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.