CILT's work on innovations at bus stops has featured before in Transition1). Four of the five case study schemes being considered in CILT's survey (Birmingham, Liverpool, Northampton and Norwich) involve Bus Quality Partnerships - the exception (up until now) is London. Bus Quality Partnerships (B.Q.P.s) are agreements, principally between local authorities and bus operators, radically to enhance bus services on particular corridors.
The provision of truly accessible buses and stops is a complex matter. Whilst any improvement is positive, the absolute level of quality of access in a given scheme depends upon the local situation, local expectations and local partnership politics.
Some form of agreement about quality is essential to the proper integration of facilities and the co-ordination of implementation to common standards and deadlines, especially where there are several agencies involved in providing accessible routes. This is particularly true in London, where there are two departments of London Transport, multiple Borough highway authorities, the Traffic Director for London, multiple operators and two police forces likely to be involved, as well as such parties as frontagers and users. The situation is about to change with the introduction of the Greater London Authority, but it is unlikely to become less complicated. On the other hand, London does have the potential advantage of its bus routes being allocated by tender, so avoiding the uncertainties of the deregulated environment.
In London, provision of bus stop enhancement has been piecemeal. However, there are encouraging developments. London Transport Buses now has a "Whole Route Corridors" bus priority initiative 2, initially for six routes, and a B.Q.P. has recently been signed by L.T. and the Borough of Islington.
In Norwich, Eastern Counties' Commercial Director, Mike Payne (personal communication), emphasises the importance of a formal agreement in the B.Q.P. to ensure delivery to the agreed time-scale. The formal agreement is good for all concerned as it is a commitment that has to be given priority.
A B.Q.P. agreement commits all parties to certain provision, whether that is accessible bus stops and bus stop clearways, parking enforcement, appropriate vehicles, trained drivers or guaranteed service levels. But it is not only the provision of facilities and the structure of the service which are important. There has to be an on-going and thorough-going commitment to the effectiveness of the scheme. A few, by no means exhaustive, examples of on-going concerns follow.
Such management issues as these need to feature in B.Q.P. agreements. The case studies 1 show a clear need for co-operation and commonality of purpose between all those involved in the planning and operation of highway facilities. It is also clear that the best arrangements, under current legislation, exist where the local authority has a specialised public transport rôle (and expertise) and already has some power, usually in the form of setting contracts for bus services. This usually means the involvement of a passenger transport authority, such as Centro (West Midlands) or Merseytravel. It appears that, although it has more power, operating with an all-tendered route network, London Transport does not exercise its power as much as it could to ensure quality in operator performance.
In conclusion, it can be said that Bus Quality Partnerships are very useful tools in the provision of an accessible bus system, but depend upon the following:
The Government now proposes 3 to introduce Quality Contracts, whereby local authorities will be able to stipulate legally enforceable standards for the quality of bus routes within partnerships and for using facilities provided by the authority. These would certainly provide for the first of these factors, but the detail would still depend upon the third, and effectiveness upon the second.
[If you have come to this point by following a reference link from within the text, simply click on your 'return' button to go back to your place in the article.]
This article is based upon a paper given to a conference on 'Bus Quality Partnerships and Quality Contracts' at Aston University on 27th April 1999. The full paper can be obtained from CILT, but the only additional information is that which is duplicated in 1.