Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 17 March 2011
17 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Bus Services Regulation
Today’s debate provides a timely opportunity to discuss the bus industry, assess its current status and consider what improvements can be made to ensure the delivery of bus services throughout Scotland. It is right that we do that on a regular basis.
Buses currently provide the key sustainable mass public transport, moving large numbers of people for a wide range of personal reasons at a reasonable cost. That contributes to the Government’s aims of enabling economic growth, improving social inclusion and accessibility, reducing emissions and improving air quality.
The number of bus passenger journeys made in 2009-10 amounted to 467 million, compared with 61.72 million journeys made by rail. Of those bus journeys, 151 million were made using the concessionary travel scheme: it was on that point that I tried unsuccessfully to intervene on Charlie Gordon and I will come back to it.
Bus company revenue from local bus services in 2009-10 amounted to £626 million, which reflects the substantial size of the industry in Scotland. The number of vehicle kilometres that were run in the commercial sector in Scotland in 2009-10 amounted to 300 million km, which represents 74 per cent of the total mileage for local services. That means that 79 million km of local services were subsidised by local authorities using their current powers to provide socially necessary services.
The Government’s role is to set the national policy framework and the strategic direction for bus services. The majority of bus services in Scotland are provided by the private sector operating in an open market. That encourages innovation, which can be difficult and at times risky, but can offer substantial rewards for the operators and the user.
I have been interested in the development of, for example, Lothian’s state-of-the-art fleet of buses that serve Edinburgh airport in direct competition with other modes of transport, in particular the private car. However, that level of service must be reflected in more areas—particularly in commuter areas—to encourage modal shift from the car.
As Charlie Gordon acknowledged, the Government has provided record levels of funding under the historic concordat with local authorities. We believe that local authorities are best placed to understand the transport needs in their areas. The development of a collaborative partnership between the public and private sectors is essential to the effective delivery of local services. That is particularly important during a period when resources become constrained, which is when creative and innovative solutions need to be devised to make the best use of more restricted resources.
Scotland is proud to have a manufacturer of high-quality innovative buses and to be the base for several world-class transport providers. The Government has made available a range of policy tools to local authorities to aid delivery of the bus services in their areas. They include punctuality improvement partnerships, statutory quality partnerships, park-and-ride schemes, traffic control orders, bus priority schemes, increased parking charges for private cars when that can lead to modal shift, increasing use of real-time information, tendering for socially necessary services, operating bus services under licence, and the provision of demand-responsive transport. That is not an exhaustive list of the policy options that we have used.
The important point is that a range of potential actions is available for local authorities to consider taking to meet the specific requirements and conditions in their areas. Many of the examples are delivered in Scotland, including travel planning that is being taken forward in Dundee as part of the smarter choices, smarter places initiative. The first statutory quality partnership in Scotland was put in place by Renfrewshire Council on 7 March, and another quality partnership is under development in Glasgow. A punctuality improvement partnership is in place in Dundee and it has resulted in changes in some bus priorities in the city.
Local authorities can operate services if appropriate via an operator’s licence. They can also operate local bus services under section 46 of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981, under which fare paying passengers can be carried on school bus services, or by using school bus vehicles when not in use to provide those services—I believe that Scottish Borders Council does that. The councils in Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Glasgow are considering bus lane enforcement, which was recently put out for consultation. Community transport partnerships are evident in places such as Badenoch and Strathspey, where a vital service is provided for local people. That has demonstrated how voluntary local schemes can work successfully.
Many of the tools can be adapted to meet the diverse aims of different parts of the country and, in particular, many interventions can be made for relatively little cost. Adopting a range of interventions in partnership with operators and other local authorities can deliver a synergy or step change in service delivery. That cannot be achieved overnight, but it can be developed through effective transport planning implemented determinedly over a period of years. Individual actions can be straightforward, but the more difficult part is identifying a shared idea of success and developing plans in partnership to put in place the actions needed to deliver effective transport.
We must ask what the Scottish Government has done in particular to advance the agenda. We have worked with a range of stakeholders to develop a detailed suite of guidance to enable local authorities and operators to use the policy tools that I have mentioned. They include statutory quality partnerships, punctuality improvement partnerships, guidance on competition issues related to agreements, which Charlie Gordon mentioned—it is right that the Competition Commission looks at such matters; that is the remedy that is available—park-and-ride frameworks and bus information.
In addition to those tools—and this is crucial—the Government provides substantial funding to the bus industry. I was pleased that Charlie Gordon acknowledged that. In 2010-11, more than £240 million will be spent on bus services. That includes funding for the national concessionary bus travel scheme and the bus service operators grant.
Charlie Gordon would not take my intervention, which was to find out whether the Labour Party’s position is that espoused by Richard Simpson, who said that he would cut back on concessionary travel, in particular for some groups of pensioners. It would be interesting to find out when Charlie Gordon sums up whether that is the Labour Party position. For our part, there will be £240 million spent on bus services. That also provides funding to local authorities to subsidise socially necessary services and the bus route development grant.
The Scottish Government fully supports our national concessionary bus travel scheme, which provides free local and long-distance bus travel throughout Scotland to older people and people with disabilities. That is essential to promote social inclusion and a more active lifestyle by enabling people to use the bus network to access public services, facilities and social networks. This Scottish Government has no plans to change the current eligibility for the concessionary scheme—at least, no plans to restrict it, unlike, as we have heard, the Labour Party apparently has.
Buses currently provide the key sustainable mass public transport, moving large numbers of people for a wide range of personal reasons at a reasonable cost. That contributes to the Government’s aims of enabling economic growth, improving social inclusion and accessibility, reducing emissions and improving air quality.
The number of bus passenger journeys made in 2009-10 amounted to 467 million, compared with 61.72 million journeys made by rail. Of those bus journeys, 151 million were made using the concessionary travel scheme: it was on that point that I tried unsuccessfully to intervene on Charlie Gordon and I will come back to it.
Bus company revenue from local bus services in 2009-10 amounted to £626 million, which reflects the substantial size of the industry in Scotland. The number of vehicle kilometres that were run in the commercial sector in Scotland in 2009-10 amounted to 300 million km, which represents 74 per cent of the total mileage for local services. That means that 79 million km of local services were subsidised by local authorities using their current powers to provide socially necessary services.
The Government’s role is to set the national policy framework and the strategic direction for bus services. The majority of bus services in Scotland are provided by the private sector operating in an open market. That encourages innovation, which can be difficult and at times risky, but can offer substantial rewards for the operators and the user.
I have been interested in the development of, for example, Lothian’s state-of-the-art fleet of buses that serve Edinburgh airport in direct competition with other modes of transport, in particular the private car. However, that level of service must be reflected in more areas—particularly in commuter areas—to encourage modal shift from the car.
As Charlie Gordon acknowledged, the Government has provided record levels of funding under the historic concordat with local authorities. We believe that local authorities are best placed to understand the transport needs in their areas. The development of a collaborative partnership between the public and private sectors is essential to the effective delivery of local services. That is particularly important during a period when resources become constrained, which is when creative and innovative solutions need to be devised to make the best use of more restricted resources.
Scotland is proud to have a manufacturer of high-quality innovative buses and to be the base for several world-class transport providers. The Government has made available a range of policy tools to local authorities to aid delivery of the bus services in their areas. They include punctuality improvement partnerships, statutory quality partnerships, park-and-ride schemes, traffic control orders, bus priority schemes, increased parking charges for private cars when that can lead to modal shift, increasing use of real-time information, tendering for socially necessary services, operating bus services under licence, and the provision of demand-responsive transport. That is not an exhaustive list of the policy options that we have used.
The important point is that a range of potential actions is available for local authorities to consider taking to meet the specific requirements and conditions in their areas. Many of the examples are delivered in Scotland, including travel planning that is being taken forward in Dundee as part of the smarter choices, smarter places initiative. The first statutory quality partnership in Scotland was put in place by Renfrewshire Council on 7 March, and another quality partnership is under development in Glasgow. A punctuality improvement partnership is in place in Dundee and it has resulted in changes in some bus priorities in the city.
Local authorities can operate services if appropriate via an operator’s licence. They can also operate local bus services under section 46 of the Public Passenger Vehicles Act 1981, under which fare paying passengers can be carried on school bus services, or by using school bus vehicles when not in use to provide those services—I believe that Scottish Borders Council does that. The councils in Edinburgh, Aberdeen and Glasgow are considering bus lane enforcement, which was recently put out for consultation. Community transport partnerships are evident in places such as Badenoch and Strathspey, where a vital service is provided for local people. That has demonstrated how voluntary local schemes can work successfully.
Many of the tools can be adapted to meet the diverse aims of different parts of the country and, in particular, many interventions can be made for relatively little cost. Adopting a range of interventions in partnership with operators and other local authorities can deliver a synergy or step change in service delivery. That cannot be achieved overnight, but it can be developed through effective transport planning implemented determinedly over a period of years. Individual actions can be straightforward, but the more difficult part is identifying a shared idea of success and developing plans in partnership to put in place the actions needed to deliver effective transport.
We must ask what the Scottish Government has done in particular to advance the agenda. We have worked with a range of stakeholders to develop a detailed suite of guidance to enable local authorities and operators to use the policy tools that I have mentioned. They include statutory quality partnerships, punctuality improvement partnerships, guidance on competition issues related to agreements, which Charlie Gordon mentioned—it is right that the Competition Commission looks at such matters; that is the remedy that is available—park-and-ride frameworks and bus information.
In addition to those tools—and this is crucial—the Government provides substantial funding to the bus industry. I was pleased that Charlie Gordon acknowledged that. In 2010-11, more than £240 million will be spent on bus services. That includes funding for the national concessionary bus travel scheme and the bus service operators grant.
Charlie Gordon would not take my intervention, which was to find out whether the Labour Party’s position is that espoused by Richard Simpson, who said that he would cut back on concessionary travel, in particular for some groups of pensioners. It would be interesting to find out when Charlie Gordon sums up whether that is the Labour Party position. For our part, there will be £240 million spent on bus services. That also provides funding to local authorities to subsidise socially necessary services and the bus route development grant.
The Scottish Government fully supports our national concessionary bus travel scheme, which provides free local and long-distance bus travel throughout Scotland to older people and people with disabilities. That is essential to promote social inclusion and a more active lifestyle by enabling people to use the bus network to access public services, facilities and social networks. This Scottish Government has no plans to change the current eligibility for the concessionary scheme—at least, no plans to restrict it, unlike, as we have heard, the Labour Party apparently has.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson)
NPA
Good morning. The first item of business this morning is a Labour Party debate on motion S3M-8177, in the name of Charlie Gordon, on transport.09:15
Charlie Gordon (Glasgow Cathcart) (Lab)
Lab
Our previous full-scale debate on local bus services was way back on 12 June 2008. That is not to say that Labour has not campaigned relentlessly before and ...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
I am intrigued by Charlie Gordon’s direction of travel. He complains about market failure, but he seems to be suggesting that he is looking for market monopo...
Charlie Gordon
Lab
Not for the first time, Mr Brown is wrong. If he listens for a bit longer, he will learn.The traffic commissioner continued:“Thus, Edinburgh has Lothian Bus ...
The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure (Keith Brown)
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Charlie Gordon
Lab
I am sorry, but I do not have time: maybe later. I pressed Mr Swinney at that meeting by asking:“Are you now saying that the deal that was done”—that was the...
The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure (Keith Brown)
SNP
Today’s debate provides a timely opportunity to discuss the bus industry, assess its current status and consider what improvements can be made to ensure the ...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab)
Lab
What?
Keith Brown
SNP
It is on record.Earlier this year, we agreed changes to the reimbursement rate with the Confederation of Passenger Transport that make the scheme more sustai...
Jackson Carlaw (West of Scotland) (Con)
Con
I was intrigued when news filtered out that Labour was to set aside the whole of this morning’s debate—the last major debate of this parliamentary session—fo...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green)
Green
Will the member give way?
Jackson Carlaw
Con
I do not think that I will, today.Scotland’s bus industry is an important private sector contributor to our gross domestic product at a time when there is ar...
Alison McInnes (North East Scotland) (LD)
LD
As Jackson Carlaw said, we have been here before. It is a bit like groundhog day.Charlie Gordon has revisited a proposal that he knows has no majority suppor...
Keith Brown
SNP
Does Alison McInnes acknowledge that the bus route development scheme was not abolished, but was given to local authorities and mainstreamed into their funding?
Alison McInnes
LD
It has been disaggregated to the point at which it is of little value to anyone. It is not enough to roll out new services and it has not been used in that w...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab)
Lab
I thank Jackson Carlaw for his comments, as I have seldom had so many compliments in one speech. However, for the record, I am more of a Cliff Richard girl t...
Stewart Stevenson (Banff and Buchan) (SNP)
SNP
Let me declare a personal interest in the debate: I am a bus card holder. I note that the only bus card holders who are likely to participate in the debate a...
Elaine Smith (Coatbridge and Chryston) (Lab)
Lab
The issue of transport, and in particular buses, is extremely important to people in my constituency and in similar communities throughout Scotland that rely...
Stewart Stevenson
SNP
Will Elaine Smith take an intervention?
Elaine Smith
Lab
No, thank you—Stewart Stevenson had the opportunity as a minister to put guards on the trains.In a transport debate, I cannot miss the opportunity to mention...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan)
SNP
Order. I hope that Elaine Smith will return to buses, which seem to me to be the subject of the motion.
Elaine Smith
Lab
I certainly will, but we need to consider transport in the round to see how important buses are.The number of trains from Coatbridge to Edinburgh on the new ...
Rob Gibson (Highlands and Islands) (SNP)
SNP
For the avoidance of doubt, the question of bus regulation was not ever in the SNP manifesto.In the debate, we are trying to look forward to find ways to ens...
Robert Brown (Glasgow) (LD)
LD
I am grateful to Charlie Gordon for focusing on bus travel in the last party debate before the election. However, as I said in an intervention, there is a co...
Charlie Gordon
Lab
I cited the transport commissioner, who described most of the bus scene in Scotland as a monopoly and near-monopoly city and county arrangement. Does the mem...
Robert Brown
LD
No, I am trying to put the issue into context and to explain the deficiency at the heart of the member’s proposition.I will say a little more about Glasgow. ...
Keith Brown
SNP
Could Robert Brown explain how his party’s policy of doing away with concessionary travel support will help more women to use the buses?
Robert Brown
LD
Perhaps the minister should read the policy. We have certainly said that there is a need to consider whether people such as me are entitled—as Stewart Steven...
Des McNulty (Clydebank and Milngavie) (Lab)
Lab
A fortnight ago, we had a by-election in Clydebank—in the Duntocher, Faifley and Hardgate ward. The key issue in that by-election was buses, specifically the...
Christopher Harvie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP)
SNP
I declare that I am president of the Scottish Association for Public Transport, which has provided a memo for members setting out a useful range of pragmatic...