Chamber and committees

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?

I think that you asked whether we accept the report, and the report has recommendations on the job of Government. The Public Audit Committee does this all the time; its role is to look at what Audit Scotland is recommending. We are taking forward the recommendations in the report.

On the findings, I can question a number of issues. For example, there was consultation when the climate plan was produced in December 2020 that included that ambitious target. That ambitious target is the challenge. We had ambitious targets to try to reach.

On leadership, I have explained that there have been changes in leadership not only at Government level but at local government level. There has been a change in the cohort of councillors during the period.

Did we have a plan? Yes. We had the draft route map that was produced in February 2022. There was extensive consultation and involvement, including of the leadership of Transport Scotland, the relevant ministers and the relevant COSLA and local council representatives at that time, during that period for delivery.

All the things that can and could be done—such as developing guidance and the toolbox and all the things that we would expect as part of that—have been worked on and developed. However, the key issue is about getting approval for what is a bold and ambitious target to deliver on. Are we doing things to help deliver it? Yes. Have we provided leadership? Yes, we have.

Almost half, if not more, of the general public across Scotland have free access to buses through the most generous concession system. Are we ensuring that there is resource and funding in the budget to help with active travel and bus priorities in these difficult times? Yes, we are. The Government has done a variety of things to provide leadership.

To boil down to the specific issue of the ambitious target of reducing car kilometres, there were challenges in providing an agreed route map and delivery at all levels. The central issue is that the Government cannot do this on its own. I am not blaming local government at all—it has a place and perspective and is absolutely key to delivery. However, if local government is not comfortable with what is put in front of it, we have to respond to that.

Has that caused a delay with regard to the plan, the route map and so on? Yes, it has. Would we have a different route map if we are trying to achieve a 20 per cent reduction, whether that is in miles, kilometres or use, compared to what we would do to achieve what the Climate Change Committee has advised the UK Government? We are still awaiting the advice to Scotland but, if that changes, of course our route map and delivery plan will change.

We are still committed to car use reduction, even though the vast majority of emissions reductions will be met by other means. Also, as you know, we do not have control over some of the issues that are in the report. Some of the major issues are about motoring taxation, such as road tax and fuel duty. On that specific point, from the start, I have actively engaged with transport ministers in the previous Conservative Government and now the Labour Government. I am also seeking agreement with Welsh and Northern Irish ministers. We have discussed the issue at the British-Irish Council, because some of the issues will need a four-nation approach to have the best effect. I am very keen for that approach to help in this area, but it has to be done collectively.

There has by no means been an absence of activity, but has there been agreement? That is the core issue in the report: has there been collective agreement on a way forward? We have not been able to achieve that, despite how positively received the draft route map was in January 2022.