Issue - meetings

Cabinet Member: Environment

Forward Plan Ref: 2015/095

Contact: Alexandra Bailey, Service Manager, Business Development & Fleet Management Tel: (01865) 797228

Report by Director for Environment & Economy (CA6).

On 26th May 2015, the Cabinet approved the launch of a full public consultation on proposed changes to subsidised bus services and Dial a Ride. This report details the consultation process that was followed and summarises the main themes which arose throughout the consultation. Finally it offers a number of recommendations for cabinet to consider.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Delivery of the agreed Medium Term Financial Plan savings

In order to deliver the savings required in the MTFP, the Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to

(a)  Consider the consultation feedback regarding subsidised bus services.

(b)Proceed with reducing bus subsidies by £2.3 million and:

1.     Consider the consultation feedback regarding subsidised bus services and decide which services to prioritise – off-peak, peak, or other.

2.     Update the methodology used for ranking services in the following ways:

                                    i.          Include additional criteria which ensure that rurally isolated and deprived areas are also prioritised.         

                                  ii.          Agree to continue to pay for (i.e. protect in the methodology) subsidised bus routes which are used to take entitled students from home to school, where on the whole it is cheaper for us to do so, instead of paying for separate dedicated school transport. (This will vary routes available on a year by year basis as school cohorts change).

                                iii.          Ensure a consistent methodology by treating all providers in the same way, whether they are external providers, OCC fleet or community transport providers.

If cabinet approves this request, then approximately two-thirds of the subsidies due to be withdrawn would cease in April 2016, and the remaining third would cease in June 2016. The £2.3m savings under option 2 would be realised in financial year 16/17, assuming notice was served in November / December 2015. 

The exact details cannot be finalised at this stage due to variables including whether contract renewal renegotiations are required, which could alter costs.

(c)  Cease funding the Dial a Ride service as of April 2016.

Delivery of further savings subject to Council approval

(d)  The withdrawal of all bus subsidies would deliver the full £3.7m savings if the cabinet makes this decision, subject to full council’s approval in February 2016 to further reduce the Supported Transport budget. The full £3.7m savings, would be realised once all contract termination processes have been completed. 

If Council approves this request, then the subsidies would cease at the following time:

Ø  50% of subsidies (59/118 services) require 17 weeks' notice and could terminate on 20^th June 2016, assuming notice was served on 22^nd February 2016.

Ø  31% of subsidies (37/118 services) require 16 weeks' notice but also require 16 weeks to modify the "Authorised Change Date". This means they would take 32 weeks to terminate. They could therefore terminate on 3^rd October 2016, assuming notice to change the "Authorised Change Date" was served on 22^nd February 2016, and notice  ...  view the full agenda text for item 104

Recommendations agreed subject to amendment:

Delivery of the agreed Medium Term Financial Plan savings

In order to deliver the savings required in the MTFP, the Cabinet RESOLVED to:

(a)  Consider the consultation feedback regarding subsidised bus services;

(b)  Proceed with reducing bus subsidies by £2.3 million and:

1.     Having considered the consultation feedback regarding subsidised bus services to prioritise off peak services

2.     To update the methodology used for ranking services in the following ways:

                       i.          Include additional criteria which ensure that rurally isolated and deprived areas are also prioritised.

                      ii.          Agree to continue to pay for (i.e. protect in the methodology) subsidised bus routes which are used to take entitled students from home to school, where on the whole it is cheaper for us to do so, instead of paying for separate dedicated school transport. (This will vary routes available on a year by year basis as school cohorts change).

                    iii.          Ensure a consistent methodology by treating all providers in the same way, whether they are external providers, OCC fleet or community transport providers.

N.B. If cabinet approves this request, then approximately two-thirds of the subsidies due to be withdrawn would cease in April 2016, and the remaining third would cease in June 2016. The £2.3m savings under option 2 would be realised in financial year 16/17, assuming notice was served in November / December 2015. 

The exact details cannot be finalised at this stage due to variables including whether contract renewal renegotiations are required, which could alter costs.

(c)  Cease funding the Dial a Ride service as of April 2016.

Delivery of further savings subject to Council approval

Cabinet RESOLVED:

(d)  to note the delivery of further savings to deliver the full £3.7m savings by the withdrawal of all bus subsidies, subject to full council’s approval in February 2016 to further reduce the Supported Transport budget and to note that the full £3.7m savings, would be realised once all contract termination processes have been completed. 

N.B. If Council approves this request, then the subsidies would cease at the following time:

Ø  50% of subsidies (59/118 services) require 17 weeks' notice and could terminate on 20^th June 2016, assuming notice was served on 22^nd February 2016.

Ø  31% of subsidies (37/118 services) require 16 weeks' notice but also require 16 weeks to modify the "Authorised Change Date". This means they would take 32 weeks to terminate. They could therefore terminate on 3^rd October 2016, assuming notice to change the "Authorised Change Date" was served on 22^nd February 2016, and notice to terminate the contract was served 16 weeks later on 13^th June 2016.

Ø  9% of subsidies (11/118 services) require 16 weeks' notice and could terminate on 13^th June 2016, assuming notice was served on 22^nd February 2016. These are services operated by Oxfordshire County Council.

Ø  9% of subsidies (11/118 services) will expire naturally on or before the 31^st March 2016.

Annex E to the report shows  ...  view the full decision text for item 104

On 26th May 2015, the Cabinet approved the launch of a full public consultation on proposed changes to subsidised bus services and Dial a Ride. Cabinet had before them a report that detailed the consultation process that was followed and which summarised the main themes that arose throughout the consultation. Finally it offered a number of recommendations for cabinet to consider.

Barry Finch speaking on behalf of the Oxfordshire ATG spoke against the proposal which would affect the most vulnerable. It would affect people’s ability to transfer between transport nodes. The report suggested only limited extra money to support alternative provision at a time when such resources were already over stretched. He highlighted the County Voluntary Drivers Scheme which depended on volunteers, often retired people. The use of cars would increase congestion and mini buses were expensive to run. He queried whether the proposals met the requirements of the, Disability Discrimination and Equality Acts to provide no lesser services for elderly and disabled people.

Councillor McMillan whilst recognising the difficulties faced by the County Council, highlighted the importance of continuing the subsidy for the 139 route. No other public service served the route between Wallingford and Goring. Without it people would be locked into the village without access to services. The route has proved successful, tripling its use and halving its subsidy. He accepted that there was scope for reduction. He asked that the Council advise quickly on specifics in order to bring clarity on the effects and timing. He welcomed the offer of pump priming and advice on mitigating the worst effects.

Mr Hugh Jaeger spoke on Option 2 and referred to the types of route receiving subsidy. There were: those routes receiving only a small subsidy; those routes that linked strategic points along busy roads and those routes that serve villages such as Stanford-in-the-Vale. There was a need to ensure these buses were better co-ordinated to encourage use and therefore reduce the need for subsidy. He supported revising option 2 to include peak travel.

Councillor Roz Smith thanked the ORCC for collating the high number of responses and spoke in support of the local service linking Sandhills to Headington. This was the only available local service and although off peak was highly regarded and valued. The service was due to end in June next year. She accepted that it may run for less days each week. She was pleased to see the pump priming funding and queried how the decision on successful schemes would be made.

Councillor Pressel and Margaret Donaldson, a local elderly resident, submitted a petition and spoke in support of the No. 17 bus service. Margaret Donaldson spoke of the impact on elderly people if the service did not run with them becoming isolated and unable to access services such as the hospital. Children too would be affected as they used the bus to get to Cutteslowe School. Mrs Donaldson queried the use of the older persons buss pass if there was no bus  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104

1410

Mark Kemp, Deputy Director – Commercial and Alexandra Bailey Service Manager Business Dev & Fleet Mgt will present the feedback from the public consultation and report to Cabinet on 10 November to the committee in order for the committee to give their views on the proposals to be considered by Cabinet. The Cabinet report will be published on Monday 2 November and will be circulated to Performance Scrutiny Committee Members at the same time.

The Performance & Scrutiny Committee considered the feedback from the public consultation and the report to Cabinet on 10 November in order for the committee to give their views on the proposals to be considered by Cabinet.

During questioning and discussion the following points were made:

·       Further consideration was needed on the dial-a –ride proposals on a number of grounds:

·       Concerns over the level of consultation and engagement with users and in particular whether the focus groups referred to in the report had been held;

·       Questions over whether the impact assessment and mitigation were sufficiently robust with concrete measures in place. Reference was made to the powerful assessment that users were within 400 yards of a bus stop and most could walk. It was noted that this was a self-assessment provided by users and was not provided in relation to this piece of work and therefore it was possible that its use could be challenged.

·       The Aspire pilot was seen as an aspirational alternative rather than a concrete proposal to mitigate the impact. More work was needed to ensure it was extendable to rural areas.

·       Access for the frail elderly to do their own shopping was of value to their overall well-being and could impact on costs to the local authority if they become isolated. Any proposals should actively involve adult social care

·       The Committee noted from their own experience talking to users and with regard to comments from ORCC that people may be willing to pay more and asked that this be considered. In particular bus operators should be urged to consider fare increases prior to cutting currently subsidised routes altogether.

·       The Committee heard that it was not possible to legally require payment for concessionary passes and asked that Cabinet be urged to pursue this with Government and in the meantime the Committee supported measures to encourage voluntary payments for concessionary passes or individual journeys.

·       There was some discussion of the methodology and concern that the complexity of how some services were provided (with one bus doing a number of different routes) could make a service as a whole unviable if part was withdrawn. Some Members felt that there was no possible way to choose which subsidies to remove. The Committee emphasised the need to treat people fairly and that decisions be based on detailed information.

·       The Committee considered how services might work in future and noted the opportunities to engage with operators to find new more integrated models of provision. There was some optimism that some services would remain even where the subsidy was lost. There was strong support for future market testing.

The Committee AGREED: that the above views be passed to Cabinet for consideration and Cabinet be RECOMMENDED to support proceeding with reducing bus subsidies by £2.3m rather than £3.7m and to support updating the methodology to include additional criteria for the rurally isolated and deprived areas.