Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 12 July 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 3014 contributions

|

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 11 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

There are huge opportunities, with or without the bill, for investment in nature and carbon markets, but do you see the bill as an opportunity to regulate those markets? At the moment, they are largely unregulated and it can feel to some communities a bit like the wild west.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 11 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Is that why you think that smallholders fall more on the tenancy side than the crofting side?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 11 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Why do you think the Government has chosen the transfer test? Were you asked for advice on the matter?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 11 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

You believe that there should be consistency between the different measures in the bill—the transfer test and land management plans.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 11 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

I know that Monica Lennon wants to come in, convener.

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 11 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

We have covered most of the questions that we wanted to ask, but I want to ask you about the definition of community sustainability. What was your thinking when you chose not to recommend that a definition should appear in the bill? Is it too difficult to provide a robust definition? If we do not provide a definition, is there a danger that areas such as community housing, for example, become less considered and less defined in the bill and that missed opportunities might arise as a result?

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 11 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Okay—thanks.

10:15  

Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee

Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1

Meeting date: 11 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

Is it too earlier to codify some of that work in legislation? Does it need to go into legislation?

Meeting of the Parliament

Rail Fares

Meeting date: 6 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

I thank members for signing the motion, and I thank those who have stayed to debate it.

Meeting of the Parliament

Rail Fares

Meeting date: 6 June 2024

Mark Ruskell

John Mason makes a good point. There was an allocation in this year’s budget, but it is, of course, a changing picture. It depends on how many people get back on to the railways and whether we can see a modal shift.

We know that modal shift takes time. That is an important point in this debate, because it is about changing habits that have formed over a lifetime—a lifetime in which Governments of all shades have prioritised investment in roads and cars over investment in public transport.

Radical interventions in public transport fares clearly make a difference. Nearly 750,000 young people in Scotland now have access to free bus travel, and more than 137 million of those journeys have been made in just over two years. The national entitlement card for bus travel goes further by offering young people 50 per cent off train fares. We are already creating a generation whose first choice is public transport.

Some green shoots of progress are already emerging from the interim evaluation of the off-peak-all-day pilot, which was published earlier this week. Although the picture is yet to fully emerge, the data shows us that 53 per cent of new rail passengers in the pilot period had previously chosen to travel by car. It shows us that a third of existing rail users made at least one additional rail journey that they would ordinarily have made by another travel mode, with two thirds of those journeys normally made by car. If we want to achieve long-term modal shift, we need to give people the security of knowing that peak-time rail fares are gone for good. Only then can commuters start to plan their work and travel options around fixed rail services that are cost competitive with running a private car.

Modal shift is an important objective for the off-peak all-day pilot, but it is not the only reason why securing cheaper and simpler fares matters. Budgets are still tight for many people across Scotland. Although inflation might have levelled out, the cost of living crisis has a long tail, with prices remaining high in many sectors. I hope that John Mason acknowledges that, although the pilot has been important in driving modal shift, it has also been important as a cost of living measure. High rail fares, particularly at peak times, coupled with a complicated pricing structure threaten to make rail an unattractive option in the future. We cannot stand still on this. Rail must continue to grow its passenger demographic, not shrink it.

For those who commute to work at peak times, the cost pressure is even more stark, as I will outline. Before the pilot, someone travelling at peak times between Edinburgh and Glasgow paid £28.90, and someone travelling between Glasgow and Stirling paid £16.10. With the removal of peak-time fares, those prices have been slashed—by half in the case of the Edinburgh to Glasgow route.

Cheaper rail fares will make train travel more attractive to commuters and leisure travellers, and there are early indications from the pilot evaluation that that is having an effect. During the pilot, 78 per cent of new rail passengers chose to get the train because of the pilot. Put simply, they got on board ScotRail because the tickets were cheaper—it is that simple. It cannot be right that it is cheaper, easier and simpler to choose private cars over public transport, so reforming antiquated and unfair structures such as peak-time fares is an important part of the picture.

However, we also need to think bigger. Creating incentives to reduce fares is just one side of the price equation. We cannot secure sustainable funding for transformative green transport solutions through driving up rail passenger numbers alone. We need to be brave and bold, and measures such as congestion charging and workplace parking levies in the cities are needed to get a better balance between private car usage and the use of public transport. We know that the Scottish Government has done initial work on demand management, and I look forward to seeing the final 20 per cent reduction plan. However, we also need councils with strong leadership that can stand with the Scottish Government and drive through measures that will transform our cities for good. We also desperately need to see progress on integrated ticketing, which the Government has often promised but has not yet delivered, and which should go a huge way to improving the passenger experience and delivering more affordable fare packages.

ScotRail’s now being in public ownership is our chance to deliver on a people’s vision for ScotRail—one that makes rail affordable and accessible to as many people as possible and that encourages folks to get out of cars and on to our incredible rail services. Getting rid of peak-time fares is a very important step on that journey.