Cambridge Labour is urging all residents to have their say on the city access scheme consultation which has been open for 4 weeks and which closes in a month on 23rd December. They have also today issued FAQ’s on the scheme in a bid to counter various misconceptions appearing on social media, in recent weeks to ensure that all residents have the correct information in relation to the consultation and the proposed scheme.

The chair of the Greater Cambridge Partnership, and County Council Cambridge Labour Leader Elisa Meschini added in relation to the proposed scheme;

“We felt this was the right scheme to put to public consultation and will listen to all points of view.  The ultimate aim of these proposals is to bring the public transport network in Cambridgeshire into local authority ownership and control. You may already have had experience of the kind of service we currently get from Stagecoach that runs a monopoly in the region and serves its bottom line rather than public need. This has led to multiple service cancellations and route deregistering, with cuts set to continue as government bus subsidies are withdrawn.”

She continued,

“I passionately believe in bringing local accountability to public transport, which is a human right and a basic need and should not be run for profit. I accept a congestion charge won’t be a universally popular way of achieving this, but we need a source of revenue if we are to double the size of the network, cap fares at £1, and franchise the lot. We are fully supportive of bus franchising, and want to see this as part of any final scheme. Today we are issuing FAQs as we want all residents to be in full possession of the facts in relation to the scheme including the large number of mitigations and exemptions.”

Cambridge City Labour leader, Cllr Anna Smith commented;

“It’s really important that we have this debate, and that as many people as possible contribute to it. We strongly encourage everyone, whatever their views, to take part in the consultation – we want to hear what people in the city are saying so that we can make our decisions based on as many responses as possible. We will listen carefully to the consultation and we won’t make a decision until the results have been analysed and published. I encourage you to have a look at the extensive consultation materials and have your say.”

The consultation is open until 23rd December: https://consultcambs.uk.engagementhq.com/making-connections-2022

Cambridge Labour have also issued FAQ’s on the scheme:

• What is the GCP?
  The GCP originates from the City Deal, which was signed in 2014 giving Greater Cambridge a large pot of money (£500m) over 15 years to create infrastructure to support and accelerate the creation of 44,000 new jobs, 33,500 new homes and 420 additional apprenticeships in Greater Cambridge. The pot of money comes with a team of officers who provide expertise on transport and other relevant areas, and with a structure to make the use of this money democratically accountable. Hence the partnership between Cambridge City Council, Cambridgeshire County Council, and South Cambridgeshire District Council. The leaders of these three authorities make up the Executive Board and have a vote on what the GCP does. The Executive Board also includes representatives from the Business Board and the University of Cambridge. However, these two representatives only advise the Board and do not have a vote when it comes to decision making. The three Executive Board seats are allocated by each of the three partner authorities, giving each Board member their authority’s mandate to pursue the GCP’s objectives of supporting growth, transport, housing and jobs.

• What is the difference between the GCP and the CPCA?
  The GCP was created as a result of the City Deal signed by Government in 2014. Its purpose was to allocate a grant of £500m to support sustainable growth in Greater Cambridge. The CPCA was established by Government in 2017, based on the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009. Combined authorities are created voluntarily by a group of local authorities to receive certain delegated functions from central government in order to deliver local transport and economic policy. The Executive Board of the GCP only has three voting members (the leaders of Cambridge City Council, Cambridgeshire County Council, and South Cambridgeshire District Council). The Board of the CPCA is chaired by a directly elected Mayor and has nine voting members: in addition to the Mayor, the Chair of the Business Board, the Leader of Cambridgeshire County Council, and the Leader of Peterborough City Council, there are the Leaders of the five Cambridgeshire District Councils (Cambridge City, South Cambridgeshire, East Cambridgeshire, Fenland and Huntingdonshire).

• How much money does the GCP have and what is it being spent on?
  The GCP was promised £500m in cash from Government in 2014, subject to three gateway reviews. At the moment, £130m has already been spent, and most of the rest is earmarked for various transport schemes including busways and greenways as well as the housing and skills We are also setting aside enough money to set up the proposed network and run it for five years until we need to bring in a charge to sustain it into the future.

• What is bus franchising?
  A franchised bus system in Cambridgeshire would look like TfL. The Combined Authority would be the Franchisor. It would tender out routes to bus operators based on local need, and assume the responsibility of those bus services being run according to local need, which would include subsidising any routes that are not commercially profitable in their own right, as long as local need requires those routes to exist. The bus operator would be the Franchisee. Operators would run the services on behalf of the CPCA, under CPCA branding, based on the terms established by the CPCA in the franchising agreement. Bus operators signing franchising agreements trade in a part of their profit in exchange for security of income (which would be guaranteed by the Franchisor).

• Why can’t the council run their own bus company?
  Under the Transport Act of 1985, local authorities are not allowed to run their own bus companies. However, under the Bus Services Act of 2017, Combined Authorities were given the powers to franchise bus routes in their areas.

• Why is this scheme being considered now?
  There are a number of factors which make it imperative that we start taking these decisions now. First, both the City (via its Joint Local Plan) and the Combined Authority have targets for a 15% reduction in car use based on the 2011 baseline by 2030. Yet, neither authority has been given the necessary resources to actually deliver this. Second, we can only franchise the buses under the powers of the Mayor, and the CPCA’s own business case for franchising does not stack up without a sustainable source of revenue. Third, the Treasury is committed to cutting fuel duty, and with the increase in ownership of electric vehicles the Treasury is rather exposed at the moment. If road based charging is introduced as a government initiative later, as government is strongly indicating it will, we’ll be stuck with it and the income will go to the Treasury. Those local authorities who introduce road based charging now will get to keep the revenue and reinvest it locally. And fourth, we are at a critical juncture with Stagecoach in this region. Since the pandemic, they have been receiving Government subsidies which have now been extended until Christmas but will likely end by March 2023. Despite regional profits of £50m this year to date, and being in receipt of Government subsidies, Stagecoach have released a list of their least profitable services, which are up for the chop. Without a plan to rescue buses in Cambridgeshire, things are about to get unsustainably worse.

• Is it a done deal/are you listening?
  We are, of course, listening, and nothing has been decided yet. The closure of the consultation on 23^rdDecember will be followed by a period of analysis and reflection after which we will agree a way forward. In order to ensure our decision is as well informed as it possibly can be, as many people as possible need to participate in the discussion that we are having now.

• What about those on lower incomes?
  Our Equalities Impact assessment shows that those on lower incomes are less likely to own a car. Of the bottom 20% of earners, only 35% own cars and, where they do own a car, they spend a quarter of their entire household income maintaining it. Car ownership is also lowest among social renters, women (where a household owns only one car, it is overwhelmingly used by the primary earner which is more likely to be a man), and in areas of higher deprivation. We recognise that changing behaviour is harder for the poorer in society who have less resilience and fewer alternatives to rely on. Because we recognise this, we intend to start introducing the benefits (capped fares at £1 in the City, increased frequency of buses, longer hours, and more bus routes) earlier (from 2023/24) while the full charge does not come into operation until 2027/28. In addition, we intend to have an extensive range of exemptions for those on lower incomes (linked to the City Council’s hardships schemes and the County Council’s Household Support Fund). We expect, subject to consultation, that taxis, blue badges, NHS vehicles, care home and social care workers, disabled tax class vehicles and wheelchair accessible private hire vehicles will be either exempt or eligible for rebates.

• Why not a pollution charge instead?
  With the increasing numbers of EVs, pollution charges are not sustainable. EVs still cause congestion in the City which affects everyone and results in pollution – even when the EV itself does not emit carbon. And EVs are expensive – it would not be fair to only charge those who can’t afford one. Areas that already have ULEZs in operation, such as Oxford and Birmingham, find that the revenue from those ULEZs falls year on year, due to the increasing number of EVs. These areas therefore face a continuous need to consult to expand the zone or increase its cost. We believe a viable scheme needs to be able to bring in a sustainable revenue.

• What would you be spending the congestion charge money on?
  Road user charges are strictly regulated by law, and can only be spent on transport infrastructure. Under the proposed scheme, we would invest the bulk of it on an improved, and fully franchised, bus network. A proportion of it would also be earmarked for investment into cycling, walking, and enhancement of the public realm in order to make the most of the space gained from a ~50% reduction in car traffic.

• What are the improvements in buses for people in the City?
  Fares capped at £1. Longer running hours – buses would run 5 am-1 am 7 days a week. More frequency – there would be 6 buses per hour off peak and 8 buses per hour at peak time (7-10 am and 4-7 pm). More routes – the network in the City would be doubled compared to its pre-pandemic size.

• Shouldn’t plans for a charge be separate from plans for new buses?
  If we were able to bring the bus improvements forward without the need to rely on a charge, then we wouldn’t need to talk about a charge at all ever. We don’t believe in the idea of a charge for its own sake, as a way to deter drivers, or as a way to just bring in revenue. We only believe in a charge because so far it’s the only sustainable way we can see of funding the buses.

• Why are you penalising those who live on the edge of town and need to commute out?
  There isn’t an easy answer given that we need to have a boundary somewhere, and wherever we put it there’ll be someone who falls just short of where they’d like to be. We intend to flesh this issue out more fully as part of the consultation. For regular commuters out, the majority of them will have a regular bus route they can use. For the minority who still don’t have a convenient bus route, we intend to significantly expand the P&Rs, so they could be used as a starting point to drive out. For those who make occasional trips out of Cambridge (visiting friends and family, holidays), the congestion charge would not operate at the weekend. Also, it should be recognised that one of the biggest expenses involved in running this is related to the high cost of individual queries to the DVLA database. For people who register with us for an account, and therefore allow us to bypass the DVLA database entirely, we will be allowing a number of free trips.

• Why are you penalising residents in the City, who don’t have a choice about whether to use their car?
  At the moment, Cambridge has one of the worst public transport systems for a city of its size, and correspondingly one of the highest levels of CO₂. Between 53 and 60% of car trips that take place within the City start within the City. This means that we won’t solve congestion in Cambridge simply by charging commuters in. If we want to enable residents to access everything their City has to offer, then we need to build them a significantly improved bus network for movement within the City. When our system is fully operational, residents of the City will be able to walk between 5 and 10 min and access a bus stop where there will be a bus within 10 min to take them on their onward journey. Under a franchised system, ticketing would also change. We would do away with a system where every new bus boarded requires paying an individual fare. A single fare would serve passengers either until their final destination, irrespective of the number of buses needed to get there; or it would last for a given length of time from issue.

• Why should drivers pay so that others can take the bus or cycle?
  The scheme we are proposing is going to benefit everyone, including drivers. There are many drivers at the moment who choose to drive because they have no alternative. We are going to give them one. And those still driving after the scheme will see a significant benefit, with no congestion, no delays, and much less harmful pollution. We are all drivers, bus passengers, cyclists and pedestrians depending on circumstance. And our loved ones. We all deserve a better deal.

• Are the buses for poor people so that rich people can drive?
  We have been talking about “two tier Cambridge” for a decade and a half. This is because Cambridge has been topping the lists for the most unequal city in the UK for some time now. Lack of public transport causes this inequality, and a good public transport system is needed to fix it. We want to build an excellent public transport system and encourage people to use it. Public transport is not some sort of poor relation of the car. In places where public transport is properly funded and fully franchised, the network is not some kind of poor relation of the car. It is a cheap and efficient option that makes travel for everyone easier. This is the case in London, it’s the case in Manchester, and it’s about time it should be the case in places that aren’t urban.

• Would you consider charging people per trip rather than per day?
  There would be advantages and disadvantages to many different types of scheme. While we do not exclude more sophisticated schemes at a later date, at this time we feel we should put forward something whose technology is more tried and tested and a daily charge is the most common feature of existing schemes of this kind.

• How would you address the current national shortage of bus drivers?
  We recognise that the problems caused by national shortages of drivers need to be solved if we are to come out of the current crisis. In the currently proposed scheme, we have budgeted for a 20% pay rise for bus drivers. We would offer them better training, competitive salaries, better contracts, better terms and conditions, better benefits. In addition to this, Mayor Dr. Nik Johnson has agreed to commit some of the CPCA’s skills budget to assist with a programme of recruitment, training and retention of bus drivers.

• How would the scheme affect local businesses in Cambridge?
  We are hearing the voice of local business loud and clear in this consultation and we will respond to the issues being raised. We want local businesses to thrive. Everywhere you look at the moment, every pub, every café, every restaurant in Cambridge, it’s “we are hiring” signs everywhere. Hospitality is on its knees because recruiting staff has become impossible, because people can’t afford to live next door to where they work, can’t commute because there’s no public transport, and can’t drive in because there’s no parking. With our scheme, we will service the night time economy. Buses will run until 1 am, allowing people to commute cheaply to and from jobs in bars, restaurants and pubs. We believe this will really benefit the hospitality sector. And with less congestion and more accessibility to the city centre, shops and businesses will benefit from increased footfall. This is the experience in every European city I know of where a scheme like this has been put in place.

• Is there really a lot of pollution in Cambridge?
  Data from the CPCA’s Independent Commission on Climate and Cambridge City Council’s Clean Air Zone study indicate that with limited intervention, transport in Cambridgeshire will produce 65 million tonnes of CO₂ between 2019 and 2050, even allowing for current projections in terms of EV ownership, and that concentrations remain above the national standard for NO₂ in Cambridge.

• How will people be able to travel to hospital/medical appointments?
  We want to ensure that access to A&E and medical appointments for those needing to drive there remains fair. Under our plans, anyone too clinically ill to travel by bus will have the vehicle in which they travel to hospital exempt from any road user charge, regardless of who’s driving it. However, there are many people, clinically ill or not, who, right now, drive to hospital simply because they have no other option. In addition to the cost of fuel, these people currently pay £4.10 for an outpatient daily parking permit at Addenbrookes, or £3 an hour for visitors. Even at current prices set by Stagecoach, it is cheaper to take the bus to Addenbrookes for those who are able to. We will provide more buses, and make them even cheaper.