Chamber and committees

I am not sure. I might ask my officials about the car kilometre metric but car use—

Our evidence is the increase in public transport use.

I think that we will need to drop the target, or change it—“change” is probably the appropriate word. As I said in my opening remarks, we still want to support car use reduction. That is still an important part of what we want to do, but the figure of 20 per cent is not realistic and will need to be changed. Therefore, we will take the advice that we are expecting to receive in May from the Climate Change Committee—I have told you what the CCC has already said to the UK Government—and that will steer us.

That will not change our focus and drive to make a difference in policy terms and to work with local government, but it will make the target more realistic and therefore more achievable. We are in a different situation from the one that we were in in December 2020; we have had different experiences and demands. We can still make the difference that is needed to achieve our climate change targets. As I have set out, we are still committed to doing that and to achieving net zero by 2045. The climate change plan that will be developed following the advice in May will help us to deliver that.

My understanding is that, when it comes to the overall measurement, the Department for Transport always uses kilometres, because that is an international metric, but the issue that we have here is how we connect with people and take them with us. I genuinely believe that we need to make the target more realisable and understandable. I would prefer to talk about a 20 per cent reduction in car use generally. That will still be measured in kilometres, but we can talk about miles if people relate more to that and what it means.

We could also interpret that as saying that, if someone was commuting by car five days a week, Monday to Friday, and they voluntarily decided, as part of a behavioural change, to travel by train one day a week, we could look at that as a 20 per cent reduction in their car use for commuting. The issue is partly about how we take people with us and communicate what they can do individually, and that is where carrots and sticks come in. People have to want to volunteer to do that.

Lots of different things can be done on an individual basis. For example, a family that owns several cars taking the decision to reduce its car ownership can help with behavioural change. Lots of things can also be done with councils, which are already doing a lot of activity, particularly in cities.

I talk about a 20 per cent reduction in car use, because language matters, and I think that that will help us to take people with us in our action.

I agree, but, unfortunately, the Department for Transport, which helps with our data measurements, used kilometres under the UK Conservative Government and still uses them under the new UK Labour Government.

As you are aware, I became the Minister for Transport in June 2023, so I am looking back at what happened. As you know, that target was first set out in the climate change plan update in December 2020, and it had to be aligned with our commitment to evidence-based policy making. An extensive period of evidence appraisal took place prior to a public commitment being made on car use.

The evidence that informed the adoption of the target included the Scottish TIMES model, independent modelling on decarbonising the Scottish transport sector, published academic material, international evidence and the UK Climate Change Committee’s evidence on the requirements for a modal shift. The UK Climate Change Committee forecast that a 10 per cent shift away from car use was needed to meet the UK’s net zero ambitions at that time, but work by Professor Jillian Anable from the University of Leeds institute for transport studies suggested that a reduction in car use of between 20 per cent and 60 per cent would be required. All those different pieces of evidence formed the evidence base that informed the target, which was very ambitious and required transformational change.

As the convener pointed out, at that time—December 2020—we were in the pandemic period, when there had been quite a change, so it was probably not unreasonable to think that the world could change and that we could meet the target, even though it was ambitious. People might have different views, but that was the context in which the target was first set, and it was subject to a 12-week consultation thereafter. I, too, wanted to ensure that I was aware of the origins of the target, which I have set out.

I think that that is her title—I do not want to mis-title her. We have engagement, but, by and large, the funding for transport will come from the budget that we currently hold in devolved areas.

We have more charging points per head of population than any other part of the UK outside the south-east of England, and we have more rapid chargers. I go back to the point about the geography of Scotland and the fact that the funding that has been provided for local authority consortiums has also been supplemented by rural and island EV funding.

I am suffering a bit.

There are two things. How do we take people with us? We need to get people to look at reducing their car use. Longer journeys contribute more to car kilometres. I would be better bringing in my officials to speak to the analysis of the data, but that is measured by agreed metrics that are used in Department for Transport assessments. Remember, I gave you the figure of 3.6 per cent reduction to date and that figure comes from using those data metrics. The issue then is that we cannot distil our individual policies on DFT metrics, if that makes sense. Does anyone want to help me on this?