UK Bus Summit 2026: What I’ll Be Listening For From the Front Line

I’m writing this on the train to Liverpool, heading up the evening before the UK Bus Summit 2026.

Tomorrow, people from across the bus industry, local and regional government, passenger organisations, operators, technology companies and other parts of the transport sector will come together at The Spine in Liverpool.

The timing feels important.

Bus policy is changing quickly. Devolution is gathering pace. Franchising is moving from discussion into delivery in more areas. Enhanced Partnerships continue to evolve. Questions around funding, reliability, accessibility, affordability, safety and accountability are becoming increasingly important.

And tomorrow’s programme reflects that.

The UK Bus Summit will feature sessions on devolution, the future of urban and rural bus networks, and what the programme describes as the “non-negotiables” of reliability, accessibility, affordability and safety, alongside a keynote from Simon Lightwood MP, Minister for Buses and Local Transport.

I’m looking forward to being there.

I’m going primarily to listen, learn and speak to people with very different roles and experiences from my own.

I’m not a transport planner, economist or engineer.

I’m a bus driver who has spent nearly two decades working on the front line of the industry, alongside representing bus workers through the RMT.

That inevitably shapes the questions I ask.

Because however impressive a transport strategy looks on paper, ultimately it has to work at the bus stop, on the road and behind the wheel.

Reliability and safety cannot be separated

One of the subjects I’m particularly interested in tomorrow is reliability.

Passengers quite rightly expect buses to turn up when they are supposed to.

Authorities and operators are also becoming increasingly sophisticated in the way they measure punctuality, journey times, service performance and network reliability.

That is positive.

But how we achieve reliability matters.

Running times, recovery time, scheduling, traffic conditions and operational pressure all affect the environment in which drivers are expected to work.

A system that becomes better at measuring punctuality should also become better at understanding safety.

For me, the interesting question is whether we are beginning to connect those two conversations properly.

If authorities can build increasingly detailed dashboards around journey times and service performance, should there also be a clearer and more consistent approach to publishing bus safety performance?

And should that information be considered alongside reliability rather than in isolation?

A bus arriving on time matters.

A bus being operated safely by a driver given reasonable conditions in which to do the job matters even more.

Where is the workforce in bus reform?

This is probably the biggest question I’m taking to Liverpool.

There is understandably a huge amount of discussion around relationships between central government, combined authorities, local transport authorities and operators.

Passengers and communities are increasingly being brought into those discussions too.

But where is the workforce?

Bus drivers, engineers, controllers, cleaners and other operational staff possess a huge amount of practical knowledge about how networks actually work.

Drivers know where running times consistently fail.

They know which junctions create recurring problems.

They see accessibility issues every day.

They experience the effect of timetable changes.

They know when facilities are inadequate.

They see how policies written many miles away actually work when they reach the road.

That does not mean frontline workers have all the answers.

We don’t.

But it does mean that reform designed with the workforce is likely to be better informed than reform eventually delivered to the workforce.

For me, meaningful workforce involvement should be built into reform from the beginning rather than treated as something to consider once a preferred model has already been chosen.

Safety should be designed in from the outset

Over the last year I have become increasingly interested in bus safety governance and transparency.

Not simply individual incidents, but the systems behind them.

Who collects the information?

Who sees it?

Who identifies patterns?

Who is accountable?

What gets published?

And when governance structures change, who makes sure safety does not fall between organisations?

Some recent information-rights work I have undertaken has raised interesting questions.

Cheshire West & Chester Council, which is participating in the Government’s Franchising and Bus Reform Pilot, confirmed in response to one of my requests that at the point covered by the request it did not hold a dedicated safety-governance framework, safety-transparency policy, safety-monitoring framework or safety-reporting arrangements created specifically for the pilot.

That does not mean safety is not being considered elsewhere, and the pilot remains at an assessment stage.

But it does raise a wider question.

As authorities design new models for governing bus services, should safety governance and public safety transparency be built into those models from the beginning?

I think they should.

I have also recently asked Transport for Greater Manchester for information about Bee Network safety governance, workforce and trade-union engagement, publication of bus safety data and evaluation of whether franchising has improved safety oversight.

TfGM is currently carrying out a public-interest test in relation to part of that request.

Again, I am not drawing conclusions before receiving the substantive response.

But the question behind the work remains the same.

As franchising expands, should there be a common minimum expectation for what bus safety information authorities publish, while of course protecting genuinely security-sensitive material?

That is exactly the kind of discussion I hope tomorrow’s safety session can begin to address.

Accessibility and affordability belong together

Another issue I’ll be listening closely to is accessibility.

A bus network can be technically accessible while still being inaccessible in practice.

A vehicle may meet accessibility standards, but that does not automatically mean the whole journey works for somebody with additional needs.

Information, infrastructure, staff interaction, interchange, reliability and confidence all matter.

Affordability matters too.

A physically accessible network is still inaccessible to someone who cannot afford to use it.

That is one reason I like the fact that tomorrow’s programme groups reliability, accessibility, affordability and safety together.

These things interact every day in the real world.

Devolution brings opportunity — and responsibility

I’m particularly interested in the opening session on devolution.

For me, the presence of Cllr Nadine Peatfield, Deputy Mayor of the East Midlands Mayoral Combined Authority, makes that especially relevant.

The East Midlands is where I live and work.

Greater regional control creates opportunities.

Authorities can potentially design networks that better reflect local communities, employment patterns, education, healthcare and economic needs.

But more power should also mean clearer accountability.

Passengers and workers should be able to understand who is responsible for network decisions, performance, safety, funding and long-term planning.

That becomes especially important where routes cross administrative boundaries.

Devolution can bring decision-making closer to communities.

The challenge is making sure accountability travels with it.

Collaboration has to include the people delivering the service

One of the themes already being raised ahead of the Summit is that the future of urban bus networks depends on collaboration, not simply contracts.

I agree.

I would simply broaden the definition slightly.

For me, genuine collaboration means government, transport authorities, operators, passengers, communities and the workforce all having an appropriate voice.

That does not mean everybody agrees.

It means decision-makers have access to practical experience before decisions become fixed.

What actually changes for passengers?

Ultimately, most passengers standing at a bus stop are not thinking about governance structures or ownership models.

They are thinking about whether the bus will arrive and whether it will get them where they need to be.

That is worth remembering.

Franchising, partnerships, funding models and institutional reform are means to an end.

For passengers, success will ultimately be much simpler.

Is the service reliable?

Is it safe?

Can I afford it?

Can I use it?

Does it go where I need it to go?

Going to Liverpool to listen

I’m not travelling to the UK Bus Summit believing I already know what everybody should say.

Quite the opposite.

There will be people in that room tomorrow with decades of experience in areas of transport I do not have.

I want to hear from them.

I want to understand what authorities are learning from franchising.

I want to hear operators’ perspectives.

I want to understand what better use of data can achieve.

I want to hear how rural networks can be protected.

I want to hear how accessibility is being built into future services.

I want to hear what government believes comes next.

And I want to meet people whose work I have followed from a distance.

But I’ll also be listening for something else.

Where is the frontline workforce in all of this?

Bus reform will not ultimately be judged by legislation, governance charts, consultancy reports or contracts.

Passengers will judge it at the bus stop.

And many of the people responsible for turning those ambitions into reality will be sitting behind the wheel.

That is the perspective I’ll be taking with me into the UK Bus Summit tomorrow.

Lee Odams

Bus Driver

Branch Secretary – RMT Nottinghamshire & Derbyshire Bus Branch

Secretary – RMT National Industrial Organising Conference of Bus Workers

The views expressed here are my own and are written in a personal capacity based on my experience within the bus industry and trade-union representation. They should not be taken as representing the official position of my employer or the RMT unless expressly stated.

Tags:

UK Bus Summit 2026, buses, bus reform, bus franchising, devolution, bus safety, transport safety, bus drivers, public transport, accessibility, affordability, reliability, transport policy, workforce engagement, trade unions, RMT, East Midlands, Liverpool, Bee Network, transport governance, passenger transport, bus workers