Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 19 April 2012

19 Apr 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

Bus Services

Hume, Jim LD South Scotland Watch on SPTV

I completely disagree with the minister on that point, which I will cover.

An above-inflation hike in fares and the reduced frequency and withdrawals of services in urban areas are driving people to private vehicle use on already congested roads. Far from incentivising fuel efficiency, the Government will see that more fuel is consumed.

The other assertion concerning the mechanism change is that it will help to protect rural services. That is a laudable objective, but plenty of rural operators stand to be just as inconvenienced as their urban counterparts. I recently spoke with the owner of a rural bus operator that is based in Lanarkshire, who told me that their company would lose out significantly and that the changes were disastrous. The changes were compounded by the lack of consultation and the incredibly short lead-up time, which gave operators little wriggle room to adapt to the new environment.

It is widely understood that operators in urban areas are the big losers. The formula change discriminates against the smaller, vital routes that operate in congested areas of towns and cities. Such services may consume disproportionate amounts of fuel and therefore may be unattractive under the new mechanism, but they often serve deprived communities and help to drive social inclusion.

In reply to a question, the minister stated in January that

“The reduction in the bus service operators grant would justify an increase in fares, if any, of about 1 per cent.”—[Official Report, 26 January 2012; c 5715.]

How wrong could he have been? At the time, it appeared that he was being somewhat cute, and recent events have certainly confirmed that. The Government asserts that 75 per cent of the 176 operators in Scotland that receive the BSOG subsidy will not be worse off. What it does not mention is that the remaining 25 per cent of operators carry in excess of 80 per cent of Scotland’s bus passengers, all of whom will be affected.

The reality for passengers is that some of the operators that run their services have just experienced a cut of 40 per cent in their grant. Fares have risen by 13.5 per cent in Aberdeen, 9.5 per cent in Edinburgh, 10 per cent in the Borders and 27 per cent in Glasgow. The people who depend on bus services are the most vulnerable people in our communities and the people for whom car ownership is a distant prospect. The Government is doing them a disservice.

I had hoped that Labour members would support the amendment in my name. I am disappointed that they will not do so, given that the amendment is the only one that identifies funding to back up its position.

I move amendment S4M-02639.1, to leave out from “has, along with the underfunding” to end and insert:

“was arrived at without any formal consultation with bus operators or users, with bus operators given inadequate time to adjust their businesses to the formula change and has, along with the underfunding of the concessionary travel scheme and high fuel costs, resulted in fare increases and service reductions across the country; recognises that this has also contributed to the decision by First Scotland East to reduce dramatically its services in Lothian and Midlothian, with the potential loss of around 200 jobs; believes that the Scottish Government has failed to listen to the concerns of operators, bus service workers and passengers, and urges ministers to take action to address the immediate problems of the industry, undertake proper consultation with operators and users and use extra money available to Scotland, following the UK Budget, to prioritise and safeguard bus services and guard against high fare increases.”

09:46

Search Hansard contributions

Meeting of the Parliament 19 April 2012

In the same item of business