Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Committee

Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee 05 June 2019

05 Jun 2019 · S5 · Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee

Item of business

Transport (Scotland) Bill: Stage 2

Greene, Jamie Con West Scotland Watch on SPTV

In relation to low-emission zones, I want to add from the outset a primary objective that sets out a clear purpose that each zone should follow. Amendment 32 stipulates: “The purpose of a low emission zone … is to reduce the transport-related emissions and … particulate matter within and in the vicinity of the zone.” The wording has been lifted from the National Emission Ceilings Regulations 2018, which is United Kingdom legislation that transposes a European Union directive of a similar name and nature and that provides an up-to-date definition of emission standards that is consistent across the UK and Europe. I realise that the amendment seems rather detailed and specific, but I feel that it is necessary for part 1 of the bill to contain an overarching and specific purpose. My rationale for that is threefold. First, it would remove any ambiguity over what the zones are for and what they are trying to achieve. In my view, the whole point of low-emission zones is to improve air quality within and in proximity to the zone. Reducing congestion, improving average road speeds and generating revenue for local authorities are all by-products of zones, but I want public support for the zones and I want to take drivers and other road users with us on the journey. We need to make it clear to them that the measure is not just a tax on motorists and that the zones will have a positive and measurable impact on their cities. Secondly, a defined purpose would allow us to monitor the success or otherwise of a zone. If nitrogen oxide emissions and particulate matter levels do not fall as a result of a zone, something is amiss. If we have a vague definition of what the zone is for, it will be virtually impossible to ascertain whether it has been successful and achieved its aims. When the committee questioned representatives of Nottingham City Council over the workplace parking levy, they found it difficult to pinpoint the specific environmental benefits of the measure, as it is part of a package of measures. Instead, the levy is seen largely as a revenue-generating activity, which low-emission zones are not—and nor should they be. Thirdly, I have lodged later amendments that would mean that the revenue that was generated from fines under a zone would have to go towards meeting the overarching objective of the zone. I hope that members agree that the bill should set out a purpose for low-emission zones. My wording tries to identify something that is measurable rather than a vague concept that is impossible to measure against or that could be used subjectively to decide whether a zone is working. I appreciate that Colin Smyth’s amendment 220 tries to do something similar, but, in my view, the wording is such that it is helpful but unmeasurable. For that reason, I think that my wording is better. 09:45 I am proposing a primary objective for the zone. Amendment 201 relates to section 9, on setting up a zone, and requires that local authorities set objectives that complement and contribute towards the primary objective of the zone. The amendment stipulates that any such secondary objectives that are set by local authorities must be aligned with the primary purpose in the bill. I move amendment 32.

Search Hansard contributions

Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee 05 June 2019

In the same item of business