Many residents have written to me over the weekend about the withdrawal of a number of bus services which serve children traveling to school. Understandably, many families are shocked and dismayed.
I am reproducing here - with some slight amendments - the information that I have sent to many residents who have written to me.
The decisions taken reflect the pressures experienced by the commercial bus industry. Contrary to what has sometimes been said, they are not a result of any decision or funding reduction by Kent County Council. We are seeking to respond to this and I will set this out below.
Some 97% of bus routes in Kent, including these that are being withdrawn, are commercial routes, neither subsidised nor commissioned by KCC. Across the country bus operators are under pressure, chiefly because of reductions in usage (still down at least 20% on pre-pandemic levels), along with fuel cost increases and severe labour shortages.
Government did make available a Local Transport Fund (LTF) to help sustain services; some of it went via KCC, some of it direct to operators. But in any case it was central government, not KCC funding and government has been very clear that this funding ceases at the end of September. So the reductions are essentially commercial decisions to set what is intended to be a network that can keep running after the central government support ends. KCC officers have been required by government to work with and survey operators concerning their plans, but we are not the decision maker for them.
It is confusing that, at around the same time, KCC did consult and decide on reductions in our subsidies for certain bus routes (this went through a KCC Committee in the course of last week). This was not a decision that we wanted to take, but it was part of the budget that we approved in February, and reflected the massive pressures on the council’s finances, which with rising inflation have only become more severe since the budget was set. Most importantly, those subsidy reductions are unrelated to, and have no effect on the school routes and other reductions that are listed in the document below.
We recognise and fully understand the great difficulties that these commercial route reductions mean for many families. The next stage for our officers is to work with operators to see if others can provide alterative services, doubtless configured differently from the existing pattern, that nonetheless address at least some of the gaps in service that have arisen. In a number of cases in the recent past, we have been able to do this to address threats to specific routes, and will do our utmost in this case. But it is important to be clear that there is no guarantee that this can be delivered.
A further element in this is that Kent (unlike many other parts of the country) was recently successful in securing £35 million from government over three years for delivery of a Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) starting in October. There are significant constraints on how this money can be spent. Two thirds of it is required to go on capital, not revenue spending, and within the revenue spending government has been very clear that this is not to be used to prop up existing service patterns. However, there may be some scope to use BSIP funding to pump prime new services that could help address some of the routes that have been lost. We are currently negotiating the details of our BSIP with the Department for Transport.
My colleague David Brazier (Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport) and I will seek to keep residents updated on any developments.
Details of the service reductions are in this link, in particular in the table starting on the third page.
