Seòmar agus comataidhean

I want to put on record my thanks to Paul Finch for bringing us back to the focus of the inquiry, which is child poverty and parental employment. I absolutely get that all three witnesses have been talking about affordability, the quality of the service and the safety of female travellers—a whole variety of things—but the focus of the inquiry is child poverty and parental employment. There are lots of factors in relation to transport in that inquiry.

I again need to put on the record the fact that we could do more on that if, rather than a national minimum wage, we had a real living wage, which would make fares more affordable. I must also say that 69 per cent of children living in poverty are in working households where at least one person is working and that 80,000 children in Scotland are impacted by the United Kingdom Government’s two-child benefit cap.

Before I come to the substantive questions, may I ask the witnesses whether they believe that ending the two-child benefit cap and moving from a national minimum wage to a real living wage would represent a substantive move towards making transport more affordable for parents who are trying to get into work or get more hours in their working day?

Mr Finch, I do not know whether you will be drawn on that, but I would not be doing my job properly, as an MSP for constituents who are directly impacted by this, if I did not ask the question: would those measures make a difference to the affordability of transport?

I do not think that that is an answer. Mr White, do you have anything to add?

My final question is for Mr Hogg, because Mr Finch and Mr White cannot speak for individual bus operators but Mr Hogg can talk from years of experience of the workforce within the railways.

One issue is that we want to have trains that run later, start earlier, or run more frequently. That all comes down to cost but it also comes down to supporting workers’ pay and conditions. Have there been discussions between ScotRail and the RMT about how we could run trains a bit earlier, or later, in a way that is affordable? There will be additional staff costs, but have we started thinking about how we can reshape the railways to be more responsive in supporting children in poverty and parental employment?

Paul Finch, that relates to rural transport, where there might be gaps in the service. Perhaps it is even more vital to get that co-ordination between rail hubs and lifeline bus routes. Does that partnership work in the more rural parts of the country?

Okay. I am going to ask transport questions in a second—do not worry, Mr Finch.

Mr White, will you be slightly more bold than Mr Finch?

I felt the need to ask that question.

Let us look at the some of the specifics of affordability, on which the UK Government is doing some decent work. I make it clear to my unionist colleagues that I am not trying to make a party political point. Jobcentre Plus provides a travel discount card for people who are seeking employment, which, in some cases, can be used in the first month once they get into employment. There is a partnership deal with ScotRail, whereby parents can travel by rail for free once they get into employment. There is also the flexible support fund. There is a mix of stuff. The Scottish Government has the parental employability support fund, which can make a contribution towards transport costs, and Fair Start Scotland has a role to play there, too. There is also a £74 million community bus fund.

Why have I listed all those resources? I have done so because I want to make sure that the witnesses believe that the money that is in the system is being used strategically. I am talking about the money that the UK Government and the Scottish Government are providing to support out-of-work parents to get into employment and to make that sustainable, and to support those parents who are in part-time employment to pick up more hours, get into full-time employment and have the opportunity for career progression. There might not be enough money being put into that, but there is still quite a lot of money whirling around the system. Is it being used strategically and effectively? Do you have a view on that, Mr Finch?

That is a very valid answer, but it is not an answer to the question that I asked. Earlier, you spoke about affordability and cost. My question was about the money that we are putting into the system to support affordability. You started to talk about the issue of the rural transport offer and whether it is fit for purpose for working families and parents who are trying to find work, which I am sure will come up later in the session. I am asking whether the money that is already in the system for affordability, whether that is provided by the Department for Work and Pensions or the Scottish Government, is being used well enough, strategically speaking.

I am not suggesting a criticism.

I will bring Mr Hogg in, because I am interested in the partnership between the DWP and ScotRail. I think that the idea of one month’s free rail travel is welcome, but I do not think that it goes far enough; it could be extended to providing bus travel for parents who are moving into employment and whose children are in poverty. That is what this inquiry is about. Perhaps there could be six months’ free travel, or perhaps three months could be fully free and the next three months could be tapered to 50 per cent support. There could be a more substantive offer, or there could be a partnership between ScotRail, the bus companies and the UK and Scottish Governments. I am trying to think about how we can deliver something that is substantive and meaningful and that actually drives change for the people that I represent, rather than just talking about things.

Mr Hogg, do you have any views on that?

Thank you very much.