Chamber and committees

Indeed. If I can have a tiny bit of time to make up for that intervention, I will be able to come to that in a moment.

I will briefly touch on comments that were made about community transport organisations, such as the Glenfarg Community Transport Group. Community transport makes a major contribution to reducing isolation and increasing community access for people who would otherwise be unable to use conventional bus services, or where suitable services are too limited. The Scottish Government provides funding to the Community Transport Association to develop and advise the sector in Scotland. Community transport is just one part of the answer to Katy Clark’s valid questions about public versus private provision. She assertively made the case for public ownership. Jeremy Balfour seemed to make the case equally clearly, but possibly accidentally. Either way, the Scottish Government’s policies and plans continue to develop to give local authorities the flexible tools that Paul Sweeney has rightly said they need in order to address transport issues.

Through the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019, local transport authorities have the power to run their own bus services. Further secondary legislation to allow bus franchising and partnership working will be introduced later this year.

As there is time for one more intervention, I will be happy to take it.

We recognise that Scotland is not a single homogeneous entity; there are different needs in different contexts in various parts of the country, and we should take that into account. A point has also been made that, although buses that are run by the private sector might operate well in some places and badly in others, a great deal of their revenue and capital investment comes from the public purse. Mark Ruskell touched on conditionality and how we make sure that we get good value for public investment, which will be critical regardless of whether services are run by the public sector, the third sector or the private sector.

We encourage local authorities to consider the range of powers that exist for them under the 2019 act and to make sure that they are used fully so that they can deliver good-quality bus services for local communities. In addition, the community bus fund will provide support for local transport authorities to assess the options to improve services in their areas. We are working actively with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and other partners to develop the detail of that fund and to work on plans for its delivery.

During the debate, we have heard different views, but it is clear we have a shared understanding of the importance of having a modern, affordable and accessible bus service for all of Scotland. I thank Mark Ruskell for securing the debate in the chamber and members for their contributions.

Without casting aspersions on the motivation of the right-wing press for the stunt that they undertook, I hope that the party that often casts itself as the supporter of individual liberty will respect the fact that the matter is one of individual choice. I fully respect Russell Findlay’s decision to wear a helmet, if that makes him feel safer, and I hope that he respects my choice.

The cost that we have committed to is £320 million or at least 10 per cent of the transport budget by the year 2024-25. Over the longer term, the sky is the limit in terms of the transformation that we could make in communities right across Scotland.

As we take that work forward, inclusion must be at the heart of our active travel policy, not just by creating better infrastructure but by working to close the mobility gap and meet the diverse needs of a diverse community. One example is the work of our delivery partners Cycling UK, which has formed a partnership with Spinal Injuries Scotland to develop a fleet of accessible and adaptable e-bikes that let people with spinal injuries and other mobility issues participate in cycling every day on journeys that many cyclists would take for granted—just going to the shops, commuting to work or attending an appointment. We should not accept that accessibility issues mean that someone cannot make an active travel journey.

In contrast with the priorities that held for so many decades, walking, wheeling and cycling are at the top of our sustainable travel hierarchy, which, in turn, informs our priorities for investment and policy decisions.

This year, I am again funding the Ian Findlay paths fund, which is named after the former chief officer of Paths for All who tragically passed away in 2021. The fund supports small local projects to make improvements to existing walking infrastructure and to make connections where there are gaps in local path networks.

I am very pleased to be able to announce today the launch of the £1.5 million active nation fund. The fund will make grants of up to £200,000 available to a range of public, third and community-sector organisations that are looking to scale up successful behaviour change interventions, enabling people to drive less and to walk, wheel or cycle as part of their everyday short journeys.

That is only a narrow sample of the wide range of activity across Scotland that is already happening. A lot of that work is still in the pipeline, and I cannot wait to join thousands of other people in seeing the benefits.

That rising investment has already had positive outcomes. To give just one example, a scheme at Garscube Road in the north-west of Glasgow, which was funded through our places for everyone programme, resulted in a 300 per cent increase in the number of cyclists using the road, demonstrating the demand for safe spaces and connected routes. Also, just last week, research that was funded by the Scottish Government showed that the numbers of children walking, wheeling and cycling to their schools are now higher than they were before the pandemic, with almost 50 per cent of pupils getting to school actively.

Just a few minutes ago, one of the member’s colleagues asked me whether I agree that we should not tell local authorities how to use money that is provided for them. Is he now saying that we should dictate from the centre how money should be used locally? Surely he can recognise that there is a case for decentralising that decision making.

The active travel transformation fund is available for councils to bid for. They can bring their projects forward and that money will be spent on delivering them.

The fund will deliver projects right across Scotland. An example is the £1.6 million to deliver phase 2 of the Alva academy link in Clackmannanshire, which will not only improve active travel for local children but will provide links to key employment centres that support about 1,000 workers. The fund will help to address transport poverty. It will also enable safe travel in rural communities. In Habost on the Isle of Lewis, we will provide £175,000 to connect the village with the local school.

We have been clear in our desire to develop the fund through a partnership approach, both directly with delivery bodies and through the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities. I want to say how grateful I am for the constructive work of our partners, which is helping to ensure that the fund meets local needs wherever possible.

I am afraid that I am coming to the end of my speech and I need to wind up.

It will also revitalise local economies in many places that are still in recovery from the Covid pandemic.

For us to ensure that we have a fit-for-purpose delivery model for active travel to meet those challenges and capitalise on the opportunities, we have undertaken a review of our whole approach in the delivery models. The transformation fund is a vital first step in that, and further changes that will follow will require not just support and funding from the Scottish Government but strong leadership and a strong approach to working collaboratively with our delivery partners.

I will finish by reflecting on what Mark Ruskell said about how much of the progress that we are making is possible only because of a movement of people demanding change and looking to reclaim their places for people instead of for vehicles. That is entirely true. On its own, the Scottish Government cannot deliver that without the community leadership that we can empower around the country. I encourage members to continue to engage with their local communities. Together we can ensure that the transformation of active travel reaches across Scotland and that the benefits are felt in every city, town, village and household. To do that, we will need that joined-up approach and the Scottish Government, local authorities and communities will need to work together to address all the issues that members have mentioned, and a great deal more besides.

Once again, I thank members for their contribution to the debate and I encourage them to take the opportunities that the Scottish Government active travel funding brings to their communities by working with them to create leadership and bring forward excellent projects that we can fund for the future.

I am sure that we can all recognise the member’s community’s claim to fame on that.

Although e-bikes are not my first choice, they are one of the many ways in which we can increase the range of bikes and active travel vehicles that people can access. Not only do e-bikes have potential to change the way in which people move about but e-cargo bikes also have huge potential to change the way in which goods move about.

The Labour amendment finishes with a point that we cannot support. It slightly unreasonably cherry picks the data to compare active travel to school with figures for the previous year, which the same report recognises was strongly impacted by Covid. The pandemic had a particular impact on school travel, so it is not reasonable to make a comparison with that year. The fact is that we now have higher levels of active travel to school than pre-pandemic. We are determined to continue making progress with the improvement in that long-term trend.

I will if it is brief. I need to make some progress.