Hansard

Here is a bit of background to the debate: in 1984, the United Kingdom Government published a white paper entitled “Buses”—good title. That resulted in the Transport Act 1985, which provided for deregulation of the bus industry. The proposals were designed to remove restrictions on competition from local and long-distance bus services. It is important to understand the background against which the proposals came forward. The following quotation is attributed to the Prime Minister of the day, Margaret Thatcher:

“A man who, beyond the age of 26, finds himself on a bus can count himself as a failure.”

The Scottish Green Party wants a lot more failures, because we want there to be a considerable increase in the number of passengers on buses.

Despite that context, the 1985 act recognised the need for subsidised services to continue on many routes, and a system of competitive tendering for such services was proposed. It is a fact that nearly 20 per cent of routes are subsidised.

It was believed that competition would deliver lower fares, new services and more passengers. Let me deal with those objectives individually. First, on fares, in the decade between 2005 and 2015, fares increased by 13.5 per cent above inflation. On new services, it is widely recognised that the number of services has reduced. As for new passengers, in the same decade, the number of passengers decreased from 460 million to 414 million—a 10 per cent fall. Indeed, the Confederation of Passenger Transport UK told us recently that the number of bus trips in 2015-16 was 409 million—43 million fewer than in 2011, five years previously.

The decline in Scotland is greater than it is elsewhere in the UK and contrasts with the 16 per cent increase in passenger numbers on trains over the five years to 2016. There might be a reason for that. Citizens Advice Scotland told us in a recent report that two thirds of Scots are dissatisfied with the frequency of local bus services, with half of its respondents saying that services are late.

Moreover, successive Governments have spent millions on motorways, and transport ministers, including the current incumbent, are never shy about hailing growth in our railways, which of course Greens welcome, and growth in our airports and air passenger numbers, which we do not. Meanwhile, Governments have neglected bus users.

There is an opportunity to reverse the decline, which I am sure that the transport minister wants to grasp. In the consultation document “Local bus services in Scotland—Improving the framework for delivery”, the minister acknowledges:

“the sector faces significant challenges with the overall number of passenger journeys decreasing and service cutbacks in some places which can leave communities without a public transport option. We believe that the legislative framework governing bus services requires improvement”.

In 2013, Iain Gray lodged a member’s bill proposal which, unfortunately, did not succeed. In the consultation document on his proposed bus regulation bill, he said:

“Good public transport—effective, reliable, safe, and affordable—is a hallmark of a modern, forward-looking society. It liberates people who cannot drive and provides a practical alternative to those who choose not to.”

On the question of buses versus trains, the transport minister has acknowledged that buses are able to serve a much wider area than rail, which is more restricted by geography and fixed infrastructure. Bus services are flexible and can be developed into use quickly when demand is identified.

In the short time that I have, I will not go into what is required to provide a bus service. However, there are issues to do with the operator’s licence, the notice that is given prior to operation, whether there are any variations and the role of the transport commissioner.

It is important to say that local authorities can subsidise only socially desirable services that are not covered by commercial services that are registered with the traffic commissioners. When a local authority proposes subsidising a socially necessary service, it must hold a competitive tendering before establishing the service. The Transport (Scotland) Act 1989 required local authorities to incorporate their municipal bus operations as arm’s-length companies, but it did not specifically require them to be privatised. Much is made of a very successful model, which is that of Lothian Buses. I know that my colleagues will talk about that company, which runs a successful and profitable operation. Fairly recently, it took over services in East Lothian and there, again, it has been a major success.

However, there has been no legislative action on the regulation of bus services since the enactment of the Transport Act (Scotland) 2001. The programme for government 2016-17 states:

“As part of our preparation for a Transport Bill later in the Parliament, during 2016-17 we will ... work with stakeholders to develop legislative options for improving bus services and securing nationwide multi modal smart ticketing.”

Sadly, the Scottish Government is failing on its targets. It is failing on congestion, modal shift and air quality. We are keen that the national indicators should inform some of the decisions that will be made, because the Government tells us that they

“enable us to track progress towards the achievement of our National Outcomes and ultimately the delivery of the Purpose.”

If we had better bus services, we would improve traffic congestion and improve people’s perception of their neighbourhoods. In the Government’s information, under the heading “Why is this National Indicator important?”, it states:

“Our satisfaction with our neighbourhoods has an important influence on the overall quality of our lives.”

Under the heading “What will influence this National Indicator?”, it states:

“Satisfaction and dissatisfaction with our neighbourhoods is governed by a wide range of factors including: the local physical environment”

and the

“convenience of services such as shops and public transport”.

We know that just under a third of households in Scotland do not have access to a car, and that the bus industry receives nearly £300 million in subsidies from local authorities and the Scottish Government. However, in real terms that funding has dropped—it is 8 per cent lower than it was five years ago. As I said earlier, nearly 20 per cent of bus journeys are subsidised, so it is entirely reasonable to have a target on increasing bus usage. We already have times and targets in relation to climate change.

What could a target look like? The information is already available, as the minister knows, with his transport statistics on bus usage. By “bus usage”, we mean journey numbers. It is certainly open to the minister to use another metric, if that is more desirable, but the important thing is that we turn the decline that we all see, and which is very evident everywhere, into growth.

What is the justification for a high-level target? As I said, it is very clear that buses stand out as the only transport type that is in decline. I accept that the solution that we produce will be complex, with bus companies, local authorities and the Scottish Government needing to work together.