When Boris Johnson promised that if elected Mayor of London he would introduce a new Routemaster bus, I don’t think many expected him to interpret that quite as literally as he has.
For by the end of his term in office, there won’t be hoardes of new Routemaster buses on London’s roads. Not even scores or dozens. But there will be a new Routemaster bus. One bus. Just the single bus.
As London Assembly member Caroline Pidgeon puts it:
We were promised that the new Routemaster bus would be up and running in 2011, but the harsh reality is that just one of these incredibly expensive buses will be on our roads before this Summer.
This latest admission exposes once and for all Boris Johnson’s real record on bus services. He promised to deliver a new bus for London within his four year term. In reality his record has been to hike up bus fares by 50 per cent and to allow buses to become more crowded.
* Mark Pack is Party President and is the editor of Liberal Democrat Newswire.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
GUEST POST The state of our canals - and riverside pubs - today
Slow consulting
ALS, MND - is this another disease where biohacking has potential?
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Care homes under threat after Labour policy change
Three less conventional ways of looking at who supports Reform - The Week in Polls
Suzanne Fletcher
Greg Hyde
David Raw
Peter Martin
Mick Taylor
25 Comments
Ha ha! No one can say that Mister Fine Print doesn’t do what he promised! You just have to be very careful not to read your own meanings into what he so carefully says.
*hordes
There sfr still a few original routemasters plying their trade.
I suppose “new Routemaster” is appropriate in one way – in that it will be completely unwanted outside a single city which takes being proscriptive in its vehicle supply into the realms of a competitive sport.
Except of course, two more prototypes are already on their way, and the costs have been for design and development of a bus that’s at the cutting edge both environmentally and functionally. It’s up to private companies whether they order them or not, but the public seem to like the prototype. I can see why the Lib Dems are desperately trying to make out that this is a failure.
Please don’t attack Boris for “hiking up bus fares by 50 per cent”.
In Merseyside we are “lucky” enough to have had a Labour-controlled Passenger Transport Authority for years. I would love for our bus fares to be as low as they are in London (even with any 50% hike).
Of course people in Merseyside are paid far more than they are in London so I suppose it is only fair??!!??
It’s just occured to me that not everyone knows how much bus fares are in London (or Merseyside, for that matter).
4 mile bus journey in London (with an Oyster card) = £1.35
1 mile journey in Southport, Merseyside (Arriva buses) = £1.90
Charles: Hardly “desperately” trying to describe it as a failure. Johnson is delivering less that he said he would, later than he said he would and at a higher cost than he said he would. That’s pretty easy material to make into “failure” 🙂
Simon Shaw
Perhaps because TfL is public sector and Arriva is private.
The rise of 50% is important in London for those who use public transport and for those of us outside then we can thank the Tories for the great success that was bus service deregulation – of course you will not be prepared to criticize the Tories though will you?
The so-called ‘new Routemaster’ presents a serious problem for bus operators: what do they do with the vehicles when they want to ‘cascade’ them down to their provincial fleets?
The original Routemaster bus was a bespoke design for London Transport, developed and introduced in the 1950s at a time when most bus fleets were state-owned or municipally-owned. These operators would typically buy new buses and retain them in their fleets until they were life-expired, about twenty years old. The Routemasters kept running for much longer than 20 years because they were thoroughly overhauled and re-engined on a regular basis, but this was not typical.
Today, bus services outside Greater London are completely de-regulated and operators can do pretty much whatever they like. Within Greater London, however, bus services are regulated by TfL (Transport for London). TfL puts routes out to tender and, amongst other things, can stipulate that the operator uses new buses, vehicles with low floors, clean fuel, low emissions, etc.
The result is that the large nationwide bus operators, such as Arriva and First, buy new buses for their London services, then cascade these vehicles down to their provincial fleets after four or five years. If you use bus services outside London operated by one of the big groups (except Stagecoach, which has withdrawn from London), there’s a good chance that you’re riding on buses that started their life in London.
Since the end of Routemaster production in 1968, new buses that were bought for London were similar to buses used in the provinces, so they could easily be transferred to provincial operations. Maybe a dual-door bus needed converting to single door, but that was about it.
But what use will the ‘new Routemaster’ be when it has completed a few years’ service in London and is ready to be cascaded to the provinces? There is little or no demand outside London for a bus with two staircases and a rear entrance (even if it can be closed off in off-peak periods). Certainly no provincial operator will want a return to two-person bus crews. But TfL is in a position to specify that operators use this design of bus when they tender to operate a bus route in London (even though this may entail higher purchase costs and running costs).
So either TfL will have to relax its rules and allow operators to use the ‘new Routemaster’ on London bus routes until it is 15 or 20 years old (rather than insist on new buses), or there will soon be a glut of secondhand not-so-new Routemasters that nobody wants.
@bazzasc
Well of course the people to really criticise are the Labour Party. In their 13 years in power they did nothing to extend the London approach to bus services to the rest of the country. Why not?
Simon Shaw
Which is precisely why they lost loads of votes in the period from 97 and were voted out in 2010. I have no truck with Labour or their policies since 1997
What also I can also see is that the Tories set the seeds for bus deregulation which is one of the reasons for the shambles we have outside London – reduced services with higher cost. Bus use and services in London are superior to those outside the capital (from my admittedly limited experience) but this does not change the fact that the current mayor has to take some responsibility for the large hikes in fares and explain that to the voters.
I find it difficult that you say that the Labour Party are the only ones to blame – the Tories were instrumental in introducing the philosophy that Labour followed in their time in power much to their shame.
What I find saddening is that the LD are following the same path and it seems to be heartily endorsed by yourself in most of your posts which is why I see your attempts at attacking Labour from the ‘left’ a little difficult to take seriously. You shouldn’t let your hatred of all things Labour blind you to the true nature of your Coalition partners
I hope these links are useful:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24037156-the-next-routemaster-has-been-delayed-for-a-second-time.do
http://www.boriswatch.co.uk/a-brief-guide-to-the-johnson-administration/
@bazzasc
When I said: “Well of course the people to really criticise are the Labour Party. In their 13 years in power they did nothing to extend the London approach to bus services to the rest of the country. Why not? I wasn’t being rhetorical. I really would like a good reason why Labour did nothing to amend the full effects of the Transport Act 1985.
As someone who was a member of the Merseyside passenger transport authority between 1981 and 1992 (i.e. Merseyside CC 1981-1986; MPTA 1986-1992) I could never understand why the 13 year long Labour Government saw no need to amend the 1985 Act.
Simon Shaw
I agree with you they should have changed the act but they didn’t , just like they should have rolled back/changed rail privatization. Not surprising really seeing they were so keen on privatization themselves. I, however, find it a little unbelievable to be honest, based on your previous posts, that you would have welcomed rolling back bus deregulation, if in fact it would have been practical to do so.
This is beside the point though – you need to get over your Labour fixation. This article is about Boris Johnson and the ‘reality distortion zone’ he has created around what he says and what he does.
Do you support the comments of the LD assembly representative or do you side with Boris? To be, honest, I can’t tell which party you really support!
@bazzasc
Please don’t tell me to get over a “Labour fixation”; you clearly need to get over a “Simon Shaw fixation”.
When you say that “this article is about Boris Johnson” you seem to miss the fact that it refers to the tremendously high level to which he has raised bus fares.
Now I know London is the only part of the UK that really matters, but I h appen to think it displays an even higher level of “London-centricity” than normal to complain that bus fares in London are now £1.35 (for any distance), when most people outside London would be delighted if their bus fares were that low.
So if the fault for that lies with Labour, I’m afraid you are just going to have to live with that.
To Simon Titley – the rest of the contributors to this discussion are not going to let the facts get in the way of a good argument. Thanks for taking the trouble to put things so clearly. Now if you could do the same for the NHS bill!!!
SimonShaw
The points I have raised – which you still fail to address are:
i. BoJo has increased fares 50% which has been criticized by the LD leader in London. Part of this criticism is due to the expensive route master he has commissioned and not used. This has been a common occurrence in relation to Boris ‘250K is chickenfeed’ Johnson. Do you agree with her or not. I do? The price of fares outside London is a disgrace but not particularly relevant (bus fare are a very much regional issue)
ii. I, and others, have pointed out that the bus services are still under public authority control in London – may this have a lot to do with the disparities in cost? You have completely failed to react to this point.
iii. You solely blame Labour for this and I just pointed out that is was the Tories, despite being told that i would happen, who went down the path of bus deregulation
I do not drive so take the bus and so am aware that outside London it is a shambles (as well as being seen to be considered only for the poor). It saddens me that this is the case and the two main parties are both responsible for this. I had hoped the LD would have a different approach but seem to be backing continued support for ‘private sector efficiency’ during this Parliament.
I referred to you personally as you seem to blame Labour for everything and the Tories for nothing – they are both equally culpable. Unfortunately for the LD you are seen by your ex-voters from the left as being ‘Tory Lite’ and you do not help matters. If your party is going to be a centre-right alternative to the Tories then please deliver a constant message in all regions of the country
@bazzasc
“The price of fares outside London is a disgrace but not particularly relevant ”
What a silly comment! As a key part of the article was the cost of bus fares in London, I would have thought that a comparison with teh level of fairs outside London was highly relevant.
Anyway, who appointed you the “relevance police” here?
As to your comment “You solely blame Labour for this”, no I didn’t!
I said “In Merseyside we are “lucky” enough to have had a Labour-controlled Passenger Transport Authority for years. I would love for our bus fares to be as low as they are in London (even with any 50% hike).” In what way does that imply that Labour are SOLELY to blame (as opposed to largely)?
Stop spending your whole time defending Labour.
@bazzasc
“If your party is going to be a centre-right alternative to the Tories then please deliver a constant message in all regions of the country.” Only people on the extreme left of the political spectrum see the Lib Dems like that – because, to them, everybody is “to the right”.
Most votes (as evidenced by the most recent UK Polling Report) see the Lib Dems as Centrist to Centre Left.
SimonShaw
In no way have I defended Labour and nor would I want to. I am centre-left so to you this may equate with Labour – it is strange then in 5 out of 6 elections I have voted LD. I have never seen any divergence in my views and those expressed in the manifestoes until the current love-in with the Tories. Perhaps I did not look too closely at the potential mendacity of your leadership – Orange Book and all that….
The public transport system in London is still regulated and this should be considered when comparing prices with areas that are not regulated. The whole focus of this argument is London and I do not think it is relevant to compare prices with those in the regions where the situation is completely different and where there has also been (in general) a decrease in bus traffic.
As you said Labour did nothing to deal with this issue when in Government – but then again neither have the Coalition and to be honest regional deregulation had been in place for 11 years before Labour took power so the Tories take their share of the blame (you never seem to criticize them though for some reason).
I seem to remember that the LD were seen to be left of Labour in polling before the election and are now significantly further to the right. I do not think the LD will have much success with left-leaning voters at the next election with this leadership in place.
@bazzasc
“The whole focus of this argument is London”
Exactly – and that’s what I object to.
“I seem to remember that the LD were seen to be left of Labour in polling before the election”
That’s an interesting observation – what do you base it on? It’s certainly not how the great mass of the British electorate saw us (according to UK Polling Report). Of course in a few selected areas (penal policy and civil liberties are the two that spring to mind) I would have said we were to the left of Labour, but so too were the Conservatives on civil liberties.
SimonShaw
You were right that Labour were seem more to the left than the LD but not by much (and I do not accept the Tories were to the left of Labour on civil liberties – they were when it was politically expedient to be so)
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/3065
What you can see from the analysis though is that the LD are now seen as centre-right rather than centre-left and a large amount of support has drifted away from that centre-left constituency.
Surely the main reason for lower fares in London is a massively higher level of public funding?
@Mark Pack
He’s pretty much delivered on his election pledge to introduce a new routemaster style bus. It’s not as if he could have gone out and bought a fleet of the four years ago, they didn’t exist. It’ll be up to whoever wins the 2012 election to decide how many of them there should be, which brings us to the question: will Brian Paddock scrap the new Routemaster or will he see it through?
@Simon Titley
Considering these buses were essentially designed by TFL and to a very high specification it’s unlikely they’re going to find themselves falling foul of TFL’s specifications any times soon and so they won’t need to be cascaded into provincial fleets.
While they continue to meet TFL’s specifications the buses will simply be refitted as and when they begin wearing out, and with a little co-operation between TFL and the operators the buses will be upgraded during the refit in order to continue meeting specifications. There’s no real reason London can’t have a bus that’s older than four years, its simply that until now it’s been the most convenient option for operators under the regime that TFL has run.