巴士真是咁討厭?

原帖由 Kaix 於 2008-6-15 01:44 發表



倫敦公共交通的管理模式不見得有實際益處，
政府制定路線、票價、班次，
再批資金給多間私人公司依足政府制定的條款營運，
就好像香港的分餅式外判政府服務一樣，
根本沒有任何競爭可言，
這種管理模式並沒有為倫敦帶來高質 ...

倫敦的巴士服務由政府大量補貼,
香港政府當然不會想走這條路背上包袱,
但對於低下階層未必是好事.
倫敦的公交質素即使不是最高亦是排在前列,
巴士全部低地台,
乘客資訊充足,
市區路線班次頻密,
車費低於大部份英國城市,
至少比起不少英國城市及對岸的巴黎,
都要好太多了....
非常發達而且與日間收費一樣的通宵服務
比不上香港的,
是好少點到點快線.
(這與倫敦的道路網設計亦有關係)

在香港，鐵路無可能取代大部份巴士服務，

除非山上人口密集之處到處建站，以滿足需求，

例如葵涌村一個站，秀茂坪一個站，富山／慈雲山各一個站．．．等

原帖由 石頭 於 2008-6-15 03:51 發表
在香港，鐵路無可能取代大部份巴士服務，

除非山上人口密集之處到處建站，以滿足需求，

例如葵涌村一個站，秀茂坪一個站，富山／慈雲山各一個站．．．等 ...

其實問題重心係巴士並無同鐵路網有足夠合作

競爭係好事，但係唔該唔好搵市民大眾的乘車時間黎較飛

原帖由 Kaix 於 2008-6-14 17:44 發表



倫敦公共交通的管理模式不見得有實際益處，
政府制定路線、票價、班次，
再批資金給多間私人公司依足政府制定的條款營運，
就好像香港的分餅式外判政府服務一樣，
根本沒有任何競爭可言，
這種管理模式並沒有為倫敦帶來高質 ...

This is correct, but it must be noted that the London bus services are tendered as it is now because a level of regulation can be retained - In other cities across Britain, the bus operation is deregulated and open for competition since 1986, and as proved since then, all that brings in is chaos, bus wars and at the end, monopoly and high fares (just ask Stagecoach about this).

I don't agree that this practice does not bring high quality public transport service to London though. Ok, the London Underground is nothing to speak about, but for buses, over the last 15 years, esp. under the mayorship of Ken Livingstone, things have improve drastically. London buses may not have the luxury like air-condition across the city, but the service (esp the scheduling), vehicles and supporting services are, in general, very high quality. You just need to look at each bus stop has its own specific timetables and service information (like the "Spider map"), and the fact that all London bus service are fully converted to low floor in 2005 really say something to it.
Obviously though, all these do not come cheap at all.

I'm not saying London's bus operation is better than HK, but each of them has their own credits, and London is certainly not worse then HK at all. If anything, I think the London operational management is much more controllable, unlike the Transport Dept in HK which just, basically, leave the bus (and minibus) operations to their own device.

原帖由 ksmbh 於 2008-6-14 19:03 發表


倫敦的巴士服務由政府大量補貼,
香港政府當然不會想走這條路背上包袱,
但對於低下階層未必是好事.
倫敦的公交質素即使不是最高亦是排在前列,
巴士全部低地台,
乘客資訊充足,
市區路線班次頻密,
車費低於大部份英國 ...

To a level though, the bus service in HK is indirectly subsidised - I believe the fuel used by franchaised operators are not taxed?

As I said in the other post, the London operation is very expensive, and I don't believe the HK government have any incentive or desire to take up that responsibility.

原帖由 Maltesers 於 2008-6-14 18:09 發表
反而路線專利就比較理想，
* h  t. R3 i+ n9 c例如九巴唔想做70號，就公開俾其他公司投，總好過完全無左條線。
0 }$ c" E6 {8 E5 l" d如果真係無人投，就可以反過來同議會講，無人肯做。

But what if the local council tell you (TD) that "why don't you go and buy some buses and run the service instead"?

The thing is, if there is not enough demand, the service is simply not sustainable. In London, that service would have disappeared for ages. Whether it's from a commercial organisation (e.g. KMB), or the governing body (e.g. TD), it makes no difference to the decision. Taking it out for tender to prove the point is just a waste of time and taxpayers' money.

原帖由 S3BL343@66 於 2008-6-14 10:54 發表
http://hk.myblog.yahoo.com/jw!vr ... bio/article?mid=852

你唔好坐巴士，姐姐

I found it funny that this lady, allegedly from an environmental group, to say things like this. Buses are on the road because people need them to go anywhere. They are not running around pumping exhausted gas out to annoy environmentalists for fun.

We have always been told to use public transport by, guess what, environmentalists, instead of driving a car. Now what, shall we all stay at home forever then?

Ouch, and then everyone will turn their air-conditioning on at home, 令路人感到很不舒服.... I wonder what we should do then.