CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Cycling News
Pedal on Parliament to be discussed... in Parliament
(114 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
Motion by Alison Johnstone (Green) and "supported by" Kezia Dugdale (Lab).
Presume other MSPs can register support(?)
Posted 13 years ago # -
now also Neil Findlay
Posted 13 years ago # -
Neil Findlay is Lab
Now Helen Eadie (Lab) supporting too.
Is there something against Government party MSPs supporting motions?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Any Member can add their name in support of a motion - no reason why SNP Members cannot sign up.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@Morningsider - true, MSPs of any party can support any such parliamentary motion if they wish. However the motion directly contradicts existing SNP government funding decisions. Specifically, it asks for 10% of the transport budget to go to active travel - that is massive, compared to around 1% at present! The motion also supports the PoP manifesto, which again asks for very substantial investment, quite at odds with existing funding levels.
Thus SNP MSPs would be signing up to a vastly different spending commitment than their own government is willing to do. It will be interesting to see if any do sign up and, if so, how they resolve that contradiction, and if they come under pressure from their senior MSP bosses, John Swinney etc! Great that several Labour MSPs are signing - maybe in next year's budget negotiations we will be able to use that to get them to actually call for such a level of investment - time will tell, but it's great that they are signing.
Finally - it's a fantastic motion - congratulations to Alison Johnstone (and Kezia Dugdale who signed it at the same time that it was lodged).
Posted 13 years ago # -
no reason why SNP Members cannot sign up.
Except that the motion concludes: "regrets that less than 1% of the transport budget in Scotland is allocated to cycling infrastructure; notes that the Scottish Government’s report, Low Carbon Scotland: Meeting the Emissions Reduction Targets 2010-22, The Report on Proposals and Policies, has proposed allocating £1.32 billion over 11 years for active travel, and believes that 10% of the transport budget should be spent on active travel."
If you were an SNP MSP, you could sign up because you agree with the points made, but you would risk the wrath of the SNP hierarchy for 'embarrassing' the government by publicly pointing out their own failings and/or telling them their business. Might appear disloyal, to say the least. Will be interesting to see if any of the 'cycling-friendly' SNP types support the motion...
(EDIT - Just seen DdF's very similar post. Great minds think alike! ;-) )
Posted 13 years ago # -
"
Marco Biagi @EdinburghBiagi@kim_harding Just remembered there are *two* 10% targets! I support 10% uptake. 10% spend is arbitrary. Should spend what is needed.
"MB is an SNP MSP - doesn't cycle but 'walks everywhere'.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I support 10% uptake. 10% spend is arbitrary. Should spend what is needed.
Carefully toeing the official line there! No point jeopardising a possible future ministerial career, eh?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Posted 13 years ago #
-
Hahahahahaha! That's brilliant. Neatly side-stepping the other motion that would call on them to criticise themselves...
Posted 13 years ago # -
Good though -
Motion S4M-02657: Marco Biagi, Edinburgh Central, Scottish National Party, Date Lodged: 19/04/2012
Pedal on Parliament Action on CyclingSupported by: Kenneth Gibson, Margaret Burgess, Richard Lyle, Clare Adamson, David Torrance, Mike MacKenzie, Stewart Maxwell, Dennis Robertson, Jamie Hepburn, Kevin Stewart, Bob Doris, Humza Yousaf, Fiona McLeod
Posted 13 years ago # -
Oh absolutely. And the thing is it might spark the opposition to the SNP to sign the original one!
Posted 13 years ago # -
Looks like the funding aspect of the manifesto might need emphasising.
Related to this, is there any guidance on producing banners for the event?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Three MORE sign up
Kenneth Gibson, Margaret Burgess, Richard Lyle, Clare Adamson, David Torrance, Mike MacKenzie, Stewart Maxwell, Dennis Robertson, Jamie Hepburn, Kevin Stewart, Bob Doris, Humza Yousaf, Fiona McLeod, Colin Beattie, Bill Kidd, Gil Paterson
Posted 13 years ago # -
And two more on original
Supported by: Kezia Dugdale, Neil Findlay, Helen Eadie, Patrick Harvie
Posted 13 years ago # -
@anth, also neatly sidesteps the issue of MONEY. Nice to see it got a fair bit of support from the SNP benches, mind.
You do see though how politicking dilutes good intentions?
Anyone have a link to the Transform Scotland report that the SNP motion mentions?
Posted 13 years ago # -
22 out of 129 (so far) not bad.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Posted 13 years ago #
-
Thanks Arelicat. The report itself is quite good, but it puts the onus on local authorities to come up with (and presumably fund) the solutions for active travel.
I can see why the SNP MSPs liked this report. It conveniently lets his Transport Minister off the hook! Now all those troublesome cyclists can go and bother their councillors and leave ScotGov HQ alone.
Except we can't, because we also need a NATIONAL segregated network alongside major trunk roads. Don't we, folks?
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Except we can't, because we also need a NATIONAL segregated network alongside major trunk roads. Don't we, folks?"
Ooh controversial!
Probably.
No time soon then.
Valid point about SNP liking report because action becomes LA responsibility.
BUT they have put caps on Council Tax and provide most of money so not really that simple.
However still a lot more councils could do within in existing budgets.
To some extent attitudes need to change rather than just 'needs more money'.
But that's political...
Posted 13 years ago # -
"To some extent attitudes need to change rather than just 'needs more money'."
Exactly, like in the Meadows with the bike lane being removed. A change in attitude to cyclign would have resulted in no money lost taking it out.
Posted 13 years ago # -
36. When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe too hard.
37. Such is the art of warfare.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@wfb, are you implying that is what ScotGov are doing, or what 'we' the massed 'revolting cyclists' should do?
Posted 13 years ago # -
"The report itself is quite good, but it puts the onus on local authorities to come up with (and presumably fund) the solutions for active travel. I can see why the SNP MSPs liked this report. It conveniently lets his Transport Minister off the hook! Now all those troublesome cyclists can go and bother their councillors and leave ScotGov HQ alone. Except we can't, because we also need a NATIONAL segregated network alongside major trunk roads."
All true, but there's a more important reason why the govt should come up with a lot more funding than now. Namely, it is the government which has set the national target for 10% of all trips to be by bike by 2020. Therefore it should be up to the govt to ensure there is adequate funding to achieve that - what's the point of setting a target without a costed and funded path to reach it!!
Of course, there is every reason for councils to play a part, set their own local targets, and come up with funding - like Edinburgh has done so powerfully. But at the moment it feels like the govt is putting in maybe 10%-20% of the funding that is needed to meet its own target, and presumably expecting councils to meet the rest. Seems like a right cheek to me!!
NB - re the idea of cycle network beside trunk roads - would be great, though obviously is much less important than decent cycling conditions in towns and cities. There are also non-trunk rural roads - which have a desperately bad record for cyclist deaths. Ironically, the govt is putting not-insignificant money into trunk road cycle routes. This is possible because it comes from the massive trunk roads budget, not from those tiny wee budgets from which a portion goes to cycling [the total being so low that there is no pure cycling budget as such].
Oh, and what a shame that the A90 Edinburgh to Forth Bridge is not a trunk road!!
Would also like to say how fantastically well PoP has done inspiring this level of interest amongst MSPs (and more widely of course). And congrats to Alison Johnstone also.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Crow,
The second one. Leave them an honourable path which might benefit all involved.
It wasn't me, it was Sun Tzu.
Posted 13 years ago # -
If I recall correctly, the (then minority) SNP government only signed up to the 10% target as part of a deal in return for Green support for their cabinet. Hence the lack of burning enthusiasm from ministers for the idea: it wasn't theirs (a bit like the trams, but let's leave that). Now that the SNP have a majority they, unsurprisingly, show even less enthusiasm.
Leave them an honourable path which might benefit all involved.
Only if they stop trying to fob cyclists off with kind words instead of deeds.
Posted 13 years ago # -
And should they fob you off what will you do then?
He who knows when he can fight and when he cannot will be victorious.
Posted 13 years ago # -
In war, practice dissimulation, and you will succeed.
We can Sun Tzu quote all day.
It's not about what I will do specifically. Rather, what 'we' might do.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Just reading that Transform Scotland document (thanks for the link). On Copenhagen something caught my eye:
"In the 1980s, the Danish Cyclist Federation found itself led by a group of young idealistic cyclists. In contrast to the older members who had previously run the organisation, these new leaders often didn’t have a car and they had a strong desire to see improvements in conditions for cyclists. They successfully tapped into
the large section of the public who wanted to continue cycling but saw conditions deteriorating. This led to
annual, colourful, demonstrations in front of the Danish parliament and Copenhagen town hall. Tens of
thousands of people participated in the demonstrations, and the level of support both surprised and
impressed the politicians. This led to increased investment and focus on cycling facilities and cycle tracks being built on more ‘difficult’ roads (for instance, where space was at a premium). The new cycling priorities were initially not popular with the planners, and there was some resistance, but the politicians pushed for more cycling investment and over time this led to cycling becoming ‘mainstream’ within transport planning."Does this mean we have to make POP Scotland an annual event? *collapses in exhaustion*
Posted 13 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
