Jump to content


Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.
Sign in to follow this  
Pakenhamtrain

(AUS)Anger as French company lands bus contract

Recommended Posts

From the age:

 

Anger as French company lands bus contract Adam Carey Transport Reporter for The Age

A French-based multinational company has won the contract to run Melbourne's busiest bus routes, in a blow to Victoria's largest bus company, Ventura.

 

In a decision that has been condemned by the local bus industry, Public Transport Victoria on Friday awarded the contract to operate 30 per cent of the city's bus routes to Transdev for the next seven years, with an option to extend for a further three years.

A multinational transport operator, Transdev in 2011 merged with Veolia, another French company that ran Melbourne's trains under the Connex brand for 10 years until it was dumped for Metro in 2009.

The bus routes Transdev will operate include the popular Doncaster rapid bus network and the orbital SmartBus routes, the three most heavily used routes in Melbourne.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Transdev is one of the world biggest transportation company.

You could have also choose  the RATP Dev or Keolis (French are everywhere) .  :D

Edited by Minato ku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very foolish move that's going to hurt Australia... Sorry but I'm a protectionist at heart.  The company chosen should've been Australian, period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a service industry, the fact that the company is from a country or an other country would not change anything because all the employees working would be in Australia.

You can't compare it to manufacturing sector and too much protectionism is bad for the economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a service industry, the fact that the company is from a country or an other country would not change anything because all the employees working would be in Australia.

You can't compare it to manufacturing sector and too much protectionism is bad for the economy.

Oh please... If this happened in France there would be an uproar and you know it.  The French are some of the biggest protectionists out there...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't mean that I would agree with it. 

I don't really criticize this anger in Australia, I just say that the protectionism is bad for the economy on long term. 

Edited by Minato ku

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This doesn't mean that I would agree with it. 

I don't really criticize this anger in Australia, I just say that the protectionism is bad for the economy on long term. 

It's only bad because our economies have become too integrated... I think protectionism should be enacted esp. during times like this when the economy is tough.  Each country should be ensuring that their citizens are tended to and have jobs not letting outsiders come in and steal jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of the list of shortlisted companies only two Australian ones were picked. Transit Systems Pty Ltd and NationalBus(Ventura)

The other companies were: First Transit of Australia Pty Ltd, Keolis Downer Rail, Veolia Transport Australasia Pty Ltd

Keolis currently hold the Melbourne tram franchise

 

They do run the risk of another National Express disaster. The bloke in charge of giving the Government buses back then was Ian Dobbs. The same bloke they have in charge of PTV. National Express undercut and ended up loosing a bit of money. They left in 04.

 

Victoria is a very good example of how to completely stuff up privatizing anything.

We ended up with a split system with two types of train that couldn't run system wide(Siemens and X'traps) and for quite a few years the same type of train that couldn't run together(Comeng trains. Two different refurbishments)

 

Of course if the contract is done the right way in terms of service improvements and punishments for late or non-running then I don't see why they can't do a good job. They're going to have to do something in regards to the 216/219/220 The city absolutely kills the on time running on these routes.

The came could be said for the 901/902/902. Although these routes it's understandable because of the length on them. The 901 is over 110KM(68 miles)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Of course if the contract is done the right way in terms of service improvements and punishments for late or non-running then I don't see why they can't do a good job. They're going to have to do something in regards to the 216/219/220 The city absolutely kills the on time running on these routes.

The came could be said for the 901/902/902. Although these routes it's understandable because of the length on them. The 901 is over 110KM(68 miles)

 

110 km?! Is that all local stops, or is there a limited-stop/express segment on the route?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

110 km?! Is that all local stops, or is there a limited-stop/express segment on the route?

All stops. Although all buses here stop only when asked and pick up if someone is waiting at the stop. It takes a bus around 4 hours to complete one direction(Ie. Frankston to Melbourne Airport)

http://ptv.vic.gov.au/getting-around/maps/metropolitan-buses/view/5774

The 902 and 903 are less severe in thier distances but are still quite long routes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're going to have to do something in regards to the 216/219/220 The city absolutely kills the on time running on these routes.The came could be said for the 901/902/902. Although these routes it's understandable because of the length on them. The 901 is over 110KM(68 miles)

It's often suggested splitting 216/219/220 will fix reliability, but itll do very little. The city while an issuse as you mention, is not the only issuse. The running times themselves are a joke, and even at times when there not as much or no congestion, buses on these routes can not make it on time. Late running is not just in peek, off peak , evenings, and even Sunday night these routes experience late running!

 

What to do about it? First thing that needs be done is more running time(even if had more bus priorty)would still more running, as the run times are that bad. Once that's done, second thing should be done, is more bus priorty. Yes could take a number of years, but the extra run time will provide some relief.

 

Route 232 can also be added to the list, it's on time running is just as bad.

 

As for the oribital smartbuses the late running on those routes is nothing compared to these ex MBL runs.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's often suggested splitting 216/219/220 will fix reliability, but itll do very little. The city while an issuse as you mention, is not the only issuse. The running times themselves are a joke, and even at times when there not as much or no congestion, buses on these routes can not make it on time. Late running is not just in peek, off peak , evenings, and even Sunday night these routes experience late running!

 

What to do about it? First thing that needs be done is more running time(even if had more bus priorty)would still more running, as the run times are that bad. Once that's done, second thing should be done, is more bus priorty. Yes could take a number of years, but the extra run time will provide some relief.

 

Route 232 can also be added to the list, it's on time running is just as bad.

 

As for the oribital smartbuses the late running on those routes is nothing compared to these ex MBL runs.

 

That just sounds like they need a schedule adjustment - surely there is an average run time for every run, give or take a few minutes. (By this I mean that a run starting at 7PM every Friday should generally have the same travel time every week, more or less.)

 

As for the problems with incompatible vehicles, you could do what taxi commissions in the US do and specify specific vehicle types to use during service (or a certain set of standards that all vehicles must comply with).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That just sounds like they need a schedule adjustment - surely there is an average run time for every run, give or take a few minutes. (By this I mean that a run starting at 7PM every Friday should generally have the same travel time every week, more or less.) As for the problems with incompatible vehicles, you could do what taxi commissions in the US do and specify specific vehicle types to use during service (or a certain set of standards that all vehicles must comply with).

It needs more bus priorty as well as more run time. In peak hour it's hard to work out the average time, as the time varies so much.

But extra run time is first step in fixing things

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh please... If this happened in France there would be an uproar and you know it.  The French are some of the biggest protectionists out there...

 

That doesn't say much. UK people are also big protectionists but when the Dutch Railways started to operate several lines there I haven't seen one screaming person on the street.

 

Transdev is getting really big and deservedly so. I support local companies if they bring something good to the table. If they don't, then let the best company win, in this case Transdev.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That doesn't say much. UK people are also big protectionists but when the Dutch Railways started to operate several lines there I haven't seen one screaming person on the street.

 

Transdev is getting really big and deservedly so. I support local companies if they bring something good to the table. If they don't, then let the best company win, in this case Transdev.

The Dutch are Western Europeans like the English, so I wouldn't expect to see too much commotion and the English aren't as snobby as the French are.  That isn't to say that Europeans don't hate each other, but that hatred lessens between some groups.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That doesn't say much. UK people are also big protectionists but when the Dutch Railways started to operate several lines there I haven't seen one screaming person on the street.

 

Parts of the British left have never been really comfortable with privatisation, and there are rumors here and there that Labour may consider renationalizing the system due to the failure of the company that held the East Coast franchise, in line with its shift left from the whole Blair-era New Labour policies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.