DECEMBER 2009

A great many Spokes members and other concerned cyclists across Scotland have this autumn written to MSPs about the declining levels of cycling investment under the SNP government - and particularly about the recommendation of the all-party Parliamentary Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee that the government should urgently (for this 2010/11 budget) conduct an exercise to identify a transfer of funding to cycling and walking from elsewhere in the transport budget.

Several MSPs have responded, the fullest response being the one below from Lothians SNP MSP Dr Ian McKee.  We reprint his letter here, together with our comments, which we will of course draw to his attention also.

Several of the MSPs who responded made the point that a large number of constituents have contacted them on this matter.

---------------------------------------------------
SPOKES COMMENTS ARE IN CAPITALS
[with some notes in brackets under the capitals.]

For convenience, we have given reference letters A,B,C,... to each of Mr McKee's paragraphs.
----------------------------------------------------

On 16 Dec 2009, at 14:51, Ian.McKee.MSP@scottish.parliament.uk wrote:

Dear Constituent

So many people have contacted me about this issue that I have drafted this response. Please do get back in touch if you wish to discuss further.

A. The Transport Infrastructure & Climate Change Committee has expressed concern over the budget line of ‘Support for Sustainable and Active Travel’ that has declined from £11.5m to £11.3m. The Committee has asked for the Scottish Government to find additional money from within the transport budget, although regrettably it hasn’t recommended where that money should come from.

THE COMMITTEE POINTED OUT [PARA 146] THAT THIS IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE SINCE THE BUDGET IS VERY 'HIGH LEVEL' - E.G. IT DOESN'T SPECIFY AMOUNTS FOR PARTICULAR ROADS TO BE BUILT/ UPGRADED - JUST GENERAL BUDGET LINES.  HENCE THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED THE GOVERNMENT URGENTLY LOOKS INTO WHERE A TRANSFER COULD BE MADE. [Spokes note: the 'substantial increase' in active travel funding recommended by the Committee would only be a small reduction in other transport modes. e.g. £20m might cover one modest trunk road upgrade, whereas it would cover literally 100-200 or more cycle infrastructure projects throughout Scotland.]

B. The Committee is now conducting a full-scale inquiry into active travel, and if this generates costed proposals then the Scottish Government will of course consider them with interest.

AT THE EARLIEST THIS WOULD ONLY IMPACT ON THE 2011/12 BUDGET, MEANING A REAL-TERMS DECLINE IN CYCLING INVESTMENT IN PROBABLY EVERY YEAR OF THIS ADMINISTRATION. IN THE CONTEXT OF THE COMMITTMENTS OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE ACT AND THE CYCLING 2020 TARGET INVESTMENT HAS TO START AT ONCE.

C. The reality of the Scottish budget however is that the Scottish Government has to work with an £800m reduction in its budget due to Westminster’s recession. This is a real threat to all public spending in Scotland and cannot simply be wished away. It means that all budgets are under severe pressure. Setting the Scottish Government's budget for the year is a lengthy and in-depth process which does involve looking at all areas of spending across the Government and identifying priorities. The Scottish Government sees investment to encourage more cycling as an important priority.

THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT PLANS TO SPEND £233M MORE ON TRUNK ROADS IN THE 2010/11 BUDGET THAN IT SPENT IN 2008/09.  AT THE SAME TIME, INVESTMENT IN CYCLING FROM ALL MAIN SOURCES HAS FALLEN YEAR BY YEAR UNDER THE SNP, HAVING REACHED A PEAK IN 2007/08 [THE LAST YEAR OF LAB/LIB BUDGETS] THANKS TO THE LAB/LIB INJECTION OF AN EXTRA £4M A YEAR TO SUSTRANS.

D. However, delivering all our priorities through the 2010-11 draft budget submitted to the Parliament is already challenging, as transport and other budgets are fully committed. I also wish to highlight that opposition parties have so far been more concerned with GARL  - the Glasgow Airport Rail Link - than active transport or green issues in general.

THE TICC IS A COMMITTEE REPRESENTING ALL PARTIES IN PARLIAMENT.  IN ANY CASE, IT IS THE GOVERNMENT WHO HAS SET THE 2020 CYCLE USE TARGET, AND IT IS THE GOVERNMENT WHO (RIGHTLY) TRUMPETS THE CLIMATE CHANGE ACT.  THEREFORE IT IS THE GOVERNMENT WHO SHOULD BE ACTING ON THIS MATTER.

E. I must also highlight that the future take up of cycling will be affected far more by factors such as the layouts of new road networks through planning policy – which the Scottish Government is in the process of comprehensively overhauling. [Announcement expected Fri 18th Dec]

PLANNING ISSUES ARE CERTAINLY IMPORTANT, BUT CROSS-COUNTRY COMPARATIVE RESEARCH SHOWS CLEARLY THAT INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE FUNDING AND POLITICAL DETERMINATION FOR THAT IS THE NUMBER-ONE CRITICAL ISSUE.  [Pucher, John and Buehler, Ralph (2008) “Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from The Netherlands, Denmark and Germany,” Transport Reviews, 28:4, 495 — 528. Available at http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/ - publications.]

F. Cycling and sustainable transport are not solely supported through this one, relatively small budget line.

THIS IS THE RESPONSE ALWAYS USED BY FINANCE SECRETARY JOHN SWINNEY - IT IS A COMPLETE DISTRACTION FROM THE TRUTH, AS HE VERY WELL KNOWS.  THE SPOKES RESEARCH [WHICH IS COMMENDED IN THE PARLIAMENT'S INDEPENDENT 'SPICE' REPORT, CYCLING IN SCOTLAND] SHOWS CLEARLY THAT CYCLING INVESTMENT IN SCOTLAND FROM *ALL MAIN SOURCES* HAS FALLEN YEAR BY YEAR UNDER THE SNP, DUE PRIMARILY TO THE 50% CUT IN SUSTRANS FUNDING AND THE TRANSFER OF RTP CAPITAL TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES.

G. Local government, which has received a record £23bn funding package from central government, is responsible for delivering many of the real improvements on the ground, and is generously supported to do so.

SPOKES EVIDENCE SHOWS INCONTROVERTIBLY THAT OVER THE LAST 15 OR SO YEARS THE ONLY TIMES WHEN COUNCILS HAVE INCREASED CYCLING INVESTMENT SIGNIFICANTLY WERE WHEN THERE WERE DEDICATED FUNDING STREAMS AVAILABLE [notably the former Public Transport Fund, the CWSS fund, capital funding to Sustrans to work with councils and others, and RTP capital].  WHEN THE SNP TRANSFERRED RTP CAPITAL TO COUNCILS, THEY ONLY PUT AROUND £2M OF IT TO CYCLING INVESTMENT, WHEREAS RTPs HAD PUT NEARLY £5M].

H. The Scottish Government’s Cycling Action Plan envisages a substantial increase by 2020 towards 10% of journeys being by bike. Consultation responses are being finalised and a copy will be made available to the TICC Committee to inform its final report into Active Travel. Ministers have already agreed that the final Action Plan would take account of the recommendations in that report which would include options for future funding.

THERE IS NO GUARANTEE ON ADDITIONAL FUNDING - AS TRANSPORT MINISTER STEWART STEVENSON HAS MADE CLEAR.  EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY, SEE OUR RESPONSE TO PARA B ABOVE.

I. Another national example is the £27.4m Climate Challenge Fund, which supports grassroots community projects across Scotland. Many of these have been wholly or substantially focused on cycling. For example the £300,000 Greener Leith project includes promotion of cycling as part of a campaign to improve the environmental profile of the area as a whole.

SUCH SUMS AND PROJECTS ARE OF COURSE VERY WELCOME.  BUT THEY MAKE LITTLE IMPACT ON THE TOTAL AMOUNT INVESTED IN CYCLING IN SCOTLAND.  THE GREENER LEITH £300K, FOR EXAMPLE, IS OVER 2 YEARS AND ONLY A MINORITY OF IT CAN BE CONSIDERED CYCLING INVESTMENT.

J. The work of the Bike Station in the Southside of Edinburgh is another excellent example. You can see my motion on this here: http://www.ianmckee.org/motions

I take this opportunity to inform you that I have marked this motion for member's debate in Parliament and that I hope to discuss the topic of cycling, the progress made by the Bike Station and how this sets an example to companies and organisations across Scotland.

COMMENT (I) ABOVE APPLIES.  THE NEW CCF BIKESTATION PROJECT IS TO PROMOTE WALKING, BUS, CAR SHARING AND ECO-DRIVING AS WELL AS CYCLING, SO ONLY A MINORITY OF IT IS LIKELY TO BE CYCLING INVESTMENT.  IT IS A FANTASTIC PROJECT IN ITSELF, BUT MAKES LITTLE IMPACT ON CYCLING INVESTMENT LEVELS ACROSS SCOTLAND.

OF COURSE, WE GREATLY WELCOME DR MCKEE'S INTEREST IN AND ACTIVE SUPPORT FOR THE BIKE STATION, BUT THAT IS IRRELEVANT TO THE QUESTION IN HAND.

Yours sincerely

Dr. Ian McKee MSP

Scottish Parliament
M4.16
Edinburgh
EH99 1SP

Tel: 0131 348 6817
Fax: 0131 348 6818

www.ianmckee.org