Press Cuttings Thread
Press Cuttings Thread
One thing I like about Lothian's set up is its cheap fare structure. As I've said in the pricing thread, I'm very much in favour of a 'flat fare' structure rather than a zonal one. Cheap fares offer an incentive for people to use public transport. A 'flat-fare' makes the fare easy and simple to understand. Lothian combine the two resulting, as of March 2013, a cheap flat fare is £1.50 with a day ticket costing just £3.50. A night ticket costs just £3.00 and is valid for multiple journeys. A weekly pass is just £17.00 a week and is also valid for use on night services.
Just a shame that this sort of simplicity doesn't exist elsewhere.
Re monopoly: The industry had a huge investigation into this, and, generally, the Competition Commission had very few recommendations to make. Pure competition in the industry would require each bus depot to have an equal sized competitors’ depot alongside it, and that’s simply not how the bus industry works. There’s no evidence that operators exploit their geographical positions; if anything, we end up with a ‘Mexican stand-off’, where operators make reasonable returns doing what they do, but don’t feel tempted to risk trying competing services; this isn’t ideal, but it doesn’t make a state-controlled monopoly ideal, either.
Re manipulation of survey results: that was your word, not mine. Are you now calling into question the sampling techniques used by Passenger Focus? You seem to me to be hell bent on discrediting their work.
Re dividends: without reasonable dividends, the shareholders wouldn’t be prepared to lend the bus companies their money. Without dividends, there would be no money to invest in transport. In a state-run system, local or national government would have to raise the money instead; and instead of paying dividends, they’d pay interest and have debt on their books. And the UK can’t afford more public debt. Under a quality contract, the winning bidders would still have to make enough of a return to justify any investment required; so I can’t see it driving costs down to any great extent.
Re “a transport organisation owned by a local authority”: I’m sorry, that’s not what I was looking for; I am sure there are many of those. I should have made the question clearer. I was looking for examples of local authority control that don’t require public money to prop up the system. The three you gave – Nottingham, Lothian and Blackpool – are poor examples, I’m afraid. Nottingham’s and Blackpool’s trams need public subsidy; and as for Edinburgh, well....!!!
I’m pleased that you admit that Amsterdam’s public transport system needs public investment, because that proves my point. here in the north east, Nexus is pursuing a quality contract not in order to put more money into the system, but to take money out.
Re Fencehouses: well, you’ve got me there. I’m afraid I don’t know the local circumstances (it’s a foreign land to me). If there’s a real demand for through services to Newcastle, have you thought of suggesting this to GNE? If the demand’s there, I’d hope they’d consider it. I’d be surprised if they had done this sort of thing to “force” people to change just to keep the patronage figures up, though. I’ve always thought that people don’t like changing buses, and this would drive people away, thus reducing patronage rather than inflating the numbers.
We will agree to disagree on the other points - just going around in circles.
With regard to Fencehouses. Nobody likes changing buses, nobody likes hanging around the poor 'interchanges' at Houghton, Chester or indeed the Galleries and Concord.
Nobody likes seeing fares increased massively either.
However, taking 3 double deckers off an hour and replacing them all with 13 single deckers in each direction per hour, forcing them to change buses along with the location of the village in relation to the buzzfare and county boundaries only tells me one thing... And it has more to do with increasing buzzfare ticket sales than it does anything else.
Washington is the same. Several services that worked through the villages of Washington going to Newcastle, Sunderland or beyond have been cancelled, with replacements all feeding into the Galleries or Concord.
Wonder if they would have done that if there was competition in those areas?
(09 Jul 2013, 4:07 pm)Andreos1 @AdamY No, there probably isn't.
It's a bit like the 'privatised' rail network... But that's a whole new discussion for another time
(09 Jul 2013, 4:07 pm)Andreos1 @AdamY No, there probably isn't.
It's a bit like the 'privatised' rail network... But that's a whole new discussion for another time
Please don't confuse 'public subsidy' with 'paying for concessionary travel'.
Let's try a flight of fantasy...
Suppose that, one day, the government decides that every pensioner in the land shall be entitled to a free pasty once a day. Greggs (and other bakers) are forced, by law, to give them out and claim reimbursement on a 'no better, no worse off' basis. The government guesses how much money it will cost and gives the money to local councils; but then, the local council's money gets bundled up into a single lump from the government and reduced by ten per cent per year.
Greggs sends its bill to the local council, based on the government's formula; but the local council hasn't got enough money.
Two questions arise:
1. Whose money is it?
2. Who is the beneficiary?
Remember, Greggs have supplied the pastys 'up front'; they've paid for the ingredients, the overheads of the shops, the wages, etc. All they want is paying. To me, it's Greggs' money that the government and the council are dithering over paying.
And the beneficiary is the pensioner, not Greggs. Greggs make no extra profit, because the formula leaves them 'no better, no worse' off, even though they've already paid out for their costs.
Next, imagine that the price of cheese on the world cheese market doubles overnight. Greggs main ingredient cost has gone through the roof, their costs have gone up, so using the government's formula, they ask for more money (and the retail cost of the pasty has jumped too!). But the council's budget is frozen and they can't pay any more money. Greggs can't afford to just give away the pastys, so what do they do? They close their shops in the little outlying villages, where the returns had been marginal to start with.
In this scenario, there's little point in having a free pasty entitlement if you haven't got a pasty shop!
And so... 'concessionary travel reimbursement' is simply the councils' fulfilling their obligation to pay for something that bus companies have already provided. It's not 'public subsidy', just as the councils paying their electricity bills for their offices isn't a 'subsidy' to the energy companies. Strip out concessionary travel from Tyne and Wear's bill, and you're left with about £10 million of public money buying bus services - split roughly one third on school buses, one third on early morning/late evening and works services, and one third on the 'battleship grey' services. You can't avoid having to run school buses; you might be able to avoid some of the rest, but these are services that we, as a 'society', decide are worth having. And I'll bet there'll always be some services like this, that will never be able to cover their costs from fares.
To me, we have a crazy system that simply leads to an increasing conflict between the bus companies and local councils, from which there is no easy escape. When I become Britain's first Benign Dictator, my solution will be simple: Concessionary travel costs about £3 per pensioner per week. So, instead, I'd remove the entitlement, but give every pensioner £3 a week more in their pension to do with as they please. I would encourage bus companies to make use of the concessionary travel smartcards by selling a simple £3 weekly, £10 four weekly off-peak multi-operator ticket for pensioners. The net effect on the Treasury remains the same: what they save on concessionary travel they give away on pensions. The effect on pensioners is either neutral or beneficial: they can pay the same (or slightly less) for their travel, or use the money as they wish. In all likelihood, some would choose to travel a little less and spend a little more at their local shops, so there would be a downside for bus companies but an upside for the local retail economy ... but that, in itself, could provide enough of a boost to lift bus patronage (more money to spend in the shops = more people working in retail).
The bus companies find themselves free from the political shackles that concessionary travel entails. They are essentially selling a commercial ticket, but at a price linked to pensions. If there aren't enough pensioners (and other passengers) willing to buy tickets, then, like any other service (bus or otherwise!), it gets taken off if it can't cover its costs. If it needs some council support, then that's up to the council to make that decision, but the maths is rather more clear cut than present arrangements.
Oh, and I must admit, I'm not a fan of BSOG, either. Take it away, make bus fares reflect true costs, and let local councils support services where required.
Sadly, I'm not likely to be offered the job of Benign Dictator very soon!
(Edited for typos)
No, I'm saying that BSOG is the ONLY subsidy; in practice, it's a refund of part of the fuel duty that bus companies already pay. I think I read in The Journal last week that it only accounts for about 5% of bus costs; I seem to recall a Tyne and Wear figure of about £12 million before it was cut by 20%, which would make it about £9.6 million today. Railways and airlines don't pay any fuel taxes - now that's a huge subsidy!
Green Bus Fund isn't really a subsidy to bus operators - it's a subsidy to the manufacturers of green buses. The bus companies get part (but not all) of the difference between the cost of a diesel bus and the cost of the green bus, so the maths of the bus company's investment case stays about the same. The other beneficiaries, though, are the local people who get better air quality as a result.
(09 Jul 2013, 6:14 pm)eezypeazy No, I'm saying that BSOG is the ONLY subsidy; in practice, it's a refund of part of the fuel duty that bus companies already pay. I think I read in The Journal last week that it only accounts for about 5% of bus costs; I seem to recall a Tyne and Wear figure of about £12 million before it was cut by 20%, which would make it about £9.6 million today. Railways and airlines don't pay any fuel taxes - now that's a huge subsidy!
End of fuel subsidy 'will wipe out bus company profits'
But low-income households will be hit hardest if fares rise and services are cut
Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/...el-subsidy
Four of Britain's biggest bus companies could lose more than £200m in profits under plans to axe public spending on transport. The government is considering scrapping a scheme that allows bus operators to reclaim around 80% of what they pay in fuel duties.
But City analysts says that if the government abolishes the Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) in one go, it could wipe out most of the profits of stock market-listed bus companies. These include First Group, Go-Ahead, Stagecoach and National Express.
Analysts at JP Morgan Cazenove say it is more likely that the grant will be frozen or phased out, as the consequences of sudden abolition would be dramatic, but one broker warned: "Abrupt cuts would be very negative for the immediate earnings outlook."
The grant is worth £500m to the bus industry as a whole, and £235m to the big four, according to JP Morgan. In June, ministers signalled concern at the profit margins of the largest public transport groups, but dozens of independent operators would also be affected by changes to BSOG, as would Arriva, which is being taken over by Deutsche Bahn and is not included in JP Morgan's research.
The broker added: "Uncertainty will weigh on the relative share price until there is greater clarity. However, we believe this is reflected in current valuations, which we view as cheap."
Bus operators could compensate for the loss of the fuel subsidy by reducing services and hiking fares by around 7%.
Simon Posner, chief executive of the Confederation of Passenger Transport, warned that outside London the bus is the main form of public transport, and is relied upon most by low-income households: "If we want to cut carbon, give jobless households the means to access work and ensure that our cities keep moving, we need to ensure buses get their share of government support."
Earlier this month the government was caught up in a row over free bus passes for the elderly. Sources in Whitehall denied ministers planned to raise the qualifying age from 60 to 65.
However, JP Morgan said: "A change to the qualifying age, the use of smart card technology or the requirement to purchase the annual bus pass are all possible ways of limiting expenditure."
(09 Jul 2013, 6:14 pm)eezypeazy No, I'm saying that BSOG is the ONLY subsidy; in practice, it's a refund of part of the fuel duty that bus companies already pay. I think I read in The Journal last week that it only accounts for about 5% of bus costs; I seem to recall a Tyne and Wear figure of about £12 million before it was cut by 20%, which would make it about £9.6 million today. Railways and airlines don't pay any fuel taxes - now that's a huge subsidy!
End of fuel subsidy 'will wipe out bus company profits'
But low-income households will be hit hardest if fares rise and services are cut
Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/...el-subsidy
Four of Britain's biggest bus companies could lose more than £200m in profits under plans to axe public spending on transport. The government is considering scrapping a scheme that allows bus operators to reclaim around 80% of what they pay in fuel duties.
But City analysts says that if the government abolishes the Bus Service Operators Grant (BSOG) in one go, it could wipe out most of the profits of stock market-listed bus companies. These include First Group, Go-Ahead, Stagecoach and National Express.
Analysts at JP Morgan Cazenove say it is more likely that the grant will be frozen or phased out, as the consequences of sudden abolition would be dramatic, but one broker warned: "Abrupt cuts would be very negative for the immediate earnings outlook."
The grant is worth £500m to the bus industry as a whole, and £235m to the big four, according to JP Morgan. In June, ministers signalled concern at the profit margins of the largest public transport groups, but dozens of independent operators would also be affected by changes to BSOG, as would Arriva, which is being taken over by Deutsche Bahn and is not included in JP Morgan's research.
The broker added: "Uncertainty will weigh on the relative share price until there is greater clarity. However, we believe this is reflected in current valuations, which we view as cheap."
Bus operators could compensate for the loss of the fuel subsidy by reducing services and hiking fares by around 7%.
Simon Posner, chief executive of the Confederation of Passenger Transport, warned that outside London the bus is the main form of public transport, and is relied upon most by low-income households: "If we want to cut carbon, give jobless households the means to access work and ensure that our cities keep moving, we need to ensure buses get their share of government support."
Earlier this month the government was caught up in a row over free bus passes for the elderly. Sources in Whitehall denied ministers planned to raise the qualifying age from 60 to 65.
However, JP Morgan said: "A change to the qualifying age, the use of smart card technology or the requirement to purchase the annual bus pass are all possible ways of limiting expenditure."
Don't quite see how you leapt to "propping up the share price"...
... but the figures seem about right. If what I read is right and BSOG is about 5% of T & W's turnover, and removing all of it before it was cut would have reduced services or hiked fares by 7%, then it seems that the bus companies, on average, across the country are only making a return of 5 to 7 per cent (but I suspect averages hide big differences!). The cut in BSOG last year did force bus fares up and cut some services. But there isn't a straight-line relationship between BSOG and profits or share prices... this looks to me like a little bit of "journalistic licence".
11 Jul 2013 12:30
Tyne and Wear Metro bosses again refuse to intervene as cleaners stage two week strike
Share on print Share on email
A metro train at East Boldon A metro train at East Boldon
Metro staff will tomorrow walk out for two weeks in a continued dispute over pay and conditions.
Churchill Services staff will again “down tools”, beginning the longest spell of action in what has been a prolonged industrial conflict.
But, despite continued criticism from the RMT union, both network owner Nexus and operator DB Regio Tyne and Wear say it is not their problem to resolve.
A Nexus spokesman said: “This is a dispute between the RMT and Churchill. Nexus does not employ the cleaning staff on Metro so cannot get involved in an issue over their terms and conditions. It is a matter for the employer and the union to negotiate over.
“We continue to urge both parties to get around the table and resolve this long-running dispute.”
Sharon Kelly, director of customer services and operations at DB Regio Tyne and Wear, agreed.
“This is a matter for Churchill to resolve with its staff,” Ms Kelly said – although she admitted DB Regio have put contingency cleaning plans in place.
The strike coincides with the Durham Miners’ Gala, where the cleaners plan to have a high profile, and follows on from 19 days of industrial action in less than 18 months over calls for a “living wage” – one the RMT suggests might be more than minimum wage and include “perks” like sick pay or free travel passes.
RMT general secretary Bob Crow said he remained confident the cleaners would get what they want.
“We now move to a serious escalation of the dispute with a fortnight of action which shows clearly that RMT is geared up for a victory that we know is within our grasp,” he said.
“This battle is now seen as having national significance in the campaign against low pay and exploitation by greedy companies and RMT will continue to ratchet up the pressure for fairness for this important group of North East transport staff.
“It remains a scandal that the regional passenger organisation Nexus, and the operating company DB Regio, have still not lifted a finger to stop this exploitation and poverty pay scandal on their own doorstep and RMT has no intention of letting them off the hook.
“Nexus and the city council cannot wash their hands of this dispute and RMT is stepping up the call for them to intervene to help force a solution as the fight for pay and workplace justice will continue until we win.”
Churchill did not provide a comment.
Source: Evening Chronicle
Tyne and Wear Metro cleaning staff walk-out
11 Jul 2013 12:30
Tyne and Wear Metro bosses again refuse to intervene as cleaners stage two week strike
Share on print Share on email
A metro train at East Boldon A metro train at East Boldon
Metro staff will tomorrow walk out for two weeks in a continued dispute over pay and conditions.
Churchill Services staff will again “down tools”, beginning the longest spell of action in what has been a prolonged industrial conflict.
But, despite continued criticism from the RMT union, both network owner Nexus and operator DB Regio Tyne and Wear say it is not their problem to resolve.
A Nexus spokesman said: “This is a dispute between the RMT and Churchill. Nexus does not employ the cleaning staff on Metro so cannot get involved in an issue over their terms and conditions. It is a matter for the employer and the union to negotiate over.
“We continue to urge both parties to get around the table and resolve this long-running dispute.”
Sharon Kelly, director of customer services and operations at DB Regio Tyne and Wear, agreed.
“This is a matter for Churchill to resolve with its staff,” Ms Kelly said – although she admitted DB Regio have put contingency cleaning plans in place.
The strike coincides with the Durham Miners’ Gala, where the cleaners plan to have a high profile, and follows on from 19 days of industrial action in less than 18 months over calls for a “living wage” – one the RMT suggests might be more than minimum wage and include “perks” like sick pay or free travel passes.
RMT general secretary Bob Crow said he remained confident the cleaners would get what they want.
“We now move to a serious escalation of the dispute with a fortnight of action which shows clearly that RMT is geared up for a victory that we know is within our grasp,” he said.
“This battle is now seen as having national significance in the campaign against low pay and exploitation by greedy companies and RMT will continue to ratchet up the pressure for fairness for this important group of North East transport staff.
“It remains a scandal that the regional passenger organisation Nexus, and the operating company DB Regio, have still not lifted a finger to stop this exploitation and poverty pay scandal on their own doorstep and RMT has no intention of letting them off the hook.
“Nexus and the city council cannot wash their hands of this dispute and RMT is stepping up the call for them to intervene to help force a solution as the fight for pay and workplace justice will continue until we win.”
Churchill did not provide a comment.
Source: Evening Chronicle
Published on 12/07/2013 12:00
Inconsiderate parkers have been criticised for causing chaos on the approach to a north Northumberland railway station.
The situation was so bad last week that Arriva’s X18, which serves Alnmouth Station, had to be diverted because stationary vehicles made nearby Curly Lane impassable.
It’s not the first time that buses have had trouble reaching stops close to the facility because of parked vehicles.
Nick Knox, area managing director for Arriva North East, said: “Last week we did experience some problems serving Almouth Station as the road was not passable due to parked vehicles. The vehicles in question were causing an obstruction; therefore we had to divert the service via Lesbury Road.
“This has been a recurring problem for a number of years.”
Parking issues around the station are long-standing and while it was hoped that the new station car park opened in 2011 would help, it appears there are still problems.
In a letter sent to the Gazette last week, Vivien Kay from South View, Lesbury, criticised the situation.
She said: “The parking at the station is beyond a joke, with people leaving their cars for up to two weeks, preventing daily commuters from using the car parks and causing them to park indiscriminately on Curly Lane, South View and the Bilton road.
“Travellers expecting to find parking spaces at the station leave home at the last minute and then abandon their cars so they don’t miss the train.
“While the argument rages on about parking charges at the station and residents’ parking bays in Hipsburn, bus users are left to bear the brunt of inconsiderate drivers’ thoughtless parking.”
The area in question falls within the Alnwick ward of Couns Gordon Castle and Heather Cairns.
Coun Castle suggested two solutions – a residents’ parking scheme, which would need to go out to consultation, and limiting parking times at the station.
Coun Cairns said she was aware of the problem and had every intention of getting it sorted in conjunction with residents. She said that parking at the station was insufficient to deal with the demand.
Source: The Journal
Buses diverted as vehicles block route to station stops
Published on 12/07/2013 12:00
Inconsiderate parkers have been criticised for causing chaos on the approach to a north Northumberland railway station.
The situation was so bad last week that Arriva’s X18, which serves Alnmouth Station, had to be diverted because stationary vehicles made nearby Curly Lane impassable.
It’s not the first time that buses have had trouble reaching stops close to the facility because of parked vehicles.
Nick Knox, area managing director for Arriva North East, said: “Last week we did experience some problems serving Almouth Station as the road was not passable due to parked vehicles. The vehicles in question were causing an obstruction; therefore we had to divert the service via Lesbury Road.
“This has been a recurring problem for a number of years.”
Parking issues around the station are long-standing and while it was hoped that the new station car park opened in 2011 would help, it appears there are still problems.
In a letter sent to the Gazette last week, Vivien Kay from South View, Lesbury, criticised the situation.
She said: “The parking at the station is beyond a joke, with people leaving their cars for up to two weeks, preventing daily commuters from using the car parks and causing them to park indiscriminately on Curly Lane, South View and the Bilton road.
“Travellers expecting to find parking spaces at the station leave home at the last minute and then abandon their cars so they don’t miss the train.
“While the argument rages on about parking charges at the station and residents’ parking bays in Hipsburn, bus users are left to bear the brunt of inconsiderate drivers’ thoughtless parking.”
The area in question falls within the Alnwick ward of Couns Gordon Castle and Heather Cairns.
Coun Castle suggested two solutions – a residents’ parking scheme, which would need to go out to consultation, and limiting parking times at the station.
Coun Cairns said she was aware of the problem and had every intention of getting it sorted in conjunction with residents. She said that parking at the station was insufficient to deal with the demand.
Source: The Journal
Another pedestrian hit by bus in Newcastle city centre
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
By Sophie Doughty | 3 Oct 2013 09:36
Another pedestrian has been hit by a bus in Newcastle city centre, bringing the casualty toll to 10 in 18 months.
The man, who is in his 40s, became the latest victim of the Blackett Street bus black-spot when he was struck by a double-decker yesterday morning.
Police and paramedics were quickly at the scene at junction between Pilgrim Street and Blackett Street. Onlookers watched on as the injured man was rescued from underneath the front of the Stagecoach vehicle, and carried into an ambulance.
He was taken to hospital but his injuries are not thought to be life-threatening. The bus driver was left shaken by the incident.
Stagecoach says its initial investigations have revealed that the bus driver was travelling within the speed limit, and it is thought the pedestrian was using a mobile phone when he was hit. But the incident has once again sparked calls for new safety measures.
Lyn Holmes, who works close to where the incident happened, said she believed buses drive too fast on Blackett Street.
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The 52-year-old, from Cullercoats, told the Chronicle: “The buses along here go far too fast. I don’t know how they get away with it and I don’t know how somebody is not killed every day. It’s just ridiculous.”
Police closed off Blackett Street for more than an hour as investigations into the cause of the incident began.
Stagecoach will also carry out its own inquiries.
A spokeswoman confirmed: “We can confirm that there was an incident today in Newcastle when a pedestrian walked out in front of a Stagecoach bus. It is our understanding, from witness statements, that the gentleman was using a mobile phone and walked out from between parked vehicles without looking.
“We are conducting a full investigation and will assist the police with any information they need. The driver is understandably quite shaken but we are pleased that reports so far suggest that the injuries to the pedestrian are not serious.”
The spokeswoman added that speed recording equipment on the bus indicated that it was travelling within the speed limit.
Peter Gray, Newcastle city council’s head of highways, said: “I am sorry to hear about this accident. The city council takes very seriously all traffic accidents which result in personal injury. We analyse information from the police and our own internal procedures to determine the precise causes of the accidents and help develop road safety proposals. We have recently made a number of physical changes to the highway including road narrowing.”
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...le-6130774
(03 Oct 2013, 4:24 pm)aureolin Another pedestrian hit by bus in Newcastle city centre
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
By Sophie Doughty | 3 Oct 2013 09:36
Another pedestrian has been hit by a bus in Newcastle city centre, bringing the casualty toll to 10 in 18 months.
The man, who is in his 40s, became the latest victim of the Blackett Street bus black-spot when he was struck by a double-decker yesterday morning.
Police and paramedics were quickly at the scene at junction between Pilgrim Street and Blackett Street. Onlookers watched on as the injured man was rescued from underneath the front of the Stagecoach vehicle, and carried into an ambulance.
He was taken to hospital but his injuries are not thought to be life-threatening. The bus driver was left shaken by the incident.
Stagecoach says its initial investigations have revealed that the bus driver was travelling within the speed limit, and it is thought the pedestrian was using a mobile phone when he was hit. But the incident has once again sparked calls for new safety measures.
Lyn Holmes, who works close to where the incident happened, said she believed buses drive too fast on Blackett Street.
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The 52-year-old, from Cullercoats, told the Chronicle: “The buses along here go far too fast. I don’t know how they get away with it and I don’t know how somebody is not killed every day. It’s just ridiculous.”
Police closed off Blackett Street for more than an hour as investigations into the cause of the incident began.
Stagecoach will also carry out its own inquiries.
A spokeswoman confirmed: “We can confirm that there was an incident today in Newcastle when a pedestrian walked out in front of a Stagecoach bus. It is our understanding, from witness statements, that the gentleman was using a mobile phone and walked out from between parked vehicles without looking.
“We are conducting a full investigation and will assist the police with any information they need. The driver is understandably quite shaken but we are pleased that reports so far suggest that the injuries to the pedestrian are not serious.”
The spokeswoman added that speed recording equipment on the bus indicated that it was travelling within the speed limit.
Peter Gray, Newcastle city council’s head of highways, said: “I am sorry to hear about this accident. The city council takes very seriously all traffic accidents which result in personal injury. We analyse information from the police and our own internal procedures to determine the precise causes of the accidents and help develop road safety proposals. We have recently made a number of physical changes to the highway including road narrowing.”
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...le-6130774
Forum Moderator | Let us know if you have any issues
Service Manager, Coatham Connect
(03 Oct 2013, 4:24 pm)aureolin Another pedestrian hit by bus in Newcastle city centre
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
By Sophie Doughty | 3 Oct 2013 09:36
Another pedestrian has been hit by a bus in Newcastle city centre, bringing the casualty toll to 10 in 18 months.
The man, who is in his 40s, became the latest victim of the Blackett Street bus black-spot when he was struck by a double-decker yesterday morning.
Police and paramedics were quickly at the scene at junction between Pilgrim Street and Blackett Street. Onlookers watched on as the injured man was rescued from underneath the front of the Stagecoach vehicle, and carried into an ambulance.
He was taken to hospital but his injuries are not thought to be life-threatening. The bus driver was left shaken by the incident.
Stagecoach says its initial investigations have revealed that the bus driver was travelling within the speed limit, and it is thought the pedestrian was using a mobile phone when he was hit. But the incident has once again sparked calls for new safety measures.
Lyn Holmes, who works close to where the incident happened, said she believed buses drive too fast on Blackett Street.
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The scene of the accident on Blackett Street
The 52-year-old, from Cullercoats, told the Chronicle: “The buses along here go far too fast. I don’t know how they get away with it and I don’t know how somebody is not killed every day. It’s just ridiculous.”
Police closed off Blackett Street for more than an hour as investigations into the cause of the incident began.
Stagecoach will also carry out its own inquiries.
A spokeswoman confirmed: “We can confirm that there was an incident today in Newcastle when a pedestrian walked out in front of a Stagecoach bus. It is our understanding, from witness statements, that the gentleman was using a mobile phone and walked out from between parked vehicles without looking.
“We are conducting a full investigation and will assist the police with any information they need. The driver is understandably quite shaken but we are pleased that reports so far suggest that the injuries to the pedestrian are not serious.”
The spokeswoman added that speed recording equipment on the bus indicated that it was travelling within the speed limit.
Peter Gray, Newcastle city council’s head of highways, said: “I am sorry to hear about this accident. The city council takes very seriously all traffic accidents which result in personal injury. We analyse information from the police and our own internal procedures to determine the precise causes of the accidents and help develop road safety proposals. We have recently made a number of physical changes to the highway including road narrowing.”
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...le-6130774
Forum Moderator | Let us know if you have any issues
Service Manager, Coatham Connect
(03 Oct 2013, 4:30 pm)tyresmoke So the pedestrian was apparently using a mobile phone at the time and walked out from between parked vehicles.... I fail to see how that has anything to do with the road layout or its safety. I must admit as a driver myself, Blackett St is a nightmare as it is, and narrowing the road has made it worse as you can barely get 3 buses (1 stopped either side) down there as it is.
Also, Stagecoach spokeswoman says they have speed recording equipment? Greenroad when it was installed did not include the speed part of the software as it was too expensive, have they now gone ahead with this? If not, I fail to see what "speed recording equipment" they may have other than in-cab CCTV with which they could check the speedo??
(03 Oct 2013, 4:30 pm)tyresmoke So the pedestrian was apparently using a mobile phone at the time and walked out from between parked vehicles.... I fail to see how that has anything to do with the road layout or its safety. I must admit as a driver myself, Blackett St is a nightmare as it is, and narrowing the road has made it worse as you can barely get 3 buses (1 stopped either side) down there as it is.
Also, Stagecoach spokeswoman says they have speed recording equipment? Greenroad when it was installed did not include the speed part of the software as it was too expensive, have they now gone ahead with this? If not, I fail to see what "speed recording equipment" they may have other than in-cab CCTV with which they could check the speedo??
I really don't think the pedestrianised look of the road does anything to help the situation and have no idea why the council gave it this appearance. Obviously people should look where they are going when crossing the road, but making the road look like a road (as it does outside Eldon Gardens) would surely help. Even just having a higher kerb with crossing places rather than being able to walk across without even noticing would be an improvement.
(03 Oct 2013, 7:17 pm)stagecoachbusdepot I really don't think the pedestrianised look of the road does anything to help the situation and have no idea why the council gave it this appearance. Obviously people should look where they are going when crossing the road, but making the road look like a road (as it does outside Eldon Gardens) would surely help. Even just having a higher kerb with crossing places rather than being able to walk across without even noticing would be an improvement.
(03 Oct 2013, 7:17 pm)stagecoachbusdepot I really don't think the pedestrianised look of the road does anything to help the situation and have no idea why the council gave it this appearance. Obviously people should look where they are going when crossing the road, but making the road look like a road (as it does outside Eldon Gardens) would surely help. Even just having a higher kerb with crossing places rather than being able to walk across without even noticing would be an improvement.
(03 Oct 2013, 7:22 pm)aureolin It's a designated pedestrian zone, so surely you'd expect it to look as such? The same way you wouldn't expect to see block paving on the A1M.
(03 Oct 2013, 7:22 pm)aureolin It's a designated pedestrian zone, so surely you'd expect it to look as such? The same way you wouldn't expect to see block paving on the A1M.
