Hansard

The legislative consent motion is a welcome sign of co-operation between the Scottish and UK Governments. The Cabinet Secretary for Transport clearly set out the rationale for the expedited procedure. Ultimately, it is crucial that we decarbonise our bus fleet and that we work collaboratively to do so. Therefore, it is important that we give certainty to the industry by agreeing to the same timetable and allowing further cross-Government co-operation.

In the context of the threat to the future of the only major bus manufacturer in Scotland, Alexander Dennis, it is important that we expedite fleet renewals, which is a key component in supporting a demand signal to industry. It is also important to note that the recent ScotZEB scheme has not been efficient in converting the demand signal into contracts for Scottish manufacturers. Of the 523 electric buses that have been funded through the Scottish Government’s subsidy scheme so far, more than two thirds—340 buses—have been manufactured overseas, with 287 made in China by Yutong Bus. Only 162 buses have been manufactured in Scotland by Alexander Dennis and EVM UK.

From written questions that I have lodged, it is particularly concerning to learn that the Government does not collect data on where buses are manufactured, so its ability to calculate social value is limited. Social value weighting in public procurement in Scotland is not fit for purpose, and it needs to be bolstered to support critical manufacturers in Scotland, such as Alexander Dennis, instead of subsidising foreign competitors that have a clear industrial strategy to dominate the electric vehicle market and put Scottish industry out of business. It is clear that the Scottish Government needs to be cognisant of that and work further with the UK Government to extend to Scotland reforms that are being made to public procurement provisions in the rest of the UK, embedding social value at the heart of the public procurement process, so that Scottish manufacturers are supported to do so.

It is important to recognise the wider provisions in the Bus Services (No 2) Bill that will allow English bus franchising to further accelerate ahead of the pace in Scotland, which is already far behind. For example, the UK Government has already clarified and streamlined the guidance to make it easier, quicker and cheaper for local authorities to intervene on bus route development, and this new bus services bill will go further to reduce the barriers to franchising, including costs. Alongside that, the Government is building capacity within the Department for Transport to provide tangible on-the-ground support to those local transport authorities that wish to pursue franchising. That is exactly what we need in Scotland to accelerate the process with Strathclyde Partnership for Transport and other transport authorities. However, unfortunately, the Scottish Government has not been anywhere near vigorous or urgent enough in its actions.

I would like the cabinet secretary to respond to that and say how we can further support local transport authorities in Scotland to bring forward bus franchising at pace. I would be willing to support the cabinet secretary in the effort to build that collaborative approach to improve our bus services across Scotland, drive up modal shift and drive demand into Scottish manufacturing, which is a virtuous cycle. Let us seize this opportunity and make the most of it.