Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee

Meeting date: Wednesday, September 28, 2016

Official Report 414KB pdf

---

Proposed Seat Belts on School Transport (Scotland) Bill

Welcome, everyone, to the fifth meeting in 2016 of the Rural Economy and Connectivity Committee. I remind everyone who is present to switch off their mobile phones. No apologies have been received.

The first item on the agenda is consideration of a statement of reasons relating to the proposed seat belts on school transport (Scotland) bill. Before introducing a member’s bill, the member must first lodge a draft proposal and then a final proposal. The draft proposal must be accompanied either by a consultation document or by a statement of reasons on why the member does not consider consultation necessary. That statement is subject to scrutiny by a committee.

Gillian Martin, the member in charge of the proposed bill, has submitted a statement of reasons for the committee’s consideration. According to rule 9.14.6 of the standing orders, when a draft proposal accompanied by a statement of reasons is referred to a committee, the committee must decide whether it is satisfied with the reasons given by the member for not consulting on the draft proposal.

I welcome Gillian Martin and Brendan Rooney, who is the road safety policy officer at Transport Scotland. I invite Gillian Martin to make a brief statement on the bill and its consultation.

Good morning, everyone. I thank the committee for this opportunity to set out my proposal to legislate for the inclusion of seat belts in all dedicated school transport. It is my firm belief that the safety of our children and young people is a responsibility that we all share. As a parent and a member of the Scottish Parliament who represents a rural community, I am acutely aware of the important role that the journey to and from school can play in those efforts. That is why I propose to introduce the bill, which will increase the safety of children throughout Scotland.

Local authorities have certain duties to provide dedicated home-to-school transport for entitled pupils, and that is also regularly seen in the independent school sector. Such transport is often delivered through contracts with private bus operators, although there is currently no legal obligation for seat belts to be fitted in such transport, despite the well-established safety benefits that they can provide in a road traffic accident. The proposed legislation is intended to address that. Many councils in Scotland already provide dedicated school transport with seat belts and ensure that seat belts are stipulated as a condition in contracts. I want to build on that good work, making such practice universal so that all pupils on such journeys benefit from this important safeguard.

As I set out in my statement of reasons before the committee, the issue has some history. It emanates from considerations by the Public Petitions Committee and follows the devolution of power that was secured last year by the previous Scottish Government Administration. Additionally, an extensive consultation was carried out from March to June this year, in which views were garnered from individuals and organisations with an interest, such as parents, schools, individuals, local authorities and bus companies. A comprehensive analysis was published last month. Given how fresh and current that consultation is, it is my view that a further consultation seems unnecessary and would simply duplicate responses from the same respondents on an issue that has not moved on. However, I completely respect the fact that the decision lies with the committee.

Alongside that, the Scottish Government also established a working group of key stakeholders specifically on the issue, which has been meeting for the past two years. Extensive dialogue on considerations such as the practical, operational and financial implications has allowed interested parties to guide and influence the proposals. Indeed, such discussions led to the Scottish Government’s plan for the legal duty to come into force in 2018 for vehicles transporting primary school children and in 2021 for vehicles carrying secondary school pupils. That lead-in time is to give those who are affected—primarily local authorities and bus operators—time to allow for the changes, particularly in relation to contracts, and it would be my intention also to allow for that. I resolve to continue such useful discourse and to carry forward the invaluable feedback from the recent formal consultation to shape the bill before I introduce it to Parliament.

I would welcome any questions from the committee.

Thank you, Gillian. Members are lining up their questions already. Stewart Stevenson will ask the first one.

I hope that you will not mind, convener, if I say that it is appropriate to thank Mike Penning, the minister at Westminster who kicked off the process of ensuring that we would have the powers to do what the bill proposes if Parliament chooses to use them.

Have you been in touch with my constituent Ron Beaty, whose efforts on school bus safety are where the genesis of the proposal lies? I know that the bill does not address all Ron Beaty’s interests, but I hope that you will dig into the collective experience and memory of Ron Beaty in taking the bill forward.

Absolutely. I met Mr Beaty a couple of weeks ago to discuss the issue. I pay tribute to him, because his local authority, Aberdeenshire Council, already requires seat belts on all dedicated school transport. It has also taken voluntary measures, such as school bus signage, largely because of Mr Beaty’s campaigning efforts. He is a very valuable person to speak to on the issue and he welcomes the bill proposal.

I have a couple of points to make. First, we are using the term “transport”, but I assume that we mean buses rather than dedicated trains. Around Glasgow, we occasionally have a dedicated train to take kids to school, and trains do not normally have seat belts.

You are right, Mr Mason. Dedicated school bus transport is the remit of the proposed bill.

Secondly, was the consultation purely about fitting seat belts on school buses rather than ensuring that they are worn? In a car, a child would have to wear a seat belt.

Yes. The laws around the wearing of seat belts are still reserved. You will know that it is the law that over-14s must wear a seat belt where one is provided. Beyond that, we cannot legislate. We are purely seeking that it must be stipulated that buses that are contracted to local authorities must have seat belts.

I come back to the fact that Aberdeenshire Council has managed to do that successfully for a number of years. Its ability to ensure that the children actually wear the seat belts is largely down to the schools, the parents and parent groups. Education is important—children are made aware of the presence of seat belts and of the safety implications. The Aberdeenshire exercise has been quite successful.

Members will be aware that the Welsh Government has also taken action on the issue. It is really a case of campaigning to raise awareness of the safety of wearing a seat belt.

Thank you.

Mr Mason asked the question that I wanted to ask about whether the bill was about ensuring that seat belts would be fitted as opposed to ensuring that they would be worn and how that would be enforced.

I would like to ask about private bus companies and their feedback in the consultation. Were they overly positive or neutral? Who would bear the cost of retrofitting the seat belts?

As I said, we have been consulting, but we also have a working group, which bus operators have been part of. They have been very positive about the proposals. Most buses already have seat belts on them, so we are really talking about the older ones, because buses have had to be fitted with seat belts for the past 15 years.

You will also notice that there is a lead-in time for this to happen. That has come out of our consultation with local authorities and bus companies. The dates are 2018 for primary school transport and 2021 for secondary school transport. It will not have to happen immediately; there will be a lead-in time. That has come out of our consultation with bus companies and local authorities, which have been very supportive.

What about the cost side?

That is still being worked on, but the costs will be borne by the companies that bid for contracts. That was how it was done in Wales.

Given that new tenders for services will stipulate that the buses have to have seat belts, the bus companies will have to sink that cost to bid for the contracts. Within the current time period, will there be any retrofitting that private bus companies will have to bear the cost of, or will local authorities or the Scottish Government subsidise that in any way?

The contracts tend to be for a five-year period. This proposal has been in the wind for quite a while. We knew that the powers were coming to Scotland, so it is not as if the bus companies have been unaware of the proposal. We have consulted them. The onus will be on the bus companies that bid for the contracts to fulfil the obligations of those contracts.

Is it the case that the bill will not prevent companies whose buses do not have seat belts from bidding for contracts? Will they be able to fit seat belts if they are awarded the contract?

I will ask Brendan Rooney to answer that, because it is a niche question that probably requires his expertise.

The way in which school transport is provided can vary considerably from local authority to local authority. The picture is not black and white. It would depend on things such as the level of competition in an area. If a local authority goes out to contract, the number of bus companies with different vehicles in their fleets will determine how easily the service can be provided in an area. There will not be one uniform situation that will be replicated across 32 local authorities; it will vary from area to area.

Obviously, 17 local authorities have already done this. In some local authority areas, the costs can be absorbed within contract costs, but in some areas the measure might lead to differences within those costs. We have had quite a lot of dialogue with bus companies and local authorities on that. We are also doing an exercise with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities and the Scottish Local Government Partnership to better quantify the cost implications of the proposed legislation. It is not simply a case of taking the cost of fitting belts in one bus and multiplying it; other factors in different areas will impact on that.

10:15  

I do not think that it would be fair for a bus company to have to put seat belts in its buses just to be given the chance to bid for a contract. However, if there was a stipulation that seat belts would have to be fitted before a company’s buses could be used on a contract, that would give tenderers some flexibility.

I will leave that hanging if I may. The point has been made.

Can I ask a couple of supplementary questions and then a question about process?

Yes.

The legal situation for young children is that, as well as wearing seat belts, they have to sit in a booster seat that is right for their size and weight. Would that also be part of the bill? Who would hand out the booster seats to the right kids at the right time?

As Brendan Rooney has pointed out, 17 local authorities already require school buses to have seat belts, so we looked to the practice of schools and bus companies in those areas. At the moment, practice varies across local authorities. In some cases there are booster seats, and in some cases there are modified seat belts. The proposed bill is specifically about providing seat belts on school buses. Other arrangements to do with the provision of booster seats on buses are not included in the bill. How those extra safety mechanisms are provided will be for schools to consider.

However, the practice has been working very well in a range of primary schools and nurseries up and down the country so far. The use of booster seats will not be stipulated, as such, but it is something that is already being done to make children safe. Many of the bus companies are already providing those extra safety mechanisms, but the bill is specifically about having seat belts on dedicated school transport.

You are using the consultation that the Government carried out. Is there anything that you are proposing to be part of the bill that has not been consulted on? Has anything been consulted on that you are not including in the proposed bill?

No. The proposed legislation will be a very simple mechanism for local authorities to stipulate that buses that are used for dedicated school transport must have seat belts. That is the premise on which we put the consultation out and on which the working group is still working. Nothing has been added to or taken away from what was consulted on.

We are all aware that the Government can take over a member’s bill, but this might be the first time that a member has taken over proposed Government legislation. What is the process for that? Will it prevent another member from proposing legislation? The Government obviously has time to introduce bills, so I would not like to see a Government bill circumventing the parliamentary process and stopping a member from proposing legislation.

I think that you have made your point, Rhoda, but I am not sure that the question is specifically about the consultation. We can take that up after the committee meeting. I am sorry to have to curtail you on that. Do you have another question?

No. Those are all my questions.

The only question that is in front of the committee today is whether we should agree that you do not need to conduct a consultation. My question is a simple one that is based on that. Are you aware of any individual or organisation that feels that they have not had the opportunity to contribute to the formulation of the proposed bill or to the consultation process? Is there anybody out there who would feel aggrieved if the committee allowed you to proceed?

No. We are fairly confident in what we have done. We had 76 respondents from a wide range of groups, and the working group is still active, so there is an opportunity for anything else that comes up to be taken into account.

As you will know, the consultation was published only in August this year. We have been working up to that point. We feel that the process has been very wide ranging. I can provide the committee with a list of the people who were involved in that consultation. There are also links to the consultation results in the statement of reasons.

But there is nobody banging on the door and saying that they wanted to be consulted but were not?

No. We have consulted local authorities, COSLA and the Scottish Local Government Partnership, school groups, parent groups, bus companies and road safety groups. We feel that the consultation has been quite comprehensive.

Thank you.

Before I formally ask whether members are satisfied with the statement of reasons, I should say that some interesting points have been brought up. I hope that, when Gillian Martin introduces the bill, she will take into account some of the points that the committee has raised, because they have been raised in the hope of making something worth while.

Are members satisfied with the statement of reasons?

Members indicated agreement.

That just leaves me to thank Gillian Martin and Brendan Rooney for coming to the meeting.

10:21 Meeting suspended.  

 

 

10:22 On resuming—