Effects
Even though the advent of competition has in some places improved service levels and reduced fares, many of the more outlying areas have seen significantly reduced service, especially off-peak. Fares have also increased significantly in some areas, particularly where there are local monopolies. As service levels were declining anyway before 1985, it is not clear whether the reduction is a consequence of deregulation or of other factors such as increasing car ownership. Certainly deregulation has not stopped the decline in bus usage.
Aside from competition on service levels and price, critics have claimed deregulation has caused some undesirable effects. For example, large companies like Stagecoach and FirstGroup can use their considerable buying power to completely take over the market in a region, using services and tactics that are meant to drive out competition rather than serve the customer better. Some areas see several companies running the same services at roughly the same times with the express purpose of drawing customers away from each other. Such "bus wars" often end in the smaller companies ceasing to operate the route, leading to increased patronage of the larger provider. An example of this practice is the lucrative 192 bus route in Manchester where two large companies began a "bus war" in March 2006, leading to complaints of increased traffic congestion and concerns over safety of passengers and pedestrians.
Critics of bus deregulation have pointed out that bus usage has fallen considerably since deregulation (in South Yorkshire, by 70%, although fares were subsidised in this area before 1985) but in London where regulation is still in operation, bus usage has risen by 55% over the same period. This may reflect the unique travel patterns of the capital as well as significant investment in new services and vehicles, but this effect pre-dates the London congestion charge which came into force in 2003; bus usage in London has been rising since 1993.
Supporters of bus regulation however, argue that de-regulation is more cost effective. This is because while the services are in the hands of the operators and are commercially run that this will have no effect on taxpayers. The reasoning behind this is that in London the general public must pay taxes to fund the services for TfL.
Where bus use has increased outside London it has been in areas where the transport policies of the local authorities are well coordinated through Quality Partnerships and where investment in public transport infrastructure, such as bus lanes, is prioritised. Prime examples are in Brighton and Oxford, but also passenger growth has been seen, for example, through Kickstart projects where initial service subsidy leads onto full commercial operation.
Whilst London may have seen a considerable amount of growth over the past few years, Stagecoach have announced that the relaunch of the bus network in Cambridge during late-2001 (branded as Cambridge "Citi") has seen growth of 77% compared to 34% in London from the same time. During the time of the relaunch, Stagecoach and the local authority went through a Quality partnership for the network, this has ensured that the fleet is run by modern low-floor vehicles, that bus priority measures are implemented and that the bus service information has been improved. Stagecoach enjoys a virtual monopoly in Cambridgeshire; the only other major bus operator being local company . A further effect was a rise in levels of cycling in areas where bus fares rose significantly.
Read more about this topic: Bus Deregulation In Great Britain
Famous quotes containing the word effects:
“Society’s double behavioral standard for women and for men is, in fact, a more effective deterrent than economic discrimination because it is more insidious, less tangible. Economic disadvantages involve ascertainable amounts, but the very nature of societal value judgments makes them harder to define, their effects harder to relate.”
—Anne Tucker (b. 1945)
“Corporate America will likely be motivated to support child care when it can be shown to have positive effects on that which management is concerned about—recruitment, retention and productivity. Indeed, employers relate to child care as a way to provide growth fostering environments for young managers.”
—Dana E. Friedman (20th century)
“I am fearful that the paper system ... will ruin the state. Its demoralizing effects are already seen and spoken of everywhere ... I therefore protest against receiving any of that trash.”
—Andrew Jackson (1767–1845)