Seòmar agus comataidhean

You have touched on the important point about the need for equity in the system and the need to ensure that the transition is affordable for everybody. That is the challenge.

On cross-pavement charging, the pilot for that in three local authority areas is doing well and is helping to inform the advice and guidance that will be given to all local authorities, based on the experience of those who know best: the local authority transport directors who come together in the Scottish Collaboration of Transportation Specialists. The guidance is in draft and has been sent to all the local authorities for feedback. We expect that to be published soon, which will mean that other local authorities that take up that approach can be confident that it has been researched and informed by the pilots.

We are not being product specific. In the rest of the UK, particularly in England, there is more of a restriction on what products can be used. The main issue is to make sure that there are no trip hazards and so on, as you would expect. Funding for the roll-out of cross-pavement charging is also being provided in the budget, which should be helpful.

As you suggest, the biggest challenge will be around cities, flats and so on. There is an issue to do with factoring and the responsibilities around what can be done in that regard. In some cities, there will be public charging in each street. That will be the sensible way forward for many places, but people will need to think about how to provide that physical infrastructure. As you said, using home electricity will help to reduce the cost.

Is it okay if I bring in one of my colleagues, convener?

I understand that criticism. Previously, that would have been more of a focus, but we took advice from the UK Climate Change Committee—and I think that we were right to do so—which identified that the biggest and quickest way to achieve the shift that is required would be to focus on replacing petrol and diesel cars with electric vehicles. That is the policy context; we have understood that, accepted it and taken it forward.

That is why our target is to reduce emissions from cars to 16 per cent of today’s levels, but that does not mean that we will not do work in other areas, including supporting people to access public transport and make the shift to using their car less. In some areas, particularly in rural Scotland, that will not be possible because of the geography and the availability of public transport. That is more of a challenge in rural areas than it is in urban areas, as you know.

With regard to the funding that we have put forward, we have a big programme of support for public transport use. The under-22s scheme, which is extremely successful, is helping to support a new generation, from a behavioural change point of view, to form the habit of using buses. The concessionary scheme extends to over-60s in Scotland.

In other areas, we are continuing the electrification of rail and encouraging people to use rail. That is one of the reasons why we decided to take peak fares off our railways for good. That also encourages people to use public transport.

Part of the work that we are doing on car use is the extensive support that we are continuing to provide, which is in the budget for active travel. That will help people to make other choices about how they might travel—for example, to mix their active travel with public transport and minimise car use where they can. We are still working in the car use reduction space. Our measurement is on emissions. For overall emissions, our target is for a 4 per cent reduction by 2030. The UK Climate Change Committee reflects that, and that extends to 6 per cent over the longer period.

Part of that question relates to what the private sector and different partners can do to drive the installation of EV charging points. The Government could contribute to that as part of new planning regulations, which is obviously an option that is open for folks to consider. However, most workplaces that have extensive car use already provide EV charging locations. The question is whether we further encourage that provision—and, if so, how—or whether we mandate it. Your suggestion is that it should be mandated.

I am not overly familiar with the 2023 regulations, but we can check with regard to planning approvals, some of which might also relate to local authority requirements. For example, Sky has just announced a big development in Livingston, so the question is whether the local authority’s planning conditions would require Sky to provide EV charging points at that new building.

There are different levers that can be pulled at different levels. I am not sure whether we would need to introduce anything at the national level, but something might be needed at the local authority level. It would make sense for employers themselves to provide EV charging points at workplaces—I do not know at what rate—or to work with partners to deliver them.

The other issue is co-location. We are trying to use our funding to help co-location—that is, to allow other types of vehicles to use the charging points. For example, the First Bus site in Glasgow has been opened up so that members of the public can use its charging infrastructure. We are seeing more use of charging infrastructure in different areas.

This is an important area, and we will take your point away and consider it. It may be that some things are already happening, but we will also check what is happening with employers and workplaces.

Clearly, our regional transport partnerships are key to that, and in my time in post, I have had a number of meetings with them to look at joint strategic approaches. Indeed, many of them have put strong initiatives in place. They are very keen on the bus infrastructure fund, which has been not only restored but increased from £20 million to £60 million, which will help deliver the sort of fund that bus companies and regional transport authorities want to see.

What does the fund do? Well, if you are sitting in a car in a queue on the M8 or elsewhere, and a bus flies by, you will see how much easier and quicker it is to get in by bus. That is an incentive, too. That sort of thing is more of a challenge at local level, but you will be familiar with the range of powers that are available under the Transport (Scotland) Act 2019 and the regulations that you will have been considering as a committee.

The plugged-in communities grant fund is also important for rural areas. Again, that has been funded in the budget as another part of our sustainable travel approach.

With regard to rail capacity, new fleet is coming in, and that will help with frequency issues and the pressures on the Fife and Borders railway lines. We have already started to electrify the Fife line. I know that the closure of the line from Haymarket and Dalmeny was disruptive, but it was necessary; indeed, I inspected it just the other week. As for the Borders line, electrification will help by improving the service more generally. I should also say that the procurement of rail fleet will allow some fleet to be cascaded to help in other areas, and that is part of what we are looking at on an on-going basis.

As for planning, the ball is in the regional transport partnerships’ court. The South East of Scotland Transport Partnership has extensive proposals with regard to what it might want to see in that respect. It is leading that work, which is also referenced in the infrastructure investment pipeline that has been set out.

You raise a number of issues. We should not be dismissive of the potential for electric HGVs, which there is active interest in and a market for. In relation to the location of the charging infrastructure, I have previously relayed to the committee the fact that we have worked with Heriot-Watt University on mapping where not only charging infrastructure for electric vehicles but, potentially, hydrogen fuelling points would need to be. The rest of the UK is interested in that work.

Although freight and haulage is quite a market-sensitive area, there has been a lot of data sharing, which I think is good for the sector. Members of the industry need to come together to plan where they want charging to be available.

Hydrogen might be more suitable for heavier modes of transport. It could potentially be used for shipping and for rail, in relation to which there have been initial pilots. In the context of freight transport and HGVs, there is limited focus on hydrogen use, although John G Russell in Lanarkshire has received UK environmental innovation funding, which it is using to trial a limited number of hydrogen vehicles close to the terminus.

I would not underestimate the potential for electric HGVs. I visited a forestry pilot, whereby a timber haulier is being funded by the Scottish Government, through Transport Scotland and the environment department, to use electric timber haulage vehicles. The vehicles are operating over short distances. The process is being tested and the finances are being looked at. The key will be the financial models that can be used.

You obviously have a specific interest in hydrogen. We have supported hydrogen in the past, especially in Aberdeen. Indeed, the committee visited the hydrogen bus fuelling station in Aberdeen as part of its inquiry on working with local authorities to deliver net zero, which was one of its first inquiries in session 6. When I was a member of the committee, I was very keen for it to do that inquiry.

You touched on a very important point. I think that the UK Government will need to change its policy on hydrogen generally. The UK Government does not see the potential that exists for hydrogen in the way that it should. That relates to the wider energy situation. Given Scotland’s capability in renewable energy generation, generation of green hydrogen and generation of hydrogen for export, hydrogen has a big part to play in Scotland’s future, but I think that we are some distance away when it comes to its applicability to transport.

You identified the importance of the UK Government’s approach to hydrogen and its policy in that area, including in relation to technical safety. That is one of the big issues in rail. Some members will have visited the prototype hydrogen train as part of the exhibition at the United Nations climate change conference of the parties in Glasgow. Obviously, transportation safety will be paramount in that area. Scotland has taken a lead through the work that we have done with Heriot-Watt University to map where hydrogen and electric charging would need to be. That is an important area.

Your point about the viability of electric vehicles for hauliers is well made, and that issue is exactly why we are working with the private sector to look at finances. I spoke at an event at which we brought together financiers and the haulage industry. We have funding this year, as well as into next year, for work on HGVs and how to help to create the market in a sustainable and viable way. We have done that previously for buses, and we want to continue it for HGVs.

Morna, do you have anything to add?

You are talking about the market using meantime technology, such as biofuels. You are right to identify that almost 80 per cent of road haulage firms in Scotland have five trucks or fewer. The financial models that we are working on must work for them. We have previously had a consortium approach with public money, where larger companies have to buddy with smaller companies to get resources.

On electric vehicle technology, Logistics UK is dealing with tight margins for operators in what is a highly competitive business. It is important to try to support that.

The UK Government has brought in a plug-in truck grant, so it is providing finance through that. We are involved in co-design—we are already actively talking with investors, fleet owners and charge-point operators about how we can ensure that private investment works. The issue is whether public funding should be focused on delivering reductions in carbon emissions for net zero or potentially be diverted into biofuels in the meantime.

The challenge with biofuels is energy management. In Scotland, among the different needs, it is aviation that will have the biggest requirement. There is a danger that the need to produce source fuel for biofuels—again, I am straying into territory that is outside my area of expertise—may cause extra pressure in other areas, whether in agriculture or elsewhere.

We need careful management of the source product for biofuels, looking at how and where it might be used. Again, I stress that it is open to the committee to have a view on whether we should focus on what we are really trying to do, which is reducing carbon emissions to reach net zero, as opposed to investing in the meantime fuels. As I said, however, there might be potential in some areas, such as rail, for moving heavier goods.

What timeframe are you talking about?

It would, but we have just moved to a contract with direct award aspects. CalMac will exist as an entity that needs to have its own audited accounts. I would rather get back to you about the technicalities of our provision.