Letter: Bus chaos: legal diversions, surplus and scarcity

Sir: I read with interest your article ('Competition brings chaos on the buses', 18 January) about the lessons of bus deregulation in Sheffield.

I note that your reporter, Christian Wolmar, travelled on our service 93 and that one of our buses was forced to make a lengthy detour in the city centre. This is a result of what many regard as an absurd decision by the local Traffic Commissioner to put a limit on the number of buses being allowed into the town centre. We are contesting that decision.

Such decisions add to the confusion suggested by the photograph accompanying the article. The five buses seen 'competing' in this photo carry three liveries and three brand names (Mainline, South Yorkshire's Transport - SYT - and Eager Beavers). In fact, they all belong to SYT, as do Sheafline, Don Valley, Little Nipper and other Mainline variants. It is easy to see how confusion can be generated.

Of course most bus users in Sheffield understand the system well enough, not least thanks to the efforts of the Passenger Transport Executive, which produces free timetable leaflets in the area.

There is also a common practice of operators sharing route numbers where services cover the same roads. SYT is trying to force other operators to change these established numbers on the pretext that it has some form of ownership of them (does Heinz, for example, have the copyright on baked beans?). This is likely to be tested through the courts.

SYT should be broken up into smaller, natural units and privatised quickly. This would bring some balance to the competitive scene through financial discipline, enable local managers to tackle high cost structures with more urgency, and bring services in line with the needs of the market more sharply. Instead of a partial deregulation, there should have been a complete deregulation, which would have led to competition on a level playing field.

Yours faithfully,

G. I. WATSON

Director, Sheffield Omnibus

Sheffield