Archived decisions

PASSENGER TRANSPORT REVIEW AND RETENDERING

1. The Executive Member has considered comprehensive reports on the review and outcome of tenders for local bus services in the New Forest and Havant Areas. In each case he has agreed a plan of action to ensure value for money and to enable transport services which give access to employment, education, health, retail and leisure facilities for the widest section of the community.

2. The review and re-tendering exercise was undertaken against a background of rising inflation within the bus industry, contrasted with the inability to increase Local Authority funding available for support of bus services without reducing other services. The reviews therefore seek to demonstrate that:

· Value for money is being achieved without sacrificing accessibility

· Subsidy payments are open and transparent

· Spending is undertaken within the context of Local Transport Plan 2 and bus strategy objectives

· The optimum balance is achieved between conventional and unconventional services

· The relationship between secured and commercial services is as efficient as possible

· Monies are used to maximise the ability to meet the unmet needs of Hampshire residents.

3. In both cases the review and re-tendering identified an option which maintained the overall level of accessibility to key services but meant that expenditure on support for bus services could be contained within the available budget. That inevitably meant some changes to bus journeys and frequencies whilst sustaining those which best met needs. In the New Forest this entailed some rationalisation of services between Southampton and the main areas of population within the Forest, an improvement in services for the proposed Lymington hospital and use of smaller, more flexible vehicles elsewhere. In Havant the changes entailed some rationalisation of services, some reduced frequencies on certain routes, a minimal reduction in service 27 and the withdrawal of service 22 which largely duplicated other services that would continue.

4. The Executive Member for Environment's decision relating to the changes in Havant was then "called in" by four members, representing more than a quorum of the committee, pursuant to Part III: D paragraph 1.16 of the Constitution. The Environment and Transportation Policy Review Committee met on 25 October and discussed the issues raised. After some debate, there was no request for the decision by the Executive Member to be changed.

5. The decision summarised above does not depart from the County Council's policy framework. It supports the corporate priority "maximising well being" by reconfiguring the allocation of resources in the light of above-inflation cost pressures and subsidy requirements to maintain passengers' access to key services.

M.J. KENDAL

Executive Member for Environment