With the Budget out of the way, the Conservative leadership contest over, and all the parliamentary select committees appointed, political life can now get down to serious business. Until the Budget was delivered, it felt as if life in Westminster and Whitehall was on hold.
So, what to make of the Budget? From a public transport perspective, it was thoroughly disappointing given that the government decided to increase the bus fare cap in England by 50% to £3 and to raise rail fares by 4.6% next March while at the same time freezing fuel duty yet again.
The motorist wins out over public transport once more, although I’m not in the least bit surprised. The politics of putting up fuel duty has become too toxic. The Department for Transport (DfT) was one of seven government departments that saw its budget for 2025/26 cut – in its case by 2.5%.
A controversial Budget
More generally, comparing the content of the Budget to what Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Chancellor Rachel Reeves said in the run-up to and during the election campaign must leave you disheartened.
This was one of the least pro-business Budgets I can recall — as surely even the staunchest Labour supporter would acknowledge, even if they supported many aspects of it.
It’s blown a hole in Ms Reeves’ claim that she would be the most pro-business Chancellor ever, while the Office for Budget Responsibility’s growth forecasts are so anaemic that her claim that her Budget would be based on growth has been discredited at the first knocking.
She also vowed that she wouldn’t fix the books to enable her to spend more – and then did precisely that by changing the fiscal rules to create more headroom to borrow.
This was one of the least pro-business Budgets I can recall
Moreover, a report from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research has said that Britain’s poorest families will be £600 a year worse off as a result of the Chancellor’s changes.
A Budget for “working people”? I suggest not. It’s hard to see any winners from all of this.
I also have a hunch that, such is the unease among Labour backbench MPs, we will see some rethinking going on in No 10 and the Treasury over the coming weeks despite Ms Reeves’ claims that she is sticking to her guns.
A dormant new shadow cabinet
Meanwhile, the Conservative Party’s protracted leadership campaign is finally behind us. Kemi Badenoch has named her top team, which includes Gareth Bacon, MP for Orpington since 2019, as Shadow Transport Secretary.
However, I can’t get too excited by this shadow cabinet as I am not sure how active it will be. I say that because I suspect that Ms Badenoch and her close advisers are going to take a while to develop a new suite of policies to reinvigorate the party.
She has said she isn’t going to make any policy commitments until she knows how to deliver them. Yes, shadow ministers will seek to attack the Labour government and to highlight its policy failings as all opposition parties must.
But, until this policy review process is completed, which could take up to 18 months or so, I can’t see the shadow cabinet being especially dynamic.
We also now have the full suite of parliamentary select committees appointed. The Transport Committee is made up of seven Labour MPs, two Conservatives and two Liberal Democrats. Veteran MP Ruth Cadbury, who was a member of the committee in the previous parliament, is the new Chair.
However, all other members were elected for the first time in July’s election so it’s something of an understatement to say that this is a very rookie committee. I cannot immediately see any member — Ms Cadbury aside — who has any particular interest or background in transport.
Given that two of the members, Catherine Atkinson and Baggy Shanker, are MPs in Derby, which is base for rolling stock manufacturer Alstom’s UK facility and the future HQ for Great British Railways, the rail industry will be delighted.
Unease over imports
I hope public transport is granted an inquiry soon by the Transport Committee, given that bus and rail reform are the Labour government’s early priorities.
Indeed, on the back of Go-Ahead’s decision to award a large contract for new zero-emission buses to Wrightbus, DfT has announced plans to set up a UK Bus Manufacturing Expert Panel.
Details of the panel’s membership and remit are yet to be announced, but I suspect that a “buy British” agenda is the driving force behind this initiative.
That Go-Ahead’s decision was announced by DfT rather than Go-Ahead or Wrightbus had me wondering to what extent there was any political stuff going on behind the scenes to make sure that this order was placed with a UK manufacturer. Perish the thought!
I fear this “buy-British” agenda is in danger of being badly ill-informed. As I understand it, UK manufacturers are dependent on overseas suppliers for many components of a bus.
Surely, we should want operators and local transport authorities to buy the buses which are not only best operationally but also the most competitively priced taking account of whole-life costs and performance
Indeed, I’m told that some of the key technical elements can only be sourced from China. Alexander Dennis had a joint venture for many years with the Chinese company BYD, on which it was dependent for the battery and chassis components. Nobody seemed to care less.
But now, with this new expert panel, the “buy British” agenda seems to be gathering momentum.
Surely, we should want operators and local transport authorities to buy the buses which are not only best operationally but also the most competitively priced taking account of whole-life costs and performance.
As we are not dealing with national security issues here, where the bus comes from should be an irrelevance. I fear the politics of this may distort a properly functioning market.
