Tell SPT to scrap BSIPs & fast-track public control

We have had these ‘partnerships’ in Scotland since the Transport Act 2001, and they have completely failed to deliver positive change.

The franchising powers in the Transport Act 2019 offer SPT a once-in-a-generation opportunity to end the chaos caused by bus deregulation and bring our bus network back into public control.

It is only by taking this approach that we can deliver a fully-integrated and coherent network across bus, Subway, rail and ferries; we can reconnect isolated communities, cut and cap fares and deliver one simple affordable ticket across all transport modes.

This is why many regional transport authorities in the north of England are now moving ahead with bus franchising, including in: Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, West Yorkshire and South Yorkshire.

They know it is the only way to deliver the transformational change to our public transport system needed to address poverty and inequality and meet pressing climate targets.

If SPT does not follow their lead – and focus all resources on fast-tracking franchising – we will fall even further behind.

But SPT also has an advantage over the English city regions, in that it has the additional power to set up a new publicly-owned operator for Strathclyde (this power is not available in England).

A BSIP would severely delay – and potentially sabotage altogether – plans for franchising and municipal ownership, locking us into the failing deregulated system for years to come.

There is a huge amount of evidence (including in Centre for Cities’ most recent ‘Miles better’ report) that no partnership model, no matter how it is framed (i.e. neither voluntary partnerships nor statutory BSIPs), can deliver the transformational change to our public transport system that we need.

A BSIP would simply maintain the failing status quo that has been highlighted so well in SPT’s Case for Change. This fact was put most succinctly by the former UN Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty & Human Rights, Professor Philip Alston, when he wrote in his 2021 report into the UK bus sector, “It is time partnerships are recognised as a tried-and-failed approach that should be retired in favour of actual regulation of public transport.” (p.33)

This is why none of the English city regions currently pursuing bus franchising (Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Region, West Yorkshire and South Yorkshire), first entered into a statutory ‘Enhanced Partnership’ (the English equivalent to a BSIP) with bus companies before or whilst developing their franchising frameworks.

If SPT was to take this misguided approach it would be a costly waste of time which would only delay even further – and potentially sabotage altogether – the complex, but essential process of taking the bus network back into public control through franchising.

Systra’s research shows that it could take 1-2 years and cost £1.5 million to establish a BSIP, and cost £40-60 million annually to run. This is money which would be much better invested in accelerating the franchising process.

Any proposal to enter into a BSIP also has to be put out to another full statutory public consultation – at which point it will face fierce public opposition for all the reasons described above. This will just lead to further delays.

If, despite this public opposition, the BSIP is still signed, it can then only be “varied or revoked subject to agreement from operators” – something the private bus companies will never agree to as all they care about is maximising their profits in the deregulated system. It is therefore essential the BSIP is avoided at all costs.

There is no financial incentive for entering into a BSIP, as Transport Scotland have confirmed that funding from the ‘Bus Partnership Fund’ for bus priority measures can still be accessed if SPT is working towards franchising or municipal ownership (if and when this Fund is ‘unpaused’).

The whole aim of bus reform should be to reduce fragmentation and deliver a coherent and joined up service across the region. It would therefore not be sensible to set up multiple new operators using this power.

I want SPT to set up one new publicly-owned bus company for Strathclyde, co-owned by the region’s 12 local authorities through SPT, which in the future has the potential to offer us the same great quality of service as Edinburgh’s successful and affordable Lothian Buses.

I’m aware that this cannot be done overnight, but the process can begin immediately with SPT setting up the new public operator to start taking over subsidised services across the region.

As Highland Council has shown with its pilot scheme launched in January 2023 (saving £1.4 million a year across just 10 previously contracted-out routes), this is a much more cost effective way of providing these services in a deregulated system. It would also give SPT the opportunity to build up experience and capacity running bus services while the franchising framework is being developed, so that the new publicly-owned operator is in a position to bid for contracts when they are ready.

Using this approach (not available in England), SPT has a distinct advantage over the English city regions currently pursuing franchising to deliver it in a much more cost-effective way in the longer-term:

Firstly, because it will ensure that there is always a public sector benchmark to check that private operators are not tendering over the odds for contracts.

And secondly, because SPT can also directly award contracts to the new public operator cutting the costs of managing the franchising process.

This petition calls on SPT to take forward the powers for franchising and to set up a new publicly-owned operator for Strathclyde in tandem, as soon as is practicably possible.

The petition explicitly demands that SPT “rejects the idea of entering into a so-called ‘Bus Service Improvement Partnership’ with the private operators which would simply maintain the status quo”. It is therefore vital that this demand is listened to and that the proposal to sign a BSIP is scrapped.