Chigwell Parish Yellow Bus Fiasco

In a response to information shared with me in which attempts have been made to undermine the value of the yellow bus service in Chigwell Row and cast aspersions on 4 retired local councillors.  I have researched 5 years worth of Full Council Meeting notes.  Here is what I uncovered...

Sometime in 2014 former Cllr John Knapman came up with the idea of introducing a community bus service to Chigwell Parish.  By the 8th of September 2015 he had began putting together an initial budget for the purchase of two buses (click here).  On 9th June 2016 at a Full Council Meeting (click here), Cllr Knapman was even given a vote of confidence to continue and was thanked for progress attained.

Please sign our petition  (click here)

On 7th November  2017 Cllr Lion opposed the project at a Neighbourhood Plan Meeting (click here) based on the need for a stronger business case. On 8th December 2017 (click here), however 4 councillors opposed the purchase of two mini-buses not because of a perceived lack of funds, as has been incorrectly quoted by some parties, but due to concerns about a lack of the required three independent commercial quotes and other practices, normal under European laws on fairness and equity regarding large tenders (look up Official Journal of the European Union [OJEU]). However it was explained that no other bus company could meet their submission deadline for the Section 106 (S106) obligations (Planning rule that allows councils to charge large construction projects alevy for community benefit), so it was believed the direct tender with one firm was permissible. The statutory financial regulation this was in response to stated:

“When applications are made to waive financial regulations relating to contracts to enable a price to be negotiated without competition the reason shall be embodied in a recommendation to the council.”

Concerns were also raised about the 'practicality of the proposed routes, time-table and methodology of the bus service itself, as described in the business plan'. 

A vote was held and fortunately,a majority of 6 councillors voted in favour for the council clerk to purchase the two buses.  The decision had to be made immediately so that  the project could meet section 106 funding requirements.  However it was agreed that a working group would be set up to work on the necessary changes to the business plan. an extract from the meeting states the following:

"Councillor Alvin stated that following the initial survey of residents, as part of the Neighbourhood Plan consultation process, it had been determined, 58% of the populace regarded the inadequacy of public transport as a fundamental problem within the Parish. 

"He further stated that the proposed routes, as described in the business plan would allow convenient and reliable travel along most main roads. 

"This service would facilitate children attending Chigwell Primary, West Hatch and Chigwell School, whilst affording travel to retail centres at Grange Hill and Chigwell Village."

For a while the working group titled 'Community Bus Service  Management Committee' (CBSMC) were considering the use of a consultant to help them through the complexities and legalities, to ensure the tender met an OJEU definition.  However, during a meeting of the CBSMC on 26th July 2018 (click here), they agreed to have a vote at the next full council meeting to proceed with a contract with Epping Forest Community Transport (EFCT) without putting the contract out to wider tender.  This seems to be based on the fact that as a Non-profit organisation the charity would not be able to tender under OJEU definition and because they provided a significantly less expensive service.  Moreover, they had a proven track record of running community bus services in the immediate locality.

Once this decision was made  EFCT also undertook some trial bus runs as the CBSMC had relinquished responsibility for business plan finalisation, which no doubt saved costs and  alot of headache.  This was duly noted in the July 26th Neighbourhood Plan Meeting notes.  I bring to your notice, that this common-sense approach also saved the council £1000's of pounds in unnecessary consultancy fees.

Only 1 councillor was opposed to the project. A section of the 28th June 2018, Full council meeting states:

"Councillor Lion questioned whether this appointment was in accordance with financial regulations, as only a single provider was being considered. 

In response the Chairman of the Community Bus Service Management Committee advised that after extensive research, the Responsible Financial Officer found only two agencies able to embark upon such a project.

 The second was quickly discounted by the RFO, because of the excessive costings, in comparison to the first."

"After a full and in-depth discussion took place, the Chairman proposed and Vice-Chairman seconded that the resolution to appoint a consultancy, in pursuance of this project, be put to a recorded vote. The result was as follows;

"Councillors in favour; Naveed Akhtar, Richard Alvin (Vice-Chairman), Deborah Barlow, Kewal Chana, Roger Farthing, Rochelle Hodds, Brian Sandler, Barry Scrutton and Darshan Singh Sunger (Chairman).

"Councillor opposed; Alan Lion.

"After, results of this recorded vote were announced by the Clerk as nine in favour and one opposed, it was then moved by the Chairman and RESOLVED that;

"A consultancy would be appointed for the Community Bus Service, if deemed necessary"

The purchased buses arrived in September 2018 and Cllr Alvin was reported in the 10th October 2018, Full Council Meeting that the buses were running at 75% capacity.  A very good figure for a new service within it's first month.

Further reports from EFCT in 2019 not only suggested that during school times the buses were full to capacity, but that usage at other times was also high.  Even then it was agreed to market the buses more and an article was put into the well read local council newsletter. 

There is absolutely no use in completing any on-line surveys from any group for the purpose of assessing or adapting the current service to improve it. EFCT are paid to do this. Moreover they have already redesigned the service to meet the requirements of those using the service and in the 13th December 2019 minutes of the Full Council Meeting, it was reported that minor alterations had been approved to the route and schedule, to improve the existing service. In Particular it was detailed that regular daily excursions to Epping town each Monday and Debden Shopping Centre every Wednesday were in place and listed on EFCT's website. We reiterate that no online survey offers any help with this...

Now we come to the issue of funding.  The initial costs for the yellow bus service was to be obtained via three S106 agreements that should have amounted to £950,000. The Luxborough Lane development eventually contributed £50,000.00, Grange Farm Camping and Sports Centre contributed £100,000.00 however Chigwell Primary School were meant to contribute £800,000.00.  Due to a failure to proceed with their construction programme attributed to planning issues they are still to make this payment. 

It has been raised by a member of Chigwell Residents Association (a group not affiliated with us) that as the S106 agreement with Chigwell Primary School was for an older application it would no longer be due to Chigwell Parish Council for the yellow bus service.  She was informed at the meeting that Epping Forest District Council (EFDC) have committed to transfer these funds for the yellow bus service and that the new application submitted by Grove Primary School, includes for the same £800,000 S106 commitment.  Moreover, EFDC are behind on their climate change targets and this yellow bus service would contribute to that, as it would offset the need for cars.  The yellow bus service also benefits EFDC because it would enhance local transport infrastructure and meets one of the needs of their local plan and would help with areas in which they hope to build social housing.  This was mentioned in a Wanstead and Woodford Guardian article in which the yellow bus service was launched (click here). 

The council has been faced with a difficult decision on what to do regarding the buses.  To meet the deadlines to get the bus service up an running, They had used Parish Funds from the General Reserve which comes out of our council tax and earmarked and amount of £150,000 for this purpose. ££97,500 was paid out towards the project, for a period of 12 months, from an agreed date: 31st August 2018.  However since August 2019 - April 2020 the council agreed a further payment of £6600 per month to keep the service running. It was agreed to review the costs regularly but due to COVID-19 the yellow bus service became a dial-a-ride service. In March 2020 Councillors came to an agreement to conclude the contract with EFCT, giving them ample time to begin a section 22 application giving them as a charity licence to conduct pay-for-bus services without a PSV operators licence (click here).  The charges for this service from 5th October will be £4.20 or £6 return and for children £2.00 each way or £3 return.  Parish Councillors have committed themselves to working towards getting the buses free if/once Chigwell Primary Schools Section 106 agreement is fulfilled.

Now we come to Grove Primary School and possible reneging of their S106 agreement.  CRRA does not believe this will occur. Firstly the commitment has been signed in writing since August 2019, and the school would not want to lose the support of local residents. 

In the school's public consultation, I spoke on the often dangerous and commonly anti-social parking around the school, during drop-off and collection of children, which was initially denied. However, a few months later it did trigger a small debate in the CRRA whatsapp group when affected residents started to speak about it.  Anyway, during the meeting the consultant agreed it was a good idea and stated he would look into it.  If there is a change of heart at anypoint we do have this matter as a lever for retention of the agreement (click here).  

This is of no real consequence however, as I firmly believe the school are doing everything in their powers to ensure community support for their proposal.  

Chigwell Row Residents Association have set the following priorities:

1. We must ensure that Parish Councillors commit the full £800,000 from S106 agreement for Chigwell Primary School to restoring the free yellow bus service once received.  Failure to get this money for the buses means we lose the money entirely - it will go direct to Epping Forest District Council and no doubt used for social housing.

2. Cllr Lions is a District Councillor and has stated that the previously agreed Section 106 money may not be forthcoming (click here).  He states that the EFDC Infrastructure Delivery Plan dictates that this money is prioritised for social housing.  This may be a battle for the community and one we fight as a unified voice.  Please sign our petition which refers to the need for infrastructure needs for future social housing (click here)

3.  Thank all Cllrs who have supported this scheme and made it work.  It has been a real benefit to users and recent figures show that usage is still high despite the COVID-19 pandemic.  

There were some lies told in a community whatsapp group that volunteers could not drive the yellow buses.  This is drivel and you can apply directly on the website of EPCT, however be aware that this will not reduce costs to Chigwell Parish Council.  Apply (here)