The Scottish Ferries Review

Consultation Document 2010

Mull – 28 July 2010

Judith Ainsley

Introduction• General presentation on Ferries review

• Q&A

• Workshop on routes and services methodology

• Opportunity for final questions

The Consultation

• Consultation Document, not a Plan• Runs to 30 September 2010• Questionnaires to complete and return• 33 key questions• scottishferriesreview@scotland.gsi.gov.uk• 0131 244 1539• Documents available on our website

Commitment to Ferries

• Essential part of our transport network• Essential for access to vital services• Enable movement of freight• Encourage sustainable and growing

communities• Must provide a safe, sustainable system• Quality employment

Summary of the Review:

• Inform a long term Ferries Strategy – to 2022• Influence next round of tendering for services• Investment programme for vessels and ports

and harbours• All publicly funded ferries included – Scottish

Government and local authority funded• No potential routes excluded• Needs of passengers, cars, commercial vehicles

and freight all to be considered

Lack of consistency

• Funding services• Funding vessels• Funding harbour infrastructure• Responsibility for delivery• What routes and what level of service• Tendered services• Provision of vessels

What we’ve done so far

• Been helped in forming opinions by project groups

• Consultants and CMAL carried out specific pieces of work to inform us

• Public consultation events last year

• Extensive data collection

Challenges

• Less money available to invest in and support ferries

• Ageing fleet and need for investment

• Ageing harbour infrastructure and need for investment

• Escalating fuel and crew costs

• Subsidy levels increasing

Funding and Procurement• To 2022 need £604m for vessels• To 2022 need £180m for ports and

harbours replacement• To 2022 need £7.5m p.a. annually for

ports and harbours maintenance• The services also need to be funded -

2007/8 cost for all c. £103m, 2008/9 for DML c.£90m

• We are asking you to consider options

Funding Options

• The status quo

• CMAL to access funds through alternative structural or financing routes

• Ports and harbours could be self-funding

• Users of the service to pay more

• Open the market up to greater competition

Procurement Options for services

• Tender some routes singly with the option for operators to bring their own vessel(s) to the tendered routes?

• Specific routes are suggested• Allow single routes to be “bundled” or stagger the

tenders?• Leave remaining routes within the 2 large bundles?• Loosen the tender requirements, specifying only the

minimum level service to allow operators the flexibility to innovate?

• What should be specified?

Fares Options• Increase all fares• Increase visitor fares• Reduce fares for island/peninsula

residents• Reduce fares for commercial vehicles• RET or other distance based• To manage demand• Mixed approach

Fares Questions• Asking you to consider what the rationale

for/purpose of the fares policy should be.

• Should fares differentiate between islanders/residents of peninsular communities and other ferry users?

• One fares policy across Scotland or different policies dependant on needs of communities?

What services should be funded?

• We have developed a methodology – based on Summer timetables - for determining what routes and services are needed

• We will now do the same for Winter timetable

How should services be provided?

• Who should be responsible for providing ferry services that need public subsidy?

• Should there be central procurement expertise regardless of who is responsible for the provision of the service?

Options• Status quo – inconsistent approach

• Scottish Government becomes responsible for all

• Local Authorities/RTPs become responsible for all

• A more consistent split of responsibility for example….

How responsibility could be split?

• SG responsible for services between mainland and islands, LAs or RTPs responsible for all others

• Dependant on administration at either end of the route

• Dependant on whether the route is classed as a “sea” route or one with less onerous conditions

Accessibility• Disabled people, those travelling with

children or luggage, PRMs• Equalities Impact Assessment at Draft

Plan stage• Accessibility Assessments carried out • Recommendations from this work in the

consultation document and you are asked for your views

Accessibility• Should they be implemented now?

• Included in future tender requirements?

• Accessibility improvement fund?

• Information system indicating the degree of accessibility?

Environmental Issues• Some questions regarding reducing

emissions aimed at operators

• Question 33, would you support longer journey times as part of a CO2 emissions reduction programme?

• Do you have any other suggestions to reduce emissions?

Any questions so far?

Part 2 - Workshop session • Opportunity to explore and discuss our initial findings

for Mull, Iona, Ardnamurchan and Morvern. So far we have considered:

1. what you need your ferry for2. what a service would look like to meet these needs3. where the gaps are

• We have still to consider options to address the gapsand prioritise future spending

Checking we’ve got this right?• Aware that in defining the needs of the

community and defining a ferry service to meet those needs there might be things we haven’t got quite right.

• We need you to tell us what you think –have we described your community correctly?do we need to change anything?

Current Issues Mull• Complicated timetable with variations on sailings;

Integration with other public transport modes on mainland

Iona• Limited sailings, winter timetable and inconsistent

timetables/sailingsArdnamurchan and Morvern• Limited timetable• Winter timetable and inconsistent timetable

Household survey results

• An average of 67% of people on Mull who use the ferry most are either quite or highly satisfied with their current services.

• Iona – small sample size so combined with other communities, therefore no separate figures available.

• An average of 79% of people in Ardnamurchan and Morvern who use the ferry most are either quite or highly satisfied with their current services.

• Average satisfaction for the network is 73%.

What you need your ferry for -

1. Commuting - importance of ferry to enable regular commuting and business travel to and from community.

2. Personal – if people are dependent on basic services and facilities from the mainland

3. Supply chain - where communities have good access to public amenities and shopping – these amenities need supplying

4. Export/Import - where an island requires the ferry to cope with high levels of freight transit.

5. Tourism – how dependent is the island on tourism.

Initial findings • Mull - Export/Import and Tourism are equally important.

Followed by Supply chain, Personal and then Commuting

• Iona – Tourism is important. Followed by Commuting, Personal, Export/Import and then Supply Chain

• Ardnamurchan-Tourism and Commuting are equally important. Followed by Supply chain and then Personal and Export/import

• Morvern- Personal, Export/Import and Tourism are all equally important. Followed by Commuting and Supply chain.

• Does this feel right?

How did we assess this?• Commuting –We used household survey

data. We looked at the % of people who said their principle use was commuting or business travel;

• Personal - We considered the population density of the island and weighted this against factors such as whether the community has access to local healthcare/school facilities etc;

How did we assess this?• Supply chain - The measure for this

dependency was the population size of the island;

• Export/import -The measure for this dependency is commercial vehicle lane metres;

• Tourism - measured by the average number of people employed in tourism for the community and the ratio of summer and winter patronage.

Defining a service

• In defining a service to meet these needs we have considered:1.Crossing time;

2.number of sailings per day;

3.length of operating day; and,

4.the number of days per week the service runs

Initial analysis • Mull - A slightly longer crossing time together with a

longer operating day. And no change to sailings per day or days per week.

• Iona - A longer crossing time, a reduced number of sailings per day, a shorter operating day and a reduced number of days per week.

• Ardnamurchan - No change to the length of crossing time, a reduced number of sailings per day, a longer operating day and no change to the number of days per week.

• Morvern – A longer crossing time and a reduced number of sailings per day, a longer operating day and no change to the number of days per week.

• However, we will take account of consultation responses and where applicable Steps 5 and 6 yet to be applied

Steps 5 and 6• Identify options to address proposed

changes at Step 4

• STAG based appraisal

• Objectives to take account of current issues

• Prioritise future spend across the Scottish ferries network

What happens next?

• Public consultation to 30 September 2010• 43 events within this period• Draft Ferries Plan with more detailed Strategic

Environmental Assessment and an Equalities Impact Assessment

• Further minimum 6 week consultation period• Final Ferries Plan