Official Report 973KB pdf
The next item of business is a debate on motion S6M-19632, in the name of Mark Ruskell, on better bus services. I invite members who wish to speak in the debate to press their request-to-speak buttons.
16:05
Scottish Green MSPs believe that everyone in Scotland deserves to benefit from affordable, accessible and reliable transport, including from their local bus services. Having access to better buses has hugely positive impacts on people’s lives, helping everyone to access education and work opportunities, to be connected to vital local and national services and to connect with one another. It also plays a role in addressing the climate crisis, because it encourages us all to leave the car at home and cut climate pollution.
However, people across Scotland still struggle with the affordability and accessibility of public transport, especially buses. Over the past decade, the cost of bus travel has risen by more than 60 per cent, which is faster than the rate of wages and the cost of living. Those fare increases put significant financial strain on families across Scotland and disproportionately impact people on low incomes, women and people from minority ethnic communities, as they are more likely to rely on the bus.
However, it does not have to be that way. The Scottish Greens have continuously fought to make public transport more affordable, accessible and reliable, which has included delivering free bus travel for all under-22s in Scotland from January 2022 and working constructively with the Government on successive budget deals. Three years on, we can see just how successful that scheme has been: since its roll-out, more than 250 million journeys have been made and there were over 800,000 cardholders as of June. I live with two of them at home. In my region, the scheme has been taken up by just over 100,000 young people, which has resulted in some 26.5 million journeys.
Does the member share the concerns of my constituents in South Scotland, particularly young people, who might have a free bus pass but not a bus service to ride on?
Absolutely. The point of the debate is to look to the future and to the vision that we all want to create.
The success of bus travel has not only been about the number of journeys that have been taken; it is shown in the way in which it has removed travel barriers for young people and encouraged them and their families to use buses more widely. It is clear that attitudes are changing: recent data from the Walk Wheel Cycle Trust shows that 67 per cent of young people are supportive and want to see more public transport. There is success in the thousands of pounds that young people and their families have saved, which has been crucial at a time of ever-stretching household budgets. It is also shown in the way in which it has allowed young people to find new opportunities, whether those are social, at work or in education.
In the one-year evaluation of the scheme, it was found that a third of young people using the concession scheme were able to access new opportunities and new activities. Ultimately, that is good for the economy. I want young people to get the best possible start in life by being able to access good careers and prosperity and to generate wealth that can then be reinvested back into the public services to pay for the services that gave them a helping hand in the first place. Let us dare to invest in that future for more young people.
In every way, the under-22 scheme continues to achieve what it intended. We must ensure that its success continues, which includes addressing some of the key issues that young people and their families have highlighted. Reliability, frequency and accessibility are some of the main reasons why young people, especially in rural areas, have not yet had the full benefits of the scheme. I agree with Mr Hoy that the scheme is great if you are a young person who can use it, but if no buses are near you, the timetable is not great or the buses just do not show up, it will have very little impact on your life.
As soon as a young person turns 22, they hit a cliff edge and, overnight, they are suddenly forced to pay full fares. A young person who commutes into Glasgow for a new job will face a £40 travel bill every week. A young person who travels into Edinburgh from Dunfermline to attend college will—overnight, when they turn 22—face a £35 travel bill every week. However, the circumstances of those young people’s lives will not have changed overnight. The affordability crisis does not stop when they reach 22; it is not paused until a later date.
People in their 20s are far more likely to be living, and struggling, with soaring costs of living, adults under the age of 25 are more likely to be living in poverty than older adults, and 37 per cent of 16 to 25-year-olds were in relative poverty, after housing costs were paid, last year. Young people are also more likely to be in insecure employment, with zero-hours contracts, low pay and irregular shifts being the norm, and they are significantly more likely to be in private rented accommodation, the prices for which have soared over the past decade. On top of all that, young people have to attempt to stretch their budgets even further to cover their travel costs. That will only worsen and deepen young people’s experiences of poverty and the cost of living crisis.
We need decisive, bold action to expand free bus travel. The schemes for under-22s, older people and disabled people should be seen as the start of the work rather than the end of it. We should invest in expanding concessionary schemes to cover more people, so that people can continue to access vital opportunities and are not left behind because they cannot afford an extortionate bus fare.
I welcome the pilot project, which was agreed as part of last year’s budget negotiations between the Greens and the Scottish National Party, to introduce a bus fare cap in a region of Scotland. However, we are just weeks away from the proposed start date and, to my knowledge—unless the minister corrects me—there has been very little progress. The Government needs to follow through on its commitments.
It is critical that more bus services are run in the public interest. It is clear that decades of deregulation have been catastrophic for bus services, so it is galling to see the Conservative amendment extolling the benefits of competition. There are different ways in which we can put the public interest at the heart of how bus services are commissioned and run in this country. I am delighted that Strathclyde Partnership for Transport is moving down the road towards franchising, and the Government should support it in every way possible to achieve that goal. However, the current franchising decision-making process still raises concerns and needs to be simplified.
I want other models, too: the direct control of services by councils, the establishment of community bus companies and even national parks commissioning their own services. The restored bus services of the future should be run by the public, for the public, and should be affordable, accessible and reliable. That is the vision of the Scottish Greens. We invite other parties in the chamber to join us and make that happen.
I move,
That the Parliament agrees that communities across Scotland deserve affordable, accessible and reliable bus services; further agrees that more bus services across Scotland should be run in the public interest to improve services and reduce fares for all passengers; celebrates that 250 million bus journeys have been taken by young people in Scotland since the introduction of free bus travel for under-22s, and calls on the Scottish Government to expand free bus travel to more young people.
16:12
I thank Mark Ruskell for bringing the debate to the chamber. I welcome the opportunity to discuss the importance of local bus services and, in particular, to acknowledge the enormous success of the under-22 free bus travel scheme, which was introduced by the SNP Government, with Graeme Dey delivering it as the minister.
Bus services play a vital role in delivering the First Minister’s four priorities: eradicating child poverty, growing the economy, tackling the climate emergency and improving Scotland’s public services. The Government is investing more than £2.6 billion in 2025-26 to support public transport and to make our transport system available, affordable and accessible for all. We have increased our funding for bus services and concessionary travel from £430 million in 2024-25 to almost £465 million this year. We invest all that money because buses offer a more sustainable way to keep our country moving in a way that is accessible to many.
The Scottish transport statistics that were published earlier this year show that about 334 million passenger journeys were made by bus in Scotland in 2023-24. That represents a 13 per cent increase compared with the number in 2022-23, which shows that good progress has been made.
Across Scotland, more than 2 million children, young people, disabled people and older people now benefit from free bus travel, and they make more than 3 million journeys per week. Since January 2022, more than 250 million bus journeys have been made across Scotland by children and young people using their under-22 free bus travel entitlement card. That has helped them and their families to cut costs for essential and leisure travel. That is an incredible achievement, and the benefits are so important to Scotland’s young people.
Will Mr Fairlie elaborate on the point that I made to Mr Ruskell, which is that one consequence of the expansion of concessionary travel is that the budget is very constrained for supported services, particularly in rural areas? Will the Government now look at creating a rural bus fund for areas, such as Dumfriesshire, that are rapidly becoming bus deserts?
I will come on to Craig Hoy’s point later in my speech.
Although we are supportive of the Green Party motion that we are debating today, it is important that any future expansion of free bus travel to more young people—and, indeed, to others—must be affordable and sustainable. The cost of the free bus pass for under-22s is currently sitting at £200.5 million, and we estimate costs of a further £100 million per year to extend free travel to young people under the age of 26.
This financial year, we will also progress a national pilot to extend free bus travel to people who are seeking asylum, as well as establishing a pilot scheme for a £2 bus fare cap in one of Scotland’s transport regions, which is backed by a £3 million fund.
I also recently announced £20 million through our transformative bus infrastructure fund. That investment supports the development and construction of a wide range of infrastructure projects across Scotland, from bus lanes and bus priority signals to accessible features and transport hubs. Those improvements are designed to shorten journey times, increase reliability and improve integration with other modes of transport, which ultimately encourages more people to choose the bus over private vehicles.
To help local transport authorities to improve bus provision in their areas, the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 has now delivered the powers for local authorities and regional transport partnerships to take forward partnership working, franchising and local authority-run services, alongside their existing ability to subsidise services. It is important to remember that it is a decision for each authority to determine which, if any, of the powers that we have introduced will best address the transport challenges of their area.
The vast majority of passengers who travel by bus do so safely and responsibly. That includes people of all ages who use their free bus entitlement to travel. None of that would be possible without the bus drivers keeping communities connected. However, a minority of people of all ages act in a way that can result in harm to bus employees and passengers, and that is simply not acceptable.
We are determined to address antisocial behaviour on the bus network. The programme for government prioritised the consideration of suspending the use of concessionary travel cards on a temporary and potentially permanent basis as a result of antisocial behaviour when using the card. Detailed work is progressing on a behaviour code, robust impact assessments and a process for suspension, with enabling secondary legislation due to be laid before the Parliament on 4 December. It is simply not acceptable for drivers or passengers to have to put up with antisocial behaviour. Our actions should send a clear message to the small minority that action will be taken and that they will lose that privilege if they continue with antisocial behaviour.
Will the minister give way?
The minister is about to conclude.
I look forward to hearing members’ contributions this afternoon. It is clear that growing bus patronage and reflecting local circumstances in decision making all contribute significantly to delivering improved bus services for all—
Minister, I must move on and call Sue Webber—we have no more time in hand.
I move, as an amendment to motion S6M-19632, to leave out from “further agrees” to end and insert:
"recognises that competition is essential to keeping bus fares fair and reasonable; calls on the Scottish Government to enhance the reliability and punctuality of bus services through the greater interlinking of timetables and integrated ticketing across bus and rail providers; agrees that good road surfaces are essential to improve bus services; notes that communities across Scotland, but particularly in rural areas, struggle to access bus services, and urges the Scottish Government to take action to make buses safer and to expedite the process to remove bus passes from passengers who commit antisocial behaviour."
I call Sue Webber to speak to and move amendment S6M-19632.2.
16:18
I think that we can all agree on the importance of having better bus services across Scotland. Communities across Scotland deserve affordable, accessible and reliable bus services because, after all, they are a vital lifeline for so many. Not only can they help the economy to prosper, but they play a key role in Scotland’s social development, linking people to work, education, healthcare and leisure, while offering a real alternative to car travel.
However, our transport network has been run into the ground under the SNP, with vital road upgrades being delayed, an ageing ferry fleet needing overdue vessels and passengers experiencing poorer services. Public transport has become unreliable and far too expensive. Taxpayer subsidies, ticket prices and complaints have all soared, while the number of services and passengers using public transport have plummeted.
We disagree with the Scottish Greens’ idea that more buses should be run “in the public interest”. That vague statement means nothing. The public sector is not automatically the most effective operator. Competition, accountability and efficiency deliver better services. Competition keeps fares fair and reasonable, and it drives operators to deliver punctual, clean and customer-focused services. First Bus, an award-winning bus company, has been keen to reiterate that, stating:
“We believe that voluntary, legally binding partnerships provide the best value to taxpayers and customers”.
Better buses also require proper infrastructure and joined-up thinking. Buses cannot run on time if our roads are in disrepair or road users face disruption, with lengthy diversions due to poorly co-ordinated road works and resulting traffic jams. The Confederation of Passenger Transport Scotland is keen to see faster, greener and safer bus and coach journeys. Its top priorities are to address traffic congestion and to improve journey times for the 900,000 trips that are made by bus every day in Scotland. The average bus in Scotland travels at 11.3 miles per hour.
Does the member recognise—and rejoice at—the fact that the cabinet secretary and I had a round-table meeting with the Scottish road works commissioner and bus operators and that they are very clear that we are getting towards a position where we will make bus accessibility and the timescales for buses work better—
Thank you. I think that the member has enough to respond to.
Could I get some of that time back, perhaps?
You can get a very short time back.
It is fantastic that Mr Fairlie has had the opportunity to meet with the road works commissioner. I have tried on several occasions, but I have so far been unable to gain that meeting.
Another real opportunity lies in better integration between different transport modes. Bus and rail timetables are poorly aligned, and ticketing systems do not work across different modes of transport or different operators. I want to focus on practical measures, such as smart ticketing, allowing passengers to travel seamlessly between bus, rail and even ferry services. Moving between different modes of transport on a trip is made far easier by single ticketing and fare caps across modes, and by synchronising timetables. The technology to facilitate those things already exists, and I am at a loss as to why they have not been prioritised and put at the top of the list of things to do—we do not have to reinvent the wheel.
I was really pleased to hear from the minister about the legislation that will be laid before the Parliament on 4 December. There is a growing problem of antisocial behaviour on buses, and drivers, passengers and young people themselves deserve to feel safe. I very much look forward to that legislation, because there must be consequences for those who engage in persistent abusive behaviour towards bus drivers and passengers.
The Scottish Government receives more money per capita for public services than the rest of the United Kingdom, and it is high time that the SNP showed some common sense and used that money to give the public across Scotland the vital services that they deserve. The public deserve a transport network that delivers for road users and provides value for money and reliability for passengers.
I move, as an amendment to motion S6M-19632, to leave out from “further agrees” to end and insert:
“recognises that competition is essential to keeping bus fares fair and reasonable; calls on the Scottish Government to enhance the reliability and punctuality of bus services through the greater interlinking of timetables and integrated ticketing across bus and rail providers; agrees that good road surfaces are essential to improve bus services; notes that communities across Scotland, but particularly in rural areas, struggle to access bus services, and urges the Scottish Government to take action to make buses safer and to expedite the process to remove bus passes from passengers who commit antisocial behaviour.”
I call Claire Baker to speak to and move amendment S6M-19632.1
16:22
I think that we all agree that buses are the backbone of Scotland’s public transport system. For many people, whether they are getting to work, school or hospital appointments or visiting family and friends, buses are not just a convenience, but a necessity. However, too often, people are left behind by a system that simply is not working.
Across Scotland, communities have seen bus routes cut, services reduced and fares increased. In too many rural and semi-rural areas, buses have become unreliable or have disappeared altogether. Local bus services have collapsed under the SNP, since it came to power, with more than 1,400 routes gone and 1,700 buses lost from Scotland’s fleet. Too many people living on low incomes are priced off bus services, which limits their ability to access opportunities to work. The consequences are social isolation for individuals who rely on the services and decline for local economies. Poor services also prevent people from making the switch to public transport that is vital in meeting our climate targets. It is clear that our current system is not working in the public interest.
Local authorities should have the powers and the resources to take back control of local bus services where that is what communities need. We want a model that puts passengers first and runs buses for the public good. Progress on change is glacial. The franchising process is far too complex and slow. It creates barriers that prevent councils from stepping in when private companies withdraw or fail to deliver. We need to shorten and simplify the franchising process, so that local government can act quickly and effectively. It is about giving councils the tools that they need to deliver reliable, affordable and joined-up public transport networks.
We can look elsewhere in the UK for examples of how that can work. In greater Manchester, the move to publicly controlled buses under the Bee Network has already delivered lower fares, integrated ticketing and rising passenger satisfaction. There is no reason why communities in Fife, Stirling or Dundee should not be able to have the same benefits.
If we are serious about rebuilding our bus network, we must also think about where the buses come from. Scotland has the skills, the workforce and the industrial heritage to build clean, modern buses of the future, yet, too often, contracts that could have supported jobs here at home have gone overseas. The Scottish Government needs to prioritise domestic bus manufacturing—supporting good, skilled jobs that already exist and creating new ones in supply chains, apprenticeships and innovation. That is how we will ensure that the transition to net zero transport delivers benefits across the Scottish economy.
The free bus travel scheme for under-22s has helped a generation of young people to access opportunities and participate more fully in society. We should all celebrate that. However, we must also ensure that there is a reliable service for them to travel on, because, as other members have highlighted, free travel means little if the bus never comes.
It is now almost a year since the Parliament supported a Labour motion on addressing the abuse of bus drivers and its call for the ability to remove bus passes from individuals of any age—any age—who repeatedly carry out antisocial behaviour. I was pleased to hear from the minister that the Government intends to bring forward regulations on 4 December that would make some progress on that, which would be part of ensuring that buses are safe places for drivers and passengers. As part of that, it might also be helpful to have, at the same time, an update on work around the report that was prepared under Jenny Gilruth about women on public transport, which covered buses as well as trains.
Our amendment is about action, not just aspiration. It is about giving local government real power, backing Scottish industry and ensuring that bus services truly operate in the public interest. Scottish Labour has long argued for a people-centred approach to transport policy. We want public transport that connects communities, supports local economies and tackles climate change. Affordable, reliable, safe and accessible bus services are at the heart of that vision.
I move amendment S6M-19632.1, to leave out from “, and calls” to end and insert:
“; believes that bus travel is vital to everyone in Scotland participating in the economy and is concerned by the reduction in bus routes across Scotland of 44% between 2006-07 and 2023-24; calls on the Scottish Government to shorten and simplify the franchising process, enabling local authorities to bring bus services under local public control and for them to operate in the public interest; further calls on the Scottish Government to prioritise using domestic bus manufacturers to support good, skilled jobs in Scotland, and calls on the Scottish Government to act swiftly to make it possible to remove bus passes from those who engage in persistent abusive behaviour towards bus drivers and passengers.”
16:26
I remember sitting at the back on a school bus trip and singing that famous school bus trip song—not the one about the ejection of one’s grandmother from said vehicle, but the other one, about its wheels going round and round. The problem is that, 30 years later, for many communities in our country, the wheels are going nowhere.
Over the past two decades, we have lost 40 per cent of our registered bus routes. In 2023-24, Transport Scotland recorded 334 million passenger journeys. To be fair, that was a recovery from the pandemic lows, but it is still way below the 425 million journeys that were recorded just a decade earlier. This is a story of long-term decline and a hollowed-out bus network, which most people find patchy, expensive and unreliable.
Will the member give way?
I wish that I had the time, but I do not. I am sorry.
In my region, bus travel has fallen by a third—that is 70 million fewer journeys just in the West Scotland region. That probably explains why the M8 is a car park most of the time. All the while, fares rose by 16 per cent over that period.
The Scottish Government says that it wants to get people out of their cars and on to public transport. That is great, but in what way does removing a lifeline bus service encourage people out of their cars? The reality is that our rural and island communities have been let down the most by that travesty.
The Scottish Government has spent a lot of money on buses. It has subsidised concessionary fares and services by nearly £1.3 billion over the past three years alone. That is public investment for the public good, right? However, the fault of the current system is that it leaves all the power to private operators, which can pick and choose the routes that they want to run while demanding subsidies for the ones that make them no profit. The model is, simply, broken.
Back in 2019, I remember sitting on the lead committee for the Transport (Scotland) Bill, which gave councils powers to create and operate local bus services under a new franchising model. However, six years on, not a single franchise has been delivered under that model. That is because, clearly, the capital and other resources that are needed to deliver such a franchise just do not exist. I said all that, of course, when the bill passed. Councils were given all the power, but none of the resource.
As has already been pointed out, when it is got right, the system actually works. Greater Manchester has had 7 million more bus journeys and there are 24-hour routes—can members imagine a 24-hour bus service in some communities?—all because it restructured its franchising model and remodelled its ticketing system. I lodged an amendment to the 2019 bill on smart ticketing but, unsurprisingly, the Government rejected it.
Some six years later, I do not think that it is beyond the wit of ministers or Transport Scotland to come up with some real long-term solutions to the long-term problems of a declining number of bus routes, rising costs and falling passenger numbers.
If the Government is serious about the local authority franchising model, it needs back that up with resource and—I am afraid—money. Multiyear funding settlements to councils will let them make multiyear investment and spending decisions. Every £1 invested in our local bus services delivers up to £4.50 in wider economic and social benefits.
However, in return for public subsidy, I want to see operators meeting clear benchmarks for reliability, punctuality and, of course, accessibility. Travellers want us to get this right—buses that come on time, tickets that they can afford and routes that connect. The current model is unsustainable for the public purse and bad for commuters, and it sees a small, select few operators make the most of the profit.
I will support all the amendments today, because they all have something valid to say, but it is not about time that we all sat down around the table and came up with some solutions? Surely the travelling public deserve that.
We turn to the open debate. I advise members that there is no time in hand. Any interventions must be absorbed within the agreed speaking time.
16:31
When it comes to buses, the Scottish Greens deliver. By granting under-22s free bus travel, we have seen hundreds of thousands more young people using Scotland’s networks. It has saved them money, allowed them to make the most of the opportunities in their local areas and beyond and reduced their climate impact.
However, there is still so much more to do to improve bus travel. Of vital importance is the provision of reliable and joined-up rural and island bus services, ensuring that no community is cut off from the network and that everyone can choose public transport.
I have seen superb work by communities to create their own bus services. The Finderne Development Trust in Moray runs a service that takes people from rural areas to Forres. It not only meets local people’s needs but provides a social aspect, connecting people as they meet one another on the bus.
Badenoch and Strathspey Community ConnXions, which is based in Aviemore, goes even further. I joined its service on a shopping day, when it brought people from all around the Strath to the local shops. Its users enthusiastically told me that they had been on a picnic outing to Loch Morlich the day before. Not only does its service take people to events but it organises its own opportunities for social interaction, with buses as the basis. Those examples demonstrate that, when buses are community run, they are more than just transport; they build community and place.
Although it is great to see communities coming together, it cannot and should not be left up to motivated volunteers to run critical public infrastructure. The Scottish Government has a responsibility to play its part in delivering buses for rural communities. In its new climate change plan, it lists free bus travel for under-22s and over-60s as a key method of cutting transport emissions, but it makes no commitment to go any further. That is not good enough. We need a Government commitment to provide reliable services, especially in rural areas. If buses do not turn up, people cannot get on.
Private operators have shown time and again that they cannot be trusted to deliver reliable rural bus networks. Services are withdrawn at short notice, fares rise well above inflation every year and timetables are all but meaningless—I say that from personal experience. That makes it hard for people to leave their car at home and opt for the bus to commute to work or to an appointment. The only way that we can resolve that is by bringing buses back into public hands. As has been shown by Lothian Buses, doing so can drive revenue for local authorities and, at the same time, deliver better services for local people. Rural councils are starting to take that opportunity. Borders Council has seen a 70 per cent increase in the number of bus passengers since taking services in-house, which shows what Highland Council can expect now that it has taken 17 routes back into public ownership.
We also need to think about how we deliver better transport for islanders. It is great that under-22s can now travel for free on the interisland ferries in Orkney and Shetland, but those communities face what the Government acknowledges are significantly higher transport costs compared with those paid by folk living in urban areas.
In Shetland, the Scottish Greens propose a two-year pilot of free bus travel for all Shetlanders. Such a move would address the inequality that islanders face while providing a boost to their economy, and it would give us a robust pilot to understand the impact of free bus travel. That is the kind of thinking that we need from the Scottish Government. The Scottish Greens stand ready to work with it to build on what we have already achieved and to deliver even fairer and more sustainable travel for all.
16:35
I will make a short contribution to the debate. I recognise the fundamental importance of buses as a mode of transport and as a social and economic lifeline for many people, including many in my constituency. I recognise that, as members have mentioned and as the Labour amendment refers to, there has been a decline in the number of bus services and bus routes over the past period. That is undeniably true, and I have seen it in my area. I have had cause to raise that issue with the relevant parties, and, if time allows, I will come back to that point.
In the context of the challenges that the bus sector faces, we must do all that we can. It is clear that the concessionary travel scheme has been important in supporting individuals, but its contribution has also been important in helping to sustain and support the bus sector.
I return to the benefit to individuals. For a long time, people over the age of 60, people with eligible conditions and people with a disability have seen the benefit from being able to access the scheme and from being able to remain mobile and active in social and economic terms. I readily agree that the expansion of eligibility to under-22s has been a significant success, with more than 250 million journeys taken, which speaks to its story of success. I declare—although I do not need to declare it as an interest—that, like Mark Ruskell, I have two young people at home who qualify for free bus travel under the terms of eligibility.
Looking at the issue through a local lens—a little wider than my household but still local—I note that the scheme has been enormously supportive to many young people in my constituency in the light of a decision by North Lanarkshire Council to end school transport entitlement for a great number of young people. I absolutely recognise, and it is important to say, that the concessionary scheme should not be used to supplement or replace any removal of bus travel. As an aside, I point out that the Scottish National Party group of councillors on North Lanarkshire Council identified funding to continue school buses, but Labour and Conservative councillors still voted the cuts through. Nonetheless, it is the case that young people travelling to and from school have been able to use their free bus travel entitlement to access school.
I take Mark Ruskell’s point that young people are less likely to have disposable income; they could have just left school, they could be at the outset of their working lives on an apprenticeship or they could be continuing with their education. I spoke with a constituent who told me that her daughter used under-22 transport to get to and from university in Glasgow every day and noted how essential that is. We know that the scheme is an essential support for many young people. It is welcome that more than 80 per cent of eligible young people now access the scheme through a national entitlement card or a Young Scot national entitlement card. The Child Poverty Action Group says that it could save a child in Scotland up to £2,836 a year.
The scheme has a significant impact, and we should be doing everything that we can to nudge that 80 per cent take-up closer to 100 per cent. We should be open to further expansion of the scheme. Mark Ruskell makes a reasonable case on that, but we need to be cognisant of the circumstances that we find ourselves in. The amendment in the name of the minister makes it clear that the scheme already costs £200.5 million. We are about to head into a budget process, and we are hearing, although it is not yet confirmed, that some changes that the UK Government is making to tax could lead to a £1 billion cut to our budget. That is the reality, so, although we need to accept that case, we must look at it realistically.
I will support the amendment in the name of the minister.
16:39
I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak in the debate. Public transport is one of the most important issues to my constituents, and bus services are the most common source of complaint or concern, especially in rural areas.
I imagine that this will be as much of a shock to the Scottish Greens as it was to me, but I actually find points of agreement with their motion on the issue. They are quite correct to say
“that communities across Scotland deserve affordable, accessible and reliable bus services”.
At that point, unfortunately, our views diverge. They return to their safe space of demanding more free stuff that is paid for out of rising Government spending funded by ever-higher taxes on Scots, whereas I believe that the solutions lie in supporting the market to operate more effectively and that, if Scotland is going to offer young people the privilege of unlimited free bus travel at the taxpayers’ expense, there should be serious consequences for abusing that privilege. I await with interest the Scottish Government’s introducing legislation to address that matter.
The motion is a classic example of how the Scottish Greens approach policy: they call for lots of nice-sounding stuff and leave the practicalities to somebody else. An example is free bus travel for under-22s, which the Greens are now saying should be expanded. In principle, there is a lot to like. Giving young people the opportunity to travel to and from education or work and to visit more distant friends and family without the cost of bus fare is not a bad idea. However, it comes with a cost, not only in the troubling increase in antisocial behaviour both on buses and in bus stations, but in the other improvements to services that are not made because funds have been directed to subsidise free bus travel. Every policy comes with a trade-off, and it seems that we are sacrificing funding support for the basics in order to support and expand giveaways such as free bus travel.
Far too often in recent years, I have dealt with reports of antisocial behaviour by young people that is deterring other bus users from travelling. In Kilmarnock, antisocial behaviour in the bus station by young people, many of whom travel from outside the town, has been such an issue that it has required on-going interventions by Police Scotland and East Ayrshire Council. Time and again, I hear from constituents who feel unsafe using the bus station and avoid it after dark. That is not easy for anyone who commutes to and from work in the winter months.
Of course, antisocial behaviour is not the only issue with bus services. Although we often talk of public transport as though it is a single entity, a brief look at the bus and train timetables would tell us that that is not the case. That is not to mention the lack of joined-up infrastructure more generally. We know that the provision of good public transport infrastructure not only encourages people out of their cars but actually improves public health, as people choose to walk or cycle from the bus stop. Nevertheless, we continue to see an inconsistent approach to ensuring that key transport facilities and routes align with each other.
Will the member give way?
I am sorry—I do not have any time. I would love to extend the debate.
While the Scottish Greens continue to peddle ideological fantasies as the solution to the challenges that Scotland’s bus services face, we, on the Scottish Conservative benches, prefer to deal with reality. Private sector providers are not the enemy of good bus services; they are an essential part of those services. Where they can run a bus service profitably, they should do so. Where they cannot, and where the Scottish Government believes that such a service is necessary, as it is in many rural areas in my region, the money should be found to support those services, recognising the economic and social benefits that good public transport links can bring.
Passengers across Scotland must have a reliable bus service that is clean, safe and punctual. Only then should we be talking about spending more public money on ever more expensive freebies.
16:43
The bus remains by far the most commonly used form of public transport in Scotland, and most people who commute to work by public transport take the bus. However, with routes being cut and prices rising, which is hitting people during a cost of living crisis, action is urgently needed to prevent people from being priced out of travelling and communities from being cut off.
Buses are vital for those on low incomes and those who need to access employment and leisure as well as their everyday lives. Lower bus fares are an aspiration, and it is an aspiration that I share. A 2023 NUS Scotland report, “Fighting for Students: The Cost of Survival”, found that more than a fifth of students had missed a class due to travel costs. Of course, it is students from low-income families who are most affected.
Local bus services in Scotland have collapsed by 44 per cent since the SNP took over in 2007. More than 1,400 bus routes were lost between 2007 and 2024, and in one year alone—2023-24—we lost 190 bus routes. I think that members will all be familiar with cuts to local services in our communities.
I have supported—and still do support—public control and the regulation of the bus industry. I believe that it is imperative that we shorten and simplify the franchising process, to enable local authorities to bring bus services under public control. I have seen an unregulated private bus industry during my lifetime, and I do not think that it has served the people all that well.
In Glasgow, taking the bus remains more expensive than taking the subway, believe it or not, with a return ticket costing nearly £6. As Claire Baker said, there is a lot to be learned from other cities, such as Manchester and Edinburgh. Edinburgh has a popular bus service whose usage reflects residents’ confidence in it, and it is certainly cheaper than Glasgow’s.
For me, the debate is about customer affordability, reliability and equivalency to other public transport sectors, such as rail. If you go into a railway station, you can see the timetable and whether the train is late. I know that the bus industry aspires to have that, and the same information should be available if you are waiting for a bus. If we do not aspire to have that level of service, maybe we can understand why many people still will not use the bus.
Recently, in Glasgow, which I represent, an 18-year-old girl was waiting for the number 57 night bus, which was the second-last bus home, but it did not turn up. The app that she should have been able to look at did not show her where the bus was, and the next bus was also cancelled. When she questioned the bus company about it, it was clear that road works played a big part in the delay. The company accepted that that is not where it wants to be with the reliability of its service and that it does not want to have to cancel buses. However, I would be concerned for a young female constituent who could not afford to get a taxi home. In 2025, we really should not have to hear about that happening—women’s safety is really important in this.
During my first term in the Parliament, in 2016, I worked on a member’s bill on the subject, because I have always believed in concessionary fares and that we have to reduce them—and not just on buses. I believe that it is also important to make train fares affordable. Mark Ruskell referred to a cliff edge, which also affects 16-year-olds, because, when people turn 16, they have to pay full fare on the trains. That is something that the Parliament could look at in a future session. It is about having affordability, reliability and concessionary fares.
I will conclude by commending the bus industry for the progress that it has made, particularly on the decarbonisation of vehicles. Concessionary schemes are very important, and we support them. We implemented them when we were in government. We must aspire to have better community bus services that take people to the places where they need to go.
16:47
I am delighted to contribute to the debate and I agree that communities across Scotland deserve affordable, accessible and reliable bus services.
I was surprised by the Government’s amendment. I recognise the cost of delivering the concessionary travel card, from which I benefited hugely in the past when I was getting to work at the hospital. I was also able to get to town to meet friends or to volunteer in the middle of Inverness. The £200.5 million investment has tangible returns. It is helping young people to hold jobs and to travel to caring responsibilities, further and higher education, voluntary roles and the social opportunities that will support their health and wellbeing.
Since the introduction of the free bus travel scheme for under-22s, children and young people have made more than 250 million free bus journeys. That is at least 250 million opportunities that have been opened up; it is 250 million steps that have been taken to relieve financial pressure on families; and it is 250 million steps towards tackling the climate crisis by encouraging a new generation to choose sustainable travel early on in their lives. Perhaps the minister can clarify the wording in the Government’s amendment when he sums up.
Does the member agree that it would be helpful for some work to be done on what happens when young people turn 22 and whether their commitment to using public transport continues?
Absolutely. There is probably a case to be made for enabling lots of different groups to access cheaper or free bus or other transport services, and I hope that work is done to assess where the best value will come from for society and for individuals in any future expansion of the concessionary scheme.
A strong, accessible bus service is a powerful engine for driving forward all the key priorities of this Government, including eradicating child poverty, growing a fair economy, tackling the climate emergency and improving public services.
In the Highlands and Islands, I see that every day. In communities that are spread across a vast geography, from the islands to villages in Sutherland, buses are an absolute lifeline. In Inverness, I think of the huge reliance on services such as Stagecoach’s number 3, which connects communities such as mine in Merkinch and the carse to the city centre, Raigmore, Inverness College and up to Culloden. When that service suffers cancellations through weather, breakdowns or staffing issues, I hear about it. Those cancellations impact on the ladies who are stuck in the rain on Kessock Road trying to get to Harry Gow’s or Raigmore hospital, the group heading to Simpsons Garden Centre and the MSP trying to make her train.
For many of my constituents—students, workers and older people—that bus is the difference between full participation and isolation. However, when we rely on commercial operators to deliver those vital services, their continuity is always at the whim of those operators, who are concerned with profits, and our rural and less well-off communities, which are the most vulnerable, are first in line for cancellations and cuts.
I share concerns about people not being able to use their concessionary card if there is no bus. That is the situation that many young people I represent are in, and it is why I spent years campaigning for an expansion of the scheme to cover interisland ferries, which I am glad has now been brought in. The justification for services involves usage, which comes with constant improvement and expansion of services, and I am confident that the direction that we are going in is the right one.
The concessionary scheme is recognised across the UK as a benchmark. We are seeing reports from Westminster committees encouraging the UK Labour Government to copy the SNP’s policy and implement it down south, where fares are rising faster than inflation and costs are said to be acting as a barrier to opportunity.
Although the Scottish Government is delivering on available bus powers, including by empowering local transport authorities to consider options such as franchising, through the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019, which has since resulted in some excellent services being taken forward by Highland Council, we must acknowledge the constraints on our ambition. The hard reality is that there is a ceiling on what devolution can achieve. We cannot secure the full fiscal powers that are needed to ensure that all essential bus services, from the busiest routes in Inverness to the crucial once-a-day lifeline service to Durness, are protected, publicly focused and permanently secured.
16:52
I thank Mark Ruskell for bringing forward the debate. As my colleague Claire Baker said in her opening speech, Scottish Labour believes that we need a public transport system that is affordable, reliable, accessible and safe for all. That is one of the reasons why the former Scottish Labour Government introduced free bus travel for over-60s in 2006 and why we called for and supported the roll-out of free bus travel for young people. That has been positive, and members have talked about the gains from that policy. However, we need to recognise that it has also presented challenges. Although the vast majority of children and young people are a credit to their community, a very small minority of them have used buses as gang huts and have displayed antisocial behaviour towards bus drivers and other passengers. That is unacceptable.
As Claire Baker said, it is more than a year since Parliament supported a Scottish Labour motion calling for the removal of bus passes from individuals of any age who repeatedly carry out antisocial behaviour, and I join her in welcoming what the minister said about his plans to ensure that buses are safe places for bus drivers and passengers.
Claire Baker and Pauline McNeill both mentioned the report on the safety of women and girls on public transport, and we particularly need an update on that, too.
We welcome the provision of free bus passes for more than 2 million people, but we acknowledge that there are 3 million working-age people in Scotland between the ages of 22 and 60 who do not qualify for free bus travel. Of course, nothing in life is free, and working-age people are paying for free buses that others enjoy, but, at the same time, they are, in some parts of Scotland, paying among the highest bus fares in the UK. For example, in my region of Renfrewshire, it can cost my constituents £3.10 to make a two-mile single journey.
I know that the Government is taking action on off-peak rail fares. We have talked about pilots, but I think that, rather than pilots, we need price regulation of bus services in Scotland.
Unfortunately, over the past 18 years, we have not had any meaningful regulation of the bus system in Scotland, let alone price regulation. Next to nothing has been done to stop private bus companies dictating our bus services and putting profits before people.
Meanwhile, as we have heard, local people have seen their bus services cut and a staggering 1,400 bus routes have been lost between 2007 and 2024. Constituents in places such as Whitehaugh, Hunterhill, Glenburn and Gallowhill in Paisley are just a few of those who have been affected. As many others have said, it is no surprise that bus passenger numbers have plummeted by nearly a third since the SNP came to power. It is no wonder that my constituents regularly ask what the point is in a free bus pass if there is no bus to get on.
We need a concrete plan to ensure that enough buses exist for those who have an existing free bus pass—and for all bus passengers—and to bring local buses under local control. The Parliament passed bus franchising powers six years ago to allow that to happen but, to date, little has changed. I am pleased that the Strathclyde Partnership for Transport is progressing plans for franchising in the greater Glasgow area after consultation showed overwhelming support from the travelling public, as has been mentioned previously. However, as has been said, it needs support from the Scottish Government to allow it to take that forward.
I am not sure how committed the Scottish Government and the minister are to bus franchising. I know that the minister said that it is for authorities to decide, but we would like to hear from the Scottish Government a commitment to support franchising and local buses being taken under local control. That is the leadership that we have had in Manchester under Andy Burnham, in Leeds under the mayor there and in Liverpool. If it is good enough for those areas, it is surely good enough for areas such as greater Glasgow and others.
Mr Bibby, will you please conclude?
I will leave it there. We want to ensure that our public transport is safe, accessible and affordable for all.
16:56
If I may put a slight dose of realism into this debate, it is that everything that we discuss here is about priorities and choices. Recently, I sat on a panel that the Royal Society of Edinburgh organised in Dumfries, at which Ross Greer spoke. I am not sure whether this is a confirmed Green policy, but he said that he hoped that the Green Party could offer free bus travel to everyone in Scotland. Although that might sound a very noble outcome, it would come at a huge cost.
The point that I make to the minister as the Government considers expanding concessionary travel is that, in certain areas of Scotland—particularly in Dumfriesshire over the summer—the bus network has almost entirely collapsed.
Will the member compare the cost of providing a policy of free bus travel with, for example, the extraordinary cost of the Government’s road building programme, which the Conservatives constantly tell us the Government is not spending enough money on and is not working on fast enough?
The fact that Patrick Harvie does not realise that buses run on roads shows the depth of the failure to engage in joined-up thinking.
When we look at the state of the roads in Dumfriesshire, we see a bus service and a road network that have been denuded of investment under the SNP Government. When we discuss the matter, Patrick Harvie and Ross Greer say, for example, that all of that could be funded by a wealth tax. However, if the Greens were ever to get closer to power in Scotland, I suspect that the last few millionaires in Scotland would be on a bus over the border. [Interruption.]
I welcome what the Government has announced today in respect of under-22s bus travel and antisocial behaviour. However, I put a practical point to it—[Interruption.]
Members, please do not speak from sedentary positions. Mr Hoy, please continue.
Will the Government give some thought to how it would work in practice if the scheme was adapted to allow the bus pass to be removed? I have spoken to bus unions that have asked whether the Government is saying that, if 13 or 14 kids are about to board a bus and one does not have a bus pass, it is prepared to single out that child, given the ramifications of the increased antisocial behaviour that that might result in. Ministers will have to think the issue through, as it might well be that slightly more draconian measures will have to be put in place to address it.
In the debate, we got to the heart of some of the issues. However, my real concern, which I will close on, is the issue of rural bus services. Any expansion in concessionary travel might result in scarce resources going into central belt areas, where we now have the concept of 15-minute neighbourhoods and people want four buses an hour. People in some parts of the south of Scotland, which I represent, simply want to have a bus service each day, and it would be impossible for them to live in a 15-minute neighbourhood.
I also ask the minister to focus on the supported services in rural areas that are being cut because councils can no longer afford them. Those are lifeline services that are being cut. We have previously debated the issue of bank closures. Before the last bank in a town can close, there has to be an assessment of access to cash. We need something similar in relation to the bus system, because we cannot have communities in parts of Scotland that have no access to bus travel whatsoever. It is fundamentally unfair if people pay their taxes and get a bus pass but there is no bus for them to use. Ministers must think about that before they expand the concessionary travel programme.
17:00
I thank all the members who contributed to the debate. It has been a good debate and the speeches have, by and large, been positive.
We have talked about the importance of buses and the challenges that we are facing. I also want to point out how we are tackling some of those challenges. I will not name everybody, but various members talked about the things that need to be put in place. The bus infrastructure fund is helping to tackle the challenge of having reliable timetables. I have seen fantastic work in Glasgow with the artificial intelligence technology that is being used there. The network support grant and the plugged-in communities fund are helping rural communities to create community bus systems.
Some of the negativity in the debate came from Sue Webber constantly running Scotland down. The Tories must come from a really miserable place when everything that we talk about—not just on buses, but across everything that happens in Scotland—is talked about in a negative way. That is disappointing, but I understand why they do it.
As I said, a lot of work is on-going. We have held meetings with the Scottish road works commissioner to try to make sure that bus transport gets moving.
I am never in a position in which I totally run Scotland down. I was just making the case that there is massive inequality in bus service provision across our country. I am fortunate to live in Edinburgh, and other cities are also well provided for, but we have heard from colleagues about Dumfries and all the rural areas that have nothing. That is the point that I was trying to get across.
I take the member’s point, but it was the Tories who dismantled the bus service in the first place.
Jamie Greene, on the other hand, talked about things that are going on. We are giving RTPs powers to make sure that local authorities have the ability to bring in the local services that they want. I was happy to hear that Mr Greene wants to talk about the solutions. There are challenges, and I welcome engagement with people who want to bring solutions to the table to allow us to get what the Parliament wants, which is a good-quality, reliable public service.
Ariane Burgess and Mr Hoy talked about rural communities not having enough bus services. That is why we have the community bus fund, the plugged-in communities fund and demand-responsive transport. Those are all things that help to give people the ability to get a bus. However, there is more to do, and I accept that we still need to work things out.
Between 2022-23 and 2023-24, there was a 13 per cent increase in the number of bus journeys that were made, which is a positive thing. The figure is not as good as it was prior to Covid, and we do not yet quite know how we will get it back up, but we will continue to work on those things.
Unfortunately, I could not hear the question that Emma Roddick put to me. We are assessing what has happened since 2022. We are working out what happens once people drop out of the age group and how many of them continue to use the bus. There is an opportunity for bus companies to say, “If those people are dropping out, how do we hold on to them and keep them in the system?” Emma Roddick also talked about the great work that Highland Council is doing, and that fantastic work is to be commended.
Jamie Hepburn talked about things that are happening in North Lanarkshire and said that the council is cutting services. I make the point that councillors must be cognisant of what the local community is telling them. If people are saying that walking routes are unsafe, councillors really need to listen to that. I am glad that Jamie Hepburn brought up that point.
As we have heard, the under-22s free bus travel scheme is transformational for the young people of Scotland. I acknowledge the Scottish Green Party’s ask for the expansion to be considered as part of the upcoming Opposition party negotiations in 2026 and 2027, but we must be mindful of what our budget is. Jamie Hepburn mentioned a potentially massive cut to Scotland’s budget later this year.
On the topic of public ownership of bus services, we have delivered all the powers for our local transport authorities and regional transport partnerships to take forward whatever they decide to run in their communities, and that is how we will proceed.
This has been a good debate, and it has given us the opportunity to talk as a Parliament. If we can work together to ensure that we bring in the systems that will allow us to improve our public services, that will be a good thing.
Patrick Harvie will wind up the debate.
17:05
I thank all members who have contributed to the debate. It is clear that, across the chamber, there is a strong recognition of the value and importance of bus services to all the communities that we represent, whether that is in tackling child poverty and the cost of living or whether that is in enabling access to services, work, college and each other. I think that one member referred to buses enabling people to access a loch to have a picnic there. Bus travel was described during the debate as the “backbone” of public transport, and I think that that is right.
I will mention Jamie Greene’s speech because he was one of a number of members who talked about the reduction in bus services, especially in the more rural parts of his region. He did not simply blame the Government for that; he recognised that the model is broken. He saw that the blame often lies with the private operators and that councils have been given the power to act but not the resource to do so. In too many parts of Scotland, we see private companies quite happily running the profitable bits of the network—some people think that that is a good thing—while abandoning other parts of the network or other communities and leaving the public sector to step in.
A number of members gave examples of where communities have stepped in. Davy Russell is in the chamber, so I will mention Climate Action Strathaven, which runs the 3C bus in his constituency. That is how I travelled when we were all heading out there for the by-election campaign. Local communities should not have to step in to fill the gaps in a failed private sector model.
A number of members talked about the impact of antisocial behaviour. I believe—we all do—that every bus passenger should feel safe and be safe when using the bus. Every bus driver and worker in the bus services should feel safe at work and be safe at work. We recognise that that is an issue, but I also say that it is not entirely tied to the under-22s free bus pass. I regret that some people seem to want to tie together those issues a little too closely.
I have seen antisocial behaviour on the wider public transport network, including on trains, and not just on buses. On buses, I have seen it from people who are significantly older than those young people who are sometimes stigmatised. I know from colleagues that such behaviour happens in parts of England and Wales that do not have something equivalent to the under-22s free bus pass.
We will look at what the Government comes forward with and take a view on it when we see it, if the Government wants to make changes. However, it is clear—at least to me—that simply removing the free bus pass would not tackle antisocial behaviour. If somebody’s behaviour is the problem, simply saying that they should pay for their own ticket is not a solution, while simply saying that they should not be on the bus means that the behaviour will take place somewhere else. I would like us to think principally about the behaviour, rather than the bus pass.
The under-22s free bus pass has been an overwhelming success. Although one or two members seem to be in denial about that and to think of it as some uncosted fantasy economics, I gently remind everyone that we have actually done it. It is happening, it is working and it has been a huge success, with more than 250 million journeys taken.
I have spoken to constituents of mine who had the option to take a job or a college course that they simply could not have afforded to do if they had had to pay the full cost of their bus travel. Publicly funded journeys—whether for younger people, older people or anyone else—help to make services more viable. They help to protect and preserve services that the private sector would otherwise seek to undermine. However, that also makes the case for moving away from what is a failed free-market model.
The Conservative amendment talks about competition. We have had decades of competition in delivering bus services, and it has failed. We have seen ever-rising prices, services have been scrapped or are unreliable and many communities have been left without a service altogether. The Government often gets the blame when communities are poorly served in that way but, in fact, it proves that the free-market model is a failure.
We need to move on, certainly to franchising—and, yes, the argument for shortening and simplifying that process is clear. As well as giving local authorities the ability to do that, we need to fund the process. We need to ensure that they are resourced and have access to the funding and skills that will enable them to use those powers. From that case for franchising, we then need to move on and talk about public ownership. That will need resource, too, but it will be the most effective way to ensure that we end up with a public transport service that works for the public interest.
I commend Claire Baker for her bravery in using the phrase “take back control” because I wish, for goodness’ sake, that the phrase had been coined as a slogan not by those who were seeking to blame the European Union for all the ills of the country but by those who were looking to blame the private sector, the super-rich and the billionaires. The bus system in this country has allowed the super-rich to line their pockets by running rubbish services that are fleecing people through tickets and not providing the service that is needed to a great many communities.
Greens are proud of the progress that we have made, particularly on travel for under-22s. We are determined to build on that progress and to see a public transport system in Scotland that is run for public benefit and that meets the interests of the communities that we serve.
Previous
Rosebank Oil and Gas FieldNext
Business Motion