Hampshire County Council have released a consultation last week, relating to service provision and service provider provision across the county. As you would expect, Hampshire is as much in financial strife as many other councils across the UK. It has previously been reported that the council is in financial meltdown.
Despite being one of the largest Conservative councils calling on the Governmment to sort out the financial support that is is giving, the story was made back in October that the council could be insolvent over the next few years.
So what does this mean for the bus services and service provision for vulnerable users in the county? Unfortunately the proposal is to cut services and cut access to services for some of those that have no other choice.
Essentially (if you look at this HCC link after reading on) they are looking to cut most, if not all of the £2.7 Million annual budget allocated to bus services and additional enhancements. Now; this is not to say that there are also many different discussions that Winchester are not involved in.
Before we begin: The not quite buses
So we probably do not talk about some of these services as much as we should, but there are periphery services that frankly save many communities and are likely for the chop.
Dial-a-ride and Call-and-go are services that have at times offshot from their own service cuts and for a near-fixed fee people can be connected from remote communities to town centres and public services like hospitals.
Taxishare is a much reduced, advance booked, scheduled car service that has also replaced some longer standing bus services. Examples of this are:
- 38 between Southwick and Cosham (replacing in part the Provincial 38 and 138 services of years gone by)
- 57 between Warsash and Locks Heath
- X57 between Linden Lea and Portchester / Fareham
Wheels to Work is a moped hire service for younger users in the Test Valley and New Forest. This short-term, up to a year, loan scheme allows for access to work and apprenticeships where there is no alternative.
Hampshire County Council is proposing to remove all funding for these schemes and services. They suggest the saving will be around £900,000 a year.
Bus Services
Hampshire County Council provide money for a reasonable number of bus services either in part or in full. Examples of these services include:
- Gosport & Fareham’s service 11 on weekdays (the Saturday service is supported by Gosport Borough Council)
- Basingstoke services 4, 12 and Overton service 74 (service 4 in part subsidised by Basingstoke & Deane Council as well)
- Hedge End’s recently introduced services 49 and 49h
- Fareham’s 28/a out to Whiteley
There is a long list and these are available on the HCC Consultation PDF available on their website to download.
Hampshire County Council are proposing to withdraw £800,000 of funding from the bus service pot. Looking at the list of services listed on the document appendixes, this could mean that almost all bus services reliant on Council money could be withdrawn or have to be operated commercially by their operators.
Now of course, this could prompt some operators to find some cash to run at least reduced services, however if they were commercially viable I can only presume they would already be.
Removal of Disabled / Older Persons Concessionary Pass perks
Lastly there is a proposal to remove some, or all, of the additional perks that Hampshire County Council provides at their own cost to disabled bus pass holders.
So as a bit of a back story, HCC must as a condition of cause, provide a Concessionary Bus Pass for disabled persons similarly to those of a pensionable age. Hampshire County Council goes beyond the statutory requirement though, in that disabled bus pass holders can travel on buses at any time wholly within the Hampshire area (Southampton and Portsmouth City Council areas excluded).
The proposal from Hampshire County Council is to withdraw this.
Hampshire County Council also allows the holders of some (but not all) pass holders to additionally have a ‘companion pass’ allowing them to be accompanied by another person where they would ordinarily have issues to travel alone.
The proposal from Hampshire County Council is to withdraw this.
For older persons Concessionary Bus Passes, the council is also proposing to remove the few examples that remain where a bus running between 0900 and 0930 is the only bus for some time, and therefore Concessionary Passes are valid.
NOW
These proposals are reliant on the discussions that are also being undertaken in central Government. As it stands, I have not heard of any changes yet from the central. consultation, but never say never.
My View
Although I feel that this is just a small corner of Hampshire County Council’s plan, it is a significant one in the overall remit to reduce services. If you note the documentation supporting the proposals, HCC suggests that they have looked at alternatives to the proposals in place; and I am not going to question that they haven’t.
I think taking a welding axe to everything is going to have an unintentional double whammy for those that might need it the most. Removing all subsidised bus service funding and taxi / car sharing services means that alternatives between one and the other are no longer available.
I felt that the funding gap was widening and services would suffer back as post-COVID bus service funding levels were maintained, causing cuts. The fact that many smaller operators declined to enter the Bus Fare Cap scheme I think shows that they are at times the fare margins for such schemes are not as wide as some think.
For many disabled people particularly, where financial assistance, access to hospital appointments and feeling a part of society is important; hitting every tangent may lead to more social isolation. For many, the Personal Independence Payment formerly known as Disability Living Allowance is now a critical piece or core income, rather than a payment to promote and provision independence.
I also say this as having multiple disabled (and concessionary pass holders) in the family. We are lucky that many of the factors do not affect us too much; the cost (and frequency) of lifting the all day pass acceptance. Likewise we also opted out of the Companion Pass scheme, as although eligible we could afford to not take it and release the funding for someone else.
So when I have finally finished my draft of my reply it will almost certainly suggest that it would be unwise to remove all the funding streams proposed. If you are going to remove the taxi and car-share service, at least leave the floor open for something to replace it; if you are going to remove the funding for Concessionary Pass enhancements then at least keep funding the bus services that need it so that there is at least a payable service other than a taxi.
I am sure that I will revise many of these words after I have published this article. Likewise I bet some of you will think I am going mad (or certainly more mad than I already am) and slightly biased.
Of course, you can also take a look at the proposals yourself and add your thoughts; maybe you can make my response to Hampshire County Council more cohesive?
Certain HCC services are so badly designed that they are in effect a waste of money even if helping some people. The 49 & 49H are examples of that. The taxi-shares (like the Linden Lea one) could in many cases actually be replaced by a bus, but it’s getting the operators to do so. For example all these 3’s going every 10 min or so around South Portchester ! Could even just one per hour go North Portchester instead!
The X5 could on its wonkydonky frequency easily serve the little bit of Warsash off peak. After all it does now go to Fareham. Cocking up the frequency would not matter now!
The 28/28A is supported in part by developers money. When it runs out (about a year I think) I can see First trimming it back but it might find its feet as new homes being built all the time there. But there’s no thinking outside the box with it being a bigger service to Southampton as a Solent ranger. Anyhow, always like to read the debates on your Blogs so hopefully there will be lots
The 49 and 49H need to be replaced by a 2-hourly extension of Bluestar 14. Running Hedge End – Botley – Curdridge – Bishop’s Waltham – Durley – Horton Heath – Fair Oak – Colden Common – Eastleigh
Agree. That’s what I suggested to HCC a year ago, except that I absolutely don’t believe the Colden Common divert is necessary, and Swanmore and Free St Bishops Waltham should be included. The 14 bus should run two hourly each way around the loop.
There are other services Fair Oak to Colden Common and Eastleigh to Colden Common.
Sadly HCC couldn’t run a bath, and instead designed the 49/49h/649 timetable to be run by one bus; which the winning tenderer duly ignored and runs it with wasteful dead mileage to and from Winchester. The money saved by decimating the service to Eastleigh and Southampton, which is where folk want to travel to was promised to be spent on other services in Eastleigh borough; I’m still waiting!
The 61 (ex E1) is also at risk, so if that’s axed, Eastleigh will be left without a bus to Colden Common. Extending the 14 that way (as per the former X9) fills in the gap.
On another note, I wonder what bus service will serve the One Horton Heath development once the link road between Burnetts Lane and Allington Lane is complete?
If there is developers money involved probably some silly shuttle to Eastleigh otherwise probably nowt!
Absolutely agree. HCC should pay Bluestar to provide such a two-hourly extension of the 14. It would probably require just one extra bus, and given Bluestar run huge numbers of school and college services, it might not be that hard to provide the vehicles and drivers for this (though perhaps more of a challenge at school/college times).
Surprised the X2 Bournemouth – Lymington is HCC subsidised but not the X1. Both routes operate at the same frequency and serve a similar-sized population catchment area, even where they diverge between Highcliffe and Pennington.
think only the Gore Rd section is subsidised
Taxi shares were introduced about 20 years ago as a replacement for lightly-used subsidised bus services during earlier rounds of “efficiency savings”. So even the little that some neighbourhoods have to call “public transport” is to be taken away. Mean spirited in the extreme!
I agree that these proposals are very badly thought out, though I lay the blame jointly with central Government. HCC need to realise that many of these services, even though they are expensive to run, are vital for certain people.
It seems to be part of 2020s political thinking that if a public service does not generate revenue, it’s not worth running. To my mind that is a very right-wing and Thatcherite view of the world, though perhaps little of a surprise from a council which has been dominated by the Conservative Party since 1997.
One piece of hope is that the proposals are due to be implemented in 2025, apparently just before the next council elections. Perhaps the cuts will be tempered if they want to avoid a huge defeat.