North Berwick Community Council (NBCC) welcomes the opportunity to

comment on the consultation on the Bus Regulation (Scotland) Bill proposed

by Iain Gray MSP.

In response to the questions posed
1. Do you support the general aim of the proposed Bill?
NBCC supports the general aim of the proposed Bill to provide transport authorities
with greater powers to set service levels for local bus services and to regulate their
delivery. It also considers it to be important that profitable routes are grouped with
non-profitable routes. At present the bus companies in East Lothian are providing an
inadequate service, failing to protect those dependent upon public transport,
particularly in rural communities.

2. What would be the main practical advantages of the legislation proposed?
What would be the disadvantages?
The main practical advantage would be that all bus companies would be the same,
operating services whether profitable or not. It is ridiculous that at present two bus
companies cannot run on the same route which means, for example, that there is no
direct bus from North Berwick to Edinburgh Royal Infirmary, causing major problems
and horrendous journeys for those reliant upon public transport.
The main disadvantage would be if those in the outlying rural areas were ignored.

3. In what ways do you consider re-regulation being used to improve bus
services?
Re-regulation would control how the services are run and ensure that a reasonable
service at a reasonable cost would be provided for everyone. It would also be harder
to withdraw services, thus avoiding the negative impact of such action on local
communities.

4. How can community transport be better utilised to serve local communities
and particularly low passenger volume routes?
Community transport could be better utilised by providing smaller buses for low
volume routes. More and better information on bus running times is also required;
everyone does not have access to the internet. Fare structuring also requires to be
looked at so that it is affordable and fair.
5. Do you agree that the Traffic Commissioner should be able to impose greater
financial penalties on operators who a) fail to meet the terms of the franchise
or b) walk away from the franchise altogether.
Yes. It is only fair, if the operators fail to meet the terms of their franchise or walk
away, that they meet the costs of re-tendering and that this should not be met from
the public purse.

6. What is your assessment of the likely financial implications of the proposed
Bill to you or your organisation? What other significant implications are likely
to arise?
A review would require to be carried out after the legislation is passed.
It is suggested that bus passes should not be used between 7.00 am and 9.00 am
and 4.00 pm and 6.00 pm, thus freeing up space on busy commuter routes.

7. Is the proposed Bill likely to have any substantial positive or negative
implications for equality? If it is likely to have a substantial negative
implication, how might this be minimised or avoided?
A positive implication would be that there would be equality in services between town
and rural areas, which should encourage more people to travel by public transport.
Only taking on routes which are profitable would be negative and would deprive
certain communities of a good, affordable service.

8. Do you have any other comment or suggestion that is relevant to the need for
or detail of the Bill?
As previously stated, information about the services must be properly relayed,
particularly to older people as not everyone has, or has access to, a computer.
Buses need to be accessible to all (e.g. lower steps). Fares for shorter routes need
to be proportionate to fares for longer routes, which is not the case currently.
Finally, it is agreed that services should be run with more consideration for the
operators duty to the communities that pay them for vital services.


30
th
August 2013