
We have power to nationalise Scotland's bus services - so let's use it
Worst of all, it's us that foot the bill.
Our new report: The Next Stop: The Case For Publicly Owned Buses In Scotland has shown that almost £500,000,000 of public money has been spent propping up a broken system of private bus ownership. In 2023–24, bus operators in Scotland received £439 million in public subsidy, equating to 58% of all revenue in the sector.
Read more Roz Foyer
Less than half of bus operators' revenue comes from passenger fares. Therefore, the public – via taxpayer money and in addition to workers spending their hard-earned cash on overpriced fare – are a major shareholder within the bus network in Scotland. But here's the kicker: the public pays into a system over which it has no agency. No say on pricing. No say on accessibility. No power over reliability or frequency. It's a system designed to exclude passengers from decision-making and rewards the dividends of shareholders.
First Glasgow, for example, paid a £25 million dividend to its parent company in 2022–23. That's set against a backdrop of bus coverage in Strathclyde and South West Scotland shrinking by a staggering 30% in the past five years. Across Scotland, bus coverage has fallen by 16%. At the same time as presiding over a fall in bus coverage, the private bus industry has produced an average gross profit margin of more than 10% over the last 20 years.
We find ourselves in the rather grotesque situation that working people are paying more for a network they don't have a say in running, with the spoils shared amongst shareholders rather than workers.
Workers losing out is a continued theme. The STUC's research highlights that many privately operated companies impose excessive working hours, lower pay and weaker protections. Contrast this with the experience at Lothian Buses, Scotland's only surviving publicly owned operator, where union representation is high, hours are family-friendly, starting pay is stronger and structured progression routes are in place.
Unsurprisingly, staff satisfaction and workforce retention are both higher. Passenger numbers are higher too.
Lothian buses are publicly owned (Image: free) 10 years ago, there were 18 million more passenger journeys in Strathclyde and South West Scotland than in South East Scotland. Now that picture is reversed – with eight million more passengers in South East Scotland. Lothian Buses has bucked the trend of rapidly falling passenger use. It is a concrete example of how public ownership delivers for the workforce and the community alike.
Lothian Buses is not a pipe dream. It's a viable model. Over the last decade, Lothian has returned £36 million in dividends to the local authority, money that wouldn't have been returned for the public good if it had been a private company. In 2023 alone, they reinvested over £4 million into maintaining vital but less profitable routes.
So not only is public ownership good for workers and good for taxpayers; it's good for the environment too. Lothian was the first operator in Scotland to convert its entire fleet to ultra-low emission vehicles and is on track to electrify fully by 2035, a pace of progress unmatched by the private sector even with £130 million of public subsidy behind them.
This is what responsible stewardship of public money can achieve. With meaningful control and fair governance, Lothian Buses is a template in how bus networks should operate: with accountability, with sustainability and with a clear public mandate.
The cost for public ownership is manageable too: £17.5 million annually for a city the size of Dundee; £44 million for the whole of Strathclyde. These are not unachievable sums. Especially not when compared to the hundreds of millions leaking into corporate balance sheets each year.
Further, the STUC estimates that 2,900 jobs could be created in bus manufacturing alone if we committed to a publicly owned electric bus transition. That is 2,900 livelihoods, built around secure, unionised work in a sustainable sector. But the status quo, where operators receive huge subsidies to buy electric buses built abroad while Scottish manufacturers struggle, must end. Public control can ensure that procurement supports Scottish jobs and skills, not just shareholder returns.
Read more
The Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 gives local authorities the power to take control through franchising or to directly operate services. Yet these powers have not been seized with urgency. The legislation exists, the public appetite is there, and the economic case is overwhelming.
So why won't politicians get on the bus then? If we are serious about transforming Scotland's transport, the empty promises of the past must be consigned to the past.
We must establish new publicly owned bus companies - arms-length or in-house - across Scotland. We must support councils and regional transport partnerships to pool resources, share infrastructure and provide stable employment. Crucially, that means treating buses as a public good, not a private opportunity.
Scotland's next parliamentary election will be a test of leadership, on climate, on inequality and on public services. Therein lies the challenge to every party, every candidate and every council leader: if you're serious about delivering accessible, affordable and sustainable transport for the people of Scotland, then you need to get on the bus for public ownership.
No more blank cheques to private monopolies. No more excuses for shrinking routes and rising fares. No more public money without public power.
Next stop: public ownership.
Roz Foyer is general secretary of the STUC
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Herald Scotland
a day ago
- The Herald Scotland
Commuting by bus from Edinburgh's suburbs is awful. Here's my solution
This week's Herald investigation into The Future of Edinburgh serves as a timely reminder of the capital's national importance. Edinburgh is the beating economic heart of the country. With one of the strongest records on Gross Value Added in the UK, Edinburgh is making the money required to fix the other struggling cities and towns around it. And a massive part of Edinburgh's economic success lies in its ability to efficiently move workers into and around the city. Read more by Andy Maciver I have lived in Edinburgh for about 40 of my 45 years, with my only absences being short stints in Glasgow and Dundee. I grew up in Currie; not much over 5 miles from the city centre, it is pretty much the dictionary definition of a suburb. Growing up, the borders of my world were close; my primary concern was getting to school, which I did on foot or by bike. However my father worked in town, and normally relied on the bus. Looking back now, that journey on the Red 44 or the Green 66 was relatively easy because we lived close to the Lanark Road, but was more of an ordeal for the majority of people in the village who lived down the hill. Currie experienced a very substantial housebuilding boom in the 1960s and 1970s but, with the Water of Leith immediately to the south of the A70 Lanark Road, all the houses were built down in the fields to the north, and expansion inevitably took place further and further away from the main road. With a 20-minute walk up a hill to the Lanark Road, and a 45 minute bus journey, we begin to see this as a very, very long five miles. It can feel shorter for those who happen to be near Curriehill Railway Station (which sits on the Shotts Line), but with only one train an hour heading into town, this is not a service designed with commuter convenience in mind. I now live inside the City Bypass, in Morningside. As was the case when I lived in Currie, I am very near the main road, so I can walk out of the door and find an array of buses awaiting me. As it happens, I tend not to use them, and instead I cycle to work in town, trying to avoid swerving into one of the new Lothian electric buses as I dodge the potholes on our truly deplorable roads. Again, though, you do not have to stray far from the main road to find yourself marooned in a location with no bus route particularly nearby. Morningside is only two miles from the West End, but for people who have, perhaps, a 15 minute walk to the bus, and then sit for 30 minutes as the bus crawls through traffic on narrow streets, it can be an awfully long two miles. Lothian Buses are up to date (Image: free) For suburbanites living away from bus stops, especially those who are elderly or immobile, the car is and will remain a necessary feature in their lives, and we need to provide them with quieter roads. To do that, we need to give commuters who choose to use the car, or to stay at home, with better options. As a mechanism for getting suburban workers to work, Edinburgh's mass transit system needs to extend beyond the bus. Time is money, and with one of Scotland's key economic problems being a lack of productivity in the workforce, efficient mass transit starts to look significantly more important than it might at first glance appear. It is time not only for Edinburgh's local authority to generate new ideas, but for the Scottish Government to help. Scotland - all of Scotland - needs Edinburgh performing to its full potential. Edinburgh, conversely, is so economically successful that it relies on workers not only from its own suburbs but from Fife, the Borders, and Mid, West and East Lothian. Driving out of Edinburgh on a weekday morning tells you what you need to know. As you breeze along the M8, up the M9 or M90 or down the A1, A7, A68, A701 or A702, you count your lucky stars that you're heading out and not sitting at 5 mph trying to come in. Travelling on four wheels cannot be Edinburgh's answer, either for those coming in or for those already living in an EH postcode. There are game-changing options which, happily, would require relatively little capital investment, and in the spirit of the Herald's efforts this week to lift the lid on some of the key discussions the capital needs to have, I will offer two. Neither involve roads; the first involves the river, and the second involves the railway. The southern side of Fife - from Dunfermline and Rosyth round the coast through Aberdour, Burntisland, Kinghorn and up to Kirkcaldy - is constantly expanding and increasingly becoming an Edinburgh commuter belt. Rail can play a role here, but only for those who live relatively close to a station, so the roads take the strain. If only we had another method of connecting Fife and Edinburgh such as, say, a body of water like a river or estuary. Ah, but we do! I am by no means the first person to moot the idea of a ferry across the Forth, but past discussion seems too often to have revolved around a beach-to-beach tourist service rather than something to integrate with the mass transit network. Read more of our Future of Edinburgh series Instead, a rapid, regular, commuter-focussed service from a new park-and-sail at Dalgety Bay (probably), directly into the tram stop at Newhaven would be an efficient, productive option for the army of workers who come from the Kingdom every day. And, not to forget those of us who inhabit the city, we live on top of a railway line called the South Suburban, currently used only for freight. If we wanted a light rail line to complement the routes driven by Lothian Buses, cutting across the south suburbs and linking Haymarket at one end and Waverley at the other, with an easy spur to the Royal Infirmary, we could not possibly design one better than what we already have. It is easy for our local and national civil servants to spend a few decades poring over hundred-page strategies which lead to consultations which lead to more strategies which lead to more consultations. But when opportunities to fix Edinburgh's commuter transport problems are already sitting before our eyes, it mightn't be a bad idea to take them. Andy Maciver is Founding Director of Message Matters, and co-host of the Holyrood Sources podcast


The Herald Scotland
a day ago
- The Herald Scotland
Regeneration plan for Seafield 'unrealistic' landowners say
The authority's latest 10-year development plan, running through to 2032, designates the 40-hectare area as a 'potential housing site' and a masterplan has now been drawn up. Alongside new properties, a school, GP surgery, shops and cafes, it shows a new waterfront park and promenade to connect with the one at Portobello. Hundreds of new affordable homes at Seafield will 'help address the city's housing emergency' amid a record 5,000 homeless households in the capital, council planning convener James Dalgleish said last year. Read more from our new investigation, The Future of Edinburgh: However the ambitious project is unlikely to come to fruition for decades yet, largely due to a number of hurdles. Chief among them is landowners unwilling to sell up. The relocation of Lothian Buses' Marine Depot, at the east of the site, also poses a significant challenge. 'They don't necessarily want to move' Iain Whyte, the Conservative councillor for Craigentinny-Duddingston, which includes Seafield, told The Herald: 'The biggest blocker, frankly, to anything happening there is the landowners of a significant chunk of it have tenants in place, a steady income, that suits their financial and business model and they don't want to change that. 'When they speak, they speak on behalf of some of the others that are there as well and I think that means this, if it's a plan that's going to work, you're probably talking 20 years before you see anything significantly change there. 'I just think the biggest problem the council has got is that it allocated that site for nearly 3,000 houses in its plan for the city, the 2030 City Plan for development, to try and find the housing numbers that are needed for the growing population. 'Doing things like that when there's no prospect of it being developed within the timescales they're talking about gives you an indication of why we're not meeting the housing numbers needed — and is the real reason, if any, why they're having to declare a housing emergency.' He added: 'I don't know if anyone's ever asked Lothian Buses where they think they're going to move their depot to. Because I don't think it's easy for them. It's fine for the council to sit there and say 'oh well, car showrooms aren't a very good use of the land' but there's an awful lot more in there and they don't necessarily want to move.' 'Their land should not be considered for housing' Council documents reveal some developers hold concerns about 'timescales and the difficulty of delivering a masterplan when such a small area of the plan is actually capable of coming forward in the short/medium term'. They also show that Royal London, which owns Seafield Industrial Estate covering a large part of the proposed development site, 'do not support proposals for residential development on their site'. In their response to a consultation on City Plan 2030, an agent representing the pensions and investment giant warned that the site 'does not present a realistic option for residential development'. They said: 'The owner [...] has no intention of releasing the land for housing use over the Plan period and their land holding should not be considered for residential or urban area housing led mixed use.' The response went on to say Royal London was not approached by the council prior to the land being identified for consideration for redevelopment. 'The identification of their land holding for this purpose is considered to be inappropriate,' it said. Proposed redevelopment site at Seafield (Image: City of Edinburgh Council) The estate, consisting of 18 fully let industrial units, has been under the company's ownership for over 25 years, is 'one of the larger complete industrial holdings' within their property fund. The agent said 'significant capital investment' has been directed into the industrial units in recent years including 'acquisition of adjacent holdings, replacement roofs, cladding renewal, unit subdivision and road/service yard replacement ensuring the accommodation is fit for modern requirements'. They added: 'Tenants undertake a range of business operations comprising urban industry, trades, distribution and local services which support their local market, of which a significant proportion comprises the established urban area of north east Edinburgh. 'The removal of an established employment area against a backdrop of limited industrial supply and constrained demand will only serve to exacerbate poverty rates in the local area.' Royal London was contacted for comment. Read more from The Future of Edinburgh series: Councillor Whyte compared the plan to proposals for the local authority's ongoing regeneration of Granton Waterfront 'which we were talking about developing 30 years ago and is only now starting to come to fruition'. He said: 'I think this will take a very long time indeed.' Asked about the prospect of the council using Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPOs) in a bid to accelerate work, he said: 'That would be incredibly expensive and the council doesn't have much money. 'We're in the top five most indebted councils in the UK, so would it make sense to go further into debt and have the interest payments to CPO land that private individuals and companies are making best use of in the market at the moment?' However, he added it was 'useful to have a masterplan so you don't get piecemeal development along there'. 'Fabulous opportunity' Cathy Maclean from Action Porty, the community group behind Scotland's first ever urban community land buy out in Portobello, agreed it would be 'quite a while before things get going' as 'a lot of the people who own those sites don't want to sell and have no plans to sell'. But she stressed the site presented a 'fabulous opportunity' as there were so few capital cities with 'a brownfield site right on the beach to develop". Seafield is currently mostly car showrooms and industrial units (Image: Google) She said more housing was badly needed and 'so much' had been built in Portobello in recent years 'with a dramatic loss of amenities at the same'. This led Action Porty to successfully complete a community buyout of Portobello Old Parish Church after the Church of Scotland announced its intention to sell the property. It reopened as Bellfield, a community centre, in 2018. Maclean said if the Seafield redevelopment ever goes ahead it would be 'welcome from Portobello as a sort of sister community, rather than particularly part of it,' however added: 'In practice it will become a part of Portobello because that's the way people are, they enjoy walking along the Prom. 'At some point it's all going to join up between Leith and right the way along Seahaven.' 'There has to be continuity between the two areas' While Seafield's regeneration is clearly still a long-way off, some details in the masterplan are already raising eyebrows. The council's visualisation of what the area could look like one day shows people enjoying the would-be promenade and leafy waterfront park. 'If you look at it it looks amazing,' said Kirsty Pattison, chair of Craigentinny and Meadowbank Community Council, whose boundary includes Seafield, 'but if you dig into the details and look at what the masterplanning is and the height of the buildings proposed, it doesn't correlate with that picture at all.' A visualisation of the council's Seafield masterplan (Image: City of Edinburgh Council) She said in terms of the height of the buildings there is 'tension between what it's supposed to look like and what is actually being proposed'. 'What they're proposing, from the top of the prom if you're looking south-east it gives you expansive views of the beach and you can see Joppa. Some of that might be lost, so it's important to preserve this place.' Ensuring the new neighbourhood is well connected with adjacent communities will be crucial, Ms Pattison said. 'We want to make sure there's improved landscape connections between Craigentinny and Seafield, because Seafield is part of our district. 'There has to be continuity between the two areas so we can preserve popular beach walks. 'There's a beach walk that connects Craigentinny to the western part of the beach and we want that put into the masterplan to make sure it's preserved. That is vital. People use it all the time - it's such a popular connection.' 'There's also issues around rising sea levels, it's all fine and well saying we're going to redevelop Seafield - but what are we going to put in place for flooding?' Ms MacLean similarly raised concerns over the impact of climate change in the future. 'I don't think you can say any flood defences are going to be effective when you don't know what's coming,' she said. 'A lot of the standards these environmental consultants look at are based on what used to be called once in every 200 year chance of flooding. That's changed quite dramatically. Nobody really knows, if the truth be told.' Edinburgh Council said the risk of coastal flooding 'is increasing due to rising sea levels and coastal erosion caused by climate change,' adding: 'This is a key consideration in the redevelopment of Seafield.' Since initial engagement about the plans in 2023 'we have needed to take additional time to engage with a range of stakeholders,' it said. 'This is to ensure that places are developed along the coastline that are resilient in the face of climate change impacts'. Read more: Now, the authority is preparing a Coastal Change Adaptation Plan and said it will 'update the draft masterplan in line with the recommendations'. The 'Seafield stench' One of the biggest constraints historically associated with making the area residential has been the 'Seafield stench' from the waste water treatment plant to the west - the largest of its kind in Scotland. Odours emitting from the works are a longstanding issue. Between 2022 and 2024 Scottish Water and Veolia invested over £10 million to add additional capacity and address concerns around the smells. However, the council said last year the issue 'has not been fully resolved at this time'. It said: 'The Council, along with SEPA, carry out ongoing monitoring of odours relating to the Works. However, the council does not have the ability to force all odours to be stopped. 'Scottish Water has committed to developing a new facility to replace the Seafield facility after 2030. This should be considered alongside the timescales of the masterplan as it is likely to reduce the impact of odours around the facility. 'Odours relating to the Works are not a significant issue for the bulk of the masterplan area. However, if odours persist, this is likely to shape how development of the northernmost part of the area comes forward.'


Scotsman
5 days ago
- Scotsman
Edinburgh roads: Miles Briggs launches campaign for Scottish Government to prioritise Sheriffhall upgrade
A Lothian MSP today launched a campaign calling on the Scottish Government to prioritise the upgrade of the most notorious junction on the Edinburgh City Bypass. Sign up to our daily newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to Edinburgh News, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Tory MIles Briggs said motorists had been subjected to "countless hours of unnecessary congestion" at the Sheriffhall roundabout because of the long delay in starting work on the proposed flyover. He said: "It's ridiculous that after nearly 20 years of discussion and more than £6m in consultation, Sheriffhall continues to bring the Edinburgh Bypass to a standstill every rush-hour. An artist's impression of the proposed Sheriffhall roundabout flyover. | Contributed Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'From day one it was clear that the roundabout needed a fly-over; 40 years later we have a significantly larger population across the region but have seen no progress whatsoever to improve the roundabout." Funding for he junction revamp was included in the Edinburgh and South East Scotland City Regional Deal announced in July 2017. But the £120 million price tag attached to it at that time is certain to have increased dramatically. Ground Investigations were carried out in 2018 and draft road orders were published in 2019. But in 2020 the plans were put on hold to allow a review of the project as part of a Scottish Government budget deal with the Greens. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad A public local inquiry was eventually held in early 2023 and the report, delivered to the Scottish Government in early 2024, is still under consideration by ministers over a year later. In a Scottish Parliament debate in 2018, Mr Briggs highlighted the economic value of the City Bypass and warning that gridlocked traffic was putting off potential investors to the area. He cited a report by Inrix which identified the bypass as the most congested trunk road outside London and predicted that the cost of bypass congestion to the economy could reach £2.8 billion by 2025. Now Mr Briggs has launched an online campaign, which will encourage the public to make their voice heard and put pressure on the government to provide a renewed commitment to this project. He said more than 75,000 vehicles used the bypass every day already, but that was set to increase since Lothian has the fastest growing population in Scotland and is forecast to account for 84 per cent of Scotland's predicted population growth over the period to 2033. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He said: 'Sheriffhall is costing commuters and businesses in our region time, money, and pollution from congestion. 'However, due to Green party opposition and SNP complacency, proposals have been left to gather dust while costs increase. 'It is time for SNP ministers to act and provide the leadership needed to get the upgrade back on track. 'That is why I have launched my campaign to upgrade this notorious junction, asking residents across Lothian to make their voice heard. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Edinburgh and the Lothians deserve better than this and I hope my campaign to upgrade the junction will make SNP ministers understand the level of frustration motorists are facing and give the upgrade the priority it deserves.'