Agenda item

Norman Kemp (Co-Owner of Nu-Venture bus company and Chair of the Kent and Medway branch of the Confederation of Passenger Transport) was in attendance for this item.

The Chairman welcomed Mr Kemp to the Committee.  Mr Kemp was the co-owner of Nu-Venture, a local bus company based in Aylesford.  Nu-Venture employed 50 people and ran 25 buses substantially in Kent but also in Medway.  The bus services operated were a mixture of commercial and tendered.  The Kent and Medway branch of the Confederation of Passenger Transport (CPT), which Mr Kemp chaired, met regularly to discuss matters such as legislative changes and technical innovation and to discuss the big issues (such as an increase in fuel price for example). 

Q -  Would Mr Kemp expect an increase in fares with an increase in fuel costs and vice versa, a decrease in fares with a decrease in fuel costs?

A – Mr Kemp explained that he would take a long term view of costs, many operators were at the smaller end of the market but also provided by people who were closer to the ‘ground’.   The bus service was a strictly regulated environment with skills necessary in many areas, it was necessary for bus companies to listen and lobby in order to put their case forward. 

Q – What are the effects of traffic congestion on bus reliability?

A – traffic congestion was a huge problem for bus operators, recent issues with road works in Tunbridge Wells had proved extremely difficult and the Grammar School system in Kent meant that buses were carrying students large distances to school.  If the buses were not able to run to time the operators would either have to reduce the service or use additional resources.   When asked whether there was anything KCC could do to ease congestion on Kent’s roads Mr Kemp explained that he understood the difficulties and the road networks were working at full capacity.  Communication was vital and it was important for Members and residents to know who their bus providers were.

Q – What does your fleet consist of?

A – Nu-Venture operated a mixed fleet of mainly elderly buses and double deckers.  The disability rules which were coming into effect in January 2017 would mean that many of the double deckers could no longer be used. 

Mr Kemp explained that Nu-Venture was alert to the small changes in passenger flows, the Kent population was changing rapidly and an incoming population was bringing more mobile families with children.  In some areas some of the older bus routes were no longer needed because the demographics were changing, with these changes the idea of serving communities with bus services less regularly but still providing them with a service was appealing.  In many areas the school routes distorted the picture of bus travel, the market had changed largely due to the school traffic. 

As a small company Nu-Venture was excluded from Quality Bus Partnerships (QBPs) and Mr Kemp would like to be involved in the discussions at the QBPs. 

It was important to carefully schedule buses and drivers, and Mr Kemp and his colleagues could spot where numbers got too low to be sustainable.  If problems were caused by traffic and road works Mr Kemp’s network of local contacts would ensure, as far as possible, that the service continued.  The bus service was built on reliability and had to be resourced enough to cover bus breakdowns and driver illnesses.  If there were large issues they would be raised with the Council.       

Q – What could KCC do, if anything, to promote improved bus transport in Kent?

A – the bus operators had huge respect for the regulators, there was a need to work more closely and perhaps informally with Members.  Mr Kemp suggested that a bus summit could be held in the same way that a previous rail summit had been.  Bus operators had to be careful to listen to customers and inform them when services were changing.  A Member asked that bus operators ensure that they give residents the opportunity to give feedback and widen the engagement to include both people who use, and don’t use, buses. 

Mr Kemp explained that difficulties sometimes arose when residents had aspirations of a door to door service, if there was an obvious demand which was being missed by the bus operators then KCC should be informed. 

Mr Kemp suggested that there could be a mid/east/west group consisting of bus operators and members to discuss the relevant issues in a friendly forum. 

Q – Did Nu-Venture accept the Kent Connected Card on their buses? (The Kent version of the Oyster Card is called Kent Connected and uses more up to date technology).

A – Yes, Nu-Venture did accept the Kent Connected Card as well as the Kent Young Person’s Travel Pass (KYPTP); it was illegal for operators to turn away a concessionary card.  Mr Kemp explained that the level of reimbursement received in relation to the KYPTP had not kept up with costs, there had been a 21% increase in the bus industry’s costs in the last 5 years and no uplift in the cost of the KYPTP for 9 years, there was a need to re-examine the schemes.  The bus operators wanted to be offering attractive products, it Members were seeking better value this required uplifts.  The Chairman confirmed that the cost of the YPTP had increased from £50 at inception to £270 currently, however Mr Kemp confirmed that the actual annual cost of an annual season ticket could reach £900 depending on journey length.   The YPTP had provided a distorted sense of value of bus journeys. 

There were difficulties with the number of people travelling, if residents were unable to get on a bus due to it being at full capacity it is uneconomical to put on an additional bus and difficult to get funding from the local authority. 

Mr Kemp explained to Members that there was an East of Maidstone Travel Group which shared information and discussed public transport issues with parish councils.  Nu-Venture was not allowed to be part of the Maidstone Quality Bus Partnership. 

In relation to the 21% in costs of running buses Members asked whether this was something they could look into further.

Q – How did Nu-Venture compete in the market?  Did Nu-Venture train its own drivers or did the company rely on those already trained?

A – Mr Kemp confirmed that it was a mixture of those already trained and those trained in house.  With regards to franchising it was proposed in the draft legislation that there would be no compensation for small operators if they lost contracts.  Economies of scale made it difficult for smaller operators to compete. 

Q – With the rising costs of concessionary travel what was KCC’s income per journey?

A – Mr Kemp explained that the bus operator was supplied with information on what they were due to be paid on a monthly basis.  15 years ago the concessionary fare was a half fare however, now income was provided to the operators retrospectively, a long way behind expenditure.  The bus operators were more alert to information from concessionary fares.  It was difficult to predict revenue; school development days for example hugely reduced the revenue received by the bus operators.    

Q – Was there any viability in profit sharing with bus operators?

A - Mr Kemp explained that some contracts were let with the fare risk by the local authority but that generally speaking the operator took the revenue risk and a more informal debate would be useful to enable views to be shared. 

The Chairman thanked Mr Kemp for his helpful comments and advised that the notes of the meeting would be shared with him for his comments prior to publication.