Seòmar agus comataidhean

I touched on that my initial response to the convener. The fair fares review is part of a broad programme of work by officials on a sustainable transport system for the future and on joining up transport modes, rather than thinking about them in silos. The immediate priorities for that work are to consider the current Covid-19 conditions—what patronage is telling us, for example—and the Covid-19 strategic framework. That is important because the pandemic has not gone away.

In response to Ms Hyslop I talked about encouraging people back to rail, but we have to do that in a way that is safe and in line with current guidance. We do not know when the next variant like omicron might come round the corner, so we need to plan accordingly. We also need people to feel confident. Ms Hyslop raised that in relation to people choosing to travel by rail for the first time.

As I mentioned, the fair fares review is currently in the planning stages and work is being undertaken on a sustainable integrated approach. It will consider a range of discounts and at the concessionary schemes that are available in all modes of transport. It is important that we consider how we can join up bus, rail and ferry travel opportunities better.

The review will also take cognisance of the cost and availability of services. The cost of public transport is hugely important in relation to the cost of living and in trying to facilitate the modal shift to get people out of their cars and on to the trains.

I have a proposal in my inbox that gives more options on the associated timescales for the fair fares review. I will be more than happy, once I have made a decision on that, to share it and to come back to the committee to discuss the work in detail. At the moment, we are in the interim planning stage.

I am not aware of any such reluctance, but we probably have not yet got to that stage in the consultation. In respect of rail, we have one national operator, so I suppose that pushback might not exist in ScotRail in the same way as it might in other sectors of our transport network. However, I am not sighted on any such reluctance, thus far.

Natalie Don has raised a really important point. When I look back at the statement on the matter, which I made a couple of weeks after I was appointed, it is clear that women’s experiences on public transport are, in the main, not particularly positive. There is a range of evidence that we can draw on to quantify that—not the least of which is, of course, the British Transport Police survey that was carried out last year, I think. It looked at comparable data from 2019 and women’s experiences of sexual harassment on the London underground train network specifically, in which there was an increase of over 60 per cent during the time frame.

The pandemic has, potentially, changed behaviour, so we need to get more data on the issue specifically for Scotland. I am meeting the BTP because it has been leading on a campaign specifically on sexual harassment. Members who travel by rail regularly, as I do, might have seen signs at local train stations, which I am keen to explore further with BTP.

However, we need to have a broader conversation about women’s safety on public transport and what that looks like. Are we just talking about what happens on the train, or are we also talking about the journey to the train? There are wider ramifications that we need to consider.

Ms Don asked how we will ensure that women’s voices are heard. I said in my opening statement that we have already engaged with Engender; we will meet soon to discuss that further. We are also looking at other women’s organisations.

Ms Don is absolutely right—we need to speak to women in the real world and make sure that we have a rail service that meets their needs, and that they feel safe using our trains late at night. In my limited experience, which I shared with members in the chamber, the train is not always a safe place to be—for example, if you are getting the last train back home on a Friday night. That should not be the case in 2022. We need to work better to ensure that our trains are safe spaces for women. On that, I again thank the rail unions for their contributions. They have had some really positive things to say.

Ms Don spoke about challenges with antisocial behaviour. I recognise that those challenges have been linked to women’s experiences of travel on our trains and to staff experiences, throughout the pandemic. It is important to remember that ScotRail staff went above and beyond the call of duty during the pandemic. They were getting people to their work but they were also at work; they were essential workers throughout the pandemic. I want to thank them for that and to acknowledge that they are often subjected to some pretty difficult and challenging behaviour. It is really important that the Government ensures that there is support for them.

The BTP has a statutory requirement to provide that support. As I mentioned, I will be meeting the BTP soon—it will be either later this week or the week after, I think. It is very important that we get the work right and that we ensure that staff feel safe coming to work, that women feel safe travelling on our trains, and that the vision that we are trying to realise for the new public ownership of ScotRail best reflects the needs of the passengers who use it.

Monica Lennon raises a really important point. I saw the reports on the issue at the time. I have not yet met the BTP to discuss the matter, but I intend to raise it with the BTP. It seems to be a specific issue in the west of Scotland at this time. I am not sighted on any similar statistics in Fife, for example, or in other parts of the country.

I would be really keen to support wider work with schools. As the member will know, our schools are really important places to try to challenge and tackle antisocial behaviour. We also need to ensure that communities’ voices are heard when things are not working. On our rail network, in particular, staff are often presented with challenges—they might have to move people on, for example.

I had a really good conversation with Mick Hogg about that two weeks ago, and ScotRail has an approach whereby it will use teams of staff. It is remobilising staff to get out and about and to move people on in cases of antisocial behaviour. I had a conversation with Mick and others about that, and they were of the view that, sometimes, when these teams come out, they just move the behaviour elsewhere, which does not help to contain or tackle the behaviour.

I would like to take up the issue with the BTP because of our shared responsibilities. Also, as we move forward with public ownership, Ms Lennon is absolutely correct that we need to ensure that there is safety on board, not only for passengers but for staff.

The wider issue of tougher action that Ms Lennon raises was raised with me by the unions in considering potential legislation. I will bring Bill Reeve in on that point, because we have not raised it further with the unions but I am not ruling it out. If there is an opportunity to consider how we might better support staff in that endeavour, I am keen to examine all options.

The advice that would have been given to the cabinet secretary predates my time in office. I might bring the officials in to respond. I am not averse to sharing that information with the committee but, with regard to the advice that was considered, that would have been given last year.

As you will know, we have already announced our plans for electrification of the Glasgow to Barrhead line by December 2023, and the new Levenmouth line by spring 2024. We are also making good progress on finalising our proposals for electrification of the East Kilbride, Fife and Borders lines, and we continue to develop our decarbonisation plans across the entire Scottish rail network.

More broadly, decarbonising transport is one of the six themes that have been set out in the draft “Strategic Transport Projects Review 2: Summary Report”, which was, I think, published in February. I know that STPR2 was mentioned at the committee’s evidence session last week.

Procurement of new rolling stock forms an integral part of the decarbonisation action plan that Ms Hyslop mentioned, and we are building on the track record of electrification of Scotland’s rail network. Pre-pandemic, 75 per cent of passenger journeys and 45 per cent of freight services in Scotland were made on electric services. That is good work, but there is clearly more to do. To some extent, the pandemic has given us impetus to focus on driving that improvement further. Transport Scotland, Network Rail and ScotRail are working in partnership with officials to ensure that the programme moves forward.

That speaks to the wider opportunities, which Ms Hyslop touched on, to support passengers who might not have considered using rail in the past to travel on our networks, knowing that they are clean and decarbonised. Given its carbon footprint, people might be more inclined to choose rail now than they were in the past.

Bill Reeve will say more about the decarbonisation action plan specifically.

I am not sighted on the detail of the specific example that Mr Kerr has highlighted, and I do not know whether officials know any more about it. However, we are happy to come back to him on the specifics. As Mr Kerr will be aware, this is a national scheme, but I do not want to say too much, as I am not aware of the news article or the debate that he cited with regard to Aberdeen City Council. As I have said, I am more than happy to write to him about the specific details of the scheme.

Do you want to come in on that, Tom?

Good morning, and thank you for inviting me to discuss the draft order. The order sets the reimbursement rate and capped level of funding for the national bus travel concession scheme for older and disabled persons in 2022-23 as well as the reimbursement rate for the national bus travel concession scheme for young persons in the coming financial year. In doing so, it gives effect to an agreement that we reached back in December with the Confederation of Passenger Transport, which represents Scottish bus operators.

The order’s objective is to enable operators to continue to be reimbursed for journeys that are made under both schemes after the expiry of the current reimbursement provisions on 31 March 2022. It specifies their reimbursement rates and the capped level of funding for the older and disabled persons scheme for the next financial year from 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023. The order is therefore limited to the coming year.

Due to the on-going impact of Covid-19 on bus passenger numbers and the continuing uncertainty about the coming year, it has not been possible to undertake the usual analysis and forecasting that underpin the annual revision of the reimbursement rates and the cap for the older and disabled persons scheme. As a result, the funding cap and reimbursement rate for the scheme have been retained from the previous financial year, with the reimbursement rate in 2022-23 set at 55.9 per cent of the adult single fare and the funding capped at £226.1 million. Those figures are the same as the corresponding figures for 2021-22. We think that, in practice, claims will be substantially less than the capped level, because of the continuing impact of the pandemic on patronage.

For the young persons scheme, the reimbursement rates have also been retained from 2021-22, at 43.6 per cent of the adult single fare for journeys made by passengers aged five to 15 and 81.2 per cent for journeys made by 16 to 21-year-olds. As in 2021-22, a budget cap is not being set for the young persons scheme in 2022-23. We believe that the rates are consistent with the aim set out in the legislation establishing both schemes that bus operators should be no better and no worse off as a result of participating in them. The rates will also provide a welcome degree of stability for bus operators.

As we know, free bus travel enables people to access local services and gain from the health benefits of a more active lifestyle, and it will also help strengthen our response to the climate emergency and support our green recovery by embedding sustainable travel habits in young people. The order provides for those benefits to continue for another year on a basis that is fair to operators and affordable to taxpayers.

I commend the order to the committee, and I am happy to answer any questions that members might have.

I am happy to do so.

I will defer to officials on that. If the motion to annul was agreed to and the instrument was looked at again, the primary legislation would still be on the statute books, and it could be overridden only by another form of primary legislation. I will pass to officials to clarify that technical point.