http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Scottish Budget 2018/19 en Mon, 18 May 2026 01:43:37 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282124 Tue, 08 May 2018 17:05:33 +0000 sallyhinch 282124@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The local authorities are all supposed to have produced cycling or active travel strategies, which ideally would provide the vision of how these individual bits and pieces add up to a network. Unfortunately, only about half of them have, and of those that do have them, they're not necessarily all that strategic (if Dumfries and Galloway's is anything to go by). On the other hand, Glasgow have a fairly clear strategic vision and are going ahead and implementing it, with the South City Way, South West City Way etc. all the way round the city. In time, I expect this to have a pretty dramatic effect on cycling levels in Glasgow. Edinburgh I think is somewhere in the middle </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282122 Tue, 08 May 2018 16:32:02 +0000 gibbo 282122@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>The purpose of CL is to provide strategic links that connect places that people want to go eg villages to nearest town or one place to another across a busy road or unbridged river.</p> <p>So to some extent it’s up to people to come up with ideas.</em></p> <p>That's the point. It's itty bitty stuff, but not strategic.</p> <p>For example, there's no point talking about encouraging cycling while, at the same time, building more and more infrastrcture that makes cycling unpleasant. (Picardy Place, Leith Walk.)</p> <p>Or, indeed, wasting money on bike lanes, while letting drivers park in them.</p> <p>Without having a vision of what transport is going to look like 10 years from now, the vast majority of money will be wasted.</p> <p>It'll either be wasted on "bike lanes to nowhere" - that never lead to meaningful increases in cycling. Or it'll be wasted on infrasrtucture that'll have to be torn up and replaced by something that fits a later vision.</p> <p>Better to have the strategy now and only build roads and paths that fit the vision. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282110 Tue, 08 May 2018 15:28:54 +0000 chdot 282110@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>But then, what has <em>strategic</em> got to do with the way the world works?? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282107 Tue, 08 May 2018 15:23:40 +0000 chdot 282107@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“I don't see anything here that's strategic”</p> <p>The <em>purpose</em> of CL is to provide strategic links that connect places that people want to go eg villages to nearest town or one place to another across a busy road or unbridged river.</p> <p>So to some extent it’s up to people to come up with ideas.</p> <p>I was at a cycle event at Holyrood a few years ago, someone from Sustrans was a bit excited (and slightly surprised) that they had just been asking people what they wanted and, generally, it wasn’t long distance cycle routes!</p> <p>SG/TransportScotland is quite good at planning strategic road networks (whether that’s sensibly based on ‘evidence’ or not is another matter).</p> <p>Local roads/transport is essentially up to LAs. Sustrans works with the ones that want to be worked with, but they usually have to find money too.</p> <p>So not as big picture STRATEGIC as it needs to be. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282103 Tue, 08 May 2018 15:05:40 +0000 gibbo 282103@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>This thread is 4 months old, and all we seem to have are questions. </p> <p>Yousaf: </p> <p>"We want this extra money to create pleasant and safe routes which make it easier for people of all ages to choose to walk and cycle as part of their everyday lives."</p> <p>So how are you making sure that's what you're going to get? </p> <p>I don't see anything here that's strategic, or that has a vision at the end of it. Just itty bitty spending here and there. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282101 Tue, 08 May 2018 14:54:29 +0000 Morningsider 282101@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Continual investment in state of the art <a href="https://www.duravit.co.uk/products/all_series/starck_3.com-en.html?product=93710">infrastructure</a> I imagine. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282090 Tue, 08 May 2018 13:40:54 +0000 crowriver 282090@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"What's the rest of the £80 million going on?"</p> <p>Community Links +++? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282086 Tue, 08 May 2018 12:57:22 +0000 Calum 282086@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>So that's £36 million for infrastructure. What's the rest of the £80 million going on? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282082 Tue, 08 May 2018 11:51:11 +0000 chdot 282082@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“as long as they don't spend it on more signage, paint and park benches”</p> <p>But those are (can be) part of getting more people to walk/cycle - not just about ‘commuter routes’. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282081 Tue, 08 May 2018 11:38:06 +0000 stiltskin 282081@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well as long as they don't spend it on more signage, paint and park benches I will be happy. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459&page=2#post-282079 Tue, 08 May 2018 11:19:41 +0000 crowriver 282079@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"the fact that the extra money will be administered by Sustrans' Community Links programme hadn't actually been announced."</p> <p>This. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-282068 Tue, 08 May 2018 08:23:05 +0000 Frenchy 282068@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That's a reannouncement. Or possibly the fact that the extra money will be administered by Sustrans' Community Links programme hadn't actually been announced. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-282067 Tue, 08 May 2018 08:11:41 +0000 chdot 282067@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“which I understand may have been mentioned once or twice over the last few months”</p> <p>Is this PR incompetence, or a reliance on media/public stupidity or just that Sustrans has got round to asking for scheme submissions?? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-282065 Tue, 08 May 2018 08:00:47 +0000 Morningsider 282065@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Stickman - the community links funds come out of the Scottish Government's active travel budget (doubled from £40m in 2017/18 to £80m in 2018/19). </p> <p>So in one sense it is "additional" and "new" money, but it isn't an increase on the £80m, which I understand may have been mentioned once or twice over the last few months. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-282062 Tue, 08 May 2018 07:21:02 +0000 gembo 282062@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>On QI there used to be the option - Nobody knows.</p> <p>Feels like re-circulation which is a shame if it is a genuine doubling of previous monies. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-282060 Tue, 08 May 2018 00:41:46 +0000 Stickman 282060@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Is this genuine new money or are they doing the old trick of reannouncing things?</p> <p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44030874" rel="nofollow">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44030874</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270109 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 22:32:43 +0000 HankChief 270109@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I have <a href="https://twitter.com/hank_chief/status/942869687750275074">asked Humza...</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270108 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 22:06:06 +0000 ih 270108@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>If I understand @Morningsider's figures, then the much heralded £80 million for active travel, which I wholeheartedly welcomed on another thread, consists of £65.4 million capital spend and £13.6 million revenue, almost all of which will go towards electric and other 'fuel-efficient' forms of motorised transport.</p> <p>Ii think we were all blatantly lied to - there's no other word for it. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270105 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 21:33:22 +0000 crowriver 270105@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I think there's a difference between organisations which really are quangos (i.e notionally arms-length from government but essentially creatures of them, such as Transport Scotland, Creative Scotland) and those which deliver government funded projects, or manage funds on behalf of government (e.g. Sustrans, Cycling Scotland (?), or an organisation like SACRO). Then there are independently funded organisations which regularly receive government grants (e.g. Cycling UK Scotland, British Cycling, National Trust for Scotland, or the Edinburgh Festival Fringe).</p> <p>So I don't really see it as hugely problematic. Public funds from our taxes will play a role in delivering infrastructure and various services for the public good. Unless we're al inhabiting some neoliberal mental universe where government should fund as little as possible and everything is left to the market to decide... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270103 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 20:58:05 +0000 I were right about that saddle 270103@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'd say that if a body is carrying out the functions of government then it should be an arm of government with all the consequences of that, including FoI legislation and governance.</p> <p>Sustrans runs those weird 'competitions' where viable and desirable projects are refused funding because others are more worthy. That sounds like a political decision to me that should be made through political channels.</p> <p>I'm sure they do some good things. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270102 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 20:48:24 +0000 Morningsider 270102@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Roibeard - hmmm. Here's how the Scottish Government describe the capital element of the Support for Active and Sustainable Travel budget line (£65.4m):</p> <p>"Investment in the infrastructure which will allow the use of electric and low carbon vehicles across Scotland; delivers the actions in the Cycling Action Plan for Scotland and facilitates active travel choices; includes funding for next phase of the Low Carbon Vehicle Procurement Scheme."</p> <p>and the revenue element (£13.6m):</p> <p>"Support for promotion of active travel and smarter measures, including travel-planning, fuel-efficient driving and car clubs, and supporting actions contained in the Cycling Action Plan."</p> <p>and the £60.25m capital Future Transport Fund:</p> <p>"Supports projects to enable us to reduce the impact of transport on our environment."</p> <p>I understand that most of the Future Transport Fund is for all things electric vehicle. As I said in an earlier post -<br /> the terminology used to describe the doubling of investment changed from "active travel" in the programme for government to "active and sustainable travel" in the budget. This hasn't happened by accident - the people writing the budget documents know the difference between the two.</p> <p>Details: <a href="http://www.parliament.scot/FinancialScrutiny/2018-19_budget__Level_4.xlsx" rel="nofollow">http://www.parliament.scot/FinancialScrutiny/2018-19_budget__Level_4.xlsx</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270095 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 19:34:21 +0000 crowriver 270095@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Maybe not, but is that the role of Sustrans? Effectively it has become a semi-quango, much as various charities in other sectors have become. I don't think it's a problem as long as there are truly independent voices and groups stirring things up for change. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270090 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 18:21:37 +0000 I were right about that saddle 270090@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Last report has 7.2% of income from fundraising, the rest from central and local government.</p> <p>That's not really a charity in the normal sense of the word. Clearly it's not an organisation which can afford to rock the boat too much. Not sure modal share is going to rocket without the boat being rocked. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270089 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 18:11:00 +0000 dougal 270089@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>From the outside, that Sustrans funding setup looks like the most corrupt nonsense ever conceived. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-270076 Mon, 18 Dec 2017 15:49:45 +0000 Roibeard 270076@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>"Sustrans Scotland welcomes £80m active travel investment in Scottish Government budget as ‘bold statement of intent’"</em></p> <p>I queried this as the speech transcript does indeed say doubling of the budget for sustainable and active travel, including £20m towards electric vehicles.</p> <p>Sustrans have got back to say that Transport Scotland have confirmed to them the additional £40m for active travel, and that the electric vehicle announcement is separate.</p> <p>Time will tell...</p> <p>Robert </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-269779 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 09:59:26 +0000 crowriver 269779@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Rail funding sees a fairly healthy increase. Small increase for buses too. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-269770 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:56:14 +0000 rider73 269770@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>well the blurb says its a charity! so i was wrong, but for sure they get huge amounts of funding from Government all sides of the border including lottery etc. - so my mistake! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-269767 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:15:48 +0000 gembo 269767@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Sustains shake cans and ask you to pay to join so maybe not totally govt. funded?</p> <p>Local and national govt in Scotland and rest of UK keen to keep motorists happy and appease cyclists. If only the DUP were as keen on cycling and the environment as the greens </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-269766 Fri, 15 Dec 2017 08:08:08 +0000 rider73 269766@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>of course sustrans is upbeat - isnt it a totally government run and funded organisation??</p> <p>does trains come under "sustainable travel" as the 80m could go towards a new publicly owned train company thats been thrown about since the last franchise owner isnt really delivering.... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=18459#post-269749 Thu, 14 Dec 2017 22:34:11 +0000 crowriver 269749@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Sustainable transport funding is being used to buy cars. "</p> <p>Shurely the "Future Transport Fund" should be used? Or is that all electric / "green" buses and electric car charging points? </p>