UK Bus Manufacturing

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

Tuesday 27th January 2026 Westminster Hall

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

I beg to move,

That this House has considered UK bus manufacturing.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Murrison. I draw attention to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and my role as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for British buses, alongside the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister).

There were 694 more zero emission buses registered in Britain in 2025 compared with 2024, a 38% rise in the number on the road in one year. There were 167 fewer built in the United Kingdom in 2025 compared with 2024. When we need more zero emission buses, when operators and local authorities are buying more buses but there are fewer orders going to factories in Falkirk, Ballymena, Scarborough, Aldershot and across the country, we know there is a problem, and it did not start yesterday.

I applied for this debate, first and foremost, having been born and raised in a community that has seen immense benefit from the UK bus manufacturing industry. The goliath industrial site, which stretches across a large section of Glasgow Road in Camelon, has been the origin of Scottish-built buses for decades. A stone’s throw away is the sleek, relatively new modern site at Larbert, which hosts the global headquarters of Alexander Dennis. I had a welcome visit to Alexander Dennis’s “meet the fleet” exhibition last week for prospective bidders to Transport Scotland’s ScotZEB3 scheme. I tentatively await the outcome of that exercise and welcome Fiona Hyslop MSP, Cabinet Secretary for Transport, writing to me earlier this month to confirm when the announcement of successful bids is to be made. I hope for an objective outcome that supports Scottish manufacturing.

Members of Parliament will recognise the inherent pride when they spot something built in their community when out and about elsewhere in the country. When the Mayor of Greater Manchester’s fantastic Bee Network was launched, I was proud to note that there were more buses built by workers in Falkirk than from any other place in the world.

[Paul Waugh (Rochdale) (Lab/Co-op)]

My hon. Friend is making a powerful case. Mellor, a bus manufacturer in Rochdale, does a superb job of producing the buses that Greater Manchester needs. Andy Burnham was the first in more than 40 years to retake control of our bus network in Greater Manchester, showing that with a publicly controlled local bus network, we cannot only improve facilities for passengers but secure contracts for local workers and British-built buses. Does my hon. Friend agree that is the way forward, particularly when we are considering Chinese-built buses?

--- Later in debate ---

[Euan Stainbank]

Franchising is certainly an opportunity for our British bus manufacturing sector. I will speak later about procurement and the opportunities it presents for us to go even further, and potentially correct some of the examples that are not as great as the fantastic work done by the Mayor of Greater Manchester in that regard.

This debate is unlike the last one held in Westminster Hall prior to the election in 2024. This is not a debate about the virtues of the current push to decarbonise transport. It is an immutable fact that the shift in demand from both operators and public subsidy is towards cleaner and quieter transport. For the UK manufacturing sector, we need to recognise that the transition to zero emission buses and away from diesel is happening. A business selling horses and carts at the beginning of the 20th century could have continued to sell the carts and might have done well in the short term, but eventually, if it did not transition to automobiles, it would have gone out of business.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank my hon. Friend for his powerful speech on a topic about which I know he is particularly passionate. He will be aware that Alexander Dennis has a base in my constituency of Harlow. Would he agree that the move towards zero emission buses is a massive opportunity to increase the skills base of our communities? We should welcome the opportunity that young people have in our constituencies to work on these revolutionary new vehicles.

[Euan Stainbank]

My hon. Friend goes to the heart of the issue we are debating today. This is an opportunity for our country to enable our manufacturers to compete within the market.

What British industry needs is not to see its renowned prowess for making diesel buses become a sentimental memory in communities such as Falkirk, but policy certainty and support to scale up and properly compete in the zero emissions market as we move towards the implementation of the ZEB mandate. International competitors have been able to scale up to meet the global market through state subsidy and clear procurement ambition. It is up to us to gather the political will to do the same, which I am sure we will hear articulated today.

Through both the mandate and voluntary targets for new registrations, operators are moving to prepare for new additions to their fleet to be fully zero emission by 2030, at the earliest. As that date approaches and diesel buses concurrently become a diminishing part of manufacturers’ order books, we must acknowledge that there is a short window before every new bus in the UK market will be zero emission. The year 2027, proposed by some during the passage of the Bus Services Act 2025 as the date for the ZEB mandate to come into operation, would, without thought, drastically narrow that window, and I was glad to see those amendments defeated.

However, the message we are hearing from our manufacturers is clear. If we now fail to get this right, we will not be talking about a British-led transition and we will not be talking just about a 35%, and rising, Chinese market share. We will be talking about transitioning to reliance on other places in the world to build the vehicles we need on our roads. We will be facing the reality of the long-term consequences of the price and security of supply being increasingly elsewhere and not here. We will have lost control.

That is why this debate is urgent. The Government, in my view, have the political temperament to deliver a new generation of British-built buses, and they have the proven ability to be bold on industrial policy, but too many missed chances by previous Governments and increasingly imminent deadlines for our industry mean that we need to be bolder. Sadly, taxpayer-funded schemes have contributed, rather than aiding a solution, to the problem of diminishing market share for UK manufacturers.

The initial ZEBRA—zero emission bus regional areas—scheme, touted proudly by Prime Minister Johnson’s Government, committed to 4,000 British-built buses by the end of the last Parliament. The scheme delivered just 2,270 buses, of which about 46% were built abroad. There was a material and harmful chasm between political rhetoric and delivery for UK manufacturers.

Scottish manufacturing fared worse recently in phase 2 of the Scottish Government’s zero emission bus challenge fund, the outcome of which was sending two thirds of ScotZEB2 orders to Yutong in China, while less than 20% went to Scottish manufacturers. That created an existential threat to 400 jobs and the Scottish bus manufacturing sector last year, with the First Minister being informed by the company in August 2024 that the outcome of the scheme appeared to show little regard for Scottish manufacturing, with unprecedented action being required in September to prevent the two factories from closing for good.

In addition, 130 jobs were lost in 2024, in part because of the aggravated issue of conditions being placed on Scottish Government funding, compelling adherence to advanced Fair Work First standards for employee remuneration, welfare and safety, while no such requirement was made of foreign manufacturers. I am all in favour of fair work standards being applied. The problem here is that they were not weighted in the procurement exercises, despite their being required only of British manufacturers. That created an unlevel playing field, tilted in the wrong direction.

We have heard testimonials to the origin of London’s public transport system in the labour of Scottish, English and Northern Irish workers, who now contend with, and are contradicted by, the rapidly increasing portions of Transport for London infrastructure coming from elsewhere in the world.

It does not have to be this way. For example, as my hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale (Paul Waugh) alluded to, the Greater Manchester and Liverpool City Region combined authorities, when franchising their bus networks, bought nationally. They chose to weight properly when buying buses, with procurement teams looking at what could be achieved when social value is appropriately weighted.

These successes and failures are largely down to how the schemes are set up. It seems entirely right to me that, because many are funded wholly with our constituents’ tax money, we should maximise the muscle of the state to make sure that as much of it as possible ends up benefiting our constituents, within the limits of our World Trade Organisation obligations.

[Lee Pitcher (Doncaster East and the Isle of Axholme) (Lab)]

In the Doncaster East part of my constituency, franchising kicks in next year. At the moment, routes are about profits, not the people who use them. With this being about buying British buses, I think we have an amazing opportunity also to think about accessibility on our buses and to make sure we are also thinking about people who have disabilities or need extra help when we build our British buses.

[Euan Stainbank]

For Members of Parliament, accessibility on our public transport network is always a key factor. At the “meet the fleet” exhibition, I was glad to see some of the new models coming out from Alexander Dennis—hopefully to be built at the Larbert and Camelon sites—which will provide greater accessibility for customers. It is important for all bus manufacturers to make that feature a key selling point when they are going out to the country.

Other countries have been able to do this and follow WTO or even EU free trade obligations. The German Government have recently started enforcing a 50% rule for contract value in procurement from the EU or countries with a free trade agreement, putting a cap on market growth of foreign competitors and, in practice, protecting jobs in the German automotive industry. The US’s Build America, Buy America scheme, introduced by the Biden Administration, mandates 70% local content for all rolling stock, and final assembly in the USA. Canada, while engaged in several free trade agreements, has introduced a Buy Canadian procurement policy framework that prioritises domestic industries.

If other countries can do it, so can we. When I have put to the Government the case for greater policy support for UK manufacturers, the very welcome forum of the UK Bus Manufacturing Expert Panel and the 10-year bus pipeline are often cited as the answer. The panel and the imminent 10-year pipeline will offer welcome certainty about the volume and source of upcoming demand, but we need alignment of policy to support our industry or we are in danger of providing just as much certainty to foreign competitors as to our own manufacturers.

The Government’s recent consultation on procurement reform is very welcome. I hope it did not escape the notice of my hon. Friends on the Front Bench and in the Cabinet Office that substantial submissions were made by Alexander Dennis, Wrightbus and supply chain businesses that rely on the primary UK manufacturing sector. The UK manufacturing sector is clear on a way forward that supports it without significant structural legislative change. We need a stronger emphasis on social value, and I believe Ministers must now consider a 30% social value weighting and clearer local economic benefit expectations.

Social value criteria should be directly linked to key performance indicators that provide evidence of growing industry; job creation and retention; skills and metrics, including economic impact; taxes paid in the UK; supply chain spend; and UK gross value added to UK plc. Simply setting social value at 10% would continue to risk it being immaterial to scheme outcomes, as we saw in Scotland, and would be an inadequate tool to deal with rapidly diminishing British market share.

Will the Minister confirm in his summing-up what further action is being considered to encourage contracting authorities to maximise their portion of the 10-year bus pipeline through domestic content when it is published? In addition, what conversations has he sought with Cabinet Office colleagues on procurement reform to amplify the views of the manufacturing sector and supply chain businesses when the time comes to legislate?

The necessity to retain and grow our domestic capacity is increasingly essential when serious concerns are being raised across Europe about the security of some Chinese-built buses. Following concerns raised by myself and the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim, there is currently a National Cyber Security Centre and Department for Transport investigation into the risk of remote deactivation in some Chinese-built buses. I understand, through subsequent reports in the media, that the possibility of remote deactivation exists for 700-plus buses currently active on British roads.

Although the risk may appear abstract to some, this issue raises important long-term security, autonomy and dependability concerns for my constituents, operators and passengers. Our manufacturers currently comply with security regulations 155 and 156, verified by the Vehicle Certification Agency, which ensures that vehicle manufacturers implement comprehensive cyber-security measures throughout a vehicle’s life cycle and ensures that software updates happen safely and securely. Approval certificates, however, can be sought from other countries’ approval authorities through mutual recognition arrangements for non-UK verification.

I raised written questions prior to the interim reports of the investigation being reported in the media. I will repeat them here, considering the new information. Have the Government considered requiring UK VCA verification for any non-domestic manufacturers in the UK following those concerns? Following that, will the Government accept that national industrial security could and should be factored into any subsequent taxpayer-funded procurement exercises? If there is any degree of fallibility in security that cannot be adequately mitigated, the Procurement Act 2023 surely provides the powers for contracting authorities to disregard bids from non-treaty state suppliers.

Is that a power the Government would consider encouraging or mandating contracting authorities to use, if they are not satisfied with the security of buses coming from abroad? Although that would certainly be significant action, buses are the most used form of public transport in the country and are essential national infrastructure. We know that there are sufficiently credible risks to warrant Chinese-built buses being investigated. Without prejudicing the outcome of the investigation, which I understand is still on track, will the Minister provide us with as much of an update as possible on when we should expect the investigation to be concluded? This concern reinforces the need to move urgently to tilt the market away from increased reliance on Chinese manufacturers and towards self-sufficiency.

With 400 jobs and the very existence of a century-old bus manufacturing sector put in jeopardy in my community in Falkirk last year, the state of the UK bus manufacturing sector is a real and present issue, not only for my community but for our national industrial security and how we effectively execute a just transition, as we move towards the zero emission bus mandate for 2030 at the earliest. The transition towards clean transport has been, and will be, backed by billions in additional funding from this Government, who have shown the ability to be bold on industrial policy. We have a valued, well-paid and skilled workforce. At the same time, we have an existential challenge from foreign competitors. Too much taxpayers’ money goes abroad, and too many self-imposed targets were missed by previous Governments.

If we do not adopt creative policies from elsewhere to support our British industry, we risk losing those jobs permanently to Chinese manufacturing, and if that is done, it cannot be undone. If UK bus manufacturing fails, for as long as this country is subsidising buses we will be sending taxpayers’ money abroad, so we cannot afford the cost of doing nothing.

Deindustrialisation is not an inevitable process—a reaction to the UK sector losing market share. We have policy levers. We can increase social value weighting expectations nationally and locally to 30%; we can give clear guidance to contracting authorities on how the muscle in the Procurement Act can best be strategically deployed; we can clearly state the risks that kill switches could present; and we can back British buses.

My constituents and I hope to see buses being built in Falkirk for a long time to come. I want the same for communities in Ballymena, Scarborough, Aldershot and beyond. I believe this Government can make that hope a concrete reality, but to do that we need to make the right choices. We need to make bolder choices, and we need to make them now.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

--- Later in debate ---

[Euan Stainbank]

Thank you, Dr Murrison. I may take the full time; I may not. I thank all hon. Members from all four corners of the United Kingdom for coming to support our British bus manufacturing sector, which shows how important this industry is to many of us here today, especially those from Scotland. It was very apt, considering where the political focus has been, that two Scots kicked off today’s debate.

The hon. Member for Moray West, Nairn and Strathspey (Graham Leadbitter) used his experience as a worker at Albion, and then as a council leader, to demonstrate the value of bus services to our community. His point on the Subsidy Control Act was fairly made, as the Minister said. I appreciate his tacit admission, which I have not heard in many corners of Scotland, that social value is a way to correct these problems. I will be looking very attentively at the ScotZEB3 scheme to see how that is addressed compared with the ScotZEB2 scheme, which, from our constituents’ perspective, was substantially inadequate.

The hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) has an extensive history as a champion for Wrightbus. It was good to hear support for both Alexander Dennis and Wrightbus in relative parity throughout the debate from two corners of our great United Kingdom. I share his frustration about the conduct of some franchisees. However, I was rather glad to hear in the Minister’s response that social value is being doubled to 10%.

My hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) brought his characteristic fire and worker-led perspective to the debate. He championed our community over the summer through some of the darkest times it has experienced up to the very welcome resolution in September, with the delivery of furlough. He has been a strong champion for the workers’ perspective.

The hon. Member for Romford (Andrew Rosindell) powerfully made the point about the value of jobs. He reminded us that for every four jobs directly within the bus manufacturing sector, 13 are created further out in the supply chain. I welcome that perspective. My hon. Friend the Member for Airdrie and Shotts (Kenneth Stevenson), who always brings to bear his wealth of experience in engineering, rightly raised the point that contracts and skills are incredibly valuable. I know that there are workers from Alexander Dennis and supply chain businesses in his constituency, and I hope for growth further down the line for him.

I welcome the contribution from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon). There is a strong presence from our friends in Northern Ireland today, which reflects the importance of Wrightbus to his constituents. My hon. Friend the Member for Paisley and Renfrewshire North (Alison Taylor) made a strong environmental case for buying British.

As a regular attendee at Murrayfield on match day, I am very well-acquainted with Lothian Buses. I recognise the orders they have made from Alexander Dennis, but, as for all franchisees, my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh North and Leith (Tracy Gilbert) will be unsurprised to hear me say that when they come to buying new parts for their fleet, they should look closer to home.

In conclusion, I still wish to raise the point about social value and recognise the urgency of where we are at. A lot of comments were made about the market share, but the point I made at the top of the debate is that we are buying electric and zero emission buses to a greater extent—which is quite right; they are cleaner, quieter transport—but less of those orders are going to every corner of the United Kingdom and less of them are being built in this country, despite a rising demand. It is important to recognise our constituents’ unhappiness with that. One of the most common complaints that I receive from constituents in Falkirk is that despite the effort, labour and history of bus manufacturing within our community, it is not British-built or Scottish-built buses that are picking them up and taking them from our communities into the centre of Falkirk. That is an important matter to address for our industry.

Today’s debate has been a call for ideas, and I will reiterate a few that I put forward. I restate my ask for a 30% social value metric, on the basis that it would be a material intervention both from national and local funding to procurement. I am aware that the Minister has managed to secure substantial progress, which I recognise and welcome, but I will not stop asking.

On the Procurement Act, I recognise the concerns and comments made about remote deactivation by the Minister. I recognise there is a limit to what will be publicised on that, but I will look diligently at the outcome. There is a sense of frustration that what we have at this stage is interim rather than confirmed. Although remote deactivation has utility, there are clearly grounds for investigation, which could perhaps be shared within proportionate boundaries. We have the muscle in the Procurement Act, which was introduced by the Labour party to address non-treaty state suppliers. If a credible risk of remote deactivation is established, I would like to see an official Government response.

I look forward to the publication of the 10-year bus pipeline. Both that and the UK Bus Manufacturing Expert Panel are signs of tangible progress from the Government, in recognising and listening to the perspectives of the UK manufacturing sector. It is important to have a sustained pipeline and a clear road map that can be met by British industry. I am aware that Alexander Dennis and Wrightbus are prepared to meet the demand of the British sector.

Sadly in the last few years, too many of our constituents have seen market share going in the wrong direction, especially in the ZEB market, because of medium-term and long-term decisions taken by the previous Government. They did not stand up for the sector, creating a problem that we have inherited. I think that is a good round of the doors in the 10 minutes I had, and I have nothing further to add. I thank all hon. Members.

Question put and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this House has considered UK bus manufacturing.

Oral Answers to Questions

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

Thursday 20th November 2025 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander]

As I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey), there are a whole number of steps subsequent to the ORR decision, which we welcomed. We are keen to see the stations at both Ashford and Ebbsfleet reopened, and I will be talking to all operators that are interested in making that a reality.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

Considering the imminent publication of the 10-year bus pipeline and rapidly rising Chinese market share in UK bus orders, will the Minister expand on what the Government will do to ensure that domestic manufacturers have a level playing field, which the SNP’s infamous ScotZEB2 shopping list for Chinese manufacturers dismally failed to deliver?

[Simon Lightwood]

As my hon. Friend is aware, we have been working closely with operators and manufacturers as part of our bus manufacturing expert panel. We will publish that pipeline of orders in the near future.

Oral Answers to Questions

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

Thursday 11th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Keir Mather]

The hon. Member speaks with passion about the state of ferry services in his constituency. It is an issue that I am keen to engage with him on further; I know the former maritime Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wythenshawe and Sale East (Mike Kane), was very engaged in this work, too. I am looking to meet the hon. Gentleman next week, alongside my hon. Friend the Member for Isle of Wight West (Mr Quigley), to take this conversation forward. On stakeholder engagement with the ferry operator itself, that local engagement is something I will be taking part in through the Department. I look forward to engaging with the hon. Gentleman as I take that process forward.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

8. What steps she is taking to support the bus sector.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)]

This Government recognise the vital role the bus sector plays in keeping communities connected and able to access key services. That is why we are providing significant multiyear funding to local authorities, including more than £1 billion this financial year to support and improve local bus services and keep fares affordable, alongside the £15.6 billion we are providing for transport investment in our city regions across England. This investment will support British manufacturing, including in my hon. Friend’s constituency.

[Euan Stainbank]

The consultation on 400 jobs at Alexander Dennis closes tomorrow. It has been a time of deep anxiety for the local workers. The SNP’s ScotZEB2 scheme initially sent over three times as many buses to China as to Scotland’s sole manufacturer. Although £40 million has now been made available by Transport Scotland, it must be spent correcting this SNP industrial failure. What engagement have Ministers had with the Scottish Government regarding recently consulted-on procurement reforms and their potential benefit to the Scottish bus manufacturing and operation sectors in the long term?

[Simon Lightwood]

I convened an extraordinary meeting of the UK bus manufacturing expert panel on 28 July, attended by the Scottish Cabinet Secretary for Transport, metro mayors and mayoral combined authorities, to accelerate the panel’s key priorities of establishing a bus order pipeline and strengthening local value within public sector procurement. I will continue to work closely with the Scottish Government on the issue. I know my hon. Friend has worked absolutely tirelessly for his constituents in this area.

Bus Services (No. 2) Bill [Lords]

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

Report stage
Wednesday 10th September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Sir Ashley Fox]

My constituents want the performance, accessibility and quality of bus services to be improved, and that is why I support new clause 34. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew) for re-tabling it. When the Secretary of State spoke to the Bill on Second Reading, she said that improving bus services underpins the Government’s plan for change. If that is the case, it strikes me as odd that the Government would strip out a new clause made in the other place that specifically stated that that was the purpose of the Bill.

I also support new clause 29, which calls for a review of the provision of bus services to villages in England. There are many villages in my constituency with poor or non-existent bus routes, with particular problems in Spaxton, Enmore, Combwich, Fiddington and Stockland Bristol. These villages find themselves just off the main routes, with the residents left all but stranded, unable even to get to and from Bridgwater unless they have a car.

Even in the villages that do have services, far too often the bus service stops in the early evening. For example, the last No. 16 bus to Langport, which serves Westonzoyland, Middlezoy and Othery, leaves Bridgwater at 5.15 pm. That means not only that the services fail to cater for those who want to travel for leisure, but that many constituents are unable to use buses for commuting because they cannot get home after work.

The review should also consider integration between different modes of transport, which is an important issue for those living in rural areas who need to travel further afield. There has been no usable bus stop at Bridgwater railway station for several years because of road layout problems. It is a relatively small fix, but despite running Somerset council for the last three years, the Lib Dem administration seems unable to fix the problem. We must ensure that the Bill obliges local authorities to act in circumstances such as these, and I hope the review will assist in that.

Another problem my constituents would wish the review to consider is seasonal timetables. I am fortunate to represent a beautiful part of Somerset that attracts large numbers of visitors to both the coast and the Quantock hills. During the summer, demand for buses is understandably higher. What the bus operators seem to forget, however, is that the local resident population relies on bus services continuing all year round. Seasonal buses help those in the north of my constituency commuting to work or college in Weston-super-Mare. The reduced frequency of the No. 20 bus service and the lack of a Sunday service in the winter months mean that fewer people can rely on it. I hope that the Government accept the need for this review and that its results better inform policy when the new franchising is rolled out.

I support amendment 23, which calls for an assessment of the ending of the £2 bus cap. The £2 cap was a great achievement of the last Conservative Government, and I was disappointed when the Labour Government decided to scrap it. They increased the amount that all our constituents have to pay by 50% and then proclaimed it a triumph. It sounds like something from Soviet propaganda. We are supposed to welcome this glorious new £3 bus fare as some sort of victory of the proletariat over the forces of capitalism, conveniently forgetting what preceded it. I want to see the £2 cap reinstated, and I hope that the assessment will be the first step toward that.

I want to see bus services improved for my constituents. I believe that amendment 23 and new clauses 29 and 34 would improve the Bill, and I urge the Minister to accept them.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

I refer hon. Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests and declare an interest as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for British buses.

Within my constituency and the neighbouring constituency of the hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) are two sites of the UK’s largest bus manufacturer, Alexander Dennis, which employs around 400 people in Falkirk, with thousands more jobs dependent on the buses created at Falkirk. Manufacturers will welcome new clause 38 and the certainty that it gives by consolidating the provisions of the Bill in Scotland.

Bus manufacturing in Britain has been in difficulty in the past year, partly due to the failure of the previous Government to deliver on their pledge of 4,000 British-built, zero emission buses by 2024. In the end, they supported just over half that number, with just under half being bought from abroad. The Tories funded too few buses and got far too many of them from elsewhere in the world.

Then there was a second policy failure, this time by the Scottish Government’s recent ScotZEB 2 programme, which saw less than one fifth of its buses come from Scotland’s only bus manufacturer and more than three times more come from China. Standing up for Scotland—aye right! Both the Conservatives and the Scottish National party did not take the protection of the domestic bus manufacturing sector seriously, and their failure has jeopardised hundreds of jobs in my constituency and potentially thousands in the supply chain across the country.

All this is to say that the future of a domestic industry that we will need if we want to see a green, clean, safe and effective bus network is contingent on legislation that supports the effective domestic procurement of buses and enables local authorities to make decisions that are right for their area and put the passenger first. The Bill does an excellent job of delivering on those priorities, with a streamlined and more flexible franchising process, stronger powers for grant funding from local authorities, and local authorities able to order in bulk, as in the case of the Bee Network in Manchester.

The Bee Network was bolstered by 254 buses ordered from and built in Falkirk. I will never miss an opportunity to remind the House that the Bee Network’s buses were reliant on the skills and craftmanship of bus manufacturing workers in Falkirk, more than they were reliant on any other place. That is thanks in no small part to the instincts and political foresight of the Mayor of Manchester to work in the national interest—instincts that will be empowered across the country by the provisions in the Bill. If only we had the same foresight from the Scottish Government, who must now deliver on their commitment to a prospective rescue deal for Alexander Dennis workers following the excellent engagement and flexibility of our Transport, Cabinet Office and Scotland Office colleagues.

It is welcome that, following consultation, the ban on registering non-zero emission buses for local services will start no earlier than 2030, as moving too fast on the necessary transition to zero emission vehicles would create a degree of risk for domestic manufacturers in the current market. This year, the industry reported that 35% of ZEV buses purchased in the country by local authorities and operators will come from China, compared with 10% only two years ago. That is an alarming share to have been taken out of our domestic manufacture. We must address that before we throw ourselves head-first or too fast into building an exclusively clean, green and foreign fleet across the country.

While I am sympathetic to the well-intentioned environmentalist calls in amendments 62 and 63 from the Green party to accelerate the non-zero emission buses ban, that approach would risk creating a situation in which authorities and operators would likely be compelled to buy from abroad, further undermining the competitiveness of our domestic industry, on which my community relies. I would more than welcome Green Members’ engagement with the all-party group to discuss how the House can align British industry with the laudable intention of those amendments. The UK timeline will align with the transition in Scotland, as I mentioned, as is addressed in the Secretary of State’s new clause 38 and amendments 46 to 48.

Accelerating our ambition beyond what domestic capacity allows would create a risk that local authorities and operators would be compelled in the long term to buy an unsustainably high proportion of their fleet from abroad, from manufacturers who have received decades of state subsidy elsewhere. I repeat the ask of my all-party parliamentary group for Ministers to use the work of the bus manufacturing expert panel to map out a fully funded and coherent pipeline of zero emission bus orders that can be met by our world-leading domestic manufacturers, and provide the certainty that the sector—especially workers in Falkirk this week—needs before the ban comes in in 2030.

As I mentioned, Falkirk has already seen the benefit of local authority-controlled bus networks, with Labour-controlled Liverpool and Manchester combined authorities making clear strategic commitments to partner with UK manufacturers and ordering significant numbers of buses from Alexander Dennis. Considered strategic and small-p political local leadership can often make more effective policy decisions than the private sector or—I acknowledge—lazy franchisers, who all too often simply look to the cheapest price rather than considering our national, industrial and economic interests.

More authorities operating like that, in tandem with the upcoming changes to the local authority procurement framework, could see us not just protect jobs in Falkirk in the short term but materially enable an expansion of the industry. That is essential to delivering the socially positive outcomes clearly articulated by hon. Members in new clause 45 and amendments 7 and 16, to mention just a few. We cannot forget the social benefit of an industry that provides an additional 3.25 jobs per job hired in manufacturing. The benefits are seen in quieter and smoother journeys, but also in jobs created and protected, taxes paid and communities strengthened.

The Bill seems on the whole to be about building up the powers of our local authorities, but it also gives us an opportunity to build up the bus manufacturing industry while we set our minds to the task of improving local transport. The Bill on the whole is better for passengers, better for local authorities, and hopefully better for British workers. With the Bill we can deliver a transport system that is clean, affordable and reliable and a bus manufacturing industry that thrives for decades to come. First stop, Falkirk.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

With an immediate five-minute time limit, I call Tom Gordon.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill (Fourth sitting)

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

Committee stage
Thursday 17th July 2025 Public Bill Committees

[Mr Kohler]

I am saddened by the Minister’s response. We cannot just leave it to the invisible hand of the market to make sure that sensible decisions are made regarding old oil refinery sites.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

In Grangemouth, we have £200 million dedicated from the National Wealth Fund, and Project Willow, which has two SAF options contained within it. Does the hon. Member acknowledge that, and acknowledge that we need to move at pace to deal with deindustrialisation in such places? His new clause would risk potentially adding another layer of report-making, rather than the real action that needs to be taken in places such as my constituency.

[Mr Kohler]

Such a report would not require there to be a delay. The report would be within 12 months, and we have already heard from the Minister that not much will happen within the first 12 months. That was the excuse given earlier in Committee for not doing various things. A report to focus attention on these sites would be useful and helpful, and I really cannot see why there should be any objection to it.

Question put, That the clause be read a Second time.

Oral Answers to Questions

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

Thursday 26th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)]

8. Whether she has had recent discussions with Alexander Dennis Ltd on the potential impact of the proposed closure of its Falkirk and Larbert bus manufacturing sites on her targets for public transport decarbonisation.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

16. What steps she is taking to support the bus manufacturing sector.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Simon Lightwood)]

I understand that this will be a deeply concerning time for workers at Alexander Dennis and their families. It is important that the Government, at all levels, support British manufacturers, which is why I was proud to chair the launch meeting of this Government’s new UK bus manufacturing expert panel on 13 March. The panel aims to explore ways to ensure that the UK remains a leader in bus manufacturing. My officials and I have been in close contact with Alexander Dennis, and I remain committed to working with it and relevant Government Departments to find a way forward.

[Simon Lightwood]

The £15.6 billion for regional transport projects over five years that we announced earlier this month will help to create a pipeline of investment for the zero emission bus market in the UK, while improving local transport for some of our largest regions. As I said, we are in close contact with all relevant parties to consider how we can support Alexander Dennis.

[Euan Stainbank]

I declare an interest as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for British buses. As the Minister has outlined, this Labour Government will double real-terms transport spending in city regions by the end of this Parliament. While this should be very good news for bus manufacturing in this country, Alexander Dennis—in my constituency and that of my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman)—is, in a contradictory move, seeking to end more than a century of bus manufacturing in Scotland and put 400 workers in Falkirk out of their jobs. What actions will the Secretary of State and Ministers, in conjunction with Cabinet colleagues and the Scottish Government, take to maintain strategically necessary bus manufacturing in Falkirk?

[Simon Lightwood]

Labour mayors across the country are putting in orders for UK-manufactured buses, as we support bus travel in our towns and cities. The Scottish people will be asking questions about why the Mayor of Greater Manchester has managed to buy almost four times as many buses from Scotland as the SNP Scottish Government have. My officials and I are in close contact with Ministers and representatives from the Scottish Government, the Department for Business and Trade, the NFI Group—the owner of Alexander Dennis—and Scottish Enterprise to explore avenues of support.

Sustainable Aviation Fuel Bill

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

2nd reading
Wednesday 11th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

I welcome this tremendous legislation, which comes not a minute too soon after the previous Government self-admittedly sat on their hands. The Bill will enable the essential move to the production of British sustainable aviation fuel, and I put on the record my thanks to the ministerial team and officials for bringing the Bill forward and for their answers to my extensive written questions.

Unless it is the will of the House to cry for the end of aviation as a practice, it is imperative that we back the sustainable use of biofuels, municipal waste, cover crops, ethanol, and even carbon dioxide straight out of the atmosphere, for aviation fuel. The mandate provides a modest progression for the aviation industry towards incorporating this fuel into its mix. We have genuinely world-leading research and development on Teesside, such as through Project Speedbird and Lighthouse Green Fuels. The green shoots of industry there must be supported by Government to enable their outcomes.

Both airlines and airports recognise the environmental and economic imperative of building a domestic SAF market. They understand that relying on imports to meet the mandate increases costs and introduces risk to our energy security, aviation resilience and national competitiveness, and there is the geopolitical risk of exposing ourselves to a cheap Chinese market. We shamefully saw the previous Government be willing to do that, as exposed by the hundreds of jobs now on the line at Alexander Dennis in my constituency due to aggressive state-subsidised Chinese industrial practices capturing an incrementally increasing share of the British bus manufacturing market. It is also in no small part thanks to the SNP Government recently buying four times as many Chinese buses as buses from Scotland, but I digress.

There is credible investment interest from traditional jet fuel producers and aviation operators, which have shown their willingness to put capital behind UK SAF projects. That investment is waiting for the RCM to be put in place, for private law contracts with manufacturers to be agreed, and for the industry to have complete certainty in investing in what is a nascent and uncertain technology.

The Bill must pass through the House as quickly as possible. One of the places that cannot afford to wait for investment is Grangemouth. The closure of the Grangemouth refinery has marked the end of over a century of oil refining on Falkirk’s doorstep, and jobs in the wider supply chain are at risk daily due to the loss of the economic anchor that the refinery provided the community. Petroineos’ conversion of the refinery into an import terminal compounds the concerns within the community that we will be reliant on cheap Chinese imports instead of growing our own SAF.

Grangemouth has the infrastructure, skills, logistics and the will to be a cornerstone of our domestic SAF industry and strategy in Scotland and across the United Kingdom, and it already has a commitment from the Government of £200 million from the national wealth fund. Organisations such as Scottish Enterprise and the team around Project Willow are already assessing investable proposals centred on SAF in Grangemouth. However, the dates for commencement of operations suggested in the report are still far too remote from the practical reality of workers who need to feed their kids and pay their mortgage.

With strategic support and the wise and expedient deployment of the £200 million dedicated by this UK Labour Government to Grangemouth, I firmly believe that we can rapidly transition Grangemouth from aviation fuel to SAF, serving as a model of industrial renewal. There are implications for fuel security in Scotland, for jobs in my constituency and the cost of heating and industrial fuel across the country. We cannot allow this to become another missed opportunity. For Grangemouth to have a chance of succeeding, we need acceleration.

With that in mind, I would like the Minister to answer the following questions. Considering that industry is raising concerns that we may have to wait up to nine months between the commencement of this legislation in quarter 4 of 2026 and the first private law contract being confirmed, what work can be done prior to the introduction of this legislation to bring the first of the contracts into effect as soon as humanly possible? How does the Bill intersect with Project Willow proposals for SAF at Grangemouth? Does the Minister understand the need to back and deliver that at pace? Would he like to touch on how the Project Willow report recommends delaying the HEFA cap? Does he consider the use of waste feedstocks for sustainable aviation fuel to be dirtier, cleaner or the same as waste incineration? What conversations has he had with colleagues at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs regarding the waste hierarchy implications?

In summary, we need the RCM rapidly, and we need to develop the industry at scale, and affordably. I hope that we can genuinely back British SAF, safeguard fuel security, protect skilled jobs and anchor the energy transition in communities such as Grangemouth, Teesside and all across the United Kingdom.

Oral Answers to Questions

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

Thursday 15th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Heidi Alexander]

The answer I gave to the shadow Secretary of State’s previous question was that if, as an operator of the railway, we felt it was necessary to take a strike on grounds of safety, we would, of course, put the safety of the travelling public first—that will always be the case. On the harmonisation of terms and conditions, we need to bring legislation forward to establish Great British Railways. We will have many discussions with our trade union colleagues in a constructive way while ensuring that we provide value for money for the taxpayer.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

T3. Project Willow supports the potential of sustainable aviation fuel to bring jobs to Grangemouth, if the right policies are in place such as flexibility on the cap on hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids, and expediency on the revenue certainty mechanism. What is the Department doing urgently to assess, integrate and implement the recommendations of Project Willow and to support accelerated investment at Grangemouth?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

My hon. Friend is a doughty champion for the Grangemouth refinery. He asks what we are doing: yesterday, we introduced the SAF Bill to bring forward the revenue certainty mechanism, and we continue to consider the Project Willow report and its recommendations.

Oral Answers to Questions

Euan Stainbank Excerpts

Thursday 27th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Simon Lightwood]

My hon. Friend is a fierce advocate for good public transport in his constituency and I absolutely agree with the sentiment of what he said.

[Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)]

Project Willow reported back last week. Among the options is a hydrogenated esters and fatty acids plant producing sustainable aviation fuel and renewable diesel, and the report recommends a delay in the implementation of the HEFA cap. Is the Department currently considering that action?

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Mike Kane)]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his commitment to Project Willow at Grangemouth. We introduced a 2% mandate from 1 January, so 2% of all aviation fuel has to come from sustainable sources. We will be legislating on the revenue certainty mechanism and looking at how we can contribute to the future of that great site.