Competitive tendering - bus

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

4th September 2014

Fears bus costs will explode if network not fixed

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers calls for bipartisan support of bus reform and bus contracting.

We seek a bipartisan guarantee from all parties: whoever comes into office next election, the bus network will be reformed from the ground up, like Auckland NZ is now doing and services opened to external competition. No ifs, no buts. If the bus network is not fixed, we fear fares will be massively raised again.

The previous 15% and 20% cost explosions engulfed some of the most vulnerable and needy in the community including minimum wage workers, refugees, the unemployed and those receiving Centrelink payments. High cost fares in SEQ continue to punish these people. It was a major contributor to the previous administration losing office. Will we see the same cycle of failure repeated for a second time? We hope not.

Failure to reform the bus network in 2013 meant that Hi-frequency services to Yeronga, the Centenary Suburbs, Albany Creek and improvements to Bulimba were not implemented.  Residents in these areas are now paying more for nothing, and in some cases, paying more for less.

While BCC councillors may object to private operators, the fact is they have a fleet of 19 privatised CityCats floating in the Brisbane river.* The private operator does a superb job running public transport in the inner city, for example, servicing West End. BCC's own council meeting minutes reveal BCC contracting with five private bus companies to run special event bus services. In addition, we have video showing BCC using a private bus company, Park Ridge Transit, to do some of their 140 BUZ services.

RAIL Back on Track calls for a guarantee from all parties that unaffordable fare rises are off the table and bipartisan support for bus contracting and wholesale bus reform. Only genuine reform of rail and bus networks, together with fare reform will guarantee abundant and low cost public transport for all and a reverse of falling patronage and lead to a better fare-box with less subsidy.

We look forward to the response from leaders of both the ALP and LNP affirming this.

Best wishes,
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration RAIL Back On Track

References

* These services are operated by BCC-privatised contract, to private multinational corporation TransDevTSL (Veolia).

[techblitz]

You can have low fares and a bus review or high fares and no bus review. You cannot have low fares and no bus review.

indeed...

Milton Dick should come clean and tell us whether he as 20% fare increases in the pipeline.

the only "coming clean" milton will do is that he will fight to retain/increase current services around inala/richlands...whilst also protecting that inala - cbd route.
Along with his counterpart anastacia...they will a force to be reckoned with come qldvotes. Milton seems to get a lot of mentions in the media of late...

[dancingmongoose]

Can't see how it's a bad thing, most of us have no experience in this regard either and we make better decisions than the ones in office.

[James]

the only "coming clean" milton will do is that he will fight to retain/increase current services around inala/richlands...whilst also protecting that inala - cbd route.
Along with his counterpart anastacia...they will a force to be reckoned with come qldvotes. Milton seems to get a lot of mentions in the media of late...

I really doubt Milton the Dick will be a "force to be reckoned with". The Richlands/Inala changes had to happen, whether he liked it or not. They were bare-bones obvious changes of routes which were first up on the chopping block.

All he and his colleagues are is a bunch of whingers who do not understand the basics of public transport, and think shuttling grannies around everywhere is the sole domain of PT. Well news for all sides of politics: if you design a public transport network to act like a granny public transport service, guess who will be the only people to use it? ....grannies!

Failure to reform the bus network will only further engulf the BCC bus network and cause the further degradation of service off the BUZ network in order to allow the Holy Family of Inala high-frequency bus service, while people who choose to live close to the CBD (Bulimba, Ascot, Yeronga and parts of the inner west) languish with service so bad, it may actually be faster to walk to one's final destination than catch a bus. I am not joking.

[techblitz]

In terms of inala..its the other one i would be worried about.....she also has a knack for getting petitions signed by the elderly down at the plaza

[#Metro]

I really doubt Milton the Dick will be a "force to be reckoned with". The Richlands/Inala changes had to happen, whether he liked it or not. They were bare-bones obvious changes of routes which were first up on the chopping block.

All he and his colleagues are is a bunch of whingers who do not understand the basics of public transport, and think shuttling grannies around everywhere is the sole domain of PT. Well news for all sides of politics: if you design a public transport network to act like a granny public transport service, guess who will be the only people to use it? ....grannies!

Failure to reform the bus network will only further engulf the BCC bus network and cause the further degradation of service off the BUZ network in order to allow the Holy Family of Inala high-frequency bus service, while people who choose to live close to the CBD (Bulimba, Ascot, Yeronga and parts of the inner west) languish with service so bad, it may actually be faster to walk to one's final destination than catch a bus. I am not joking.

It is rather simple, but might be pricey to do, but possible. Substitute it out.

1. Introduce the feeder bus service at full frequency in direct competition with the current bus route. Just run the new route straight over the top of the current one.

2. The internal competition will then set about cannibalising patronage, so that patronage will fall dramatically on the BUZ 100 (as we have seen with Maroon Glider vs BUZ 385, neither were in the top 10).

3. BUZ the 125 so that the competition intensifies, hardly anyone catching the BUZ 100 now

4. Now that most people are using the new services, do a graph showing the massive decline in BUZ 100 patronage, and then make the changes.

[SurfRail]

Or they could just grow a pair and do it.

[ozbob]

Or they could just grow a pair and do it.

+ 1

[techblitz]

It is rather simple, but might be pricey to do, but possible. Substitute it out.

1. Introduce the feeder bus service at full frequency in direct competition with the current bus route. Just run the new route straight over the top of the current one.

2. The internal competition will then set about cannibalising patronage, so that patronage will fall dramatically on the BUZ 100 (as we have seen with Maroon Glider vs BUZ 385, neither were in the top 10).

3. BUZ the 125 so that the competition intensifies, hardly anyone catching the BUZ 100 now

4. Now that most people are using the new services, do a graph showing the massive decline in BUZ 100 patronage, and then make the changes.

interesting tactic there LD......cannabilsation would be a good angle to get around the inala potholes....well at least your adknowledging that it will be difficult...
just on that cannibalisation
Ive compared the 2010/2104 lists

Biggest movers.(.all routes however enjoying good loads at peak)
333 number 1 down to  13  <<< 340/330 buz
385 into oblivion....number 10 to out of top 20  <<<< maroon glider
200 buz  number 5 to 17  <<< 222/209 etc

= bigtime cannibalisation in the off/counter peaks

[#Metro]

Or they could just grow a pair and do it.

No. This approach is disrespectful and helps no one. There are real psychological / emotional reasons why the substitution approach should be taken : loss aversion, status quo bias, and 'bigger is better' (i.e. more routes = better, when really it is the exact opposite). The current retention of buses within BCC is an example of Endowment effect.

Substitution permits incontrovertible physical proof to be demonstrated when people voluntarily shift between services. In effect, you get them to vote with their feet.

Status quo bias is a cognitive bias; a preference for the current state of affairs. The current baseline (or status quo) is taken as a reference point, and any change from that baseline is perceived as a loss.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_quo_bias

In economics and decision theory, loss aversion refers to people's tendency to strongly prefer avoiding losses to acquiring gains. Some studies suggest that losses are twice as powerful, psychologically, as gains.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion

In behavioral economics, the endowment effect (also known as divestiture aversion) is the hypothesis that people ascribe more value to things merely because they own them.[1] This is illustrated by the observation that people will tend to pay more to retain something they own than to obtain something owned by someone else—even when there is no cause for attachment, or even if the item was only obtained minutes ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endowment_effect


The bus review suffers from all of these effects, the reality of this must be accepted and thought put into the response.

[SurfRail]

Don't care.  Network planning isn't democratic.

If it's good enough for the other regions on the network its good enough for Brisbane.

This tactic has also failed spectacularly (eg running 369 at high frequency without changing the 375), so it surprises me you would think of suggesting it.

[#Metro]

Don't care.  Network planning isn't democratic.

If it's good enough for the other regions on the network its good enough for Brisbane.

This tactic has also failed spectacularly (eg running 369 at high frequency without changing the 375), so it surprises me you would think of suggesting it.

Nobody was going to remove the 375, it is one of the surviving 'tram' routes from 1969, almost completely unchanged even today. I personally caught buses in this corridor and the 375 would appear and vacuum up the pax 5 minutes before the 369 came past.

On the other hand, as has been demonstrated, the principle works, with both the Maroon Glider and 385 annihilating one another resulting in NEITHER in the top 10. Techblitz has detailed other examples on where patronage has taken a tumble because twice the buses are now carrying half the pax each.

Perhaps the largest evidence against your approach is the failure of the bus review.

[SurfRail]

The approach you have suggested would never happen in the current environment anyway so why not just change the environment to something more amenable to good planning?

[techblitz]

so why not just change the environment to something more amenable to good planning?

Its what he wants foremost SR...he has been the most vocal one on here in that regard...the difference is that he also realises people do suffer from loss aversion or whatever it is...probably hates that its happening with the current network....but at least he adknowledges that it wont go away....and sometimes a chess move or powerplay is required to get those people onboard...all angles have to be looked at.....he gets my respect for his alternative suggestions around my local area of salisbury station and granard rd....

Network planning isn't democratic.

So it should always be the planners way or the highway? People should not he allowed to put in objections?

[James]

I really doubt Milton the Dick will be a "force to be reckoned with". The Richlands/Inala changes had to happen, whether he liked it or not. They were bare-bones obvious changes of routes which were first up on the chopping block.

All he and his colleagues are is a bunch of whingers who do not understand the basics of public transport, and think shuttling grannies around everywhere is the sole domain of PT. Well news for all sides of politics: if you design a public transport network to act like a granny public transport service, guess who will be the only people to use it? ....grannies!

Failure to reform the bus network will only further engulf the BCC bus network and cause the further degradation of service off the BUZ network in order to allow the Holy Family of Inala high-frequency bus service, while people who choose to live close to the CBD (Bulimba, Ascot, Yeronga and parts of the inner west) languish with service so bad, it may actually be faster to walk to one's final destination than catch a bus. I am not joking.

It is rather simple, but might be pricey to do, but possible. Substitute it out.

1. Introduce the feeder bus service at full frequency in direct competition with the current bus route. Just run the new route straight over the top of the current one.

2. The internal competition will then set about cannibalising patronage, so that patronage will fall dramatically on the BUZ 100 (as we have seen with Maroon Glider vs BUZ 385, neither were in the top 10).

3. BUZ the 125 so that the competition intensifies, hardly anyone catching the BUZ 100 now

4. Now that most people are using the new services, do a graph showing the massive decline in BUZ 100 patronage, and then make the changes.

I see an issue with #1, in that the feeder is generally less attractive than the direct service. Hence, the direct service will either carry air or slightly stimulate patronage (remembering the feeder, by transfer, serves Indooroopilly, far more significant than the Woolies at Annerley or Centro Buranda, especially to people living in Forest Lake).

This would be expensive, but 4tph at Richlands + 460 feeder at 4bph may very well work better in cannibalising 100 BUZ patronage in Forest Lake than a 100 FUZ. In part because the 460 for people in this area is a lot faster (and Inala/Forest Lake are two rather distinct areas).

#3 is a lot more sound. I think BUZing the 125 and turning it into a Cityxpress would be the way forward, and carefully timetabled so that the 100 BUZ will have its pax vacuumed up by the 125, and Ipswich Rd has much stronger BUZ demand than Inala/Forest Lake (as was evident by the high level of service provided by buses even 15-20 years ago).

I think in looking at this, we need to remember the reason why 100 BUZ is being canned. It isn't because we hate grannies, it is because the routes are improperly profiled. Inala/Forest Lake and inner Ipswich Rd are made up of two very different demographics and two very different PT user profiles. Hence, to have the two routes joined together is going to result in wasted money.

In the end, the best outcome for the people of Brisbane is to reduce 100 BUZ frequency significantly and replace with 125 BUZ and 100 FUZ. It isn't about being mean, it is about growing a pair and having the political courage to reverse what was a mistake in network planning.

[SurfRail]

So it should always be the planners way or the highway? People should not he allowed to put in objections?

Why do people think their objections are determinative of the outcome?  It's not a right of veto.

I will lay this out for you as clearly as possible.

- BT is not cost-effective.
- Dollars spent on BT which do not need to be are dollars which are not spent elsewhere.  It doesn't work in reverse because BT's needs are always accommodated.
- When there are significant pockets of Brisbane City where public transport is provided and stops after 3pm, I will start having sympathy for sooks who might have to walk another 100m to their stop where they can get a bus until midnight.

[techblitz]

Ideas..all ideas...whether they eventuate remains to be seen..some people hinge their hopes on councellors/rbtu/translink/commuters growing a set....good luck with that...seriously....
On that note...currently on a "sorry bus full" extended axle 3.20pm 130 after southbank....not the first ive seen around this time...
Some of these can seriously be diverted straight to griffith from queen st they are that full...

[techblitz]

I think in looking at this, we need to remember the reason why 100 BUZ is being canned. It isn't because we hate grannies, it is because the routes are improperly profiled. Inala/Forest Lake and inner Ipswich Rd are made up of two very different demographics and two very different PT user profiles. Hence, to have the two routes joined together is going to result in wasted money.

Correct on the demographics standpoint...2 completely different subs...
Translink proposed the oxley feeder to deal with the off-peak wastage of the 100 buz to better serve mt ommaney.......but also retaining a whatever frequency was planned 100 replacement to serve the p.a hospital directly from inala,forest lake......CROSSTOWN.....without having to send them there via roma st.
Those are the  main reasons why TL came up with what they did....

[ozbob]

Media release 11th September 2014



Election 2015: More Buses More Often With Bus Reform

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers calls for bipartisan support of bus reform and bus contracting.

The options are simple: fix up the bus and rail networks and be able to offer low fares and high quality services, or do nothing and announce the next 15% or 20% cost explosion. Voters in Albany Creek, Centenary Suburbs, Bulimba and Yeronga particularly want the problems fixed.

Albany Creek

Extra Albany Creek 359 services can be put on by running the bus into Enoggera Rail Station Interchange. Feeder-isation will allow 6 new inbound and new 6 outbound 359 services to be created at virtually zero cost. Topping this up with extra funding from $30 million in carbon tax abolition savings will permit doubling of bus frequency to Albany Creek, from hourly to half hourly. As patronage grows, this could be further increased to a BUZ service every 15 minutes, all day. Introducing a connection will speed up journeys because the waiting time component (up to 60 minutes wait) will be massively reduced.

Bulimba

Bulimba is grossly under-serviced compared to similar inner city suburbs. For example, Bulimba's 230 bus runs approximately 60 services per day. Compare this to West End BUZ 199 which runs approximately 200 services per day. West End residents are getting about three times more service, which explains why Bulimba residents suffer chronic car parking congestion issues.

A high frequency BulimbaGlider, a concept that BCC explicitly rejected, can be introduced by amalgamating the 230, 235, 231 and 236 in the area into a single high frequency BulimbaGlider. Using top-up funding from $30 million in carbon tax abolition savings would permit a high frequency bus connection to Morningside station. Starting this service at Roma Street and ending it at Morningside train station will solve the rail access problem at both ends.

Centenary Suburbs

Route 454 would be renumbered to BUZ 400 and altered to run via Yallambee Road. Using $30 million in carbon tax abolition savings, the service would be extended to Darra Rail Station opening frequent access to one stop express trains and Ipswich/Springfield services.

Yeronga

Yeronga is Brisbane's worst public transport black hole. Proposals to introduce high frequency bus services into Yeronga were rejected when BCC rejected the 2013 bus review. Again, using top up funding from the $30 million in carbon tax abolition savings, BUZ 196 can be extended via Yeronga Rail Station solving the rail access problem and also providing direct high frequency buses to the Brisbane CBD.

These changes will fill in the gaps in the bus network and set the stage for recasting the bus network.

RAIL Back on Track calls for all parties to affirm bipartisan support for bus contracting and wholesale bus reform. Only genuine reform of rail and bus networks, together with fare reform will guarantee abundant and low cost public transport for all.

References:

1. Map of proposed routes (conceptual) http://tiny.cc/BUZit

2. Current BCC Bus Network: Check Your Bus Map http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10897.0

3. Calls for Bulimba glider rejected http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/calls-for-bulimba-glider-rejected-20120201-1qtbt.html

4. Lobby Group Calls For Support on Bus Reforms, Published Queensland Times Newspaper, 06 September 2014 http://backontrack.org/docs/qt/qt_6sep14_p51.jpg

5. Comparison Service totals used in the comparison were calculated by adding the inbound and outbound trips together, and rounding. Given that 235 services attract high patronage despite their low frequency, we believe running high frequency service along Thynne Road is justified. High frequency trains service Morningside station as of January 2014.

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

11th September 2014

Bus Reform: What's 'The Prize' Lord Mayor?

Greetings,

It is now possible to observe the catastrophic effects of BCC's rejection of the 2013 TransLink Bus Review.

Passengers have made an exodus from Brisbane Transport. This is due to the massive 15% and 20% cost explosions. While Brisbane City Council does not set fares, it does set bus supplier costs, and obviously, higher supplier costs equals higher fares.

RAIL Back on Track is a strong supporter of genuine bus and rail reform and fare reform to reverse this catastrophe. In our opinion, the loss of passengers from the public transport network is a threat to bus staff job security. If nobody is catching buses, we predict the BCC's next steps will be another round of service cuts, and redundancies, even under public operation. Job security isn't guaranteed by government ownership, it is guaranteed by strong and growing patronage. If you lose customers, you eventually lose staff.

We agree with Cr Milton Dick when he says' "The Brisbane [City Council] bus review and changes to bus routes and timetabling has made it harder for commuters to catch public transport because there are fewer and less frequent services available throughout the city," he said.'

Of course; Brisbane City Councillors were at the forefront of rejecting TransLink's 2013 plan for high frequency services to Yeronga, Centenary, Albany Creek and improvements to Bulimba. When BCC did their own review, it was even worse, putting on a grand total of ZERO new BUZ services. This is why we support public transport being removed from BCC's direct control.

BCC needs to take responsibility for its fair share of the drop in patronage.

The Lord Mayor at the time described BCC's defeat of bus reform as a 'win for passengers'. Passengers now hit with a combination of massive cost explosions and fewer services are now rightly asking 'what did we win, Lord Mayor?'

RAIL Back on Track calls for all parties to affirm bipartisan support for bus contracting and wholesale bus reform. Only genuine reform of rail and bus networks, together with fare reform will guarantee abundant and low cost public transport for all.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

References:

Lobby Group Calls For Support on Bus Reforms, Published Queensland Times Newspaper, 06 September 2014 http://backontrack.org/docs/qt/qt_6sep14_p51.jpg

Current BCC Bus Network: Check Your Bus Map http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10897.0

Brisbane commuters abandon buses, choose cars instead http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/brisbane-commuters-abandon-buses-choose-cars-instead-20140911-10fqak.html

Media release 11th September 2014



Election 2015: More Buses More Often With Bus Reform

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers calls for bipartisan support of bus reform and bus contracting.

The options are simple: fix up the bus and rail networks and be able to offer low fares and high quality services, or do nothing and announce the next 15% or 20% cost explosion. Voters in Albany Creek, Centenary Suburbs, Bulimba and Yeronga particularly want the problems fixed.

Albany Creek

Extra Albany Creek 359 services can be put on by running the bus into Enoggera Rail Station Interchange. Feeder-isation will allow 6 new inbound and new 6 outbound 359 services to be created at virtually zero cost. Topping this up with extra funding from $30 million in carbon tax abolition savings will permit doubling of bus frequency to Albany Creek, from hourly to half hourly. As patronage grows, this could be further increased to a BUZ service every 15 minutes, all day. Introducing a connection will speed up journeys because the waiting time component (up to 60 minutes wait) will be massively reduced.

Bulimba

Bulimba is grossly under-serviced compared to similar inner city suburbs. For example, Bulimba's 230 bus runs approximately 60 services per day. Compare this to West End BUZ 199 which runs approximately 200 services per day. West End residents are getting about three times more service, which explains why Bulimba residents suffer chronic car parking congestion issues.

A high frequency BulimbaGlider, a concept that BCC explicitly rejected, can be introduced by amalgamating the 230, 235, 231 and 236 in the area into a single high frequency BulimbaGlider. Using top-up funding from $30 million in carbon tax abolition savings would permit a high frequency bus connection to Morningside station. Starting this service at Roma Street and ending it at Morningside train station will solve the rail access problem at both ends.

Centenary Suburbs

Route 454 would be renumbered to BUZ 400 and altered to run via Yallambee Road. Using $30 million in carbon tax abolition savings, the service would be extended to Darra Rail Station opening frequent access to one stop express trains and Ipswich/Springfield services.

Yeronga

Yeronga is Brisbane's worst public transport black hole. Proposals to introduce high frequency bus services into Yeronga were rejected when BCC rejected the 2013 bus review. Again, using top up funding from the $30 million in carbon tax abolition savings, BUZ 196 can be extended via Yeronga Rail Station solving the rail access problem and also providing direct high frequency buses to the Brisbane CBD.

These changes will fill in the gaps in the bus network and set the stage for recasting the bus network.

RAIL Back on Track calls for all parties to affirm bipartisan support for bus contracting and wholesale bus reform. Only genuine reform of rail and bus networks, together with fare reform will guarantee abundant and low cost public transport for all.

References:

1. Map of proposed routes (conceptual) http://tiny.cc/BUZit

2. Current BCC Bus Network: Check Your Bus Map http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10897.0

3. Calls for Bulimba glider rejected http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/calls-for-bulimba-glider-rejected-20120201-1qtbt.html

4. Lobby Group Calls For Support on Bus Reforms, Published Queensland Times Newspaper, 06 September 2014 http://backontrack.org/docs/qt/qt_6sep14_p51.jpg

5. Comparison Service totals used in the comparison were calculated by adding the inbound and outbound trips together, and rounding. Given that 235 services attract high patronage despite their low frequency, we believe running high frequency service along Thynne Road is justified. High frequency trains service Morningside station as of January 2014.

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[ozbob]

Letter to the editor Queensland Times published 15th September 2014 page 17

Drop in passengers a threat to transport jobs

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

28th September 2014

Can Brisbane's Buses be saved?

Greetings,

Interesting snippet in today's Sunday Mail.  Mr Peter Cameron is particularly well informed I have noted.

Sunday Mail 28th September 2014 page 15.



Let's examine briefly how this has come about.  TransLink set about reforming the bus network for SEQ, including Brisbane in 2012/13.  BCC refused to allow Brisbane Transport to cooperate fully with TransLink in the preparation of the bus review.  See page 79 of this RTI at http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/aboutus/rti/disclog/rti13501772.pdf

As a direct result of this, and lack of political leadership to support TransLink,  the proposed bus review changes for Brisbane were not proceeded with.  The changes proposed for the rest of SEQ bus network have largely gone ahead, except where BCC's intransigence compromised some of the proposed improvements.  Regions outside SEQ have also had some service cuts in hours of operation and frequency to prop up the failing Brisbane bus network.  Hardly equitable I would suggest.

Brisbane Transport has the ability to deliver an improved network for Brisbane, particularly in full cooperation with TransLink and the rest of the bus network in SEQ and other operators. This should be allowed to occur now.

Brisbane City Council should eat some humble pie.  Lets move ahead with the original proposals as put together by TransLink in 2013.  This will then put in place a much improved network, which will drive significant passenger numbers, probably around 20 million a year as more parts of Brisbane will have direct access to frequent and connected bus routes, and rail is better supported with connections and feeder buses. This will then remove the need for Brisbane Transport to be sacrificed on the alter of 'competitive tenders'.

There will be a better fare box which in turn allows for proper reform of the fare system.

There you have it.  A path to rescue public transport in SEQ, which at present is in a crisis.  No-brainer really.

Have a nice day.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[ozbob]

Media release 11 August 2013 re-released 6 February 2014 re-released 29 September 2014



SEQ: Bus review shambles confirmed by RTI

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers is calling on the Brisbane Lord Mayor to explain why Brisbane Transport's network planners were instructed not to attend network planning sessions with Translink staff as part of TransLink's review of the entire SEQ bus network.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"A recent RTI request by the State Opposition has revealed a TMR briefing note on the review which states that under instruction, Brisbane Transport declined to attend strategic network planning sessions with Translink on at least 6 separate occasions (1)."

"We believe the uninformed political interference from BCC Councillors is the main reason for the Minister for Transport's announcement  on the back down and lack of support for TransLink when he said that no changes would be made to Brisbane Transport routes without approval of the council. Is this putting political mates before the real community need?  Is this weak leadership?  Certainly is!"

"Can the Lord Mayor explain why he and his council blocked TransLink from reviewing the network they are charged with organising, and instead had their own insufficient review done which has led to a continuation of the waste and failure the review was meant to help reduce?"

"Further more, can the Minister for Transport also explain why the situation was allowed to arise in the first place, and why more wasn't done to get BCC and Brisbane Transport involved in the review from the start, rather than the haphazard and mismatched mediocre series of reviews that has now occurred?"

"It is the view of our members that the lack of a proper review of the Brisbane Transport network is leading to ongoing waste and duplication across the public transport network which is limiting patronage growth and the expansion of public transport services across SEQ."

"It is time for Premier to step into this festering mess and sort it.  As the Premier indicated in 2010 when Lord Mayor of Brisbane, in the interests of all citizens the State Government needs to run the buses to stop the failure and position public transport in Brisbane and SEQ for a better future, free from petty self interest from Brisbane Councillors."

Reference:

1.  RTI  http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/aboutus/rti/disclog/rti13501772.pdf

2.  Lord Mayor Campbell Newman wants State Government to run buses
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/campbell-newman-wants-state-government-to-run-buses/story-e6freoof-1225839337936

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Sent to all outlets:

28th September 2014

Can Brisbane's Buses be saved?

Greetings,

Interesting snippet in today's Sunday Mail.  Mr Peter Cameron is particularly well informed I have noted.

Sunday Mail 28th September 2014 page 15.



Let's examine briefly how this has come about.  TransLink set about reforming the bus network for SEQ, including Brisbane in 2012/13.  BCC refused to allow Brisbane Transport to cooperate fully with TransLink in the preparation of the bus review.  See page 79 of this RTI at http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/aboutus/rti/disclog/rti13501772.pdf

As a direct result of this, and lack of political leadership to support TransLink,  the proposed bus review changes for Brisbane were not proceeded with.  The changes proposed for the rest of SEQ bus network have largely gone ahead, except where BCC's intransigence compromised some of the proposed improvements.  Regions outside SEQ have also had some service cuts in hours of operation and frequency to prop up the failing Brisbane bus network.  Hardly equitable I would suggest.

Brisbane Transport has the ability to deliver an improved network for Brisbane, particularly in full cooperation with TransLink and the rest of the bus network in SEQ and other operators. This should be allowed to occur now.

Brisbane City Council should eat some humble pie.  Lets move ahead with the original proposals as put together by TransLink in 2013.  This will then put in place a much improved network, which will drive significant passenger numbers, probably around 20 million a year as more parts of Brisbane will have direct access to frequent and connected bus routes, and rail is better supported with connections and feeder buses. This will then remove the need for Brisbane Transport to be sacrificed on the alter of 'competitive tenders'.

There will be a better fare box which in turn allows for proper reform of the fare system.

There you have it.  A path to rescue public transport in SEQ, which at present is in a crisis.  No-brainer really.

Have a nice day.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[ozbob]

Twitter

Lyall Mercer ‏@LyallMercer 4m

Qld Bus industry Council chair tells conference that all stakeholders incl bus operators & union oppose state gov tender policy #qldpol

=============

Twitter

Lyall Mercer ‏@LyallMercer 29m

Qld Bus industry conference today - concerns new State Gov tender process will see multinationals taking over local bus routes #qldpol

[ozbob]

Looks like a hot issue for #qldvotes ... 

[ozbob]

Amazing mess all of this now.  QLD Bus Industry off side, internal duplicitous politics between state and council, morale shot at BT.

If the so called Minister for Transport had done the right thing and stood up for TransLink and got council involved, all would be well.

Opposition unable to engage meaningful debate either ..  Brisbane, you are f u k e d!

#qldvotes cannot come fast enough ...

[#Metro]

This is to be expected. Industry doesn't want the competition and neither does the union. CityCats have been run by a 'overseas multinational' Veolia for many years now. Gold Coast Light Rail is also part owned by French company Keolis which has bus and tram operations all over Europe, and nobody seems to think Australian companies operating overseas is a bad thing.

'Today, Transit Systems has announced the £21.3 million acquisition of three strategic London-based bus depots from FirstGroup plc.

Operating as Tower Transit as part of the Transport for London network, the company will operate approximately 400 double and single deck buses from depots at Westbourne Park, Lea Interchange and Atlas Road, transitioning 1500 employees.'

http://www.transitsystems.com.au/articles/315-australian-public-transport-innovator-acquires-first-international-fleet

[James]

Amazing mess all of this now.  QLD Bus Industry off side, internal duplicitous politics between state and council, morale shot at BT.

If the so called Minister for Transport had done the right thing and stood up for TransLink and got council involved, all would be well.

Opposition unable to engage meaningful debate either ..  Brisbane, you are f u k e d!

#qldvotes cannot come fast enough ...

If the Minister had forced the changes on BT, I believe we likely would have just seen a giant fight within the LNP and BCC doing all kinds of stuff to undermine the review (worse than what they were doing). I would not have put it beyond BCC (or BT) to take an 'our way or the highway' approach to things and pull ratepayer funding from BT if the changes went ahead. Regardless, I think things would have become very ugly very quickly... The division between trains and buses (formerly trams) is a division which is 100 years deep, and has applied regardless of who is in power.

To fix this century-long problem, it will take a lot of pain, political will power, and likely cause a lot of tears and cranky grannies. In the end, this is what happens when you have a network which has bus routes which have not been changed since the trams stopped running. In the end, I think putting BT out to tender is the only way to do it. Sometimes people need to be put off side to achieve real change for the greater good.

[ozbob]

BCC should have been actively involved in all stages of the review.  That way would have been much more supportive.   Simply hanging out TransLink to dry achieved little.  Steps should have been taken during the preparation 2012/13 to sort it.  It wasn't sorted.

Rhetoric from BCC has changed of late.  I think they are realising they have been snookered ...   

[#Metro]

Should have.

There were six separate occasions when TL approached BCC. BCC rejected on all six.
In addition to this, BCC ran its own review and had pretty much carte blanche to do whatever it pleased. They could have done a proper review with citywide consultation, a bit like how they do neighbourhood planning. They have all the resources already, and BCC already has a consultation and community engagement unit that could have handled the process very well. They could have engaged external transit consultants and had plenaries before council etc, like Auckland did.

They missed the bus, that's too bad. The had all the chances in the world, and even free reign to put things right by themselves when they gained control of the review.

Ultimately I see Brisbane ending up a bit like Perth. Three operators or so, all private working for the transit agency. There just isn't room for wildcat operators like BCC.

Why is it things that appear so effortless to do in overseas jurisdictions appear to be so hard in Queensland. Just do the job right from the start.

[ozbob]

There is very little confidence left for the 'transport power group' amongst the operators ... 
the mere mention of certain names sends people into ear steaming rage ..

There is much grief below the surface sheen of spin and selfies ...  just saying ...

[James]

As far as I'm concerned, Lapdog has it spot on.

BCC had the opportunity to directly rip off the good parts of the bus review (frequents into Yeronga, Northwest, Centenary) and fix the parts which were rotten (e.g. Moggill Rd to Kenmore, the St Lucia local non-solution, MaroonGlider etc.), but instead simply opted to gut the Waterworks Rd corridor, kill off weekend services of routes like the 468 and only trim the obvious waste routes (Saturday 402s, very early morning 104s).

The unions fought against the review. Brisbane City Council fought against the review. As far as I'm concerned, they've made their choices and now they need to deal with that. If putting BT out to tender and BCC losing control of BT and BT becoming the responsibility of some "evil multinational", so be it. At least they might actually care about running half-decent services, and running buses on Sundays.

[SurfRail]

I don't care if multinationals run our services.  Period.  They already do in the Redlands and on the Brisbane River.

Council's buses are all built on chassis imported from Europe and built with bodies which contain components built under licence from a Swiss company (and the bodybuilder is now owned by Brazilians).  The destination displays and multiplexing systems are Swedish.  Do we see Council buying from an Australian manufacturer (of which there is now basically only one)?  No - because the supplier won an open market TENDER.

QBIC is just as opposed to tendering as they were opposed to light rail.  It doesn't make them right.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

30th September 2014

Re: Can Brisbane's Buses be saved?

Greetings,

Seems to be a lot of grief from the Bus Industry National Conference at the Gold Coast.  Not unexpected.

Real shame Brisbane Transport was not directed to cooperate fully with TransLink in 2012/13.   The grief would have been largely avoided.

Weak political leadership costs the community dearly.   Reform is needed, and could have been achieved by now with competent political leadership, both at Council and State level.

Failed bus review, failed fare system, botched TTCC.  Patronage gone backwards. Band aid fare cuts, whilst system suffers fatal haemorrhages ...

Yes, it is public transport policy in SEQ!

Don't miss the bus!

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Media release 11 August 2013 re-released 6 February 2014 re-released 29 September 2014



SEQ: Bus review shambles confirmed by RTI

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers is calling on the Brisbane Lord Mayor to explain why Brisbane Transport's network planners were instructed not to attend network planning sessions with Translink staff as part of TransLink's review of the entire SEQ bus network.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"A recent RTI request by the State Opposition has revealed a TMR briefing note on the review which states that under instruction, Brisbane Transport declined to attend strategic network planning sessions with Translink on at least 6 separate occasions (1)."

"We believe the uninformed political interference from BCC Councillors is the main reason for the Minister for Transport's announcement  on the back down and lack of support for TransLink when he said that no changes would be made to Brisbane Transport routes without approval of the council. Is this putting political mates before the real community need?  Is this weak leadership?  Certainly is!"

"Can the Lord Mayor explain why he and his council blocked TransLink from reviewing the network they are charged with organising, and instead had their own insufficient review done which has led to a continuation of the waste and failure the review was meant to help reduce?"

"Further more, can the Minister for Transport also explain why the situation was allowed to arise in the first place, and why more wasn't done to get BCC and Brisbane Transport involved in the review from the start, rather than the haphazard and mismatched mediocre series of reviews that has now occurred?"

"It is the view of our members that the lack of a proper review of the Brisbane Transport network is leading to ongoing waste and duplication across the public transport network which is limiting patronage growth and the expansion of public transport services across SEQ."

"It is time for Premier to step into this festering mess and sort it.  As the Premier indicated in 2010 when Lord Mayor of Brisbane, in the interests of all citizens the State Government needs to run the buses to stop the failure and position public transport in Brisbane and SEQ for a better future, free from petty self interest from Brisbane Councillors."

Reference:

1.  RTI  http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/aboutus/rti/disclog/rti13501772.pdf

2.  Lord Mayor Campbell Newman wants State Government to run buses
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/campbell-newman-wants-state-government-to-run-buses/story-e6freoof-1225839337936

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Sent to all outlets:

28th September 2014

Can Brisbane's Buses be saved?

Greetings,

Interesting snippet in today's Sunday Mail.  Mr Peter Cameron is particularly well informed I have noted.

Sunday Mail 28th September 2014 page 15.



Let's examine briefly how this has come about.  TransLink set about reforming the bus network for SEQ, including Brisbane in 2012/13.  BCC refused to allow Brisbane Transport to cooperate fully with TransLink in the preparation of the bus review.  See page 79 of this RTI at http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/aboutus/rti/disclog/rti13501772.pdf

As a direct result of this, and lack of political leadership to support TransLink,  the proposed bus review changes for Brisbane were not proceeded with.  The changes proposed for the rest of SEQ bus network have largely gone ahead, except where BCC's intransigence compromised some of the proposed improvements.  Regions outside SEQ have also had some service cuts in hours of operation and frequency to prop up the failing Brisbane bus network.  Hardly equitable I would suggest.

Brisbane Transport has the ability to deliver an improved network for Brisbane, particularly in full cooperation with TransLink and the rest of the bus network in SEQ and other operators. This should be allowed to occur now.

Brisbane City Council should eat some humble pie.  Lets move ahead with the original proposals as put together by TransLink in 2013.  This will then put in place a much improved network, which will drive significant passenger numbers, probably around 20 million a year as more parts of Brisbane will have direct access to frequent and connected bus routes, and rail is better supported with connections and feeder buses. This will then remove the need for Brisbane Transport to be sacrificed on the alter of 'competitive tenders'.

There will be a better fare box which in turn allows for proper reform of the fare system.

There you have it.  A path to rescue public transport in SEQ, which at present is in a crisis.  No-brainer really.

Have a nice day.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[techblitz]

good ol facebook lays out all the BT issues for all to see..
apart from the ridiculous amount of late arriving buses......now seeing a spike in rude bus driver complaints...
doesn anyone care to retract those statments that translink were stupid/idiotical for opening a facebook page...i beleive there were a couple on here that did...you know who you are

[ozbob]

Letter to the editor Queensland Times published 1st October 2014 page 13

Transport grief could have been avoided

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

3rd October 2014

Re: Can Brisbane's Buses be saved?

Greetings,

Bonuses for the 'elite' in the bumbling bureaucracy.
( http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/top-bureaucrats-pocket-big-bonuses-20141001-10ov47.html )

TransLink has been decimated.  Struggling to achieve.  Look at the evidence.  A nightmare of missed connections between bus and rail.

Public transport in SEQ in a stalled patronage and failed fare system crisis.

Forgive me for being a little cynical.

Have a great day.  Don't miss the bus!

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Sent to all outlets:

30th September 2014

Re: Can Brisbane's Buses be saved?

Greetings,

Seems to be a lot of grief from the Bus Industry National Conference at the Gold Coast.  Not unexpected.

Real shame Brisbane Transport was not directed to cooperate fully with TransLink in 2012/13.   The grief would have been largely avoided.

Weak political leadership costs the community dearly.   Reform is needed, and could have been achieved by now with competent political leadership, both at Council and State level.

Failed bus review, failed fare system, botched TTCC.  Patronage gone backwards. Band aid fare cuts, whilst system suffers fatal haemorrhages ...

Yes, it is public transport policy in SEQ!

Don't miss the bus!

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Media release 11 August 2013 re-released 6 February 2014 re-released 29 September 2014



SEQ: Bus review shambles confirmed by RTI

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers is calling on the Brisbane Lord Mayor to explain why Brisbane Transport's network planners were instructed not to attend network planning sessions with Translink staff as part of TransLink's review of the entire SEQ bus network.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"A recent RTI request by the State Opposition has revealed a TMR briefing note on the review which states that under instruction, Brisbane Transport declined to attend strategic network planning sessions with Translink on at least 6 separate occasions (1)."

"We believe the uninformed political interference from BCC Councillors is the main reason for the Minister for Transport's announcement  on the back down and lack of support for TransLink when he said that no changes would be made to Brisbane Transport routes without approval of the council. Is this putting political mates before the real community need?  Is this weak leadership?  Certainly is!"

"Can the Lord Mayor explain why he and his council blocked TransLink from reviewing the network they are charged with organising, and instead had their own insufficient review done which has led to a continuation of the waste and failure the review was meant to help reduce?"

"Further more, can the Minister for Transport also explain why the situation was allowed to arise in the first place, and why more wasn't done to get BCC and Brisbane Transport involved in the review from the start, rather than the haphazard and mismatched mediocre series of reviews that has now occurred?"

"It is the view of our members that the lack of a proper review of the Brisbane Transport network is leading to ongoing waste and duplication across the public transport network which is limiting patronage growth and the expansion of public transport services across SEQ."

"It is time for Premier to step into this festering mess and sort it.  As the Premier indicated in 2010 when Lord Mayor of Brisbane, in the interests of all citizens the State Government needs to run the buses to stop the failure and position public transport in Brisbane and SEQ for a better future, free from petty self interest from Brisbane Councillors."

Reference:

1.  RTI  http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/aboutus/rti/disclog/rti13501772.pdf

2.  Lord Mayor Campbell Newman wants State Government to run buses
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/campbell-newman-wants-state-government-to-run-buses/story-e6freoof-1225839337936

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

Sent to all outlets:

28th September 2014

Can Brisbane's Buses be saved?

Greetings,

Interesting snippet in today's Sunday Mail.  Mr Peter Cameron is particularly well informed I have noted.

Sunday Mail 28th September 2014 page 15.



Let's examine briefly how this has come about.  TransLink set about reforming the bus network for SEQ, including Brisbane in 2012/13.  BCC refused to allow Brisbane Transport to cooperate fully with TransLink in the preparation of the bus review.  See page 79 of this RTI at http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/~/media/aboutus/rti/disclog/rti13501772.pdf

As a direct result of this, and lack of political leadership to support TransLink,  the proposed bus review changes for Brisbane were not proceeded with.  The changes proposed for the rest of SEQ bus network have largely gone ahead, except where BCC's intransigence compromised some of the proposed improvements.  Regions outside SEQ have also had some service cuts in hours of operation and frequency to prop up the failing Brisbane bus network.  Hardly equitable I would suggest.

Brisbane Transport has the ability to deliver an improved network for Brisbane, particularly in full cooperation with TransLink and the rest of the bus network in SEQ and other operators. This should be allowed to occur now.

Brisbane City Council should eat some humble pie.  Lets move ahead with the original proposals as put together by TransLink in 2013.  This will then put in place a much improved network, which will drive significant passenger numbers, probably around 20 million a year as more parts of Brisbane will have direct access to frequent and connected bus routes, and rail is better supported with connections and feeder buses. This will then remove the need for Brisbane Transport to be sacrificed on the alter of 'competitive tenders'.

There will be a better fare box which in turn allows for proper reform of the fare system.

There you have it.  A path to rescue public transport in SEQ, which at present is in a crisis.  No-brainer really.

Have a nice day.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[ozbob]

Brisbanetimes --> Bus companies fight Newman government tender plan

South-east Queensland bus companies have united against State Government plans to put their routes out to tender.

Queensland Bus Industry Council executive director David Tape said the proposal, which would replace an existing model of direct negotiations with local bus companies, had put Queensland businesses into a "position of limbo".

Instead, bus companies from interstate and overseas would be able to "undercut" local providers, Mr Tape said, which could force some Queensland companies against the wall.

"They're now commercially impotent in the fact their businesses are worth zero," he said.

"The government is going to open market tender post-September next year and nobody's going to buy a business when you're only guaranteed a contract until the end of September."

Fairfax Media contacted several bus companies in south-east Queensland, which indicated a united front against the process.

Mr Tape said he was concerned Queensland companies would miss out, as happened in October when Cairns-based airline Skytrans lost out to New South Wales-based Regional Express in a tender to run government-regulated routes.

Mr Tape said "the whole gamut" of transport services would be "compromised" by enforced cost-cutting brought about by the need to provide the cheapest tender.

"You've had operators delivering services to Queensland for 40, 50, 60 years, depending on the regions," he said.

"They've been doing a good job and all of a sudden now they want to do a cost-cutting exercise going through to open market.

"We believe they can achieve that contestability through industry benchmarking."

A spokeswoman for Transport Minister Scott Emerson said open tenders was normal practice for government services.

"The LNP Government is committed to building a safe, affordable, frequent and reliable public transport network for Queenslanders," she said in a statement.

"As announced in the commission of audit released in 2013, the government supports getting the best services and value for money for passengers through a competitive contract process.

"Fourteen of the 15 bus operators in south-east Queensland are private companies.

"We have delivered an additional 2000 bus services across SEQ since 2012.

"We are currently consulting with all operators about future contracts which are due to expire in late 2015."

Mr Tape said QBIC had largely existed outside of the spotlight, with many people unaware of its organisation.

"That doesn't surprise me given the fact that, historically, as an association we've always worked well with the department and the incumbent government to deliver services," he said.

"We've never had an issue, all our operators have had their contracts renewed, they've never had issues meeting their KPIs, they haven't had any reason for their contracts to be terminated.

"That's why people haven't heard of us – we just sit in the background doing what we do best, and that's delivering people from A to B."

[ozbob]

Nothing will happen prior to the election.  No one has the guts.

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

3rd December 2014

Bus Reform: RAIL Back on Track Reaffirms Support For Competitive Bus Contracting

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers reaffirms its strong support for competitive bus contracting.

Things need to change. Brisbane needs a revolution in public transport, and in our opinion, a new bus operator if the present operator cannot drive the sort of network improvements that TransLink proposed in 2013. We reaffirm our strong support for bus reform, both organisational and network reform, and other parts of South East Queensland will be necessarily affected also.

Bus network reform has largely gone ahead in the rest of SEQ outside of Brisbane.  The present private bus operators will be competitive in our opinion, they are delivering now.  Brisbane Transport, presently constrained by BCC is the weak link.

RAIL Back on Track does not support the 'closed industrial shop'.

In the same way that a democracy makes politicians compete in an election to decide who shall win the social contract of being in office for three years, private businesses engaged with the state should be subjected to open and competitive tendering. It is the private sector equivalent of an election, and we see no reason why established operators should not be subjected to the same.

RAIL Back on Track therefore welcomes open and competitive bus contracting. This is not new and already happens in Perth. Brisbane City Council itself already contracts out the CityCat operators and has engaged five private bus companies to run special event bus services. Local operators already have the advantage of depots, experience, local knowledge, a track record and staff compared to external operators.

In the same way it would be unacceptable for state government MPs to extend their own term in exchange for promising to benchmark their own performance against the performance of other State Governments around Australia, it would also be unacceptable for a bus operator to extend its own engagement without periodic challenge by others. Bus contracting does not mean that a unsuccessful bus operator's buses and land assets go up in smoke; these assets obviously have a value to an incoming operator.

The people's representatives should have the power to choose which bus operator to use.

The opening of Brisbane's Bus Network to open competition also presents an opportunity to gain lucrative contracts within the Brisbane City Council area. Smaller operators could work together to submit joint proposals to win these contracts against the incumbent operator Brisbane Transport, a division of Brisbane City Council. This area has major problems including (a) very high 'dead running costs', (b) a need for larger buses on main routes, and in our opinion, the largest inefficiency of all (c) an inefficient legacy network.

Queensland Private Bus operators could massively undercut Brisbane City Council by simply promising to do what Brisbane City Council cannot bring itself to do - run a new, more efficient, connected bus network and cooperate with bus network reform.

In our opinion, the single largest inefficiency within Brisbane City Council's bus network is not the per kilometer service cost or the wage costs, but the inefficient bus network routings that it cannot bring itself to change for political reasons.

Because private bus operators do not run in Mayoral elections and are more than happy to drive buses across council boundaries, they are at a natural advantage in this respect. Of course, the success ultimately hinges on how well prepared and researched the State Government is.

Our suggestions for a new bus network are here: New Bus Network Proposal http://tiny.cc/busreform Good luck and may the best bus operators win.

Only genuine reform of rail and bus networks, together with fare reform will guarantee abundant and low cost public transport for all.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org


References:

Bus companies fight Newman government tender plan http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/bus-companies-fight-newman-government-tender-plan-20141202-11yr14.html

Redland company takes wheel of London's big red buses http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/redland-company-takes-wheel-of-londons-big-red-buses-20130612-2o3jv.html