Category: Uncategorized

In April, EBUG submitted an FOI request to Transport Scotland requesting details of funding disbursed by the Bus Partnership Fund, which the Scottish Government closed in 2024. On 9 May Transport Scotland replied that this was addressed by an earlier FOI ( https://www.gov.scot/publications/foi-202400432144/ ), though figures for the North East Bus Alliance had more recently been finalised.

We grouped the spending in geographical areas by 3 categories:
A. Projects which produced actual physical change on road networks
B. Projects producing some change to roads networks, as well as studies, appraisals etc (where data does not clearly distinguish them)
C. Projects producing only studies, appraisals etc

Argyll & Bute Partnership
Feasibility Study; George St/Dunollie Rd Bus Lane (not progressed after study).
Project management costs.
Signals upgrade on A816.
Upgrade bus shelters and cycle racks
£49,402 Category B
Ayrshire Partnership
Feasibility study; Pennyburn Rd, Kilwinning bus lane extension.
Feasibility study ; John Finnie St, Kilmarnock bus prioritisation at signals.
UTC extensions Kilmarnock– Three Towns to prioritise buses at B751/B7081 junc, and 2 signals, Ardrossan.
£248,810 Category B
Edinburgh Bus Alliance
Strategic Business Case on 8 Edinburgh corridors to identify potential bus priority measures. Prepare additional evidence for Transport Scotland.
Scoping/Appraisal of bus priority at 37 signals.
Appraise extra physical bus priority measures on Edinburgh corridors/junctions.
Feasibility studies for early interventions identified in the SBC.
Outline Business Case incl. design of selected bus priority measures: A7/A772, A71, A90.
Upgrade QMS, A90 near Barnton junction.
Bus priority trial: install virtual loops, 7 junctions Slateford Rd and 6 junctions Dalkeith Rd.
Make permanent the temporary A1, A90, A89, Gogar Pass, Newcraighal, Kaimes and Gilmerton Crossroads bus lanes; previously temporary signals Riccarton Mains Rd Roundabout; the temporary splitting of bus stop outside Musselburgh police station.
A70 Bus Lane Camera, Gillespie Crossroads.
Project management costs
£1,757,819 Category B
Fife Bus Partnership Central North & East
Cupar-Kirkcaldy, Glenrothes-Leven, St Andrews-Kirkcaldy corridors; STAG Appraisal to identify and develop bus priority measures.
Prepare additional evidence for Transport Scotland.
Project Management
£341,062 Category C
Fife Bus Partnership West
Cowdenbeath-Kincardine, Dunfermline to Ferrytoll; STAG Appraisal to identify and develop bus priority measures.
Prepare additional evidence for Transport Scotland scrutiny and approval.
Project management costs
£265,675 Category C
Forth Valley Bus Alliance
STAG Appraisal of 5 corridors (Stirling-Falkirk, Glasgow Rd, Grahams Rd, A9/A872, A908/B9096) to identify and develop bus priority measures.
Project management costs
£444,883 Category C
Glasgow Bus Partnership
Paisley Road West, Maryhill Rd, Dumbarton Rd, Pollokshaws Rd, Great Western Rd, all Glasgow; Outline Business Cases.
Economic assessment of short-term measures for these bus corridors re value for money.
Glasgow & Strathclyde Strategic Bus Network Plan; build on corridor appraisal and produce SBC on wider network enhancements to 2030.
Make permanent a temporary bus lane on Bothwell St.
Howard St, Glasgow: Install bus priority at signals.
Paisley Town Centre; upgrade signals, implement urban traffic management & bus priority at junctions on Glasgow Road.
Paisley Rd West; convert traffic management system to above ground detection at 13 junctions, link together.
Paisley Rd West traffic signal upgrade at 4 junctions.
£2,476,867 Category B
Highland Partnership Fort William
Fort William STAG Appraisal (incl. Mobility Hubs) of bus priority measures.
Blar Mhor; Bus link health centre-new residential development; prepare and design.
Upper Achintore; Bus link residential development- Lochaber Rd; prepare and design.
£188,747 Category C
Highland Partnership Inverness
Millburn Rd, B9006 and A82; STAG Appraisals to identify and develop bus priority measures, and Black Isle Mobility Hub.
Rose St Inverness; Make permanent a temporary bus link to bus station. Bus link camera.
Raigmore bus gate; improve bus access to Raigmore Hospital in Inverness.
Implement bus priority at 26 junctions.
Torvean Mobility Hub, Inverness.
Bus stop infrastructure improvements, Inner Moray Firth
Project management costs.
£2,219,783 Category B
Midlothian Bus Alliance
STAG Appraisal on 4 corridors (A6094 Whitecraig-Eskbank, B6392 Eskbank to A772 Gilmerton Junc, A7 Gorebridge-A7 Danderhall, A6094 Eskbank-A701 Straiton).
Bus stop infrastructure improvements.
Project management costs.
£450,349 Category B
North East Bus Alliance
Ellon-Garthdee, Inverurie-Aberdeen, Westhill-Aberdeen, Laurencekirk to Aberdeen; STAG Appraisals and Outline Business Cases for bus priority measures.
Aberdeen City Centre; OBC and Implementation of bus gates, Bridge St, Guild St, Market St.
Aberdeen Rapid Transit; STAG Appraisal, including communications and engagement.
Aberdeen City Centre South College St junction improvements for bus priority.
Project management costs.
£9,855,429 Category B
Tayside Bus Alliance
STAG Appraisal 12 corridors in Dundee, Perth and Fife for bus priority.
Install urban traffic control equipment, Dundee and Perth with bus priority (early interventions identified by the appraisal).
£755,935 Category C
West Lothian Bus Alliance
STAG Appraisal covering various locations in West Lothian
£185,129 Category C

Spending by category

Category A = nil
Category B = £17,058,459
Category C = £2,181,431

This produces a total of £19,239,890, approximately £10 million less than the generally quoted total BPF spend. It is not clear why.

Nevertheless, with Category B including a number of projects producing some change to roads networks, as well as studies, appraisals etc, it is clear that a considerable amount of money was spent overall on the latter, often with no further action resulting.

The EBUG Annual General Meeting will be on Thursday 19 June, from 6pm to 8pm at the Quaker Meeting House, 7 Victoria Terrace, Edinburgh. On the agenda:
– Approval of the draft minutes of the 2024 AGM. (linked here)
– Presentation of the Committee’s report for the year. (linked here)
– Presentation of  EBUG’s accounts for the previous year. (linked here)
– Edinburgh Bus Users Group Constitution (May 2025 Draft for Approval)(linked here) with Summary of Changes to EBUG Constitution (linked here)
– Elect a Committee of up to 11 members.

• After the AGM formalities, YOU can share good bus practice from elsewhere in the UK or abroad.
  We invite good bus practice examples. The best will be recorded and published on our website, and may be used to lobby the Council, Lothian Buses and the Scottish Government.

In 2024, the New Town and Broughton Community Council (NTBCC) was alerted by a local Councillor that the City of Edinburgh Council was considering removing the number 13 bus service, which the Council subsidises,  from part of its route through our area. Following his intervention, it was agreed to postpone any decision until there had been engagement with the local community.

The New Town and Broughton Community Council posted an article on its website seeking residents’ feedback on the bus service. There were over 20 responses, including feedback from others not living in the area but who were regular users of the service. The overwhelming majority supported the service continuing, providing examples of its importance to them. They also offered suggestions for how the service could be improved. This information was summarised  Summary of Comments Received by NTBCC regarding Number 13 Bus Service and sent to Councillors before a meeting of the Council’s Transport and Environment Committee to consider the future of the service. NTBCC had positive feedback from the Councillors, and the results of our survey were shared with Council staff involved in re-tendering the contract.

Although the service was continued, the contract was awarded to a new bus operator. Feedback from users remains positive. Disappointingly, there has been no follow up on the suggestions made for increasing the service’s usage. Clearly there is a role for Community Councils to ensure that they can provide feedback on the use of bus services in our communities.

How should Edinburgh Bus Users Group work with Community Councils to ensure residents’ views are heard when decisions about supported bus services are being made? Suggestions?

A summary of ‘Edinburgh Bus Users Group: Engaging with the Wider Community’
Project for Business Management, Napier University April 2025.

Edinburgh Bus Users Group (EBUG) launched in 2019 to represent bus passengers in Edinburgh and nearby. This report looks at how EBUG can connect more with bus users in Edinburgh and make a bigger impact on policies. It focuses primarily on Lothian Buses users.

Data Collection
The main data collection method was a structured questionnaire. We also reviewed key documents and reports for background context and to support analysis.
Sampling Strategy
Stratified random sampling; dividing the population into key sub-groups (“strata”) before selecting our sample. We focused on age, area of residence, and usage frequency as the main variables for stratification.
81 responses were collected; relatively small in statistical terms, but reflecting time constraints and resources. Participants were over 16 and had used Lothian Buses/other Edinburgh-based services at least once in the last three months.
Data collection during March 2025; online surveys and In-person surveys at hubs.

What users want to see improved
Respondents identified practical priorities like more frequent buses, expanded route coverage, better real-time information, and improved services outside standard hours.
Sustainability and integration with other transport services were mentioned, but less frequently.
Satisfaction with bus services
When asked to rate different features of the bus service, most people said they were generally satisfied. The highest scores went to cleanliness and comfort, both averaging just over four on a five-point scale. Buses are seen as physically comfortable, safe, and well-maintained .

Other areas were rated slightly less positively. Value for money and safety were well-regarded but didn’t stand out so much. Reliability, specifically on-time performance, had more mixed responses. The average was still reasonable, but some passengers clearly had negative experiences, especially in peak times or when making connections.
The lowest scores went to real-time information and route coverage. The spread of responses suggests these experiences vary widely. Some people seem to rely on real-time tools without issue; others found them confusing or unreliable.
Age-based differences in satisfaction
18-24 year olds were generally the most satisfied across almost every service category, scoring higher on frequency, affordability, and real-time information.
65-74 year olds also expressed high satisfaction, especially in relation to cleanliness and safety.
35-54 year olds were less satisfied overall; giving consistently lower scores for e.g. route coverage, frequency, and real-time tracking.
These contrasts suggest Edinburgh buses work reasonably well, but not equally well for all.
Being represented in transport decisions
Only around 14% felt their needs were taken into account in decisions about Edinburgh’s buses system; half did not feel represented at all/to a limited extent. The rest were unsure.

Conclusions
The survey had 81 valid responses, showing that while bus services perform well in some areas, particularly cleanliness, comfort, and safety, there are common frustrations with e.g. route coverage, real-time information, and overall reliability.
Respondents consistently feel their views are unheard. Groups feeling left out of the conversation include disabled users, night workers, people in outlying areas, students, and families with young children.

Napier University students are looking at how to increase EBUG’s ‘reach’ with bus users & influence on local and national policy.

They’re surveying local bus users for evidence on how to enhance community engagement & reflect user needs.

To take part, click  https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=WNzgmUucIEiGFwTDhsJUxnNGbbi4RMZNoTH_4m-vPYNUNVQ0OFhLS1ZWWTNESU9aN1lLOVIyTjFWMy4u

Dear Councillor Jenkinson,

Congratulations on your new appointment as Transport Convener. We are sure you will be aware that this can be a challenging role, and we thought that some of our observations may prove helpful.

At Full Council in September 2022, our deputation acknowledged how Edinburgh’s bus network is successful, but often taken for granted. In the 1980s and 1990s, there was a successful partnership between the Council and bus operators. At that time, Lothian Buses operated a successful service, grew passenger numbers and returned a dividend to its share-owning Councils.

In parallel, the City of Edinburgh Council used its extensive powers as highway authority to assist and where appropriate prioritise bus operations.

Latterly, Edinburgh Council lost sight of this but while Scott Arthur was Transport Convener, a lot of ground was regained. We hope you will progress with his legacy.

Continue reading “An open letter to Edinburgh’s next Transport Convener”