Bus Contract: Hoppa and Amendment (P.156/2011): Comments of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services

Information about the publication of Ministerial Decisions

A formal published “Ministerial Decision” is required as a record of the decision of a Minister (or an Assistant Minister where they have delegated authority) as they exercise their responsibilities and powers.

Ministers are elected by the States Assembly and have legal responsibilities and powers as “corporation sole” under the States of Jersey Law 2005 by virtue of their office and in their areas of responsibility, including entering into agreements, and under any legislation conferring on them powers.

An accurate record of “Ministerial Decisions” is vital to effective governance, including:

demonstrating that good governance, and clear lines of accountability and authority, are in place around decisions-making – including the reasons and basis on which a decision is made, and the action required to implement a decision
providing a record of decisions and actions that will be available for examination by States Members, and Panels and Committees of the States Assembly; the public, organisations, and the media; and as a historical record and point of reference for the conduct of public affairs

Ministers are individually accountable to the States Assembly, including for the actions of the departments and agencies which discharge their responsibilities.

The Freedom of Information Law (Jersey) Law 2011 is used as a guide when determining what information is be published. While there is a presumption toward publication to support of transparency and accountability, detailed information may not be published if, for example, it would constitute a breach of data protection, or disclosure would prejudice commercial interest.

A decision made on 25 October 2011:

Decision Reference: MD-T-2011-0110
Decision Summary Title :	Comments on P.156/2011 Bus Contract: Hoppa and Amendment		Date of Decision Summary:	25 October 2011
Decision Summary Author:	Director of Transport		Decision Summary: Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	Public
Type of Report: Oral or Written?	Written		Person Giving Oral Report:
Written Report Title :	Comments on P.156/2011 Bus Contract: Hoppa		Date of Written Report:	25th October 2011
Written Report Author:	Director of Transport		Written Report : Public or Exempt? (State clauses from Code of Practice booklet)	Public
Subject: Comments on Deputy Southern’s proposition for P.156/2011 Bus Contract: Hoppa and Amendment
Decision(s): The Minister approved the draft comments as attached and instructed the Chief Officer to arrange for the comments to be presented to the States for consideration during the debate on 1st November 2011.
Reason(s) for Decision: To enable the comments to be presented to the States.
Resource Implications: Officer time at TTS and the Greffe for the preparation and presentation of comments. However, the proposition if accepted could result in an annual commitment of £500,000 of States funding for a town hoppa service commencing in 2013.
Action Required: Chief Officer to request the Greffier to arrange for the comments to be presented to the States for consideration
Signature:		Position:
Date Signed:		Date of Decision (If different from Date Signed):

Bus Contract: Hoppa and Amendment (P.156/2011): Comments of the Minister for Transport and Technical Services

TRANSPORT AND TECHNICAL SERVICES

Comments on P.156/2011 Bus Contract: Hoppa and Amendment

()

Purpose of the Report

To provide comments on Deputy Southern’s proposition for P.156/2011 Bus Contract: Hoppa and Deputy Le Herrisier’s Amendment

Background

The proposition from Deputy Southern requests the Minister for Transport and Technical Services (TTS) in part (a) to prioritise a town “hoppa” bus service in the tendering process for a new bus contract and (part b) to request the Council to make provision for the additional cost (up to £500,000) in the States expenditure proposals for 2013. The proposition also requires that the service would be free to the user or at a low fixed cost rate, and use zero or low emissions vehicles.

The amendment from Deputy Le Herissier requires that TTS consult the community in the proposed catchment area.

Discussion

The contract for public (including school) bus services is currently out to tender for a new contract commencing in January 2013. First stage tenders will be received by 14th October 2011. The first stage tenders are based on an improved “model” network which will enable preferred bidders to be selected for the second stage of the tender process, leading to an appointment by May 2012. Details for a town bus service will be developed with the preferred bidders during the second stage, along with other further requirements of the new bus service beyond the improvements within the model network, including a doubling of peak hour bus capacity and a 20% increase in school bus use, by 2015. Although the principle of a low or zero fare town service is an aspiration of the Sustainable Transport Policy, the fare structure for the town service will need to be considered in view of the level of integration the “town” service may have with the wider network. Low (hybrid) or zero (electric) buses would be beneficial in the town centre but a commitment to this needs to be mindful of the financial implications, which are largely unknown at this stage, but likely to be significant.

Although costs of the new bus contract will not be known until the tender process is completed, a detailed review of the existing service has identified that efficiencies should be possible enabling many improvements to be provided at no extra cost.

TTS therefore considers part a) of the proposition to be unnecessary as the town service will be part of the tender process, and part (b) to be premature, as final costs of providing an improved comprehensive island wide (including town ”hoppa”) bus service will not be known until the end of the tender process. To “prioritise” a low or zero fare, low or zero emissions town service (at a cost of up to £500,000 per annum) implies that a lower priority will be given to all the other elements of an improved service. TTS is working to deliver all the aspects of an improved service as detailed in the Sustainable Transport Policy and would therefore advise against such a prioritisation.

The proposition if accepted could result in an annual commitment of £500,000 of States funding for a town hoppa service commencing in 2013.

For these reasons the Minister for Transport and Technical Services cannot to support the proposition as currently framed.

The Amendment by Deputy Le Herissier is considered non contentious.

Recommendation

The Minister approved the comments and instructed the Chief Officer to arrange for the comments to be presented to the States for consideration during the debate on 1st November 2011.

Reason for Decision

To allow the Greffier to arrange for the comments to be presented to the States for consideration.

Resource Implication

Officer time at TTS and the Greffe for the preparation and presentation of comments. However, the proposition if accepted could result in an annual commitment of £500,000 of States funding for a town hoppa service commencing in 2013.

Action Required

Chief Officer to request the Greffier to arrange for the comments to be presented to the States for consideration

Written by: Director of Transport

Approved by: Director Transport