Chamber and committees

I acknowledge that I was at that meeting on 29 May.

Antisocial behaviour is up 5 per cent in the past year, and e-bikes and e-scooters are playing a huge role in encouraging it. Trail bikes and souped-up e-bikes and e-scooters are tearing around the streets, often in a very dangerous manner, and are repeatedly being used to facilitate home break-ins, shoplifting and car thefts. My constituents are fed up.

Meanwhile, the police are powerless. They do not give chase, and they lack the required resources to stop them. If the bikes are seized, they are more often than not handed back.

Minister, enough is enough. Do you not agree that it is time that we got tough on this sort of crime, and that we should provide the police with real resources to tackle it?

With due respect, Mr Ruskell, I have only 30 seconds left and I have tons to say.

I have no doubt that the removal of the free bus pass for under-22s would make a difference. Therefore, I would like the pass to be taken away from those who are responsible for significant antisocial behaviour. I hope that the minister will provide an update on where we are with that. The First Minister has said that work is under way to develop a system that would strip under-22s of their entitlement following repeated bad behaviour, and I look forward to that being implemented.

First—I was going to call you First Minister, Presiding Officer.

Right now, there is a great opportunity to allow our young people and their voices to influence our transport for the future, and I am delighted that the debate has taken place this afternoon. I again thank Sarah Boyack for the opportunity to speak on this important issue.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. My app would not refresh; I would have voted no.

Lothian Buses has done an awful lot of study and data analysis—it is the only bus company to have done that—and its research shows a direct correlation between the increase in antisocial behaviour and violence on the buses and the introduction of the under-22 bus pass. I cannot hide from that.

I extend my thanks to Sarah Boyack for securing the motion for debate in the chamber and congratulate the Scottish Youth Parliament on its work, which is about reinforcing the importance of youth voices in discussions about our country’s transport needs. We cannot disagree with the statement that public transport should be affordable, safe, accessible and reliable, not just for young people, but for everyone across Lothian and Scotland. In Edinburgh and the Lothians, we are lucky enough to have an award-winning, first-rate bus service, Lothian Buses. However, other parts of the country are not so fortunate and suffer from extremely limited bus services and infrastructure. In some cases, there are no bus services.

We all know the importance of good transport links for the Scottish economy and businesses, but they play a key role in our social development. Dr Allan outlined some specific challenges in our island and rural communities, and some of my colleagues in the Scottish Conservatives tell me about the limitations in rural areas because of the lack of public transport. That inequality is not acceptable. We need good transport links to form the backbone of our communities. They link people to work, education and leisure, and they offer a direct alternative to car travel. The benefits of good public transport are particularly important for young people’s access to social, educational and employment opportunities, while it also gives them independence. Access to colleges, universities, apprenticeships and work is so important for young people as they grow into young adults.

The young person’s under-22 bus travel scheme has attracted a huge number of participants and has increased our young people’s mobility. However, I will talk a bit about the challenges. Most people who use the under-22 scheme exercise their participation thoughtfully, but some groups of youths are abusing the scheme to engage in antisocial behaviour. The actions of the very disruptive minority are unacceptable and we must be prepared to tackle antisocial behaviour head on. As the shadow cabinet secretary for transport in the Scottish Parliament, I spent an evening on patrol with Lothian Buses and Police Scotland, and I witnessed at first hand the growing problems of antisocial behaviour and heard the views of drivers and passengers.

Not at the moment.

That fact is one of the reasons why so many people are reluctant to get back to office working, and that decision has a direct correlation with the recovery of town and city centre economies.

The SNP’s decision to reintroduce peak fares across ScotRail trains last year was a disastrous decision, which served to punish hard-working Scots, especially those businesses and employees who were just considering returning to work to kick-start their business performance and increase productivity. We campaigned against that. Despite being defeated on a Scottish Conservative motion on the issue last year—a year ago almost to the day—the SNP refused to budge. Its members claimed at the time that abolishing peak fares permanently was unaffordable.

Perhaps I am far too cynical, but the timing of the U-turn did not really come as a surprise to me. The Government was desperate for a good news story and desperate to take full credit—we have seen that modus operandi before from the SNP. However, I am thrilled with the SNP’s latest U-turn, which is long overdue. The Scottish Conservatives have always said that we would permanently scrap peak rail fares to ease the burden on hard-working Scots.

Today’s debate is also about improving rail connections throughout Scotland. That is not just about the regional benefits—it is a national priority. We need to enhance the infrastructure to not only foster local community cohesion but bolster the entire country’s transport network. Passengers have been let down by SNP mismanagement. It is common sense to link new railway developments to future centres of population growth, and the SNP Government must outline how it plans to link the railway with growing towns and villages across the country.

Will the member take an intervention?

I think that we can all agree on the importance of rail to the Scottish economy and Scottish business, such as in the transportation of whisky and fresh produce, as well as on the importance of rail to the future decarbonisation of transport. Rail also plays a key role in Scotland’s social development. Our railways have long been a backbone of our communities, linking people to work, education and leisure while offering a critical environmental alternative to car travel.

Rather than simply celebrating past achievements, however, the Scottish Conservative amendment calls for a forward-looking strategy that will ensure that the needs of the public and the wider economy are met.

It is vital that the Scottish Government ensures that value for money and passenger satisfaction remain at the forefront of railway delivery in Scotland. The Scottish National Party promised an improved ScotRail when it nationalised the rail service more than three years ago, yet, under the SNP, public transport has become unreliable and far too expensive. Ticket prices and the number of complaints have soared, while the number of services and the number of passengers have plummeted. Indeed, there is not a single mention in the Scottish Government motion of the stark fact that our rail services have never quite got back to offering anything like the same level of service that they offered pre-Covid.

This is part and parcel of today’s debate. The motion that the SNP has lodged looks back. I want to look forward to the future.

Winchburgh is a perfect example of a place that would benefit from a train station; I have been pushing for that in this Parliament for some years now. Winchburgh is a vibrant and growing community in West Lothian, and it desperately needs to be connected to the rail network. The establishment of a new railway station would enhance connectivity, ease traffic congestion in West Lothian and the west of Edinburgh, and support our ambitions to provide sustainable transport solutions. There will be 4,000 new families living there, and they will need that connection.

A new station in Winchburgh is essential. It is not only a necessity to alleviate mounting congestion but critical for the Scottish Government to meet its failing net zero ambitions. That is also true of investment in the Almond chord line, because, if investment was made there, it would make Edinburgh Gateway station, in which £41 million was invested, look like less of a white elephant. The Almond chord line would connect services from Fife to the west of Scotland and, with all the new houses that are being built in west Edinburgh, I know that commuters are crying out for that to be considered.

However, there is no future plan today. In the debate, we are celebrating stations that have come into service, but there is no detail on what stations will come in the future. The Blindwells development in East Lothian will result in 10,000 new homes, but, despite the east coast main line running through that stretch of what is an ever-expanding commuter area, there is only one train per hour. The homes are being touted as commutable to Edinburgh, but it seems that going by car will be far more preferable to taking the train. Residents are buying homes there because they are in easy reach of Edinburgh for social and leisure activities, but they will have to drive. We need to help those people to make the decision to use public transport.

The Scottish Government motion makes no mention at all of new rail building for those vital new communities and homes. Instead, there are dire warnings about threats to the Scottish ministers’ powers. When she closes the debate, perhaps the cabinet secretary might outline what will be done to accelerate badly needed investment in our rail infrastructure, instead of displaying the customary foot dragging that slows up so many practical and cost-effective schemes such as Winchburgh and the Almond chord.

We need investment in the train fleet, which is ageing, and our assets, which are in need of renewal. The future development of our railway is currently hindered by its ageing 19th century infrastructure—we cannot hide from that; it is a fact—and the ageing ScotRail fleet. Joanne Maguire, the director of ScotRail, has said:

“We have got another challenge with ageing—that’s our fleet. We have one of the oldest fleets in Britain.”

On key intercity routes, the reliability of the InterCity 125 fleet has been a persistent disappointment and has led to overcrowding and service disruptions. Rural lines face equally significant challenges. Iconic routes such as the west Highland and far north lines remain plagued by outdated infrastructure and limited amenities, despite our scenic railways holding immense untapped potential.

The Scottish Government is committed to spending in excess of £6 billion on new road capacity on corridors from Perth and Aberdeen to Inverness, yet no similar ambition exists for parallel rail routes. The Highland main line has been left with infrastructure that the Victorians would recognise, while an Aberdeen city deal promise that £200 million would be spent on faster line speeds north of Dundee has been reneged on.

It is vital that the SNP outlines how it plans to future proof the rail network. We have heard about the importance of the supply chain from organisations that are concerned about boom and bust in the investment cycles. The sector faces real uncertainty due to the boom and bust that is part of the cyclical nature of rail infrastructure spending. Businesses want to see a consistent long-term plan so that they can invest in this country, but, as I said, instability hinders long-term planning and discourages new talent from entering the industry.

I have also heard that skills shortages are an issue and that workforce retention is challenging. A notable portion of the rail workforce—9.4 per cent in the past year alone, especially from supplier firms—has exited the industry, and that is causing a critical loss of expertise. Without a steady pipeline of projects, companies struggle to invest in the staff recruitment and training that are needed.

In her opening remarks, the cabinet secretary mentioned the crucial nature of growth in rail freight. That is a strategic priority, but rail faces challenges with cost competitiveness when compared with road transport, especially following the abolition of a key freight support grant for 2024-25. Capacity constraints on critical cross-border and internal routes are hampering growth in rail freight.

There are also challenges with asset renewal. In addition to the cost of the trains themselves, there is significant inflation to contend with, and the supply chain disruptions are challenging.

I have just clocked the time, so I will conclude. We must focus on putting passengers first, cutting waste in bloated quangos, tightening spending rules and focusing every penny on delivering a safe, reliable and modern railway that delivers value for money for taxpayers, commuters, businesses and our economy.

I move amendment S6M-18763.1, to leave out from first “welcomes” to end and insert:

“urges the Scottish Government to ensure that value-for-money and passenger satisfaction remain at the forefront of railway delivery in Scotland; notes that the cross-party support for the removal of peak rail fares was made possible thanks to a Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party motion that called on the Scottish Government to remove them; recognises the importance of rail to the Scottish economy and business, such as in the transportation of whisky and fresh produce, and agrees that rail is important to the future decarbonisation of transport; notes that new railway developments should be linked to future centres of population growth, such as at Winchburgh, and calls on the Scottish Government to outline how it plans to deliver upgraded rail links in existing towns and villages, and connect those that do not have a rail link; recognises that future development of the railway in Scotland is hindered by aging 19th century infrastructure; calls on the Scottish Government to outline how it plans to future-proof the rail network, and urges the Scottish and UK governments to outline how they will work together to deliver private investment in the rail network.”