Contact: Andrew Wilson, ext 6389 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 This report provides details of the latest position on concessionary fares, bus services, Quality Bus Partnerships, Community Transport and rail issues.

2. Concessionary Fares

Free Bus Travel for Senior Citizens and Disabled People from 1 April 2006

2.1 Over 70% of the bus mileage in Hampshire is operated commercially, with routes, timetables and fares determined by the operator concerned. On subsidised services, fares charged are generally in line with those on commercial services. Most bus operators give free travel to children under five, and charge half-fare to children over five but under 16. Few discounts are offered commercially to senior citizens or disabled people.

2.2 Currently, legislation requires the district councils in England to offer a half-fare bus pass for travel within their district, at all times on Saturday and Sunday, and between 09.30-23.00 hours on Monday to Friday, to residents over 60 or who are disabled. Eligibility is determined, and passes issued, by each district.

2.3 All the Hampshire districts, and Portsmouth City Council, participate in the Hampshire Farepass scheme, administered by consultants MCL, retained by the County Council on behalf of the districts. This offers a more generous concession, with no time restriction and allowing travel as far as the bus goes, provided that the passenger either boards or alights in Hampshire. For example, a Lymington resident with a Farepass issued by New Forest District Council, can travel to Bournemouth, or by bus from Lymington to Southampton, then from Southampton to Portsmouth, then from Portsmouth to Chichester, and return. Half-fare applies to ordinary single or return tickets.

2.4 All the Hampshire districts except Havant currently offer an alternative to the half-fare bus pass in the form of tokens, to an annual value per holder ranging from £24 to £70. These are accepted by taxis and private hire cars, buses (for full adult fares, not half-fares), most community transport and for railcards (Senior Citizens' or Disabled). Some districts offer a railcard themselves, as an alternative. In all districts, over 50% of people eligible for a half-fare bus pass waive this right and take tokens instead.

2.5 From 1 April 2006 legislation requires that half-fare travel for pass holders is replaced by free travel, within the same limits of time and geography (ie within district) as detailed above. The Government is providing additional funding for districts, on a formula basis. However, the formula does not reflect the varied provision of bus services within districts.

2.6 In an urban district, with a dense network of frequent bus services, far more additional journeys will be made when travel becomes free than in a thinly-populated rural district with infrequent bus services and longer distances to travel to shops, etc. In Hampshire, MCL has estimated that the additional funding will be insufficient to meet the additional costs of unlimited free travel for Fareham Borough Council (by over £400,000 per year) and Winchester City Council (by over £100,000 per year).

2.7 Fareham Borough Council has therefore decided to opt out of the county-wide Farepass scheme in order to reduce its deficit on the new scheme. Its passholders will receive free travel within the district and pay half-fare for journeys outside the district (subject to negotiation).

2.8 All the other districts, and Portsmouth, will remain in the Farepass scheme, but Winchester residents' passes will not allow free travel on Monday to Friday between midnight and 09.00; Havant's passes will not be valid between 04.00 and 09.00 on Monday to Friday. A summary of the new schemes is attached, including the varying provision of tokens; several districts are restricting or withdrawing tokens from 1 April.

2.9 Negotiations are now taking place with the bus operators on the level of reimbursement for free travel. Legislation requires that the operators should be no better and no worse off as a result of participating in a concessionary travel scheme.

2.10 Thus there is no automatic recompense for carrying more passengers, unless additional capacity is required. Operators are understandably concerned that pass-holders may fill a bus and deny seats to fare-payers at subsequent stops. Whilst additional costs incurred in providing additional capacity may be claimed from the scheme, it will be difficult to forecast where and when more capacity will be needed. For example, a journey which is only quarter-full on a wet day in winter may be oversubscribed on a fine day in June.

2.11 Summary of Concessionary Fares Schemes in Hampshire from 1 April 2006

District	Bus pass acceptance (for residents)		Alternative concessions
	Times	Geography
Basingstoke and Deane	No restriction	County-wide *	£53 tokens for over 60s; £70 tokens for disabled, or over-60 and on benefit
East Hampshire	No restriction	County-wide *	£24 tokens for 60-69 year olds; £30 tokens for 70 plus; £50/£75 for disabled
Eastleigh	No restriction	County-wide *	EBC Tokens - £32 for disabled and people aged 70-79; £45 for people 80+
Fareham	No restriction	Free within District. Possible half-fare outside (under negotiation)	£35 tokens for £5 charge for over-75s or disabled, but from 1 April 2006 new applicants will not receive tokens on age grounds.
Gosport	No restriction	County-wide *	£40 tokens for over-60s or disabled
Hart	No restriction	County-wide *	£35 tokens if 60+ AND receiving housing or council tax benefit; £48.50 tokens for disabled.
Havant	Not available 0400 - 0900 on Mon to Fri	County-wide *	(Ceased issuing tokens April 2004)

New Forest	No Restriction	County-wide *	Vouchers for people 60+ AND receiving housing benefit/ council tax benefit/pension credit OR disabled.
Rushmoor	No Restriction	County-wide *	£46.50 tokens for people 75+. £51.50 tokens for disabled (any age)
Test Valley	No Restriction	County-wide *	£40 vouchers for disabled people who are on a means-tested benefit
Winchester	Not available Midnight - 0900 on Mon to Fri	County-wide *	Ceasing issuing tokens from 1April 2006
Unitary authority Portsmouth Southampton	No Restriction Not available Midnight - 0900 on Mon to Fri	County-wide* City only, plus Totton, Airport and Moorgreen Hospital

* County-wide includes any journeys which either start or finish in Hampshire

3. Bus Services Update

3.1 Cango services for some of the villages around Romsey started in August 2005. These mostly replaced existing supported conventional bus services. However, an off-peak service was introduced between Romsey and Stockbridge, use of which has generally been disappointing. The performance of the services will be kept under close review.

3.2 In Andover, an afternoon school special for fare-payers from Winton School to King Arthur's Way and other estates will be withdrawn in April due to persistent poor behaviour by the children on the bus. This is currently operated commercially by Stagecoach. Alternative provision is being investigated but it may be that no replacement service is provided for some or all of the children, leaving them to walk, or change buses in the town centre.

4. Quality Bus Partnerships (QBP)

4.1 Improvement works are almost complete on bus stops along Weyhill Road in Andover and at the railway station. The £100,000 cost is funded through the Local Transport Plan. Works include raised kerbs to ease access to buses, new bus stop poles with integrated information displays and new shelters. This route is served by the services to Salisbury via Tidworth, where Wiltshire County Council is undertaking similar works under the joint QBP.

4.2 In September 2005 the Executive Member for Environment: North Hampshire and Spatial Strategy approved a £100,000 scheme to improve the infrastructure on the more frequent Andover town bus routes, Services A, B and C. As well as raised kerbs, new poles and new shelters, real-time information displays will be provided to advise passengers when the next bus will arrive. It is anticipated that the work will start in summer 2006.

Romsey-Southampton Quality Bus Partnership

4.3 Work was completed in July 2005 on new bus stop infrastructure on this route, following improvements to the bus service introduced at the end of May 2005. The service improvements included re-branding the service as Bluestar 4, offering a more regular evening service and a commercial Sunday service, together with a late-night service at the weekends.

4.4 The infrastructure works included new high quality bus stop poles with integrated information displays, raised kerbs to assist boarding, bus stop clearways and refurbished or replacement bus shelters. A passenger survey to measure satisfaction is due to be undertaken in spring 2006 which will be measured against a similar survey undertaken before the improvements.

5. Community Transport

5.1 Community transport schemes play an important role in meeting locally the transport needs of organisations and individuals which cannot be easily met through the existing conventional bus network.

5.2 Funding has been provided to enable the purchase of an additional vehicle for the community transport scheme operated by Test Valley Community Transport Services. The vehicle is being funded through the Local Transport Plan Capital Programme and forms part of the County Council's overall approach for supporting and developing community transport schemes in Hampshire.

5.3 Mini-buses like the ones operated by Test Valley Community Services offer older people, disabled people and even younger people the opportunity to access a range of services and facilities within their local community.

6. Rail Update

Greater Western Franchise

6.1 First Group plc has recently been appointed franchise holder for the Greater Western Franchise for ten years from 1 April 2006. Hampshire's interest is in the Portsmouth/Brighton to Bristol and Cardiff, Basingstoke to Reading, and Reading to Gatwick services. The franchise is subject to review after the seventh year.

6.2 Comment on the draft timetable issued recently for consultation by First Great Western, which proposes cuts to services at Romsey, Dunbridge and Dean, can be found in the attached appendix.

6.3 The South Western Franchise is the key franchise for Hampshire's rail services. A new ten year franchise starts in February 2007, subject to review after the seventh year. The new franchise combines two existing franchises - South West Trains (SWT) and Island Line.

6.4 Stakeholder consultation has been completed. A copy of the County Council's full response is available from the Passenger Transport Group on 01962 845492 and on the web at

/decisions/decisions-docs/060118-exmshr-R0112093833.

6.5 An Invitation to Tender (ITT) will be issued by the Department for Transport (DfT) in March 2006 to the five short-listed companies which have pre-qualified. Bidders then have 90 days in which to submit their bids. The bidders are:

· Arriva Trains South West Limited (Arriva plc);

· First South Western Limited (First Group plc);

· Great South Western Railway Company Limited (a joint venture between GNER holdings and MTR Corporation Limited of Hong Kong);

· Trafalgar Trains Limited (National Express Group plc); and

· Stagecoach South Western Trains Limited (Stagecoach Group plc) (the incumbent)

6.6 The decision by DfT on the successful franchisee is expected in autumn 2006.

6.7 In parallel with the franchise process, Network Rail is preparing capacity assessments of the rail network on a route-by-route basis, to determine the optimum utilisation level for the existing infrastructure and to consider where investment to improve capacity could most advantageously be applied. These assessments are known as Route Utilisation Strategies (RUS), and that for the South Western Main Line has recently been consulted on. Once input from consultees has been evaluated, a definitive version will be published by the Office for Rail Regulation (ORR). A copy of the County Council's response is available from the Passenger Transport Group on 01962 845492.

6.8 The key points which the County Council made in its responses to these two consultations were:

(i) opposition to a proposal to truncate the Romsey - Totton via Chandler's Ford service at Eastleigh;

(ii) desire to retain a Basingstoke to Brighton through service;

(iii) support for increasing clearances on the routes between Southampton Docks and the Midlands to enable taller containers to be carried on standard height wagons;

(iv) support for the examination of radical solutions such as double-deck trains in order to address growth predictions;

(v) need for a half-hourly frequency of stopping services between Portsmouth and Southampton off-peak; and

(vi) support for timetable accelerations, especially on the Alton line.

Station Improvements

6.9 It is envisaged that the annual match-funded rolling programme agreed between the County Council and train operators will continue whichever company secures the South Western franchise, which encompasses the vast majority of stations in the county.

6.10 New vandal-proof waiting shelters will be provided in 2006/07 at Portchester, Bedhampton and Warblington. The programme of cycle storage provision (hoops and lockers) at stations will be continued where unsatisfied demand is identified.

6.11 `Welcome Boards' branded with the County Council logo and listing the facilities available at each station, together with local maps and Helpline numbers, are being installed at all stations. The programme for SWT stations is now complete. Stations on the future GW franchise and on Southern Railway will be so equipped by the end of 2006. These comprise Dean, Dunbridge, Romsey, Bramley, Farnborough North, Blackwater, Warblington and Emsworth.

Station Car Parks

6.12 In its response to the South West franchise consultation, the County Council expressed the view that the issue of increasing car park capacity on a selective basis must be seriously addressed if there is to be any capacity provided to cater for off-peak travel, and expressed its willingness to work with Network Rail and franchisees to this end. At the same time it considered that franchisees could be required to implement such measures as car-sharing incentives.

Bus/Rail Integration

6.13 In its response to the franchise consultation, the County Council stressed the importance of developing further bus/rail links and suggested that a requirement be placed on bidders to make proposals for dedicated bus/rail links at particular stations which should be funded within the franchise.

Carriage of Cycles

6.14 SWT introduced its new Cycle Policy in October 2004 aimed at creating a better balance between the needs of peak hour passengers and cycle users. On the whole, fewer cycle-related problems have been referred to the Rail Officer as the policy has been implemented and understood by cyclists. The use of a different colour in the timetable to denote trains with cycle restrictions has been useful.

Eurostar beyond 2007

6.15 When Stage Two of the new Channel Tunnel Rail Link, from the Medway area to London St Pancras, is complete in 2007 Eurostar will concentrate all its services on St Pancras and withdraw completely from Waterloo International. There are operational advantages to the company in doing so, as without the need to serve Waterloo, the third rail electric equipment on the Eurostar trains can be removed.

6.16 This means that passengers from Hampshire and the rest of Waterloo's catchment area will be considerably inconvenienced by having to cross London on already congested Underground services to join Eurostar trains at St Pancras, or else travel from Waterloo East to Ashford International to connect there - a double change is required, compared with walking from one side of Waterloo station to the other.

6.17 The County Council had previously voiced its concern to the Strategic Rail Authority about the threat to Waterloo services posed by the move to St Pancras and asked that a residual service to Waterloo be maintained after 2007. However, Eurostar is not franchised in the same way as other train operators and the SRA was unable to influence the decision in Hampshire's favour.

6.18 A recent study commissioned by the DfT has recommended that the Eurostar platforms be retained for alternative rail use rather than sold off as a commercial development. Further studies will determine the most beneficial solution, which could involve transferring Windsor line services to the former international platforms, thereby freeing up other parts of the station, or using them for main line services (which could directly benefit Hampshire) or by treating them as an overspill to the South Eastern lines towards Kent. There are also thoughts of remodelling Waterloo itself to create additional track capacity, possibly involving longer platforms able to deal with longer trains.

New Stations

6.19 Progress is being made on the proposal for a new station at Chineham on the Basingstoke to Reading line, which has already passed the initial operational feasibility hurdle. The next stage is to commission further work on establishing a business case for the project, and this will be undertaken in the first half of 2006. Long lead times are inevitable with projects of this nature, that frequently involve changes to infrastructure and signalling which are the responsibility of Network Rail.

6.20 Further south, the County Council is examining the feasibility of making a case to re-open Marchwood station on the Waterside line.

7. Impact Assessments

7.1 This report provides a position statement only, therefore an impact assessment in terms of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act has not been undertaken.

Recommendation

That this report be noted.

838/AW

APPENDIX

Comment on Draft Timetable for Portsmouth/Brighton to Bristol and Cardiff Service, from December 2006

Romsey, Dunbridge and Dean are served by the Portsmouth/Brighton to Bristol and Cardiff trains which constitute the train service between Southampton and Salisbury.

A draft timetable, to come into effect in December 2006, has been published as a consultation document by First Great Western. This draft was based on principles laid down by the new Rail Group at the Department for Transport (DfT), which took over the franchising selection and management role from the Strategic Rail Authority on the latter's demise last year. The DfT's stated aim in specifying levels of service within new franchises is to maximise the use of capacity and improve performance by a selective reduction of train movements through congested parts of the network.

In developing the specification for the franchise, the DfT consulted with stakeholders, including the County Council, on the principles on which the timetable was to be constructed. This was at the level of service groups and approximate frequencies, so for example the number of trains per hour over a particular section was specified, or in the case of smaller stations, the number of train calls per day.

Thus it was far from clear that the new timetable would result in Romsey's train service (excluding the Chandler's Ford line, the subject of a different franchise) falling from 27 westbound and 26 eastbound to 21 and 20 respectively - an overall reduction of 29%, and this at a time when year-on-year passenger growth is averaging 11% on the route.

In its response the consultation, dated 02 August 2005, the County Council said:

"The method of presentation in the Stakeholder document does not clearly indicate the scale of the reduction of services between Southampton, Salisbury and Westbury compared with the present service level. The description of one train per hour between Portsmouth and Cardiff plus three Westbury services extended to Southampton and one to Brighton seems to mean there will be about eight trains per day fewer, in each direction, on the Southampton-Salisbury corridor. Even with two-car Class 158 units extended to three-car on the hourly Portsmouth-Cardiff services, we predict serious overcrowding on sections of the journey.

We would like to see a more specific objective of catering for growth. The objectives mentioned of managing crowding, exploiting growing market opportunities and developing train services to meet changing market needs are all germane but reflect a rather defensive stance.

It is clear that growth will increasingly be an issue as spare capacity is eroded, and a more pro-active approach would be appropriate in our view in providing the necessary infrastructure to cope with future demand."

In the case of Dean and Dunbridge, the document on which the DfT consulted last year showed a reduction to only four trains each way from the current level of nine trains southbound and 11 trains northbound. These would comprise calls on three Bristol-Southampton and vice-versa services and one Cardiff-Brighton and vice-versa service.

The County Council's response to this proposed reduction in service level was as follows:

"Dean and Dunbridge currently have 9 southbound and 11 northbound services per day. The proposal is for only 4 services calling each way. While these stations have very low patronage levels (under 35 passengers per day on average) we must ensure that those services which continue to call are able to serve the majority of existing customers and enable significant flows - eg schoolchildren - to be retained."

In the event the First Great Western timetable draft contains only two southbound and three northbound services at both Dean and Dunbridge. This suggests that the DfT has altered the timetable specification given to First Great Western without consulting stakeholders on this point.

The County Council's response to the First Great Western consultation is in preparation (deadline for response is 8 March). The response will be copied to the DfT and an explanation sought as to why the level of service specified in the original consultation document was not adhered to. A timetable proposal will be put forward which will attempt to cater for the needs of commuters, schoolchildren and shoppers from Dean and Dunbridge towards both Southampton and Salisbury and for tourists visiting Mottisfont Abbey and its gardens.

While it is considered that the current level of service is not tenable in the prevailing climate, given the low numbers involved (only around 10,000 passengers per year at each station, arriving and departing) the level of service and timings proposed are such that the train service would not be of much use to anyone and it is hoped that an acceptable compromise can be arrived at with the DfT, which First Great Western can sign up to. Passenger counts have been carried out by the County Council at both stations to ascertain how the passenger numbers divide themselves across the day, which will assist in putting forward sensible timetable alternatives.

In its response to First Great Western and the DfT, the County Council will likewise pursue the claims of Romsey to a greater level of service than that proposed.

The timetable draft shows Dunbridge under the appellation `Mottisfont Dunbridge', though the County Council was not consulted on such a change. A short while ago it was reported that Mottisfont Parish Council petitioned Network Rail to rename the station `Dunbridge & Mottisfont'. This latter suggestion would have the County Council's support, rather than `Mottisfont Dunbridge'.

Michael Hedderly

Rail Officer

2.3.06