The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 2646 contributions
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 February 2026
Mark Ruskell
Thanks.
I have one last question. I am aware that, at long last, a scheme has been put in place to extend concessionary bus travel to people trapped in the asylum system, who have no recourse to public funds and are effectively destitute. However, I believe that the current budget for the scheme will end on 31 March. Will the Government extend that provision into next year?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 February 2026
Mark Ruskell
Okay. Well, £4 million seems like quite a low amount.
I want to talk about the overall spend, though. We are looking at £472.8 million—half of the Scottish bus industry’s income. The industry says that the scheme is neither a benefit nor a disbenefit to it, but, when we see those figures, it is hard to see how it is not a massive benefit to the industry when substantial numbers of people travel by bus who would not do so were it not for the Government’s investment in the schemes, which is very welcome.
How do we get more out of this? What about the conditionality for the bus companies? What about the linkage with investment in better bus services at either a community level or a regional level? What about the Government’s target for a vehicle mileage reduction? Are we getting the most out of the investment? Could we be hitting other public transport policy objectives by using the existence of the cards and the massive investment as a lever to get more bang for our buck?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 17 February 2026
Mark Ruskell
What does Transport Scotland think about it? Does it have any creative ideas as to how we could use that huge investment to get more people out of their cars? What is the offer for people out there? Are we linking this with travel planning for colleges, universities and workplaces? I do not know. As a transport policy, this has been fantastic, and it is a great initiative that supports individuals. However, when it comes to all the wider transport issues that we are really struggling with at the moment, how do we use this to drive modal shift? That is the key question. What do your officials have to say about that?
11:00
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
Would that not be, in effect, ecocide?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
If there had been a severe environmental impact and clear intent, and if the court had to decide whether to impose a five-year penalty or an eight-year penalty, would an eight-year penalty not feel more like the result of an ecocide offence?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
I am not proposing anything at the moment; I am just exploring the territory. If that provision was available under the 2014 act, would the courts, when deciding whether to impose an eight-year sentence, be able to consider whether there had been a severe environmental impact and whether there had been clear intent? I am just exploring, from your perspective, the argument for a stand-alone offence.
10:30
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
My point is that, if an eight-year prison sentence penalty were available under the 2014 act, would that lead to an equivalent ecocide provision? Are we thinking about something quite distinct by having ecocide at the apex of the legal system—
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
Okay, I understand.
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
Cabinet secretary, you said at the beginning of the evidence session that you would seek to amend the bill to remove the reporting provision. We have heard evidence and views from stakeholders that they would like to see an alternative reporting provision, which would follow any conviction to assess how ecocide was allowed to happen and look at how such an incident could be prevented in future. Is that something that you would consider as an alternative to the straight reporting of the bill?
Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee [Draft]
Meeting date: 2 December 2025
Mark Ruskell
I think that what is being put to us is more about incident reporting. If there was something like a Deepwater Horizon incident—God forbid—in Scotland, it would be about looking back and saying, “How did this occur, given that we have a permitting regime, and what could be learned?” rather than a wider assessment of whether the act is working.