The next item of business is a debate on motion 8497, in the name of Hamza Yousaf, on the promotion of active travel in Scotland. May I ask those who wish to speak in the debate, even, to press their request-to-speak buttons now? We are a bit pushed for time, so I call on Hamza Yousaf to speak to and move the motion up to 12 minutes, please minister. I am delighted to speak to and move the motion in my name, on behalf of the Government. I am delighted this morning, Presiding Officer, to have attended Cycling Scotland's conference today, over 200 people enthusiastically conspired about active travel. I would also, as transport minister, since being appointed, delighted to not only talk the talk but, as we are talking about active travel walk, the walk. I was going to say the peril, the peril, it does not quite fit, but I think members understand where I am going with it. I was delighted this year to do the peril for Scotland for the first time. In fact, being told today by Cycling Scotland, I am the first-ever transport minister to have completed the peril for Scotland. I will not tell you where my other colleagues and predecessors stopped at, but none the less delighted to have completed it. Not only myself, this was a cross-party endeavour. I think my colleague Liam Kerr and Conservative Benches and and indeed Graham Simpson completed the peril for Scotland this year, both of them getting a better time than I did. I was also delighted just a couple of weeks ago to take part in my first-ever 70-mile cycle from Glasgow to the Kelpies and back. A word of advice for anybody, if you are ever going to cycle back from the Kelpies to Glasgow, do not do it on a day where a storm is going to approach. The headwind took me six hours to get back, but none the less enough about me and my cycling endeavours and back to the motion at hand. The Government's commitment to active travel cycling and walking has been demonstrated by the First Minister's commitments in the programme for government, the headline and, of course, the doubling of the active travel budget from £40 to £80 million. I will talk more about the programme for government, but perhaps before doing so I should speak about why that investment in active travel is so vital. The active travel, of course, has very obvious physical benefits. You could rule off stats after stats after stats, maybe just a couple to mention. Those that cycle to work showed that there was a link to 45 per cent lower rates of cancer and 46 per cent lower in terms of cardiovascular issues. One of the benefits of active travel that is less talked about is the benefits of mental health as well. I was delighted to be able to visit a project in Vernesa velocity cafe where it dealt with helping people with mental health issues in particular. There was one lady there who, before coming to velocity, was afraid to go out of the house due to her mental health condition. She was very isolated, did not engage with others and have not come to velocity. She had never ridden a bike, she learned how to ride a bike, she had the physical health benefits of it and the mental health benefits of it. Not only did she learn to cycle, but she was leading one of the cycle teams as well. Sometimes it is understated, but the benefits of mental health are important to state on the record in the debate. Climate change is well in terms of a reduction of CO2 emissions, there is no doubt at all that active travel can play its part. It may be a small part in a wider transport picture, but I think that still every bit most certainly counts active travel can play a part in our very ambitious climate change targets that we have. Then there is a social inclusion element as well. I welcome the Labour amendment in that respect in relation to the Sush Trans report, which I think is made for difficult reading but also important reading for the Government and stakeholders. However, one of the key statistics out of that report that I pulled out was that 61 per cent of those in high-risk areas are within a 10-minute bike ride or a half-hour walk of essential and vital services, such as GP clinics, job centres and other vital services. That does not mean that transport, poverty and itself will be overcome simply by cycling and walking, but it can be a key part of that mix. On top of cycling, we should not forget that walking is an important part as well. Again, it is often overlooked in active travel, but walking and the benefits of walking tick all those boxes that I have spoken about as well. In fact, I had Sir Alex Ferguson recently in my constituency in Govind opening a walkway and a pathway. He himself said that the best exercise that he could ever give to his players over the years was to get them walking more. If the world's greatest football manager, club manager after Jock Steen, can say such a thing, then it is advice that is worth listening to. On the radical shift to get more of a population and engage in active travel, I think that the programme for government was central to the programme for government. If I can say a little bit more about the First Minister's commitments during that. On top of the doubling of active travel budget, which should be understated, I am sure that it is not actually, and I know that it was very welcomed by the stakeholders at the conference this morning. This is the first for the UK and Scotland is very much leading in terms of the financial contribution, the doubling of that budget and rightly being lauded for it. Increasing the active travel budget is one thing. How to make sure that we get the best bang for that buck is going to take the advice, the considerations of those around this chamber, but of course of stakeholders, academics and experts as well. Richard Lochhead I thank the minister for giving way and on that note of the benefits of doubling the budget for active travel and speaking as one veteran of Petal for Scotland to another as a self-confessed mammal, a middle-aged man in Lycra. I welcome the minister's comments about the benefits of cycling for health and tourism. I have seen those signs in Murray, where there is an increase in popularity of cycling in particular in recent years. It has been put to me that, perhaps Transport Scotland could do more to be focused on cycling to meet the most of that increased budget, and I wonder if the minister would be willing to consider creating a unit within Transport Scotland dedicated to promoting cycling in Scotland and working with our local authorities. Hamza Yousaf I thank the member for his contribution. I think that he touched on a serious point that was raised this morning at the conference that expertise is needed within government, local government and other public agencies, and even in the private sector to help to facilitate an increase in active travel. You will know that we already have officials within cycling, but his idea, which he has mentioned to me previously, has been given some very serious consideration in terms of a cycling unit within Transport Scotland. Back to what I was saying, if I can, about the programme for government. We want to be the leaders in the UK on active travel. That is very much our ambition. Our vision is to make our towns and cities friendlier and safer places for pedestrians and cyclists. To start that process, I announced in September that all five community links plus projects would receive 50 per cent match funding. That was two projects in Edinburgh, a second one in Glasgow, one in Stirling and in Venice. All those projects will deliver high-quality, segregated cycle paths. They will improve the public realm, make it as accessible as possible for everyone. The projects will put people in places first, with behavioural change in education programmes being delivered. They will ensure that people of Scotland see walking and cycling as an attractive everyday option for shorter journeys. We have also committed to appoint an active nation commissioner in early 2018 to ensure that we deliver world-class infrastructure across Scotland and projects to encourage greater physical activity levels, such as road user training and access to bike hire. We will also promote e-mobility in the use of electric and cargo bikes for businesses and for projects that help older people, young families and people with disabilities to benefit from our network of routes. We will step up our work with partners and communities to ensure that active travel helps to address challenges that I have already touched upon in relation to transport poverty. For example, I have already asked the fourth environment link in ScotRail to provide us with options for providing free bike hire to those seeking work. Key thread throughout all the programme for government commitments and the commitments that we made previous to that is collaboration. Collaboration is going to be key with our stakeholders, but, vitally importantly, at local authority level. I will be hosting a summit on 7 November with councillors that are spokespeople for transport and the Administrations and also with the chief officers of transport at local authorities and the RTPs. That will be to align local and national priorities around active travel. Some of the things that we are looking to align and we are also examining and exploring through the active travel task force are behavioural change. I think that all of us realise that behavioural change is going to be key to get more people engaged in cycling and in walking that behavioural change takes many different aspects. I am not going to all of them, but, for example, we know that in cycling, taking one example, there is a drop-off of cycle rates between primary school and high school. There are a number of different factors for that. Longer journeys are one of them. Teenagers want to walk together to talk as they go towards school. There might even be things around not getting your hair messed up, the helmet and so on and so forth. The behavioural change in that age group is important. Behavioural change is also among drivers, which is hugely important. Many of us cycle are also drivers. There are road car users as well. Too often, I am sure, we have heard the unsaving attitude of some car users. Behavioural change is hugely important. Another big driver to getting more people more active on our roads will be making our roads safer. I have never been hesitant to put on record my belief that more segregated cycle paths can only be a good thing. I can only encourage more people to get on our roads and to give confidence to those who want to cycle to cycle, whether they are young or whether they are not so young. That applies at a national level as well. When I talk about road infrastructure, the local level, of course, is important, but it is clearly important for us as a Government as well. We are hoping to take forward integration of walking and cycling paths into our national infrastructure. For example, our drilling projects in the A9 and the A96 will provide walking and cycling routes on the trunk roads. There is already a commitment in the PFG regarding the 35km of cycle track on the A9, which is the more developed of the two drilling projects. We are consulting with communities along those two routes, and we will do all that we can to give people what they need in terms of confidence for cycling and walking. Sheriffhall in Edinburgh is another example where Transport Scotland has listened and will deliver what local communities need. Provisions for non-motorised users at Sheriffhall, including cyclists, are currently being developed in dialogue with a number of organisations such as Spokes and Sustrans. I would like to reassure you that we are taking into account the views of those groups alongside the wider public. Finally, as part of the programme for government, I touch on a point that Richard Lochhead has already made. We will deliver a long distance walking and cycling route to match the north coast. There are 500 for people to be able to enjoy the scenery of our beautiful country through activity. That route or routes will stimulate local economies, increase tourism, health benefits through increased physical activity and put Scotland on the map for being a healthy and welcoming nation. On top of the national infrastructure, it is clear that modal shift is hugely important—not just modal shift but integration of transport, as well. Many members across the chamber have spoken to me about the railways and what more we can do in terms of the railways infrastructure, helping and encouraging active travel, as well. Abellio has, in the first two years— Can you come to a close, please, minister? —and 269 cycle parking spaces. There are many other plans, I am sure, that members will be aware of. On high-speed trains, which I know has been an issue, there are eight cycle spaces for bikes as well. Generally speaking, to conclude on this point, collaboration is going to be key. We are going to be listening to the views that members have across the chamber in terms of how we can best use that money, but I am confident that with the action that we take, with the collaboration that we take forward, that we will get more people cycling, more people walking, and our nation will be healthier and better for it. We are going for time. I am going to have to take time off some of the speeches, but meanwhile, I call Jamie Greene to speak to and move amendment 8497.2. No more than seven minutes, please, Mr Greene. Jamie Greene Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. May I start with something that I do not do very often in the chamber, and that is to start with an apology to the minister. I woke up in a rather enlightened mood this morning and retrospectively considered my amendment today. Whilst there are some very relevant and valid points to be made in it and to consider, my colleagues will go through some of those, I would like to start with a positive. We, on these benches, welcome the Scottish Government's plans to promote active travelling. We believe that it is a vital component in not just reducing carbon emissions, but also in tackling health issues such as obesity, but as well as promoting affordable and accessible forms of transport. We do therefore welcome the appointment of an active nation commissioner. That seems like a very sensible idea and one that we can support. Our only ask is that the role of this commissioner is clear and that the objectives and measurable outcomes are part and parcel of this role. We would also expect that this new position should be charged with ensuring that every penny of the proposed active travel budget is spent sensibly and wisely, and with the right balance and mix of projects and investments, they will ultimately help the Government to meet its objectives. So there is my concession on that. Our amendment did not address this appointment, but be assured that the new commissioner will have the support of these benches in the task before him or her. In the last Holyrood election, the Scottish Conservatives stood on an explicit manifesto promise to promote active travel in Scotland. Active travel, as we know when properly promoted and facilitated, has countless health and social benefits, many of which will be discussed over the course of this afternoon's debate. However, our amendment today makes reference to a number of issues surrounding the current plan that I would like to explore. The four main points in our amendment are around progress, funding, collaboration and infrastructure. On the progress front, we feel that insufficient progress has been made. It is true that Scotland is a diverse country with very differing travelling needs, and it is also fair to say that the weather is not always kind to us as active travel invariably means more walking and cycling, but that should come as no great surprise to anyone who chooses to face the elements and opt for a healthier commute to work or school. If, for example, we look at the cycling action plan laid out by the Government in 2010, at the current rate, the Scottish Government will not meet its 2020 target of ensuring that 10 per cent of all journeys are made by bicycle. Transport Scotland's own report shows that cycling as a mode of transport to work sits at just over 2 per cent, so we're quite some way off the 10 per cent target. The 2013 cycling action plan for Scotland set some admirable ambitions, but so-called everyday bike rides has increased by just 0.2 per cent in a decade. At the current rate of increase, the 10 per cent target will indeed be met in 300 years, and by then, I suspect, we'll be taking hovercrafts to work instead. In fact, today, national statistics show that people are shifting back to the car, and this is worrying. The main reasons given are that the length of their journeys were far too far to walk or cycle, but secondly, there's a perception that there are too many cars on the road. So there's very little progress that's been made in the psychology behind modal shift, and that has not been addressed in the Government's motion today. The second point that we'd like to make is about funding. Absolutely, funding plays a fundamental role in the success of this policy, and whilst we do welcome the Government's commitment today to increase funding by £40 million in the coming financial year, it is important to see how we got to where we are today. In 2010, the active travel budget was £35.7 million. That reduced to £29 million in 2014, and down to £25 million by 2015. In the current financial year, the budget sits at around a real-terms cut of 8 per cent since 10 per cent. So again, whilst today's budget announced is very welcome, it has been noticed that this is a somewhat knee-jerk reaction to the fact that all the warnings are pointing to us being way off target. We will be seeking greater clarity on how targeted and effective this additional funding will be, which specific projects it will be put towards to, and we will be monitoring the success or otherwise of that spend. The devil is very much in the detail. But funding isn't everything. I was pleased to hear the minister speak in his opening remarks on the important point of collaboration. A key driver in ensuring the success of this plan will be better collaboration. Bruce Crawford My understanding is that funding for active travel has increased year on year, even prior to the announcement from the minister. Your amendment seems to suggest that more money needs to go into this area. If that is the case, how much and where is it coming from? Jamie Greene I think that I have already welcomed the increase that the minister has made of 40 million, and all I am asking for is some greater clarity on where have we spent. It is fair to say that the active travel budget has been cut year on year in the last 10 years, and I believe that those are, according to spice figures, happy to check them after the debate. On collaboration, Government, Transport Scotland, local authorities and local communities must must work together to ensure the success of the Government's plans. In a 2016 Transport Scotland's review of active travel report, it highlighted a lack of liaison in a number of cases. I will quote from that report that it says, The Scottish Government does not rigorously check whether schemes accord with its own or local policies and does not commonly advocate good outcomes for active travel in local decision making. Local interest and capacity is essential to generate effective community-led schemes. In contrast, the UK Government has created an active transport policy, which is very much centred around community bases. Up to £1 billion of funding for cycling walking projects has been made available to local bodies. That way, local communities can identify which projects would be the most effective rather than central government taking all decisions. The Scottish Conservatives have also been calling for safe travel routes to schools. We have also been asking for one segregated cycle route in each of our cities, and I hope that that is something that the minister will take on board, and indeed calling for greater collaboration between Government, local authorities and the third sector. On the amendments today, we are very happy to support Labour's amendment. They make a very valid point around transport poverty, and the Government is welcome to offer more detail as to how the additional funding might target that. The Lib Dem amendment also points out the importance of cycling from a very early age, and we are happy to support that as well. We are unable to support the Green amendment today, as we do not think that a predefined or fixed amount dedicated in the budget to active travel is the best way to approach it. We do believe that the Government needs flexibility in that. Unfortunately, we are unable to support that amendment. I move amendment in my name, and I hope that I can rely on support of other parties today. I call Neil Bibby to speak to and move amendment 8497.4, up to six minutes please, Mr Bibby. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The Scottish Government's motion quite rightly recognises the work that is taking place across communities, across Government and across political parties to develop the active travel agenda. The vision of communities shaped around people where we have the confidence to make healthier choices and walk our cycle from more of our regular journeys we make every day is a vision that the minister talked about. Lenton is a vision that we share, a vision for better health, a more active population living less sedentary lives, exercising and out and about more in the community. For the places that we live and work, more livable communities, better pedestrian access and cycling facilities and more footfall in our town centres. For our environment, better air quality, modal shift away from cars and our reduction in vehicle emissions. Presiding Officer, the active nation that we want to build must be a fairer nation too. Members will be aware of the research by Sir Stran's into the concept of transport poverty. There may be different measures of transport poverty, but there is a widespread acceptance that being unable to access transport or afford transport limits people's choices and their opportunities in life. Unfortunately, the Scottish Government's big idea when it comes to transport is to cut air passenger duty that will benefit the wealthiest, frequent flying few and do nothing to tackle transport poverty. That cost is projected to be over £190 million in that tax cut, money that could and should be invested elsewhere, particularly in other transport initiatives. Government have failed over the past 10 years to regulate Scotland's bus services and refused to back Labour's call for a fair freeze on railways. We will still not rule out raising the eligibility criteria for the free bus pass. It has to be said, Presiding Officer, that instead of addressing transport policy, this Government too often makes decisions that make it worse. In the report, Sir Stran has produced an analysis of factors such as income, car ownership and access to services through public transport. The analysis placed over a million people in data zones where there is a high risk of transport poverty. Active travel, as the minister has said, can address those risks, an affordable alternative to other, more expensive modes of transport. The Labour amendment addresses the issue of transport poverty. Head on and calls on the Scottish Government to set out specifically what measures will be taken to reduce transport poverty. We welcome the increase in funding from £40 million to £80 million, but the Scottish Government and the Minister must ensure that this budget is used to tackle transport poverty. According to Transport Scotland's own statistics, it shows that people from the least deprived area are 20 per cent more likely to own a bike than those from the most deprived area. The Scottish Government should also consider ensuring that tackling poverty and inequality forms part of the remit for the new active nation commissioner. Funding allocated for the active travel previously has been matched by local authorities, yet council budgets are under sustained pressure. Since 2011, £1.5 billion has been cut from local government budgets. Fraser Valander Institute anticipates further cuts to non-protected areas of spending, ranging from 9 per cent to 14 per cent by the end of the Parliament. Local authorities have told me—they may have told the minister—that, if things continue as they are, councils will be unable to match the funding. I will take an intervention from the minister on that. Hamza Yousaf Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I thank the member for giving way. He will notice that I acknowledge that we will be accepting the Labour amendment because of the wide issues on transport poverty. Local authority does not necessarily always reflect or rebuttering true in that Glasgow City Council new administration in place has committed 10 per cent of its budget over the course of the council administration. SNP-led, Edinburgh City Council is doing the same. Local authorities are leading by example, but the member does not agree that other local authorities should look to them to see what more they can do. Neil Bibby There are good examples of local authorities and laboural local authorities. SNP local authorities are well prioritised, active travel, but, on the increase in funding from £40 to £80 million, local authorities have told me—I am sure that they have told the minister—that the match funding criteria will put at risk the embedding for potential funding. I encourage the minister to look at that, because good projects must not be dropped because councils cannot afford the match funding requirement. I hope that the minister will look at that. Councils should be properly supported to play their part in the active nation agenda. It is councils that will be responsible for clearing streetscapes to make them more accessible. They will be delivering the active travel projects on the ground, responsible for the upkeep and investment in local road networks. I make no mistake that investment is needed. Just last week, according to the Society of Chief Officers of Transport in Scotland, they have said that there is a £1.6 billion backlog in road repairs, and it will be impossible for them to clear the backlog within existing budgets. That figure does not include pavements—that will concern motorists, of course—but it will also concern cyclists, because pottles are more of a nuisance and a risk to their bike and to their own personal safety. I want to stress the importance of integrated transport. The Government's aspiration is that, by 2030, walking and cycling will become the most popular modes of travel for shorter journeys, longer journeys and public transport, more and more passengers will come to expect to secure bike parking facilities at bus and train stations, and they will come to expect that more buses and trains should carry bikes. Modal shift towards cycling for many people is about behavioural change, but it is also about ensuring that adequate facilities to help people to make the choice to cycle. That was one of the key points of the national cycle action plan. There will be a consensus around many of the issues that we are discussing today. We share the aspiration that Scotland should be an active nation. What is important is that the debate about active travel does not take place in isolation. There is a link between active travel and addressing the health inequalities and transport poverty that we see in our society. The Labour amendment makes that clear and it demands action. I move the amendment in my name. I call John Finnie to speak to and move amendment 8497.3. No more than six minutes, please, Mr Finnie. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I move the amendment in my name. That amendment sets out our long standing. Indeed, many people's long standing ambitions want to see safer, healthier streets and for 10 per cent of the transport budget to be spent on walking and cycling. We know that 25 per cent of all journeys are by foot or by bike, yet, currently, the Scottish Government budget has 1.6 per cent spent on walking and cycling. It is very important that we get this right for a number of reasons. I am sure that the minister will recognise us. The rising cost to the NHS is caused by air pollution, for instance, and by inactivity. Earlier in the chamber, it would be interesting to hear the feedback from Cabinet Secretary Cunningham on the issue of low-emission zones, because that is certainly something that we need to make progress on, not simply for the question of health but also reducing congestion and making our roads safer. It is very important. We have been working very hard on a new policy in the Green Party, and that has been developed in consultation with disability groups, traffic engineers and walking and cycling campaigners. That is all with a name to aligning Scotland with other more progressive EU countries in respect of transport such as Denmark and the Netherlands. It is thanks to decades of investment in active travel that these countries have some of the fittest and happiest populations in the world. Building on that, yes, indeed. Mike Rumbles Is there a concern with the development of the green transport policy that, if you put 10 per cent of the transport budget for walking and cycling, it could possibly put public transport at risk? Could you address that issue for us, please? John Finnie Well, it is all part of a party. The member will recognise that he is a member of a party. As are all the other parties in here, we are very happy at spending £6 billion on two roads, simply spending £6 billion on two roads when we have heard from Neil Bibby from the Labour Party at the backlog of repairs. The Scottish Green Party is not again spending on road infrastructure, but what we would do is we would maintain and perhaps upgrade some of them rather than have these vanity projects that the other party seemed very keen on. So it is an overall package that needs to be considered. I was going to come on to the issue of safety and talk about my colleague Mark Ruskell's member's bill now. That is to have a default speed limit in built-up areas of 20 miles per hour. That was a very well responded to consultation. Over 2,000 people responded, 80 per cent support that and have been overwhelmingly welcomed by family schools and community groups. That is simply because people want streets where they live and work and play to be safe and pleasant places. People have suffered the blight of pollution and danger caused by high traffic levels of traffic. Key to that is planning policy and we have a planning bill coming up later in the year and I am sure that that will have a factor. I want to pick up on a point that my colleague Bruce Crawford made there, because, of course, it is about the percentage—the overall percentage—and the increase in the budget is welcome. However, it is about the overall percentage of the transport budget, and that went from 1.1 per cent in 2013 to a commendable almost doubled in the next year, but last year it was down to 1.6 per cent. The progress is welcome and perhaps in summing up the minister can clarify the programme for government aspect of whether that will be maintained. In the short time that I have available, I want to talk on the issue of walking and how difficult it is to calculate. Local authorities are mainly responsible for the infrastructure, and it is acknowledged that there are grants available, but they have been used for a wide range of sustainable transport projects. I spend an exact figure on walking. I am finding it difficult to get a source to. Of course, there is always conflict with everything and I had representations from the ramblers about the meddling of paths when there is multi-use for that and what is seen as intrusion into the green space because of that. Of course, the actual spend on cycling, again, is a complex issue. Indeed, the annual survey that Spokes undertook was discontinued in 2015 due to the increasing complexity of compiling it. We talk about the household survey and the percentage of journeys that are taken by walking bikes. There is some encouraging use. I want to talk about the improvements in figures for travel to school by cycling. The number of child casualties is plunged, the distances travelled by bikes is in an upward trend. To be parochial for a minute, 2.5 per cent of people in Highland Council area, a report being their bike being their main mode of transport, second highest percentage in Scotland and across the Highlands and Islands, and this will perhaps surprise people that the figure is 1.9 per cent. Today, the minister announced funding for what we refer to as the mad mile. That is a stretch of road across a Greenberg area in Inverness, which at peak times will take motorists 12 seconds quicker between two points. That is not a sustainable position, and I alluded to the A96 as well. It would be interesting to hear how that contributes to active travel. In the very short time that I have left, I want to say that we will be supporting the labour motion. I think that it is commendable that it is addressing the issue of transport poverty. Certainly, in relation to the APD, the sum of money there could be much better spent. We would acknowledge that. The Lib Dem talks about equipment, and one of the things that we should be equipping people with is knowledge and attitudes. There are tensions between the various groups. What I would plead for is courtesy, courtesy for pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, people and horses to remove those tensions. There are challenges, too, and the challenges are in rural areas, the speed of vehicles. If we can get heavy goods vehicles onto rail, and again, not some positive news in the past couple of days about that, that would be a big help. I want to conclude by commending a constituent, Mr Robert Phillips, who gives us all a very fine example. He commutes between home mains and the outskirts of Inverness and Inverness by kayak on a daily basis. It is not an option that is available to all of us, but we might not have a way to look at what we can do. I now call Mike Rumbles to speak to and move amendment 8497.1. Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. The fact that the Scottish Government has announced a doubling of the active travel budget in this year's programme for government is very welcome. Boosting the number of people cycling would be a win-win for Scotland, and the Scottish Government recognised that as far back as when Stuart Stevenson was transport minister in 2009. Back then, the number of journeys taken by bike was 1 per cent of all journeys. Stuart Stevenson said that the Government's target was for 10 per cent of journeys to be taken by bike by 2020. Stuart Stevenson said at the time that this 10 per cent target was, and I quote, an ambitious target, but one, I believe, is achievable. We are now just three years away from the date that the target was to be reached. How have we done? The percentage of journeys taken by bike has moved from 1 per cent by some figures to 1.2 or some to 2 per cent in the last eight years. The one words of Scottish ministers, as in so many other areas, have not been matched by the reality. It is more than time to move up the gears. As well as increasing the share of the transport budget that is spent on cycling and active transport, the Scottish Government must ensure that safe provision for cyclists and pedestrians is built into the transport system and that people feel confident to cycle from an early age. Countries across Europe have shown that that is possible. The Scottish Liberal Democrats believe that the case for increasing the uptake of cycling is compelling, and it is increasing in schools. One practical way of doing that is by ensuring that every school child should have the opportunity to benefit from cycle training, hence our amendment to the Government's motion today, which, by the way, I do move. We are not prescriptive as to how each child should be given that opportunity, but we are clear that that should happen. I would like the minister to address that in the summing up. Increasing cycling has a huge potential to benefit people's health, tackle obesity and congestion, and it will contribute to meeting Scotland's climate change targets. Cycling can also help to boost our economy, because a lifestyle is taken into account by people and companies when making choices about where they live and where they locate to. However, despite the surge of interest in cycling in recent years, driven, I think, in part by sporting successes, participation in cycling remains a minority pursuit. We need action to increase investment in both cycling and walking to improve dedicated cycling infrastructure to ensure that people are confident that they can ride their bikes safely and put cycling at the heart of our planning processes. I want to return to the Government's target of getting 10 per cent of all journeys to be made by bike. All parties in this chamber support that target, but I have to say that the Scottish Government simply has not shown the strong, effective and sustained leadership over the years that is required to meet that target. I note in relative terms that the Transport Minister has not been in his job for that long, but I am hopeful that we will get sustained leadership in this field. It was recently confirmed that the proportion of journeys taken by bike is now lower than it was in 2011. At this rate, we will never achieve the Government's target, and I have to disagree with Jamie Greene. I do not think that it will take 300 years at this rate. At this rate, we will never achieve it. Meanwhile, what are the Government's other transport priorities? It has been mentioned by Labour. It has wished that half air passenger duty would cost up to £125 million in lost revenues, and it is aimed to entirely abolish it up to £250 million—some dispute about the figures, but it is effectively about the same. Just think what could be done with even a small part of such resources if they were directed towards active travel instead. What do we need to do to make cycling a more effective option for most people? Not only do we need more investment in dedicated cycling infrastructure, but we need to ensure that people feel confident that they can cycle safely. I have mentioned this a few times now, because it is a really important issue. Research in 2015 found that only 62 per cent of Edinburgh residents, for instance, felt safe riding a bike during the day, falling to just 34 per cent after dark. Presiding Officer, I am conscious of time, so I will keep this short. We need real action, rather than warm words, from the Scottish Government to tackle these issues. That is not just moving up a gear, but we need to see real leadership from the Scottish Government if we are ever to get even close to achieving the 10 per cent target set for journeys. Bye-bye. Thank you, Mr Rumbles. We now move to the open debate speeches. Aside from Mr Rumbles, all the other opening speakers went over their allocated time. That will have an effect on open debate speakers. Up to five minutes, please. I call Gillian Martin to be followed by Brian Whittle. The advantages of active travel are well documented, positive implications for the nation's health, economy and quite staggering benefits for the environment. Our actual happiness is something that I do not think that we would talk enough about in this chamber or in life generally. One of the absolute treats for me of living in Edinburgh three days a week is the fact that, for the first time in 20 years, there is a working woman. I can walk to work, come rain or shine, I get the trainers on and I walk into Hollywood. It sets me up for the day. 20 years of sitting in horrible Aberdeen traffic has made me very grateful for that. All those wonderful benefits are obvious, and I hugely welcome any Government investment in active travel. Indeed, there are certain local authorities that Mr Yousaf has mentioned in his intervention earlier. More people walking and cycling will not happen if there is not more investment and inventive innovation in existing projects, whether they are brand new or improvement-based. Safety is a major reason why many people who want to walk or cycle still do not. A lot of safety concerns can be addressed through infrastructure. Safe routes to school are tremendously important if every child should be able to walk safely or cycle to school if they do not qualify for school transport. I was quite evangelical about my children walking to school, even if sometimes they were not. If I stood outside my house, I could pretty much watch them until they reached the school gates, so I was lucky. I have admitted in the past been quite judgmental about parents who rock up on a four-by-four to the school gates, whom I know do not live that much further away than I did. Walking to school from an early age is good for the child's health and the child's development, particularly when you give them the trust to do it alone or with friends, I would argue. However, as an elected member, I get many emails from parents who do not feel that it is safe enough to let the child walk or cycle to school. Narrow pavements or non-existent pavements are a common theme. Large commercial vehicles going through residential areas is another. All the same, every local authority must ensure that a child has a safe route to school with crossings and assistance that crossings have required and pavements lining that route. For cycling, I would argue that we are nowhere near where we need to be in that regard, particularly in rural locations. Cycle paths or marked-off paths and pavements for bikes are rare in rural towns and villages. I am hoping that a large part of the active travel money will be addressing that. I would also like to see local authorities build cycling provision into every new pathway or take into account when maintenance of existing pavements or pathways is undertaken whenever possible. In my recent visit to the Aberdeen western peripheral route under construction, I was pleased to see routes for cyclists joining up existing paths over and under the new highway. I also think that it is great that Sandra White has highlighted in the past that parking on pavements is a concern, and I am glad to hear that stopping that practice is under consideration in the forthcoming transport bill. Cars parking on pavements and across cycleways are a scourge for cyclists, wheelchair users and those with young children trying to get to their destination. Again, my email box is very full of that kind of complaint. I agreed with much of Transform Scotland's submission to us MSPs before this debate, but I felt that it was heavy on improvement to urban environments. It does not address rural issues in the same way. I absolutely agree that 100 per cent of low-emission zones are an important priority, and encouraging more cycling in walking cities is not just desirable but essential. However, we must be aware that much of the traffic is commuter traffic from rural areas, mine included. In Aberdeenshire, links between towns and cities are still sorely wanting for those who want to be active and those who want to leave the car at home but encounter difficulties. There is only one train station in my constituency, and it is on the edge of it. Anyone wanting to cycle or walk partway into work or study place in Aberdeens city will either have to walk or cycle wholesale or take the buses, which in my view are still far too expensive in my area. I once cycled into work at the college that I worked at. Martin Bucking's cycle path was wonderful. He got me to dice on the edge of the city in no time at all, but from there, cycle path provision was intermittent and I had to join busy highways. It was counterintuitive to the direction that I was travelling, which is a complicated way of saying that I was sent all over the place in my attempt to get to the city centre. The traffic was terrifying and I never attempted it again. My journey around it was like a chapter in a Stephen King novella. I only lived three miles from Aberdeens city boundaries. He thought that cycling to work would be a breeze, and I never did it again. I am not one of the ones that we need to convince to give it a try. We need to ensure that experience is a good one and a safe one. A joined up approach is needed. We need to link the urban and the rural, and we always need to be thinking about why people would not opt to walk or cycle. I say that safety is right at the top of that list. I call Brian Whitchhawks, followed by Fulton MacGregor. As anyone who has ever heard me speak in this chamber on more or less any subject will tell you that I am a great believer in the benefits of physical activity as a way of improving public health, the principle behind active travel that is getting people out of their cars and encouraging walking and cycling is one that I think all sides of this chamber wholeheartedly support. Preventable agenda is one that we should be very much at the forefront of all our ambitions. As has just been mentioned, early intervention by promoting cycling to and from school is really important, and that is going to require the need to deliver the safe routes to do that. Speaking as a parent, I would be only too happy to let my youngest child cycle to school, but there is no way that I am going to let her if it involves cycling on busy main roads. Most children, given half the chance, are quite happy to walk or run or cycle or scoot or skate to school, but that can only happen if parents are confident that it can be done safely. Creating safe travel zones around school, which can be applied anywhere in towns, cities and villages to give those kids that safe route to school, has to be a priority. We must make that objective a priority when planning schools and the surrounding areas. In East Ayrshire, there is a park and stride initiative that is getting parents to drop children off a few hundred yards from school entrance to the use of identified drop-off and pick-up places and giving them a safe route between them and the school. There are a number of known barriers to cycling and to achieve the kind of increases in active travel that we want to see. We need to address them all. One of the first ones is distance. Most people will never be persuaded to set off at 5.30 am—obviously Richard Lockhart and Liam Kerr aside clad in their high-fizz lycra and cycle to work. Public transport has a key role to play in making active travel sustainable. Provision of bikes, stories, space and trains, as I am sure Liam Kerr will go into more detail. Access to higher bikes at railway stations. We have active travel hubs such as the one in Kilmarnock railway station. They are great examples of what can be done. Splitting travel between biking and public transport is cycling to the station where perhaps our secure bike storage or the space and trains take the train to the city and walk our cycle to the office. In road safety, as Mr Yousaf alluded to earlier on, when we are sharing that road with other road users, that relationship between cyclists and drivers can sometimes be an uneasy one. It is important that we continue to develop a network of cycle lanes that give cyclists a safe route. Again, active travel must be a priority when planning infrastructure. I recently asked the current secretary if there are any plans to build a cycle route in conjunction with the building of the Mabel bypass on the A77. Apparently, there is not. I have to say that this is shortsighted and shows a lack of co-ordination between Government departments. From a health perspective and a tourism perspective, looking at a cycle route with ambitions of joining Ayr and Strynmar is desirable. The integration of active travel initiatives with other infrastructure projects has to be a sensible approach. We have the financial barriers. The statistics show that households with higher household incomes have greater access to bikes. That is why it is so important to increase provision of higher bikes or even free loan of bikes. A few weeks ago, I attended the launch of a Brody's bikes project at the University of the West of Scotland in Ayr. The project set up in memory of the UWS student Brody Eaton, who passed away while studying at UWS, provides students living in halls of residence with access to bikes and safety equipment free of charge. Identifying all the reasons that limit people's ability to cycle and walk should be another priority. Delivering a sustainable long-term shift towards more active travel in Scotland is a complicated task within the even more complicated task of addressing Scotland's long running issues with preventable illness, poor diet and an active lifestyle. There is a danger in formulating policy based on the need to hit headlines by meeting self-imposed targets rather than concentrating on bedding and cultural change for the long term. I think that the Scottish Government has an ambition of 10 per cent journeys to be made by bike by 2020. Lots of good round headlines were the numbers, but there is little sign of progress towards this goal, with only 2 per cent of journeys being taken by bike in recent years. On the move towards an active travel nation that will not happen overnight, it may well be that we achieve the long-term shift by focusing on today's school pupils and students who are still forming their travel habits, perhaps coupled with a long-term integrated infrastructure strategy. In conclusion, we and the Conservative benches welcome the Government's direction of travel if you will excuse the pun. However, the delivery on the ground is what matters. Cross-portfolio working is what required here, as was highlighted when questioning Minister Eileen Campbell last week during her announcement of the diet and obesity consultation. So far, the minister has yet to demonstrate to me this kind of initiative and understanding of the issues and opportunities that we have. I just say to members that all those little extra 10 seconds add up and penalise someone towards the end of the debate. Fulton MacGregor, I got that wrong—excuse me, Ms Beamish. Fulton MacGregor, to be followed by Claudia Beamish. Thank you, Presiding Officer. It is a pleasure to be able to speak in this debate today. I welcome the motion put forward by the Government and the £80 million investment and appointment of an active nation commissioner. I repeat the ground that others have said, but walking or cycling to work as active travel is good for our health and the environment. It is undeniable, as the minister has said, that the impact that walking and cycling can have on health, both physical and mental. For example, the NHS dates at regular walking alone has been shown to reduce the risk of chronic illnesses, including heart disease type 2 diabetes, asthma stroke and some catensers. We know that that is similar to the stats for cycling, as well. Further notes have been proven that walking improves on individuals' overall wellbeing and even helps to fight depression. Research indicates that walking is as effective as anti-depressants in treating mild to moderate depression. In some cases, it is more effective and is positive rather than negative side effects into the bargain. That is fantastic, although I would put on record that anti-depressant drugs are still a necessity in some instances. It is quite easy for us to incorporate walking more into our days, probably more so than cycling, as other speakers have mentioned. Does sometimes baffle me when we see the amount of cars parked outside primary schools in the morning due to parents taking the children to drop off? I know that people are busy and maybe everybody is prone to that every now and again, but some people have a very regular occurrence in part of their daily trip. I am sure that I am not the only MSP in the chamber who has a mailbox full of constituents complaining about various parking scenarios over their constituencies. For example, one of the ones that we are dealing with just now in terms of working with councillors as well is the issue at the Coatbridge College campus, where far too many cars are parked there. One of the things that we are encouraging the college and others to do is to look at ways that they can encourage their students and employees to use the walking routes that are available. I think that there is that when it is on organisations to promote walking as an alternative to their work as well. That said, it is all very well. I was saying that we should walk in cycle, but we really need to change it culturally. I think that everybody across all parties has said that. The daily miles is a really good example of this. I have spoken debates in here before on the daily mile, and I know that most schools across my constituency are engaging with it. I have spoken to some young people about it in the past debate, and they seem to really enjoy it. I hope that that embeds them in the culture of walking. There are a couple of other groups in my constituency that I would like to quickly mention. The Muirhead district pensioners club has started a walking club, and it makes that available to all members of their community. It has gone very successful. They won an award for that. The St Monica's Rambos in Coatbridge formed 25 years ago. They dedicated themselves to organising walks every fortnight and getting people active across Lanarkshire. They do everything from walking country parks to scaling moon roads. They beat the street, which was operated across North Lanarkshire, my own office, and I signed up for it. In total, there were 104,000 miles completed, obviously not just by myself in the office, but across the whole of North Lanarkshire. Jog Scotland in the Christen area encouraged people to go out and jog a couple of times a week and get fresh air. I think that, although those examples that I have given to mention organisations and projects in my constituency are not directly equating to walking as active travel, they still promote it through their endeavours and what they are doing. The leaders in those programmes talk to the people who participate. I am probably a good example of a middle ground between that. It was the new college Lanarkshire students when they created the Dunbeth park walk this way route that I had done a member's debate on last year. That was to encourage, among other things, students to use the route at the lunch time, but also for students and employees to use the route on their way to the college or other work nearby. I want to pick up very quickly as I have come to the end, something Neil Bibby and Mike Rumbles mentioned, just about cycling and affordability cycling. I am currently teaching my wee boy, who is three and a half, to ride his bike. I am walking and I can afford to do that. I can get my bike and we are able to travel to the locks in Coatbridge and use that for him to practice on. I wonder about other people who are not in that position. We might need to look at projects so that young people have the opportunity to look at walking and cycling as they go forward. There is a balanceability project in North Lanarkshire, which teaches children to cycle. I will stop there, but I think that I made my point. Thanks very much, cheers. Officer, this is a really important debate. As co-convenier of the cross-party group for cycling, walking and buses, I take a keen interest in active travel and its integration with public transport, not to forget the rail cross-party group as well. I welcome the recognition in the Scottish Government motion of the collective effort that has gone into pushing forward active travel. On those benches, we also welcome the Scottish Government announcement of doubling the active travel budget. We must all acknowledge that Scotland is still far from the target of 10 per cent of journeys by bike by 2020. I am very supportive of our Scottish Labour amendment today as it recognises the issue of transport poverty and calls specifically for action on that. It is indeed fantastic to see the community links plus award flourishing, since Alison Johnstone, Jim Eadie and I, as fellow co-conveniers of the cross-party group on cycling in the last Parliament, proposed it to the Scottish Government. Developments of the first winning project, Glasgow City Council's South City Way, are indeed under way. Floating bus stops, which I look forward to seeing, and cycle parking racks outside the community centres, have been the first steps in developing opportunities for healthier and greener travel on a major commuter belt. This year's five winning entries in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Stirling and in Venice will be invaluable models for place making. However, in terms of transport poverty, the award going forward must have inclusive criteria and so must see action on developing the new funding if that is to reach to more deprived communities. This summer, I visited Amsterdam specifically to experience the difference in the cycling culture for myself. Being in older cities is indeed no excuse for not going forward. Here, many local authorities and community groups are proactively involving residents in the way forward, and the spokes event to be held jointly with Midlothian, East and West Lothian and Edinburgh City Council reps on 9 November is a good example of that, and he is the flyer to give it a plug. Of course, it is not only about road layout and place making that make cyclists and pedestrians become equal road users. There are a wide range of ways in which we can become empowered and feel it is safe to take up active travel. One of those is through the protection of civil law, and we are one of the few countries in Europe that still does not have some form of strict or presumed liability to protect vulnerable road users. I am personally a keen supporter of presumed liability, and there are those across all parties and far beyond who agree. I am clear that the time has come to acknowledge its value and to consider acting further on that. Education for all road users is, of course, essential as we go forward. As an ex-primary teacher, I have always been uncomfortable with how little there is in terms of on-road cycling education as part of bike ability. I am delighted to see that the figures have radically improved recently to 42 per cent. I am also delighted that walking is now part of the remit of our cross-party group along with cycling and buses. I have been asking myself and I ask everyone involved today in the chamber and beyond. Does walking really have as much exposure as cycling in the active travel quest? In terms of social justice and transport poverty, we hear Rambler Scotland's briefing of a new study that demonstrated that people living in the most deprived areas are more likely to take journeys by active travel and predominantly by walking. That can be helped by pedestrianisation of streets, maintenance of pavements and paths and making planning decisions that put pedestrians first. We must not forget rural active travel, either. There are still significant gaps in the national walking and cycling network. One such is in my region, the Crawford Community Council, which is keen to create opportunities for villagers and to develop cycling and walking opportunities for tourist links. That would help with local accommodation businesses. However, there are integrated transport link problems. Enabling tourists to use trains and buses with their bikes must happen more actively. It is now several years since I asked Keith Brown, when he was the transport minister, to consider the model of the hook-on carriages. I understand that one of our briefings is highlighted that is very successful in the South Tyrol, where large, dedicated carriages are used. Will the minister explore that further? Finally, in terms of transport poverty, this morning, our Eclare Committee took evidence on air quality, affecting our community's health, and the development of active travel will be key in that. In the words of the five third sector organisations that put a joint briefing together, heartening in itself, achieving active travel, nation, vision and growth in walking and cycling will only be delivered through collaboration between business, transport, health and planning. You must conclude—I am very sorry. You must conclude. I call Marie Todd to be followed by Liam Kerr. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I would like to draw members' attention to my register of interest because I am a trustee for the Peffery Way Association. Our goal is to create an off-road path suitable for walkers, wheelchairs, buggies and bikes, which links Dingwall and Straspefer and all of the communities in between. Like many in this chamber and all over Scotland, I very much welcome the commitment and programme for government to double active travel funding for walking and cycling to £80 million a year. With reference to the Green amendment, I think that this is the rapid shift in resources that are required to hit the 10 per cent target for making everyday journeys by bike. We might not be matching the level of funding in leading... John Finnie. Thank you. I am very grateful for the member for taking intervention on that point. Does the member share the concerns that I have about the lack of maintenance that has taken place on many roads and bridges across the country as a result of the expenditure on two main roads in particular? Marie Todd. Thank you. I have had some concerns with that and I have raised those with both Sustrans and I am raising them with Bear Scotland as well. We may not be matching the level of funding in leading European countries, but we are way ahead of the other nations in the UK. A whopping annual £13.50 per head here compared to £6.50 in England outside London and only £3 to £5 per head in Wales. In Northern Ireland, the Department for Infrastructure has previously acknowledged that the funding available for cycling has been limited and spread thinly. We are doing a great thing in Scotland. The benefits of walking and cycling are extremely well researched and documented. Cycling and walking for short journeys in local communities can help to provide an answer to pressing issues that are faced in Scotland, including air pollution, town and city congestion, ill health, obesity and the rising cost of physical inactivity to the NHS. Walking and cycling are also a cost-effective method of transport for short journeys and can be an enjoyable and fun way of travelling if the environment is safe and accessible. The physical benefits are obvious, but the benefits to mental health are also huge, with evidence of reducing stress, depression and even dementia. While nearly everyone walks, at least some of the time, only about 1 per cent of trips are by bike, as others have said, and this Government wants to see that rise to 10 per cent. The big barrier to cycling is safety. If we want to get more than just the dedicated few lycra clad men cycling, we need to do more than paint a line on the road. We need to build dedicated infrastructure that segregates cyclists from traffic. Data from Denmark shows that only 30 per cent of cyclists feel safe mixing with traffic, but 70 per cent feel safe on segregated paths. That is why everyone is so excited about the extra money, because it will undoubtedly deliver new infrastructure and that will increase active travel. Another great statistic from Denmark shows that new cycle paths typically generate a 20 per cent increase in cyclists from day one. If you build it, they will come, you might say. An example of that in my own region is the three distilleries pathway in Islay. It is a brand new path running from Port Ellen and taking in the distilleries of Laffroy, Glagrullan and Ardbeg. The path runs for five and a half kilometres and is fully accessible for walkers, cyclists, pushchairs and wheelchairs. The idea behind it was to enable visitors to go to the distilleries and sample the goods without drinking and driving, but now there are loads of locals using it too. In Inverness, thanks to the high-profile cycle route developments such as the Milburn Road Shared Use Path and the Golden Bridge, the number of cycle commuters has more than doubled in the past few years. We are up to 8 per cent in Inverness. Earlier this year, I was delighted to see Inverness receive funding to develop psychofriendly infrastructure as part of the SysTrans community links plus design competition, as Claudia Beamish mentioned. Inverness is a growing city and I think that building cycling into the transport system could fundamentally change the way we live in future and I welcome that. I want to finish by mentioning some of the economic benefits that I expect from the investment. Scotland is a fantastic destination for cycle tourism and the highlands and islands that I represent, we boast some of the most scenic cycle routes in the country. Cycle tourism brings great benefits and great value to the Scottish economy. According to SysTrans, it was worth £345 million in 2015. There are some brilliant long-distance routes in the national cycle network already and plans to link destinations like Skye and Ollipoll to Inverness are really welcome and will integrate the incredibly successful Hebride and Way with mainland links. I think that that is a fantastic… That is a nice place to stop. Thank you very much. Any moves by parties and communities to encourage active travel, particularly in relation to cycling, must be welcomed. It is in that spirit that I focus my comments. First of all, the Scottish Government set out, as we have heard, in the 2010 cycling action plan, an objective to achieve a 10 per cent modal share by 2020. However, the 2016 transport and travel in Scotland document showed a decrease in cycling as the main mode of travel to work from 2.6 per cent in 2014 to 2.2 per cent in 2015. National statistics show that commuters have switched back to the car from cycling with 8 per cent of those who cycled to work a year ago, now driving. Nearly one-fifth says that this is due to too many cars on the road. That is what we need to focus on. I note in passing that at the moment the answer seems to be an arbitrary 20-mile-per-hour speed limit that is observed by virtually no one, is all but unenforceable, mirrors a scheme that Manchester has just abandoned, apparently due to minimal impact on speed or accidents, increases emissions and does nothing to make cycling a better commute. In that regard, I want to develop a point that Mike Rumbles made. I cycled to Parliament and I have been road cycling for about 30 years now. I have been knocked off my bike on Parliament Square by a bus, on Tottenham Court Road by a car and I have collided with a lamppost when a tourist stepped in front of me on the King's Road, but I would still rather ride in London than try to negotiate my current route from the Macdonald Road Leathwalk junction down the London road and try to take that right at Abbey Lane as two opposing lines of traffic vie to see how closely they can get their wing mirrors to me. The Scottish Conservatives document global challenge local leadership calls for one segregated cycle route in each of Scotland's cities and safe travel routes to schools. Mary Todd is right that we will never encourage significant numbers of people to cycle to work or school if they have been asked to cycle only on unsegregated roads. According to the Sustrans Cycling Scotland report, 42 per cent of primary schools provide on-road cycle training, but that is a wasted resource if parents do not feel comfortable letting their kids ride. John Finnie makes some positive remarks on school cycling, but if we really want people to cycle, we have to make it safe and comfortable for them to do so. That means all abilities, including children and those less confident, as the Liberal Democrat amendment rightly calls for. I wonder if the minister can expand in closing on the extent to which cycling can be designed in two roads and junctions. Secondly, members may recall that in May of this year I called a debate on bike capacity on trains. Currently, nearly all long-distance ScotRail trains are class 170 turbostars with four official bike spaces on board. From summer 2018, ScotRail will introduce what we will colloquially call intercity 125s. Despite ScotRail's 2015 promise that, quote, the 125s will have a capacity of at least 20 cycles, in the minister's opening remarks, he conceded there would only be eight spaces. Following my debate and a great deal of pressure from amongst others the spokes organisation, Transport Scotland recently reached an agreement with ScotRail to increase the number of spaces available at intermediate stations from two to four. With six in the power cars, that is 10 spaces in all, which is a long way short of at least 20. Although increasing the intermediate capacity to four merely takes us back to the existing class 170 capacity, in practice it will be worse. On a 170, three bikes can squeeze into two cycle spaces, but you lose that flexibility on the high-speed trains as the storage is on hanging hooks, which themselves are a challenge for those of lesser stature or lesser strength. This is not good news for Avymor, Montrose or Stonehaven, which are great jumping off points for cycle tourism. Finally, in the opening remarks, the minister mentioned the programme for government and on page 59 it is stated that, quote, dedicated carriages for cycles and outdoor sports equipment on rural routes in the north and west, end quote, will be introduced. Now, if this actually means what it implies, an additional coach on these routes, then this is positive, but we have no details yet. What is the north and west? Does it include the north east? Where is the rolling stock coming from? Which services in particular are we talking about? What does success look like in terms of usage? Now, in September, I asked the Scottish Government these questions and more, but I haven't yet had an answer. I have no doubt it will come soon. In closing, I spoke in the latest newsletter saying that, if the reports of the extra carriage are true, quote, then all concerned and especially Minister Humza Yousaf will be heroes. Minister, this is the moment. In the Government's closing, be the hero. I am afraid on that note that Mr Humza Yousaf is your hero, then we will move on. Live that down, Mr Kerr. I call Bruce Crawford to be followed by Colin Smith. On Friday last week, I was delighted to join people from Stirling Cyco Hub, together with the Cabinet Secretary, Keith Brown and others, to celebrate the third anniversary of the Stirling City's fabulous rental bike scheme, Next Bike. Next Bike has been delivered through 4th Environment Link. It has seen 37,000 cycle journeys since it started, with more than 24,000 in the past year alone. It is a truly remarkable success story in my constituency and one that I am delighted that Transport Scotland is sent to build on. The Cabinet Secretary announced a further £270,000 of investment into Stirling Cyco Hub's Next Bike scheme. That is an awful mouthful. It will bring in the overall Scottish Government investment into the organisation to more than £1 million. I understand that further funding will secure five smart screens across 4th Valley that provide advice to the public about walking in cycle routes, as well as tight tips on bike maintenance. Perhaps, more importantly, it will bring a fleet of e-bikes that is available to rent by members of the public to 50. Presiding Officer, this is the first ever large-scale electric bike scheme of its kind in Scotland, a remarkable achievement by those involved in piecing it together. I understand that today there are over 2,000 registered and active users of the scheme. This number includes many who have opted to leave the car at home so that they can engage in this exciting and accessible mode of active travel. Stirling Cyco Hub's aim is clear to turn Stirling into a cycling city where cycling is made appealing, accessible and rewarding. The development and growth of this service among those who live in Stirling area is in large part due to the support from Transport Scotland, Sustrans and Stirling Council. The project has made a great advancement in improving the cycling culture in Stirling and the numbers speak for themselves. Since opening up to the public in 2014, the service has seen a 300 per cent increase in usage, clearly signalling a shift in local attitudes to Stirling. Stirling Council has also recently been awarded £2.7 million from Community Links Plus to create a world-class active travel network in our city. I may have mentioned a couple of times in the past in those debates that I represent what I consider to be one of the most beautiful and inspiring constituencies in our country. That includes the vast rural setting of the lochs, the mountains and the highland glens, a perfect destination in which to enjoy outdoor life on foot or bike. I was privileged to take part in the opening of the Strathair to Kingshouth pathway and cycle track in rural Stirling. The project saw investment from the Scottish Government, which was matched and funded by Stirling Council and Loch Lomond and Traswick National Park, a 3.5 kilometre route that allows residents to cycle or walk on a traffic-tree track between the communities that also give access to other existing routes in the area. The Loch Lomond and Traswick National Park has also worked with Transport Scotland and Sustrans across my constituency to create many more opportunities for active travel. Through the partnership approach and an uplift in active travel funding in recent years, 20 kilometres of projects have been delivered in places such as Drummond, Tindrums, Strathair, Calender, Croftami and St Philan, with a total capital value of £3.5 million. On matters to do with the rural aspect, Roseanna Cunningham would never forgive me if I did not mention the three cents way. That route itself can already be walked in part. However, once it is completed, it will connect Calinn on the western edge of my constituency to St Andrew's on the most northern eastern coast of Fife. Some of that expansion into walking to compare with the north route 500 that others talked about earlier. The things that I have demonstrated today say to me that this is Government into action, representing real improvement, despite the carmerginally tone that we have taken by some of the debate today. In 2011-12, the active travel budget was £17.5 million. In 2018-19, it will be £18 million. Let us celebrate this and other real achievements that are being made on the ground. I just wish I had time to address some of the real issues that Labour has raised in their transport poverty and their amendment. I welcome that amendment in the way that they brought that forward and the tone that they brought it forward in, because I have also got to make real progress there. Thank you very much, Mr Crawford. I call Colin Smith. We fall by students. Stevenson, Mr Smith, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. As Labour's spokesperson on public health and a member of the health and sport committee, I want to focus my brief comments on the important health benefits of active travel. Those benefits, Presiding Officer, are significant. I am pleased that the minister highlighted the fact that being active can have a positive impact on our mental health and wellbeing. It can also reduce the risk of type 2 diabetes, stroke, heart attack, cancer such as bowel cancer and dementia. Walking and cycling are also the ultimate low emission options for local transport, reducing air pollution, the cause of thousands of premature deaths every year. Despite those benefits, only about two thirds of adults in Scotland currently meet the moderate to vigorous physical activity guidelines. A quarter describe their activity levels as low or very low. That is why increasing active travel is so important. With two-thirds of journeys under three kilometres being done by car in Scotland, there is no doubt that there is scope to deliver that increase in active travel if we break down the barriers to walking and cycling. One of those barriers is unquestionably the activity gap that exists in Scotland, with physical activity levels in more prosperous areas higher than levels in our most deprived communities. Communities that, as we have heard from Neil Bibby and Claudia Beamish, already suffer high levels of transport poverty. The recent Scottish household survey found that there was a 18-point gap between the percentage of adults participating in physical activity from sports to walking between the richest and the poorest communities. 69 per cent of people from the poorest backgrounds have taken part in some form of physical or sport activity compared to 87 per cent from the most affluent. The survey found that it was three times more likely to go cycling if you live in the most affluent areas. However, the activity gap was especially large when it came to walking with 77 per cent of people in more affluent areas likely to go for a 30-minute walk compared to 57 per cent in our most deprived communities. If we want to increase walking and cycling for travel or recreational purposes, there needs to be a particular focus on breaking down the barriers to activity within some of our most deprived communities, starting by routinely measuring participation rates within those communities, something that is not currently done. However, it is not just among the least well-off groups that barriers to cycling and walking exist. Roger Geffen, the policy director of cycling UK, said that UK cycling conditions to, quote, disproportionately deter young people, older people, women and people with disabilities from cycling. Issues such as safety and accessibility must be tackled both in cycling and walking if we are to prevent these groups of people being excluded. As we have already heard, that will take investment. Studies from across the world show that barriers to walking and cycling are broken down and cultural shifts towards active travel take place if we invest in the necessary infrastructure. The drastic expansion of segregated cycleways in Seville saw the proportion of journeys made by bike increased from 0.5 per cent to 6 per cent. Research from Denmark found that new cycle tracks increased bicycle traffic by 20 per cent from day one. Yet the cuts to local councils who need to match fund active travel projects in Scotland to secure such trans support means the roll-out of cycleways has been far slower here. If we are serious about achieving a step change in active travel, we need to be serious about ending the cuts to local council budgets. We also need to empower local communities to deliver bold and creative solutions, increase cycling and walking. I want to briefly highlight one example that Fulton MacGregor referred to earlier. When I chaired Dumfries and Galloway Council's Economy, Environment and Infrastructure Committee, I had the privilege of being involved in a fantastic initiative called Beat the Street, which prompted a significant increase in cycling and walking in towns across the region. For members unfamiliar with the scheme, it operates as a game. Participants collect points on a card or a fob by walking, cycling or running across the town, swiping their card or fob when they reach scanners usually attached to lamp posts. Points are counted on a leaderboard and there are cash prizes available for the winning teams often representing local community groups. It is an inclusive and community-focused initiative targeted at those of all ages and all levels of fitness, and the levels of participation were exceptional. In 2016, Beat the Street came to Stranraer and nearly 4,000 residents—39 per cent of the population—took part. Of those, 80 per cent said that they continued the changes that they made during this time. The proportion of adults' report and frequent active travel increased from 57 per cent before Beat the Street to 62 per cent six months later. The number report and no active travel decreased from 16 per cent to just 2 per cent. The figures were similar in other towns. Over 1,625 in Dolbeity, a third of the population, and an in 3,285 players took part, nearly 40 per cent of the population, the highest percentage that I have played anywhere in the world. In the past few months, the scheme was rolled out in the hometown of Dumfries where nearly 8,000 people signed up as part of 83 teams. It is a clear example of the benefits of creative and locally led interventions. It is one that I very much whole-heartedly commend and hope that it will be rolled out across other communities as a result of the increase in active travel. Thank you very much. I want to focus on walking. Just as the last time I spoke in a debate on active travel, I want to focus on walking. In the motions and the amendments before us, there are only two references to walking and nine references to cycling. The accessibility of walking is substantially greater than the accessibility of cycling. I suggest to colleagues that the best way of improving active travel is to encourage people to walk. Let us think about some numbers. Looking at the report on prescriptions in the last year for which I have been able to find numbers, of the top five prescriptions—prescription number one, number three and number five, total 8.78 million prescriptions—those are all for respiratory conditions, particular conditions that will be greatly benefited by people taking more exercise, quite gentle exercise, or if they are capable of it, more serious exercise. How much do those prescriptions cost? I do not quite know, but the average cost of prescription is £10. Those are the top end, so they are more expensive than that. We are looking at a figure that is in excess, just for those three prescriptions, of the active travel budget. What is the cost of a pair of trainers?  Let us get our doctors in a position where they prescribe walking and the equipment with which it can be done to improve the health of the nation and promote active travel. I have a few words to say to colleagues in the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body, because it is not just the Government that can do things. At paragraph 11.18 in the allowance scheme for Parliament, you are required, if you take a taxi costing £20 to provide a letter of justification. Let me suggest that we add to that that you are required to provide a letter of justification if the taxi journey did not exceed one mile, because it is the short taxi journeys that we should be replacing. From the outset, we have been paying members here 45 pence a mile if they use their car, but only 20 pence if they use their cycle. How about turning that round so that we pay them 45 pence if they use their cycle and 20 pence if they use their car? I know that that sounds a little bit whimsical, but the reality is that we are actually going to have to—yes, I will, Mr Finnie, if you are brief. John Finnie. Yes, I will be very brief. Would you like to explain to me how I can cover an area between the north of Shetland, the Mull of Kentire, on a push-bike with a death of public transport, as much as I would like to? He has only got a minute and a half to do that. The bottom line is that we have to challenge the existing norms and have a debate around it. It is not meant to be there, because I too have a similar problem, albeit on a smaller scale. I am glad that I now have, as my greatest fan here, Mr Rumbles, who mentioned me three times in the first minute of his contribution in 2007. In 2009, I said that it would be challenging to reach a 20 per cent target for cycling. I got that one right, I think that it is fair to say colleagues. However, we can be ambitious, genuinely ambitious and walking. I have done four kilometres today—that is 5,650 steps. I prefer to count kilometres, because it sounds bigger than miles. The rest of us should also be doing something at least as big as that. Liam Kerr tells us that he cycles. That is good. My last bicycle cost me a ffiver. I am not going to pay more than 25 from an X1 when I go to a rural route. I will be able to get that. Let me just conclude, Presiding Officer, in the remaining very, very few seconds, by saying that we all have, at our own feet, the tools to promote this agenda. We should, as MSPs, be seen to be walking. We should encourage others to walk. It delivers health, wealth and a community benefit. I welcome the opportunity to take part in today's debate on the promotion of walking cycling as active travel in Scotland, particularly someone who regularly cycles to work and for pleasure. It is vitally important that we acknowledge the correlation between active travel and the protection of the Scottish environment when we discuss today's issues. However, it is clear from the past seven years that the SNP Government has failed to adequately engage with the population to encourage a satisfactory level of active travel across Scotland. With almost no progress to show from the active Scotland outcomes framework, the only track that the Government is currently peddling on is one that will lead them from missing their own targets. Active travel plays a crucial role in the reduction of air pollution, which in many areas is exacerbated by people travelling by car on short commutes to work. In 2017 alone, the number of sites where air pollution levels are regularly broken rose from 33 in 2016 to 38 in 2017, according to Friends of the Earth. We know that there is an estimated 2,500 deaths attributed to air pollution—sorry, I do not have time—by making realistic commitments properly funded and supported, the Government can reduce air pollution and increase healthy outcomes by encouraging and facilitating a greater uptake of cycling in our towns and cities. A commitment to further investing in children's cycling proficiency training, alongside further designated cycle routes across the country, will provide an additional catalyst for greater active travelling, bringing us closer to achieving the modal shift that we need to come even closer to achieving ambitious targets of 10 per cent of all journeys to be made by bike by 2020. The Scottish Government has substantially increased the active transport budget, but it still remains less than 4 per cent of the overall transport budget. I welcome the Government's cycling action plan, which is established to provide funding for communities, local authorities and other relevant bodies to work towards this 10 per cent of all adult cycling to work. However, it is going to be a difficult task. In 2014, the figure was 2.6 per cent, dropping to 2.2 per cent in 2016, according to the stats from Transport Scotland. With the current disappointing 0.2 increase in everyday bike journeys in the past decade, without concerted effort, it will take a further 300 years for the Scottish Government to reach the 10 per cent mark. It is a very admirable target, but can this Government really achieve it? The Scottish Government needs to invest wisely. As is mentioned by Claudia Beamish, there should be no excuses made for old straight layouts, etc. If Copenhagen and Amsterdam can integrate active travel so successfully, then so should we. We need modal shift, we need to change attitudes and remove barriers to people taking their bikes or their feet to work. Even simple things such as accelerated roll-out of more bike stands would remove the barrier created by people having to carry bikes up flights of stairs. One of my own experiences, and I can tell you that electric mountain bikes are way too heavy to carry up any stairs. We should look at successful active transport schemes across the world and, indeed, closer to home. The UK Government is providing £1 billion worth of funding to local bodies in England without cycling a walking investment strategy, and as a result it has seen an increase in cycling rates where it has increased dedicated funding. The Scottish Government should look at the successes south of the border and learn lessons and improve on the progress that is made with our neighbours. We in those benches understand the benefits of encouraging active travel in Scotland. Through the global challenge local leadership, the Scottish Conservative Unionist Environment and Climate Change position paper, we are committed to working with local authorities and third-party partners to improve our cycle path network. Furthermore, we are committed to supporting safe travel routes to school in order to encourage active travel from a young age. Although it appears that the Scottish Government is pedalling an unrealistic target akin to a bike riding without a chain, a probably targeted and funded budget could and hopefully will provide for greater success in promoting active travel and the benefits that come with such action. My colleagues and I on those benches will support that aim. Emma Harper and Ms Harper will be the last speaker in the open debate, then we move to closing speeches. I am pleased to speak today about the importance of walking and cycling, and I have decimated my speech knowing that the time is not going to be too long. Ms Harper, you can have your five minutes. As a member of the Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee, I am well aware of the public health benefits that promoting active travel will bring, and I welcome the Scottish Government's commitment to doubling the active travel budget from 2018. A commitment that has been held by Cycling UK's chief executive as an unprecedented level of investment into active travel from a national government. As an MSP with a health care background, I understand that active travel is so important from a public health perspective because the best way to achieve the health-enhancing potential of physical activity is for people to incorporate that activity into their daily lives. By replacing time spent commuting by car with physical active forms of travel such as walking and cycling, physical activity becomes embedded in participants' daily routines. It is therefore welcome news that both cycling and walking and scooting continue to increase steadily every year as the main mode of getting to work. The doubling of the active travel budget will allow major capital infrastructure projects to be funded in urban and rural settings. However, it is important to recognise that active travel faces different challenges in rural and urban areas. Experience in Dumfries and Galloway shows that, for it to be successful, active travel must be relevant to people's lives and appropriately executed. It is hard in rural areas to use cycling or walking as a means to get them to work. If I had to cycle to work, it would be a 150-mile round-trip from Dumfries to Stranraer or Ayrshire for meetings or surgeries. Recently, my colleague Daniel Johnston MSP was discussing with me how he gets to work and he says that he lives five minutes from his office and he walks. That would be quite a challenge for many of us MSPs in rural areas. I am making an effort to walk to the office from home as much as possible and walk to Parliament while in Edinburgh to support my active travel. In Dumfries and Galloway, walking and cycling as a leisure is very popular already and it is well established. We already have over 450 miles of sign-posted cycle routes, as well as many off-road cycle trails and world-class mountain bike trail centres. With our network of picturesque road cycling, it has massive potential. I am pleased to say that Dumfries and Galloway is one of the local authority areas with an active travel strategy in place. We are lucky to have a well-developed and accessible path network that encourages walking and cycling as daily activities, but there is still potential for more improvement. To realise that potential, the right infrastructure needs to be in place to provide user-friendly, sign-posted and safe links for residents and visitors. Earlier this year, I attended a great event in Parliament that was sponsored by my colleague Angus MacDonald MSP. It was hosted by an organisation called Cycling Without Age. During the evening, I learned about this new initiative to get older people out into the fresh air. It is a great scheme that has health benefits for both pilots and passengers of the trike shores. A similar scheme has been started in Falkirk and I have been linked with local stakeholders to explore the potential of a similar scheme in Dumfries and Galloway. Investing in safe cycling infrastructure will be vital to ensure the success of such schemes, so when the programme for government was announced, I wrote to transport minister to explore ideas for investment in the south west. I am particularly interested in the Government's plans for a long distance walking and cycling route equivalent to the NC500 or the North Coast 500. I have written to Government to recommend, including the coast of the south-west of Scotland, maybe Fetroun to Gretna, as well as inland, which would be a particularly fantastic place. Absolutely, yes. Just one of the member… Hang on a minute, Mr Castle, get my button please. Finlay Carson. Does the member recognise the south-west 300 already established route that is already in a lot of the tourist information? Absolutely. I recognise that the south-west 300 has been established, but it has primarily been identified for cars. I am talking about walking and cycling here. We are talking about a coastal development that would encourage tourism in the south-west of Scotland. I look forward to working with the Scottish Government to develop significant infrastructure that will be so much welcomed in the south of Scotland that reflects the social value of active travel and promote more walking and cycling for the people who I represent. I move to closing speeches. I call Mike Rumbles, closing for the Liberal Democrats. This has been a largely consensual debate because we all want to see the Government succeed in its aim of increasing the number of journeys taken by walking and cycling. If I can just mention two contributions that took my eye, Julian Martins said that, living in Edinburgh three days a week, she can now walk to work. I agree entirely. I normally bus and walk two miles a day to and from work, and I feel the benefit of this. I think we could all feel the benefit of it by doing so. Liam Kerr made some excellent points about the availability or not of bikespaces on our rail network and finished by saying that, if the transport minister delivered these extra bikespaces as promised, he would be his hero. I would like to have the transport minister as a hero as well. I have to say, Deputy Presiding Officer, I said that I would like to have, I did not say that he was. I have to say, Deputy Presiding Officer, all parties are largely agreeing on what should happen. However, the proof of the pudding is in the eating end, if I may say so, to the minister. He is in the driving seat on this one. Yes, he is delivering a doubling of the budget and everyone has welcomed this, but will his own Government's target be achieved in the next three years? We're supposed to move from one or two per cent of journeys by bike to 10 per cent. Everyone knows, and I'm mentioning Stuart Stevenson again, that this is not going to be achieved even though Stuart perhaps thinks that it's still going to be achieved. It's not going to be achieved without dramatic action. I'm not convinced that we're going to get that dramatic action that would be necessary. Minister, I would be delighted if he could prove me wrong on this one. The Liberal Democrats will be supporting the motion and all the amendments, except the Green amendment, because simply we are worried about the impact that this might have on our public transport network. No one wants to put our public transport system at risk because of such a dramatic change in the budget. It's outcomes, and I mentioned that. It's outcomes that the Liberal Democrats are focused on, not necessarily on inputs that the Greens seem to be focused on. Deputy Presiding Officer, I've already moved amendment in my name and I'm pleased to finish early so that other people could speak. Thank you. That's very gallant of you, Mr Rumbles. Can I call on Alison Johnstone to close the Liberal Democrats, Ms Johnstone, please? I'm closing for the Greens, Presiding Officer. As this debate has shown, when we discuss active travel— I'm so sorry, did I call you a little— Twice? Twice I've done that. I'll give you an extra 30 seconds. Thanks, my Presiding Officer. Thank you. It's quite traumatic. As this debate has shown, when we discuss active travel, we discuss so many issues from mental health to poverty. I prefer to call it walking and cycling, but, as my colleague John Finnie has pointed out, some people do their active travel by kayak. However, the contributions that we've heard in this debate highlight how investment in walking and cycling can help us to improve so many aspects of life in Scotland. It's essential that those activities, which are the solutions to so many of the challenges that we face, are invested in and properly. We know that the cost of heart disease and diabetes alone takes £40 million annually from the NHS, but that is just under half of the amount that physical inactivity is costing us. The Health and Sport Committee, as we've heard, is undertaking its sport for everyone inquiry. The testimonies that we've received make it clear that time and cost are two of the biggest barriers to becoming physically active, and that is where walking and cycling are really important. When they are safe and attractive options, they save people time and money, and exercise, as we've heard from colleagues, becomes part of their daily routine. We might chuckle when we hear of folk driving to the gym to sit on a stationary bike for half an hour, but that's not an option for everyone. Some people can't afford that gym membership, and 50 per cent of people in Glasgow, for example, do not have access to a car. Let's do what we can to make physical activity possible for everyone. So many car journeys in Scotland are short and could easily be undertaken by foot or bike. 30 per cent of them are between one and two miles. 11 per cent of journeys taken by car are under a mile. However, as we've heard, currently the national percentage of journeys taken by bike is 1.2 per cent in 2016. I probably won't join in with calling Hums of Youth if my hero, if he manages to increase that to 10 per cent of all journeys by bike by 2020, but I will say that it will take heroic hard work to go from the 1.2 per cent that we're seeing now to 10 per cent in three years. Transport Scotland officials have told the committee this morning that this is going to happen, and I really hope that it does. I hope that we're all congratulating the minister on that in 2020. Things have to change. We will support the Lib Dem amendment, but I point out that the bike ability training is still relying on volunteers, so we have to do more to make sure that those volunteers are supported. Claudia Beamish was right to point out that presumed liability has an important role to play here. Wherever high levels of cycling have been achieved, presumed liability is part of civil law. Only the UK, Romania, Malta and Cyprus do not have such law. It really is time to look at this again. When I debated this in members' business in 2013, there was cross-party support for that. Let's look at that again. Wholeheartedly support pedal on Parliament's eight-point manifesto. There probably isn't anything in there that the transport minister could disagree with, and I'm sure that's the same across the chamber. I'm sure that members will wish to join me in congratulating spokes who celebrate their 40th anniversary this year. They are the Lothian Cycle campaign, but they've been involved in bringing so many policy issues to the chamber and to this Parliament. They have led the way on so many issues, whether that's about being able to store your bike outside if you live in a tenement, or building the strategic network of major motor traffic free cycle routes that we clearly need. That's our party policy. We're seeing some movement, but when it comes to initiatives such as the Baersway and the Edinburgh East to West route, we still see a lot of disagreement and dispute. I took part in a cycle to show support for the east and west route in Edinburgh.  That was because they'd been convinced that business in that area would ground to halt, but we know from looking at international research that cycling in communities has a really positive impact on business. Footfall increases, neighbourhoods are safer and shops do really well indeed, and it's really important that we get that message out to people. Let's look at what's happening in this city at the moment. The Broughton Spirtle is speaking about what's the proposals for Pickardy Place. Five minutes walk from here. We're going to see a huge gyratory, very unpedestrian friendly, simply a challenge for cyclists. We can and must do better. It's no accident, Presiding Officer, that the Dutch—the WHO, the World Health Organization—are saying that the Dutch by 2030 are going to be the slimmest nation in Europe, that every other nation will be facing an obesity epidemic. What do we see there? Movement and activity is just part and parcel of everyday life. The British Heart Foundation has shown us that air pollution can make existing heart conditions worse, that it's linked to increased risk of heart attack and stroke. That is an area that's just got win after win after win if we invest in it properly. I'm sorry that the Conservatives and the SNP find our motion too radical, too ambitious. We will continue to call for that 10 per cent of the transport budget spent on active travel because we need to do that. I gave you your 30 seconds. I hope you voted. I hope I get this right. A call would grant close for Labour. It's been a good debate, and I think that there is a lot of agreement across the chamber that active travel must increase. This is obvious benefits in improving air quality, it's good for the environment. It also improves our health, both physical and mental health, and it saves people a lot of money. Transport poverty was the subject of our amendment. Neil Bibby spoke about transport poverty and pointed out how most of the affluent areas have a higher bike ownership than those in the most deprived communities. We ask ourselves why, because surely bike ownership is cheaper than buying a car and the like. I believe that it's down to the infrastructure in our deprived areas. There is also affordability of bikes and the like. We can see that good bikes cost a huge amount of money, but there are good schemes out there that recycle bikes and provide them affordably to people. That might overcome one of the obstacles. What about looking after your bike somewhere to store it in those communities and the cost of upkeep? Fulton MacGregor spoke about the cost of children's bikes. It's important that children learn to cycle young. That's a skill that will stay with them, but they need to learn while they're not afraid of balancing on a bike and the like. There's the cost of a child's bike and access to a safe area to learn. That all costs money. Claudia Beamish talked about how we spend the additional money that the Government has given. That might be an area for priority for the new spending, working in more deprived areas and encouraging young people to learn, giving children access to bikes and safe places to learn to cycle. Gillian Martin and Brian Whittle talked about children's active travel to school, both walking and cycling. They talked about the fear that some parents have about the safety of their children. Safety is an issue that has popped up throughout the debate. Nobody is totally focused on it, but it is an issue that has been touched on. There is conflict between pedestrians, cyclists and cars. The minister said that in his opening that there was going to be road user training as part of that expenditure. John Finnie talked about courtesy between different road users, but there can be conflict between pedestrians and cyclists, especially because we now have many more shared paths. Those are quite often signposted, but areas that are not shared paths are not signposted so that pedestrians become put in dangerous conditions. A constituent of mine wrote to me ahead of the debate and asked me to point out one incident that he had seen where there is the community cafe. That opens up on to the pavement. The pavement is not a shared route for cyclists and pedestrians. He said that some of the elderly users of the cafe are in danger and indeed one was knocked down and hurt just leaving the cafe. They have now put up signs to pedestrians to be careful that people or cyclists are using that pavement. We need better signposting not just for the areas that are shared cycle and pedestrian routes, but we have to make it very clear to cyclists where it is not appropriate for them to cycle. That was pointed out to Inverness councillors who experienced what it was like to be deaf blind and walk down the street, because they cannot hear a bike and they cannot hear a bell. The same thing for people who roller-blade, blade and cycle as well. I almost saw an accident. Luckily, we both managed to stop in town between someone cycling and someone roller-blade and so we need to teach all road users how to use the road safely for everybody. The debate talked a lot about cycling, but we also need to talk about walking as just as important because it is free to do, it is easy to do and it has the same health benefits and Colin Smyth talked about the health benefits that we could all accrue. We need to win over hearts and minds to increase active travel. The minds of planners and transport strategists and the like then need to make it safe and attractive and only that way can we win over the hearts of those who would be encouraged into active travel. I thank the Government for providing the opportunity to discuss the issue, particularly in the light of the consultation on diet and obesity, which was announced last week. Of course, active travel has the potential to mitigate some of the most damaging and burdensome aspects of Scotland's obesity problem. Having spoken about that on innumerable occasions since I was elected last year from a health perspective, I am acutely aware that we need to act rather than simply talk and strategise. Encouraging more people to walk and cycle whether they can mute or simply for personal pleasure will also help to cut carbon emissions, deliver more pleasant communities and support sustainable economic growth, while it is all the time encouraging better health and safer travel. For all, in each and every one of the objectives outlined in Transport Scotland's long-term vision for active travel is an important metric for the health of our society and the plans laid out in the Transport Scotland proposal provide actionable goals for improvement. However, we should also be mindful of the fact that Government alone won't deliver the objectives of an active travel nation. Personal responsibility plays a crucial role, too. As does the third sector. Charities such as Path for All, Cycling Scotland, Sustrans and Rambla Scotland, to name but a few, work incredibly hard to promote the salient and important issues. For example, Cycling UK's Play on Pedals project supports every preschool child in Glasgow to learn how to ride a bike. I would like to briefly turn to some of the points raised by colleagues across the chamber. It has been an excellent debate, replete with lots of travel jokes and cycling puns. In particular, I would like to draw attention to Jamie Greene, who made a measured opening for my party, who set out a number of concerns, which is appropriate to lay out, despite his general tone of consensus and support for what the Scottish Government is trying to do here. We will be supporting the Scottish Government's motion tonight. Brian Whittle spoke of imaginative schemes in his region that park and stride in East Ayrshire for school children and the active travel hub at Kilmarnock railway station. Liam Kerr spoke of the difficulty of cycling in Edinburgh, contrasted with London. He also spoke about his issue in terms of cycle tourism and the someone who travels on the trains to the West Highlands relatively frequently. I am particularly aware of the difficulties cyclists have of travel on trains. Finlay Carson, whom I am delighted to see actually saw cycling into Parliament this morning, spoke about the need to change attitudes. Claudia Beamish spoke about the importance of cycling. Bruce Crawford spoke about persistence. Finlay Carson, in his own contribution, suggested that the UK Government was doing better than the Scottish Government when it came to cycling. Will the member therefore agree with the head of Cycling UK when he said that, once again, we are seeing Scotland setting the high bar and this time on active travel, Cycling UK would urge England, Wales and Ireland to look at their own public health and environment commitments and follow Scotland's own tracks? Donald Cameron, I certainly have no issues celebrating Scotland's achievements, but I would also note that a lot of money has been spent in England and Wales on cycling. I was talking of Claudia Beamish's contribution and the importance of collaboration between agencies and also a road of grant who spoke about road safety. John Finlay made the very important point that travel to school. We have seen the number of casualties plunging and how important road safety is in rural areas. Mike Rumbles spoke of the need for leadership and action in light of the fact that we will almost certainly miss the 10 per cent cycling target. Gillian Martin made two very important points, firstly about mental health and the happiness that she felt no longer travelling or stuck in traffic, but walking to Parliament three days a week. She also made the point that it is often assumed that in rural areas there is not a problem with cycling routes because there are tracks and roads and so on, and it is assumed that it is easy simply because it is not in an urban setting. There are concerns—I do not have long to lay them out—but it is evident from statistics that Scots who drove to work five years ago, 98 per cent, are still driving to work and there is clearly a lot more to be done. We are seeing a worrying trend in the number of commuters who switch back to driving as opposed to cycling. We need to get more people walking, not just to work but out and about in some of Scotland's excellent walking routes, such as the Great Glenway and the Great Borth It and the Great Glen Cycle Route, go past my front door, an area that John Finnie will know well, given that he grew up there. We are broadly welcome to the Scottish Government's motion today, but we must be mindful that, after 10 years, insufficient progress has been made, and we need to do much more to ensure that what we speak about today is not just lost in the ether, and we need to drive forward an agenda that gets more people walking and cycling because those simple things, above all, will have a dramatic effect in improving some of our nation's greatest ills. I am delighted to close today's debate on behalf of the Government. I was also delighted to hear Stewart Stevenson get a route on to the official report because it was a farmed route that I got my first bike as a child. Thank you for getting that on to the OR. However, it is important that Humza Yousaf led and I am closing, as it symbolises the fact that getting people active does not just fit into one ministerial portfolio. As I have often said, life does not neatly fit into one ministerial job. That is why it is important in a country of £5 million that we work together, collaborate and innovate where we can for the benefit of the whole country. That is why the increase in funding for active travel from £40 million to £80 million is important. It gives us all an opportunity to ramp up momentum in getting the infrastructure right that helps to nudge people towards taking an active travel option. That investment aids my commitment to build an active and healthier Scotland, but it also helps Rosanna Cunningham with her climate change efforts, more in what with her mental health brief, and it helps us to create that fairer country that we all seek to see, recognising absolutely the points raised by many of the members from the Labour Party around transport poverty. While Brian Whittle did not necessarily consider us joined up, and is critical often of this Government on the part of inequality and the fairness that he seeks to reduce, I wonder if he is as critical of his own UK Government colleagues and is as passionate about creating a fairer country as he is here, with his colleagues down south, which perpetrate and peddle many of the inequalities that we see in our society. The debate is rightly interlinked with input essential from planning, from housing, from third sector organisations, from local authorities and most importantly of all our communities. We need to see our communities empowered and enabled to create the spaces and the places that they live in to be as good as they possibly can be. Those were points that were made by Neil Bibby, Mike Rumbles himself, John Finnie, Gillian Martin and many others. Could you just outline whether the Scottish Government believes that every school child should have the opportunity to benefit from cycle training, not being in a prescriptive way, but that they should have the opportunity to do so? We have the opportunity to indicate to him that we want to support his motion and also take cognisance of many of the pellets that he made in confidence and other issues that he articulated through his contribution. However, while it is right to challenge the Government to do more and focus on other things that we should be doing, it is also fair to say that the large thrust of this debate has been consensual with our recognition that, with the increased funding that we should use it as an opportunity to consider approaches that are impactful, that are cognisant of local existing infrastructure projects, that encourages that behavioural change that people have sought to bring about, that focuses on education in the early years to establish good healthy habits and also to recognise the particular needs of our rural communities. We have had, but we do have, I would say, a good basis from which to build from. Cycling as a main mode of travel to work for adults in Scotland has increased. The distance travelled by cycle has also increased. Bikeability has increased its participant numbers and the amount of on-road cycling training has increased in our schools. We also see through the hands-up survey 50 per cent of our school children travelling to school actively. To those who are critical of our funding, let me say again that, while recognising the space that is needed to critique our approach, our spend on cycling and walking is almost quadruple what we inherited in 2006-07. While much has been said particularly from John Finnie of so-called vanity projects in the not-too-distant past, he himself recognised the importance of this Government's commitment to rebuild the infrastructure of this nation. I hope that he recognises that, when he also said in the past that Opposition parties have spent years grumbling, the SNP is the only party to take action. Would the minister recognise the issue of modal shift? There is not comparable spend in the Highland men line, for instance, on the A9 or, likewise, in Aberness. Unless it is properly addressed, it is going to see movement from rail to road, and that is not in the Government's interests, presumably. We are seeking to bring about a positive modal shift, but, again, this is the point that we have rebuilt the infrastructure of our country. He said in the past that, when Opposition parties have spent years grumbling, the SNP has taken action. Of course, we recognise that there is also more that we need to do to improve active travel. On the issue of segregated routes, points raised by Liam Kerr and Mary Todd were outlined in Humza Yousaf's opening remarks about the community links plus projects that recognise the importance of making those segregated paths accessible as possible. It is important to note that, in the past, those projects have been subscribed. I must make some progress. Members also mentioned conference reaching out to other groups to encourage cycling. I agree that, while hearing from so many mammals, middle-aged men and lycra, we also need to dispel the myths that, to cycle unique lycra, it does not necessarily help to normalise cycling or cycling to work if you have to have that special gear. That is why projects such as Bikeability, Pedal for Scotland and the Cycle Friendly Awards operation close pass are so crucial. It is why the first two years of the rail franchise that there has been 1,269 cycling spaces have been developed at 44 stations. That is why ScotRail intend to roll out a further 800 spaces at stations and why the bike and go higher schemes are rolled out across 12 stations. Work is on-going to ensure that we can use that opportunity of the high speed rail network to ensure further opportunity to embed cycling. I do not know whether that makes us a hero in Liam Kerr's eyes or not, but we will certainly always seek to do what we can. I had the pleasure last week of meeting internationally around planning expert Brett Tondorine, who attended the recent paths for all AGM. Paths for all, given that so many people talked about the importance of walking, should be absolutely credited with helping to see that increase that we are seeing in recreational walking. However, the reason that I mentioned is because his ethos was to create multi-modal cities, multi-modal citizens, making walking, biking and transit delightful. If you design a city for cars, it fails for everyone, including drivers. If you build a multi-modal city, it works better for everybody, including drivers, trying to ease that tension that I think was articulated by Rhoda Grant in her remarks. Many members have also mentioned fantastic local projects, Beat the Street ramblers, Crawford's endeavour to link into the walkways around them, assets and capacity in our communities that we must allow to flourish and permit to flourish to bring about that shift that we all seek to see happening. To close, Brett Tondorine also recently tweeted about this being Halloween. His point being about whether or not ensuring tonight when children are about to go out in guise, whether they have the spaces and the streets that are there designed well enough to encourage walking to be safe and whether they are encouraged to regularly walk beyond just this one opportunity that we have tonight to see our children out in guise. That is why we need to plan good-quality places so that the next generation can pursue active lives. Again, that is just the opening up of this dialogue. Again, what is really important is that across the political parties in this Parliament we have agreement that this is the right thing to do and we will continue on that basis. Thank you very much, minister. That concludes our debate on the promotion of active travel in Scotland. We move to decision time. The first question is that amendment 8497.2 in the name of Jamie Greene, which seeks to amend motion 8497 in the name of Humza Yousaf on the promotion of active travel in Scotland be agreed. Are we all agreed? We are not agreed. We will move to a vote and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 8497.2 in the name of Jamie Greene is yes, 55, no, 58. There were no abstentions. The amendment is therefore not agreed. I do not think that the member's vote would have made a difference there. If there is any doubt, could you check afterwards that it was recorded? I do not think that it would have affected the outcome. I think that it should have been recorded because there is 113. The next question is that amendment 8497.4 in the name of Neil Bibby, which seeks to amend motion 8497 in the name of Humza Yousaf on the promotion of active travel in Scotland be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are all agreed. The next question is that amendment 8497.3 in the name of John Finnie, which seeks to amend motion 8497 be agreed. Are we agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to a division and members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 8497.3 in the name of John Finnie is yes, six, no, 108. There were no abstentions. The amendment is therefore not agreed. The next question is that amendment 8497.1 in the name of Mike Rumbles, which seeks to amend the motion in the name of Humza Yousaf be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are agreed. The final question is that motion 8497 in the name of Humza Yousaf, as amended on the promotion of active travel in Scotland be agreed. Are we all agreed? Yes. We are all agreed, and that concludes decision time. When I move to members' business in the name of Ben Macpherson, we just take a few moments for members to change seats.