Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 19 April 2012
19 Apr 2012 · S4 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Bus Services
If the minister bothered to read our motion, he would see that we identify any number of factors, of which the BSOG is one. I am giving him the evidence on the matter.
What is the Scottish Government saying? It is, of course, blaming Westminster, but Transform Scotland makes the succinct comment in its briefing for the debate that
“That is complete rubbish. The overall transport budget is due to increase not fall, between 2011-12 and 2012-13”.
However often Scottish ministers blame membership of the United Kingdom for every decision that they make, they cannot shirk responsibility for how they spend their devolved budget of more than £30 billion and for the decisions that they make about their priorities.
The First Minister claims that
“safeguarding bus routes is a priority for this Government”.
Who does he think he is kidding? He is certainly not deceiving the bus users campaigning throughout the country to preserve the services on which they rely. How does he answer the petitioners in Dalkeith and Danderhall who are campaigning against the withdrawal of their service? How does he answer the worried commuters in Pencaitland, who face not being able to travel to work by public transport? What about the concerned residents of Stewartfield in East Kilbride, who may lose their number 31 bus service, which is the only regular service in that area? What does he say to the residents of Clackmannan villages who are raising a petition against the loss of their service? What about the bus passengers in Coatbridge who are campaigning to retain their number 17 service from Townhead? What does he say to the employees of First Scotland East facing redundancy, who are represented by Unite the Union and some of the drivers who are in the public gallery?
We reiterate our call for regulation. We do so in the full knowledge that other parties, other than possibly the Greens, will oppose that. However, regulation is the other side of the coin: it is the guarantee that value is obtained in return for public subsidy. It is used in service provision in other modes of public transport, such as rail and ferry. The voluntary approach to quality bus contracts has resulted in only one being formed—last year in Renfrewshire, as George Adam informed us in the previous debate on buses.
Local authorities must be empowered to develop integrated public transport systems in their areas. I was interested to hear the minister for Housing and Transport argue on Radio Scotland’s “Call Kaye” programme on Tuesday that he did not have the power to reverse deregulation. He said:
“unfortunately, this is not one of the powers the Scottish Government has”.
I replayed the minister’s statement several times on the iPlayer, and that is what he said. If he does not have those powers, it is slightly strange that that option seemed to be discussed in the context of East Lothian.
I admit that some of the provisions of the Transport Act 1985 are reserved, but there are actions that we can take under our current powers. The member’s bill that Charlie Gordon proposed in the previous session of Parliament fell not because it would not have been competent but because other parties would not support it. If members of other parties now regret not having supported Charlie Gordon’s bill to regulate bus services, they need not be too dismayed: unlike buses in many parts of Scotland, there will be another bill along shortly, courtesy of my colleague Patricia Ferguson.
Bus passenger numbers have been falling over the past three years due to the recession but, even so, 438 million journeys were made by bus last year, which is more than were made by any other form of public transport in Scotland. If people are to be enticed out of private cars, bus services need to be affordable, reliable and integrated with other forms of public transport. We are going in the wrong direction and we believe that the measures proposed in our motion would allow the fortunes of the industry to be reversed.
Mr Hume’s amendment leaves out regulation, as I suspected that it would; Mr Harvie’s says a plague on both your houses; and Mr Brown’s says that he is doing a brilliant job. He is a bit like a schoolboy who failed his maths exam but says that it does not matter because he got a good mark for his English essay. We will not accept any of the amendments.
I move,
That the Parliament notes the concerns expressed by bus service operators, passengers and the trade unions that represent bus workers regarding the impact of the Scottish Government’s changes to the Bus Service Operators Grant; notes that the Scottish Government’s decision to cut the grant by 17% in 2012-13 and to revise the formula has, along with the underfunding of the concessionary travel scheme and high fuel costs, resulted in fare increases and service reductions across the country; recognises that this has also contributed to the decision by First Scotland East to reduce dramatically its services in Lothian and Midlothian, with the potential loss of around 200 jobs; believes that the Scottish Government has failed to listen to the concerns of operators, bus service workers and passengers; urges ministers to take action to address the immediate problems of the industry, including urgently revisiting the 17% cut in the Bus Service Operators Grant, and instead begin proper negotiations with operators to ensure that the scheme is sustained at a level that does not threaten services, jobs and high fare increases, and believes that new legislation is required to enable the regulation of bus services in Scotland to ensure sustainable and reliable bus services throughout the country.
09:29
What is the Scottish Government saying? It is, of course, blaming Westminster, but Transform Scotland makes the succinct comment in its briefing for the debate that
“That is complete rubbish. The overall transport budget is due to increase not fall, between 2011-12 and 2012-13”.
However often Scottish ministers blame membership of the United Kingdom for every decision that they make, they cannot shirk responsibility for how they spend their devolved budget of more than £30 billion and for the decisions that they make about their priorities.
The First Minister claims that
“safeguarding bus routes is a priority for this Government”.
Who does he think he is kidding? He is certainly not deceiving the bus users campaigning throughout the country to preserve the services on which they rely. How does he answer the petitioners in Dalkeith and Danderhall who are campaigning against the withdrawal of their service? How does he answer the worried commuters in Pencaitland, who face not being able to travel to work by public transport? What about the concerned residents of Stewartfield in East Kilbride, who may lose their number 31 bus service, which is the only regular service in that area? What does he say to the residents of Clackmannan villages who are raising a petition against the loss of their service? What about the bus passengers in Coatbridge who are campaigning to retain their number 17 service from Townhead? What does he say to the employees of First Scotland East facing redundancy, who are represented by Unite the Union and some of the drivers who are in the public gallery?
We reiterate our call for regulation. We do so in the full knowledge that other parties, other than possibly the Greens, will oppose that. However, regulation is the other side of the coin: it is the guarantee that value is obtained in return for public subsidy. It is used in service provision in other modes of public transport, such as rail and ferry. The voluntary approach to quality bus contracts has resulted in only one being formed—last year in Renfrewshire, as George Adam informed us in the previous debate on buses.
Local authorities must be empowered to develop integrated public transport systems in their areas. I was interested to hear the minister for Housing and Transport argue on Radio Scotland’s “Call Kaye” programme on Tuesday that he did not have the power to reverse deregulation. He said:
“unfortunately, this is not one of the powers the Scottish Government has”.
I replayed the minister’s statement several times on the iPlayer, and that is what he said. If he does not have those powers, it is slightly strange that that option seemed to be discussed in the context of East Lothian.
I admit that some of the provisions of the Transport Act 1985 are reserved, but there are actions that we can take under our current powers. The member’s bill that Charlie Gordon proposed in the previous session of Parliament fell not because it would not have been competent but because other parties would not support it. If members of other parties now regret not having supported Charlie Gordon’s bill to regulate bus services, they need not be too dismayed: unlike buses in many parts of Scotland, there will be another bill along shortly, courtesy of my colleague Patricia Ferguson.
Bus passenger numbers have been falling over the past three years due to the recession but, even so, 438 million journeys were made by bus last year, which is more than were made by any other form of public transport in Scotland. If people are to be enticed out of private cars, bus services need to be affordable, reliable and integrated with other forms of public transport. We are going in the wrong direction and we believe that the measures proposed in our motion would allow the fortunes of the industry to be reversed.
Mr Hume’s amendment leaves out regulation, as I suspected that it would; Mr Harvie’s says a plague on both your houses; and Mr Brown’s says that he is doing a brilliant job. He is a bit like a schoolboy who failed his maths exam but says that it does not matter because he got a good mark for his English essay. We will not accept any of the amendments.
I move,
That the Parliament notes the concerns expressed by bus service operators, passengers and the trade unions that represent bus workers regarding the impact of the Scottish Government’s changes to the Bus Service Operators Grant; notes that the Scottish Government’s decision to cut the grant by 17% in 2012-13 and to revise the formula has, along with the underfunding of the concessionary travel scheme and high fuel costs, resulted in fare increases and service reductions across the country; recognises that this has also contributed to the decision by First Scotland East to reduce dramatically its services in Lothian and Midlothian, with the potential loss of around 200 jobs; believes that the Scottish Government has failed to listen to the concerns of operators, bus service workers and passengers; urges ministers to take action to address the immediate problems of the industry, including urgently revisiting the 17% cut in the Bus Service Operators Grant, and instead begin proper negotiations with operators to ensure that the scheme is sustained at a level that does not threaten services, jobs and high fare increases, and believes that new legislation is required to enable the regulation of bus services in Scotland to ensure sustainable and reliable bus services throughout the country.
09:29
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Elaine Smith)
Lab
Good morning. The first item of business is a debate on motion S4M-02639, in the name of Elaine Murray, on transport. I advise members that the debate is tig...
Elaine Murray (Dumfriesshire) (Lab)
Lab
Scottish Labour selected the topic of bus services for a debate on 26 January. We bring it back for discussion today because, in the intervening 12 weeks, th...
Christine Grahame (Midlothian South, Tweeddale and Lauderdale) (SNP)
SNP
For what purpose did the member ask for that if Labour is not considering changing the present situation?
Elaine Murray
Lab
For the purpose of considering what is said in evidence to the Finance Committee. It is necessary to assess all the evidence. Mr Neil misquoted me—anyone can...
The Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure and Capital Investment (Alex Neil)
SNP
As it is clear that the member watched “Sunday Politics Scotland”, will she answer the question that Mr Baker could not answer and tell us what Labour would ...
Elaine Murray
Lab
Mr Baker answered the cabinet secretary’s question; indeed, Mr Rennie answered it, too, but the cabinet secretary was too busy shouting over them to listen t...
Christine Grahame
SNP
Will the member take another intervention?
Elaine Murray
Lab
No—I will get on.The budget has returned to £192 million this year, where it will remain for the rest of the spending review period, according to the spendin...
Mark McDonald (North East Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
Does the member agree with Ellis Thorpe, the Labour candidate for Inverurie and district, who said in The Press and Journal on 4 April:“Arguably the problem ...
Elaine Murray
Lab
I do not even know whether that quote is about the BSOG. If it is about the BSOG, I disagree with it, so that is fine.Paul Thomas, the managing director of F...
The Minister for Housing and Transport (Keith Brown)
SNP
The member mentions other parties. Tim O’Toole, the chief executive of FirstGroup, has said that“underlying weakness ... led to this performance”.He identifi...
Elaine Murray
Lab
If the minister bothered to read our motion, he would see that we identify any number of factors, of which the BSOG is one. I am giving him the evidence on t...
The Minister for Housing and Transport (Keith Brown)
SNP
As Elaine Murray said, the previous debate that we had on buses was held in Parliament on 26 January 2012. At that time, we had a fairly wide-ranging discuss...
Jim Hume (South Scotland) (LD)
LD
I want to correct the minister. Willie Rennie stated on “Sunday Politics Scotland”, and my amendment states, that consequentials of some £7 million this year...
Keith Brown
SNP
I have lost track of the number of times that the Liberal Democrats have spent the consequentials that have been allocated.It is important to acknowledge tha...
Richard Baker (North East Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
What has happened in Wales is a matter for the Welsh Assembly. The Welsh Government has listened to the concerns about the cut in the grant there and imposed...
Keith Brown
SNP
I have different information. I read a publication this week that stated:“Labour meanwhile blames the SNP for bus cuts and pretends that it would end deregul...
Elaine Murray
Lab
Will the member give way?
Keith Brown
SNP
I will let the member in once I have made some progress. I have mentioned the £85 million and the £1 billion. Labour has not identified one penny of the mone...
Elaine Murray
Lab
Can the minister give me the source of the quote that he read out about Wales?
Keith Brown
SNP
The source is this week’s edition of Private Eye. I will give the member a copy if she likes. Laughter. Obviously, those on the Labour benches are avid reade...
Kezia Dugdale (Lothian) (Lab)
Lab
The minister is two thirds of the way through his speech and has so far shown no empathy whatsoever for the people who are affected by the service cuts. What...
Keith Brown
SNP
I might have done that if I had not been intervened on so much, so I am happy to get to that point.Some of the coverage in the papers has been disappointing....
Jim Hume (South Scotland) (LD)
LD
Earlier in the year, when bus operators were still coming to terms with the proposed 17 per cent cut to the bus service operators grant, they were informed o...
Alex Neil
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Jim Hume
LD
I have hardly started, but I am always delighted to take an intervention from Alex Neil.
Alex Neil
SNP
Will the member join me in asking the UK Government to reverse the crazy decision that was announced in the budget to have a further hike in fuel duty from 1...
Jim Hume
LD
I do not think that the bus operators would agree with that. First and Stagecoach have highlighted that the change to grant funding has major implications in...
Mark McDonald
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Jim Hume
LD
I have hardly started.Apparently, environmental reasons are the rationale behind the move. That is what we have been told. In January, the minister stated th...