Andy Burnham | Manchester Mayor

Blue Mist said:
Who funds loss running routes/times on these evening services ?
Click to expand...
You sound like one of the operators from.the old order, who wouldn't run unprofitable routes, Sundays or evening services, thus obliging TfGM to intervene with subsidised services.

So there's no change really. Just a vastly different outlook.
 
The departure of Sasha Lord last month, the nightime economic adviser to Burnham got little coverage.
He resigned as the Arts Council asked him to return £400k his company was granted not so long ago. His application for the money was dodgy.
Lord was appointed by Burnham, backed by him, he became his right hand man and they were as thick as thieves.
Lord has been totally discredited and by association so has Burnham, who I would not trust as far as I could throw him
 
Blue Mist said:
Who funds loss running routes/times on these evening services ?
Click to expand...
The ultimate aim is to get people out of cars and onto buses so to me the obvious answer to this question is an increase in fuel duties for private vehicles and maybe an increase in road tax too.

I'm guessing the proposed congestion charge would have partly gone to public transport as well.
 
PaulPowerScreamer said:
The ultimate aim is to get people out of cars and onto buses so to me the obvious answer to this question is an increase in fuel duties for private vehicles and maybe an increase in road tax too.

I'm guessing the proposed congestion charge would have partly gone to public transport as well.
Click to expand...
VED increases next month for everyone. Electric cars no longer exempt plus they don’t qualify for exemption from the expensive car supplement (£40k+) either from 1st April.
 
PaulPowerScreamer said:
Yes I think the ticketing is better and I've not seen any drop off in service (though I believe others have). More buses in the evening is what I've always wanted to see
Click to expand...
The routes this London company have took over are a shambles tbf, even worse for being to timetable than stagecoach were, but as they are new to the region hoppefully will settle down

I do think when stagecoach left Hyde Rd they took the decent bus stock and left some right old bangers, you have 15 yr buses from aberdeen on the 216 route.

East Manchester is an afterthought though to GMPTE and always has been while.they obsess over salfod quays and burnhams love of the wigan area.
 
BTH said:
You sound like one of the operators from.the old order, who wouldn't run unprofitable routes, Sundays or evening services, thus obliging TfGM to intervene with subsidised services.

So there's no change really. Just a vastly different outlook.
Click to expand...
That's a strange take. It was a straight forward question.
If a route has 3 passengers on it between 7pm and 11pm it will lose money.
Now Burnham is 'running it' are we the GM taxpayer paying to subsidise it.
I've just been hit with a 7.5% council tax rise. I want to know is my money being spent on this rag farce and this new bus system.
If we are subsidising it via tfgm who is looking at whether routes are viable. Are they competing with the Met for instance.
I have no problem with subsidising loss making routes that are required but I object to paying for services because some one is too lazy, too dishonest, too frightened to make a decision.
 
Blue Mist said:
That's a strange take. It was a straight forward question.
If a route has 3 passengers on it between 7pm and 11pm it will lose money.
Now Burnham is 'running it' are we the GM taxpayer paying to subsidise it.
I've just been hit with a 7.5% council tax rise. I want to know is my money being spent on this rag farce and this new bus system.
If we are subsidising it via tfgm who is looking at whether routes are viable. Are they competing with the Met for instance.
I have no problem with subsidising loss making routes that are required but I object to paying for services because some one is too lazy, too dishonest, too frightened to make a decision.
Click to expand...

I’ll defend the position. It’s about providing access for all when needed at reasonable prices therefore it’s supported from peak to under utilised.

It’s the same principle for insurance, health or even postal services in rural areas.

At times we may think it’s a waste of money but it might be the only way the little old dear gets to visit her husband in hospital etc…..
 
Blue Mist said:
That's a strange take. It was a straight forward question.
If a route has 3 passengers on it between 7pm and 11pm it will lose money.
Now Burnham is 'running it' are we the GM taxpayer paying to subsidise it.
I've just been hit with a 7.5% council tax rise. I want to know is my money being spent on this rag farce and this new bus system.
If we are subsidising it via tfgm who is looking at whether routes are viable. Are they competing with the Met for instance.
I have no problem with subsidising loss making routes that are required but I object to paying for services because some one is too lazy, too dishonest, too frightened to make a decision.
Click to expand...
Certain routes have been subsidised for years, even down to just individual journey times on a wider schedule of a service, it's usually noted in the printed schedule somewhere. However it's a chicken and egg situation in poorly served communities. You need a service to attract passengers but if a service doesn't exist how do you know if one is needed. We only have regular buses at stops 3/4 mile walk from home but do have a bus stop nearer (100yds or so) that used to have an hourly (9-5) service, so pretty useless to working people. It got improved about two years ago so there are at least early and late buses now, well, 7am to 9pm and still only hourly, but it's a start and a lot of the older residents are using it I notice. It took a while though and it was only when it became part of the Bee Network that it picked up in terms of passenger numbers.

At the moment, the Bee Network has mainly just taken over existing services and not changed much. You can ask questions in the Network survey (https://www.gmconsult.org/transport/c8dc97b7/) and look at the current and previous consultations about some of the routes (https://tfgm.com/consultations-and-engagement). Again, much of this was pointless when the buses were independent.
 
1000017229.png

'You don't know how realistic it is, it's all up in the air. Words are cheap, and we could say anything about anyone, you can say in 10 years we'll have the biggest and best stadium in the world, you can say anything!

'For a long time, we've been called the richest club in the world, but I feel like we're begging a little but, coming out and asking for the stadium and that we need £2billion, and selling players to buy players.'

United plan to pay for the stadium, and elements that benefit them directly, but are relying on public funding for the rest of the project and wider regeneration of the Old Trafford area, with Chancellor Rachel Reeves backing the plans.
 
Corky said:
It was all done in public papers, the commercially sensitive stuff was in a part 2 report (confidential) but it was as transparent as possible with full loan amounts and units in part 1, just not repayment terms.

It is the £300m Housing Investment Loan fund which predates Burnham, and was the first bit of devolved funding for GM which come from the DCLG at the time (now MHCLG) in 2016. The fact it has been recycled, paid back with interest to GM and already worth £800m shows it has been successful, and has helped provide for multiple schemes of different types in all 10 districts.

The criticism over the last year has been the amount of loans to Renaker for large city centre developments when it was aimed at SME builders. If there has been lots of SME builders whose schemes would qualify lining up for the cash they would be likely to have got it, but as demand wasn't excessive it was better to have someone using the money and paying it back quickly with interest then have it spare. It is really a massive non-story, and the Government gets it all back in the end.
Click to expand...
There's a legal challenge going on at the moment. A developer is claiming that the funding to Renaker is distorting the market because they have access to preferential borrowing costs. On the face of it, Renaker appear to be getting a good deal. It doesn't bother me on account of they have been successfully completing schemes around M/cr & Salford, so I'm sure GMCA are getting a decent return coupled with the rates & GVA spend from residents.

https://www.placenorthwest.co.uk/gmca-faces-legal-challenge-over-renaker-loans/
 
jrb said:
Laing O’Rourke has become the first major contractor to publicly declare an interest in building Manchester United’s new ground.

The firm is an early favourite for the job given it has recently completed Everton’s new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock in Liverpool.

Laing O’Rourke’s group commercial and Europe hub clients and markets director, John O’Connor, told Building: “We are always interested in opportunities that align to our business model and allow us to deploy our extensive capabilities in project delivery, manufacturing and utilising modern methods of construction. Such an approach allowed us to deliver Everton’s new stadium at Bramley-Moore Dock earlier than scheduled.

www.building.co.uk

Laing O’Rourke throws hat into ring for Manchester United work

Firm's group commerical director tells Building job appeals to contractor's business model and skill set
www.building.co.uk www.building.co.uk
Click to expand...
LOR were in the box seat for the North Stand development having done some preliminary work on the scheme. I'd heard that they pushed back on the pricing when it was formally tendered, so they ended up missing out on the contract as a result.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jrb
kismet said:
The departure of Sasha Lord last month, the nightime economic adviser to Burnham got little coverage.
He resigned as the Arts Council asked him to return £400k his company was granted not so long ago. His application for the money was dodgy.
Lord was appointed by Burnham, backed by him, he became his right hand man and they were as thick as thieves.
Lord has been totally discredited and by association so has Burnham, who I would not trust as far as I could throw him
Click to expand...
manchestermill.co.uk

Breaking: Sacha Lord has resigned as an advisor to Andy Burnham

The Arts Council wants his company Primary Events to pay back the taxpayers’ money it obtained during the pandemic
manchestermill.co.uk manchestermill.co.uk

manchestermill.co.uk

Exclusive: Documents show how Sacha Lord’s company obtained £400,000 of public money during the pandemic

…and that it requested £10,500 of emergency funding - to redesign a website
manchestermill.co.uk manchestermill.co.uk
 
Eds said:
manchestermill.co.uk

Breaking: Sacha Lord has resigned as an advisor to Andy Burnham

The Arts Council wants his company Primary Events to pay back the taxpayers’ money it obtained during the pandemic
manchestermill.co.uk manchestermill.co.uk

manchestermill.co.uk

Exclusive: Documents show how Sacha Lord’s company obtained £400,000 of public money during the pandemic

…and that it requested £10,500 of emergency funding - to redesign a website
manchestermill.co.uk manchestermill.co.uk
Click to expand...
"mistakes were made" was, I believe, the quote from Lord at the time. Right.
 
cheekybids said:
I’ll defend the position. It’s about providing access for all when needed at reasonable prices therefore it’s supported from peak to under utilised.

It’s the same principle for insurance, health or even postal services in rural areas.

At times we may think it’s a waste of money but it might be the only way the little old dear gets to visit her husband in hospital etc…..
Click to expand...
In reply to you and @Citizen of Legoland
I agree with subsidising travel if that travel is needed. I certainly agree with subsidising travel in the more rural areas, I sometimes forget people don't realise I am posting about local Manchester travel.
The tram goes to most parts of Manchester and is easily accessible. It has had a huge impact on people who used to travel by bus. It makes sense to review bus routes and travel to see if they are needed. It is pie in the sky to say buses should run at a huge loss when other transport is available.
My argument, to bring it back on topic is, just because Burnham says it is a wonderful idea, (the stadium) doesn't mean it is. He states the buses now run a brilliant service, all thanks to him. (Sasha Lord says hi) They don't. It's spin (lies) so is this Trafford rebirth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top