Contents - SPAD

2.5) Bus Service Planning
Bus service planning is carried out by each operator acting unilaterally. There is at present no
overall bus route strategy. Service delivery is required by law to be within the terms and conditions
set down in the route licences granted to the operators. However operational observations
demonstrate that the levels of service provided differ in many respects from those authorised in
the route licences.
The route licence application form (LPKP3, 2005) requires the submission of route details including
a timetable; however this appears to be provided only very infrequently if at all, and any data
supplied initially is not updated when services are altered. Additionally there is a requirement for
the local councils to be consulted and provided the opportunity to comment on the need for the
proposed service to the licensing board prior to issuance. There is little evidence of prior
consultation, although this does take place where for example new bus stop infrastructure is
required.
In summary, although the mechanisms are in place for detailed service proposals to be put forward
for at least some strategic consideration of the need for a particular route, there is at present no
overall strategic policy that proposals can be set against, no strategic network planning either for
the local bus industry alone or for its integration with other LPT modes, or its contribution to wider
transportation policy.
Very little data has been made available by operators to establish an accurate account of the level
of bus network planning being done. At an operational level individual operators ensure that
service operation is delivered as efficiently as possible within their own pool of services. However
even at this level the day to day operation of individual services appears to be conditioned by the
manner in which competing operators are performing on the same corridor or route. In the case of
some operators, a system of “license sub-letting” or “mini-franchising” means that the person or
organisation to whom a license is issued may not be aware of the detailed delivery of services.
In the case of RapidKL, their broad objectives and the manner in which they are funded should
acknowledge wider transportation policies and the need for integration. However the general lack
of compliance with the requirements of the regulatory process as it stands at present can be
considered to be restricting their ability to integrate services effectively or provide comprehensive
services.
The visual effects of this lack of planning and coordination is shown in the day to day operations of
heavily concentrated vehicle allocation to key radial routes; with the requirement placed on
generating revenue as opposed to delivering on policy objectives. Competition between operators
takes place on the road and tends to be “duplicative” in that operators focus their resources on
key corridors and the times of day when demand is highest. Provision at shoulder periods is much
reduced and there is evidence of considerable day to day variation in the volume of bus resources
available to passengers, especially during these off-peak periods.
In summary, this comparatively ad-hoc approach to service delivery results in direct on-street
competition, fare competition, the ineffective use of resources (both vehicles and staff) and
potentially the demise of those operators who operate marginal services. It is impossible to
provide accurate and timely information for passengers in such scenario as little or no attempt is
made by operators to manage their operations in a manner that is likely to offer consistency. Thus
local bus services become a “last resort mode” and those who have the choice of alternative modes
exercise that choice. Whilst being critical of the present way the bus industry operates, this
commentary does not ignore the impact of congestion and general traffic conditions to the
reliability and regularity of bus services. A wide integrated approach to transportation policy
Page 14