Clare Adamson
Scottish National Party · Scotland
“That concludes the debate. I wish members, their staff and everyone else who works on the parliamentary campus a wonderful recess. Meeting closed at 18:10. This is a draft Official Report and is subject to correction between publication and archiving, which will take place no later than 35 working days after the date of the meeting.”
“I am reminded again of my discussion with the family of the man on licence in the community. They reported that there is a broken community payback system and that hours have been wasted by a poorly managed scheme.”
“Home detention as part of a wider set of tools to manage a prison population does work, yet the number of prisoners on home detention curfew is lower now than it was 10 years ago. Between 2016 and 2018, an average of 288 prisoners were on home detention at any one time; during the same period ending in 2025, the average number was 87.”
“I call on the Scottish Government to do what Pauline McNeill described clearly and take the action that is needed to clear the backlog in the justice system. We need to reduce the number of people who are held on remand.”
“He committed an act of violence and punishment is appropriate, but we agree with the Scottish Government that to assume prison is a panacea for all crime is to simplify the most complex of issues. As my colleague from across the chamber emphasised today, the aim of our justice system is twofold: to punish and to rehabilitate.”
“We now move to closing speeches. I call Yi-pee—sorry, Yi-pei—Chou Turvey to speak for up to four minutes. 15:50 Yi-pei Chou Turvey: Do not worry, Deputy Presiding Officer—Yi and pei are both pronounced like EE, the phone company, if that makes it easier to remember.”
The complete record
Every one of 640 lines we hold for Clare Adamson, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 13.
“I slightly differ from Mark Ruskell, who said that there is still significant public interest in this issue—I do not think that there is the interest that there used to be. I am worried that climate change is being seen as a trend that we can move on from. It should not be seen as that. It is a crucial issue that will be pervasive through all our lifetimes and those in the future. One point that I do agree with is that young people recognise that, and that is their main fear. I agree with David Barratt that we need to see “The People’s Emergency Briefing” screened right across our country so that that understanding is pervasive—that is a tool to help us to do that. I ask that, as political parties, we make sure that we reinforce this issue as a key message. I look to the Green Party in particular to do that and say this to it.”
“I will no doubt say this numerous times in this session: a target has to be related to a plan that says what is going to be done, by when, who will do it, how much it will cost and the change that it will deliver. Too frequently, we do not deliver on that. However, the main issue that I want to sum up with is that we need to take people with us. Gillian Martin: I would just like to say that the climate change plan is, effectively, that route map. The main part of the plan might be slim in bulk, but it has many annexes that set out plans for every sector. Duncan Dunlop: I look forward to seeing how we follow through and deliver on those plans as they reach those who are responsible for carrying them out. The main issue for me is how we take people with us.”
“As has been said in this debate by my colleague Sanne Dijkstra-Downie, it is tragic that we are missing our 2030 interim climate change targets and that eight out of 12 emissions milestones have been abandoned. We cannot keep moving the goalposts on this. Indeed, the Liberal Democrats were the original green party, which is in part why I joined them. We always had ambitious targets on this issue. It was a Liberal Democrat minister in the first parliamentary session who set the first targets for renewable electricity use in Scotland. However, as Finlay Carson reminded us, targets are meaningless unless there is an action plan related to them.”
“Speak through the chair, please, during interventions and contributions. Duncan Dunlop: As I just said, today is the hottest day ever recorded in June in London. That record will be beaten tomorrow and probably again the following day. That is the evidence before our eyes, and we had the same in May. We can see numerous events. We can see the increasing need to build flood defences in Dumfries and we have had to do the same in Hawick. Duncan Massey rose— Duncan Dunlop: I will not continue on that point, so I will not take any more interventions on it. [Interruption.] Moving on, the Government must realise that we are in danger of moving goalposts.”
“For me, the answer is clear: we should meet the challenges of climate change with honesty about the risks, confidence in the science and optimism about the opportunities that are before us. If we do that, Scotland will not simply adapt to a changing world—we can help to lead it. 16:49”
“The member is in his last few seconds. David Barratt: I believe that climate change should not be viewed solely through the lens of risk. Challenge also means opportunity, and Scotland possesses some of the greatest renewable energy resources in Europe. We have world-class engineering expertise and a highly skilled workforce with enormous potential for offshore energy storage and emerging low-carbon technologies. Investment in renewable energy is not simply about reducing emissions. It is about strengthening our energy security, improving our resilience and creating jobs in future industries. The national emergency briefing asks a simple question: if the evidence points to growing risk, do we respond with urgency or do we bury our heads in the sand?”
“I move amendment S7M-00434.5, to leave out from “that climate change” to end and insert: “the reality and impacts of climate change and supports an affordable transition to net zero; understands that Scotland is committed to reaching net zero by 2045; raises significant concern over the findings of the Climate Change Committee that meeting this target will require significant and far-reaching changes across the economy, including major reductions in domestic oil and gas production, substantial changes in agriculture and livestock numbers, rapid acceleration in the uptake of electric vehicles and the expensive mass installation of heat pumps in homes across the country; recognises that public confidence in climate policy depends on targets being credible, achievable and supported by clear delivery plans; calls on the Scottish Government to set out clearly, honestly and in full, how it plans to meet its 2045 targets, including the practical steps required, the trade-offs involved, and the real impact on jobs, households, businesses and communities; emphasises that Scotland’s transition to net zero must be grounded in economic reality, protecting jobs, strengthening energy and food security and supporting sustainable economic growth; recognises the vital contribution of Scotland’s farmers, crofters, land managers, gamekeepers, fishing industry and rural and island communities in protecting the natural environment; supports the continued responsible extraction of oil and gas from the North Sea as part of a managed transition, recognising its importance to Scotland’s economy, energy security and skilled workforce, and rejects virtue signalling in favour of a practical, transparent and accountable approach to climate policy.” 16:26”
“The member must conclude. Finlay Carson: A credible approach must be combined with investment in renewables and a realistic understanding of current energy needs. This debate is about credibility, because people will support the transition to net zero only if they believe that it is fair, achievable and grounded in reality.”
“It is a collective challenge. I look forward to working across the chamber and with universities, staff and students on our shared ambition to ensure that our world-class university sector continues to thrive. Meeting closed at 17:20. Correction Hannah Mary Goodlad has identified an error in her contribution and provided the following correction.”
“Minister, you must come to a conclusion now. Ben Macpherson: Implementing the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Act 2026 and addressing the other immediate issues before us are important measures, along with the framework, on which I look forward to engaging with colleagues. I have sought to reassure members on the points that they raised and to understand the real challenges that universities face, many of which are also being experienced across the UK. As I set out, we will continue to take action to ensure that our world-class universities deliver outstanding teaching, research and innovation and meet the needs of learners, the economy and society. I look forward to engaging with colleagues. I appreciate that I have not been able to address every point, but let us keep up the engagement.”
“Evidently— and disappointingly—the university did not agree to that and pressed ahead with Tuesday’s announcement. Although the Scottish Government absolutely recognises the autonomy of the university, ministers must also be assured that the university has complied with the SFC’s conditions of funding. The education secretary, other ministers and I have engaged with the SFC in recent days, and we will consider the detail of the SFC’s evidence. I also refer to what the First Minister said in the chamber on Tuesday at back-bench members’ First Minister’s question time. The SFC will continue to monitor the university’s compliance with its conditions of funding through to July 2027. That includes meaningful engagement with staff and students and adherence to the fair work principles.”
“I am conscious that I need to touch on the situation at Dundee before we conclude, so I ask the member to allow me to continue. Like many others, I was concerned about the University of Dundee’s announcement of further job cuts, which undoubtedly and understandably are deeply upsetting to staff, whose voices, along with those of campus unions, must be central to any decisions about the future of the institution. I reiterated that to the principal in writing and to the SFC in a meeting last week. The Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic met the principal of the University of Dundee on 16 June to request that the university’s leadership pause the consultation process on staff reductions to give ministers reasonable time to consider the SFC’s evidence regarding compliance with conditions of funding.”
“I still have not heard what action the Scottish Government or the Scottish Funding Council plans to take, even though there have been proven failures to abide by the fair work principles, which universities are contractually obliged to do. Ben Macpherson: Ministers, including me, and the SFC regularly engage on that matter. I also encourage the member to seek their own engagement with the SFC. I give a commitment to the Parliament and to the member in particular, as they have raised the question, to continue dialogue with the SFC about ensuring that we see proper implementation of the conditions, whether under the Higher Education Governance (Scotland) Act 2016 or the Tertiary Education and Training (Funding and Governance) (Scotland) Act 2026.”
“Because of the legislation that we passed in the early part of the year, from April 2027, universities will be expected to adopt all fair work criteria, and the SFC will look to include them as a condition of grant—an announcement that trade unions and I have spoken about in recent weeks. They welcome that, and we will continue to work together on it. Maggie Chapman: I thank the minister for taking an intervention—he has been generous with his time. Although universities are already obliged to comply with two elements of the fair work agenda, it is clear that that is not happening and that that has no consequences. Either the Scottish Government or the Scottish Funding Council needs to take action.”
“In my recent discussions with trade unions, I heard examples in which agreements were reached with university employers to end disputes through positive engagement. We want more of that, and I expect other universities to continue to work with their recognised trade unions in the same spirit. Although employment law is reserved, we as a Government will continue to do what we can to ensure that workers are treated fairly and that their voices are heard. Fair work principles should be at the forefront of universities’ decision making, and the Scottish Funding Council will continue to monitor the implementation of fair work principles as part of its outcome framework and assurance model, taking action to support compliance where necessary.”
“I reach across the chamber for collaboration in that work, as we had in the previous Parliament, and I look forward to engaging with colleagues on that. As many members have mentioned, the Government is very clear that universities cannot meet the challenges that are in front of us right now unless decisions are made in consultation with staff and students. Although our 19 universities are, rightly, autonomous and responsible for their own operational decisions, the Scottish Government fully expects meaningful engagement as cost-reduction measures are considered and progressed. Universities must make every effort to protect jobs and consider compulsory redundancies only as a last resort, after all other cost-reduction measures have been fully explored.”
“In 2027, as a Parliament, in the budget process that lies ahead, we will need to think collectively and come to decisions together about how we support this vital sector during a period in which there are complex student needs, rising costs, increasing global competition, shifting demographics, fast-paced changes in technology, and uncertain global markets and conditions. We need to consider all of that and ensure that we are not complacent. I am grateful for the insight and ideas that have been provided so far by student and staff representatives, as well as experts in the steering group. That is all good work that is ongoing in the future framework for the sustainability and success of Scotland’s universities.”
“Dundee is a bit of an outlier, but colleagues have been right to emphasise that there are challenges across the sector. Willie Rennie, Iris Duane, Meghan Gallacher, Heather Anderson and other members talked about the need to think ahead and ensure that we sustain our sector, invest in it and future proof it. That is exactly what the framework, which Willie Rennie was right to emphasise, is all about. It is a collective endeavour to ensure that we are considering what bold and strategic decisions and proactive steps we need to take to ensure that our world-class universities are successful and sustainable for coming decades. The review will report at the end of the year.”
“You can get the time back, minister. Ben Macpherson: I will take the intervention. Q Manivannan: A year ago, 632 job losses were not acceptable. If we admit that staff are the bedrock of all the topics that we are talking about, why are 900 job losses at Dundee now okay? Will the minister agree that that must not be treated as a precedent, and that there is now an incredible crisis that one must urgently address? Ben Macpherson: No Scottish Government minister has been anything but concerned about the situation in Dundee in recent days and years. If colleagues show a little patience, I will get to those issues shortly in my remarks. I have been determined since September that we do all that we can to get ahead of this challenge.”
“Before I call Mr Adam, I am minded to accept a motion without notice, under rule 8.14.3 of standing orders, to extend the debate by up to 30 minutes. I invite Maggie Chapman to move such a motion. Motion moved, That, under Rule 8.14.3, the debate be extended by up to 30 minutes.—[Maggie Chapman] Motion agreed to. 16:53”
“You must come to a conclusion, Mr Marra. Michael Marra: I will, Presiding Officer. I appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the debate. It is right that we get some answers from the minister on what steps will be taken next. I look forward to hearing the rest of the contributions. 16:34”
“However, there are questions to ask about the broad financial issues that are at play here. I have been raising the crisis in the university sector in the Parliament for years—I was doing that well before the crisis at the University of Dundee, the institution that is close to my heart. The issue is one of systemic underfunding of the university sector. The primary driver of the current crisis, which goes beyond Dundee university, is that in Scotland, since 2014-15, funding per student has fallen by 39 per cent in real terms. The Scottish Funding Council research excellence grant has fallen by 43 per cent. That has had consequences. There has been a comparative lack of improvement in relation to the rest of the UK in the research excellence framework. That represented clear evidence of a chilling in the Scottish research sector.”
“Although the Scottish Funding Council has looked at the documentation that the university has presented and seems to have approved it, in recent days we have heard some words from the Government that suggest that it thinks that that is open to question. I ask the minister, in his summing up, to reflect on the university’s relationship with the Scottish Funding Council in that regard and to set out what can be done to explore those issues further. We must not lose sight of the broader causes of the current situation. It is true that the university’s management were absolutely appalling. In the previous session of Parliament, MSPs saw with their own eyes how dreadful they were when members of the previous senior management team appeared before committees.”
“I have spoken on many occasions to the trade unions at the university, which are rightly querying the scale of the EBITDA—earnings before interest, taxation, depreciation and amortisation—target, which is an outlier in the sector. The university management must provide clear justification for the position that they are taking on that, because that is one of the key factors in relation to the putting in place of the cuts. The job losses that we are looking at now are significantly larger than those that had previously been described. Given that the previous target was described by the First Minister as “entirely unacceptable”, the Government needs to tell us why it thinks that the job losses that are now proposed are acceptable. I recognise that the university is an independent institution, which means that it has its own legal status.”
“The fact that the current process is cutting the university to the absolute core and removing some of the broader missions of a university represents a very big challenge not only for the community, but for the staff who are directly impacted. We must ask why that is happening. Maggie Chapman said that we are not really talking about a crisis of money. I fundamentally disagree with her on that—we are talking about a crisis of money at the University of Dundee. That is why people are about to lose their jobs. The university claims that, unless it acts now— immediately—to make the savings that it has set out, the institution will be bankrupt by 2028.”
“Frankly, I am astounded that the Cabinet Secretary for Education, Culture and Gaelic did not make a visit to Dundee university the first appointment in her diary when she was appointed on 20 May 2026. The Government knew that a raft of cuts was on the way, in one form or another, or was to be proposed. That was written about in the press, and the issue was a matter of continued dialogue with the Scottish Funding Council. Therefore, on one level, I find the Government’s reaction somewhat bewildering. I share some of the previous speaker’s concerns about the use in the Dundee situation of too narrow a definition of what a university is.”
“Will you switch your camera on, please, Mr Marra? Michael Marra: Yes—my apologies, Presiding Officer. I thank Maggie Chapman for securing the debate, which is very timely for my constituents in Dundee. This week has been yet another shocking one for people who are employed at the University of Dundee, as I was for some 15 years prior to my election to Parliament in 2021. A significant number of people have reached out to me, which reflects the huge anger among the staff population and their bewilderment about a situation that they have been caught up in for far too long. Significant questions need to be asked about the situation at the University of Dundee and the issues that my constituents are raising.”
“We move to the open debate. A large number of members wish to take part, so it would be very helpful if people could stick to four minutes. 16:21”
“Motion debated, That the Parliament expresses its deep concern at what it sees as the growing crisis facing Scotland’s higher education sector, including the reported threat of significant job losses at the University of Dundee, the University of Aberdeen and other institutions across Scotland; notes reports that hundreds of jobs have already been lost at Dundee, and that up to 111 academic posts are threatened at Aberdeen as part of ongoing restructuring and cost- reduction programmes; recognises the anxiety, uncertainty and distress that these proposals are causing for staff, students and communities; further recognises the evidence of declining staff morale across the sector, with, it understands, many workers reporting exhaustion, insecurity and a loss of confidence in institutional leadership and governance; believes that those who teach, research, support students, maintain campuses and sustain university life should not be made to pay the price for failures of governance, financial mismanagement or short- term decision making; notes reported concerns regarding increasing casualisation, workload pressures, threats to pensions and job insecurity across the sector; further notes the calls on university leadership teams, governing bodies and the Scottish and UK governments to work collaboratively with staff and students with Fair Work principles as their foundation, to develop long-term solutions that protect jobs, safeguard teaching and research, strengthen transparency and accountability, and secure a sustainable future for what it considers is Scotland’s vital higher education sector.”
“The final item of business today is a debate on motion S7M-00266, in the name of Maggie Chapman, on sustaining jobs and securing the future of Scotland’s universities. The debate will be concluded without any question being put.”
“A large number of members still wish to ask questions. If we are to get through them all, we will need more concise questions and answers.”
“The minister will now take questions on the issues raised in his statement. I intend to allow 20 minutes for questions, after which we will move on to the next item of business. Members who wish to ask a question should press their request-to-speak button.”
“On this day of all days, given that there has been a bit of interest in my travel plans, it is right for me to take part in this debate, to move the motion in my name and to thank Tahir and all his colleagues for the work that they do every day in serving the people of Scotland.”
“Members from the previous parliamentary session will be conscious of the fact that, in March, a statutory instrument was passed that creates a framework for addressing antisocial behaviour, whether by a young person or an older person—I do not think that we should be explicit in that regard. We need to ensure that that code of conduct is put in place, and I expect that to come back across my desk in the coming months so that we can put the issue to bed and make sure that our bus drivers are safe at work. In Glasgow today, I met a wonderful bus driver— a chap called Tahir—who is very proud of the work that he does.”
“I am sure that the Deputy First Minister would be delighted to do that, so that we can have progress. Graham Simpson: Will the member take an intervention? Stephen Flynn: I will make some progress, because I am conscious that my time is drawing to a close and I want to address an important point that was raised by Craig Hoy and, rightly, by Willie Rennie. I said that I would address the issue of antisocial behaviour. None of us in the chamber can accept the treatment of any individual who works on our buses in the fashion that we have seen, including terrible instances that have occurred in parts of Scotland—in particular, the Moray constituency— with which we are all very familiar.”
“The cabinet secretary says that the Government will get on with it, yet we have seen very slow progress on bus franchising. Can he address why we have seen so little progress in six years, and say how he intends to accelerate that? Stephen Flynn: For members who were not in the chamber at the time, I say that Daniel Johnson made that point earlier and I had to remind him that SPT, which is the biggest player right now, is making progress in that regard. That is a positive thing. Daniel Johnson and the Government seem to be in agreement on a lot—we will, of course, support his amendment. However, in his opening remarks, he listed a whole host of projects that he wants to happen. If he wants those things to happen and progress to be made, he should engage with us and have discussions with us in the run-up to the budget.”
“I hope that all of us can agree, as we did during the debate earlier, that the important and tough decisions that we have made are the right thing for the people who have elected us to represent them in the chamber during a cost of living crisis, when pressures far outwith the control of this Parliament—primarily driven, of course, by the decisions of Westminster—are impacting our constituents directly. We are using the levers that we can to help people in their daily lives, and that is incredibly important to me. Patrick Harvie: [Made a request to intervene.] Daniel Johnson: [Made a request to intervene.] Stephen Flynn: I will give way to Daniel Johnson. Daniel Johnson: I am grateful to the minister for giving way and apologise to Mr Harvie.”
“On the £2 fare cap, we have a pilot that is under way in the Highlands and Islands, which was rightly mentioned by Ariane Burgess. To build on what she was saying, if I recall the numbers correctly, around 300,000 journeys have been taken using the price cap. What a change and transformation. That is exactly what we want to see and build on. That goes to the heart of everything that we are seeking to do in Government. We are seeking to ensure that people have the opportunity to get on in life and to take part in society and in their communities. We know that there is no functioning, strong economy without a transport system that works.”
“Paul Sweeney: I thank the cabinet secretary for being generous with his interventions. It is one of the virtues of devolution that we can do things differently in Scotland. That is exactly what has happened—[Interruption.] If I may complete the point, it is exactly what we did with regard to the concessionary travel scheme for over-60s, which was a Labour innovation in Scotland. The point is that the cap policy has been devolved to city-region transport authorities in England. Therefore, for example, in Liverpool and Manchester, the £2 cap continues. Stephen Flynn: I was struggling to hear Mr Sweeney over other members, but I thought that I heard him say, correctly, that devolution allows us to do things better. I certainly agree with him in that regard.”
“I want to work closely with Mr Sweeney in relation to bus transport, because I know that he is passionate about it and he has done some tremendous work on it, which I have watched from afar. However, he has made some comments in relation to a £2 fare cap in England—I see him nodding his head. What he does not seem to take into account is that, if I recall correctly, as I was sitting in Westminster, Keir Starmer raised that cap by 50 per cent to £3. Further, what Mr Sweeney has also not taken into account is that, under the Labour Party, no young people in England get access to a free bus pass. Similarly, with regard to older and disabled people, a vast number of people have to wait until they are 67 to get a bus pass. The comparison that he seeks to draw is neither fair nor reasonable.”
“We have a responsibility to balance our budget, and that is exactly what we have done and will continue to do when we deliver the £2 fare cap, as set out in our manifesto. Paul Sweeney: My constituents are keen to see the cap rolled out quickly. Will it be delivered by 16 August, as was indicated previously? Stephen Flynn: I am grateful to Mr Sweeney for reminding me of his comments in that regard, because I am not entirely sure that that date has been given by anyone on these benches, and I am not entirely sure where he got it from. What I have been very clear about is that we will stick to what we said in our manifesto in relation to the 100-day commitments, and will move the issue forward as quickly as we possibly can. I give him that commitment.”
“That point applies not only to older people and disabled people; it applies to young people, too. I was at Buchanan Street bus station today and heard directly from young people about the benefit to their lives that has been brought about by this Parliament’s decision to pass a budget that gave them free bus passes. It has changed their lives and has opened up a world of opportunities that we never had but which they now do. That is why, in the space of just four years, they have taken 300 million journeys. Members ask me how sustainable that is in terms of finances. However, only some of them seem to want to commit to full discussions through the budget process to make sure that it is sustainable.”
“In response to the points that Mr Hoy made, I say to him that he seems to know the price of absolutely everything—and rightly so—but he does not know the value of anything, because he refuses to accept the benefit that the changes that we are seeking to introduce through the fare cap will bring for individuals and their families. Indeed, I am not even sure that he could bring himself to accept the benefits that have been brought by the bus pass as it stands. In one year alone, 113 million journeys were made by our older people and our disabled people. How many of those journeys would have been made without that bus pass being in place? How many of Mr Hoy’s constituents would have been socially isolated as a result of him being a curmudgeon? Far too many. We would do well to ignore Mr Hoy’s advances on the issue.”
“That may well be how the Transport Committee looks in a few short months’ time, but I will try to push it as far as I can. Important points were made about the availability of services. I understand the need for services to be available. I get it—we all do. Each and every one of us recognises the desire of our constituents to have access to bus services that meet their needs. Quite frankly, access to such services is not being delivered in Scotland in the way that any of us would want it to be delivered. However, in order for that to change, we cannot do as Mr Hoy seems to think that we should do, which is to continue doing the same thing over and over again, hoping that we will get a different outcome.”
“I invite the cabinet secretary, Stephen Flynn, to respond to the debate. 17:01 Stephen Flynn: I have spoken in two debates since I came north from Westminster and returned to this wonderful Parliament and, on both occasions, I appear to have found an ability to gain consensus across the chamber. It is a wonderful thing. [Interruption.] Ms Baillie is shaking her head, but she missed the collegiate debate that we have had, in which everyone agreed that the Government is taking positive steps to ensure that people can deal with the cost of living crisis that is in front of them and that they have a Scottish Government that is delivering for them on their priorities. I will come back to that point. Mr Rennie looks less than impressed by my approach.”
“How much will the policy cost, and will that be achievable after Ivan McKee and the Deputy First Minister have run their slide rule over Scotland’s finances in the coming years? How will it be paid for? Which taxes will rise and by how much, or which services will be cut? Unless those fundamental questions are answered, I am afraid that this policy, like so many other SNP policies of the giveaway variety, is likely to fall short or to fall apart entirely. 16:39”
“Those are lifeline services, and if the cost of concessionary travel continues to rise inexorably, my fear is that those services will become even more vulnerable. I will close by repeating a couple of questions to the minister, but I will first read a quote from the Confederation of Passenger Transport, which said: “Ambitious transport policy only succeeds if government works through the practical realities of delivery from the outset. Without careful consideration of deliverability in the short and longer term it could risk disappointing passengers, communities, and industry alike. What impact will the £2 cap have on other forms of transport and their revenue, and specifically on train services? What impact might it have on the funds that are available for supported and rural services?”
“The motion also fails to explain what the better bus service provision will be, whereas it is very specific on the headline- grabbing £2 fare, even though many of the questions that I raised earlier, which have also been raised by industry bodies and others, have not yet been addressed. Graham Simpson: I thank Craig Hoy for lavishing praise on me, which I certainly was not expecting. I was a bit baffled by his first speech in the debate. Is there anything about the current bus system that he would like to change? Craig Hoy: Yes, there absolutely is. The member will have looked closely at the Scottish Conservative and Unionist Party’s manifesto, which included a clear commitment to a rural bus fund so that the very fragile supported services in areas such as Langholm, Closeburn, Sanquhar and Thornhill in my constituency continue.”
“I seem to remember that, when Graham Simpson was in the Conservative Party, he persuaded me that we should have a fringe event on through-ticketing, and he made that fringe event very interesting. Today, he managed to make an international comparison of fare caps around Europe and the rest of the world equally interesting. I have some sympathy with the concept of a fare cap, but the devil lies in the detail. My problem— and my party’s problem—with the motion is that it glosses over some of the deficiencies, such as those relating to antisocial behaviour, which Mr Rennie just made clear.”
“First, will the expenditure on bus travel mean less for supported services in rural areas, which certainly seems to have been the trend to date? Secondly, as Mr Brown referred to, what impact will the policy potentially have on rail travel? The cabinet secretary is responsible for Scottish Rail Holdings. If I were to go on the 5.06 train from Dumfries to Annan, it would cost £6.40. Under the fare cap policy, if I went by bus, which takes about 20 minutes longer, it would be a flat £2. Will that have ramifications for ScotRail, or will the Government have to extend the subsidy scheme to rail services in Scotland, which would make the policy yet more expensive? I will refer to a few of the contributions that have been made.”