Chamber and committees

I will stay on the subject of concessionary travel and other investment in bus services, although we have discussed that at length. Some facts and figures about investment have been put on the record. I note that, as was mentioned, the main way that money is leveraged into the sector is through the concessionary fare scheme, which amounts to £414 million. The bus infrastructure fund is more modest at £20 million, but it is established, and we want to see multiyear funding and a long-term commitment to the network support grant.

In relation to the £414 million of funding for concessionary travel, which the convener mentioned, there was a 67 per cent real-terms increase in funding for concessionary travel between 2006-07 and 2023-24, but there has been only a 13.5 per cent increase in the number of concessionary travel trips taken, so there seems to be a sizeable disconnect between the investment and the number of trips that are taken, even though what we are talking about is all desirable. If we add all the money together, is it working in the most effective way that it can? Are there other ways to spend the money? How could it be better used or deployed?

That is a very open question. I think that it makes sense to go to Sara Collier first.

I am focusing my questions on you because I think that the wider issue has been well explored with the other witnesses. If the grant were to be uprated, should the Government, local authorities and strategic transport authorities get something back for the uprating, or should we just uprate it without any conditions being attached?

I have more questions to ask later, but do any of the other witnesses have any comments about the quantum of public cash that is going into bus services, mainly, but not exclusively, through concessionary travel funding? How could that funding best be used, or tweaked, to get better or more desirable outcomes?

If no one wants to put anything on the record, that is fine—if you do, though, now would be a good time to do it. Are you all comfortable with that investment? Are things all going as intended? I am not trying to create an issue if there is not one—I am just looking for clarity. Are there no concerns about a 67 per cent real-terms increase in funding for the concessionary travel scheme, given that there has been only a 13.5 per cent increase in the number of trips taken through it?

I do not want the witnesses to misinterpret my questions as meaning that I am not supportive of all this. My job is to interrogate whether we are getting the spend right.

Sara Collier, I know that it was not you who said this, but there is a perception, which I will challenge slightly, that the easiest way to get the biggest reduction in car usage is in large urban areas, where the services currently exist. That might be true, but that is where the most substantial investment might also be required. As a non-driver with a family, and as a regular bus user in Maryhill and across the north of Glasgow, I know well the congestion on the routes on Maryhill Road, Great Western Road and Dumbarton Road. We all play the game of looking at the interactive timetable to see when the bus is likely to appear—first, it is five minutes, then eight, then seven and so on as the bus gets clogged up at Cowcaddens or on Byres Road or Queen Margaret Drive. I also know that the buses are bursting at the seams when they arrive.

The first thing that should probably happen in large urban areas is that the quality of services are improved for those who already use them. I suspect that if there were modal change, and people got out of cars to use those bus services, they would do so for only a short period of time and then not use them again.

This might take us back to the infrastructure fund, but do you have any comments about how we first get services running well in large urban areas, before we talk about those services being the game changer in getting people out of cars? Is the picture that I have painted of some people’s experience of using buses in large urban areas a reasonable one?

I will move on. I have put on public record what I think is important in urban areas and for my constituents.

How can the Scottish Government rethink its development of a new car use reduction target and policy? The previous target was abolished, because achieving it was not seen as realistic. There is an interim 4 per cent car mileage reduction target out there, but I understand that the Scottish Government is developing a new, more substantive policy.

Professor Davis, you have already put on record all the push factors involved in achieving modal shift from car to other forms of transport, including active travel. I will not ask you about that, but what would a realistic target look like? If there is any push factor that you have not yet put on the record, now is your opportunity to do so.

Okay. I think that you are answering a different question from the one that I asked, but you have put that on the record.

My final question is for all of the witnesses. Is there a contradiction in trying to incentivise the use of electric vehicles while looking to reduce car usage? On the one hand, we are trying to promote the use of low-carbon vehicles, but, on the other, we are trying to get more people to drive certain types of cars. Is there anything that the Government has been mindful of in its strategy in relation to that?

I am finished, convener. My apologies for the dreadfully rushed questioning.

I might squeeze out some of your colleagues by coming back in, and I will take Kim Pratt as the second person to volunteer. Earlier, you spoke about the need for capacity to process all that stuff, but is that separate from those issues?

Thank you. I agree with all that. I am sorry that we were not able to have a discussion; it was almost like a speed-dating session. Kim, do you have anything to add?

My concern is that the first tranche of investment should be used to improve services for those who already use buses. Tonight, I will probably have to stand on a bus to get back to my home from Glasgow city centre, because of capacity issues. I do not blame the bus companies—I know that finances are tight and it is not easy to magic up a new bus service. It is not just one bus, either; it takes four buses to complete the route, which means additional drivers and significant costs. Is the first step to get it right for existing users before we can realistically talk about getting people to switch from cars to buses?