« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
4. Form and structure of the PTUC - Options
35. In setting up a Public Transport Users' Committee, we would like to achieve an overarching body with a high-level advisory remit, an influential and respected body that gives passengers a voice. It should not deal with individual complaints (although these could be handled by a sub-committee) because arrangements already exist for passengers to take up complaints with operators and, if they are not satisfied, to take them further. The PTUC would build on the best of the existing (or proposed) bodies and work with them rather than against them. The PTUC could through either of the options set out below have an input and be involved in high-level, strategic issues such as integration, equal opportunities, accessibility, aggregate complaints, the National Transport Strategy and concessionary travel.
Option 1: Create one integrated high-level committee incorporating mode-specific sub-committees
36. One integrated high-level committee with mode-specific sub-committees is possible. The functions of the proposed SFC could be taken on by the PTUC and dealt with by a sub-committee leaving the new-style SSACs to deal with individual complaints, although the PTUC's ferry sub-committee might deal with unresolved issues referred to it by the SSACs. The functions of MACS could be incorporated into the PTUC and be carried out by a sub-committee which would build on the excellent work of MACS and set its functions in a wider context. The functions of BUCT could be incorporated into the PTUC and be carried out by a bus sub-committee with an expanded remit to cover all aspects of bus user representation, although this would involve the PTUC's bus sub-committee in individual complaints. Sub-committees would be largely self-directing but would be answerable to the main PTUC. By working closely with them, the PTUC could complement the work of the reserved bodies ATUC and RPC.
37. Advantages of this option are that it would provide a consistent, manageable structure for the PTUC that would maintain the benefits of having customised sub-committees, while still creating a body with real influence based on a hierarchy of passenger interests. Gaps identified in user representation could be filled. This would enable bus users, whose representation is disproportionately low compared to other modes, to be more comprehensively represented. There may also be scope to deliver best value benefits by having the sub-committees serviced by a shared administrative unit or secretariat. There would be a clear message that the main PTUC would not deal with individual complaints.
38. Disadvantages of this option are that it would be legally complicated to recreate MACS and BUCT as sub-committees of the PTUC. The reserved ATUC and RPC would not be incorporated in the PTUC, so user representation of modes of transport would still reflect the devolution settlement.
Option 2: One umbrella body superimposed on the existing bodies
39. The new PTUC could be an umbrella organisation working closely with and involving the existing bodies but having no statutory relationship with them. Its remit could be entirely separate from the existing bodies. It could provide a forum for members of the existing and other interested bodies to come together.
40. Advantages of this option are that it does not require the dismantling of any of the existing arrangements. It would maintain the benefits of having customised bodies and would be able to complement their work whilst adding a multi-modal perspective to transport users' needs.
41. Disadvantages of this option are that, due to the very varied nature of the remits and functions of the existing and planned bodies, it would be very difficult for the PTUC to avoid duplication. It is reliant on the existing and planned bodies working closely together and it is likely that such a forum would be less influential.
Scottish Executive's preferred option
42. The Scottish Executive's preferred option is Option 1: creating one integrated high-level committee incorporating mode-specific sub-committees. While it is recognised that this option may cause disruption in the short term, there are potential benefits for users in the long term because it would provide a simple structure which would be easy for users to understand and engage with. Furthermore, it would reduce the total number of user representation bodies and the number of public bodies which is in keeping with the principles of best value and efficient government. Under this option the PTUC could address identified shortfalls in user representation especially with regard to bus users and work in close partnership with the RPC and the ATUC.
Question 1: Which option do you believe would best deliver an effective PTUC?
Question 2: Do you have any alternative suggestions of how the PTUC could be structured?
« Previous | Contents | Next »