List below. It's not gone down well with the Labour South Yorkshire Metro Mayor or the Labour leaders of Cheshire East and Cheshire West councils.
Blackburn with Darwen and Lancashire: £34.2m
Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole: £8.9m
Brighton and Hove: £27.9m
Central Bedfordshire: £3.7m
City of York: £17.4m
Cornwall (including Isles of Scilly): £13.3m
Derby City: £7m
Derbyshire: £47m
Devon: £14.1m
East Sussex: £41.4m
Greater Manchester: £94.8m
Hertfordshire: £29.7m
Kent: £35.1m
Liverpool City Region: £12.3m
Luton: £19.1m
Norfolk: £49.6m
North East and North of Tyne: £163.5m
North East Lincolnshire: £4.7m
Nottingham City: £11.4m
Nottinghamshire: £18.7m
Oxfordshire: £12.7m
Portsmouth: £48.3m
Reading: £26.3m
Somerset: £11.9m
Stoke-on-Trent: £31.7m
Warrington: £16.2m
West Berkshire: £2.6m
West Midlands: £87.9m
West of England and North Somerset: £105.5m
West Sussex: £17.4m
West Yorkshire: £70m
(07/04/2022 20:15)1466 Wrote: [ -> ]The Liverpool City Region allocation is a pittance compared to the ask https://www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.u...P_2021.pdf absolute disgrace, levelling up is just an empty soundbite
If they gave Liverpool a partial award I don't get why some areas have been excluded altogether. Surely every area should have got something, even if the funding didn't stretch far enough to give every area as much as it would have liked.
It also seems they have made Cornwall a trial area for certain improvements and financial incentives. I don't get that when Cornwall's actually benefitted from restrictions on international travel by getting a considerable number of additional domestic tourists. A city region, like Sheffield that's missed out, will have lost a considerable amount due to people who used to commute in to the city instead working from home or being furloughed.
(07/04/2022 20:15)1466 Wrote: [ -> ]The Liverpool City Region allocation is a pittance compared to the ask https://www.liverpoolcityregion-ca.gov.u...P_2021.pdf absolute disgrace, levelling up is just an empty soundbite
The funding was limited. If it was a case of 'all or nothing', only about 5 authorities would have gotten any funding. The overall asks added up to something like £7bn and only 1bn was left in the pot to give out. There was always going to be winners and losers. It's better to give bits of money to as many people as possible than giving a lot to a few people.
Just because one area doesn't get funding, doesn't mean that 'levelling up' is a an 'empty soundbite'. A lot of areas have been levelled up with this funding. There will always be winners and losers when funding is limited.
(08/04/2022 09:37)knutstransport Wrote: [ -> ]If they gave Liverpool a partial award I don't get why some areas have been excluded altogether. Surely every area should have got something, even if the funding didn't stretch far enough to give every area as much as it would have liked.
Because giving every a few million won't make much difference and doesn't give any minister a press opportunity. More money means more meaningful changes can be made.
(08/04/2022 09:37)knutstransport Wrote: [ -> ]It also seems they have made Cornwall a trial area for certain improvements and financial incentives. I don't get that when Cornwall's actually benefitted from restrictions on international travel by getting a considerable number of additional domestic tourists. A city region, like Sheffield that's missed out, will have lost a considerable amount due to people who used to commute in to the city instead working from home or being furloughed.
Cornwall also had some of the highest fares and most patchy bus networks. The funding has provided a lot of additional buses in the area and massively reduced fares so the bus network is less tourist based and more local based. No good having a bus network only for the tourists, you need buses for locals to get the work, shops and doctors too.
(08/04/2022 11:53)iMarkeh Wrote: [ -> ]Cornwall also had some of the highest fares and most patchy bus networks. The funding has provided a lot of additional buses in the area and massively reduced fares so the bus network is less tourist based and more local based. No good having a bus network only for the tourists, you need buses for locals to get the work, shops and doctors too.
I didn't say they should only have a bus network for tourists. I was saying Cornwall got additional bus revenue during the COVID pandemic, while most areas lost revenue.
Under the plans Cornwall will have a £5 all day any operator ticket from next week. Yet in most parts of Cheshire East you'll be paying £11 or more if you're making a return journey that requires both Arriva and D&G. Giving Cornwall funding for this and giving nothing for Cheshire East or Cheshire West isn't levelling up.
(08/04/2022 12:39)knutstransport Wrote: [ -> ]I didn't say they should only have a bus network for tourists. I was saying Cornwall got additional bus revenue during the COVID pandemic, while most areas lost revenue.
Under the plans Cornwall will have a £5 all day any operator ticket from next week. Yet in most parts of Cheshire East you'll be paying £11 or more if you're making a return journey that requires both Arriva and D&G. Giving Cornwall funding for this and giving nothing for Cheshire East or Cheshire West isn't levelling up.
Cornwall was charging £11 for a single operator day ticket so using multiple operators would cost even more. Cornwall is a trial test bed to see what successes can come out of it. It doesn't seem so far like there are many successes as I believe a good number of the new routes carry fresh air.
At the end of the day, there will always be a winner and loser. It's one of those things. Cheshire East may win next time around if more funding comes out.
It was down to the local boroughs to convice the government to give them the money. Clearly these councils didn't present a convincing case.
(08/04/2022 14:59)iMarkeh Wrote: [ -> ]Cornwall was charging £11 for a single operator day ticket so using multiple operators would cost even more. Cornwall is a trial test bed to see what successes can come out of it. It doesn't seem so far like there are many successes as I believe a good number of the new routes carry fresh air.
At the end of the day, there will always be a winner and loser. It's one of those things. Cheshire East may win next time around if more funding comes out.
It was down to the local boroughs to convice the government to give them the money. Clearly these councils didn't present a convincing case.
There could be political reasons for the funding awards like which areas have local elections this year, which areas were hit hardest by the loss of EU funding etc.
I don't know where your £11 figure has come from. First Cornwall were already advertising a £9 day ticket and a £28 weekly ticket that is also valid on all Stagecoach, Go Cornwall, Hopleys, OTS and Travel Cornwall services in Cornwall. They're also promoting £3 multi-operator day tickets valid within certain towns.
https://www.firstbus.co.uk/cornwall/tick...et-any-bus
So it seems Cornwall had launched the multi-operator day ticket anyway and are using the fund to cut the cost significantly.
Just a thought based on the money awarded vs what was asked/needed does this not put into question the plans to franchise Manchester and Liverpool City Region etc as that will need a lot of funding…..
