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.

My memory of the discussions with the unions is that there was a feeling that it is unfair that the legislation does not extend to railway workers in the way that it covers other parts of society.

I do not want to exclude it from the national conversation but it will probably not part of it, because I want to follow the matter up with justice officials. We will do that after the committee meeting, and I would be happy to share information with Ms Lennon on it. We might have a specific legislative fix that might not be part of our wider national conversation. Although I do not want to exclude it at this point, they are probably two separate things.

As Ms Lennon will know, it is not off the table, because we are still in negotiations. I have discussed a number of things with the unions, not least their views on ticket office closures. We are having conversations at the moment, and those engagements are on-going directly between officials, ScotRail and the unions, but, as I have said, the issue is not off the table. I have heard Mick Hogg’s comments on the matter, and I think that the committee would be surprised if we took ScotRail into public ownership and did not have a no compulsory redundancy policy. However, we are not there yet, because we have not established a pay deal. I would be very keen to get to that place with the unions, but, as those negotiations are on-going, I do not want to prejudge anything.

I am not personally in favour, but the matter is still on the table, because the negotiations are on-going.

As I mentioned in my answer to Natalie Don, I have received a submission that sets out a number of options. I will be arriving at a decision on the matter imminently, and I will be happy to share that with the committee.

The current associated timescales might take us to 2023, but I am keen to see results sooner than that. I will speak to officials about how we can do that and how we best join up the different modes of public transport so that we do not look just narrowly at rail travel. It is important that we do the preparatory work in that respect.

We should also be cognisant of the fact that travel patronage patterns are not what they were two years ago and not what I hope they will be in two years’ time. As far as looking at the data is concerned, it is difficult to prejudge how the public might feel in, say, three months’ time. As I mentioned earlier, another wave of coronavirus, such as omicron or some equivalent, might put people off returning to public transport. We need to be cognisant of that, too.

I do not have timescales to share with Ms Lennon just now. However, as I have said, I have the submission that has been made, and once I have made a decision on what the fair fares review will look like, I will be more than happy to share that with the committee. Given that we are in the planning and preparatory stages, I do not have that detail to hand just now.

I am happy for you to do so. I was of the view that it has been.