Chamber and committees

Magic carpets. That is something else to check out, convener.

Before I ask you about community engagement, I want to push back a bit on your view about flooding. You will correct me if I am wrong, but what I picked up from what you said is that you think that flooding is driven entirely by climate change. I am not disputing that climate change is a factor, but exhibit 2 in your report sets out various reasons for flooding. There is river flooding, surface water flooding, erosion-enhanced flooding, coastal flooding and groundwater flooding. We have also spoken about housing developments, which can exacerbate the risk of flooding. Therefore, do you accept that, although climate change is a factor, it is not the only thing that can cause flooding?

I will go on to community engagement briefly. We have touched on it a bit. Paragraph 77 on page 33 of your report says:

“Overall, there are major barriers to meaningful engagement for both public bodies and communities. This includes issues and barriers around consultations on major flood schemes”—

we have just spoken about one—

“as well as engagement around broader resilience activity.”

Will you provide some detail on what the “barriers to meaningful engagement” are?

Do you have any examples of that disinterest?

I want to follow on from Jamie Greene’s line of questioning and ask you about a specific project that you mention in the report: the Grangemouth flood protection scheme. It is a very good example of what we have talked about, which is how costs have spiralled and responsibilities have changed. In 2015, the cost was estimated to be £108 million; now, it is as much as £672 million, and the scheme is not off the ground yet.

A task force has been set up that involves Falkirk Council, which clearly cannot afford even a fraction of that sum, and the Scottish Government. I will give you some figures that tell you about the scheme’s massive size: it will provide around 17 miles of flood defences, which will involve walls, embankments and floodgates; and it will protect more than 6,000 people, 2,700 homes, 1,200 commercial properties and 14 miles of roads in the surrounding area. What is your understanding of the situation and how the scheme should be progressed?

That is a comprehensive answer. I am very aware of the time, and I know that Mr Brown is itching to get in, but I have one more question on this subject. When someone is a victim of flooding, they need instant information and help, probably from the council—they want it to step in. Have you uncovered any issues with community engagement, or lack of it, in that respect?

The furlough scheme is very welcome, but it is contingent on the company providing evidence of orders. When does the Deputy First Minister need to see that evidence? How many orders are needed to meet the requirements of the scheme?

I just want to be clear on the wording of the amendment. Perhaps Sharon Dowey can clear this up. The amendment says that, if there is a victim statement, it

“must be read aloud in court”.

That is the wording of the amendment. Irrespective of whether a victim wants their statement to be read out, it “must be” read aloud. Is that correct?

I thank Sarah Boyack for bringing the debate to the chamber. The background to it was a great piece of collaboration between the cross-party group on sustainable transport and the Scottish Youth Parliament. It was a really good example of how a cross-party group can be effective in the Parliament.

The cross-party group held an inquiry into inequalities in transport. Transport has a vital role in delivering a fairer society and enabling everyone in Scotland to have equal access to daily life, work, education and community wellbeing. However, there are gaps in the current system, which mean that women, children, disabled people and low-income households do not have equal access to transport. Those groups experience barriers that are related to cost, availability, safety and convenience of the transport network. We must create a fair and reliable transport system that everyone can access.

We held a series of valuable evidence sessions to consider those different experiences when it comes to accessing transport. Each of the groups raised issues, which included unaffordable fares, poor transport connectivity, inaccessible services and safety concerns. All those issues have been mentioned during the debate already.

Our report made a number of recommendations to the Scottish Government and transport authorities to achieve a transport system that works for everyone. Those include

“defining transport poverty and better data collection and metrics to facilitate better monitoring”.

We also called for

“transport authorities to implement lived experience participation with those most affected by transport inequalities.”

The Scottish Youth Parliament and Sustrans presented to the CPG meeting in October 2024, and they both highlighted the critical role of transport in shaping the lives of younger people. As we have heard, we had great presentations from David McGilp MSYP and Islay Jackson MSYP—two fantastic and impressive young people. They outlined the youth perspective on public transport, building on their all aboard campaign, which helped to secure free public transport for under-22s. They emphasised the importance of making transport accessible to all young people, especially those in rural and island communities. They called for the extension of the free travel scheme to people up to the age of 26—they did not put a cost on that, I have to say—and recommended improvements in affordability, accessibility and frequency of public transport services. A key theme that emerged from the question-and-answer session was the critical need to involve young people in transport decision-making processes.

The free bus travel scheme for under-22s has made a significant difference to the lives of young people, but challenges remain around the availability and reliability of services. Earlier this year, I joined the Transport, Environment and Rural Affairs Committee of the Scottish Youth Parliament to discuss transport and young people. It called for more reliable and frequent services, safer waiting areas, better route planning and the ending of negative attitudes towards young passengers.

It has been fantastic to work with members of the Scottish Youth Parliament and it behoves us all to listen to young people when we are designing public services such as transport.

How old were you?