) – to divert their commercial direct service between Wallingford and Didcot via Wilding Road Estate, Wallingford and Brightwell cum Sotwell village. Also tendered as new contracts PT/S 65, S 66 and S 71.
Contract PT/V 38 (ITEM T) (Oxford Bus Company) – Price to continue hourly evening service, daily Abingdon – Didcot but like the Sunday commercial declaration this would operate via Drayton, Steventon and Milton Park. They would cease to go round the St Michael’s Way loop in Steventon so that the service will become identical to their commercial daytime operation on route 35A. Although this would mean a doubling of the frequency through Steventon in the evenings, presently alternate journeys on the hourly frequency so via Drayton, Sutton Courtenay and Milton village (as 35B). County Council Officers have therefore had to consider how best to continue to provide a service to Sutton Courtenay and Milton and has put out various options under new contracts (including the existing service pattern - reference PT/V 40 – Item T).
22. For all of the other contracts, not mentioned above (roundly 11 in total plus new contracts to cover sections unserved by the above declarations), Officers have as a basic specification sought tenders for the current level of service. However, as usual various alternative options have also been specified for many contracts at either a lower level of service, or for a combination of existing routes in order to achieve savings.
c – Cross – boundary services
23. Three Oxfordshire administered contracts in this review currently operate into the Reading Borough Council area, none of which receive a financial contribution from that authority. Of these, two are contracts for operations wholly within Oxfordshire (PT/S 31 (ITEM B) – service 800 and PT/S 36 (ITEM D) – service 142) but where the operators currently continue through to/from Reading on a commercial basis. The third, PT/S 48 (ITEM E) –service X40 (Wallingford – Reading) is mainly commercial throughout. Within Reading all are wholly or partly paralleled by generally more frequent local buses run by Reading Transport.
24. In respect of contract PT/S 36 (ITEM D) – service 142, this route is contracted to operate from Checkendon via Woodcote and Whitchurch Hill to Pangbourne (in West Berks). The present contract is held by Thames Travel, who also hold a separate contract with West Berkshire District Council to provide a Goring – Streatley – Upper Basildon - Pangbourne – Reading service (route No. 132) which is not subject to review by West Berkshire until November 2008. Together the 142 and 132 combine to provide a regular hourly service from Pangbourne to/from Reading via Purley. There is no obligation for the successful tenderer for route 142 (if awarded) to continue this section (although as many of the passengers from the Oxfordshire villages such as Whitchurch Hill currently travel through to either Pangbourne or Reading) it is hoped that they would consider doing so. Options for the 142 route include a connecting shuttle with route X40 in Woodcote offering an alternative route into Reading.
25. As a result of the consultation exercise, we also received a request from Sonning Common Parish Council for the restoration of a late night journey from Reading on route 137. The daytime Reading – Sonning Common service runs Monday to Saturday and is provided commercially by Reading Buses with no financial support from Oxfordshire County Council. The last bus from Sonning Common is at 20.00hrs, although they did run a return journey back from Reading at 23.00hrs on Friday and Saturday, commercially until November 2002. Prices have therefore been sought for a similar journey leaving Reading between 23.15 and 24.00 on the same two nights per week (new contract PT/S 33).
d - Discussions with the Home-to-School Transport team - Carriage of students
26. In accordance with normal practice, officers from Public Transport and the Home-to-School Transport team have worked together to identify any opportunities to carry entitled schoolchildren on public bus services, as well as to integrate education and public transport contracts as recommended in the Best Value Review. Officers did identify a small number of pupils that could possibly be transferred from Home-to-School Transport to public bus services but the majority of schools within this review area are large secondary establishments that involve very large flows of pupils.
27. However two services currently carry entitled schoolchildren (one in lieu of a Home to School contract, and another with low numbers where students are issued with passes for use on the public bus). Tendering options for these contracts have retained these flows as a feature but alternatives ask for prices without scholars’ carriage so as to compare prices. Differing afternoon finish times on different days of the week (at schools in both Didcot (and currently) Wallingford) makes drawing up a comprehensible public timetable more difficult.
28. Following discussions between Home to School Transport and Henley College it has also been decided to seek prices as part of this review for the network of coaches to/from the College that have previously been organised by the college itself. This is because of the substantial funding currently given to support students from Oxfordshire attending the college (partly due to the lack of other sixth form facilities in the South Oxfordshire area), although some of the coaches run from pick-up points outside the County (where students pay their own fares). As an alternative some of the students could possibly use service 139 between Wallingford and Henley and some options for contract PT/S 84 (ITEM L) cater for this.
Identification of Flows of Non-Entitled Schoolchildren
29. It is notable however that there is a significant level of non-entitled students currently being carried on the contracts under review. These are either to private schools such as the European School at Culham or journeys which are less than three miles in length. Examples are from Ladygrove (route 91) and South Didcot (route 94) to Didcot Girls and Boys School and Wallingford / Abingdon to the European School (Route 140). The Ladygrove service (PT/S 75 – ITEM O) has been declared commercial by Whites Coaches and will therefore continue. There is also movement of students from Brightwell to/from Didcot (route 130) which the “commercial declaration” by Thames Travel using the direct A4185 will not cater for.
30. The Bus Strategy states that subsidy will not be paid for services provided wholly or mainly for passengers who are (non-entitled) students who pay their own fares, although where a service can be justified on the basis of catering for other users, and can cater for students at no extra cost, then every effort will be made to ensure that this is achieved. Whilst the tender options put out include the current level of service (which by default meet many of the existing flows) it is likely that if a lower level or differing pattern of service is awarded then not all existing students will have a suitable or convenient service from June 2008 (or for the last seven weeks of the summer term). This is likely to generate a high level of complaints from parents and where this might happen has been highlighted in the notes in against the recommended award option in Confidential Annex 2.
e - Requirements of Abingdon/Witney College
31. Abingdon-Witney College already contribute to service 140 (PT/S 70 – ITEM J) and have indicated their agreement to continue to do so for a further four years. The specification has been drawn up to continue to meet their requirements
Developer Funding – Section 106 Monies
32. A number of potential or existing contributions to bus services were identified in the review area, as follows: Currently available (a) Enhancement of peak service 130 (Wallingford to Didcot) (b) Funding from Ladygrove development (ongoing) (c) Development of Harwell Business Park site
Future funding (possibly within duration of contracts (a) Chilton Green, Harwell (route 96) (b) Great Western Park, Didcot (new network) (c) Various smaller schemes in Wallingford (d) Fairmile hospital, Cholsey, site redevelopment
33. The potential for use of those Section 106 contributions listed above to support subsidised services may depend on the award of certain contract variations. Details of the availability of Section 106 funding and the potential financial effects appear alongside the relevant contracts in Confidential Annex 2, along with alternative options where appropriate.
Loss of Public Transport services to certain parishes
34. In view of the budgetary constraints outlined above there is a greater likelihood in this review than some of the previous reviews that have been undertaken in recent years, of certain parishes having no public transport facilities after 1 June 2008. Where this is likely to occur will be clearly set out in Confidential Annex 2, and if this option is awarded then prompt involvement of bodies such as Oxfordshire Rural Community Council may be necessary to explore other alternatives within the time available before the planned withdrawal. Also see paragraph 7.
Use of Social & Health Care and Community Transport vehicles
35. Officers considered the possible use of County Council-owned Social & Community Services vehicles in the context of this review. In the event of tender prices being prohibitive or no tenders being received for contracts, and especially if rural communities may be left with no bus service as a result, officers from elsewhere within the Integrated Transport Unit may have to investigate the potential operation of such contracts by utilising Social and Community Services vehicles if this can be done with insignificant disruption to their existing commitments and within the restrictions imposed by the complex licensing restrictions for operation of these services.
Contributions towards timetabled Community Transport Operations
36. There is one community Transport operation in this review area (the operations by Readibus in the Henley and Goring areas to/from Reading) and this is dealt with separately in paper to the Committee prepared by Mr Neil Timberlake. These do run on a specific scheduled day of the week but require pre-booking beforehand.
Accessibility Studies - How the Project Supports LTP2 Objectives
37. Buses are at the heart of the County Council’s 2nd Local Transport Plan. The Bus Strategy, as part of the LTP, describes how the County Council creates the conditions in which commercial bus services can thrive, whilst ensuring that subsidised services are provided where necessary to supplement the commercial network and which best meet local needs and provide best value for money.
38. The bus services considered in this report are some of these subsidised services and contribute towards meeting the shared priorities of delivering accessibility and, to a lesser extent, tackling congestion.
39. Regrettably, the staff within Environment and Economy have received insufficient training to operate the ‘Accession’ system to its full potential. It was therefore decided in this instance that it was not practical to conduct a full accessibility study for the area under review. However, now that the specific accessibility target has been included in the new Local Area Agreement, this will need to change and greater consideration will need to be given at future area reviews to delivering improvements to accessibility in determining contract awards.
Consultation During Review
40. Extensive consultation has been carried out during the course of this review and just over half the consultees responded. A brief summary of all the comments received is set out at Annex 1 under their respective contracts.
41. In addition, public meetings were held in Henley (afternoon) Wallingford (afternoon and evening) and Didcot (evening) in November 2007 to which all consultees were invited and at which various proposals were outlined and comments received.
B. Contracts for Subsidised Bus Services Elsewhere
Contract PT/O18: Service 500 (Oxford City – Water Eaton Park & Ride) (ITEM V)
42. The existing arrangement for Park & Ride service 500, operated by the Oxford Bus Company expires on 31 May 2008. This consists of a payment to the company to provide a 15 minute frequency on Mondays to Friday peak periods and all day Saturday (there is no Sunday service). Monday to Friday off-peaks operate at a 20 minute frequency, which is what Oxford Bus claims is a “commercial” level of service. The additional funding is provided from the Public Transport Development Officers “Premium route” budget.
43. In discussions with the company Oxford Bus have indicated that, were the subsidy to be discontinued they would continue with a 20 minute service at all of the current times on a commercial basis. It is very difficult to quantify the value for money aspect of the current frequency enhancement as, other than from Water Eaton Park & Ride terminus, the route parallels frequent commercial Oxford Bus and Stagecoach routes (although 500 does not serve a number of lesser used stops). Water Eaton Park & Ride site has become increasingly busy during the past year due to the removal of parking charges whilst those at nearby Peartree P & R remain in force. This may be an argument for retaining a peak frequency enhancement.
44. This issue is still under consideration with all the parties concerned and I will report orally at the meeting and make my recommendations.
Contract PT/O1: Service U10 (Oxford City – John Radcliffe Hospital) (ITEM U)
45. This contract was awarded as part of the Oxford City review in June 2006 and is jointly funded by the County Council and Oxford Brookes University. It combines, on Monday to Saturday evenings and all day Sundays, Stagecoach Oxford route 10 and Brookes Bus route U5 and offered significant savings by doing so at the time of the contract award.
46. Most Oxford City contracts were awarded until June 2010, but Stagecoach were unable to enter into an agreement for this route beyond 20th September 2008 when the current contract with Brookes University to provide the Brookes Bus network expires. The University are currently in the process of re-tendering their network and the successful operator (for a new five year contract) is expected to be announced by the end of May 2008.
47. Discussions with the University authorities has indicated that they are generally satisfied with the Sunday arrangements but weekday evening services suffer unreliability, partly due to insufficient journey times. Observations indicate that the services are fairly well used by both students (who travel without charge on “U” network routes) and ordinary members of the public. The existing operator has therefore been asked as to the level of commerciality in this operation but it is unlikely that this will be vouchsafed until after the award of any new contract by Brookes.
48. It may therefore be necessary for Officers to make arrangements at short notice to either continue the present service with either the existing or new contractor (depending on the award by the University) or, if necessary seek (by a quick tender exercise) a replacement service 10 operation at these times. Authority is therefore sought for Officers, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport, to investigate a replacement for the existing PT/O1 contract dependent upon the outcome of the award of the new Brookes Bus contract by Oxford Brookes University, so as to ensure a continuation of service.
Financial and Staff Implications
49. The financial implications as they relate to bus service subsidies will be dealt with in the Supplementary Annex 2. There are no staff implications.
CONFIDENTIAL EXEMPT ANNEX 2
50. Will be circulated prior to the meeting to all relevant County Council members. In order to clarify the recommendations being made, a revised format has been introduced. Each contract (or group of like contracts) will have a separate sheet in the same order and numbering as in Annex 1. Relevant information on the current operation will be repeated in the heading followed by Officers recommended option and suggested course of action (including the costs of recommended option). This section will also highlight the likely consequences of proceeding with award of this recommended option (parishes unserved or known traffic flows displaced). This is followed by a summary of all the other options/prices sought and the cost /likely effect of awarding these options (and which may be awarded by the Cabinet Member for Transport in lieu of the Officers recommended option if he so wishes). It is hoped to refine this document in future reviews and any comments thereon would be appreciated.
RECOMMENDATIONS
51. The Committee is RECOMMENDED to:
(a) in view of planned restrictions on the bus subsidy budget in forthcoming years, aim for a subsidy cost increase, on the contracts under review at this meeting, not exceeding the current cost.
(b) make its decisions on subsidy for the services described in this report on the basis of the tender prices (and the periods of time) as set out in Exempt Annex 2 to be reported subsequently;
(c) note the commercial elements declared in respect of contracts S30, S35, S65, S75, S76, and V39.
(d) make decisions on the future support for service 500 in the light of the oral report and recommendations to the meeting
(e) authorise Officers, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport, to make the necessary arrangements to ensure continuation of contract PT/O1 in the light of the award of the new Brookes Bus contract.
(f) record that in the opinion of the Cabinet Member for Transport Implementation the decisions made in (b) above are 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.
STEVE HOWELL Head of Transport Environment & Economy
Background papers: Correspondence with Local Councils, Parish Transport Representatives, Transport operators and other bodies (refer to contact officers).
Contact Officers: Allan Field (Tel: Oxford 815826): Financial information and other services. John Wood (Tel: Oxford 815802): Henley, Wallingford and Didcot area review
March 2008
|