Yeah, thanks for this comment. That's what makes this matter worse: they restrict private transport, but public transport just gets worse and more expensive every year.
At least for the Madrid metro, they have what I consider to be one of the most accessible and convenient public transportation systems I've used. And compared to Indianapolis, where I currently live, Madrid's public transport makes what we have here an embarrassment.
Madrid public transit is pretty comprehensive, but not particularly cheap or accessible. The rail is a bit archaic to use (single use tickets require source and destination stations despite being mostly one fare zone), station layout is fairly confusing at the bigger stations IMO. Perhaps most importantly, the stations are often pretty deep requiring a lot of waking -- not a problem if you're able bodied though.
I didn't use the bus system at all so I can't comment there. Barcelona in comparison has fairly easy to navigate stations and a much friendlier fare system.
In several places where I lived the public transport road service was subcontracted to the lowest-bidding private company of the region.
This in turn creates this shitty illusion of "public" service that nobody wants to use, because:
- it's unreliable (delays and strikes are common)
- short working hours
- poorly planned (or no) interconnections with other public services
- abusive service costs to recoup the costs
Even factoring all expenses of a car, several bus connections I was forced to take in the past where in the order of 5-6 times the total cost of car ownership. This doesn't even include the grave annoyances I listed above.
And this is a problem. Lowest-bidder-wins always creates a race to the bottom.
At least in the province of Venice, there was a complicated set of rules to pick between bidders of public contractors - so the law is certainly not universal in this regard.
If I recall correctly, it was based on percentiles instead of taking just the lowest bidder in an attempt to avoid companies racing to the bottom.
This in turn created a system where winning ad these bids was mostly by chance, and unsurprisingly was found to be rigged several times. But I digress...
I think the actual (EU) law is closer to "best suited". You have a number of offers to select from and have to say why you chose that offer. Saying "I chose them because they were the cheapest" is the easiest and safest solution so that's what usually happens, but it's not the only option.
You have to pre-declare how you choose the best offer. Final procurement order is oftentimes made into existence after many rounds of rejection by procurement overseeing committee.
It should be mentioned here that in the case of Madrid, the metro is managed by a rightwing party who intentionally reduced the amount of trains when the car restrictions started, in order to cause discontent. See https://www.publico.es/politica/madrid-central-arranca-madri... (sorry for the link in Spanish).
I’ve tried going over the article and cannot find any mention to any right-wing party intentionally reducing the amount of trains. I should disclose that Spanish is my mother tongue.
If anyone wants to pour over the article and explain it to me: EMT is the TfL of Madrid, Mayor's office is left-wing, Regional government is right-wing.
Sorry, the article doesn't mention that the regional government is right-wing (my fault), but it does say this: "Sin embargo, en lugar de reforzar el servicio, como prometió hace un mes el presidente del Gobierno regional, Ángel Garrido, la frecuencia de los trenes se ha visto mermada".
