Issue - meetings

A petition signed by 284 residents is to be presented by the Lead Petitioner Mrs. R. Johnson.

A petition submitted by Mrs. Johnson, a local resident in Belton, signed by 284 local residents was presented to the Commission requesting retention and improvements to the 129 service between Ashby-de-la-Zouch and Loughborough.

A briefing note of the Director of Environment and Transport summarising the situation relating to the petition was considered by the Commission. A copy of this report, marked ‘B’, is filed with these minutes.

With the consent of the Chairman, Mrs. Johnson addressed the Commission and stated that there had been rumours that the service was to be withdrawn and that this would have an adverse effect on the older people in Belton and Osgathorpe who relied on the service to gain access to essential services of those villages. She further stated that it was the opinion of many in those villages that a ‘dial-a-ride’ or equivalent demand-response service would not be adequate for the needs of villagers.

The Director of Environment and Transport addressed the Commission and made the following key points:

·                    The service was being reviewed within the context of the Council’s need to identify unprecedented savings of £66 million;

·                    The Council’s Cabinet had agreed to review all services that were outside of the Council’s policy to provide a daytime network of services to at least an hourly timetable and within 800 metres of 95% of County residents;

·                    The Council was currently in the process of gathering information on the service. No final decision had yet been made and users were encouraged to inform the Council of their essential journey needs in order that an appropriate alternative service could be designed in the event of withdrawal;

·                    Those affected by the withdrawal of the service would be given four months’ notice;

·                    The operator of the service had already been notified that the contract for the service might be terminated;

·                    The Council was having to look critically at all services and it was acknowledged that there were a number of services outside of Council policy that, for historical reasons, had continued to operate, of which this was one. The potential saving from withdrawal of the service was in the region of £47,000 per annum.

Arising from discussion of the points made above, and in response to questions from members the following key points were noted:

·                    There were a number of alternative ways to provide a service for users, of which one was a demand-response service provided by a taxi company. It was highlighted that this had been successful in other villages as it was guaranteed and viewed as more personal – allowing users to make arrangements for regular journeys;

·                    It was felt that the Council’s policy might need to be reviewed in the future to take account of the significant savings being expected of the Council.

It was proposed, seconded and carried:-

“That the matter be referred to officers in the Environment and Transport Department for consideration as part of the ongoing review of services that were regarded as exceptions to the Council’s policy for supported bus services.”