Holyrood, made browsable

Hansard

Every contribution to the Official Report — chamber and committee — searchable in one place. Pulled from data.parliament.scot, indexed for full-text search, linked through to every MSP.

129
Current MSPs
415
MSPs ever elected
13
Parties on record
2,355,091
Hansard contributions
1999–2026
Coverage span
Official Report

Search Hansard contributions

Clear
Showing 0 of 2,355,091 contributions in session S6, 16 Apr 2026 – 16 May 2026. Latest 30 days: 148. Coverage: 12 May 1999 — 14 May 2026.

No contributions match those filters.

← Back to list
Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 06 June 2024

06 Jun 2024 · S6 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Rail Fares

I remind members of my voluntary register of trade union interests, and I thank Mark Ruskell for bringing this important debate to the chamber.

Let me start with some basic facts. This year, the Scottish Government has abandoned its 2030 climate change targets—that is a fact. This year, the Scottish Government’s budget for trunk roads is up by 25 per cent, to over £1 billion. It is up by 25 per cent—that is a fact. This year, the Scottish Government’s budget for rail services has been cut by 10 per cent and is now below £1 billion. It has been slashed by 10 per cent—that is a fact. And, this year, the Scottish Government has put rail fares on ScotRail up by nearly twice the rate of inflation, by 8.7 per cent—that is a fact. Peak fares pilots or not, price-sensitive travellers, including some of the poorest passengers, will have stopped using public transport.

Just two weeks ago, the new First Minister, in his first major speech, told us all of his commitment to transparency and openness, highlighting

“the importance of Parliament in scrutinising our record and our plans.”—[Official Report, 22 May 2024; c 24.]

But when it comes to Transport Scotland’s evaluation of this policy, which was presented to Parliament two days ago, I have to say that it is completely lacking in crucial detail and lacking in critical evidence, meaning that Parliament can scrutinise neither the record nor the plan.

So, six months into the trial, we do not know whether there has been an increase in rail travel at peak times, in particular, or, if so, whether it has varied by region. We do not know the impact that the pilot has had on rail travel for passengers who already travel off peak. We do not know to what extent it has got people out of their cars and on to public transport. We do not know because there were 50 million train journeys over the period that was covered by the Transport Scotland report and yet there were fewer than 1,500 responses to the Transport Scotland survey. So, we do not know.

What we do know is that, because of the 8.7 per cent rise in ScotRail fares on 1 April this year, if peak fares were reintroduced to our railways, ticket prices would skyrocket. It would mean that a day return between Dundee and Edinburgh would go up by 22 per cent during peak times. From Ardrossan harbour to Glasgow, the fare would go up by 38 per cent, and, on Scotland’s flagship service between Glasgow and Edinburgh, the price of a day return ticket would shoot up by as much as 48.4 per cent—a near 50 per cent rise overnight. That would, in my view, be reckless, but it would also be heartless, and it would be completely unnecessary.

Back in March, in Parliament, the Cabinet Secretary for Transport spoke of

“medium to longer-term rail fares reform”,

of

“our ambitions on net zero”,

of the need for

“more radical and bold initiatives”,

and of public transport as

“a key enabler for growth and opportunity”.—[Official Report, 28 March 2024; c 54-55, 95.]

These are all reasons why the off-peak fares trial needs to be made permanent and why there can be no going back.

Finally, there is something else. The “Fair Fares Review” report concluded this year that

“Rail fares are extremely complex with a range of products (sometimes as many as ten fare types for one journey depending on where and when the journey is being made).”

It reasoned:

“Passenger research has shown that confusion over buying the right ticket type is acting as a barrier to encouraging modal shift from car to rail.”

That is why the integration of ticketing, which has been promised for the past 12 years but is still awaited, must be introduced. It is why the staff on our trains and in our railway stations must stay. It is why the scrapping of peak fares on our railways must stay, and it is why our ticket offices must stay open as well.

In the same item of business

The Deputy Presiding Officer (Liam McArthur) LD
The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-13270, in the name of Mark Ruskell, on permanently ending peak rail fares on ScotRail. ...
Mark Ruskell (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Green) Green
I thank members for signing the motion, and I thank those who have stayed to debate it.
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
Please resume your seat Mr Ruskell. I ask those leaving the public gallery to do so as quickly and quietly as possible. Mr Ruskell, please resume.
Mark Ruskell Green
They may be running for their trains. Last Wednesday, I was delighted to join passengers on the first train to Leven and Cameron Bridge since 1969. The Cabi...
John Mason (Glasgow Shettleston) (SNP) SNP
Mark Ruskell talks about investment. Does he or anyone else know what the cost of the off-peak rail fare pilot is or is likely to be? That will be a factor i...
Mark Ruskell Green
John Mason makes a good point. There was an allocation in this year’s budget, but it is, of course, a changing picture. It depends on how many people get bac...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
We move to the open debate. 12:55
Emma Harper (South Scotland) (SNP) SNP
I welcome the opportunity to speak in the debate, and I congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing it. I will keep my contribution brief. The removal of the peak...
Graham Simpson (Central Scotland) (Con) Con
I congratulate Mark Ruskell on securing the debate. I was very happy to sign his motion, because I agree with every word of it. The removal of peak fares on...
Graham Simpson Con
I see that Mr Ruskell wants to make an intervention, and I am happy to take it.
Mark Ruskell Green
I am enjoying hearing Graham Simpson’s not just acceptance but enthusiasm for green policies, but I am interested in what his views are on demand management....
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
Begin winding up, please.
Graham Simpson Con
I will close by answering that point. My view is that I am more of a carrots man than a sticks man. The kind of proposal that Mark Ruskell has come up wit...
Alex Rowley (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Lab) Lab
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in the debate and to Mark Ruskell for lodging the motion. As an MSP and Scottish Labour’s transport spokesperson, ...
Mark Ruskell Green
I thank Alex Rowley for his mention of the unions. I met the four unions again on Monday. They told me that, from the perspective of workers, the scheme has ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
I will give you the time back, Mr Rowley.
Alex Rowley Lab
As well as speaking to rail unions, from speaking to rail workers when using the trains, and from speaking to passengers, it is clear that the policy is posi...
Ross Greer (West Scotland) (Green) Green
As other members have done, I thank Mark Ruskell for giving us the opportunity to debate the policy today. I am proud that the Scottish Greens were able to s...
Richard Leonard (Central Scotland) (Lab) Lab
I remind members of my voluntary register of trade union interests, and I thank Mark Ruskell for bringing this important debate to the chamber. Let me start...
Ross Greer Green
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. Richard Leonard quite rightly referred to his entry in the register of members’ interests, which made me realise that...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
Thank you, Mr Greer. That is now on the record. I invite Fiona Hyslop to respond to the debate. 13:20
The Cabinet Secretary for Transport (Fiona Hyslop) SNP
I thank Mark Ruskell for lodging the motion and all members for their contributions. I, too, recognise the role of trade unions in calling for this policy, a...
Patrick Harvie (Glasgow) (Green) Green
Does the cabinet secretary agree that, however much information the assessment, or a final report, can currently give us, it will be an assessment only of th...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
Cabinet secretary, I can give you the time back.
Fiona Hyslop SNP
Patrick Harvie makes a reasonable point. As he knows, it was after the Bute house agreement ended that I took the decision, along with colleagues, to extend ...
The Deputy Presiding Officer LD
That concludes the debate. 13:28 Meeting suspended. 14:00 On resuming—