Hovercraft at night time

Evening Hovers to end even earlier, following further service cuts

Hovertravel has announced a further reduction in its evening services, with changes to the timetable set to take effect from 17th February 2025.

The final weekday service from Southsea will now depart at 6.45pm, with a slightly extended schedule during the summer months allowing a last departure at 7.30pm.

Slow cutting of services
The last Hover from Southsea at the moment is 7.40pm.

In 2023 it was 8.30pm, but prior to Covid the last Hover from Southsea was 9pm.

Review prompted by declining passenger numbers
The decision follows a detailed commercial review undertaken by Hovertravel in December. The company gave several factors driving the review, including a “continued decline in numbers travelling across the Solent since the pandemic,” challenging economic conditions and recent Budget measures.

This review involved all staff across departments, with input from unions, to assess the sustainability of the current service.

Adjustments to evening timetable
As a result of the review, the weekday timetable will now begin with the first service departing Ryde at 6.30am, with the final service leaving Southsea at 6.45pm.

Weekend services will remain unchanged in the morning, but the final departure from Southsea will also be at 6.45pm.

Hovertravel’s summer timetable, starting on 7th April, will extend the last service to 7.30pm in the evenings.

Flexibility for special events
Hovertravel has assured customers that it retains the ability to add extra services during the day should demand increase. The company also confirmed its commitment to providing additional services for key events such as Victorious Festival and Portsmouth home football matches.

Details of these additional flights will be made available on their website.

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
0 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
VentnorLad
19, October 2016 5:10 pm

Any Councillors absent?

Sally Perry
Reply to  VentnorLad
19, October 2016 8:09 pm

Apologies accepted for Cllrs Smart, Hollis, Nicholson and Perks.

VentnorLad
19, October 2016 6:04 pm

1802: Chris Whitehorse (sic) abstained.

Isn’t that Mr Perks’ normal role?

Sally Perry
Reply to  VentnorLad
19, October 2016 7:22 pm

He’s absent today.

VentnorLad
Reply to  Sally Perry
19, October 2016 7:45 pm

So he missed the July Full Council, the October Scrutiny Committee and hasn’t updated his “annual” report since May 2015?

One might begin to draw the conclusion that the Councillor for Ventnor East can’t really be bothered.

retired hack
19, October 2016 7:17 pm

Cllr Stewart: “There will be strings attached to this – the government doesn’t just give money away.”
Not at all like the Highways PFI, then…

Yawn 666
19, October 2016 7:41 pm

Spooky, is it Halloween yet? This meeting sounds exactly as described by Charlotte H in last weeks local paper.

nico
19, October 2016 8:03 pm

I wonder how many who voted against the Deal turned up for in-depth briefings beforehand, and didn’t just vote on an uninformed whim on the night.

Geoff Lumley
Reply to  nico
19, October 2016 11:15 pm

I can assure you Cllr Bob Seely was never there. He is too busy writing something about warfare (see story elsewhere)……

VentnorLad
19, October 2016 9:05 pm

Absolutely flabbergasted that three Councillors voted against a road safety motion with a clear evidence base to save lives.

Who are these people and how can they possibly justify such an irresponsible move?

okayanyway
Reply to  VentnorLad
19, October 2016 9:43 pm

Absolutely, can we have them named?? and who abstained.

Geoff Lumley
Reply to  okayanyway
19, October 2016 11:07 pm

Ward (Con), Kendall (IW Indy), Jordan (IW Indy)

Nitonia
Reply to  Sally Perry
20, October 2016 8:10 am

If Cllr Stephens cannot be bothered to express an opinion on serious issues by voting then he should resign immediately. Absolute disgrace.

phil jordan
Reply to  Nitonia
20, October 2016 9:47 am

Nitonia:

…would you extend that same call to Cllr Whitehouse who, earlier in the evening, also failed to express an opinion whatsoever on the medium term budget strategy (now THAT is a serious issue) and subsequently abstained ?

VentnorLad
Reply to  Nitonia
20, October 2016 9:51 am

Does anybody still take Mr Whitehouse seriously?

Isn’t he just the very loosest of cannon?

An embarrassment not only to himself and his party, but also to the council and our Island.

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Nitonia
20, October 2016 10:54 am

Sometimes we are torn on a decision and really don’t want to vote either for or against. Whilst some councillors will make a habit of abstaining, or even not voting at all (to avoid any negative press perhaps!) most usually do vote one way or the other. I think it would be dangerous to remove the ability to abstain and force decisions which councillors are no comfortable… Read more »

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  VentnorLad
19, October 2016 10:07 pm

The motion has serious issues that made it rather pointless beyond a political statement. Very worrying when one Councillor asked if we can just change the 30mph signs to 20mph signs as they get renewed. There is no understanding of policy and legal requirements. In reality it is a decision for the Executive as there are likely to be fairly hefty budget implications. Not a cheap process… Read more »

Matt Price
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
19, October 2016 11:33 pm

There is every understanding of policy Luisa, I for one am a qualified accident assessor and have far more understanding of road safety and highway related regulations than you may think. YOU and your colleagues shouting over me while I was talking (or trying to) was entirely out of order. I don’t interrupt you do I? Why would it be such a stupid question to ask the… Read more »

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 10:50 am

I wasn’t going to name and shame but as you’ve chosen to identify yourself, so be it. Your very question demonstrated that you have no clue about council policy or procedure regarding this issue and I am concerned that this should be the case after 3.5 years as a Councillor. How can we expect residents to understand if their elected representatives think that it’s as simple as… Read more »

Matt Price
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 12:12 pm

You and your colleagues were the embarrassment last night Luisa, your shouting across the chamber, and unruly behaviour is a disgrace. I have always treated every one of you with respect and have worked with all of you and frankly was taken aback at being spoken over by you all. I am not ashamed to represent my residents and by asking the questions they have asked of… Read more »

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  VentnorLad
20, October 2016 11:00 am

As I’ve said elsewhere the motion has issues and what is required is a paper going to Executive which sets out the huge costs and resource implications of this decision. Phil Jordan tried to explain – as the Executive member he understands the issues better than any other Councillor – but he didn’t really get the chance to provide the points of information that were needed. We… Read more »

VentnorLad
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 11:15 am

You seem to be confusing 20mph zones and 20mph limits. Or at least using the terms interchangeably.

The link I posted yesterday morning explains the difference.

When you criticise others for a poor understanding of the issues, wouldn’t it be wise to be clear about them yourself?

VentnorLad
Reply to  VentnorLad
20, October 2016 11:16 am

The link I alluded to (posted at 1001 yesterday) is still awaiting moderation!

Here it is again:

http://www.rospa.com/road-safety/advice/drivers/speed/20mph-zones-and-limits/

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  VentnorLad
20, October 2016 11:20 am

Legally they are the same. So yes, I’m using interchangeably because they are enforced the same.

Based on cost I would expect limits to be introduced, rather than zones. However, zones would reduce the incidence (and requirement to monitor) speeding. They also inconvenience emergency vehicles.

VentnorLad
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 11:36 am

You seem to be implying that as they need external enforcement that speed limits are ineffective in curtailing dangerous driving. As such, if saving lives and reducing injuries is the purpose of such changes, shouldn’t we be advocating the use of zones instead? How much is too much to spend on them if we save even one life? As for inconveniencing emergency vehicles, aren’t the emergency services… Read more »

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 10:15 pm

DaveIOW a potential lack of enforcement is what my residents have expressed as a concern for the effectiveness of any changes. Certainly not all are even in favour of speed restrictions. I can see the benefit of dense residential areas with terraced houses and on-street parking becoming zones, although as I say I would be concerned about access for emergency vehicles and the effect on patients experiencing… Read more »

Mat
19, October 2016 9:28 pm

Southampton voted for Solent Devolution.

adrian whittaker
Reply to  Mat
19, October 2016 9:36 pm

of course they would the only available space to build the required nuber of housing would be the isle of wight Portsmouth ans Southampton are full

Mat
Reply to  adrian whittaker
19, October 2016 9:45 pm

Just the messenger.

Stewart Blackmore
19, October 2016 10:30 pm

Surely it’s untenable that a senior member of the Executive and a former leader (and still member of the executive) should abstain on a vote on a motion which the leader of the council has put his name to and on which he (the leader) led the debate? There are only two options here. Either Councillor Stephens has to resign or Councillor Bacon has to dismiss him.… Read more »

caulkhead
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
19, October 2016 10:46 pm

True Islander.

caulkhead
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
19, October 2016 10:53 pm

Ian Stephens,knows about the Solent LEP.

Stewart Blackmore
Reply to  caulkhead
19, October 2016 10:56 pm

I believe he’s still on it.

caulkhead
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
19, October 2016 11:05 pm

Ian Stephens,is not on the LEP Board Cllr Bacon is.

Stewart Blackmore
Reply to  caulkhead
19, October 2016 11:20 pm

I’ve checked, and Councillor Bacon has replaced him. Apologies.

Caulkhead
Reply to  caulkhead
20, October 2016 4:52 am

Also,on the Solent LEP Board are the Council Leaders of Portsmouth and Southampton.

Geoff Lumley
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
19, October 2016 11:11 pm

I have to agree Stewart. The Labour councillors supported this reluctantly after our No Mayor amendment was defeated. But Cllr Bacon could not even deliver his own group. So much for ‘independents’…….

Mo
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
19, October 2016 11:19 pm

Nice to see you are talking to the VM now.

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Geoff Lumley
20, October 2016 11:03 am

independent is the operative word. We vote as individuals without a whip, although usually it’s easy to reach a consensus.

Julia Baker-Smith
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
20, October 2016 12:59 am

We work by consensus, and accept there will always be times when people will need to vote otherwise or abstain based on commitments they have previously made or pure matters of conscience. There is no whip therefore how could Cllr Stephens be removed? Ian’s abstention is a matter for him as an Independent member. What is more concerning is the obvious 3 line whip that appears to… Read more »

tyke
19, October 2016 10:37 pm

A terrible embarrassment for the leadership. Not only did they fail to sell this idea to the public it seems from your coverage (thanks Sal) that there were plenty of senior Independents who, though they voted in favour, failed to speak in support of the plans. This silence is telling: almost as though Independents were half heartedly following a whip. Which, of course they wouldn’t be because,… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  tyke
20, October 2016 9:42 am

tyke:

that’s right tyke….no whip or political party….which is why we had members abstaining….!

On the other hand, not only did the conservative group vote in a whipped manner but their unholy alliance with IMG also ensured that they also acted in a whipped manner.

This type of political grouping does not serve our Island well at all….

tyke
Reply to  phil jordan
20, October 2016 11:53 am

Of course the Tories voted together: they are a political party and make no bones about it. Are we seriously expected to believe that the Indies all made up their own minds – to a man and woman – not to vote against the proposals? The abstentions signal to me that they were against the plans but could not bring themselves to vote that way. I wonder… Read more »

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  tyke
20, October 2016 11:10 am

I’m skeptical of what Devolution can offer. Mostly because I don’t trust the government and their motives, which is to reduce the deficit. I’m not strongly in favour but if the government says it’s the only way that we will get additional funding then I’m going to support negotiations until a final deal is put on the table so that I can make a fully informed decision.… Read more »

Ali Hayden.
20, October 2016 12:01 am

It was refreshing to see that most who voted no to the Combined Authority did so taking on the views of those who elected them. Speaking their mind on the very valid reasons for voting no. The consultation yielded a very poor response rate with many comments that were echoed this evening by Councillors. The public meeting was also very poorly attended with similar questions + fears… Read more »

Rod Manley
20, October 2016 1:07 am

Well that’s that out of the way, so let’s hold our heads up and get on with the business of sorting our own problems out.

nico
Reply to  Rod Manley
20, October 2016 6:05 am

Who needs money anyway. We can stumble along …. and become more vulnerable than ever to outside forces.

VentnorLad
Reply to  nico
20, October 2016 11:48 am

A delightfully sinister turn of phrase!

Which “outside forces” are you worried about?

Does the People’s Republic of Dorset have malign intent? Are they drawing up invasion plans as we sit here wallowing in complacency that the Solent is acting as our moat?

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Rod Manley
20, October 2016 11:12 am

We are not capable as an Island of ‘sorting out our own problems’ when the issue is not enough money to pay for statutory services. The government continues to cut our funding with the intention of cutting it completely. Without devoted powers we cannot increase our income to even attempt to bridge the gap.

Caconym
20, October 2016 8:13 am

***”A huge kerfuffle breaks then out after Cllr Price asks why Island Roads can’t just change the 30mph for 20mph signs when they are renewed.”***

So, that’s confirmed then.

Intelligence and common sense are not high on the list of requirements for a Councillor.

VentnorLad
Reply to  Caconym
20, October 2016 9:02 am

Confirmed?

I hadn’t realised there was any doubt!

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Caconym
20, October 2016 11:14 am

There is more information on his naive question on another article.

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 11:15 am

*thread. Further up.

Matt Price
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 12:31 pm

Nothing naïve about the question which was simply put: ‘could the signage element not be looked at within the island roads contract??’ Of course the answer is yes, but then the ‘kerfuffle’ is typical of the independents when asked to use common sense, so Luisa stop trying to belittle me which frankly I don’t give a damn if you try. Representing island people is what I always… Read more »

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Matt Price
20, October 2016 10:06 pm

That was not the question asked which was of concern. The real question has been quoted several times and not just by me.

Jonathan Bacon
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 10:48 pm

Of course if you are creating the basis for someone to be convicted of a criminal offence then there is rather more to it than just changing a sign!

Matt Price
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 12:48 am

Crickey Jonathan, I cannot believe you are joining in this ridiculous debate about the signage, and also please don’t patronise me, I may sound stupid but be assured I am far from it. I asked whether the executive member had discussed the signage issue with Island roads! Not whether it could go ahead without appropriate consultation or changes to policy or without the required legalities! It was… Read more »

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 8:18 am

Matt Price seems not to recall his own question. I think that a transcript of the meeting is required. However, my recollection is this (as has been stated by myself and others):

“Why can’t Island Roads just change the signs from a 30mph to a 20mph?”

It is that question which is causing the issue.

nico
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 8:19 am

*I* can believe Jonathan is joining in this debate about signage.

However ‘ridiculous’ Matt Price thinks it is, Jonathan (and other Exec members) are very good at ensuring we have access to the facts here, and keep on the rails of reality.

We also get a good idea of the characters of councillors when they post on here, which is useful.

Matt Price
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 8:36 am

You only hear what you want to hear Luisa so whatever was said is irrelevant (and as I have said, and it was witnessed by all,), the noise that erupted from your side of the chamber prevented me finishing what I had to say. So read above if you want to understand where that attempt was leading. I see this as a convenient distraction by you and… Read more »

VentnorLad
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 9:12 am

Luisa & Matt, Are you both proud of the way you’ve conducted yourself in this public disagreement? Is this conduct what you would have expected of yourselves? Is it in line with Nolan principles? Do you think the people you were elected to represent will see it as: a. A reassuring sign of the passion you have for the role that you are willing to disagree so… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 10:51 am

Matt: Just to (finally!) answer your query. We have and continue to discuss the issue of signage with IR. For clarity, signage is a ‘sub’ division of the contract with specific conditions and contractual obligations held within the overall contract. For example, there is written into the contract a *de-cluttering* policy which is being followed. Any removal of signs (on the basis that they can safely be… Read more »

nico
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 1:36 pm

I posted a comment in the above strand about 5hrs ago, at 08.19.

*I* can see it, of course, but it’s not appeared on Latest Comments, and due to the finite length of the LC list, I now won’t be able to tell if it appears there or not, (as it would slot into the no-longer-in-sight time slot).

I presume it accidentally went into moderation.

nico
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 1:51 pm

I have no quarrel with Luisa’s contribution, Daveiow.

Phil’s comment is quite an eye opener as to how the current Chair, unreasonably kept in post by the Tories for a second year, has yet again hampered Council, and thus Island, business.

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
21, October 2016 4:42 pm

DaveIOW, I did not make my criticism of his comments personal. I did not even name him. Cllr Price chose to identify himself and try to turn it into what he describes as a ‘spat’… which all seems to be based on him having no recollection of making the comments which myself and others have issue with.

bones
20, October 2016 9:25 am

We have offered to pay for and maintain a 20mph sign here. Offer refused ( Health and Safety )
We have never seen IR maintaining the current 30mph signs.

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  bones
20, October 2016 11:23 am

It’s not the cost of the sign which is the issue. It’s the lengthy legal process that has to be followed in order to change it.

Matt Price
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 12:33 pm

The question was about the signage only, although was shouted over,

why do you not listen????

tr
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 1:30 pm

‘lengthy legal process’ Luisa?

I thought the IWC had no problem taking those on – aka the pursuit of ‘the clarity required’ following the actions of Jon Platt.

phil jordan
Reply to  tr
21, October 2016 10:22 am

tr:

No connection. A *better* phrase might have been ‘ a lengthy legislative process’ …but I think we probably all know what was intended by the comment.

Old Knobby
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 9:34 pm

The question is, why is there a lengthy legal process? Is it just a council process and the way it’s always been done, so could be changed? Is it something enforced on us by the government? Or is it another unfortunate consequence of the PFI contract that the previous administration left us with?

VentnorLad
Reply to  Old Knobby
20, October 2016 9:54 pm

It doesn’t seem from this document to be terribly difficult to lower a 30mph limit to 20mph:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/63975/circular-01-2013.pdf

Philip Hawkins
Reply to  VentnorLad
21, October 2016 7:18 am

Thanks for that link DaveIOW – it looks a very interesting document.

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Old Knobby
20, October 2016 10:21 pm

Part of the problem is that the Council no longer has a Highways department. The Conservatives passed this over to Island Roads and got rid of all our in-house staff. Which means we can do nothing without the co-operation of Island Roads and they charge for every new change. The legal process is that of a Traffic Regulation Order and I’ve dealt with several of these in… Read more »

VentnorLad
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 10:40 pm

That’s absolutely fine then, Luisa.

If it’s too difficult or time consuming it’s entirely unreasonable of the electorate to expect those who volunteered to become Councillors to bother with it.

I’m sure there’s much more important stuff you could be doing. Stuff that’s popular with voters.

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  Luisa Hillard
20, October 2016 11:08 pm

I have not suggested an unwillingness to undertake the task. I voted in favour. What I have said is that a decision will have to be taken regarding the best use of the available staff and money. There is a difference. And we are in a situation of not having enough of either to fulfil our basic requirements, let alone a wish list. If the choice is… Read more »

phil jordan
Reply to  Old Knobby
21, October 2016 10:18 am

Old Knobby:

It’s Government Legislation.

The Local Authorities Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England)
Regulations 2012.

The Road Traffic (Temporary Provisions) (Procedure) Amendment –
England) Regulations 2012.

The Secretary of State’s Traffic Orders (Procedure) (England and
Wales (Amendment England) Regulations 2012.

Nitonia
20, October 2016 10:02 am

“Nitonia:

…would you extend that same call to Cllr Whitehouse who, earlier in the evening, also failed to express an opinion whatsoever on the medium term budget strategy (now THAT is a serious issue) and subsequently abstained ?”

That’s a really good question Cllr Jordan to which the answer is absolutely!

tiki
20, October 2016 3:28 pm

Luisa Hillard has a point. The legal process in order to introduce these changes will surely be lengthy and expensive, one assumes surveys will need to be undertaken etc? I believe Cllr Peacey Wilcox has been trying for years to get a Stop Sign erected at a black spot in Cowes (think it’s Mill Hill Rd?) without any success despite numerous accidents so I don’t think reducing… Read more »

Luisa Hillard
Reply to  tiki
20, October 2016 10:33 pm

Thank you, tiki. You obviously grasp the issue and I would use Cllr Peacey-Wilcox’s TRO as the perfect example of how difficult these can be and we’ve commiserated together when I’ve had similar trouble in my ward. In my experience what seems like a simple change always has huge amounts of red tape to overcome and this motion will require a very detailed paper to be written… Read more »

Colin
21, October 2016 10:44 am

I would like to thank all the councillors contributing in this thread; it has been a most enjoyable read. I must make an effort to come to the next council meeting, it sounds like fun, although Ms. Hofton often seems to think not.

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined