Meeting documents

To receive and discuss the report.

The Chair invited Natasha Bates, Service Manager for Commissioning-Highways and Transport, to present the update.  She stated that hopefully everyone was aware that Somerset had been awarded BSIP funding of approximately £11.9 million, and whilst that was significantly lower than the original bid, it was worth pointing out that Somerset could be very pleased for having been recognised in what was a highly competitive and obviously over-subscribed process entailing 79 bids received and only 31 funded.  She has circulated a report with the agenda which sets out more information about the funding split and the rules governing the funding; it has to be spread over three years and has been split between capital funding, which amounts to approximately £8.2 million, and revenue funding, which totals approximately £3.7 million.  The next stage of the process is for us to submit a summary table to DfT which sets out how we propose to use the funding and the cost of the schemes that we are looking to fund; this needs to be submitted by 2 May, which is a bank holiday, so it is a very tight timescale. 

In the next agenda item today, Tim Reynolds from WSP will be presenting some of the funding options, but the important point is that we are working within very specific rules set by the DfT.  They have sent us a follow-up letter confirming how the funding should or should not be used, and NB will circulate a copy of that letter to this Board.  As regards the capital funding, the DfT have been very clear that their priority for capital funding is centred on bus priority measures; while on the revenue funding side, there are two key areas, with the first being ambitious initiatives that reduce or simplify fares, and the second being an increase in service frequencies and introducing new or expanded routes (but not existing service levels and patterns).  DfT has also been very clear that the funding should not be used for any schemes that do not primarily benefit buses, nor for generic marketing and advertising, nor for provision of bus hardware such as CCTV or audio-visual equipment, not for investment in existing infrastructure, which rules out investment in bus stations.  There are also funding stipulations that the focus must be on promoting the use of the bus more widely, promoting the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme (ENCTS), providing ENCTS travel on those schemes funded by BSIP, and ensuring that publicity will be made in conjunction with the DfT so that it is all co-branded and co-publicised.

A discussion by the Board followed; the point was raised that the DfT said funding could not be used for existing infrastructure "unless it directly tackles barriers to use".  It was believed that the argument could be made that not having a transport hub in a major town centre is a definite barrier to use of bus services, as if there is no interchange to get another bus, that is a barrier.  It may also be a safety issue as well if there is no safely organised hub bus station.  The Chair responded that this issue will be explored more in the next session, but at the moment they are very keen to stringently follow the rules to ensure that the funding is ultimately secured.

It was suggested that the restriction on marketing of approximately 3% is not enough, as marketing is key to getting more people on buses, and it was also suggested that there be an all-operator ticket across the county, as there are in other areas, even including railways in some cases.  This would be important for reaching holiday destinations, where we need to grow our market with tourists.  It was responded that the BSIP sits within the EP, so marketing will also be done outside of the BSIP funding.  As far as county-wide tickets, this will be difficult to institute because of a vast urban area in the north of Somerset and a very rural area in the south, but it is something that needs to be discussed within the EP rather than being included in BSIP funding. 

With respect to the bus station, the opinion was expressed that it would be better not to upgrade what was there before at Tower Street but to start with a clean sheet and look at how people actually move around Taunton, as less than half of services go through Taunton centre.  It was opined that we could do more and do better than re-opening that station.  Another member expressed the belief that there is a separate fund for bus stations across the country outside of the BSIP which might provide funding.  The Chair said he was not aware of such a fund, but they will obviously explore all funding opportunities; it was responded that it was a levelling-up transport fund for changes in bus and railway stations that came out recently.  The Chair noted that the Council is not currently eligible for round two of levelling up but asked that information on the fund be sent to him and NB.

Another issue raised was the possibility of having the park and ride open after normal hours so that nurses working shifts at the hospital can get to work, as this has been ongoing for years, as well as the possibility of re-routing some services to areas where there are more residents.  It was responded that there were security issues to consider with leaving the park and ride open longer, but the issue would be looked at; it could be part of both the EP and the BSIP.  As regards re-routing, it was replied that operators regularly review their routes in light of new housing developments, but there is a difference between perceived social need and commercially viable operations.  One of the criteria for getting more bus users is speeding up services, so making journeys longer may not be advantageous.

The Bus Advisory Board received and noted the update and discussed it.