Sue Webber
Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party · Scotland
“I am grateful for the opportunity to contribute, albeit briefly, to today’s debate on the legislative consent motion on the Railways Bill. As colleagues know, the bill represents a significant reshaping of how rail services and rail infrastructure will be overseen across Great Britain.”
“On the subject of public money, the entire premise of the climate plan is that the renewable investment that is outlined happens only because of subsidies from bill payers across the UK. I want to speak about transport.”
“Evidence that was considered by the Net Zero, Energy and Transport Committee made it clear that open-access operators remain unconvinced that the new arrangements will protect their ability to compete on a level playing field.”
“Those are sensible steps. However, our party has a long-standing commitment to a rail system that grows instead of restricts choice, competition and freight capacity, which brings me to the principal issue that prevents me from supporting the LCM today.”
“We are committed to doing what we can, particularly in relation to the EV charging network—which, as an EV driver, I know has improved dramatically in the past five years and which is set to improve even more.”
“Any framework that risks weakening that model, whether unintentionally or through lack of safeguards, must be approached with caution. Similarly, on freight, Scotland has ambitious growth aspirations, but growth depends on confidence that freight paths will be protected, that investment will be worthwhile and that decisions affecting Scot…”
The complete record
Every one of 411 lines we hold for Sue Webber, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 9.
“To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to ensure that the CalMac vessels being constructed in Turkey are delivered on schedule and on budget. (S6O-05283)”
“It is unacceptable that motorists are being treated with contempt by an SNP Government that, shamefully, keeps kicking the can down the road. We are the only party at Holyrood to have proposed bold action to tackle this issue. We would pass an emergency law at Holyrood that would set out a special fast-track process for completing the A9 dualling project. We would also pass an emergency law that would see key sections of the A75 dualled by 2031 and the entire road dualled as quickly as possible thereafter.”
“It has failed to dual any of the A96, despite promising to do so in 2011. The SNP has also spent £30 million on the Inverness to Nairn upgrade despite no construction having begun. If we are serious about unlocking Scotland’s potential, the SNP Government must accelerate the upgrading of key roads such as the A75, the A77 and the A96, and it must finally deliver on its commitment to dual the A9, without rejecting the private investment that could help to make that happen. The state of key roads across Scotland is a national disgrace, and the SNP’s incompetence is continuing to cost lives. SNP ministers have sat on their hands while roads have fallen into a state of total disrepair, despite repeated promises to dual roads such as the A9 and the A96.”
“[Interruption.] Sorry—I am phoning someone by mistake. Scotland’s road network is the backbone of our connectivity and economic growth. Communities across Scotland, from the Borders to the Highlands, rely on safe, efficient and modern roads to access jobs, education, healthcare and life opportunities, yet Scotland’s roads have been neglected by the Scottish National Party. Dangerous and deteriorating roads are costing lives, damaging local economies and leaving motorists stuck with long, unsafe journeys on roads that should have been fixed years ago. Motorists are essential to Scotland’s economy and crucial for our connectivity, but they are being punished by the SNP Government. Too often, promises are made and not delivered. The SNP will dual the A9 10 years late at the very earliest.”
“That will enable us to protect pedestrians, road users and communities and reclaim our streets from those who misuse e-bikes and e-scooters for crime and intimidation. The Deputy Presiding Officer: We move to the open debate. I advise colleagues that we have a lot of interest, so I would be grateful if members could stick to their allocated speaking time, given the time already. 18:10”
“We need campaigns that raise awareness, but we also need police on the ground who are equipped with the right vehicles to pursue offenders, and who can seize dangerous machines, to protect the public. Our constituents deserve to feel safe. My motion is not about politics—it is about public safety, restoring confidence in our communities and saying that Scotland will not tolerate intimidation, lawlessness or crime on our streets. With that in mind, I call on colleagues across the chamber to support my motion, so that we can send a message that Parliament will act—that we will give Police Scotland the tools that it needs and establish a nationwide task force to break the link between e-bikes and organised crime.”
“That is why I am calling today for the creation of a nationwide police task force that is dedicated to tackling the criminal misuse of e-bikes, e- motorbikes and e-scooters. That task force must be equipped to investigate and dismantle the networks that use those vehicles for drug dealing, car theft, house break-ins and other organised crime. Furthermore, high-visibility clothing is not a fashion statement but a necessity, and yet too many riders ignore it and choose instead to cloak themselves in darkness to intimidate people and commit crimes. Traffic laws and speed limits exist for a reason. They are not optional, and they are not suggestions—they are the rules that keep us safe. Some will say that my proposed approach is heavy handed, but the problem continues to get worse.”
“Local authorities and Police Scotland are already stretched for resources and funding, and this problem requires more than the occasional police operation. We need a serious plan that is targeted at this growing threat to public safety on our streets. That is why I am asking the Scottish Government to act decisively by giving Police Scotland the resources that it needs; empowering officers to seize vehicles that are being misused—and let us not give them back; and sending a clear signal that we will not tolerate such behaviour in our communities. Too often, our police are left without the tools, the vehicles or the resources to enable them to respond effectively. Local enforcement is not enough; I believe that, given the scale of the problem, we need a national response.”
“In addition, police departments in New York and Los Angeles have set up specialised task forces to tackle e-bike-enabled robberies and drug trafficking, often using plain-clothes officers and undercover stings. Last week, I met an ex-police officer from West Midlands Police who had been working in the gang unit. He told me of intelligence that they had received that criminal gangs were disguising themselves as Deliveroo drivers to supply and courier drugs across the area, filling their teal bags with drugs and moving about the city with impunity. He told me that he went undercover as a Deliveroo driver and worked with colleagues, and they soon had enough information to put a stop to that illegal activity. The Parliament has a duty to protect the public and to uphold the rule of law.”
“In 2024, across the UK, police confiscated 937 illegal e-bikes—that was up from 511 in the previous year. There have been police and multi- agency operations in Southampton, Greater Manchester and Merseyside, all leading to arrests, the recovery of stolen vehicles and the seizure of e-scooters and e-bikes. The people arrested and the vehicles seized during those operations have been linked to drug smuggling, robberies, knife crime and money laundering. Further afield, cities such as Paris and Amsterdam have introduced strict licensing and registration rules for high-powered e-bikes, alongside police patrols targeting antisocial use.”
“At a time when businesses are already struggling, that is the last thing that people need to deal with. I want to make it clear to those who are listening to the debate or who may be listening back tomorrow that law-abiding cyclists, responsible scooter users and those who genuinely benefit from using electric vehicles should not be tarred with the same brush as criminals, but the numbers who are abusing such vehicles continue to grow. Reports from Police Scotland confirm that such vehicles are increasingly used in organised crime, vehicle theft and antisocial behaviour, and it is not only in Scotland that that is happening. Police forces across the United Kingdom and internationally are responding to the rise in e-bike- associated criminality with targeted operations and seizures and by using new advances in technology.”
“The statue was worth £900, and the closed-circuit television showed the suspect breaking a £350 table in the process of getting away with the theft on his e-bike. At the weekend, there was an incident much closer to my home. James from the Currie, Balerno & District Round Table contacted me to say: “We were out on the Juniper Green Santa run tonight and got buzzed a couple of times by wee punks on the off road bikes” and the “first time ... they were blasting horns.” He told me that he was “concerned they would try and nab a collecting tub so told elves to hold them tightly”. I know that it seems like I am making light of that, but nothing is sacred or left untouched by those who are hellbent on intimidating people who are out volunteering for charities.”
“In May this year, police charged nine people during an initiative targeting illegal e-bikes and e-scooters in Leith. Offences included dangerous riding and using phones while “in control”—in inverted commas—of these machines. In July, a 16-year-old boy was stabbed and robbed of his e-bike. In November, Police Scotland seized 13 e-bikes and charged men between the ages of 18 and 45 with offences including riding with no insurance, riding with no licence and riding with no helmet. Residents had complained of antisocial behaviour such as riding on the pavement, speeding and causing alarm. Just recently—in the season of good will—a masked thief on an e-bike stole an 8-feet-tall Christmas nutcracker statue from outside a bar on George Street.”
“We have all seen it—in Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Dundee and Glasgow, and in towns across the country, these vehicles are being misused in many ways that put ordinary people at risk. Riders are weaving through traffic with no regard for the highway code. Vehicles exceed legal speed limits and often have modifications that make them even more dangerous. Pedestrians are put at risk by reckless drivers. The riders are dressed all in black, with balaclavas and face coverings, and they are breaking the law and committing crimes. I believe that action must be taken and that people should not feel scared or intimidated by the actions of these hooligans. Some members may think that I am exaggerating, but I will list a few examples of recent e-bike and e-scooter crime in Edinburgh alone.”
“I thank everyone who has taken the time to stay behind and speak in this members’ business debate, given the challenging weather tonight. Last week, in the chamber, I asked the Minister for Victims and Community Safety how the Scottish Government “plans to respond to the reported increase in antisocial behaviour and criminality associated with people using e- bikes”.—[Official Report, 3 December 2025; c 21.] That is why I am pleased to have the chance to raise the issue again. My motion for debate today addresses one of the fastest-growing threats to public safety on our streets: the dangerous and antisocial use of e-bikes and e-scooters across Scotland. I want to make it clear that, when I talk about e-bikes, I am also referring to the e- motorbikes—such as Sur-Ron bikes—that we see being used.”
“The time for excuses is over—it is time for answers. 15:54”
“Thirdly, the Government must implement stronger oversight and accountability to prevent further cost overruns, including by providing a detailed plan to deliver the MV Glen Rosa without any further delay. This fiasco is not about shipbuilding. It is about trust. It is about a Government that cannot deliver its most basic promises. The SNP’s failures have left islanders isolated, taxpayers fleeced and Scotland’s reputation for shipbuilding in tatters. The Scottish Conservatives demand clear ministerial accountability for every penny that is spent and every broken promise. A revolving door of transport ministers, chief executive officers and chairmen, along with the lack of a coherent business plan, means that the future of Ferguson Marine is uncertain, and the blame lies with the SNP Government. Enough is enough.”
“My takings are down 20 per cent—tourists have heard the horror stories and stayed away.” Barb Toab, from the Arran ferry action group, summed it all up by saying: “We’ve gone beyond frustrated. We feel like we’ve been abused and ignored by the very people supposed to have our best interests at heart.” The committee is clear on what must happen next. First, Ferguson Marine and the Scottish Government must immediately publish a revised business plan and strategy to set out how the yard will secure sustainable work beyond that on the MV Glen Rosa. Secondly, all future investment must be subject to transparent governance and rigorous value-for-money checks, with clear monitoring of outcomes.”
“Ministers must stop hiding behind excuses and start taking responsibility.” As I have said previously, it should be a given that a nationalised shipyard wins a Scottish Government contract, but ferries that should be being built on the west coast of Scotland are instead being made in eastern Europe. Beyond the numbers lies the human cost. Ena Burke, from Arran, told reporters: “When you live on an island the ferry rules your life. It puts huge pressure on us. You find yourself sitting there crying, thinking I can’t go through this anymore.” Local business owner Morag Kinniburgh said: “People are saying they won’t be back until the ferries are fixed because they can’t risk being stranded.”
“The Public Audit Committee’s report exposes systemic failures: internal audit was so weak that assurance on governance could not be provided; exit packages exceeding £95,000 were paid without ministerial approval; and contractor arrangements bypassed board oversight, leaving the yard liable for £48,000 to HMRC. What has been the SNP’s response? More money, more excuses and still no ferries. Douglas Ross said it best when he said: “This is the SNP’s ferry fiasco—an embarrassment that has cost taxpayers hundreds of millions while islanders are left stranded.”
“The latest figures are staggering: £47.9 million has been allocated for 2025-26, including £38 million for the MV Glen Rosa and £9 million for yard improvements; an additional £14.2 million has been allocated for modernisation; and the forecast cost of the MV Glen Rosa now sits at £185 million, up from £150 million last year. That is not just mismanagement; it is a scandal. The SNP promised island communities lifeline ferries back in 2018. Instead, the MV Glen Sannox entered service six years late, and the MV Glen Rosa will not be delivered until quarter 2 of 2026— which is getting closer and closer, by the way—a full decade after the original contract. Meanwhile, businesses on Arran and the Western Isles suffer, and confidence in the Government collapses.”
“The Public Audit Committee’s unanimous report on Ferguson Marine is a damning indictment of SNP incompetence and failures in ministerial accountability. The SNP’s nationalisation of Ferguson Marine has resulted in islanders having to wait for delayed ferries and taxpayers having to foot the bill for the ballooning costs of new vessels. Since the yard was nationalised in 2019, the Scottish Government has poured more than £500 million of taxpayers’ money into this fiasco. What do we have to show for it? Two ferries—not quite two, remember—that are years late, are massively over budget and have still not been delivered.”
“Ferguson Marine’s future depends on it independently securing work both from the United Kingdom and overseas. It is a Scottish National Party Government-owned yard, so what action is the First Minister taking to ensure that it is competitive, restores its reputation for delivering projects on time and under budget, and can procure its own work rather than relying on a direct award? The First Minister: That is part of our ensuring that the yard has leadership and a workforce in place to support the direction towards its being able to attract orders and operate competitively in international markets. That is what Government support for the yard is all about and the focus of our interventions will be to ensure that that remains the case.”
“To ask the Scottish Government how it plans to respond to the reported increase in antisocial behaviour and criminality associated with people using e-bikes. (S6O-05241)”
“The board gave us an assurance on the progress that is being made, and I will be updating the Parliament in due course on the outcome of that discussion.”
“Following an unannounced HIS inspection in June 2025, NHS Lothian’s maternity service has been escalated to level 3, requiring Government oversight after failing to meet 26 basic standards of care. Only two health board maternity services have been inspected. Will the cabinet secretary accept that now is the time for a nationwide review into our maternity services? Neil Gray: I and the Minister for Public Health and Women’s Health have set out in detail our response to NHS Lothian’s position and the wider concerns that were raised following the BBC’s “Disclosure” documentary. We are taking the issues seriously and are establishing a task force that can help to inform a review. As an immediate update, this morning, I and Ms Minto had a further discussion with NHS Lothian to get a progress update.”
“The issue of open access is critical to the UK Government’s decision making. We have set out in our strategy and our high-level output specification that freight is essential. I am pleased to see that the UK Government has copied that and reflected in its position the need to increase rail freight. That is encouraging, but, until rail powers are fully devolved, we will always have to protect Scotland’s interests in our on-going discussions with the”
“Proposals in the Railways Bill would require the UK Secretary of State for Transport to set an overall target of a 75 per cent increase in the amount of freight moved by rail by 2050. I am keen to understand what engagement the cabinet secretary has had with the UK Government on rail freight. Does she agree that maintaining open access for rail freight companies is the best way to ensure that goods can be moved more effectively across Scotland? Fiona Hyslop: As part of the bill’s development, I have had extensive discussions in person with Lord Hendy, the rail minister, and the secretary of state, Heidi Alexander. Issues of cross-border travel are part of continuing discussions—intercity travel and freight are essential parts of rail development, as are aspects of access.”
“That means that every MSP who is elected on a regional list owes their place in the chamber to the voters who supported that party’s platform. If a member chooses to defect from the party under which they were elected, they no longer represent those voters and they no longer have that mandate. That, to me, is a democratic betrayal. In those circumstances, there should be a clear consequence. Either the individual should be subject to a recall process, or, more straightforwardly, they should just resign and allow the next candidate on the party’s list to take their place. That would make it clear that seats in the Parliament belong to the voters, not to politicians’ personal ambitions.”
“The bill attempts to address two important issues: the removal and recall of members who have been convicted of crimes or sanctioned by the Parliament, and the introduction of a recall process such as the one that exists at Westminster. Those are serious matters and they deserve serious scrutiny. I recognise the effort that has gone into the bill but, as it is drafted, I have several concerns, not about its intent, but about how it would work in practice and whether it would deliver true accountability without unintended consequences. First, on recall and the principle of defection, our list system in Scotland is designed to reflect proportional representation. People vote for parties as much as they vote for individuals.”
“I start by saying that I fully support the principle that is at the heart of the bill, which is that members of Parliament must be accountable to the people who elect us. The proposal formed part of the Scottish Conservatives’ 2021 manifesto and it aims to allow the public to better hold politicians to account in Holyrood. Accountability sits at the core of public trust and, when standards fall or when the actions of members of the Scottish Parliament damage confidence in the institution, it is right that there should be a mechanism that enables the public to respond. The principle must, however, be underpinned by a system that is fair, workable and fit for the realities of modern public life, and perhaps that changes as things evolve.”
“Will the member take an intervention? Graham Simpson: If I get the time back. The Deputy Presiding Officer: There is a wee bit of time at this point, if the member wishes to take the intervention. Graham Simpson: I will take one more intervention. Sue Webber: What might you consider to be “a good reason”? Graham Simpson: If you are perfectly fit and able to come in, you should come in. That is the position. I turn to the committee report. I am grateful to the committee members—”
“I move, as an amendment to motion S6M- 19632, to leave out from “further agrees” to end and insert: “recognises that competition is essential to keeping bus fares fair and reasonable; calls on the Scottish Government to enhance the reliability and punctuality of bus services through the greater interlinking of timetables and integrated ticketing across bus and rail providers; agrees that good road surfaces are essential to improve bus services; notes that communities across Scotland, but particularly in rural areas, struggle to access bus services, and urges the Scottish Government to take action to make buses safer and to expedite the process to remove bus passes from passengers who commit antisocial behaviour.” The Deputy Presiding Officer: I call Claire Baker to speak to and move amendment S6M- 19632.1 16:22”
“There is a growing problem of antisocial behaviour on buses, and drivers, passengers and young people themselves deserve to feel safe. I very much look forward to that legislation, because there must be consequences for those who engage in persistent abusive behaviour towards bus drivers and passengers. The Scottish Government receives more money per capita for public services than the rest of the United Kingdom, and it is high time that the SNP showed some common sense and used that money to give the public across Scotland the vital services that they deserve. The public deserve a transport network that delivers for road users and provides value for money and reliability for passengers.”
“Bus and rail timetables are poorly aligned, and ticketing systems do not work across different modes of transport or different operators. I want to focus on practical measures, such as smart ticketing, allowing passengers to travel seamlessly between bus, rail and even ferry services. Moving between different modes of transport on a trip is made far easier by single ticketing and fare caps across modes, and by synchronising timetables. The technology to facilitate those things already exists, and I am at a loss as to why they have not been prioritised and put at the top of the list of things to do—we do not have to reinvent the wheel. I was really pleased to hear from the minister about the legislation that will be laid before the Parliament on 4 December.”
“Jim Fairlie: Does the member recognise—and rejoice at—the fact that the cabinet secretary and I had a round-table meeting with the Scottish road works commissioner and bus operators and that they are very clear that we are getting towards a position where we will make bus accessibility and the timescales for buses work better— The Deputy Presiding Officer: Thank you. I think that the member has enough to respond to. Sue Webber: Could I get some of that time back, perhaps? The Deputy Presiding Officer: You can get a very short time back. Sue Webber: It is fantastic that Mr Fairlie has had the opportunity to meet with the road works commissioner. I have tried on several occasions, but I have so far been unable to gain that meeting. Another real opportunity lies in better integration between different transport modes.”
“Buses cannot run on time if our roads are in disrepair or road users face disruption, with lengthy diversions due to poorly co-ordinated road works and resulting traffic jams. The Confederation of Passenger Transport Scotland is keen to see faster, greener and safer bus and coach journeys. Its top priorities are to address traffic congestion and to improve journey times for the 900,000 trips that are made by bus every day in Scotland. The average bus in Scotland travels at 11.3 miles per hour.”
“Taxpayer subsidies, ticket prices and complaints have all soared, while the number of services and passengers using public transport have plummeted. We disagree with the Scottish Greens’ idea that more buses should be run “in the public interest”. That vague statement means nothing. The public sector is not automatically the most effective operator. Competition, accountability and efficiency deliver better services. Competition keeps fares fair and reasonable, and it drives operators to deliver punctual, clean and customer- focused services. First Bus, an award-winning bus company, has been keen to reiterate that, stating: “We believe that voluntary, legally binding partnerships provide the best value to taxpayers and customers”. Better buses also require proper infrastructure and joined-up thinking.”
“I think that we can all agree on the importance of having better bus services across Scotland. Communities across Scotland deserve affordable, accessible and reliable bus services because, after all, they are a vital lifeline for so many. Not only can they help the economy to prosper, but they play a key role in Scotland’s social development, linking people to work, education, healthcare and leisure, while offering a real alternative to car travel. However, our transport network has been run into the ground under the SNP, with vital road upgrades being delayed, an ageing ferry fleet needing overdue vessels and passengers experiencing poorer services. Public transport has become unreliable and far too expensive.”
“The Scottish Parliament’s committees are an essential part of our legislative process, but scrutiny could be improved. Let us make sure that we do not have poor legislation that is rushed through in this session; we really need to get into the detail. We need to let our committees be more effective, so that our scrutiny is more meaningful and our Parliament is much more accountable to the people it serves. The Deputy Presiding Officer: I take the opportunity to remind members who wish to speak, including those who are online, that they need to press their request-to-speak button. 15:50”
“I support the principle that our committees should reflect the diversity of the Parliament and of Scotland, but we must be careful not to turn that into a tick-box exercise where the women have to take on an extra workload just to fulfil the criteria. I know that the female parliamentarians who are on the gender-sensitive audit advisory group have made that point clear. What matters most is that committees are made up of people who have the right experience, knowledge and commitment to hold the Government to account. They should also be interested in the topic, because then we would get genuine engagement. Let us aim for balance, while keeping a focus on merit and effectiveness. The report gives us a clear route to better balance.”
“My party made an important suggestion about committee witnesses. We suggested that they should have to declare where their funding comes from, including the amount of public funding, to further aid transparency about the potential influence of the Scottish Government. The idea of committees reviewing their own performance each year is a good one. In any other workplace, teams look back on what they have achieved, what worked, what did not work well and how they might change their approach going forward. There is no reason why Parliament should not do the same. That is how we keep improving and making things better. I referred to gender balance.”
“My position is that, at a time when public finances are stretched, that would send the wrong message, because leadership is about responsibility, not necessarily remuneration. However, being convener was a lot of work and more effort than anyone can realise until they are in that role. It is also clear that time is one of the biggest barriers to proper scrutiny, and we all feel that pressure. Committee members are juggling legislation, inquiries and constituency work, and there are just not enough hours in a week, especially if the committee sits on a Thursday. Allowing committees to meet while the chamber is sitting or to use Monday afternoons and Friday mornings for evidence sessions makes sense, because, after all, it is about giving committees the space that they need to do the job well.”
“When I was a convener, none of my powers or influence in that role was hindered by the fact that I was not elected to be there. Our submission also raised practical concerns about the approach to electing conveners, which links to the use of the d’Hondt method and questions about how to deal with in-session vacancies. A lot of the churn happens when members from the governing party find themselves in ministerial roles. We find that that contributes significantly to churn. Letting Parliament choose who leads a committee could strengthen a committee’s independence and improve accountability, but I agree with the committee’s view that that should not come with extra pay.”
“However, to counter Mr Leonard’s comments about the lack of gender equality on his committee, I note that when some female members from the Conservatives moved on, some people stayed put, so positions could not be changed. That also contributes to the inability to get a woman into the room. The lack of continuity makes it harder to build expertise and develop the kind of trust in cross-party working that committees need to function well. If we want better scrutiny, we need more stability. I welcome the discussion about elected conveners. The Conservatives’ submission stated that we do not believe that elected conveners alone will improve the situation in Parliament unless they are accompanied by wider reforms. We welcome the investigation into how that could move forward.”
“The committee’s report sets out sensible, practical recommendations that would help us to get there. Reducing committee sizes, for example, from 15 members to around seven would make a difference. Smaller committees can get into detail and have some real discussions, rather than just managing speaking lists. Having been the convener of a large committee, I understand the pressures that members felt when I had to cut them short and not allow them to follow a train of thought that might uncover a nugget of important evidence. The report also highlights the problem of constant churn, as we heard from Mr Carlaw and Mr Leonard. Members are moved on just as they start to understand their brief.”
“Those principles are as important now as they were 25 years ago, but I think that we can all acknowledge that they have all been stretched thin in recent parliamentary sessions. Too many bills have been rushed—we are certainly feeling the pain of that now—and too many important details have slipped through the net. Too often, the Parliament has been asked to sign off on legislation that was simply not ready. That is not what good government looks like and it is not what the people we represent expect from us. Hard-working Scots do not want politics for its own sake. They want us to be competent at what we do and they want decisions that are thought through, not thrown together to meet a deadline or make a headline. That means that our committees must be able to do their job properly.”
“I am pleased to speak in the debate on strengthening the effectiveness of our Parliament’s committees. I joined the Standards, Procedures and Public Appointments Committee right at the beginning of the inquiry. There was a bit of shoogling of chairs and stuff, but I remember hearing most of the evidence. The report goes right to the heart of how we serve the people of Scotland. The Scottish Parliament’s committees are an essential part of the legislative process, and hard-working Scots deserve a Parliament that examines evidence and legislation carefully. When the Parliament was created, the committees were meant to be its engine room. They were meant to be where legislation was tested, where evidence was properly examined and where the voices of the public could be heard.”
“Look at the situation in London, where the former mayor— a certain Boris Johnson—put in place measures to encourage EV use, which were then whipped away from people who had bought EVs; they had to get rid of those cars because the charging associated with them went absolutely through the roof.”
“Gillian Martin: I have outlined quite a lot of the new policies for EVs that are in the plan. They include consumer incentives to encourage EV uptake and additional support for the rapid roll-out of critical EV charging infrastructure, including on public EV charging in rural communities and home charging at domestic properties, which includes cross-pavement charging. It is important that we recognise that a lot of people want to own an EV who do not have a driveway and the ability to have their own home charger. A great deal of work is being done by my colleague Fiona Hyslop in that regard. There needs to be consistency in this.”