Meeting of the Parliament

Meeting date: Thursday, March 29, 2012

Official Report 1082KB pdf

---

Community Transport

The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S4M-02387, in the name of Jim Hume, on the road forward for community transport. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.

Motion debated,

That the Parliament believes that community transport initiatives play a vital role throughout Scotland in meeting the needs of many communities, particularly in remote and rural areas; considers that community transport services are viewed as a lifeline by many older or disabled people residing in areas currently underserved by commercial bus operators; further considers that such services help to improve the wellbeing of service users and are an illustration of effective preventative spending by delaying the entry of older people into residential accommodation; notes that one of the key objectives of the concessionary bus travel scheme is to “allow older and disabled people (especially those on low incomes) improved access to services, facilities and social networks by ‘free’ scheduled bus services; and so promote social inclusion”; understands that in some areas there are no regular scheduled bus services and where community transport services are the only alternative; notes the work by organisations in the third sector such as Age Scotland in campaigning for the widening of access to such services; commends The Bridge for operating the Teviot Wheels and Tweed Wheels services in the Scottish Borders, the latter winning a Queen’s Award for Voluntary Service in 2011, and acknowledges calls for greater consideration of and support for such services in future.

17:07

The purpose of the debate is to highlight the outstanding and vital contributions that are made by often unnoticed community organisations and unsung volunteers across Scotland. Those volunteers assist our elderly and disabled citizens daily to lead more active and social lives.

I thank the members from across the parties—from every single party—who have supported my motion, and those who have decided to remain in the chamber for the debate, especially given that the recess starts tonight.

The Community Transport Association in Scotland describes community transport as

“flexible transport run by the community for the community.”

Community transport is an example of people being empowered, knowing what is best for their area and taking responsibility for solving their own problems. The CTA in Scotland, which is represented in the public gallery, has about 160 members. Many of the groups in our communities are such small operations that they do not become members. In all, there are some 250 such organisations across Scotland.

Yesterday, the CTA in Scotland was at Parliament to launch “The CTA State of the Sector Report for Scotland 2012”. It is the first such survey of Scotland’s community transport network and it was compiled by surveying Scotland’s 80 largest community transport organisations. The report shows that there is a vibrant and expanding network in this country, which is sustained by at least 2,500 volunteers who contribute more than 278,500 hours of their time, which at the current rate of the minimum wage, would amount to a value of approximately £1.7 million annually. Of course, that is a significant underestimate because of the inability of the CTA in Scotland to reach many of the smaller operations.

What, exactly, are those groups doing in our communities? They are providing 3.5 million passenger journeys every year, 80 per cent of which are for elderly or disabled people, with a fleet of more than 900 vehicles. Those journeys are provided for people who for financial, physical or logistical reasons do not have access to cars, taxis or buses. They include the child who cannot access a bus service to get to school, the elderly person who has difficulty completing their shopping, the sick person who needs to attend a healthcare appointment and so on. Often, the most disadvantaged members of our society are not best served by our transport network.

There are a number of outstanding providers in South Scotland, such as the Teviot wheels project, which operates out of Hawick; the Annandale Transport Initiative, of which Elaine Murray will be aware; the Gala wheels initiative; and the award-winning Berwickshire wheels project, which has 28 volunteer drivers who cover some 47,000 miles per year.

I recently spent some time with Tweed wheels in Peebles, which has been transporting people around Tweeddale since 1997. In the past 12 months it has transported more than 3,000 passengers around the Borders, thanks to its dedicated and hard-working team of volunteers. In recognition of that service, it deservedly received the Queen’s award for voluntary service last year. Teviot wheels is operated in conjunction with Tweed wheels by the organisation The Bridge. Both services are shortly due to celebrate their first anniversary after a highly successful first year. Here’s to many more for them.

What more can be done to sustain Scotland’s network of community transport organisations? Members will note that my motion quoted a Government statement on one of the objectives of the concessionary bus travel scheme—namely, that the scheme will

“allow older and disabled people ... improved access to services, facilities and social networks by ‘free’ scheduled bus services”.

We should be proud of the way in which the concessionary fares scheme has allowed our elderly and disabled citizens to live more independent lives. However, for a variety of reasons, many people who have a pass are currently underserved by commercial bus operators. It is those people who are most reliant on the types of services that are offered by groups such as Tweed wheels. That is why community transport providers are calling for the extension of the concessionary fares scheme to cover their operations, which are entirely in keeping with the objectives of the scheme.

Currently, around 90 per cent of the sector operates under section 19 permits, which allow groups to carry socially excluded people but not the general public, thereby making them ineligible for that particular source of funding. An elderly person in a rural area may need to pay a subsidised rate of 50p per mile to travel in a community transport vehicle to do their shopping, whereas their elderly sibling in an urban area can simply hop on a local bus and use their pass.

The sector claims £660,000 annually from the bus service operators grant. Such funding is always welcome, but there is to be a significant squeeze on the budget in the next financial year. Community transport providers are understandably nervous at a time when demand for their services is increasing year on year.

Our population is ageing, and it is the older demographic group that makes the most use of such services. Organisations such as Age Scotland—which is also represented in the gallery this evening—and the CTA in Scotland are calling for the concessionary fares scheme to be extended to include section 19 permits. One official from Tweed wheels told me that the extension of the concessionary fares scheme would enable the group to offset its dwindling funds from other sources and continue to provide a subsidised service to the most vulnerable members of its community.

The challenges for the concessionary fares scheme and bus operators were highlighted in the media just yesterday, and we know that budgets are tight. The Government’s 2009 review of free bus travel did not consider community transport in any great depth, but it produced an estimate of the cost of extending the schemes, which amounted to roughly 3 per cent only of the next financial year’s concessionary fares budget. That is a bargain when one considers the improvement to wellbeing that service users derive through such effective preventative spend.

The challenges that are being placed on the concessionary fares budget and bus operators have been highlighted recently in the media. Although the Government is intent only on reviewing operator reimbursement, it is clear that a more thorough review of the entire scheme must take place. I hope that, when that review is eventually undertaken, consideration will be given to the extension of the scheme to cover section 19 permits. I look forward to hearing the minister’s views on the matter when he sums up the debate.

17:15

I thank Jim Hume for bringing this important debate to the chamber and for lodging a motion that is comprehensive and has a lot of meat in it.

I have been a strong supporter of community transport since the Parliament was established. As the first minister with responsibility for transport in the Scottish Parliament, one of the most pleasurable things that I did was go to various parts of rural Scotland, work with the people there and kick off the grant support for community transport. I know the huge change that it has made to ordinary people’s lives. For many people in rural communities, community transport initiatives are a lifeline. For people who are not car owners, who live in an area that has no local bus services or who have some form of disability, there are no alternatives; it is just impossible to get out and about.

We need to view community transport as a preventative measure. It enables people to live independently and with dignity in their own homes, sometimes with extra support. It also enables them to access community events and facilities, to go shopping—activities that the rest of us take for granted—and to take part in human interaction, whether that is talking to other people or volunteering. The service is fantastic and important.

I, too, was dismayed at the cut in the bus service operators grant. I know that, in my region, that has led to bus fares going up and services being reduced. With regard to my region, I point out that, although community transport is vital for rural communities, it is also important for urban communities. As an urban dweller, I must say that although some parts of the Lothians have good bus services, they are not good enough for people who have physical disabilities, who do not live near a bus stop and who would not get out without community transport.

In Lothian, there are several community transport projects, including the Pilton Equalities Project, Dove transport and Lothian Community Transport Services. Those services exist because the traditional bus services do not meet people’s needs. Handicabs in particular does a great job. When I had the chance to invite a local hero to the opening of Parliament following the last elections, I invited Muriel Williams, who is an Edinburgh resident who has spent more than 20 years raising awareness of and supporting community transport initiatives. Community transport is a lifeline in rural communities, but as some of you will have been surprised to hear, it is also important in urban areas. The Pilton Equalities Project runs 90 local projects. Without the community transport that it runs, the people who need that support to visit events that are held by mental health groups, older people’s groups and so on would simply not be able to do so.

I very much support the profile that Jim Hume has given this issue by bringing it to the chamber.

There is an issue about cost. Local people tell me that they have a taxi card that lets them go on two visits a week. It is not free; they must still make a contribution. Community transport also has to be paid for. However, without it, people would have to choose every week between going to the shops or going to a local project, and I do not think that that is a choice that people should have to make. The benefits to older people who are able to get out of the house, socialise with other people and get advice and support are important, and community transport is vital to ensuring that they can do those things.

I hope that the minister, in his response, will talk about support for community transport in terms of the capacity of groups to run those services and to provide the accessible minibuses that are needed, and in terms of concessionary travel. Even when there are buses in their areas, a lot of older people cannot use them and, in communities where there are no buses at all, community transport means that they have a chance to get out and about.

I hope that the minister will look at this issue. It is important for rural and urban areas across the country.

17:19

I congratulate Jim Hume on securing this debate, which is on an important issue, particularly to those of us who represent large rural areas.

Members who have been kind enough to have offered me a lift from time to time will know that I largely rely on public transport to get around the south-west of Scotland. Therefore, the challenges in accessing public transport are not alien to me; I certainly have experience of them.

I will refer mainly to work that is going in Dumfries and Galloway to develop the role of community transport in partnership with the local council. In Dumfries and Galloway, only around 15 per cent of bus services are commercially viable; the remainder rely on public subsidy in order to operate. I appreciate that maintaining those subsidised services is increasingly challenging and that high fuel costs are a significant problem in Dumfries and Galloway. The region has that in common with the rest of rural Scotland.

The south west of Scotland transport partnership has its work cut out in trying to support operators that find that, even with a subsidy, many of the longer routes that have low passenger numbers may no longer be financially viable. When Swestrans commenced its recent retendering exercise, estimates suggested that between 30 and 50 per cent of the region might end up with no bus services. It is greatly to the credit of Swestrans that that situation has not come to pass, although the underlying economic trends have not disappeared.

Dumfries and Galloway Council has been working with the third sector on a potential solution in developing a partnership approach that permits community transport operators to tender for timetabled services and provide local authority transport services, including for schools and social work services. An example of that innovative approach is the partnership between the council and Wigtownshire Community Transport. An approach has been developed that allows the community transport organisation to use the council’s bus fleet to undertake a school run in the morning, after which the organisation has bus use for other services for the rest of the day. It also has them during school holidays. The approach started as a trial that was supported by the European northern periphery programme, and there is now work being done towards its operating on a self-sustaining basis. An additional benefit is that Wigtownshire Community Transport now employs its own drivers, which generates employment and adds to its list of achievements.

I am not suggesting that that precise model could or should be rolled out across the country, although the underlying principle has wide relevance, and nor am I arguing that the approach would solve all the complex transport challenges that rural Scotland faces. However, it shows that there are innovative partnerships and that there is joined-up thinking between our local councils and community transport providers.

I also want to highlight the work that the Dumfries and Galloway third sector forum has done as part of the Parliament’s third community partnerships project. Its recently published report, which is entitled “A Road to Health”, identifies a number of issues that relate to the transport of older people to and from hospitals and clinical appointments, and underlines the extent to which adequate transport provision in remote and rural areas, such as south-west Scotland, is vital for the health and wellbeing of older citizens.

I am grateful for the opportunity to highlight the good work that has been started in Dumfries and Galloway on improving community transport, although I certainly do not underestimate the challenges of meeting the wider transport needs of those who reside in our rural communities.

I endorse Jim Hume’s remarks about transport in rural Scotland being a key element in supporting our older and vulnerable citizens. In that respect, the costs of doing so represent preventative spending in the terms that were elaborated in the Christie commission’s report, which was published last year. Indeed, we can find in that report a comprehensive statement of the principles that should inform our approach to community transport. In particular, transport services have to be designed around the needs of older and vulnerable people who live in our rural communities.

The integrated approach that Dumfries and Galloway Council is promoting is an example of the Christie principles being put into action. It will result in real benefits and will give community transport in the region an even more prominent and integral role in the future as a partner that provides flexible and responsive transport that can fill in the gaps in provision of which we are all only too aware.

17:24

I, too, congratulate Jim Hume on bringing the important subject of the road forward for community transport to the chamber for debate. In the time that is available to me, I want to expand on a couple of points that Aileen McLeod made.

Just two nights ago in the chamber, we had the final event of the third community partnerships project, which has been run under the auspices of the Parliament. A group from Dumfries and Galloway gave its final report on the road to health—Dr McLeod referred to that. The group started as a small group of volunteers, who came together under the auspices of the community partnerships project to campaign to improve the provision of health-related transport for older people and their carers in rural Dumfries and Galloway. As often happens, the project started with a fairly widespread questionnaire and consultation, some of whose findings are worth considering.

The survey found that more than a third of the people in the sample—which was considerable—were unable to do their own shopping, and that two thirds of those who could do their shopping lived more than a mile from shops, while nearly 10 per cent lived more than 10 miles from shops. It found that more than 40 per cent of older people had difficulty getting out of their houses and that nearly half of that group found it almost impossible to get out. Finally, it found that a quarter of older people did not get out of their houses at all in a month—I find that staggering.

When the figures are extrapolated across the region, they become stark, suggesting that 15,000 older people in Dumfries and Galloway cannot do their shopping, 3,000 older people live more than 10 miles from shops, 18,000 older people have difficulty getting out and—this is the figure that hits me—more than 10,000 older people get out of their houses less frequently than once a month. I fully accept that this was not a scientific survey but, even if the figures are halved, they remain alarming.

I hope that a motion that I lodged on “Road to Health”, which has the support of Elaine Murray and Aileen McLeod—and I hope will have the support of Jim Hume—will be debated in May and that we will come back to the subject.

No sooner had the “Road to Health” figures hit my desk than I came across the rural transport solutions information and networking day, which was held in Kirkcudbright in January. It was attended by a number of members, certainly from the Labour benches—I was outnumbered; let me put it in that way. The event was fascinating. We learned about a pilot scheme whose objective is to implement vehicle sharing by partner organisations, to reduce underutilisation of vehicles.

The estimable Brian McIlwraith, who runs Wigtownshire Community Transport, which is very much the vehicle for the pilot scheme in the area, told us that before the pilot got under way, the school transport fleet in Wigtownshire worked for only two and a half hours a day. For the rest of the time it was idle, sitting in garages doing nothing. In the four months since a new, more joined-up approach was adopted and the fleet became available 24/7, the fleet has done more than 22,000 miles and carried more than 8,000 passengers, who would not otherwise have had a form of public transport to utilise.

I very much take Sarah Boyack’s point that community transport is not just a rural issue. The Wigtownshire service now runs a service in Stranraer—it is unsubsidised and qualifies for concessionary travel under section 22 of the Transport Act 1985. Wigtownshire Community Transport recognised a problem and dealt with it.

There are public transport difficulties throughout rural Scotland and in parts of urban Scotland, which I am sure the minister recognises. Community transport has a huge part to play in solving some of the problems.

17:28

I thank Jim Hume for bringing this members’ business debate to the Parliament. I am encouraged by the cross-party support for his motion.

Since becoming an MSP, I have spoken in the Parliament about community transport almost as much as I have spoken on all other subjects, because the issue is so important to me and to many constituents in South Scotland, as well as to constituents in urban areas and throughout Scotland, as we heard.

As it rightly says in the motion,

“community transport initiatives play a vital role throughout Scotland in meeting the needs of many communities”.

Like other members, I commend the work of the Community Transport Association.

I will focus, first, on the importance of having a diverse range of community transport initiatives, rather than a one-size-fits-all solution, and secondly, on the need to widen access to public transport for elderly and disabled people, which is mentioned in the motion in the context of Age Scotland’s recent campaign.

At the start of the month, I had the opportunity to visit Tweed wheels in Peebles, as Jim Hume has done, to meet volunteer drivers and learn about the services that they offer. The group provides community transport services in Tweeddale, which enable local voluntary groups and people who have mobility needs to hire vehicles for travel to all kinds of activities.

There are other excellent community transport initiatives in South Scotland. Clydesdale community transport provides a door-to-door transport service that helps some of the most vulnerable people in the community to travel where there is no other available option.

Another great scheme, which combines rural development with community transport, is organised by the Rural Development Trust in Douglas Water. When I was a teacher, we used it to take a swimming group swimming, which would not otherwise have been possible, on cost grounds. It is involved with the WRVS in Lesmahagow, which I visited recently. Among the people I met was Tom Morris, a volunteer driver, who told me that, as well as providing a useful service to the local community, the scheme has given him the confidence to meet new people and a new purpose in life.

Such schemes are essential for people who often find themselves isolated and for whom a lack of transport makes it nearly impossible to access local services. That is a real problem for older people who, as other members have highlighted, can all too easily find themselves stranded at home, and for people with disabilities, who find it difficult to locate accessible transport. The Scottish Government recently acknowledged the important role that organisations such as Tweed wheels can play, and I was encouraged to hear its commitment to looking at how it can support such initiatives in the future.

Like other members, I attended a recent rural transport solutions event in Kirkcudbright. It was highlighted to me that, rather than there being one solution that fits every situation, there is a myriad possible solutions, each of which should be actively encouraged. As Aileen McLeod highlighted, Wigtownshire Community Transport, which works with the Scottish Ambulance Service, NHS Dumfries and Galloway and local authority partners, should be commended for the access that it gives people to numerous services and leisure facilities. There are door-to-door services that take people to specially arranged activities. Community groups run scheduled services where no other public transport service exists, although they do not do so simply to cover for cuts to services. In addition, there are self-drive services that provide accessible transport vehicles for individuals with reduced mobility.

All those services are lifelines for local communities and, as the motion says, play a vital role in meeting the needs of those whom they serve. We must encourage more such schemes and support those that exist, and I welcome the cross-party support that has been expressed for that this evening. I hope that I am not making too many assumptions when I say that I also welcome the support for the extension of the concessionary fares scheme, which Jim Hume explored.

17:32

I, too, thank Jim Hume for securing a debate on the topic of community transport.

Community transport plays an extremely important role in keeping potentially excluded people connected with their friends and the services that they need. Importantly, it helps them to retain their independence for longer than they may otherwise do. The motion recognises the role that community transport plays in allowing people to stay in their homes as they grow old. Community transport also takes children to school and folk to work and to healthcare. In rural areas, the public transport system cannot reach every house and every person who needs a lift into town for the shopping or into the village for a social evening. That is where the flexibility of the community transport model most clearly fills the gap.

I live in and represent a fairly urban region, where we have an excellent bus service, but even here community transport plays a vital role. I whole-heartedly support Sarah Boyack’s comments. I have an elderly neighbour who is almost 90. She is very independent and asking neighbours for help makes her miserable. She resents doing that; it has a real impact on her wellbeing. I stay three minutes from a bus stop. That is nothing for me, but such distances make bus stops absolutely inaccessible to the many people like her, which is why community transport is so important.

In Edinburgh, valuable community transport services are provided by several organisations, including Dove transport, the South Edinburgh Amenities Group, the Pilton Equalities Project, Lothian Community Transport Services and Handicabs, which provides the dial-a-ride service. All of them are doing great work, but the sector faces significant pressures.

For that reason, I was pleased to host the launch of the CTA’s state of the sector report in Parliament. It is clear that this diverse sector is made up of lots of very small community-rooted groups that understand local need.

I was struck by figures in the report predicting the growth in demand from our changing demographic. The number of people over 75 will rise by 20 per cent by 2020 and will continue to rise. At the same time, the Scottish Ambulance Service has reduced the number of lifts that it provides for non-emergency appointments. Clearly, the ambulances must prioritise emergency trips, because there will always be accidents that require immediate attention. However, as the Christie commission made clear, it is cheaper in the long term to ensure that we tackle problems before they become crises.

People still need access to non-emergency health services and the community transport sector is well placed to provide it, but not without more support and a strategic approach from the national health service to working with the community transport sector. The need for the health service to work collaboratively with the CTA was made very clear to me yesterday.

It is also clear that the community transport model lends itself to the future that Christie envisaged of a bottom-up approach to the design and delivery of local services. Age Scotland’s hustings last night emphasised the need for community connectedness for elderly people in terms of health and wellbeing, which can make a massive difference to their lives. The community transport sector is incredibly important and we must support it.

The sector is perhaps a little like aspects of the cycling sector, in that a little money can go a long way and make a big difference. As Jim Hume said, the CTA has valued the time given in volunteering to be the equivalent of about £1.79 million every year at the minimum wage. However, it is worth more than that to the people who use the service to stay connected to their friends and retain their independence.

17:36

I, too, congratulate Jim Hume on securing the debate. As he said, community transport is particularly important in rural areas such as Dumfries and Galloway and the Scottish Borders, where public transport is at best infrequent and sometimes non-existent.

Community transport services such as those that are provided by the Annandale Transport Initiative are very important in my constituency. The organisation was established in 1999 and provides essential services, including vehicle hire, transport for individuals, day trips and opportunities for volunteering. The initiative provides minibuses, accessible people carriers, registered bus services on routes to Peebles and Carlisle, and a programme of weekly day trips across the south of Scotland and up to Glasgow and Edinburgh that are open to anyone to book. In fact, the last time that I had a look at the programme I was very tempted to book a trip.

The initiative provides individual transport that prioritises people with mobility problems, but it is open to anyone who has difficulty in using public transport, including those whose needs cannot be met by the existing public transport network—for example, people can use the transport to attend general practice or hospital appointments, or to go to day centres.

The minibuses are available for hire to voluntary groups and community organisations serving the Annandale area. Community organisations can also hire them to provide shopping trips, outings, transport to meetings and even United Kingdom short-break holidays. Indeed, the village primary school from Annandale has taken advantage of that provision to take pupils up to visit the Scottish Parliament, and at least one of the local day centres books a minibus for its annual members’ holiday.

The Annandale Transport Initiative has been successful in attracting funding from a variety of agencies, including the former Scottish Executive rural community transport initiative, which was one of the very first supporters. Many years ago, Sarah Boyack came to Moffat as transport minister to launch the initiative’s first bus. That was more years ago than either of us would possibly care to remember. The initiative has also had support from the Lloyds TSB Foundation, Dumfries and Galloway Council, Age Concern, the Big Lottery Fund, Rotary clubs and the People’s Postcode Trust.

Dumfries and Galloway Council honoured the commitment to continue to fund the ATI until March 2010. Since then, funding has been provided by the Annandale and Eskdale area committee. However, the continuation of that funding is uncertain and a bit of emergency funding had to be provided last year.

There is a long-standing request, which I have raised with a number of ministers over the years, to allow the holders of concessionary bus passes to use their passes on community transport services.

Demand-led transport was a component of the Labour debate on buses that was held in Parliament on 26 January this year. During the debate, Mr Brown, the Minister for Housing and Transport, informed us that as of 1 April—the beginning of next week—he intended to allow demand-led transport services that are available to the general public to be registered as local bus services and to qualify for the bus service operators grant and concessionary travel.

That announcement was very welcome, but I wonder, as Jim Hume did, whether the minister will clarify it. Does it refer only to community transport that is covered by section 22 permits, or will it be extended to some of the eligible, appropriate services that hold a section 19 permit, for which individuals pay a fee? I understand from the Community Transport Association’s state of the sector report, which was launched at the event that Alison Johnstone hosted yesterday, that 70 per cent of community transport organisations hold a section 19 permit, whereas 20 per cent hold a section 22 permit. Therefore, extension of section 19 permit services would benefit a much greater number of older people and the services on which they rely.

Community transport provides an essential service in many rural areas. I hope that we will find imaginative and innovative ways of providing sustainable support for such services over the coming years.

17:40

I, too, congratulate Jim Hume on securing the debate and on the broad support that he has achieved for it.

Every member who has spoken has recognised the important role that community transport groups and organisations play in providing transport services for vulnerable people throughout Scotland, and I echo that point. As we have heard, such services are often of particular benefit to people with mobility difficulties who cannot access conventional buses and people who live in areas where there are limited or no public transport services. Community transport can offer a more personal touch with trained drivers, passenger escorts, door-to-door transport by accessible minibus and volunteers who use their own cars.

As a number of members mentioned, the users value those services highly. They help individuals to get out and about, to access services, facilities and health appointments, to go shopping—a point that Alex Fergusson made—and to visit friends and family. Being given the option of mobility is extremely important, as it can overcome the sense of isolation. That helps people to remain part of their community and improves their wellbeing.

I applaud the employees and dedicated volunteers who give up their time to help to provide transport services. At least two examples have been mentioned: Teviot wheels and Tweed wheels. In my area, there is Dial-a-Journey Ltd, which I visited earlier this week. That long-running organisation provides a tremendous service and has opened fantastic new premises. Interestingly, it is resourced by and large by the three local authorities in its area but also benefits from substantial support from the Order of Malta, which is involved in many such activities.

Talking of funding, it is true to say that the local authorities are provided with resources to support community transport services in their areas, but we do not ring fence those resources. Local authorities have flexibility on how they spend their funds. We encourage them—that is as far as we would go—to maintain and, where possible, extend spending on community transport services.

We also encourage local authorities to consider community transport options in the provision of transport services in their areas, as well as more efficient and effective use of such services through partnership working and integrated services. The idea of school buses—a resource that was underused previously—being used for additional purposes was mentioned. More efficient use of ambulances was also mentioned. A great deal of work is being done on that, not least by the Strathclyde partnership for transport. When we have constraints on resources, it is right that we get the most out of the resources that we have.

The concessionary travel scheme was mentioned. In case members do not remember, that has cost £180 million this year and is about to go up to £187 million. It services exactly the people about whom we are talking—older people and people with disabilities—as well as disabled veterans, who are a new addition to the budget line.

As Aileen McLeod said, the main reason that that budget line is growing is the cost of fuel. That is a huge factor. It seems pretty obvious that it drives up the cost of transport. For example, CalMac Ferries needs an extra £14.5 million this year alone for ferry costs because of the increase in fuel charges. There is no doubt that there is pressure on budgets.

Sarah Boyack mentioned BSOG. There is no question but that there has been a cut in the overall amount of BSOG, but many rural operators have welcomed the change that levels the playing field between rural and urban services. Three times as many operators will benefit from that change as will lose from it. That has been appreciated because some of the services that were previously under threat now attract more support. That includes rural community transport services.

We have put £3 million into the bus investment fund, which is set up to enable transport authorities to make bus improvements in their areas. Details of that are still to be finalised, but we envisage that organisations will be able to access the fund for, among other things, the development of community transport.

We will look at the system for issuing section 19 permits to community transport services that are not available to the general public. Elaine Murray drew that very distinction in her speech.

Will urban as well as rural authorities be eligible for the Scottish Government’s new money?

Yes. The main driver for establishing the support was the fact that a number of urban operators were losing out from the shift to rural areas. As a result, the funding will also be available to those in urban areas.

Going back to Elaine Murray’s comments, I point out that we have agreed that we should make changes to allow for demand-responsive transport; however, they would have to be for services that were available to the general public. That is the further step that would have to be taken. Jim Hume suggested that the cost of extending the schemes would be about 3 per cent of the budget, or the not insignificant sum of £6 million or £7 million. That said, we will consider all the types of organisations that are able to issue permits and look at the crucial role of the traffic commissioner and the development of a community transport operator database.

We have regular discussions with the CTA; after all, it is the main voice of community transport in the UK and works on behalf of its members to engage Government and to inform, influence and help to shape future community transport policy and development. It is encouraging more transport providers to be less reliant on public funding, which is crucial, and to engage in the social enterprise model of delivery. It is also encouraging providers to consider bidding for local contracts, allowing them to play a bigger part in local transport delivery. Community transport providers must consider how to integrate their services better with the commercial network and, as has been mentioned, ensure that there is no duplication of existing services.

In conclusion, I should mention two points. First of all, the bus stakeholder group has been established and will meet next Tuesday. The CTA will be represented—as it should be, given that it forms part of the transport landscape. Secondly, I am pleased to announce a new £45,000 grant for the CTA in 2012-13 to allow it to continue its operations in Scotland.

Meeting closed at 17:46.