A PUBLICLY-owned bus company was devalued when council leaders admitted it was struggling, a union has claimed.

But a leaked Blackburn with Darwen Council memo reveals that bosses feared that if Blackburn Transport was not sold it could lead to crisis in transport services in the borough.

The council's executive board decided to sell its 100 per cent share in Blackburn Transport to Yorkshire-based Blazefield, an arm of French operator Transdev, last month.

It is not known how much Blazefield will pay but the contract, to be signed later this year, will see a multi-million investment in new buses along with a commitment to replace the 124-bus fleet within a certain amount of time.

In a letter to all councillors Jim Casey, branch secretary of the Transport and General Workers Union, stated: "By admitting the council is no longer satisfied Blackburn Transport can meet the challenges, it has in effect devalued it."

The confidential memo, sent to Labour councillors on behalf of Graham Burgess, the executive member for regeneration, at the request of council leader Kate Hollern, details the reason for the sale.

It stated: "The company cannot generate sufficient investment to modernise the fleet which is currently ageing and does not meet the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) nor modern accessibility standards to allow older people or mothers with pushchairs to access the vehicles. The school transport fleet is of poor quality and recent tenders have been lost."

It said the company was vulnerable to competition by any private operator who, because of the lack of resources in the company, could do great damage.

"However, it is believed the offer represents the best way forward for the citizens of the borough as it provides sustainable and modern transport," it stated.

"The current provision by Blackburn Transport would inevitably, because of lack of resources, mean a decline in both service and the standard of vehicles, and could eventually lead to a crisis in transport provision because of the poor trading position of the company."

Mr Casey's letter argued against all these points, stating the company was on track to meet DDA requirements.

He wrote that since an efficiency programme started the company appeared to be making "a reasonable profit."