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
There is provision in the bill to allow a local authority to suspend the provisions of an LEZ for a particular event to take place. If there was to be a parade of historic military vehicles, for example, the local authority could suspend the LEZ to allow that to happen. There is provision in the bill to allow a council to do that. As I mentioned, my officials have been undertaking extensive work with interested parties. A stakeholder workshop on the topic of regulations was hosted by Transport Scotland last month, and it included the issue of exemptions. A detailed report of findings from the workshop will be published shortly. That approach is helping us to gather a full picture from key interest groups and to test opinion properly in a considered forum. I am happy to update Parliament on how that develops as we move towards stage 3, but we need to give that process some space and to avoid addressing the issue of exemptions in a piecemeal fashion. 10:15 Amendments 56 and 57, which do not relate to vehicle type, have been lodged by the Government to address issues that were raised with us during stage 1. It seems not to be appropriate that, in the event of an unavoidable road closure that might divert traffic into an LEZ, a registered keeper of a non-compliant vehicle would receive a penalty when they had no alternative but to enter the LEZ. Amendment 56 will allow local authorities to create time-limited exemptions for such scenarios. However, the amendment has been drafted to ensure that the exemption would apply only if the driver entered the LEZ “following a signed diversion”. The four cities LEZ consistency group is comprised of representatives from Aberdeen, Dundee, Edinburgh and Glasgow. It told my officials that it would not be desirable for the appeals process to be used in such scenarios, and that its primary function should be reviews or appeals in connection with alleged erroneous issuing of penalty charge notices. We have, therefore, acted on the matter. Amendment 57 is consequential on amendment 56 and will allow local authorities to make time-limited exemptions for road closures, subject to conditions or restrictions. Amendment 203 also concerns time-limited exemptions. It aims to remove the one-year time limit for exemptions other than those for road closures, thereby leaving them open-ended. I think that a time limit is appropriate, to make it clear that such exemptions should not carry on indefinitely and to encourage people, particularly fleet operators that receive a time-limited exemption, to prepare for LEZ compliance in the shortest time possible.
In the same item of business
The Convener
Con
Agenda item 2 is consideration of stage 2 amendments to the Transport (Scotland) Bill. I welcome the Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Infrastructure and Con...
The Convener
Con
Amendment 40, in the name of Colin Smyth, is in a group on its own.
Colin Smyth (South Scotland) (Lab)
Lab
Amendment 40 sets out key principles that I believe should be at the heart of our transport system. The Transport (Scotland) Bill provides an opportunity to ...
Stewart Stevenson (Banffshire and Buchan Coast) (SNP)
SNP
I have a number of comments about the way in which this amendment is constructed. Subsection (2)(a) says: “transport is a key enabler for the realisation of...
Jamie Greene (West Scotland) (Con)
Con
I thank Colin Smyth for lodging his amendment. It is a good start to the session. There are some admirable intentions in the wording. Delivering public tr...
John Finnie (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Green
Like others, I think that the principles are admirable and I support them. I listened to what Mr Stevenson said, but that would not preclude support—or clari...
The Cabinet Secretary for Transport, Infrastructure and Connectivity (Michael Matheson)
SNP
I welcome the fact that Mr Smyth’s amendment looks at transport in its wider strategic context, because it is easy to get bogged down in the detail of legisl...
The Convener
Con
Thank you for that comprehensive explanation.
Colin Smyth
Lab
As a nation, I think that we have lost sight of the bigger picture of what our transport system should be about, as was mentioned. In particular, there is th...
The Convener
Con
Amendment 32, in the name of Jamie Greene, is grouped with amendments 220 and 201.
Jamie Greene
Con
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...
Colin Smyth
Lab
Amendment 220, in my name, introduces a definition of the purpose of an LEZ, which was one of the committee’s recommendations at stage 1. Amendment 220 helps...
Stewart Stevenson
SNP
Like Colin Smyth, I think that the omission of the PM10 particles from Jamie Greene’s amendment 32 is quite serious. I had a quick look at the legislation th...
John Finnie
Green
Jamie Greene’s amendment 32 is the first of a series of amendments that, despite his apparent enthusiasm for low-emission zones, dilute the purpose of the bi...
Michael Matheson
SNP
Amendments 32, 220 and 201 call for the purpose of an LEZ to be included in the bill. In my view, the amendments are too restrictive. Amendment 32 would set ...
Jamie Greene
Con
I thank members for their comments and for the spirit in which their feedback was given. The purpose of amendment 32 was not to be overly prescriptive and u...
Colin Smyth
Lab
In the light of the cabinet secretary’s commitment to work on the wording of a potential amendment at stage 3, I will not move amendment 220. Amendment 220 ...
The Convener
Con
The next group is on low-emission zones: exemptions. Amendment 221, in the name of Rachael Hamilton, is grouped with amendments 33, 34, 2, 30, 31, 203, 56, 5...
Rachael Hamilton (Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con)
Con
I recognise the importance of low-emission zones and the purpose that they will strive to achieve in relation to air quality. However, community transport o...
Jamie Greene
Con
I will be happy to support Rachael Hamilton’s amendment 221 and amendments 30 and 31, in the name of Murdo Fraser—I am sure that Murdo will speak eloquently ...
John Finnie
Green
Jamie Greene says that he has no view one way or another, although he has lodged the amendment. Is that your position?
Jamie Greene
Con
Yes. Let me explain why. It is for the Government to take a view on whether diplomatic vehicles should be exempt from paying the fees. I am trying to ensure ...
Richard Lyle (Uddingston and Bellshill) (SNP)
SNP
I declare that I am the convener of the cross-party group on the Scottish Showmen’s Guild. I support the introduction of low-emission zones in cities, towns...
The Convener
Con
Oh, well. There you go, Mr Lyle.
Murdo Fraser (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)
Con
Like other members, I support the principle of LEZs. My amendment 30 is intended to exempt historic vehicles from the rules on LEZs—a historic vehicle being ...
Michael Matheson
SNP
We heard a lot of views on proposed LEZ exemptions during stage 1, and there have been some interesting additional proposals made by members this morning. I ...
Richard Lyle
SNP
This provision might answer every call for an exemption, including mine. Under the heading, “Time-limited exemptions”, section 12 of the bill says: “A low e...
Michael Matheson
SNP
There is provision in the bill to allow a local authority to suspend the provisions of an LEZ for a particular event to take place. If there was to be a para...
Jamie Greene
Con
I am finding the discussion to be extremely helpful and useful. However, in relation to permanent exemptions, amendment 203 and time-limited exemptions, Mr L...
Michael Matheson
SNP
I can see where your confusion arises. It is because the exemptions will be dealt with by regulation. The work that we are currently undertaking will, rather...