LOCAL bus services are said to be under serious threat following a refusal by Hampshire County Council to reprieve the subsidised network which faces crippling cuts in the 2002/03 budget.

Described as Òa body blow to bus usersÓ, the decision by the Conservative controlled cabinet to slash the budget by £400,000 has led to accusations by Liberal Democrat councillors of Òdeliberate underfundingÓ.

Alton county councillor Tony Ludlow (Lib Dem) is among those questioning the inconsistency of reducing bus subsidies at a time when county policy is to encourage people to use public transport.

And at a time when HCC is actively involved in a major European project aimed at developing and implementing a transport policy which will help to achieve changes in travel behaviour.

The Òvery significantÓ cut, which represents nearly ten per cent of the £4.5m bus subsidy budget will, Dr Ludlow fears, affect the smaller, unprofitable routes serving the rural communities.

While many bus services are run commercially by private bus companies without any subsidy, many others have to be subsidised by the county council or they would not run at all.

The level of subsidy is determined by competitive tender. Sometimes the cost of the subsidy goes down and the county council is able to make a saving on its budget. On other occasions the cost goes up and extra money has to be found.

This year the prices are up but the Conservatives are steadfastly refusing to find the extra money to keep the services going. Instead they intend to carry out a Òstrategic review....of the subsidised bus networkÓ which they say will lead to Òa reduction in some services where necessaryÓ.

It is feared that reductions of as much as £600,000 worth of services may be necessary if no money is allocated in the budget.

Liberal Democrat leader Adrian Collett explained: ÒThe subsidised bus network tends to include many of the services which, if they didnÕt exist, would leave people stranded. Often it is the evening and weekend services that are subsidised, or services to rural areas.

ÒWe are in danger of losing many of our subsidised services at a time when the county council is trying to persuade people to find and use alternatives to the motor car. If this is allowed to happen, the county council would, quite rightly, stand accused of hypocrisy and of failing to care about the needs of many Hampshire residents including elderly and rural people.Ó

With this in mind, Tony Ludlow is actively involved in an EC-funded initiative which aims to change patterns of transport behaviour across Europe.

Known as ÔTAPESTRYÕ the initiative is being trialled by three clusters of villages in East Hampshire, centred around the main towns of Alton, Petersfield and Alresford. They include Upper Farringdon, Newton Valence, Selborne and East Tisted; Hawkley, Liss and Steep; and Cheriton, Bramdean and West Meon.

Involving local residents, representatives of local business and services together with county, district and parish councillors, the first phase of the project, which is now in its final stage, was to explore how people travel at present.

The second phase involves promotion and improvement of existing services and the third phase will analyse the results.

In welcoming the initiative as Òa step in the right directionÓ, Dr Ludlow was quick to point out that the routes involved would benefit for the duration of the project by EU funding but that they, along with others, could eventually fall foul of county budget cuts.

He believes that one of the keys to retaining any service is to make sure it is used.

ÒAt the end of the day bus services will only survive as long as people use them,Ó he said.