Rural operators ‘petrified' by bus reforms
RURAL bus operators are petrified by the Welsh Government's plans to introduce a London-style bus network in Wales, the industry warned.
Scott Pearson, chair of the Coach and Bus Association Cymru, gave evidence on the bus bill which seeks to bring buses into public control, with operators bidding for contracts.
Mr Pearson, who has been running bus services for 25 years, cautioned against a regional approach or modelling reforms on other franchise systems such as Greater Manchester's.
'That's a massive population in a big urban area,' he told the Senedd's infrastructure committee. 'Wales is not like that: you've got three big cities in the bottom, one at the top and, in between, a whole load of hills and mountains.
'The rural aspect to this, our members – the SME [small- and medium-sized enterprise] membership – are petrified about this bill.'
Expressing concerns about smaller operators being squeezed out, Mr Pearson told the meeting on May 15: ''Petrified' is the right word to use because we don't have detail.'
Aaron Hill, director of the Confederation of Passenger Transport Cymru, agreed: 'Scott is right, buses are inherently a very local service and respond to very local needs. We would be missing a trick if local authorities didn't have a bigger role in how we shape the network.'
Mr Hill warned of significant barriers for SMEs, with six-figure costs in some parts of the UK to bid for franchises and regulatory hurdles to clear to even take part in the procurement.
'We need, if we're going to do it successfully in Wales, to overcome that,' he said.
Mr Pearson stressed: 'If you hand a guy who's got ten buses a 150-page document for the franchise and say 'do you want this?'… they're not going to do it, they're going to sell up.'
Mr Hill cautioned a change in the regulatory model will not guarantee success, warning the bill does little to take buses out of traffic, coordinate roadworks nor speed up journey times.
He said: 'The bill doesn't actually change the economics of running bus services in Wales – so many of the challenges that the network faces today, the network will still face on the other side of re-regulation.'
Raising examples of other franchised networks, Mr Hill said London has historically had a gap of around £700m between the cost of the service and the income generated.
He said the gap in Greater Manchester, which took control of buses in 2023, is about £250m and the Welsh bill exposes the network to similar affordability challenges.
Mr Hill told Senedd Members: 'We think the bill only lends itself to one type of franchise, a gross-cost franchise – that is the franchise that carries the most risk for taxpayers.'
Mr Pearson warned the public purse will shoulder all the risk under the bill as drafted.
Mr Hill warned a regulatory impact assessment (RIA) published alongside the bill was insufficient, with 'at least' £200m of additional costs not factored in.
'That feels to me to be a significant question that hangs over the viability of franchising,' he said, pointing to examples including national insurance tax hikes and staff costs.
In written evidence, the Confederation of Passenger Transport Cymru warned: 'We are concerned that the assessment of the financial implications are overly optimistic and based on weak assumptions and unrealistic forecasts.'
Mr Pearson similarly criticised a lack of detail in the bill and impact assessment, making it difficult to understand the costs and challenges.
He said: 'If we're trying to do the same with the current funding, and adding a whole load of costs into it from TfW [Transport for Wales], for instance, it's just simply not going to work because you can't get more for less.'
Mr Pearson added: 'It talks about patronage increase in the RIA – that's a big, big faux pas because nothing in this bill… looks at the main cause… which is congestion.
'It's not dealt with at all. I think we've got a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity here and we're not… addressing the main problems that we currently face as operators.'
Mr Hill added: 'There's a real risk here: we've built up public expectation, in the same way… as with the railways, then delivery or significant improvement doesn't follow for a long time.'
Asked about the scope of the bill, with councils rather than ministers remaining responsible for school transport, Mr Pearson questioned the logic of separating the two.
He raised the example of a rural operator, which provides bus services and school transport, missing out on a franchise, asking: 'What happens to the home to school, the local authority picks it up? That's a whole… different ball game… I don't think that is going to work well.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Belfast Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Why Spending Review offers Stormont a huge opportunity to bring about reforms
A three-year settlement from the Chancellor provides a chance for the Executive to take longer-term look at what it funds and how Westminster's imminent Spending Review will set the social and economic tone for the whole of the UK. Its implications for Northern Ireland will be significant, as will the Executive's decisions about the funding it receives. Chancellor Rachel Reeves' announcement on Wednesday, June 11, will signal the Labour Government's priorities for the rest of this mandate and set funding allocations for the next three years. This settlement is intended to give stability to Government departments and provide time and space to plan spending, investment and reform.
Reuters
39 minutes ago
- Reuters
BP needs to scrap its Big Oil mentality, and its buybacks: Bousso
LONDON, June 3 - BP has jumped from crisis to crisis in recent years, severely eroding the British firm's stature as one of the world's leading oil companies. Given the increasingly challenging dynamics in today's oil market, BP may finally need to accept that it is no longer a true oil major and can't keep managing cash like one. The exclusive Big Oil club of Exxon Mobil (XOM.N), opens new tab, Chevron (CVX.N), opens new tab, Shell (SHEL.L), opens new tab, TotalEnergies ( opens new tab and BP (BP.L), opens new tab has for decades been synonymous with sprawling upstream and downstream oil and gas operations, solid balance sheets and long-term strategies that have helped generate sizeable, stable shareholder returns. But BP hasn't ticked most of these boxes for years, having dealt with a succession of crises over the past 15 years that have slashed its market cap and left it financially vulnerable and lacking clear strategic direction. Most recently, a failed foray into renewables and a management scandal saddled the company with a ballooning debt pile as it struggles to revert back to oil and gas. CEO Murray Auchincloss acknowledged the need for change when he unveiled in February a fundamental strategy reset that includes reducing spending to below $15 billion to 2027, cutting up to $5 billion in costs and selling $20 billion of assets in an effort to boost performance and rein in ballooning debt. The plan also reset the rate of shareholder returns to 30-40% of operating cash flow. But the reset has done little to alleviate investor concerns. BP's shares have declined by 18% since the strategy update, underperforming rivals. Piling on the pressure, activist shareholder Elliott Management, which has recently built a 5% position in the company, has indicated it wants BP to cut spending even more. There is, therefore, clearly a need for deeper change. While it may be challenging for the 116-year-old company to admit that it can no longer carry the same financial heft it once did, accepting reality will offer the company's leadership an opportunity to reduce some of its commitments to investors, particularly its share repurchase programme. All energy majors today have multi-billion-dollar buyback programmes that send capital back to shareholders, helping to attract investors who may be wary about the future of fossil fuel demand. But BP's buybacks feel like a luxury that is out of synch with its financial woes. In its first quarter results released in February, BP said it would buy back $750 million over the following three months. That was lower than the $1.75 billion in the previous three months, but even at this reduced rate, this would still total $3 billion per year. That doesn't seem prudent, especially given the 20% drop in oil prices to around $65 a barrel this year and the darkening economic outlook. Auchincloss' financial objectives assume a Brent oil price of $70, meaning the Canadian CEO will most likely struggle to meet his targets without borrowing further. Removing the annual $3 billion buyback would certainly upset investors, but it would go a long way towards reducing BP's net debt to between $14 and $18 billion by 2027, compared with $27 billion at the end of March 2025. The 'ground zero' of BP's financial decline was the deadly 2010 Deepwater Horizon disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, which generated $69 billion in clean-up and legal costs, opens new tab. The company continues to pay out over $1 billion per year in settlements. The financial shock forced BP to sell billions of dollars of assets and issue huge amounts of debt to foot the bill. Its market value dropped to around $77 billion today compared to $180 billion in 2010. BP's debt-to-capitalization ratio, known as gearing, reached 25.7% at the end of the first quarter of 2025, significantly higher than those of other oil majors, including Shell's 19% or Chevron's 14%. And, importantly, BP's current $27 billion net debt figure omits several major liabilities held on its books. This includes $17 billion in hybrid bonds, an instrument that has qualities of both equity and debt, including a coupon that must be paid or accrued. While companies may issue hybrids for many reasons, including maintaining flexibility, they often do so in part because rating agencies do not treat hybrids as regular debt, which flatters the issuer's leverage ratios. Anish Kapadia, director of energy at Palissy Advisors, calculated BP's adjusted net debt hit $86 billion at the end of the first quarter of 2025, when including net debt, hybrids, Gulf of Mexico liabilities, leases and other provisions. Ultimately, cutting the buybacks should enable BP to tame its huge debt pile and repair its balance sheet faster. That, in turn, should create a strong foundation for rebuilding investor confidence. The departure of current BP Chairman Helge Lund in the coming months could be a good opportunity for the company to consider such radical change. It's unclear who will take this job, but one qualification for whoever succeeds Lund should be a much-needed sense of financial realism. Want to receive my column in your inbox every Thursday, along with additional energy insights and trending stories? Sign up for my Power Up newsletter here.
Daily Mail
39 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Was this the moment Harry and Meghan realised they were no longer part of the Royal Family A-list?
It was dubbed a 'royal reunion' at the time, as Prince Harry and Meghan Markle united with the rest of the Royal Family for their first joint engagement in two years. But the Sussexes were kept apart from Prince William, Kate Middleton, Prince Charles and Camilla - and left separately. The Service of Thanksgiving for the Queen's Platinum Jubilee at St Paul's Cathedral, which took place on this day three years ago, came at a frosty time for Harry and his family. He had reportedly hardly seen his father and brother since emigrating to California with Meghan. The Duke of Sussex had accused Charles of cutting him off financially and Meghan claimed an unnamed royal made a comment about Archie's skin tone before he was born during their bombshell Oprah Winfrey interview the year prior. It was the first time Harry and Meghan had been on full public view alongside the Royal Family since they stepped down from official royal duties. Crowds cheered the pair as they arrived, with the couple smiling and waving, but both boos and cheers could be heard as they departed. And, although they would have known it had they seen their plummeting approval ratings in opinion polls, it was the first time they had to face up to the new reality that the public was turning against them. Harry was seated at the opposite side to his brother Prince William and the two did not speak at the St Paul's Cathedral service They arrived ten minutes before William and Kate and were seated to the right. When William and Kate arrived to loud cheers, they were whisked off to the left. The late Queen missed the historic event following a last-minute decision announced by Buckingham Palace after she experienced 'discomfort' during the Trooping the Colour parade the day before. The Duke of York was also absent after testing positive for Covid. Indicative of their new more minor position within the Royal Family, the Sussexes were seated in the second row, behind the Wessex family and the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, with Harry next to Princess Eugenie 's husband Jack Brooksbank and Meghan next to Princess Margaret 's daughter Lady Sarah Chatto. Across the aisle, Charles and Camilla had seats beside them for William and Kate and the Princess Royal and her husband, Vice Admiral Timothy Laurence. Harry was seen appearing to enjoy a joke with someone seated across the aisle. Beatrice, sitting a few seats down from him, was also grinning in the same direction. But William was not pictured smiling throughout the ceremony and did not exchange words with his brother. Harry and Meghan previously told the Queen they would keep a low profile during the Jubilee celebrations and would only take part in official engagements. She reportedly 'ordered the family to come together' with 'no dramas' to overshadow the events. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex (left) and the now Prince and Princess of Wales (right) outside St Paul's Cathedral on June 3, 2022 A source said at the time: 'It's a typically elegant solution as you would expect. The Queen wants her family there and they are still part of it. But in a carefully controlled fashion.' It was Harry and Meghan's first joint engagement with senior royals since the icy Commonwealth Service at Westminster Abbey in March 2020 - shortly before they officially stepped down as senior royals. The Daily Mail reported that the couple were upset to learn that they would not be permitted to join the Queen and other family members in the main VIP party. Instead, they were told they would have to make their own way to their seats at the front of the abbey, alongside the Earl and the Countess of Wessex, before the arrival of other senior royals. William and Kate stepped in to defuse the situation and offered to join 'emotional' Harry and Meghan as they waited in their seats for the Queen, Charles and Camilla to arrive. But not before 2,000 orders of service had been signed off and printed, which very clearly - and rather embarrassingly - placed William and Kate firmly as entering with the main royal party. And it seems that their 11th-hour olive branch did not ease the ill-feeling within the feuding family. As Kate and William arrived to take their seats, Kate appeared to blank Harry and Meghan, while the two brothers exchanged only the most awkward of hellos. Although Harry greeted his brother William with a smile, there was little interaction between them. The decision not to include the Sussexes was made by the Queen's office directly, led by her private secretary Edward Young, MailOnline reported. Prior to the Service of Thanksgiving for the Platinum Jubilee, the Queen had lunch with the Sussexes and other senior royals behind closed doors - and also met her great-granddaughter Lilibet for the first time. Harry and Meghan, who were staying at Frogmore Cottage in Windsor while visiting from California, were not allowed on the Buckingham Palace balcony during the Trooping the Colour parade, and instead watched proceedings from the Horse Guards Parade. Meanwhile, key workers, charity volunteers and members of the armed forces were invited to the Queen's Service of Thanksgiving at St Paul's in recognition of their contribution to public life. Perhaps after these two tense events it was no surprise that Meghan would stop returning to the UK. Her relations with the Firm had been strained since she started dating Harry in the summer of 2016 before they creaked further after her wedding in 2018, and then finally reached a breaking point after the so-called Megxit of 2020. The Queen's funeral in September 2022 was the last time Meghan touched UK soil with the notoriously awkward walkabout further fracturing the wounded relationship between the families. The Queen's funeral was the last time Meghan touched UK soil, with the notoriously awkward walkabout further fracturing the wounded relationship between the families Since the seating incident in June 2022, Meghan and Harry have launched the Netflix series Harry & Meghan and With Love, Meghan. Meghan's lifestyle and cooking brand, As Ever, was officially launched in April 2025. Most recently the Duke of Sussex lost a legal challenge over the levels of security he and the family are entitled to while in the UK. Harry had been seeking to overturn a decision that had downgraded his security after he stopped being a working royal and moved to the US with Meghan and their two children - Archie, six, and Lilibet, three. In his sit down interview with the BBC shortly after losing his appeal, the Duke said he wanted to reconcile with his family, while alleging his father, King Charles, was not speaking with him. He said there had been 'so many disagreements' in the family, but the 'only thing that's left' is the row over his security - which he said had 'always been the sticking point'. Hopes of a reconciliation are unlikely as Harry continues to make public jabs at the Firm, which his grandmother, the late Queen, devoted her entire life to.
