Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Tuesday, November 4, 2014

Official Report 856KB pdf

---

School Bus Safety

The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-11008, in the name of Stewart Stevenson, on the importance of school bus safety around Scotland. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament notes the importance of school bus safety around Scotland and what it considers the important work of Ron Beaty of Gardenstown, whom it congratulates for his efforts on this issue, specifically in relation to bus safety signs and bus visibility; considers that there is a very real danger of school pupils being injured if the situation at present is allowed to continue as it understands that recommendations from Transport Scotland are not being carried out across the country, and hopes that the need to ensure the safety of children across Scotland is urgently recognised, acknowledging that Mr Beaty first petitioned the Parliament on this matter in 2005.

17:18  

Tonight, we are joined by my constituent Ron Beaty of Gamrie. He is far from unique in believing that we have a duty to protect our vulnerable and inexperienced young folk, but following the permanent disablement of his granddaughter in an accident in the vicinity of a school bus, he has been a ferocious champion of improving safety in our school transport system.

I have not been alone in supporting Ron. Members of the Public Petitions Committee, of all political parties and of none, have supported his efforts to improve public policy and practice. Today’s debate is an opportunity to revisit the issue, look at what has been achieved thus far and discuss what we now expect, which is important.

The issue is one not just for the Beaty family, with the pain that it has suffered, nor just for the north-east of Scotland, where we have seen too many accidents involving school students mounting or leaving school buses; it is an issue for all Scotland—both rural and urban Scotland.

Let us be clear: around two thirds of a million pupils make their way to around 2,700 schools each day, and a goodly number of those pupils use a bus. Youngsters are not naturally born with adequate appreciation of all the risks that they will meet in life. Motorised transport in particular presents challenges. Assessing the speed of approaching traffic and deciding whether it is safe to step on to a road are not skills that we are born with.

Buses add a further complication. They are big and are likely to obstruct one’s view of the road. Education authorities and bus operators that work with them to transport school students are acutely aware of the need to protect passengers, and other road users also have a role to play. This debate and, I hope, the commentary around it will help to remind us all of the need to exercise care near school buses, especially when they are stationary.

What can be done to help to alert drivers? There can be good, clear signage that the bus is a school bus. Crucially, that signage should be removed when the bus is not operating as a school bus. Our brains are alerted by changes in the environment. There is the psychological phenomenon of ennui—we no longer notice what we see all the time—so buses must look different when they are carrying school students, and only then.

There can be flashing lights on the bus to break into drivers’ attention, speed limits that can vary throughout the day, and lights to alert drivers to the need for reduced speed. Those exist already outside many schools throughout the country.

In Aberdeenshire, Aberdeen and Moray, a number of steps have been taken to improve safety, and Transport Scotland—Mr Beaty is not its greatest fan—has produced guidance for our 32 local authorities on how they can help to improve road transport safety. SeeMe technology has been trialled in Aberdeenshire. It causes flashing lights to switch on at bus stops as they detect people approaching the stop who are carrying a transponder. After it was established that there was no legal impediment to doing so, much larger school bus signage has been used. Aberdeenshire Council has made it a condition of school bus contracts that the signage must come off when the bus ain’t carrying school students.

Progress has therefore been made and lots of good things have been done by people of good heart.

I am grateful to Stewart Stevenson for bringing this important issue to the chamber. He is right to point to its being an issue across the country. Councillor Andrew Drever, who is one of the most tenacious campaigners on the issue in my constituency, has put forward the suggestion of banning the overtaking of stationary school buses. Has Stewart Stevenson been aware of that as a campaign strategy? What are his views on the efficacy of that?

I was not aware of Councillor Andrew Drever’s initiative specifically, although I have heard that suggestion in other places, and it is certainly worth considering. It is not, of course, within our gift in the Parliament to legislate to do that, but I will return to that subject a little later in my remarks with another suggestion that might have that effect.

With a greater focus on school transport safety in the north-east in particular, we have not seen a repeat of the string of very serious injuries that occurred a few years ago. Policy and practice changes may have contributed to that; or the very bad winters that closed down schools and, therefore, school transport and the comparatively mild winters, which reduced weather risks, may have been significant factors.

Either way, the questions are: is there more that we can reasonably do and do we know what to do? The answer to both questions really ought to be yes.

Perhaps the most important thing that the north-east experience tells the rest of Scotland is that the costs of addressing the issue are between nil and trivial. It just takes an increased focus on the issue. Therefore, we can and must do more, but what should we do?

We can put requirements into school bus contracts. I do not necessarily mean the existing contracts—it always costs a lot to change a contract—but certainly the new ones, which tend to be on a three-year cycle. We can make contractors provide better signage—not behind the bus window but outside the bus—and use it responsibly. We can also get drivers to use constant headlights when running and flashers when stopped.

We can do risk assessments and introduce 20mph speed limits where it will help. We can reconsider school travel plans and work with parents on bus routing, perhaps to arrange for pick-up and drop-off points to be at safer locations. They might need to be at different places in the morning and evening for individual kids because the bus might be coming from a different direction.

When I spoke in Alex Neil’s debate on school bus safety in November 2006—whatever else we can say about it, the issue is not new—I suggested that we could use bus signage that looked as if it were making a legal statement to other road users. We could have a big sign on the back of a bus saying “Don’t break the law” on line 1, “Don’t overtake this school bus” on line 3 and, on line 2, the word “please” in incredibly small print. That might give the effect of a legal request without the necessity of legislation. We never know.

Let us try to think of a few tricks that grab attention and make things happen. Let us innovate.

I congratulate Ron Beaty on his tenaciousness in keeping the issue alive. However, let us make sure that the actions of our Government and our councils mean that we keep youngsters alive so that Ron’s campaigning does not need to.

17:26  

I congratulate Stewart Stevenson on securing the debate, which recognises the tireless work that Ron Beaty has done on school bus safety following the tragic accident involving his granddaughter Erin.

Road safety and accidents involving schoolchildren were a focus of mine even when I was a councillor on Grampian Regional Council. I was proud to have managed to get one rat run that commuters used through my ward blocked off, which definitely reduced road accidents in that and the adjoining roads. Therefore, I was happy to support Ron Beaty’s campaign, particularly when there was a school bus accident on the Netherley road, which lies between my home and my work.

When I saw Stewart Stevenson’s motion, it rang a bell and I remembered that I had a similar members’ business debate on 8 February 2007. That debate was specifically about the provision of seat belts on school buses. Only vehicles that were first used after October 2001 were required to have seat belts fitted, and the legislation still rested with Westminster, which was the main focus of the debate. In fact, the legislation was in the hands of Douglas Alexander, who was then Secretary of State for Transport.

At that time, I rightly got an email from Ron Beaty gently reminding me that there was more to school bus safety than seat belts. It said:

“Yes belts are vital to safety, as are improved bus visibility, modern visible flashing signage, the removal of the sign when children are not aboard ... at present you will see buses on outings with this sign displayed which makes a total nonsense of its use ... dedicated school transport ... extra flashing lights more visible than hazard lights many use when popping into the local shop ... So please don’t stop at seat belts ... It is the cheapest option”.

That was me told then.

Mr Beaty has kept up his campaign, with petitions being considered by the Public Petitions Committee. I note that progress has been made, albeit slowly, but it has in no way fulfilled Mr Beaty’s ambitions.

It seems that we still await the transfer of power over this from Westminster. I look forward to hearing what the minister says, but I hope that it will be transferred before the general election. The time that it has taken to do that is not a good portent for the transfer of many, much more substantial powers.

Much has been done, however, as Stewart Stevenson mentioned. He mentioned that Aberdeenshire Council had conducted various demonstrations and trials, but on top of those it has produced a bus stop education pack and has introduced operators induction training.

As has been mentioned, councils have great opportunities in how they frame school bus contracts and in what they require of operators.

As Mr Stevenson mentioned, the behaviour of schoolchildren and parents should be at the top of the agenda.

I once again congratulate Mr Stevenson on his motion.

17:30  

I also congratulate Stewart Stevenson on securing the debate and I acknowledge the role that Ron Beaty has played in keeping the issue high on the agenda. When parents in Kingseat in Fife encountered a major issue with school bus safety, they were able to go to websites to see what was happening in the north-east, and to get advice from and speak to people there. That helped them with the campaign that they ran at that time.

I have some concerns about the pressures on local government at the moment. When I was a council leader, officials would often give me the option of going to the statutory limits in terms of the distances from schools with regard to school bus provision, and I know that some local authorities have done that. If we did that in Fife, a lot of the kids in my home village of Kelty would be expected to walk to Beath high school in Cowdenbeath, because it would be within the statutory limit. That would be a worry, particularly in the winter months. I worry about the pressures on local authority budgets. School transport often seems to be an easy option when officials are looking for ways to save money. I wanted to flag that up tonight.

On a more positive note, I know that there is a lot of good work going on in schools in Fife. I was recently approached by a volunteer driver who pointed out that there was no signage on some of the minibuses that are being used to take kids on trips. I took that up with Fife Council and I have been assured that that has been addressed.

The role of the police in community safety partnerships is also important, particularly with regard to primary school transport. We need continually to highlight the trend that sees parents trying to get their cars as close to schools as possible. That can create a hazard for kids coming off buses, and elsewhere around the school. I often joke that, if some parents could get their cars into the playground they would do so. It is important that Police Scotland, community safety partnerships and the schools continue to examine that issue.

We send our kids and grandkids out to school in the morning and we want to know that they are safe in the school and getting to the school. That is why I commend Stewart Stevenson for bringing this debate to Parliament. We need to continue to be vigilant and to ensure that the current pressures on local government do not result in any compromise on school transport.

17:33  

Like others, I welcome the opportunity to discuss the motion, and I congratulate Ron Beaty on his campaigning efforts over many years. Often, it takes an impassioned constituent to raise issues in the Public Petitions Committee, and it is a mark of the success of this Parliament that such issues can go from that committee through to the chamber. I also thank Stewart Stevenson for bringing the issue for debate.

It was in October 2005 that petition PE892 was lodged in Parliament by Mr Beaty, who was calling on the then Scottish Executive to set down minimum safety standards for school bus provision. As Stewart Stevenson was speaking, I was reminded of a friend of mine in Hillside primary school in Montrose, many years ago, who ran out from behind a school bus and was killed. The petition moved from the Public Petitions Committee to the then Education Committee, and there have been reports on the issue in 2010 and 2013. However, today, we are still in a position in which, as the motion suggests, more has to be done on school bus safety.

The Transport Scotland report in 2010 identified 10 ways to improve school transport safety, some of which were mentioned by Stewart Stevenson. Those include reducing speeds on school routes and around schools, encouraging motorists to reduce their speeds when passing stationary school buses, setting minimum safety standards in school transport contracts, and risk assessing school drop-off and pick-up areas. In his foreword to the document, the Minister for Transport and Veterans said:

“I believe that this guide will be invaluable for local authorities and operators as a reference point for their responsibilities in terms of school transport and will provide local authorities with a toolkit of measures that they could consider seeking to implement best practice.”

Unfortunately, three years on, when Transport Scotland reviewed the success of the document, its conclusions were disappointing. Some council respondents who were spoken to had never even heard of the 2010 study, let alone its recommendations. Some councils said that because responsibility for school transport could lie with the education, transport or engineering department, there was often confusion within councils about who should take the lead. That is exacerbated when there is a shared responsibility, which diffuses responsibility even further.

As I said, one of the most critical conclusions was that some local authorities had never even seen the 2010 report. That is not to say that school bus safety is not considered an important issue in those council areas, but surely bus safety should be the same in Shetland, Shettleston, Elgin and Edinburgh. The 2010 report and Mr Beaty’s petition both sought a consistent approach throughout Scotland.

There are recommendations of best practice and advice on how to optimise school transport safety, so it is disappointing that so little progress has been made since Ron Beaty began his campaign almost a decade ago. I looked at the transport policies of each of the councils in the Highlands and Islands region. It is quite difficult to decipher whether those councils have implemented all, or even some, of the recommendations of the 2010 report.

I hope that, in summing up, the transport minister can reflect on his comments in the 2010 report, which we welcome, and suggest how the Scottish Government and local councils can work together to improve safety on school buses further in order, as others have said, to ensure the safety of school pupils throughout Scotland.

17:37  

I, too, am grateful to Stewart Stevenson for bringing this important issue to the chamber. I am pleased to record my gratitude for the tireless work of my constituent, Ron Beaty. Alongside others who have been touched by similar personal tragedies in my North East Scotland region, he has fought for a decade for safety improvements on school transport. Together, they have determinedly turned traumatic events into a positive and substantive campaign for change. That commitment and contribution of our campaigners must be matched by the relevant authorities. I hope that the minister will explain how the Scottish Government intends to encourage compliance with the 2010 transport guidance, if there are disparate approaches throughout the country.

It is worth highlighting the groundbreaking work of Aberdeenshire Council in proactively developing safety measures. Tragically, it was two fatalities within two weeks of each other in 2008 that, in part, led to the adoption of those safety measures, when 15-year-old Robyn Oldham and 12-year-old Alexander Milne were both knocked down, having just got off a school bus. In consultation with the Department for Transport, the council trialled revised larger school bus signage. That included the words “school bus” and the use of chevrons and high-visibility materials. The results were overwhelmingly positive. Only 40 per cent of the motorists who were surveyed could correctly identify the existing statutory signage, but 80 per cent understood the enhanced model. Indeed, all the findings indicated that the enhanced model was more effective, comprehensible and visible. The council has since rolled it out across all of its services and has covered the initial costs.

Aberdeenshire Council has two surveyors whose prime purpose is to monitor contract compliance and safety throughout the school transport network—that is some 174 schools and 700 contracts. Non-compliance, such as the failure to appropriately display the signs, results in penalties against the contract. Elsewhere, as Maureen Watt said, it has piloted the interactive school bus stop technology and the “bus stop!” education packs. Crucially, it has required the provision of seat belts in all home-to-school transport services since 2010. Belting up in a car has been second nature since it became law in 1983 and we know that wearing a seat belt can dramatically reduce the risk of serious injury or death. I am surprised that 30 years later it is not yet compulsory on buses.

I welcomed the announcement in March that the UK Government will transfer to us the powers to make it mandatory for buses that are dedicated to taking children to and from school to provide seat belts. I would be grateful if the minister could provide us with an update on the Scottish Government’s plans and the reasons why—if the reports are correct—that measure will not be phased in until 2018.

My colleague Sir Malcolm Bruce highlighted further options while seeking to introduce a new road traffic offence to prevent overtaking of school buses when children are boarding or alighting, to which my colleague Liam McArthur referred. Malcolm Bruce told this Parliament’s Public Petitions Committee in December 2009 of the benefits of standardising seat belt types, flashing signage and the requirement to remove school bus signs when vehicles are not operating as such.

When parents entrust their children to others each morning, whether at the school gates or the bus stop, they rightly expect them to be safe and secure. There is a duty of care. It must not take further accidents to focus minds on better protecting children during the school run.

There is much more to be done, but as everyone else has said, the initiatives would not require under-pressure local authorities to fund significant investment or new infrastructure. It is often affordable, practicable and primarily cultural changes that are needed, but they are changes that will help save lives.

17:41  

I am delighted that Stewart Stevenson, the MSP for Banffshire and Buchan Coast, has received cross-party support for his motion on the importance of school bus safety around Scotland.

Like Mary Scanlon and other colleagues who have spoken, I congratulate Mr Ron Beaty. As Mary Scanlon said, a success of the Scottish Parliament is its petitions system, which is the best way of providing access to democracy and making sure that issues are not always left to politicians, so that people such as Mr Beaty can have an input and can change legislation. Let us remind ourselves that he first petitioned the Parliament on the matter as early as 2005. It is imperative that recommendations from Transport Scotland are implemented across the country. I share his frustration about that.

At the heart of the matter is where the power lies to change legislation on bus safety standards. That power, like many others, is still reserved to Westminster, as Maureen Watt said. If a call could be made today, it is for that power to be devolved.

We all care about improving school transport safety, but where we do it is most important. European directive 2003/20/EC states that buses must be fitted with seat belts, but directives from Europe are only directives—as we know, on this matter it is up to Westminster to make them law.

Another example that we debated this morning at the Justice Committee is the lack of devolved power to tackle drink driving. Most such powers are reserved, which makes it slow and cumbersome for us here to increase road safety. If the Parliament wanted to increase penalties for a school bus driver who was over the drink-driving limit—there might be a new limit next month—it would not be able to do so.

Does the member agree that the campaign for schoolchildren that is running this week in the Moray Council, Aberdeen City Council and Aberdeenshire Council areas called safe drive stay alive helps immensely?

I thank Maureen Watt very much for that. She will be pleased to know that I signed the motion today to celebrate that initiative. It is a fantastic event, given that youngsters from lots of different academies and primaries go to it. When I saw all the films and testimonies from people from different emergency services telling our youngsters that safety is important, I remembered that, when I came into the Beach ballroom in Aberdeen for the event, there was a line of buses waiting to take the youngsters back to their academy or primary. I thought, “Let’s make sure that all those buses have seat belts,” and now we are happy that they have.

It is very important that safety advice is given to the youngsters as early as possible, because we need to have a culture of safety. A culture of safety is relevant not only for us adults—and certainly not only for us politicians—but for our youngsters, who need to understand its importance from the start. It makes life a lot easier: it makes youngsters better drivers later, when they might not try to pass a school bus that has stopped next to a school. It is very important that we think about that. Safety for our youngsters is important, and a culture of safety must be recognised in this debate.

17:45  

I, too, congratulate Stewart Stevenson on securing this important debate. Children’s road safety matters to us all, and road safety in general has particular resonance in north-east Scotland.

Ron Beaty is an outstanding example of an active citizen. He was affected by a tragic accident to a child on our roads and has worked tirelessly to reduce the risk to other children of suffering in the way that his granddaughter has. In that he is not alone, as we have heard. He has put a particular focus on safety around school buses and highlighted the responsibilities of government at every level.

As we have heard, the matter is not for this Parliament alone or uniquely for Scottish ministers; there are responsibilities at both United Kingdom and local government levels. I understand that Mr Beaty has raised petitions with this Parliament and the United Kingdom Department for Transport, and he has lobbied his local council as well as MPs and MSPs in the north-east region.

Mr Beaty has put a particular focus on this place and those who are accountable to it. I read his comments in The Press and Journal this morning, in which he said that Transport Scotland should

“stop arguing and making excuses”

for not doing more and called on the Scottish Government to use the powers that it has to take the issue forward.

Members have been right to emphasise that this is not just an issue for the north-east, but there is no doubt that our region has a particular issue of danger on its roads. Aberdeenshire has the highest rate of fatal and serious accidents in Scotland, according to Transport Scotland figures for last year, which were published just last month, with more fatal accidents to people of all ages than any other council area. The number of accidents involving children on roads across the north-east is also high, and the need for action is clear.

Local councils are taking the issue seriously. As we heard, just yesterday Aberdeenshire community safety partnership hosted the 10th annual safe drive stay alive event at the Beach ballroom in Aberdeen, supported by the police, fire and ambulance services, NHS Grampian and all three councils in Aberdeen, Aberdeenshire and Moray. As has been described, pupils and guests alike were gripped by the testimony of survivors of accidents and relatives of people affected by their impact. It seems that the consequences of unsafe behaviour on our roads came across loud and clear to all concerned.

The roadshows are aimed at making young people not only safer and better pedestrians but safer and better drivers when they get behind the wheel. In the 10 years that the safe drive stay alive campaign has been running for, the number of fatal accidents in the north-east involving young drivers has fallen significantly, although there is clearly a good deal more to do.

As we have heard, we need an equal emphasis on making the school bus run safer for all concerned. Transport Scotland’s guidance on improving bus safety is certainly helpful, but the question is whether more can be done to ensure that its recommendations are implemented in full, across the board.

I hope that the minister can tell us what more he can do in partnership and with the powers that he has, and how he hopes to increase the buy-in of partners across Scotland. Families should not have to worry about whether their child is going to come home safely from school. That is the point of today’s debate, and Mr Beaty’s impatience for further progress deserves a positive response to make his long journey worth while.

17:49  

First, I express my gratitude to Stewart Stevenson for bringing this important matter to Parliament and, as all other members have done, to Mr Ron Beaty, whose tireless commitment to improving the safety of our young people as they travel to and from school deserves the utmost praise and, indeed, wider recognition than it has so far had.

There are tragic family circumstances related to his efforts and I can only imagine the pain that that has caused, so his tenacity over so many years is an example to us all. He also speaks and campaigns on behalf of Alexander Milne and Robyn Oldham, who have been mentioned, who died in 2008, at the ages of 12 and 15, after being struck by cars when they stepped off school buses in Aberdeenshire.

There is no greater responsibility than the protection of our young people, and Scottish ministers remain unwavering in our endeavours to keep them safe. Reducing the risks to children as they travel between home and the classroom plays a key role in our efforts.

All parents face a natural apprehension when leaving their children in the care of others. However, as we wave our children off to school in the morning, none of us should have to worry that they will not come home safely at the end of the day. Therefore, the Scottish Government is progressing a range of measures to improve safety on dedicated school transport. I am thankful that the risk of children being seriously injured on bus journeys is small, but there is no room for complacency.

Ensuring that school buses have clear and visible signs to show that they are carrying young people is vital. We have heard reservations from various quarters around the minimum legal requirement on school bus signs. I want to be clear on that matter: the Scottish Government agrees that there is room for improvement, but the powers to legislate in that area rest with Westminster, and the UK Government has refused our request for the devolution of competence, which is extremely disappointing to say the least. Despite that, we will not be sidetracked in our efforts and Transport Scotland has introduced a range of measures to promote best practice in the area, encouraging local authorities to embrace high-visibility signage that builds on the minimum standards.

As members have mentioned, we have published guidance that not only details the legislative requirements, but encourages local authorities to go further. We are often berated in the chamber for insisting that local authorities do things; in this case, we have encouraged them to go further. To supplement the best practice guidance, Transport Scotland also ran workshops, where further encouragement was given to adopt enhanced signage.

Mary Scanlon and Alison McInnes put a challenge to the Scottish Government to do more. I accept that challenge; the request is perfectly legitimate. However, neither of them showed any inclination to support the further devolution of the relevant powers to Scotland from the Westminster Parliament. I am happy to give way to either of the members if they wish to show support for that, because those additional powers would allow us to take further measures. I am not saying that there is not more that we can do, and I am happy to discuss the matter further. In fact, Mr Beaty is in the gallery and I am more than happy to meet him again to discuss what more we can do.

I do not have my speech in front of me—I have given it to the official report—but I was quoting the 2010 report’s foreword. The devolution settlement is going to the Smith commission, but the promises that Keith Brown made in 2010 in relation to a consistent approach still stand—the devolution settlement, which comes four years later, will make no difference to those promises.

It is unfortunate that Mary Scanlon did not use her intervention to say that she would support devolution of the powers that I mentioned, which are crucial to us taking the matter further. If we had a consensus in the Parliament on that, it would make a stronger case for the UK Government to devolve the powers.

The powers that we have used and the guidance that we have issued, along with the further encouragement to local authorities are, as I say, not the final word: we should look to do more and I accept that. However, we will be building on the effective work in Aberdeenshire, where there has been a successful pilot, which led to the local authority-wide roll-out of enhanced signage.

Despite the UK Government’s reluctance to drive forward changes in this area, we are working with local authorities to promote innovative approaches. That is the right approach to take. It is envisaged, for example, that the Glasgow pilot will provide a robust analysis, helping us to further explore how best to promote and support the implementation of enhanced school bus signs more widely across Scotland.

In addition to signage, we are also driving forward improvements more widely, and members will be aware that I have announced our intention to introduce legislation in the next session of Parliament to ensure that seat belts are fitted to all dedicated school transport vehicles in Scotland. Alison McInnes asked why we have to wait until 2018 for those measures. We have made it clear that, as Stewart Stevenson said, it can be extremely expensive for local authorities to vary contracts. Therefore, by giving them the time—which is, in fact, the approach that was taken in Wales, where there was an agreement between local authorities and the Welsh Assembly Government—such changes can be effected when the new contracts come up. Not all councils should have to wait until 2018, but that is the backstop. That is why we have taken that approach.

In a world in which commercial operations are under ever greater scrutiny, does the minister agree that events such as this debate can often lead companies to act ahead of legislation? We should not underestimate the ability of that to happen.

Indeed. Another point is that local authorities have substantial discretion to insist on higher standards. As Alex Rowley said, there are sometimes resource implications in that regard. When I was a council leader, I faced the same challenge to do with reducing the school bus service to the statutory minimum, and I always refused to do so. However, resources are always a question for local authorities.

Enhanced signage is an important measure, which will ensure schoolchildren’s safety on home-to-school transport. We have set up a working group of partners, which is taking forward discussions to ensure that everyone involved is ready for the changes that will come into effect. We are aware that there can be issues with bus operators who fail to remove school signs when they undertake journeys without children on board. That is disappointing. The guidance is clear and local authorities should make that a condition of contracts with operators.

We will continue to work with partners to consider what further action we can take. I repeat my offer to meet Mr Beaty again. I have met him on a number of occasions when he has come to meetings of the Parliament’s committees and I acknowledge the work that he has done. If he is aware of further suggestions that we can take forward with the powers that we have, I will be more than happy to hear them—indeed, I will be happy to hear suggestions from any of the members who have spoken in the debate.

It is vital that we promote safety for all our pupils as they go to and from school. That is why we are working to reduce traffic speeds on school routes and around schools. Lewis Macdonald, in his very balanced speech, acknowledged that different levels of democracy have different powers in this area. We must try to work together for the common good.

We are also working to promote risk-assessed school transport pick-up and drop-off points, to encourage the regular review of school travel plans and to promote education materials that foster road safety behaviour that can last a lifetime. Through that comprehensive approach, we can continue to reduce the risks to young people who use the roads on their way to school. That is a goal towards which I am sure that all of us in the Parliament and beyond strive.

Meeting closed at 17:56.