Meeting of the Parliament 01 March 2016
Before I give my opening speech to Parliament, I thank Sandra White for her opening speech and the commendable work that she has put into developing the Footway Parking and Double Parking (Scotland) Bill in a complex subject area that we all acknowledge is challenging.
Kevin Stewart is right to say that it was Sandra White’s tenacious approach that has led to the bill coming this far and to a Government commitment to continue it into the next parliamentary session. Indeed, any incoming Government will now recognise that there is a great deal of consensus in Parliament on the issue and will want to take it forward.
Parking is an important issue for many people and is subject to a variety of acts and regulations. The bill aims to introduce clear prohibitions, while allowing for various qualifications and exceptions. Those aims align with our key strategic transport policy of improving the quality, accessibility and affordability of transport. The Government is committed to promoting, supporting and advancing the rights of non-motorised users to ensure that our roads and footpaths are accessible for all.
As part of the Local Government and Regeneration Committee’s stage 1 inquiry, it received almost 4,000 responses to an online questionnaire and 63 submissions to its written evidence stage, all of which highlights just how much people are concerned about obstructive and irresponsible parking. Enter Cameron Buchanan, YouTube star—who knew?
The committee concluded in its stage 1 report that it is content with the general principles of the member’s bill, and I share that view. Having said that, I acknowledge that a number of issues still require to be worked through, particularly the issue of this Parliament’s powers to legislate on the matter.
After the bill’s introduction, the Presiding Officer issued a statement stating that, in her view, the bill is outwith the current legislative competence of the Scottish Parliament. That statement has raised doubt about whether any act that flows from the bill will be fully within the legislative competence of the Parliament.
While there may be differing legal views on whether Parliament could legislate competently in this area, as the legislation may give rise to financial penalties and potential criminality it is absolutely essential that all doubt is removed. That is why the Scottish and UK Governments have agreed the general approach to the amendment of the Scotland Bill that seeks to address the legislative competence issues raised by the Presiding Officer.
The principal amendment was laid on 24 February and we are working with the UK Government on further minor and technical amendments to deliver the appropriate competence to the Scottish Parliament. As has been said before, it is not our preference to have legislation made in the House of Lords in relation to Scotland, but it is welcome that we have made this progress. However, any agreed amendments will not be in force before this Parliament is dissolved.
In addition to the legislative competence issues, the committee heard evidence from local authorities, Police Scotland and businesses, which have stressed the need for more detailed consideration on the implementation and enforcement of the bill’s provisions. I also acknowledge the committee’s concerns about the challenges facing many local authorities in managing Scotland’s roads to ensure that they work effectively for pedestrians and cyclists as well as motorists and businesses.
Sandra White acknowledged those concerns and the fact that the bill as drafted does not cover all roads in Scotland. We have to look at the challenging priorities in relation to the residential nature of many of our streets around town centres and not shunt the problem to another area, as has been described. That is why a careful consultation and fuller consideration will be required on some of the traffic management and planning issues.