Chamber and committees

I am grateful.

Does the minister agree that, if a mother has to give birth to a child that is going to be born asleep, that should happen in a separate area, and that we should strive to reach that goal as soon as we can in every hospital and maternity service in Scotland?

Absolutely, and that is why we need to get rid of the SNP-Labour administration in the May elections and have a Conservative-led administration in the city that will implement the policy properly. Nevertheless, the minister makes a fair point. The policy that Labour and SNP councillors implemented in Edinburgh was a direct result of legislation that was passed in this Parliament. The two are not separated.

What has been worst about the spaces for people scheme is that it has caused massive problems for the most vulnerable people in our city. There was no consultation on the implementation of the scheme. When older people, disabled people and mums with prams pointed out the dangers of the scheme, they were ignored completely.

Will the minister take an intervention on that point?

I am going to carry on for the moment.

With fewer parking spaces in town for people who have low mobility, the scheme, in effect, excludes many disabled people from town centres and high streets. That is not to mention the barriers that have been erected, which create further obstacles to street crossing and other activities for people with visual impairment or other physical impairments.

Spaces for people was supposed to create room for more active travel, but for disabled people in Edinburgh it has served to do nothing more than alienate them and cause stress. Once again, ideologically and dogmatically driven policies from the Government have come at the cost of detriment to the disabled community in Edinburgh and other parts of Scotland.

I am sure that Liam Kerr will address that point in his closing statement, but I absolutely agree that, where disabled people are affected, proper consultation is needed before the schemes are brought in, rather than afterwards. That has not happened in Edinburgh. I have no doubt that the scheme was started with noble intentions, but the reality is that it has failed. It needs to be scrapped and started again.

Even worse than that, cycle lanes have been imposed where there is one already in place. A few weeks ago, Mr Harvie turned up at Roseburn Terrace to look at the new cycle lane that has been put in there. That cycle lane has been hotly contested—I know that because I was a local councillor for the area for many years—but they have now decided to close down the shops and we are seeing the economic impact of that.

There was a cycle path 20 yards away that was already being used. That cycle path may have needed slight upgrading, and there may have needed to be a slightly better way to reach it, but the path was already there and being used by cyclists. The City of Edinburgh Council’s dogma was, “Let’s make it more difficult for shop owners. Let’s make it more difficult for local people to shop. Let’s stop older and disabled people from getting to nearby shops by putting up more barriers, having more road works and causing more problems.” That is a ridiculous policy.

When the minister sums up, I would be interested in hearing him clarify two points. First, how many disabled charities has he met to discuss active travel? Secondly, can he confirm that the access bikes scheme, which was launched in September 2021 to provide loans to allow people to purchase their own bike, has not had anyone sign up for it yet?

Will the minister give way?

Active travel is a great thing. It is functional and healthy, and it allows us to experience the physical and mental benefits of exercise while going about our daily lives. One of the small benefits of the past two years was the opportunity that I had during lockdown to spend more time walking and enjoying the countryside around me.

Active travel should be promoted and prioritised. However, the Scottish Government’s record on it seems flimsy and slapdash at best. That record involves either not following through on policies or implementing policies that have often been counter-productive in respect of actually helping people to engage in active travel. A prime example is the spaces for people initiative and the way that it has been implemented in the capital city. It has wreaked havoc for those on whom it has been imposed.

This year, I sent out a survey with my annual report. It asked people to list the three biggest issues for them in the whole of Lothian. What came back as the number 1 issue, by miles, was the need to get rid of the spaces for people scheme. Not only had it affected cars and people, but, ultimately, and even worse, it had affected health.

The school that my daughters go to is on a main road. Normally, the traffic is heavy but it keeps moving. When the spaces for people scheme was put in, it took literally 10 minutes to go 20 yards. Buses, cars and everything came to a standstill because of the scheme. The pollution that occurred outside a major primary school, affecting children’s health, was a direct result of the implementation of that policy by the SNP-Labour administration in Edinburgh.

Does the minister understand that there is genuine anger in the disability community when things are imposed without any consultation, as has happened here in Edinburgh? How can the disability community be heard? It wants to play a constructive role, but it is simply not being listened to, or being asked its opinion. Can he suggest to me and other disabled people why councils do not engage before schemes are imposed?

Will the minister take an intervention on that point?

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I always look forward to Ms Chapman’s speeches, but my understanding is that members are meant to be in the chamber for opening speeches if they are taking part in the debate, and I do not think that Maggie Chapman was here for any of the opening speeches. I wonder whether that is a problem with regard to hearing her today.