UK Coach Industry
Tuesday, 13 October 2026
Contributions
Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab) [R]Labour
I beg to move, That this House has considered the future of the UK coach industry. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. A couple of years ago, I was invited to speak at the conference of the Coach Operators Association. Being a reasonably diligent MP, I checked how many mentions of “coach” there had been in that parliamentary Session. There were rather more than I expected. Delving deeper, I found many references to cricket coaches, football coaches, basketball coaches and various issues that hon. Members wished to drive a horse and coach through. Parliament has been talking about coaches for almost as long as they have existed. In the 1790s, Parliament debated people who leapt on to stagecoaches and, just as they reached the tollgate, jumped off and got on again at the other side, in what seems the short ticketing of the past. In 1839, there was a mention of Dunstable and coaches. A coach proprietor, Mr Johnstone of Dunstable, was worried about taxation on stagecoaches and competition from newfangled railways. I have to report that, unfortunately, the Chancellor was not sympathetic to the plight of stagecoaches. I hope the Minister today will be more so to the modern coach industry. Coaches have been described to me by many in the industry as a social glue. They are certainly not niche; we see them all around us. They offer flexible, affordable and sustainable transport for millions of people. They take 600,000 children to school every day. One million people take coach trips and tours in the UK each year.
Daniel Zeichner (Cambridge) (Lab)Labour
Given the importance of the coach industry, I wonder whether my hon. Friend agrees that parking arrangements for coaches have never been given proper consideration. In a city like Cambridge, a tourist hotspot, it is a long-running problem.
My hon. Friend makes a fantastic point. Cambridge, along the Backs, is often full of coaches. It is important to get across to residents that one big coach stops a lot of small cars. Although we need more coach parking spaces, it is important to think about the environmental benefits that a coach brings. Coaches also take people to concerts and football matches—Wembley is home to Europe’s largest coach park—and they provide rail replacement services. Importantly, they bring passengers to the door. A railway station might be a little away, but a coach will take passengers to the door of Alton Towers or a National Trust property.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)Democratic Unionist Party
Coaches do even more than the hon. Lady mentions. They take my Orange lodge in Northern Ireland, my Royal Black Preceptory and the Apprentice Boys to the 12 July parade. For Northern Ireland, coaches are the glue that keeps the community and our Orange lodges going.
Karl Turner (in the Chair)Independent
Order. Interventions need to be short.
Coaches can be booked to get people anywhere they want to go. They are also important for growth, a defining mission for Governments of all stripes. The coach industry brings £17 billion to the UK economy. When I pitched this debate to the Backbench Business Committee, I compared coaches to the fishing industry, which brings about £1 billion, saying that coaches should feature in as many debates as fish in this place. Coaches are easy to deploy. There is no need to spend years building railway tracks, for example. Despite all that, coaches remain under-appreciated. Why is that? Surveys show that about a third of respondents think coaches are uncomfortable, outdated and infrequent. That is an outdated view; today’s coaches are comfortable and modern, and often take passengers precisely where they want to go. I think one of the reasons for that view is that they are family businesses and do not necessarily employ public relations folk to talk to us here and get the messages across that they need to. I also think it is down to us. MPs and journalists do not often use coaches in the way that we use trains. There is a good statistic that says that 97% of people have never heard a politician talk about coaches. I hope they are all tuning in today so that we can right that wrong.
Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)Liberal Democrat
I am going to talk about coaches. The hon. Lady mentions local businesses, which include Eastbourne Coaches and Lynns Travel Eastbourne. Does she agree that there is a role for those businesses, and also for big business such as National Express to bring their coaches to Eastbourne, especially in the light of the terrible railways we are experiencing in our patch?
Coaches have the potential to bring people to all kinds of tourist destinations and to fantastic seaside areas. We should appreciate them for that. Within the Department for Transport, there are specific teams for bus and for rail, but not a specific coach team. Might the Minister be willing to comment on that? On that theme, one issue facing the coach sector is that it gets lumped together with other sectors, most noticeably bus, but also HGV. Having waxed lyrical about coaches, I come to my next question: what is a coach? That might seem a bit odd at this stage, because I think we all instinctively and intuitively know what a coach is: the passengers climb up into it, there is a space for luggage underneath, they sit—there are probably seatbelts—and the coach takes them a reasonable distance. However, in law it is a bit more of a muddle. When granting an operator’s licence for a coach, the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency mixes coaches and buses together, so coaches cannot be specifically counted. When it comes to accessibility rules, the Department for Transport says a coach is something that passengers sit down in and there are no standing passengers. A coach can even become a bus as it is driving along—it can start being regulated as a coach, but if it picks up and drops off passengers with a 15-mile gap between them, it becomes a bus for that bit of the route, before magically turning into a coach again. When I have asked parliamentary questions on this subject, Ministers cannot reliably tell me how many coaches there are. I do not think it should be down to enthusiasts to be counting them. As well as not being able to count coaches, we cannot count coach drivers. It is the same issue: the standard occupational classification data used by the Office for National Statistics puts bus and coach drivers together. When I was looking at that dataset, I did the same thing as I did with Hansard and did a keyword search to find out where coach drivers appeared. They were indeed in with bus drivers. Then I looked again at sports coaches, which have their own subcategories of cricket coaches, football coaches, and the like. Why can we not do the same for coach drivers? If we had better data, we would ultimately be making better policy. While we are on the subject of drivers, we need more of them. There are 5,000 to 10,000 vacancies in the sector at the moment and about a quarter of coach drivers are over the age of 60, so it is a challenge that is likely to get worse. What we need is a plan to get young drivers straight from school into the driver’s seat. Back in 2024, there was a consultation on one of the issues for young drivers. The mileage that young drivers do is limited by law at the moment. For example, if a young driver started off from 10 Downing Street and drove north to No. 10 North, they would only get as far as about Milton Keynes before they had to stop. The Minister has said before that he is looking at the results of that consultation and assessing proposals. Might he be able to give us a timeline for when we might hear more about that? While the Minister is at it, could he also talk to his colleagues in the Department for Education? Yesterday, I received a letter from a Minister about skills bootcamps, but although HGV drivers can use the good funding available in skills bootcamps, coach drivers cannot. Lumping things together also happens on the path to net zero. Coaches are lumped in with HGVs, rather than buses, although the requirements can be quite different. If an HGV driver stops at a motorway service station, they park, plug in, and away they go, but a coach driver has 50-odd passengers to deal with, all of whom need to be got safely off the coach and into the motorway service station to buy some overpriced sandwiches, so the requirements are very different. A zero emission HGV and coach infrastructure strategy is due soon. Can the Minister assure me that adequate attention will be given to the specific challenges for coaches? In a recent pilot programme to install charging infrastructure, which was shared between trucks, HGVs and coaches, it turned out that less than 3% of the funding went to the coach sector. Coaches have also been excluded from the van and truck zero emission grants because they are not vans or trucks, and from ZEBRA—the zero emission bus regional areas scheme—because they are not buses. In dealing with issues around net zero, we need more support for the industry, which is hard to decarbonise, because coaches by their nature go to lots of places and do not necessarily have predictable routes. At the moment, 75% of operators say that they do not plan to buy net zero vehicles. Will the Minister commit to a long-term road map so that the coach industry knows where it is going? Has the low-carbon fuel strategy, which was consulted on back in 2022—some in the industry are still awaiting the outcomes—been lost in the mists of time? Should we be waiting for something else, or will we get some results from it? Fuel costs are one of the issues that many in the industry are talking about. Because of Trump’s ill-thought-out war in Iran, diesel prices have absolutely rocketed—they are up 46% since February—and that is having a real impact on operators up and down the country. I am sure we will hear some examples of that after I have finished speaking. I know the Minister cannot comment on what is likely to be in the Budget, but would he be willing to talk to some of his Treasury colleagues ahead of the announcement to make the case for the coach industry?
Ben Lake (Ceredigion Preseli) (PC)Plaid Cymru
I congratulate the hon. Lady on her fantastic speech and on emphasising the importance of coach operators across the country. Does she agree that, in making the case to the Treasury, the Minister should point out that in many rural areas local coach operators serve as the backbone of the school transport system? Quite frankly, the school transport system would collapse without them.
Absolutely. The hon. Gentleman makes the point well. Coach operators normally sell tickets in advance, whether for tours around the country—the brochures are printed perhaps a year in advance, they go through letterboxes, and half the places are filled up by Christmas—or for school transport, for which they bid for a contract from the local authority at a time when they thought the fuel price would be different. Coach UK warns that, without help, some schoolchildren could be left stranded, so I hope the Minister will look into that. This debate is about the future of the coach industry, which I think is bright. We have a brand-new trade body, Coach UK. Coaches were mentioned in the Government’s “Better Connected” strategy, which many people in the industry were enthused and excited about. Pursuing a closer relationship with our European partners and neighbours might sort out some of the issues that coach drivers face at the border during international travel.
Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)Conservative
I apologise for missing the beginning of the hon. Lady’s speech. She is making a bold case and a welcome one, and I congratulate her on bringing this matter to the House. She mentioned the issue of recruitment; she will know that two of the barriers to recruitment relate to the restrictions on young people driving. First, Gary and Michele Salter from Long Sutton in my constituency, who run GDS Travel, tell me that young drivers cannot start their off-road and theory training until they have a provisional licence. That seems to be a nonsense. Secondly, young drivers are restricted as to where and how far they can drive. Changing those two things would attract more young people into the industry and deal with some of the issues the hon. Lady has raised.
The right hon. Gentleman makes a good point, and I am keen to hear from the Minister when we might hear back from the Government about the consultation that was undertaken. To make sure the coach industry succeeds as much as possible, we need to make sure that the industry is visible and that the Government really focus on it. That could involve big things like a net zero strategy, and also little things to make coach operators’ lives a bit easier. I cannot understand why, a quarter of the way into the 21st century, coaches still have to display a paper disc on their windscreen showing their operator’s licence when we got rid of all that kind of thing for cars years ago. We might be able to sort out those kind of little bureaucratic things. I have been bothering the noble Lord Hendy about the new Great British Railways app. Trainline—other apps are available—allows users to toggle between train and coach. The new GBR app ought to be able to do the same thing if we believe in an integrated transport system and in giving people choice. Choosing to travel by coach is often much more affordable. Coaches are unique and vital. We should celebrate them for what they are, not for what they share with other forms of transport. I am convinced that they will continue to adapt as we move into the future. On that note, I wish everybody a happy National Coach Week.
Order. I remind Members that they should bob if they wish to speak in the debate. As there is a lot of interest and lots of people want to speak, I am going to impose an informal time limit of four minutes. I call Jim Shannon.
Thank you very much, Mr Turner. It is always a pleasure to be called, and to be called first is almost unique. In the Chamber I am usually last, but the last shall be first and the first shall be last, so in this case I am well ahead. I thank the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for raising the issue of the coach sector. I will speak about two significant coach companies in my constituency, what they do and what it means to the community. Across the United Kingdom, some 2,500 coach operators have faced a 46% increase in diesel prices since February this year. For many industries, the question is no longer how to turn a profit but how to stay afloat. Some 38% of coach companies say they are likely to withdraw from home-to-school transport contracts due to the rising operating costs, which have not been matched by the rates they receive. I am aware that colleagues on the Opposition Benches have some comments, and I look forward to hearing them, but the companies that I talk to tell me they are under pressure to try to deliver a contract that has been agreed, while diesel prices go through the roof. The pressures today are immense, and the consequences will be deeply felt by families and parents who face additional stress and the expense of finding alternative arrangements. In the rural community where I live, the buses and particularly the coaches are under incredible pressure because of some of the contracts. The challenges facing coach services will extend beyond the industry itself, as the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard said. Of course, fuel costs are not the only challenge. The proportion of unfilled coach driver positions stands at 12.4%—again, the hon. Lady referred to that. A community group in my constituency has done some excellent work in introducing men to the opportunity—very rarely is it a woman who takes on the job, at least in my constituency. It is mostly men, but the opportunity is there and people are encouraged. We must look again at scrapping the outdated restrictions on younger coach drivers. For instance, qualified 18 and 19-year-olds can drive HGVs without the same distance restrictions that apply to younger coach drivers. It is difficult to justify maintaining such restrictions when coach operators face a national recruitment shortage. Combined with an ageing workforce, the restrictions make the shortage even worse. We must support the economic contribution of the coach sector, which supports some 81,000 jobs and generates £6.4 billion in economic value. Allowing our coach services to fail would put people out of work and undermine local economies.
Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)Democratic Unionist Party
Does my hon. Friend agree that there needs to be greater recognition of excellent companies such as Hutchison Engineering and Wrightbus in Northern Ireland, which frequently hold fantastic exhibitions to demonstrate their expertise? We need more recognition of and support for coach builders.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and it is brilliant to see that locally. I will mention two companies in particular. Coach Connections in Portaferry is doing so well from its hub in my constituency. Adrian and the team do a fantastic job keeping community members, schoolchildren and sports teams moving safely and reliably right across the country. Managing a top-class fleet alongside a dedicated team of more than 15 local staff is no small feat. They have a brilliant line-up of vehicles, from highly accessible 19 to 33-seater mini-coaches, which are perfect for community groups, right up to the flagship 53-seater Mercedes-Benz Tourismo luxury tri-axle coaches. Now, if that is not a good encouragement for a business in my constituency, I do not know what is. Seeing the expansion of Coach Connections this year, alongside its taking on the excellent Volvo and Plaxton touring vehicles from McAvoys, which it brought over, is a massive testament to the hard work and dedication of its staff. We are incredibly lucky to have such a brilliant and dependable service operating right on our doorstep. Of course, the strength of our local transport network does not stop there. We also have a fantastic team at Giles Tours. Since 1981, Neil and Patricia’s award-winning family business has been a household name for quality travel. Their wonderful drivers, including Josh, Dave and Andrew, constantly go the extra mile to look after passengers with unmatched hospitality. Whether it is on an executive private hire or on the company’s famous luxury coach holidays across the United Kingdom, Ireland and Europe, Giles Tours provides a first-class service that makes the entire constituency of Strangford proud. I am very proud to be the MP for Strangford and to have such companies locally. It is is encouraging. Our local travel needs are in the safest possible hands. The Translink bus group is under considerable financial pressure, saying that it faces a £46.6 million loss in the upcoming year. Translink has some 160 coaches in Northern Ireland. [ Interruption. ] I am going to conclude—
Order. We need to stick to the time limit to allow Members to get in, if we don’t mind.
Okay. I urge the Government to consider short-term support for coach operators to help them to keep services on the road.
Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)Labour
Good morning, Mr Turner. It is a pleasure to have you in the Chair, as always. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing the debate. I wish to concentrate on the industrial and procurement elements in respect of buses and coaches. I refer right hon. and hon. Members to my membership of Unite the union. At the end of March, Alexander Dennis announced that there would be 115 job losses and an end to Scottish bus manufacturing in Falkirk. In my constituency, the Larbert site has been converted to chassis manufacturing. The week before Alexander Dennis made that announcement, the Scottish Government declared the results of the £45 million Scottish zero emission bus challenge fund, or ScotZEB 3. In total, 334 zero emission vehicles were to be built. Alexander Dennis was awarded 123 buses, which is just 36% of the total, whereas just under half of all orders—for 166 buses—were awarded to a Chinese company Yutong. Make no mistake: the SNP Scottish Government were fully aware that ScotZEB was essential for the sustainability of the Alexander Dennis sites in Scotland. The SNP also knew that Alexander Dennis workers needed the Scottish Government to back them, but the SNP backed China instead. Of course, as with all industrial issues, there is a ripple or knock-on effect. For every job in bus manufacturing, there is a multiplier of three to four jobs in the wider supply chain and support services. The 115 job losses on the site really translates into hundreds more job losses—maybe even as high as four figures—in the supply chain across the Forth valley and the rest of Scotland. What is happening at Alexander Dennis is another example in a catalogue of industrial closures impacting Scotland. I say respectfully to the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) that he is welcome to challenge me and intervene on anything that I am about to say. The truth is that the SNP solution was a furlough scheme, introduced with the aim of providing a stopgap solution, so that NFI—the Canadian-based owners of Alexander Dennis—could come up with a rescue plan, but no rescue plan was forthcoming. The SNP strategy was, “Let’s give NFI a pot of money and hope that the problem will go away.” Instead of doing anything meaningful that would actually save the jobs, all the SNP had to offer was a stalling tactic: delay the news of the inevitable SNP Scottish Government’s failure to help and save Scottish bus manufacturing until after the Holyrood election. The SNP put its own party’s success at the ballot box well ahead of workers and industry in Scotland.
Seamus Logan (Aberdeenshire North and Moray East) (SNP)Scottish National Party
Does the hon. Member agree that it might be more reasonable for him to focus on issues reserved to Westminster, rather than speaking about issues reserved to Holyrood, given that he is not an elected Member there but is an elected Member here?
I say to the hon. Member from the Scottish National party that constituents are constituents. When constituents from Alloa and Grangemouth, in the corresponding Scottish Parliament area, come to me because they have had dreadful service from an SNP MSP, does he expect me to turn my back on them? No, I will do something different: I will give them the service that they elected me to provide. Instead of subsidising Chinese competition, the Scottish Government should simply back Scottish workers. A possible solution, as Scottish Labour suggested, was for the Scottish Government to move to direct state procurement, allowing contracting authorities to use the Procurement Act 2023 to legally disregard bids from non-treaty state suppliers such as China and instead embed domestic social value for Scottish workers, Scottish communities and Scottish business. The Scottish Government should get rid of the failed ScotZEB model and put in place a state-backed purchasing and leasing scheme. I find it laughable that the SNP wants more powers to go to Holyrood. How about using the powers that it actually has for public good and saving Scottish bus manufacturing? Of course, that would not fit in with the “Westminster bad” narrative, which is oh so easy. After 20 years of SNP government, the party still refuses to take responsibility, and the Alexander Dennis workers and the wider Scottish working class are paying the cost for it.
Order. I remind Members that the subject of the debate is the future of the UK coach industry.
Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)Liberal Democrat
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing this important and timely debate. Coaches are often primarily viewed as being used only for holidays and leisure, but that is just a small part of the important services that operators provide. In fact, coaches account for 450 million passenger journeys a year in Great Britain and support 81,000 jobs, generating £6.4 billion of economic value for the economy. Coach passengers are estimated to spend £8.3 billion annually in local economies—and perhaps service stations, to which the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard alluded—through tourism, retail and leisure. Coach companies such as Edward Thomas & Son, which operates in my constituency, provide essential services. They transport children safely to and from school every day, support educational trips and are available for private hire and transport for local groups, organisations and communities. Coach journeys present an important and often more affordable alternative for travel across the UK, particularly with the current high rail and fuel prices. Without a healthy network of independent coach operators, services will become more expensive to provide and more difficult to access. The coach industry is struggling and we must do more to support it. High fuel prices are a massive concern. Coaches are high-mileage vehicles, and fuel represents one of their largest operating costs, so any significant increase or volatility in diesel prices immediately impacts operators, particularly where fuel contracts have been agreed well in advance at a fixed price. It is really difficult for coach operators to absorb substantial cost increases of this nature without ultimately affecting the costs or availability of their services. But it is not just about fuel: the general costs of operating a coach company have increased significantly, whether that is the price of coaches, insurance, maintenance, parts, tyres, wages or regulatory compliance. Modern coaches are a huge capital investment and can cost upwards of £250,000—that is massive. To make those investments, coach operators need certainty and support to justify continued investment in their fleets. The Government’s anti-business tax regime, with increased business rates and employer national insurance contributions, has hugely impacted the industry’s bottom line. That is threatening the future commercial viability of the coach industry. The availability of drivers is also a major challenge, as has been alluded to. The current driver vacancy rate is 14%. Recruiting and retaining suitable professional passenger-carrying vehicle drivers continues to be difficult. Coach driving is a skilled and responsible occupation, but the industry has an ageing workforce, with around 25% of drivers aged 60 or above. Attracting enough new drivers remains challenging, not least because of the Government-led barriers to training new and young drivers, with regulatory restrictions on drivers aged 18 to 20 limiting the journeys they can take. That makes coach driving an unattractive early-career option, which compounds recruitment difficulties as the workforce ages out. It restricts the amount of work operators are physically able to undertake, even when high customer demand is there. The coach industry continues to be overlooked in Government planning and infrastructure. That has caused the sector to suffer, like so many other industries, from the pressures that the last decade has placed on businesses. It has been left to deal with blows from uncontrollable shocks such as the pandemic, Brexit red tape and the push for net zero, with limited support. If a coach operator wants to commit to zero-emission coaches, it needs to secure, at high cost, vehicles with sufficient range, and ensure that there is reliable charging infrastructure across its routes. Coaches travel longer-than-average journeys, and there are currently limited charging provisions on motorways and A roads. Operators need greater certainty before committing to the significant investment required to reach net zero. However, unlike cars and vans, coaches are not currently covered by the zero-emission vehicle mandate, and no equivalent statutory trajectory or long-term road map exists for the sector. We must do more to support the coach industry. We must engage meaningfully with the sector to fix those fundamental issues. If we fail to do so, we will lose this industry and the vital services it supports. I therefore urge the Minister to reflect on all the contributions and calls made by me and other colleagues today.
Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)Labour
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner, and I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for bringing us here. I want to speak about Stanley Travel, a coach business based in my North Durham constituency. Established in 1961, Stanley Travel remains a family-owned and operated business. It operates more than 50 vehicles and employs 95 staff. From serving schools and colleges in my constituency to allowing tourists on a budget to get around the country, it provides constituents with a great deal of value, like other coach companies we have heard about today. Unfortunately, Stanley Travel and other coach businesses face severe pressures on their operations, so I want to raise four questions with the Minister. Rising fuel prices have substantially increased costs. Diesel prices have risen from £1.08 per litre in March to £1.59 per litre last week. That represents an additional £9,690 each week across Stanley Travel’s operation. Where transport contracts have already been agreed at fixed prices in advance, it is local family businesses that are forced to absorb that cost. Those challenges will only be compounded by future increases in fuel duty. We ought to recognise coaches as essential users of fuel, delivering education and community transport and lower-carbon group travel. Therefore, my first question is, will the Minister support an essential user fuel rebate for coach operators and urge the Treasury to cancel the proposed fuel duty increases? Driver and technician shortages make it harder for operators to maintain and expand services. Recruiting and training new staff requires lots of investment, while restrictions affecting younger coach drivers make it difficult, as we have heard, to recruit directly from schools and colleges. Stanley Travel tells me that it needs a clearer pathway into coach driving and engineering, supported by accessible training and apprenticeships. Will the Government support funded category D licence training, review driver apprenticeships and remove unnecessary barriers to younger people entering the sector? Too often, coaches are overlooked in transport and destination planning. Inadequate parking, unsuitable pick-up points and insufficient space for wheelchair boarding create practical difficulties for drivers and passengers. What steps will the Government take to ensure that councils and visitor destinations provide adequate coach parking, accessible boarding facilities and suitable driver rest areas? Finally, coaches already offer an efficient way of moving groups while reducing individual car journeys, but operators also want to invest in cleaner technology. However, vehicle costs, range and charging infrastructure must reflect the demands of long-distance and touring work. A clear, coach-specific road map to cleaner technology would give businesses greater confidence to plan investment, supported by practical infrastructure and appropriate financial assistance. Will the Government develop that road map with operators and provide funding support that recognises the coach sector’s needs? Currently, trading conditions for coach businesses such as Stanley Travel are exceptionally difficult. Supporting coaches protects local jobs, affordable travel and essential services while helping communities to access experiences and opportunities across the country. I hope the Minister can set out what the Government will do to address each of the concerns I have raised and to support companies such as Stanley Travel, which has delivered so much for my constituents over the last 65 years.
Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)Reform UK
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. Coaches are an essential part of Britain’s transport infrastructure, and they deserve proper recognition in Government transport policy. Their role goes far beyond holidays: they take children to school, workers to their jobs and patients to appointments, and they provide transport for our armed forces and community groups. They keep communities connected. For older people without a car, coach services can be a lifeline, helping them stay independent and preventing isolation. Coaches also support local jobs and businesses, bringing visitors into our towns, and they help to reduce the number of cars on our roads. But operators are under serious financial pressure. Rising diesel costs are particularly difficult for companies tied into school and other contracts agreed months ago. Those extra costs cannot simply be passed on. The Government must treat the industry fairly. Bus operators in England have received additional fuel support through the bus service operators grant—I think it is 15p a litre, although it may have gone up, but I am not 100% sure. Hauliers have been given a temporary vehicle tax break. Coaches deserve proper consideration too—they get nothing. In my constituency of Runcorn and Helsby, local coach companies such as Anthony’s Travel, which I am delighted to welcome to the Public Gallery today, face an additional burden: bridge tolls. Charges on the Mersey Gateway and Silver Jubilee bridges add to the cost of journeys across the river. A large coach can face a charge of £19.20 for a return crossing, before discounts. For operators making repeated journeys, those charges quickly mount up. That bridge tax puts further pressure on already stretched businesses—valuable businesses that we do not want to lose and which, like Anthony’s Travel, contribute so much to the local community. At the moment, the cost must either be absorbed by the operator or reflected in what customers pay. I would like Ministers to consider meaningful toll relief for coaches providing essential services, alongside fair treatment in future transport funding and support. National Coach Week is an opportunity to recognise the people who keep this industry moving: the drivers, staff and operators delivering services that our communities depend on. The message to Government is simple: recognise coaches, listen to operators and give them a fair deal.
Laura Kyrke-Smith (Aylesbury) (Lab)Labour
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank my colleague and neighbour, my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer), for securing this important debate. In Aylesbury and across the country, transport is not just about moving people from one place to another; it is central to our economy, future growth and the wellbeing and opportunities in our communities today. Coaches have a particularly important role to play, and I pay tribute to all the operators in my area, including Masons coaches, Motts Travel, Redline and Star Travel. They connect Aylesbury with the surrounding rural communities and vice versa; support schools and colleges, as we have heard; provide transport for community groups; and help residents access leisure, cultural, sporting and tourism opportunities. Alongside our rail and bus networks, these coaches are vital in so many ways. Last week, I caught up with the brilliant Candice Mason from Masons coaches in my constituency to discuss the challenges facing the business and the sector. Sadly, the picture is not looking great. Masons is planning to reduce its fleet from 28 coaches to fewer than 20, because the costs on the business have skyrocketed. Workshop costs are up from £50,000 to £90,000 per year before covid to £330,000 now. Insurance has risen sharply, and the business is spending £8,000 per week on diesel. That is on top of rising energy costs and national insurance, minimum wage and business rates. Those pressures are felt not just by Masons but by small and medium-sized enterprises across Buckinghamshire, which are the backbone of our economy. What does better engagement and support from Government for the coach industry look like? I want to share three suggestions. The first point is about transport and planning policy, because that is where it all starts. Too often, local planning decisions overlook the practical needs of coaches. The result is poor parking, poor drop-off and pick-up facilities, a lack of suitable rest areas for drivers and so on. If we want coaches to support our local communities, planning guidance has to recognise them as a distinct mode of transport, while local authorities and visitor destinations have to be encouraged to provide appropriate facilities for coach operators and their passengers. That could help to tackle the increased congestion on our roads, but it could also have a beneficial impact on the environment, given that a single coach can remove dozens of cars from the road and significantly reduce emissions per passenger. Within transport planning, accessibility must also be front and centre. I know that the coach sector strongly supports making travel more accessible for disabled passengers and older people, but it must not just be about the coaches themselves; it must also be about the wider adaptations across the whole journey, including suitable boarding areas, kerbside spaces, level access points and so on. The second issue is the skills shortage in the coach sector. Around 14% of posts remain vacant, and nearly a quarter of drivers are thought to be over the age of 60 and close to retirement. Masons has highlighted that it is hard to attract new drivers, particularly because of insurance restrictions that mean it can no longer teach and train newly qualified drivers, but also because of wider issues with the industry and struggles to attract women. I would like to know what the Minister thinks about that. The third suggestion is about costs. So many of our coach operators are local, family-run SMEs. They play a vital role in employing and training up local people, purchasing from other businesses and paying taxes and national insurance, and yet they are having to absorb increasing costs. I ask the Minister what he can do to address that, whether through targeted support when SMEs experience fast-rising costs beyond their control or through grants or transitional funding when Government regulation—for example, on accessibility—requires new investment. As we have heard, the coach industry would particularly welcome support with fuel costs, through similar mechanisms to those available elsewhere in passenger transport. Coaches are too often the forgotten part of our transport network, and yet they are vital. A thriving coach sector is not just a luxury but a necessity in Aylesbury, the villages and across the country, and I look forward to hearing the Minister’s thoughts.
David Chadwick (Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe) (LD)Liberal Democrat
It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Turner. I thank the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing this debate, and I commend her on her informative speech. Earlier this year, I had the pleasure of visiting AE Gough & Sons coaches in Llandrindod Wells, where I heard at first hand some of the challenges facing the industry. I am also fortunate to have other excellent coach operators in my constituency, including Herdman Coaches and Williams Coaches. These family-run businesses are the hidden workhorses of our economy, but right now they are absorbing a lot of pain. The coach industry is particularly important to the Welsh economy and plays a vital role in connecting rural communities and destinations that cannot always be reached by rail. That is particularly important in my constituency, which contains major attractions and sites such as the Brecon Beacons, Hay-on-Wye and Waterfall Country. However, the coach industry faces significant challenges, particularly when it comes to rising operating costs and recruiting the next generation of drivers. On fuel costs, the Government must continue the freeze on fuel duty to protect operators and passengers from further inflationary pressures. The Liberal Democrats believe that a lot more must be done to help. Donald Trump’s reckless war with Iran, cheered on originally by the Conservatives and Reform, has pushed up prices at the pump, while the Treasury stands to receive an additional £2 billion in tax revenues as a result of soaring prices. The Liberal Democrats believe that money should be returned to motorists and businesses through a 10p cut in fuel duty that would reduce pump prices by around 12p per litre. For the coach operators that we have been talking about, who rely on fuel every single day, that would provide some much-needed relief. We must also see work being done to address the industry’s growing workforce crisis. That point has been made several times, which makes it apparent how pressing that really is. The bus and coach sector faces an estimated shortage of between 5,000 and 10,000 drivers, with almost a quarter of existing drivers thought to be over 60. At a time when so many young people are struggling to find employment, particularly in areas such as rural Wales, it is extraordinary that an industry that is crying out for skilled workers is facing such significant barriers to recruitment. That is why we need to see funded category D licence training and reform of the driver apprenticeship system. That was one of the issues raised with me by AE Gough & Sons, which highlighted the difficulties that operators face by taking on apprentices directly, rather than having to rely on college-led arrangements. Ultimately, if we want a thriving tourism economy, better rural connectivity and more opportunities for young people, we must give our coach industry the support that it needs. I hope the Minister will take those concerns seriously and work with the industry to secure its long-term future.
Euan Stainbank (Falkirk) (Lab)Labour
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing this debate, and I declare an interest as co-chair of the all-party parliamentary group for British buses and draw hon. Members’ attention to my declaration in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests. At the start of the debate, my hon. Friend rightly asked about the distinction between what a bus is and what a coach is. It is one that very few people think about, and I acknowledge that I did not give that much thought before becoming a Member of Parliament. Luckily, I believe that that distinction is understood by the Minister and by No. 10, if not in Bute House or, as my hon. Friend described more alarmingly, in UK law. While many companies still call themselves coachbuilders, there is no longer any full coach manufacturing taking place exclusively in the UK. However, the latent capacity is still there at Alexander Dennis and Wrightbus of Northern Ireland, with the latter having secured a deal to build the revived line of contour coaches last year. But primary coachbuilding ended last year in the United Kingdom and that should cause us alarm. However, we are part of a wider European automotive supply chain that contains countless companies that build engines, brakes, HVAC—heating, ventilation and air conditioning—and thermal systems, wheelchair lifts, destination displays, screens and battery packs. As the industry transitions to zero emission coaches, that means that Government support such as developing electrification infrastructure, funding through programmes such as DRIVE35 and subsidies for transitioning fleets becomes more important, especially as there has been less access for decarbonisation funding for the coach sector than there has been for buses. Before the Minister, off the back of the spending review, heads off to develop such a scheme for coaches—there has been one for buses—I again make the case that when we spend taxpayers’ money to help this sector, and the broader transport sector, we must ensure that operators relying on Government intervention benefit, not bash, our domestic manufacturing industry. Too often, quick decisions and poorly designed schemes have seen money sent to Chinese manufacturers, with a subsequent loss of domestic jobs and undercutting of the UK industrial capacity that could help us to bring coachbuilding back. In the coming years, we need a sustainable pipeline to deliver a successful transition to an electrified coach and bus fleet, with a focus on incentivising our manufacturers to restart coachbuilding here in the United Kingdom. There has not been access to previous dedicated decarbonisation funding for the coach sector. As my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) pointed out, the Scottish Government spectacularly failed to do that. The primary beneficiary of their ScotZEB3 scheme was the coachbuilder Ember, who run a fantastic, comparatively affordable and fully decarbonised coach service in Scotland. However, as they have run exclusively electric buses since they started their operations in 2020, and as the largest beneficiary of that scheme as an operator, they ended up using taxpayer-funded decarbonisation schemes to scale their fleet, not to decarbonise. When the Government design any future support for the sector, rather than totally lacking a strategy like the SNP, they should found it on two principles: whether it will take more carbon out of the air than would have otherwise been there, and whether it will put more money into the pockets of British manufacturing workers or more money into the pockets of those in boardrooms in Beijing. ScotZEB3 is a cautionary tale for any future Government support. Currently, mayors are required to provide only 10% consideration of social value for new content orders when they are building up their fleets, which is simply inadequate in practice to materially change contracting authority behaviour when we are subject to the scale of Chinese dumping that we are seeing. The loss of jobs in bus manufacturing makes bringing back British-built coaches less likely. I will admit that the deal struck by the DFT last year is an improvement to the situation, but it does sit awkwardly when the Government are rightly mandating 20% social value for central major procurement decisions. I believe that the agreement the Department struck last year must be reopened in consideration of that. I also noticed that the DRIVE35 scheme sets no rules on ownership, on keeping intellectual property in the UK or on national security screening. Considering the outstanding DFT and National Cyber Security Centre investigation into Chinese buses, that is worth consideration. The only rule requires benefiting companies to be registered in the UK. If we seek to onshore jobs, bring coachbuilding back and incentivise manufacturers to grasp the opportunity, that would be worth updating. The ZEB mandate outlined—there is no separate mechanism for the coach sector—that we should be equally pragmatic with the coach and bus manufacturing sector as we consult and provide a pipeline that does not seek to undercut our manufacturing sector. Although having a clear focus on developing our own industrial supply chain with the existing funding would go a long way to supporting the UK’s industries, we could go further with measures that are coming up. As tariffs on Chinese EVs are being considered, I ask that the Minister makes representations to his colleagues in the Department for Business and Trade to make sure that any measures are inclusive of Chinese coaches and buses that would otherwise undercut our domestic market or the prospect of building one.
It is a pleasure to serve under you, Mr Turner; I thank you for keeping the best wine to the end. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in this debate, and I congratulate the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on her excellent speech. Would I be right in saying that Toddington services is in her constituency? If not, it is very close. It is a place I am very familiar with, as I will explain in a moment. Maynes Coaches in my constituency represents one of the many hundreds of family-owned and run coach companies up and down these islands. I must declare a non-financial interest because my mother and father founded a coach company more than 50 years ago. Along with my brothers Liam, Sean and Enda and my sister Una, I was part of a ready-made, non-unionised labour force that my parents ruthlessly exploited, but that is all part of history now. Coaches connect our rural communities, transport pupils to school, provide resilience when rail services fail and ensure that major cultural and sporting events run smoothly and can take place successfully. Additionally, coaches play a very important role in the tourism sector. For those who do not drive or for those who take coach tours, for example, coaches can be the only transport option to many world-class tourism facilities. In fact, they are the bees that pollinate all those places. For example, research has highlighted that one coach calling at the same location every day each year can introduce at least £1 million to the local economy. Although much responsibility for transport is devolved to the Scottish Parliament, I want to focus on issues that are in the remit of the UK Government, as opposed to some colleagues who wasted valuable time in their speeches speaking about matters that are devolved to Holyrood.
Will the hon. Member give way?
No, I will not, because we have heard quite enough from those on the hon. Gentleman’s side of the House on these matters. I want to focus on two points. The European Union entry/exit system poses a significant challenge to international coach operators, with the 90 and 180-day rule already causing havoc for operators trying to comply with EU regulations with a limited supply of drivers who are compliant. The EES will increase the logistical challenges of the channel tunnel and ports, driving up costs and causing delays. That will result in unfair advantages for less green forms of international travel, such as air travel. The UK Government, as part of their ongoing discussions with the EU, should simplify border controls and explore pre-registration for coaches and ways to make international travel easier for the coach sector. I look forward to the Minister’s response to that point. My second point concerns the cost of fuel, which has already been mentioned. This is a crucial issue. Fuel prices are increasing significantly due to the war in the middle east and the Government should outline what action they are taking to mitigate that increase as much as possible. To many households, coaches offer a lifeline of affordable travel. Support is therefore more vital than ever. We look to the Budget in the next two weeks to tell the coach industry what help it can expect in that area. If Scotland seeks to grow its visitor economy, improve connectivity, support rural communities and meet ambitious environmental targets, coaches must be part of the solution.
Will the hon. Member give way?
No, I will not. I make this penultimate point: I recognise that the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard said that sometimes it is a coach and sometimes it is a bus, but I can assure her that a coach, and a coach driver, is a very different thing. Finally, I urge Ministers to work closely with operators and industry bodies to address the issues with coach travel. I seek their assurance that further action will be taken on fuel costs in the forthcoming Budget.
Olly Glover (Didcot and Wantage) (LD)Liberal Democrat
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Turner. I thank the Backbench Business Committee for allocating time for this debate and thank the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing it. She brought to the Chamber her customary passion and championing of the coach industry, of which she always makes us conscious in the Transport Committee. She articulated the distinctive requirements of the coach industry and made me aware of National Coach Week, which I confess I had not previously known was a “week”, but there are weeks on a great many topics these days. We have heard important themes raised during the debate. The hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) and my hon. Friend the Member for Brecon, Radnor and Cwm Tawe (David Chadwick) highlighted the critical rural role that the coach sector can play in getting people and to and from schools. The hon. Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) and the hon. Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank) outlined the critical role of manufacturing for our country’s bus and coach sector, and the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) talked about his own family heritage in the coach sector. Those three hon. Members gave us an amuse-bouche of the passions that dominate Holyrood, which was very interesting for those of us who do not get there often. My hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) talked about the critical role that the coach plays in providing affordable travel. Many hon. Members, including the hon. Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) and the hon. Member for Runcorn and Helsby (Sarah Pochin), talked about the local coach companies that they have in their constituency. The hon. Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) talked about the need for support and encouragement of the coach sector as a whole. In my constituency, I have several coach companies that provide a critical service, such as Pearces coaches, now owned by the Go-Ahead Group at Thames Travel’s Didcot depot; JD Travel in Culham, which provides private hire; and Ridgeways Coaches in Wantage. Weavaway Travel is based in the next-door constituency, in Newbury, but took over the once-legendary Tappins Coaches brand, which was based in my constituency. The economic benefits of the coach industry are hard to overstate and yet, as the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard said, we tend not to reflect on them as much as we should. Around 450 million passenger journeys are made by coach in Britain each year. Coach passengers are estimated to spend £8.3 billion annually in local economies through tourism, retail and leisure, with inbound international visitors travelling by coach contributing a further £610 million a year. The industry estimates that a single additional coach visiting a destination each day can generate around £1 million a year for the local economy. With rail prices still generally higher than many would like, private coach operators often present an important, more affordable alternative for long-distance travel. Indeed, for inter-city rail operators, coach operators provide a vital function in the all-too-common rail replacement road service. I was on holiday in Switzerland recently and—believe it or not, fellow hon. Members—I had to go on a rail replacement bus even there, so it is not an issue unique to us. As has been said, coach travel can also be essential to providing some school transport. There are key regulatory and economic challenges facing the coach industry. It has suffered, like so many industries, from the pressure that the last decade has placed on businesses, with uncontrollable shocks such as the pandemic, and completely self-imposed ones such as the Conservatives’ botched Brexit deals, excessive red tape and the huge delays we now see at borders for international coach travel as a result of the EU entry and exit system. Some of the Government’s anti-business policies have further increased pressure, with raised business rates and employer national insurance contributions further threatening the coach industry’s bottom lines. Coach companies do not receive any of the fuel duty relief measures that other modes of passenger transport do. Operators want UK Government engagement with the EU on pre-registration and digital documentation for coach parties, a specific exemption for professional coach drivers from the 90/180 Schengen rule, and continued investment in port and border infrastructure to prevent repeats of the severe queuing seen in past peak periods. As many hon. Members have mentioned, the coach sector faces severe workforce issues. The industry reports that driver shortfall stands at an estimated 5,000 to 10,000, with around 14% of driver roles currently vacant and about a quarter of the existing driver workforce aged over 60. I hope the Minister will specifically address the issue of coach drivers not being allowed to start at the age of 18. That seems particularly anomalous given recent Government announcements about the train driving age being lowered to 18. It is quite hard to see the logic and consistency, so I hope the Minister will be able to shed some light on that. On the planning system, coaches have historically been an afterthought in both local and national transport planning, regulated in practice as an afterthought to bus policy despite being a fundamentally different and deregulated commercial method of transport. That has produced a chronic shortage of coach parking, drop-off space and driver rest facilities, directly affecting operators’ ability to comply with statutory drivers’ hours rules, and has left coaches significantly absent from local transport and spatial plans. Industry bodies are calling for coaches to be recognised as a distinct mode in planning guidance, for motorway service areas to be required to prioritise coach parking and driver facilities, and for more standardised local authority procurement to reduce the administrative burden on operators bidding for home-to-school and other contracted work. Coaches are also an important consideration in improving integrated transport policy. Whether coach operators are given access to major urban bus stations is highly inconsistent, with local authorities and owners and operators of those bus terminals making very different decisions on whether to grant access to national coach operators. Accessibility remains a challenge. The Public Service Vehicles Accessibility Regulations 2000 require coaches in scope to be fully wheelchair accessible, but in practice that depends on kerbside infrastructure just as much as the capability of the coaches. Level ground of up to 4 metres is needed, which does not exist at many locations coaches serve. That means vehicles can be technically compliant while still failing to deliver a reliably accessible journey. The accessibility equipment required also adds weight and takes up capacity that could otherwise carry passengers, so the sector’s ask is for a shift from a vehicle-focused compliance regime towards a whole journey accessibility framework covering booking, boarding infrastructure and arrival, developed jointly with local authorities, operators and disability groups. As the hon. Member for Falkirk said, decarbonisation is a challenge for this sector. Unlike cars and vans, coaches are not currently covered by the zero emission vehicle mandate, and no equivalent statutory trajectory or long-term support and road map exists for the sector. Zero emission coaches face a much harder technical challenge than buses or cars, with longer average journeys increasing the importance of range and refuelling infrastructure, with charging and hydrogen infrastructure suitable for coaches largely non-existent on the motorway and major A-road networks. Industry data suggests that roughly three quarters of coach operators currently have no plan to introduce zero emission vehicles, citing high up-front costs and insufficient range as the main barriers. The sector is asking Government to publish a long-delayed low-carbon fuel strategy, to extend infrastructure trials such as a zero emission and hydrogen infrastructure demonstrator to coaches on a similar footing to heavy goods vehicles, and to consider an interim fuel duty incentive for low-carbon fuels to bridge the gap until zero emission coaches are commercially viable at scale. We have heard today of the vital role that coaches play, whether as a long-distance public transport offer, helping children to get to school or enabling groups of people old and young to access tourism, hospitality, culture and so on. Coaches have not been supported or given enough attention. The hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard is moving us on the journey and I hope the Minister will say what more can be done to recognise and support this critical sector.
Greg Smith (Mid Buckinghamshire) (Con)Conservative
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, as always, Mr Turner. I congratulate the hon. Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) on securing the debate, and I agree with her that coaches are unique and vital. The debate has shown that not much divides the House on this topic. The challenge, as ever, is what the Government do with the asks from Members on both sides of the Chamber and how they support the UK coach sector and secure its future. As we have heard, coaches play a critical role in getting people to school, supporting tourism and helping businesses transport people around the country and internationally. The sector has said that just one additional coach every day can deliver £1 million in economic value annually to a destination. On the face of it, that may sound like a rather surprising amount, but when we consider the capacity of a coach and the number of people it can transport, it immediately becomes less surprising. Although the precise number is unclear, we know that there are about 2,500 coach operators in the United Kingdom. It is estimated that 88% are family owned or individually owned, and they employ tens of thousands of people across the country. To give just one example of their contribution, they transport 600,000 children—including one of my own—to school every day. On that note, with the indulgence of the House, I want to briefly thank a wonderful man called Rob, who drove coaches on multiple home-to-school transport routes in Buckinghamshire until the end of last academic year, when he moved on to a local taxi firm. His bright outlook gave real joy to the children he transported each and every day. He would hand-write each of them a Christmas card, and he became famous for the songs that he put on between the bus stops, the pick-up points and school. The children very much miss him as their home-to-school coach driver. We thank him for what he did, and hopefully one day he might return to those routes in Buckinghamshire. As with much of the transport sector, we would be foolish not to recognise the challenges facing the industry, particularly for operators that have not received Government support. With diesel hitting all-time highs, the challenges facing the coach industry are more pronounced than ever. A recent survey by the newly established Coach UK warned that 41% of operators would withdraw from home-to-school contracts and 18% would consider closing down altogether if high prices persist beyond December. Although hope may be a suitable remedy for the Labour party, it does not help with the financial reality faced by businesses across the county. Given the particular challenges for the industry, there is a need to take steps to reduce costs for business, but what message would operators have taken from what the Government said at Labour party conference? The Transport Secretary did not mention the word “fuel” once in her speech, but operators face an increase in fuel duty scheduled to take effect at the start of next year, and another hike in March. The deadline is fast approaching, which is why the Conservatives have called for the Government to provide clarity immediately and freeze fuel duty further. Although Labour Members may think that everything is going right simply because they have a new leader, the reality for coach drivers and operators is different. Given these circumstances, I recognise the coach industry’s call for targeted financial relief this year. I can clearly understand why operators are asking for it, and it should serve as a reminder that the Government’s focus should not be on extracting ever-greater revenues to fund its profligate spending. I recognise the challenge in committing to specific financial support, but ultimately we need to ensure that fuel prices remain affordable and that businesses can continue to operate sustainably. That involves ensuring that fuel duty does not increase and doing what we can as a country to increase the supply of fuel—fossil fuel, advanced sustainable fuels and, in the future, synthetic fuels. Additionally, we must acknowledge the broader energy-related issues that are relevant to this discussion. The consultation outcome on ending the sale of new non-zero emission buses and on the decarbonisation of coaches and minibuses showed that respondents emphasised that coaches have significantly different operating cycles from those of buses used in regular services. For example, coaches may not return to their depots as often as service buses. They may also need to find refuelling locations wherever they operate, and the vehicles may need a range of hundreds of miles. If such measures were introduced, they would place obvious strains on efforts to procure vehicles that meet the standards the Government will ultimately require. The practicalities of operating the vehicles underline the importance of technological neutrality, allowing businesses to buy the vehicles that will enable them to provide the services they know how to deliver effectively. Returning to the example of transporting children to school, we have heard from a variety of operators about the increasing costs resulting from the Government’s increase in national insurance contributions, originally estimated at £800 per driver per year. Those costs create challenges for the provision of transport for disabled people, who may require more bespoke arrangements. Overall, when considering the financial pressures facing the sector, it appears to be another example of treating those on the roads as a means of simply extracting revenue. Although costs such as fuel remain an important consideration, we must also consider the regulations in place. One issue raised by operators in the coach sector, as well as the wider transport industry, is the difficulty of recruiting and training staff, which has come through in this debate. Such skill shortages can rapidly affect the industry if left unchecked, as in the HGV sector a few years ago. That means that we need to ensure that the regulations in place enable people—particularly young people entering the workforce—to develop the skills they need. Providing young people with opportunities to learn and develop at an earlier age would be advantageous. For example, one element that Conservatives have sought to address in our recently released skills package is the removal of the 50-kilometre restriction for fully qualified bus and coach drivers aged 18 to 20. Finding ways to make regulations work better for business while creating opportunities for young people is essential. Furthermore, Conservative plans for a reduction in national insurance contributions for employers of 21 to 24-year-olds could provide opportunities for SMEs to invest in skills and encourage more young people to join the sector at the start of their careers. We do not mind if the Government pick up and run with those proposals. I appreciate that that alone would not be sufficient to solve all the issues facing the industry, but it should inform the approach. The Government have said they acknowledge the role of the coach industry and are committed to supporting it. They could go further, however, by adopting the right approach and asking a simple question: what can Government do to enable those small businesses to operate and grow? Ultimately, the coach industry needs to be able to operate despite the significant costs it faces. It is an industry that typically receives no public funding, relying heavily on small operators working exceptionally hard to run their businesses. We must not forget the people behind those businesses. Any steps that can be taken to make it easier for them to run their businesses should be welcomed. Ideas have been put from all sides of the House this morning. The challenge I put to the Minister is to take them back to the Department and make them a reality.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport (Keir Mather)Labour
It is a pleasure, Mr Turner, to serve under your chairship. I join colleagues in thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard (Alex Mayer) for securing this critically important debate, for her continued interest in the area and for holding the feet of Ministers in the Department for Transport to the fire on an important issue. I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond and participate on behalf of the Government. I wish everyone a happy National Coach Week. I will turn later to some of the topics raised by my hon. Friend, particularly decarbonisation and the recruitment and retention of younger drivers. First, I want to touch on the point she raised about coach data, which is critical. She is right to say that the coach sector is relatively unevidenced compared with other major modes of transport. However, the available coach industry evidence suggests that there are about 2,500 coach operators in the United Kingdom, most of them small and family-owned, although she is right to say that no definitive national estimate currently exists. We must work tirelessly within the Department for Transport to remedy that. I hope that hon. Members will be reassured about the Government’s commitment to supporting the UK coach sector, as well as the coach manufacturing sector, which has been raised by Members, in every part of the United Kingdom, including Scotland.
I thank the Minister for talking about the importance of coach and bus manufacturing. The hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) described it as a waste of time for Members to raise that today; ludicrously, his old boss, Stephen Flynn and the Member of the Scottish Parliament for Falkirk West blame this place for the challenges that ADL has faced. Why does the Minister think SNP Members duck this debate depending on which Parliament they happen to be sitting in at a particular moment?
I thank my hon. Friend and my hon. Friend the Member for Alloa and Grangemouth (Brian Leishman) for their remarks. Manufacturing and sovereign capability in our bus and coach sector is critical irrespective of where someone lives in the United Kingdom: it is a matter for both the UK Government and the Government in Holyrood. Irrespective of who is holding the pen, the Prime Minister has been clear that he wants to facilitate reindustrialisation and growth in every postcode of the United Kingdom. We want colleagues in the SNP and across the United Kingdom to help us in that work and to work collaboratively with us to ensure that UK domestic manufacturers have the support needed to carry out their vital work. Coaches are an essential, if sometimes under-recognised, part of our transport system. They connect people with education, employment, family, leisure and major events. They support rail passengers during disruption and give communities an affordable way to reach destinations across the country. They are a very democratic form of transport.
Sam Carling (North West Cambridgeshire) (Lab)Labour
A number of years ago, there was a great initiative in my constituency to run coach tours of local heritage assets linked to Mary, Queen of Scots and John Clare, the famous poet. Does the Minister recognise the value that the sector brings to supporting local heritage and tourism?
I thank my hon. Friend for shining a spotlight on the impact that the coach sector has in his constituency, putting greater focus on our incredible British heritage sites; the point is incredibly well made. However, there is also a macro point here: the sector itself estimates that coaches provide around 450 million passenger journeys each year. It directly employs around 54,000 people and supports a further 27,000 jobs through its supply chain. It contributes an estimated £6.4 billion to the economy. As has been said, coach passengers are also estimated to spend £8.3 billion each year in local economies.
The sort of people who travel on coaches are typically not the most advantaged—pensioners, for example, or children getting to school. Some people can afford coach travel but cannot afford other forms of travel. For the constituents I have mentioned already, as well as Fowler’s in Holbeach Drove, Cropley in Fosdyke and other local coach operators, will the Minister agree to the rebate on fuel that they have suggested? The industry has suggested a small short-term rebate to help it get over the hump of escalating fuel prices and therefore provide the service to the vulnerable people and many others whom I have mentioned.
The right hon. Gentleman points to an important fact: the coach sector is used by those who may not otherwise be able to book public transport to get where they need to. Although those people can also benefit from the package of measures brought forward by this Government to give them much needed breathing space, including the £2 bus cap, he is right to encourage me to always go further to improve on that. Unfortunately, he will be momentarily disappointed as I cannot provide him with advance notice of what may or may not be in the Budget. However, his general point—that support is important—is well made. That is why the fuel duty freeze is currently in place. The figures that I raised underline the sector’s importance to tourism, high streets and destinations throughout Great Britain. However, the industry is also rooted in local communities. Many of those operators are small and family-run businesses that have served their areas for generations, as the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire North and Moray East (Seamus Logan) pointed out from his own personal experience. We want those businesses to grow, invest and continue providing the flexible services on which passengers, schools and businesses depend. I turn first to driver recruitment. We must continue to have an open dialogue with the coach sector about its challenges to doing business and what the Government can do to help. Driver recruitment is central. I recognise the sector’s concerns about recruiting and retaining drivers, in particular about the restrictions affecting younger drivers, which multiple hon. Members have raised today. At present, 18 and 19-year-olds may drive buses and coaches only on regular services of up to 50 km. That can severely limit the work available in a sector where journeys are often of longer distance or not part of regular services. My hon. Friend the Member for North Durham (Luke Akehurst) and the right hon. Member for South Holland and The Deepings (Sir John Hayes) also raised the issue of when young drivers can begin their qualifications and theory tests. I will certainly take that away and raise it within the Department. The Department has been engaging with the bus and coach industry, alongside road safety groups, to understand the potential impacts of amending the restrictions that apply to young drivers. However, I want hon. Members to be assured that we are working hard and at pace to get the next generation of drivers into the coach sector. We are considering the evidence carefully and will set out our next steps in due course. However, I will ask the Under-Secretary of State for Transport, my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), the Minister with direct responsibility for this matter, to set out more detail on the timings in writing to my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard. I turn now to cost pressures, which have been a consistent theme of this debate; they were particularly raised by my hon. Friend the Member for North Durham. I recognise that operators face pressures at the pump. That is why the Government have extended the 5p fuel duty cut until the end of the year, which provides important support to businesses, including coach operators. We will continue to work closely with the sector, listening to its concerns and ensuring that the challenges facing coach operators are understood across Government. There is also a continued role for international advocacy, which sits within my role at the Department for Transport: working with colleagues both across Government and with the UK delegations at the International Energy Agency, to ensure that we continue to maintain a robust supply of diesel into the United Kingdom.
I want to raise an issue that I appreciate sits more with the Treasury than with the Department for Transport. Since fuel costs increased earlier this year, the Government have taken in over £1 billion in extra unexpected income to the Treasury from VAT on those higher fuel prices. The money is there to support the coach sector, the logistics sector and other sectors that so desperately need it, is it not?
Later in my speech, I will reflect more on the steps that we are taking to support the coach sector, especially in building the longer-term resilience that we believe can be achieved through the benefits that can be accrued from decarbonisation. The hon. Gentleman is right to raise the issue of rising fuel prices, which concerns the Government and on which we work on in close collaboration with the sector. He will, of course, understand that ahead of the Budget I cannot say much more about the exact issue that he raised. I turn next to the issue of transport connectivity and the indispensable role of coaches as part of an integrated transport network. Earlier this year, the Department published “Better Connected”, the Government’s strategy for integrated transport in England. It sets out a clear national vision for all partners across the transport system to create integrated networks that work well for people and are safe, reliable, affordable and accessible, so that people can make their journeys easily. Its principles of putting people first, creating well-connected places and working in partnership apply across all forms of transport, but perhaps no more than in relation to coaches, which have a critical role to play as part of an integrated picture, particularly in connecting people to education and visitor destinations, but also in connecting rural communities and supporting elderly residents, as was raised by the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover). Better information, well-designed interchanges and closer co-ordination with rail, bus and local transport can make journeys easier, and we will continue working with local leaders to ensure that coach travel is properly considered in local transport plans. I will also just touch briefly on an important point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Aylesbury (Laura Kyrke-Smith) about working more closely with local authorities to break through planning challenges. Currently, there are obligations for local authorities to have regard to land use and land need for myriad factors that do not pertain to driver welfare stops as they relate to critical national infrastructure on the strategic road network. There is more work for the Department of Transport to do in order to work more closely with local authorities to make them more aware of just how critical it is to have proper freight and coach connectivity to every part of the United Kingdom. I turn next to zero emission coaches. Coaches already provide an efficient form of mass transport, but we recognise the need to support the sector to go further in a way that makes good business sense. The transition to zero emission coaches presents particular challenges that I am very cognisant of: journeys can be long and variable, vehicles may spend extended periods away from their depot and operators need confidence that suitable charging will be available. The Government’s £170 million multi-year depot charging scheme supports zero emission HGVs, vans and coaches by part-funding charging infrastructure at fleet depots. Its first 2026 funding window offered support for up to 70% of eligible charge points and civil engineering costs of up to £1 million per organisation.
The Minister is right to underline the issue of energy efficiency, but when it comes to ensuring that companies across the United Kingdom—Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and here in the mainland—could work together, does he agree that the Government need to push energy efficiency through all the companies so that they can all gain?
The hon. Member raises a really important point about ensuring that where the Government are encouraging decarbonisation and the resilience benefits that that can bring for the long term, it has to be done in a sustainable way, recognising the particular challenges faced by the coach sector in meeting that challenge. That applies in every part of the United Kingdom, but especially in Northern Ireland and the sort of area that he represents, where the tourist economy is so essential. Coach connectivity is critical to ensuring that his local economy continues to thrive, so that is an important point well made. Depot charging will meet many operating needs, but as Members have raised today, longer-distance journeys will also require appropriate charging facilities at destinations and strategic locations. The Government’s forthcoming zero emission HGV and coach infrastructure strategy will provide clearer national direction—a road map, some might say—for how that infrastructure will develop, and we will continue engaging coach operators, charge point providers and motorway service area operators as the network expands. We understand that ultimately the transition must be practical, commercially viable and shaped by real operating patterns. To touch briefly on accessibility, coaches provide vital connectivity for many people with disabilities. It is essential that they are able to travel safely, confidently and with dignity. That is just as important when they travel on leisure, rail replacement and home-to-school services as it is when they make long-distance journeys. Accessibility should be considered at all stages of the passenger journey, from finding information and planning trips though accessing coach stations and stops, and boarding, alighting and travelling on the vehicle. Accessible information is vital for giving disabled passengers the confidence to use services, and from 1 October, all coaches operating services that are subject to the accessible information regulations, which are largely rail replacement, must be compliant unless they are covered by an exemption. That is part of the broader work we are doing to ensure a more accessible transport network. I will draw my remarks to a close by thanking my hon. Friend the Member for Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard again for securing this critically important debate, and all the Members who have contributed and shared their personal and constituency-level experiences of the phenomenal contribution that the coach sector makes to our economy. I hope I have demonstrated that the Government recognise coaches as a vital part of the transport system—not just something that is lumped in with HGVs and other modes, but that deserves cognisance of the challenges coaches face and the enormous opportunities and benefits that they bring to communities across the United Kingdom in supporting growth, widening opportunity, strengthening tourism and connecting communities. We will continue working with the sector to support its progress and tackle some of those barriers together, including on growth and integration with the wider transport network, strengthening the workforce, increasing investment and progressing towards decarbonisation. Our aim is clear: we want a thriving, inclusive and sustainable coach industry that passengers can rely on for years to come, and I think that hon. Members from across the House have pushed us further in that direction today.
A wide range of issues have been raised today: accessibility, driver recruitment, planning, international travel and, perhaps most of all, fuel. What struck me about today’s debate was the wide range of local coach companies that were mentioned and how this is really all around the country, in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. We have had a magical mystery tour all around the UK, and I think the coach sector should perhaps adopt the slogan, “Everything you need, satisfaction guaranteed”. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered the future of the UK coach industry.
Source: UK Parliament Hansard API. Debate ID: 5415320.