The Scottish Government

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

Chapter 4: Where We are Now

The consultation stated:

Overall, the key trends and analysis suggest that our transport goals should be to:

• Facilitate economic growth - by ensuring that the right transport infrastructure and services are in place to enable economic growth on a socially and environmentally sustainable basis;
• Promote accessibility - through linking up our transport networks and by ensuring that we consider transport issues when locating services and reduce the need to travel wherever possible; and by making sure that transport is physically accessible;
• Promote choice and raise awareness of the need for change - through measures such as travel plans and behaviour change interventions;
• Promote modal shift - by shifting the balance away from unsustainable growth in car use, particularly single-occupancy car use, and towards walking, cycling and public transport; by incorporating public transport considerations into the planning of land use ( e.g. large retail, office and housing developments); and for freight through promoting the use of rail and shipping;
• Promote new technologies and cleaner fuels - through ongoing support and encouragement to Scottish industry and motorists where it is appropriate;
• Manage demand - by promoting the efficiency of our networks through demand management measures;
• Reduce the need for travel - by providing local services on local walking and cycling networks and promoting the uptake of alternatives such as home working; and
• Promote road safety - through promotional campaigns and interventions with key groups.

4.1 The consultation asked:

Q1: Are: facilitate economic growth; promote accessibility; promote choice and raise awareness of the need for change; promote modal shift; promote new technologies and cleaner fuels; manage demand; reduce the need for travel; and promote road safety the right goals for transport in Scotland?

This question attracted a relatively high response with 178 respondents (57%) providing views on whether the goals outlined in the consultation document were right for transport in Scotland.

It is not appropriate to quantify the number of respondents supporting or opposing the proposed goals as most of those who addressed this question supported the goals in part whilst providing views on suggested improvements and amendments.

4.1.1 General Comments in Favour of Goals

Amongst the general comments in support of the goals were, " laudable and appropriate" ( LA) and " comprehensive and demanding" ( LA). Many respondents highlighted particular goals which they were pleased to see amongst the list. Most commonly cited were:

• Facilitate economic growth
• Promote modal shift
• Promote accessibility

4.1.2 Comments Against Goals

Those opposing all or some of the goals provided more detailed commentary than the supporters. A few consultees commented that they considered there to be too many goals ( EB/ ST, Rep Org); that they appeared too general (Rep Org) and vague (Rep Org); or that they seemed to be muddled (Acad). One respondent questioned why the goals appeared in the document before the overall vision for transport ( EB/ ST).

The 2 most commonly cited arguments against the proposed list of goals are listed below:

• The goals appear to work against each other, eg. modal shift may work against economic growth
• It was not entirely clear how the goals fitted with the aims and objectives which are presented later

Others considered that the goals portrayed an inappropriate "anti-car" bias (Pub), with several consultees commenting that as far as goals were concerned, one size did not appear to fit all circumstances across urban and rural Scotland. A few respondents suggested that the goal of reducing the need to travel should be removed. One argued:

" Travelling is good; it stimulates trade and the economy and broadens our outlook and awareness. It stops us being parochial, encourages people from towns to understand rural issues and vice-versa. It also assists in social inclusion." (Rep Org)

One respondent opposed the goal to manage demand by arguing that transport supply could not be made more efficient by managing demand (Pub). Another considered that the suggested goals did not fit with the Scottish Executive's Sustainable Development Strategy on account of what they perceived to be the undue weight given in the consultation document to economic growth ( EB/ ST). One view was that the goals were "centralist" in design and did not appear to include peripheral areas within their scope ( LA).

4.1.3 Order of Goals

The order in which the goals were set out in the consultation document attracted much comment. Views were mixed on whether the list of goals had been prioritised in order of importance. Some respondents from a variety of sectors ( EB/ ST, LA, Pub) argued that if not, then they should be listed in order of priority. However, one argument against this was that the weight of each goal would vary depending on geography (Pub).

Amongst the many consultees who presumed that the list had been prioritised a recurring comment originating largely from the business sector was that facilitating economic growth should remain the top priority. Others agreed with this view so long as the goal included a reference to sustainable economic growth. However, another recurring comment emerging largely from the environmental bodies and representative organisations was that it was inappropriate to place economic growth at the top of the list of goals.

Many different consultees highlighted the goal which they wished to see prioritised above all others. Most frequently cited were:

• Promote accessibility
• Promote choice
• Promote road safety

A general concern was raised by one respondent who stressed that the ordering of goals should not be swayed by pressure from lobby groups (Pub).

4.1.4 Suggested Additions to List of Goals

A significant body of respondents made suggestions for additional goals and amendments to those already listed. The most common suggestions are outlined below:

• More emphasis in the goals on the environmental impact of transport
• The need to insert "sustainable" prior to "economic growth"
• A new goal needed on the need to integrate transport goals with those of other complementary policies such as planning
• Introduce a goal relating to promoting health and wellbeing
• Introduce a goal relating to promoting social inclusion and equal opportunities

In addition to these frequently recurring suggestions, other ideas were put forward by a small minority of respondents. These included:

• Promotion of integration between transport modes
• Influencing transport choices of young people
• Maintain and improve the existing transport network infrastructure
• Change "promote road safety" to "road danger reduction"
• Re-establish streets as multiple-use spaces
• Make a positive design contribution
• Promote active travel
• Promote integrated ticketing
• Ensure better information, education and training for transport users
• Improve quality of service and customer care
• Ensure value for money

Several respondents suggested changes in the terminology adopted for the proposed goals. For example, a recurring comment was that "promote" should be changed to "facilitate" or "enable".

4.1.5 Suggestions for More Substantive Changes to Goals

A small number of consultees argued for a complete change in the list of goals. One view was that the starting point should be what goals would make the Scottish transport system fit for the 21 ^st century? ( CTG). Another respondent argued that the goals should be more people focused and should do much more for disabled people (Rep Org). One consultee considered that there were 2 main policy drivers, reduction in carbon emissions and congestion in cities, and all goals should focus on addressing these (Oth PB). Finally, it was argued that the goals should be reworked to address more adequately the Scottish Executive's environmental obligations for biodiversity and climate change ( EB/ ST).

« Previous | Contents | Next »