-
8/10/2019 56 East Lothian Council
1/4
Date: 26 September 2013
By email: [email protected] Gray MSPScottish
ParliamentEdinburhE!"" 1SP
Dear Mr Gray
BUS REGULATI! "S#TLA!$% BILL
I am #ritin on behal$ o$ East %othian &ouncil in response to
your consultation onproposals $or a 'us (eulation )Scotland* 'ill+
,his response sets out theconsidered -ie#s o$ rele-ant &ouncil
o$$icers and $ollo#s the order and $ormat o$ the.uestions in your
paper+
1. Do you support the general aim of the proposed Bill? Please
indicateyes/no/undecided and explain the reasons for your
response.
,he eneral aim o$ the 'ill is to be commended+ ,here may also be
more scope toe/plore better use o$ current leislation+ dditionally
i$ the 'ill could be e/panded todeal #ith other $orms o$ transport
then it could include the $ollo#in:
(oads in$rastructure
o 'us lanes
o Guided road#ays
o acilities suitable $or streetcar busestrams
o &ycle #ays separate $rom the road )#here possible* similar
to
!olland Germany+o ,ransport !ubsinterchaneso Increase in and
better positionin o$ Par4 5 (ides
www.eastlothian.gov.uk
Angela LeitchCHIEF EXECUTIVE
John Muir HouseHaddingtonEast LothianEH4 !H"
Tel #$%# &%'%%%Fa( #$%# &%'4#)hie*e(e)+eastlothian.g
ov.uk
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]
-
8/10/2019 56 East Lothian Council
2/4
(ail et#or4
o Interation connectin o$ ser-ices
,ram #ays%iht rail
o 'etter use o$ inter 5 outer circle lines to enhance
commutin
ir ,ra-el
o 'etter connection lin4s to airports
erry ,ra-el
o 'etter connection by public ser-ices
2. What ould !e the main practical ad"antages of the legislation
proposed?What ould !e the disad"antages?
,he main ad-antae as o$$icers see it #ould be the ability to
include non7commercial routes #ithin a pac4ae )pro-ided appropriate
$undin is a-ailable*+
Possible disad-antaes include:
o ,he cost to %ocal uthorities #ould ine-itably increase to
allo#
manaement o$ the proposal+o Smaller commercial operators may not
ha-e su$$icient resources to tender
$or rouped lots #hich include a number o$ ser-ices+
#. $n hat ays do you en"isage reregulation !eing used to impro"e
!usser"ices?
%eislation to encourae consistency could impro-e the le-el o$
ser-ice to the public+,here is a perception that di$$erent
operators #or4 to di$$erent standards o$ .uality+
%. &o can community transport !e !etter utilised to ser"e
local communitiesand particularly lo passenger "olume routes?
8$$icers #ould suest a mappin e/ercise across all local
authorities to $ind out#hat community transport resources are
a-ailable and then de-elopment o$ a
system to best use the resource #hich o$$icers thin4 may #ell be
currently under7utilised+
'. Do you agree that the (raffic )ommissioner should !e a!le to
imposegreater financial penalties on operators ho a* fail to meet
the terms of thefranchise or !* al+ aay from the franchise
altogether?
,his is a t#o7eded s#ord+ n increase in $inancial penalties miht
be seen to tendto impro-e the ser-ice pro-ided but then aain miht
also deter some smalleroperators $rom submittin prices $or the
$ranchise+ ,he recent #or4 carried out bythe ,ra$$ic
&ommissioner has sho#n that operators re.uire to be more
proacti-e in
their approach+ It does not seem that the &ommissioner uses
the po#ers alreadya-ailable to their most puniti-e e/tent+
-
8/10/2019 56 East Lothian Council
3/4
,. What is your assessment of the li+ely financial implications
of the proposedBill to you or your organisation? What other
significant financial implicationsare li+ely to arise?
,here #ould need to be a substantial increase in resource #ithin
the &ouncil to$acilitate the current proposal particularly in
sta$$in+ E.uipment in$rastructure andso$t#are #ould also ha-e to
purchased #hich is li4ely to ha-e a substantial $inancialimpact+ or
e/ample i$ the &ouncil #ere to use its bus $leet to $ill any
aps inpro-ision #e #ould e/pect to ha-e to buy more -ehicles and to
e.uip our -ehicles)and sta$$* #ith the capacity to handle cash+
-
8/10/2019 56 East Lothian Council
4/4
-. $s the proposed Bill li+ely to ha"e any su!stantial positi"e
or negati"eimplications for euality? $f it is li+ely to ha"e a
su!stantial negati"eimplication ho might this !e minimised or
a"oided?
,his #ould depend on the $ranchises that #ere put toether and
#hether any o$
the companies #ishin to participate had the re.uired resources
toimpro-emaintain the e/istin le-el o$ ser-ice+
9e cannot see any immediate concerns $or e.ualities in the
proposals as #ritten+
ny e/pansion o$ ser-ices #hich increases accessibility is a
positi-e thin $or allroups particularly youn people older people
and those #ith disabilities+ ,hepaper places a positi-e emphasis on
the role o$ transport in tac4lin socialisolation+
!o#e-er #e #ould li4e to ma4e you a#are o$ representations $rom
the East
%othian outh &ouncil+ ,hey $eel that it is un$air that all
60; ha-e $ree tra-el butyoun people #ith no income o$ten cannot et
the $unds $or
