Hansard

I am grateful to Donald Gorrie and Robin Harper for introducing their amendments. In a sense, I would like to accept the challenge that Donald has thrown out to take up the principle of home zones and to improve on it. I strongly support what he is trying to deliver with amendment 265.

We all accept that, although it has brought immense personal freedom and mobility for some, the car also has a downside. Rates of child accidents and serious injury are particularly important considerations, and we know that those rates increase with car speeds. We have a target of reducing road accidents in general by 40 per cent, and road accidents involving children by 50 per cent, over the next decade. That is an area in which home zones could play an important part—by enabling children to play safely in the street.

We believe that maintaining and developing vibrant communities is important. Home zones could provide an environment in which the roads outside people's houses can be used safely for a variety of purposes and not just for access by people coming and going in cars. It is important for children to be able to play safely, particularly where they may not have access to private gardens. There are a lot of important issues buried in the title of home zones.

My final point concerns access to health and the benefits that come with sustainable transport. Walking and cycling do not create pollution, they cause no congestion and they provide good exercise; but if they are to use those options, people need to feel safe on the roads. We feel that home zones could be part of a wider network of approaches to making our roads safer.

We support the intention behind amendment 265. I advise Fiona McLeod that four pilot schemes, which I launched in August this year, are examining the before, during and after experience, so that we can learn what works, and what does not work, for future reference.

Donald Gorrie's proposals, as drafted, are not acceptable to us for a number of reasons and I want to take them away to reframe them. There is a technical problem in subsection (1), which refers to prohibiting driving "at the speed specified" in a speed limit order, rather than above "the speed specified". There are no powers to make regulations for the procedures that local authorities should follow when designating home zones or those that should be followed if objections to proposals are maintained.

We all talk about home zones being a good thing, but it is important to have a process for involving and consulting local communities on proposed home zones. While I welcome Donald Gorrie's idea that local authorities should be required to crack on and get going with a home zone within six months of its designation, it might be a bit of a risk to give them the discretion to put in the measures that they "deem appropriate".

The last thing we want is for local authorities to put up signs only; other home zone design solutions must be considered. We want to ensure that home zones in an area do not exist as a name only but that they reflect features that make them special and that pick up the point Donald Gorrie made about people perhaps feeling safe, but having a false sense of security. We need a rigorous approach. In my view, guidance issued by the Executive would allow local authorities to pursue these proposals in an informed way.

Robin Harper's amendments—amendments 265A, 265B and 265C—fall into two categories. Bruce Crawford did not speak to amendment 265A, which extends the list of criteria in subsection (2) of amendment 265. I will come back to that issue.

Amendments 265A and 265C introduce the concept of "quiet lanes" which, in our view, is an English phenomenon of quiet, rural routes, as most of the Scottish rural road network is different. Fife Council is a good example of a local authority that is considering the management of its rural roads under existing roads legislation by providing local access and preventing through access. I do not think that the suggested designation is necessary. I will consider the issue further in the run-up to stage 3, but I am not convinced that designating roads as "quiet lanes" meets Scottish needs.

The DETR's Transport Bill contains provisions to enable the UK secretary of state to review the operation of speed limits on rural roads and to report on that review within 12 months. The review will consider whether it is necessary to amend the law to facilitate the introduction of rural road hierarchies. A rural road hierarchy is a system under which rural roads are categorised by the local traffic authority by reference to the ways in which they are used, with the option of consider applying different speed limits to different categories of rural road.

Speed limits are reserved; consequently, the secretary of state's review will cover all of Great Britain. We must keep an eye on that review, but it will not require us to have quiet lanes in Scotland—there is more than one way to skin a cat.

I agree with the objectives that Donald Gorrie and Robin Harper are trying to achieve in relation to home zones. The Transport (Scotland) Bill provides the legislative opportunity for giving statutory weight to home zones, which can be rolled out from the pilots that are already running in Scotland. I am keen to lodge amendments at stage 3 but, rather than simply give that general commitment, I will outline briefly what I intend to do at stage 3 so that members are able to understand why I am asking Donald Gorrie not to press his amendment today.

First, local authorities already have delegated powers to introduce 20 mph speed limits without reference to Scottish ministers. I am keen to extend those powers to 10 mph speed limits where the local authority intends to use them in conjunction with a home zone. It is important that we use this opportunity to tie those powers to statutory home zones.

Secondly, I want to ensure that local authorities follow a set of proper procedures when designating home zones. My amendment at stage 3 will contain powers to enable ministers to make regulations. I take Donald Gorrie's point about the words "may" and "will". The purpose of my amendment will be to introduce regulations that allow local authorities to get on and designate home zones.

It is important that where there are objections to an authority's proposal, and they are maintained, the proposal comes to Scottish ministers for final determination. That is the same approach as we take with other types of road order, such as stopping-up or redetermination orders. It enables local people to feel that their views are being taken on board and considered fairly.

Thirdly, I propose that ministers be empowered to issue guidance on criteria for home zones and that authorities be required to have regard to that guidance. That is important where a 10 mph home zone is being considered, since authorities will have delegated powers to do that. We need to ensure that the authority takes advantage of those new powers properly and that it delivers a real home zone, not just one in name only. That addresses the points that several members have expressed concerns about. I will consider carefully the criteria that Donald Gorrie and Robin Harper propose, many of which I agree with, in making sure that we get the criteria correct.

I also envisage issuing guidance on the detailed measures that might be implemented. It would be non-statutory, as circumstances vary widely across the country, and I would not want to prescribe exactly in each case what local authorities should do, but I will ensure that they have a list of best-practice options that come from the pilots that we are currently running. I want to ensure that local authorities deliver and do not just promise, so it is important that there is a time limit between the designation of a home zone and its installation. However, I want to make sure that this is not just about new signs and that design features are put in place to ensure that home zones are safe for people to use.

I will consider further giving pedestrians and cyclists precedence over vehicles in home zones. That approach has not been adopted by the DETR. In terms of road safety and people using our roads network, obvious issues arise from having in Scotland an approach that is different from that in the rest of the UK. I want to reflect on that further, so I am not giving a commitment to include this issue in the amendments that I will lodge at stage 3. I will consider the matter carefully and think about what such a measure would mean in practice. I am not giving a commitment to include the measure in my amendments, but I will give a commitment to consider it.

I hope that I have given the committee a helpful indication of the shape of the amendments that I intend to lodge at stage 3 and the points that I intend to take from amendment 265. I hope also that I have given some useful notice of the home zone entitlement that we intend to introduce.