Fury over Dorset bus service cuts by South West Coaches

Councillor Kate Wheller and residents at a bus stop in Doncaster Road, Wyke Regis

Councillor Kate Wheller and residents at a bus stop in Doncaster Road, Wyke Regis

First published in News by

COMMUNITIES are up in arms after a bus company revealed it was axing services in Dorset.

South West Coaches is withdrawing buses on routes which are not financially viable but have been described by elderly passengers who rely on public transport as a ‘lifeline’.

They include the Downclose estate service in Wyke Regis, Weymouth, and a Portland bus serving The Grove and Wakeham, where no other companies serve the areas.

Company bosses say the ‘regrettable’ withdrawal of services comes after reduced government funding, particularly for the concessionary bus fare scheme.

The 13 routes affected in Dorset and Somerset are commercially-operated services not subsidised by Dorset County Council.

Passengers losing buses in rural areas can pick up other connections in their villages but senior travellers relying on the two-hourly 205 Portland Bill service and the half-hourly 207 Downclose service face a long walk to pick up a connecting First bus.

Weymouth and Portland councillor Kate Wheller said it was another ‘black mark’ for public transport in the borough.

She is calling for subsidised routes to be reviewed to see if funding can be found for communities which have lost their services.

Coun Wheller said: “I have received numerous phone calls, particularly from elderly people who will be confined to their homes when they lose the bus service that passes close by – it is a disgrace to cut people off like this.”

Pensioner Eddie Vaux, of Doncaster Road, Wyke Regis, said: “The 207 stops near my house and when it goes I’ll have to walk to Portland Road to catch the First bus. I wouldn’t mind if it was even two-hourly but to withdraw it completely isn’t right.”

Neighbour Geoff Grigg added: “I’ve got my own transport but my eyesight is failing and soon I’ll have to rely on the bus which is a lifeline for the estate.”

Penny Seaward, who is starting a petition, said: “It’s the most vulnerable members of society who will be penalised.”

Borough councillor Colin Huckle, who with Coun Wheller wants to meet the bus operator for talks, added: “We cannot leave the residents of Downclose, Southlands, The Grove and Wakeham without this important lifeline.”

Public transport team leader at Dorset County Council Terry Spracklen said: “It is a shame that South West Coaches isn’t able to carry on with these routes. Our budget for subsidising local bus services is fully committed.

“However, we will talk to our partner operators to see if any of our existing contracted routes could be modified to cover any of the affected areas.”

* SERVICE manager for Somerset-based South West Coaches Lewis Trahar said the cuts came down to the fact there were not enough people who pay to travel to allow the firm to make any money.

He said the government had this year reduced the amount companies get for the concessionary bus fare scheme, which allowed free travel for elderly people, prompting the firm to review services where a high number of passengers use concessionary fares. The amount firms can claim back on diesel has also been reduced.

Mr Trahar said: “We’ve had to take difficult and regrettable decisions.

“Our costs are going up and our income is going down and that puts pressure on when your main form of income is concessionary fares and your main cost is fuel.

“It is the worst part of my job when I have to take people’s buses away but our business as a whole has to make sense.”

He added: “If there’s a significant need, it should be a subsidised service.”

Routes run by South West Coaches which will be cut at the end of November:

205 Weymouth-Portland Bill. Six days a week service. The Grove and Wakeham will lose their bus service.

207 Weymouth-Downclose. The estate will lose its six days a week service.

109 Wincanton-Dorchester.

3 Gillingham-Yeovil.

7 Sherborne-Poole.

15 Sherborne-Salisbury.

28 Templecombe-Salisbury.

30 Wincanton-Poole.

32 Castle Cary-Salisbury (does not affect Dorset).

36 Gillingham-Yeovil.

7 Sherborne-Yeovil.

117 Wincanton-Sturminster Newton.

202 Chard-Dorchester (Weds only).

Comments (32)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:24pm Sat 13 Oct 12

snowleopard says...

When the Conservative Government of Maggie Thatcher deregulated buses, then privatised the NBC in later years I knew this would happen and will keep happening until no rural or edge of town services exist.
When the Conservative Government of Maggie Thatcher deregulated buses, then privatised the NBC in later years I knew this would happen and will keep happening until no rural or edge of town services exist. snowleopard
  • Score: 0

12:28pm Sat 13 Oct 12

annotator1 says...

Fuel is too expensive, running costs are too high ... where would you like me to stop?

It is a real shame that these services have to stop.
If it is not breaking even, it clearly cannot continue.

We have only the current wages - work ethic to blame. Too greedy!
Fuel is too expensive, running costs are too high ... where would you like me to stop? It is a real shame that these services have to stop. If it is not breaking even, it clearly cannot continue. We have only the current wages - work ethic to blame. Too greedy! annotator1
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Old Contemptible says...

As car motoring gets even more expensive bus companies should gain more new business. By cutting down services they are likely to dwindle.
As car motoring gets even more expensive bus companies should gain more new business. By cutting down services they are likely to dwindle. Old Contemptible
  • Score: 0

2:32pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Dylanfan says...

This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days. Dylanfan
  • Score: 0

2:32pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Dylanfan says...

This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days. Dylanfan
  • Score: 0

5:48pm Sat 13 Oct 12

oldbrock says...

Dylanfan wrote:
This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.
[quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.[/p][/quote]Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were. oldbrock
  • Score: 0

6:15pm Sat 13 Oct 12

I'mavoter says...

Old Contemptible wrote:
As car motoring gets even more expensive bus companies should gain more new business. By cutting down services they are likely to dwindle.
Would you run your business at a loss ?
[quote][p][bold]Old Contemptible[/bold] wrote: As car motoring gets even more expensive bus companies should gain more new business. By cutting down services they are likely to dwindle.[/p][/quote]Would you run your business at a loss ? I'mavoter
  • Score: 0

6:19pm Sat 13 Oct 12

I'mavoter says...

oldbrock wrote:
Dylanfan wrote:
This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.
Typical labourite/ socialist , wants everything for free.
[quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.[/p][/quote]Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.[/p][/quote]Typical labourite/ socialist , wants everything for free. I'mavoter
  • Score: 0

6:41pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Joe_Bloggs says...

Seems as though the Tories are all to blame for this, but don't forget that Labour actually brought in the concessionary pass scheme as per usual it is all governments to blame not just one and like local councillors they are never held responsible to pay.
Also it is greedy businesses who want to cream money off on routes but if they lose money on a route that has to go as the fat cat owners need to make a living without lifting a finger.
Unfortunately until the whole goverment system is changed this is the way we will have to live with public transport and just like the train franchise fiasco this country is a total mess and it will be a very hard job for someone to come along and upset people to put it all straight a bit like the beeching cuts in the 60's
Seems as though the Tories are all to blame for this, but don't forget that Labour actually brought in the concessionary pass scheme as per usual it is all governments to blame not just one and like local councillors they are never held responsible to pay. Also it is greedy businesses who want to cream money off on routes but if they lose money on a route that has to go as the fat cat owners need to make a living without lifting a finger. Unfortunately until the whole goverment system is changed this is the way we will have to live with public transport and just like the train franchise fiasco this country is a total mess and it will be a very hard job for someone to come along and upset people to put it all straight a bit like the beeching cuts in the 60's Joe_Bloggs
  • Score: 0

7:17pm Sat 13 Oct 12

why dont you get a job? says...

Bus Companies are privately owned companies,out to make a profit to pay to shareholders,or very occasionally reward their staff.Although they provide a service to the public they are no longera PUBLIC service.The psv licence is now pcv.People complain about bus travel in rural communities and rightly so,BUT costs rise,with income from bus passes being cut yet again it becomes unviable to run these services at a constant loss.Not only the bus services in this town are affected,coach travel which supplied day trips for the tinsel and turkey brigade to Lyme Regis and Dorchester market for instance have lost out to free bus travel.With buses costing upwards of £200k each its no wonder that not only Firstgroup but Stagecoach,Arriva and Go-ahead are all declining to invest in rural and semi-rural routes.The Only answer is to take the whole transport system under public ownership,which i'm quite certain will not happen because nationalisation is still a dirty word to the thatcherites that run this country of ours.Remember if it dont make a profit it aint gonna run
Bus Companies are privately owned companies,out to make a profit to pay to shareholders,or very occasionally[almost never] reward their staff.Although they provide a service to the public they are no longer[since de-regulation]a PUBLIC service.The psv licence is now pcv[passenger carrying vehicle].People complain about bus travel in rural communities and rightly so,BUT costs rise,with income from bus passes being cut yet again it becomes unviable to run these services at a constant loss.Not only the bus services in this town are affected,coach travel which supplied day trips for the tinsel and turkey brigade to Lyme Regis and Dorchester market for instance have lost out to free bus travel.With buses costing upwards of £200k each its no wonder that not only Firstgroup but Stagecoach,Arriva and Go-ahead are all declining to invest in rural and semi-rural routes.The Only answer is to take the whole transport system under public ownership,which i'm quite certain will not happen because nationalisation is still a dirty word to the thatcherites that run this country of ours.Remember if it dont make a profit it aint gonna run why dont you get a job?
  • Score: 0

7:23pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Dylanfan says...

I'mavoter wrote:
oldbrock wrote:
Dylanfan wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.
Typical labourite/ socialist , wants everything for free.
This is NOT for free - we have paid for it! I blame all governments for allowing everyone in this country to be ripped off. I'm not a socialist, but I am for the people who acually pay for the things that should make life easier when we all get older. And that really is every one one of us!
[quote][p][bold]I'mavoter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.[/p][/quote]Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.[/p][/quote]Typical labourite/ socialist , wants everything for free.[/p][/quote]This is NOT for free - we have paid for it! I blame all governments for allowing everyone in this country to be ripped off. I'm not a socialist, but I am for the people who acually pay for the things that should make life easier when we all get older. And that really is every one one of us! Dylanfan
  • Score: 0

7:43pm Sat 13 Oct 12

Dylanfan says...

annotator1 wrote:
Fuel is too expensive, running costs are too high ... where would you like me to stop? It is a real shame that these services have to stop. If it is not breaking even, it clearly cannot continue. We have only the current wages - work ethic to blame. Too greedy!
Consider - Why is fuel too expensive? Could it be because someone rips us off? Why are wages the problem? Does annotator live without them? The suggestion seems to be that it is people who need services who are greedy. I wonder what those in favour of these cuts would think if it actually affected them. My eyesight is failiing. What if this happened to you and you could no longer drive a car. I sincerely wish this will never happen to you. But you seem to wish me ill.Why?
[quote][p][bold]annotator1[/bold] wrote: Fuel is too expensive, running costs are too high ... where would you like me to stop? It is a real shame that these services have to stop. If it is not breaking even, it clearly cannot continue. We have only the current wages - work ethic to blame. Too greedy![/p][/quote]Consider - Why is fuel too expensive? Could it be because someone rips us off? Why are wages the problem? Does annotator live without them? The suggestion seems to be that it is people who need services who are greedy. I wonder what those in favour of these cuts would think if it actually affected them. My eyesight is failiing. What if this happened to you and you could no longer drive a car. I sincerely wish this will never happen to you. But you seem to wish me ill.Why? Dylanfan
  • Score: 0

8:32pm Sat 13 Oct 12

why dont you get a job? says...

Dylanfan wrote:
I'mavoter wrote:
oldbrock wrote:
Dylanfan wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.
Typical labourite/ socialist , wants everything for free.
This is NOT for free - we have paid for it! I blame all governments for allowing everyone in this country to be ripped off. I'm not a socialist, but I am for the people who acually pay for the things that should make life easier when we all get older. And that really is every one one of us!
We still pay for it in council tax.The problem is successive goverments have placed the burden on private companies..When the bus passes were first introduced they were to help the older generation to get into the local towns and what a great idea.The problems started when they went national.We see it more than most here in the summer,full buses for no profit,to offset this fares increase for those that pay,the bus companies make less profit for shareholders.That has a knock-on effect.Miniscule wage rises for the drivers who have to suffer torrents of vile abuse from a majority of passengers all for a below average pay.
[quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]I'mavoter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.[/p][/quote]Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.[/p][/quote]Typical labourite/ socialist , wants everything for free.[/p][/quote]This is NOT for free - we have paid for it! I blame all governments for allowing everyone in this country to be ripped off. I'm not a socialist, but I am for the people who acually pay for the things that should make life easier when we all get older. And that really is every one one of us![/p][/quote]We still pay for it in council tax.The problem is successive goverments have placed the burden on private companies..When the bus passes were first introduced they were to help the older generation to get into the local towns and what a great idea.The problems started when they went national.We see it more than most here in the summer,full buses for no profit,to offset this fares increase for those that pay,the bus companies make less profit for shareholders.That has a knock-on effect.Miniscule wage rises for the drivers who have to suffer torrents of vile abuse from a majority of passengers all for a below average pay. why dont you get a job?
  • Score: 0

10:08am Sun 14 Oct 12

greenglasses says...

I think some of the bus pass problem is its unlimited use. When I get my mid morning bus into town for work I see the same faces every day get on , I pay £3 they pay nothing and yet if I dare to sit near the front or in their favourite seat I get glared at. When a child living else where the elderly were giving weekly vouchers for a certain number of journeys.
I think some of the bus pass problem is its unlimited use. When I get my mid morning bus into town for work I see the same faces every day get on , I pay £3 they pay nothing and yet if I dare to sit near the front or in their favourite seat I get glared at. When a child living else where the elderly were giving weekly vouchers for a certain number of journeys. greenglasses
  • Score: 0

11:27am Sun 14 Oct 12

SouthWestBuses says...

This withdrawal of another former Sureline service (in the case of Downclose) should come as no surprise. South West Coaches has never appeared to have any real interest in serving the people of Weymouth - think back and remember that the residents of Verne Common Estate on Portland lost their buses after the purchase of Sureline by SWC. Needless and pointless SWC buses running on the Dorchester route where First operates a good service is yet another example of a small company trying to 'cream off' passengers on a prime route that helps pay for other less profitable routes. It would be better for the local residents if SWC ceased to operate in Weymouth (apart from perhaps school contracts they have) at all so that a public route network could be designed and operated by First that could include areas such as Downclose (yes I know First pulled out of there and Sureline stepped in) and the overall network run at a (hopefully)profit by 'cross-subsidising' less profitable routes from those that pay well such as Dorchester/Littlemoo
r/Chickerell.
Yes I know that bus companies have suffered greatly increased costs due to fuel price rises and that the payment from the Council for passes does not properly reflect the public fares - i've been told that some journey's on First's 31 (Axminster - Weymouth) and X53 (Poole - Exeter via Weymouth) loose money due to the buses (mostly double-deckers) being full of people who do not pay.
The pass scheme MUST be modified to return to a reduced fare strucure to prevent this situation and ensure that the companies recieve a reasonable return for carrying pass holders. Another factor that might be considered in the case of Downclose is that the vehicles used by SWC are elderly (most former Sureline or other older buses transfered from Somerset) and not 'low-floor' - unlike the First fleet where much investment has occured nationally that has allowed 'low-floor' vehicles to come to Weymouth - and before too long these vehicles will not be allowed on local bus routes due to disabillity/access regulations.
This withdrawal of another former Sureline service (in the case of Downclose) should come as no surprise. South West Coaches has never appeared to have any real interest in serving the people of Weymouth - think back and remember that the residents of Verne Common Estate on Portland lost their buses after the purchase of Sureline by SWC. Needless and pointless SWC buses running on the Dorchester route where First operates a good service is yet another example of a small company trying to 'cream off' passengers on a prime route that helps pay for other less profitable routes. It would be better for the local residents if SWC ceased to operate in Weymouth (apart from perhaps school contracts they have) at all so that a public route network could be designed and operated by First that could include areas such as Downclose (yes I know First pulled out of there and Sureline stepped in) and the overall network run at a (hopefully)profit by 'cross-subsidising' less profitable routes from those that pay well such as Dorchester/Littlemoo r/Chickerell. Yes I know that bus companies have suffered greatly increased costs due to fuel price rises and that the payment from the Council for passes does not properly reflect the public fares - i've been told that some journey's on First's 31 (Axminster - Weymouth) and X53 (Poole - Exeter via Weymouth) loose money due to the buses (mostly double-deckers) being full of people who do not pay. The pass scheme MUST be modified to return to a reduced fare strucure to prevent this situation and ensure that the companies recieve a reasonable return for carrying pass holders. Another factor that might be considered in the case of Downclose is that the vehicles used by SWC are elderly (most former Sureline or other older buses transfered from Somerset) and not 'low-floor' - unlike the First fleet where much investment has occured nationally that has allowed 'low-floor' vehicles to come to Weymouth - and before too long these vehicles will not be allowed on local bus routes due to disabillity/access regulations. SouthWestBuses
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Sun 14 Oct 12

JamesYoung says...

oldbrock wrote:
Dylanfan wrote:
This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.
It's a cycle. Labour pledges money they haven't got to pay for services they can't afford. Then the Tories come in, clear up the mess, while Labour claims that the cuts are unnecessary because they have some special secret plan that allows them to make things for free (although strangely they can never manage to do this when in power). Then voters with poor memories vote Labour in again. Stuff gets better for a while, like it does when you blow a grand on a credit card for a holiday and a new TV...and then some crisis, which is never ever Labours fault, catches us all out once more. Perhaps, if Labour had stuck to Tory spending plans, there would have been money in the coffers. Perhaps, if they hadn't tinkered with banking regulation, there would never ave been a property bubble. Perhaps, if they hadn't sold our gold reserves at rock bottom prices, we'd have had something to all back on. And perhaps if all that had happened, these necessary cuts implemented by an evil Tory government wouldn't have been necessary at all. £4,000,000,000,000 is a lot of money for a country to owe.
[quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.[/p][/quote]Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.[/p][/quote]It's a cycle. Labour pledges money they haven't got to pay for services they can't afford. Then the Tories come in, clear up the mess, while Labour claims that the cuts are unnecessary because they have some special secret plan that allows them to make things for free (although strangely they can never manage to do this when in power). Then voters with poor memories vote Labour in again. Stuff gets better for a while, like it does when you blow a grand on a credit card for a holiday and a new TV...and then some crisis, which is never ever Labours fault, catches us all out once more. Perhaps, if Labour had stuck to Tory spending plans, there would have been money in the coffers. Perhaps, if they hadn't tinkered with banking regulation, there would never ave been a property bubble. Perhaps, if they hadn't sold our gold reserves at rock bottom prices, we'd have had something to all back on. And perhaps if all that had happened, these necessary cuts implemented by an evil Tory government wouldn't have been necessary at all. £4,000,000,000,000 is a lot of money for a country to owe. JamesYoung
  • Score: 0

10:45pm Sun 14 Oct 12

Dylanfan says...

JamesYoung wrote:
oldbrock wrote:
Dylanfan wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.
It's a cycle. Labour pledges money they haven't got to pay for services they can't afford. Then the Tories come in, clear up the mess, while Labour claims that the cuts are unnecessary because they have some special secret plan that allows them to make things for free (although strangely they can never manage to do this when in power). Then voters with poor memories vote Labour in again. Stuff gets better for a while, like it does when you blow a grand on a credit card for a holiday and a new TV...and then some crisis, which is never ever Labours fault, catches us all out once more. Perhaps, if Labour had stuck to Tory spending plans, there would have been money in the coffers. Perhaps, if they hadn't tinkered with banking regulation, there would never ave been a property bubble. Perhaps, if they hadn't sold our gold reserves at rock bottom prices, we'd have had something to all back on. And perhaps if all that had happened, these necessary cuts implemented by an evil Tory government wouldn't have been necessary at all. £4,000,000,000,000 is a lot of money for a country to owe.
I find it interesting that no-one has made a connection to the real need of older people. Should we walk everywhere, assuming we can of course? Also, I thought we were doing what experts say is best for our planet - using publc transport. If car drivers took a bus or train occasionally there would be much more money in the kitty, and would be cheaper and cleaner. We all get older regardless of politics.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.[/p][/quote]Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.[/p][/quote]It's a cycle. Labour pledges money they haven't got to pay for services they can't afford. Then the Tories come in, clear up the mess, while Labour claims that the cuts are unnecessary because they have some special secret plan that allows them to make things for free (although strangely they can never manage to do this when in power). Then voters with poor memories vote Labour in again. Stuff gets better for a while, like it does when you blow a grand on a credit card for a holiday and a new TV...and then some crisis, which is never ever Labours fault, catches us all out once more. Perhaps, if Labour had stuck to Tory spending plans, there would have been money in the coffers. Perhaps, if they hadn't tinkered with banking regulation, there would never ave been a property bubble. Perhaps, if they hadn't sold our gold reserves at rock bottom prices, we'd have had something to all back on. And perhaps if all that had happened, these necessary cuts implemented by an evil Tory government wouldn't have been necessary at all. £4,000,000,000,000 is a lot of money for a country to owe.[/p][/quote]I find it interesting that no-one has made a connection to the real need of older people. Should we walk everywhere, assuming we can of course? Also, I thought we were doing what experts say is best for our planet - using publc transport. If car drivers took a bus or train occasionally there would be much more money in the kitty, and would be cheaper and cleaner. We all get older regardless of politics. Dylanfan
  • Score: 0

2:51am Mon 15 Oct 12

JamesYoung says...

Dylanfan wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
oldbrock wrote:
Dylanfan wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.
It's a cycle. Labour pledges money they haven't got to pay for services they can't afford. Then the Tories come in, clear up the mess, while Labour claims that the cuts are unnecessary because they have some special secret plan that allows them to make things for free (although strangely they can never manage to do this when in power). Then voters with poor memories vote Labour in again. Stuff gets better for a while, like it does when you blow a grand on a credit card for a holiday and a new TV...and then some crisis, which is never ever Labours fault, catches us all out once more. Perhaps, if Labour had stuck to Tory spending plans, there would have been money in the coffers. Perhaps, if they hadn't tinkered with banking regulation, there would never ave been a property bubble. Perhaps, if they hadn't sold our gold reserves at rock bottom prices, we'd have had something to all back on. And perhaps if all that had happened, these necessary cuts implemented by an evil Tory government wouldn't have been necessary at all. £4,000,000,000,000 is a lot of money for a country to owe.
I find it interesting that no-one has made a connection to the real need of older people. Should we walk everywhere, assuming we can of course? Also, I thought we were doing what experts say is best for our planet - using publc transport. If car drivers took a bus or train occasionally there would be much more money in the kitty, and would be cheaper and cleaner. We all get older regardless of politics.
Old people are an irrelevance. Many of you are unable to vote. The same is true of those with special needs. If you are unable to vote you can safely be left to rot. As it happens, I completely agree that retired people should have access to subsidised services and so do most others (as you say, we all get older). But politics is about sleight of hand and until there is a sea change then life will not get any better. To dismiss politics as irrelevance is to ignore the core issue.
[quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.[/p][/quote]Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.[/p][/quote]It's a cycle. Labour pledges money they haven't got to pay for services they can't afford. Then the Tories come in, clear up the mess, while Labour claims that the cuts are unnecessary because they have some special secret plan that allows them to make things for free (although strangely they can never manage to do this when in power). Then voters with poor memories vote Labour in again. Stuff gets better for a while, like it does when you blow a grand on a credit card for a holiday and a new TV...and then some crisis, which is never ever Labours fault, catches us all out once more. Perhaps, if Labour had stuck to Tory spending plans, there would have been money in the coffers. Perhaps, if they hadn't tinkered with banking regulation, there would never ave been a property bubble. Perhaps, if they hadn't sold our gold reserves at rock bottom prices, we'd have had something to all back on. And perhaps if all that had happened, these necessary cuts implemented by an evil Tory government wouldn't have been necessary at all. £4,000,000,000,000 is a lot of money for a country to owe.[/p][/quote]I find it interesting that no-one has made a connection to the real need of older people. Should we walk everywhere, assuming we can of course? Also, I thought we were doing what experts say is best for our planet - using publc transport. If car drivers took a bus or train occasionally there would be much more money in the kitty, and would be cheaper and cleaner. We all get older regardless of politics.[/p][/quote]Old people are an irrelevance. Many of you are unable to vote. The same is true of those with special needs. If you are unable to vote you can safely be left to rot. As it happens, I completely agree that retired people should have access to subsidised services and so do most others (as you say, we all get older). But politics is about sleight of hand and until there is a sea change then life will not get any better. To dismiss politics as irrelevance is to ignore the core issue. JamesYoung
  • Score: 0

12:06pm Mon 15 Oct 12

South Dorset Labour says...

Sign Councillor Kate Wheller's online petition to support her in this campaign: http://www.ipetition
s.com/petition/207an
d205/
Sign Councillor Kate Wheller's online petition to support her in this campaign: http://www.ipetition s.com/petition/207an d205/ South Dorset Labour
  • Score: 0

3:34pm Mon 15 Oct 12

why dont you get a job? says...

Why has it become a neccessity for free bus passes for the elderly.I'm fast approaching that age myself.What happened before free bus passes.Why not let them also have free beer and free food.How many times do i have to re-iterate.BUS COMPANIES ARE PRIVATE COMPANIES. If they were under public ownership,great,but they are not.J .D .Weatherspoons are a private company that make a huge profit.Why don't the goverment issue pensioners with free passes for their pubs that entitle O.A.P.'s to free beer and food while paying them only about 7.5 % of there retail price.Or Tescos who post huge profits year after year.Let the oaps get a free shop...Why pick on the buses,they are just a scapegoat,an easy target.Something must happen soon or the 75% of bus routes in this town that run at a loss will just stop
Why has it become a neccessity for free[its not free,nothing is in this life] bus passes for the elderly.I'm fast approaching that age myself.What happened before free bus passes.Why not let them also have free beer and free food.How many times do i have to re-iterate.BUS COMPANIES ARE PRIVATE COMPANIES. If they were under public ownership,great,but they are not.J .D .Weatherspoons are a private company that make a huge profit.Why don't the goverment issue pensioners with free passes for their pubs that entitle O.A.P.'s to free beer and food while paying them only about 7.5 % of there retail price.Or Tescos who post huge profits year after year.Let the oaps get a free shop...Why pick on the buses,they are just a scapegoat,an easy target.Something must happen soon or the 75% of bus routes in this town[and elsewhere] that run at a loss will just stop why dont you get a job?
  • Score: 0

6:50pm Mon 15 Oct 12

bootedsw says...

It is a great shame that any compnay needs to remove a bus route but in these tough times it is all too common. Services that are not profittable will be cut. There used to be loads of bus routes around before the free pass was issued.
It is a great shame that any compnay needs to remove a bus route but in these tough times it is all too common. Services that are not profittable will be cut. There used to be loads of bus routes around before the free pass was issued. bootedsw
  • Score: 0

8:58am Tue 16 Oct 12

Simon 1965 says...

Actually, the network of commercial services in the Weymouth area is on par with what was offered in the 1970s.

The 31 (Axminster-Weymouth) only ran through to Weymouth every two hours then, and the X53 (which is a marvelous enhancement) did not exist.

Frequencies on the main corridors (Portland, Littlemoor, Hereford Road, Chickerell and Preston) are generally better as well. Dorchester has seen a massive improvement.

There have been reductions and losses within the town however - Radipole, Southill and Lanehouse see a much reduced level of service and the future of Downclose is dependent on local authority funding.

Rural services again only survive if funding is available.

The trouble is, some of these routes only carry at best a handful of passengers per day - I know that, to these people, they are lifelines, but to be honest the cost of provision is huge - it would be easier and cheaper to give them a weekly taxi each.

As for the bus companies themselves, they are being hit from all sides - increased fuel prices, lower subsidies, reduced BSOG fuel rebate, reduced level of reimbursment for carrying free OAPs, ongoing bizarre and pointess legislative EEC nonsense, the need to put every member of staff through an accedited training scheme by this time next year, and finally the EEC driven requirement for every new bus to meet strict emissions levels, all of which use more fuel in the process.

Operating costs of bus companies obviously vary, but most need every bus to earn at least £250 per day to even break even.

Simon N.
Actually, the network of commercial services in the Weymouth area is on par with what was offered in the 1970s. The 31 (Axminster-Weymouth) only ran through to Weymouth every two hours then, and the X53 (which is a marvelous enhancement) did not exist. Frequencies on the main corridors (Portland, Littlemoor, Hereford Road, Chickerell and Preston) are generally better as well. Dorchester has seen a massive improvement. There have been reductions and losses within the town however - Radipole, Southill and Lanehouse see a much reduced level of service and the future of Downclose is dependent on local authority funding. Rural services again only survive if funding is available. The trouble is, some of these routes only carry at best a handful of passengers per day - I know that, to these people, they are lifelines, but to be honest the cost of provision is huge - it would be easier and cheaper to give them a weekly taxi each. As for the bus companies themselves, they are being hit from all sides - increased fuel prices, lower subsidies, reduced BSOG fuel rebate, reduced level of reimbursment for carrying free OAPs, ongoing bizarre and pointess legislative EEC nonsense, the need to put every member of staff through an accedited training scheme by this time next year, and finally the EEC driven requirement for every new bus to meet strict emissions levels, all of which use more fuel in the process. Operating costs of bus companies obviously vary, but most need every bus to earn at least £250 per day to even break even. Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: 0

5:02pm Tue 16 Oct 12

JamesYoung says...

Simon 1965 wrote:
Actually, the network of commercial services in the Weymouth area is on par with what was offered in the 1970s.

The 31 (Axminster-Weymouth) only ran through to Weymouth every two hours then, and the X53 (which is a marvelous enhancement) did not exist.

Frequencies on the main corridors (Portland, Littlemoor, Hereford Road, Chickerell and Preston) are generally better as well. Dorchester has seen a massive improvement.

There have been reductions and losses within the town however - Radipole, Southill and Lanehouse see a much reduced level of service and the future of Downclose is dependent on local authority funding.

Rural services again only survive if funding is available.

The trouble is, some of these routes only carry at best a handful of passengers per day - I know that, to these people, they are lifelines, but to be honest the cost of provision is huge - it would be easier and cheaper to give them a weekly taxi each.

As for the bus companies themselves, they are being hit from all sides - increased fuel prices, lower subsidies, reduced BSOG fuel rebate, reduced level of reimbursment for carrying free OAPs, ongoing bizarre and pointess legislative EEC nonsense, the need to put every member of staff through an accedited training scheme by this time next year, and finally the EEC driven requirement for every new bus to meet strict emissions levels, all of which use more fuel in the process.

Operating costs of bus companies obviously vary, but most need every bus to earn at least £250 per day to even break even.

Simon N.
I think you hit the nail on the head, Simon. It is not the private sector's job to provide lifelines.
[quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Actually, the network of commercial services in the Weymouth area is on par with what was offered in the 1970s. The 31 (Axminster-Weymouth) only ran through to Weymouth every two hours then, and the X53 (which is a marvelous enhancement) did not exist. Frequencies on the main corridors (Portland, Littlemoor, Hereford Road, Chickerell and Preston) are generally better as well. Dorchester has seen a massive improvement. There have been reductions and losses within the town however - Radipole, Southill and Lanehouse see a much reduced level of service and the future of Downclose is dependent on local authority funding. Rural services again only survive if funding is available. The trouble is, some of these routes only carry at best a handful of passengers per day - I know that, to these people, they are lifelines, but to be honest the cost of provision is huge - it would be easier and cheaper to give them a weekly taxi each. As for the bus companies themselves, they are being hit from all sides - increased fuel prices, lower subsidies, reduced BSOG fuel rebate, reduced level of reimbursment for carrying free OAPs, ongoing bizarre and pointess legislative EEC nonsense, the need to put every member of staff through an accedited training scheme by this time next year, and finally the EEC driven requirement for every new bus to meet strict emissions levels, all of which use more fuel in the process. Operating costs of bus companies obviously vary, but most need every bus to earn at least £250 per day to even break even. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I think you hit the nail on the head, Simon. It is not the private sector's job to provide lifelines. JamesYoung
  • Score: 0

7:16pm Tue 16 Oct 12

Dylanfan says...

JamesYoung wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote: Actually, the network of commercial services in the Weymouth area is on par with what was offered in the 1970s. The 31 (Axminster-Weymouth) only ran through to Weymouth every two hours then, and the X53 (which is a marvelous enhancement) did not exist. Frequencies on the main corridors (Portland, Littlemoor, Hereford Road, Chickerell and Preston) are generally better as well. Dorchester has seen a massive improvement. There have been reductions and losses within the town however - Radipole, Southill and Lanehouse see a much reduced level of service and the future of Downclose is dependent on local authority funding. Rural services again only survive if funding is available. The trouble is, some of these routes only carry at best a handful of passengers per day - I know that, to these people, they are lifelines, but to be honest the cost of provision is huge - it would be easier and cheaper to give them a weekly taxi each. As for the bus companies themselves, they are being hit from all sides - increased fuel prices, lower subsidies, reduced BSOG fuel rebate, reduced level of reimbursment for carrying free OAPs, ongoing bizarre and pointess legislative EEC nonsense, the need to put every member of staff through an accedited training scheme by this time next year, and finally the EEC driven requirement for every new bus to meet strict emissions levels, all of which use more fuel in the process. Operating costs of bus companies obviously vary, but most need every bus to earn at least £250 per day to even break even. Simon N.
I think you hit the nail on the head, Simon. It is not the private sector's job to provide lifelines.
We seem to have lost our way as to what is important. Public transport operators took on the job of providing a service to the public when they decided to bid for a franchise or to apply for a licence to operate. I try to do what I say I will do. Why are private companies and politicians thought to be immune from such a simple principle? They put their hand up and no-one forced them to do that.
[quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Actually, the network of commercial services in the Weymouth area is on par with what was offered in the 1970s. The 31 (Axminster-Weymouth) only ran through to Weymouth every two hours then, and the X53 (which is a marvelous enhancement) did not exist. Frequencies on the main corridors (Portland, Littlemoor, Hereford Road, Chickerell and Preston) are generally better as well. Dorchester has seen a massive improvement. There have been reductions and losses within the town however - Radipole, Southill and Lanehouse see a much reduced level of service and the future of Downclose is dependent on local authority funding. Rural services again only survive if funding is available. The trouble is, some of these routes only carry at best a handful of passengers per day - I know that, to these people, they are lifelines, but to be honest the cost of provision is huge - it would be easier and cheaper to give them a weekly taxi each. As for the bus companies themselves, they are being hit from all sides - increased fuel prices, lower subsidies, reduced BSOG fuel rebate, reduced level of reimbursment for carrying free OAPs, ongoing bizarre and pointess legislative EEC nonsense, the need to put every member of staff through an accedited training scheme by this time next year, and finally the EEC driven requirement for every new bus to meet strict emissions levels, all of which use more fuel in the process. Operating costs of bus companies obviously vary, but most need every bus to earn at least £250 per day to even break even. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I think you hit the nail on the head, Simon. It is not the private sector's job to provide lifelines.[/p][/quote]We seem to have lost our way as to what is important. Public transport operators took on the job of providing a service to the public when they decided to bid for a franchise or to apply for a licence to operate. I try to do what I say I will do. Why are private companies and politicians thought to be immune from such a simple principle? They put their hand up and no-one forced them to do that. Dylanfan
  • Score: 0

7:47pm Tue 16 Oct 12

why dont you get a job? says...

That's not the problem. Subsidies have been cut again and again.successive governments and councils are both guilty of this . They renaged on the original agreement . Would you still work for less than was originally agreed. If your employer paid you £7.00 ph then decided he couldn't afford it and gave you £5.00 ph . What would you do?
That's not the problem. Subsidies have been cut again and again.successive governments and councils are both guilty of this . They renaged on the original agreement . Would you still work for less than was originally agreed. If your employer paid you £7.00 ph then decided he couldn't afford it and gave you £5.00 ph . What would you do? why dont you get a job?
  • Score: 0

8:12pm Tue 16 Oct 12

JamesYoung says...

why dont you get a job? wrote:
That's not the problem. Subsidies have been cut again and again.successive governments and councils are both guilty of this . They renaged on the original agreement . Would you still work for less than was originally agreed. If your employer paid you £7.00 ph then decided he couldn't afford it and gave you £5.00 ph . What would you do?
Cutting subsidies would be bad enough, but to offer people free travel first is a very cynical way to escape blame when services are eventually withdrawn.
[quote][p][bold]why dont you get a job?[/bold] wrote: That's not the problem. Subsidies have been cut again and again.successive governments and councils are both guilty of this . They renaged on the original agreement . Would you still work for less than was originally agreed. If your employer paid you £7.00 ph then decided he couldn't afford it and gave you £5.00 ph . What would you do?[/p][/quote]Cutting subsidies would be bad enough, but to offer people free travel first is a very cynical way to escape blame when services are eventually withdrawn. JamesYoung
  • Score: 0

8:16pm Tue 16 Oct 12

Dylanfan says...

why dont you get a job? wrote:
That's not the problem. Subsidies have been cut again and again.successive governments and councils are both guilty of this . They renaged on the original agreement . Would you still work for less than was originally agreed. If your employer paid you £7.00 ph then decided he couldn't afford it and gave you £5.00 ph . What would you do?
I think that 100's of thousands of people have already experienced their wages being cut, with a great many more to follow. I expect this includes the bus drivers concerned. Try justifying government expenditure on things that don't benefit the general population, rather than supporting unecessary penny pinching that affects so many people who have paid taxes all their lives.
[quote][p][bold]why dont you get a job?[/bold] wrote: That's not the problem. Subsidies have been cut again and again.successive governments and councils are both guilty of this . They renaged on the original agreement . Would you still work for less than was originally agreed. If your employer paid you £7.00 ph then decided he couldn't afford it and gave you £5.00 ph . What would you do?[/p][/quote]I think that 100's of thousands of people have already experienced their wages being cut, with a great many more to follow. I expect this includes the bus drivers concerned. Try justifying government expenditure on things that don't benefit the general population, rather than supporting unecessary penny pinching that affects so many people who have paid taxes all their lives. Dylanfan
  • Score: 0

11:49pm Tue 16 Oct 12

snowleopard says...

Noticed comments about cross subsidised routes and level of service from years ago.
The government of the day outlawed cross subsidised routes years ago and with regard to increased level of service to Dorchester, that was down to Weybus
Noticed comments about cross subsidised routes and level of service from years ago. The government of the day outlawed cross subsidised routes years ago and with regard to increased level of service to Dorchester, that was down to Weybus snowleopard
  • Score: 0

7:04am Wed 17 Oct 12

cj07589 says...

I'mavoter wrote:
oldbrock wrote:
Dylanfan wrote:
This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.
Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.
Typical labourite/ socialist , wants everything for free.
Exactly! No mention of the lib dems either, selective memory obviously. It thanks to the rotten stinking socialists aka nu liebour there is no money left. They've practically destroyed this country in 13 short years and there still idiots would would vote them back in. So blame the real culprits who bankrupted the business environment making it uneconomical to run the buses in the first place. Once again thanks a million (not) labour traitors.
[quote][p][bold]I'mavoter[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]oldbrock[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: This is a contrived plan by national government to kill off concessionary bus passes. As always, they make it look like local government and/or the service provider are the bad guys. The real problem is that national politicians have allowed bankers and the financial market to bleed the country dry. An even more cynical view is that it's a lot more convenient to keep people in one place. This country became great when people were able to leave the villages they were born in - We must not return to those bad old days.[/p][/quote]Dead right, those TORIES are so slimy, they pledge NOT to cut concessionary services then reduce the funding to run them, these are NOT a privilege, they we paid for by years of work and taxpaying, propaganda, like that against the disabled and unemployed has been focussed on those who cannot help themselves, through unemployment, disability and now AGE, how cowardly and dishonest, typical politicians, especially TORIES who, indeed ARE the nasty party they ALWAYS were.[/p][/quote]Typical labourite/ socialist , wants everything for free.[/p][/quote]Exactly! No mention of the lib dems either, selective memory obviously. It thanks to the rotten stinking socialists aka nu liebour there is no money left. They've practically destroyed this country in 13 short years and there still idiots would would vote them back in. So blame the real culprits who bankrupted the business environment making it uneconomical to run the buses in the first place. Once again thanks a million (not) labour traitors. cj07589
  • Score: 0

8:24am Wed 17 Oct 12

Simon 1965 says...

Dylanfan wrote:
JamesYoung wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote: Actually, the network of commercial services in the Weymouth area is on par with what was offered in the 1970s. The 31 (Axminster-Weymouth) only ran through to Weymouth every two hours then, and the X53 (which is a marvelous enhancement) did not exist. Frequencies on the main corridors (Portland, Littlemoor, Hereford Road, Chickerell and Preston) are generally better as well. Dorchester has seen a massive improvement. There have been reductions and losses within the town however - Radipole, Southill and Lanehouse see a much reduced level of service and the future of Downclose is dependent on local authority funding. Rural services again only survive if funding is available. The trouble is, some of these routes only carry at best a handful of passengers per day - I know that, to these people, they are lifelines, but to be honest the cost of provision is huge - it would be easier and cheaper to give them a weekly taxi each. As for the bus companies themselves, they are being hit from all sides - increased fuel prices, lower subsidies, reduced BSOG fuel rebate, reduced level of reimbursment for carrying free OAPs, ongoing bizarre and pointess legislative EEC nonsense, the need to put every member of staff through an accedited training scheme by this time next year, and finally the EEC driven requirement for every new bus to meet strict emissions levels, all of which use more fuel in the process. Operating costs of bus companies obviously vary, but most need every bus to earn at least £250 per day to even break even. Simon N.
I think you hit the nail on the head, Simon. It is not the private sector's job to provide lifelines.
We seem to have lost our way as to what is important. Public transport operators took on the job of providing a service to the public when they decided to bid for a franchise or to apply for a licence to operate. I try to do what I say I will do. Why are private companies and politicians thought to be immune from such a simple principle? They put their hand up and no-one forced them to do that.
I understand what you are saying, but its the legislative landscape that is wrong, not the operators, most of whom were around before the days of deregulation and free passes for OAPs. They had no say in either.
This is not so much about public service as a business that will go bust if they continue to operate services at a loss.

Its very diffcult for any bus or coach operators to make any money these days. The big boys like First, Stagecoach, Arriva and Go Ahead do so as they have large UK wide operations where the profits made in their large city bus operations and rail franchises allow them to mask the shortfalls in their many underperforming operations. Even taking that into account however, First have considerable debt which they are desparate to bring down.

The smaller private operators are in the main living off historical profits on their balance sheets built up during better times, and exist on little more than the company owners enthusiasm for the industry.

The big boys are starting to say enough is enough however - First has just closed down their North Devon operations and have made it known that their operations in Plymouth, much of Somerset, the midlands and Northampton are very much for sale.

Not suprisingly, there have been few interested to date.

Simon N.
[quote][p][bold]Dylanfan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JamesYoung[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Actually, the network of commercial services in the Weymouth area is on par with what was offered in the 1970s. The 31 (Axminster-Weymouth) only ran through to Weymouth every two hours then, and the X53 (which is a marvelous enhancement) did not exist. Frequencies on the main corridors (Portland, Littlemoor, Hereford Road, Chickerell and Preston) are generally better as well. Dorchester has seen a massive improvement. There have been reductions and losses within the town however - Radipole, Southill and Lanehouse see a much reduced level of service and the future of Downclose is dependent on local authority funding. Rural services again only survive if funding is available. The trouble is, some of these routes only carry at best a handful of passengers per day - I know that, to these people, they are lifelines, but to be honest the cost of provision is huge - it would be easier and cheaper to give them a weekly taxi each. As for the bus companies themselves, they are being hit from all sides - increased fuel prices, lower subsidies, reduced BSOG fuel rebate, reduced level of reimbursment for carrying free OAPs, ongoing bizarre and pointess legislative EEC nonsense, the need to put every member of staff through an accedited training scheme by this time next year, and finally the EEC driven requirement for every new bus to meet strict emissions levels, all of which use more fuel in the process. Operating costs of bus companies obviously vary, but most need every bus to earn at least £250 per day to even break even. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I think you hit the nail on the head, Simon. It is not the private sector's job to provide lifelines.[/p][/quote]We seem to have lost our way as to what is important. Public transport operators took on the job of providing a service to the public when they decided to bid for a franchise or to apply for a licence to operate. I try to do what I say I will do. Why are private companies and politicians thought to be immune from such a simple principle? They put their hand up and no-one forced them to do that.[/p][/quote]I understand what you are saying, but its the legislative landscape that is wrong, not the operators, most of whom were around before the days of deregulation and free passes for OAPs. They had no say in either. This is not so much about public service as a business that will go bust if they continue to operate services at a loss. Its very diffcult for any bus or coach operators to make any money these days. The big boys like First, Stagecoach, Arriva and Go Ahead do so as they have large UK wide operations where the profits made in their large city bus operations and rail franchises allow them to mask the shortfalls in their many underperforming operations. Even taking that into account however, First have considerable debt which they are desparate to bring down. The smaller private operators are in the main living off historical profits on their balance sheets built up during better times, and exist on little more than the company owners enthusiasm for the industry. The big boys are starting to say enough is enough however - First has just closed down their North Devon operations and have made it known that their operations in Plymouth, much of Somerset, the midlands and Northampton are very much for sale. Not suprisingly, there have been few interested to date. Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: 0

9:10am Wed 17 Oct 12

Simon 1965 says...

snowleopard wrote:
Noticed comments about cross subsidised routes and level of service from years ago. The government of the day outlawed cross subsidised routes years ago and with regard to increased level of service to Dorchester, that was down to Weybus
Whilst I can`t really disagree with the fact that the bus war between Weybus and (pre First) Southern National did artificially increase frequencies between Weymouth and Dorchester, the prime mover in the retention of decent frequencies on this corridor was the subsequent introduction of the OAP free bus pass scheme, which resulted in significant modal shift from train to bus.

Simon N.
[quote][p][bold]snowleopard[/bold] wrote: Noticed comments about cross subsidised routes and level of service from years ago. The government of the day outlawed cross subsidised routes years ago and with regard to increased level of service to Dorchester, that was down to Weybus[/p][/quote]Whilst I can`t really disagree with the fact that the bus war between Weybus and (pre First) Southern National did artificially increase frequencies between Weymouth and Dorchester, the prime mover in the retention of decent frequencies on this corridor was the subsequent introduction of the OAP free bus pass scheme, which resulted in significant modal shift from train to bus. Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: 0

12:03pm Sun 4 Nov 12

Debbie Peach says...

Given a choice of dubiously maintained buses on the road running a full service or fewer buses that were well maintained and able to operate correctly. I know what I would rather have. (Spoken by someone who got hit TWICE by a bus not so long ago, through no fault of their own.)
Given a choice of dubiously maintained buses on the road running a full service or fewer buses that were well maintained and able to operate correctly. I know what I would rather have. (Spoken by someone who got hit TWICE by a bus not so long ago, through no fault of their own.) Debbie Peach
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree