« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
Chapter 5: What We are Trying to Achieve
The consultation stated:
What we are trying to achieve - our vision - is:
An accessible Scotland with safe, integrated and reliable transport that supports economic growth, provides opportunities for all and is easy to use; a transport system that meets everyone's needs, respects our environment and contributes to health; services recognised internationally for quality, technology and innovation, and for effective and well-maintained networks; a culture where fewer short journeys are made by car, where we favour public transport, walking and cycling because they are safe and sustainable, where transport providers and planners respond to the changing needs of businesses, communities and users, and where one ticket will get you anywhere.
Our overall aim is to promote economic growth, social inclusion, health and protection of our environment through a safe, integrated, effective and efficient transport system.
Our high level objectives for transport, as set out in the White Paper, are to:
- Promote economic growth by building, enhancing, managing and maintaining transport services, infrastructure and networks to maximise their efficiency;
- Promote social inclusion by connecting remote and disadvantaged communities and increasing the accessibility of the transport network;
- Protect our environment and improve health by building and investing in public transport and other types of efficient and sustainable transport which minimise emissions and consumption of resources and energy;
- Improve safety of journeys by reducing accidents and enhancing the personal safety of pedestrians, cyclists, drivers, passengers and staff; and
- Improve integration by making journey planning and ticketing easier and working to ensure smooth connection between different forms of transport.
5.1 The consultation asked:
Q2: Do consultees consider that the aim, vision and objectives need to be amended, for example to reflect Scottish Ministers' expectations to see health improvement at the heart of Scottish Executive policy?
In total, 162 respondents (52%) addressed this question. Of these, only 14 consultees (9%) appeared to disagree strongly with the suggestion that the aim, vision and objectives should be amended to reflect an emphasis on health improvement. The main argument against amendment was that the aim, vision and objectives already made adequate reference to health either explicitly or implicitly. One pragmatic view was that as local and regional strategies have or are being developed based on the current aim, vision and objectives then changing them would cause confusion and lack of cohesiveness. One respondent argued that:
" while healthy transport options can obviously be promoted as desirable as part of modal shift, it is not the place of the NTS to pander to politically correct notions that have very little to do with delivering the transport that we need in Scotland" (Rep Org).
5.1.1 Comments Regarding Integrating Health Improvement Within the Transport Strategy
Many respondents remarked on what they saw as the compatibility of the draft strategy with the health improvement agenda. For example, consultees highlighted the emphasis on encouraging walking and cycling as an area of overlap between the 2 policy areas. One respondent urged that both mental and physical health be considered as part of the transport strategy (Pub).
A common view was that the transport strategy should include a new objective dedicated to the promotion of health. Many suggestions were made for the wording of the proposed objective. Typical amongst these were:
" Improve health by promoting cycling and walking especially for short journeys" ( LA)
" Improve health and well-being and address health inequalities by promoting neighbourhoods and employment sites which are accessible by walking, cycling and public transport" (Oth PB)
" Secure health improvements through increased use of walking and cycling as travel modes and through reduced air pollution" (Oth PB).
5.1.2 General Comments Regarding Vision, Aims and High Level Objectives
Many respondents provided more general commentary regarding the draft vision, aims and high level objectives outlined in the consultation document. Overall these attracted much support with several consultees describing them as "laudable". A few consultees highlighted specifically that they welcomed the attention given to social inclusion within the objectives ( CTG, Eq Bod).
A common theme to emerge was that respondents wished to see the vision, aims and objectives linking more explicitly with wider related policies and the strategies of other organisations such as Communities Scotland, Community Planning Partnerships and Community Health Partnerships.
A few respondents urged that the objectives be prioritised in order of importance. One view was that they should be more clearly evidence-based ( LA). It was suggested that the Framework for Economic Development should underpin the vision, aims and objectives (Oth PB). Another view was that the document should make it obvious that environmental and social concerns were as important to the strategy as economic ones (Oth PB). One consultee stressed that the strategy should say more about how the aim and objectives would be supported by budgets (Rep Org).
It was recommended that whatever the final agreed vision, aims and high level objectives were, they should be kept under review to reflect further developments ( LA, Oth PB).
A minority of respondents provided general criticism of the vision, aims and objectives. The main bones of contention were that there were too many of them ( EB/ ST, LA), with the effect that this diluted the key messages ( LA). They appeared confusing to some ( EB/ ST, LA) and needed greater clarity ( LA). Two respondents called for them to be more aspirational in nature (Rep Org, Oth PB). One consultee considered them to be too general as they currently stood (Rep Org) with another remarking that they were too loosely drafted, suggesting a lack of clarity in thinking (Pub). However, a contrasting view was that the vision, aim and objectives should remain broad and not get too detailed as this could hamper efficient delivery ( EC).
One respondent acknowledged the size of the task of achieving the vision, aim and objectives, commenting:
" the difficult decisions and trade-offs inherent in achieving these objectives simultaneously should not be underestimated" (Rep Org).
5.1.3 Comments Regarding the Vision
Relatively few respondents passed comment on the vision contained in the consultation document. The only recurring view (emerging from local authorities) was that the vision appeared to be too long and could be more focused, perhaps on key outcomes. One suggestion was for a much shorter vision along the lines of:
" A transport system which promotes an inclusive society" ( LA).
Another suggested:
" A vibrant, thriving economy throughout Scotland" ( EC)
One respondent argued that the vision should contain more reference to the relationship between land use planning and transport (Oth PB).
5.1.4 Comments Regarding the Aim
Again, few respondents commented specifically on the draft aim. Of those who did, the overriding message was that the aim should include reference to the issue of sustainability.
One respondent welcomed the aim as being " commendably succinct" ( LA). Others made detailed drafting suggestions. Key amongst these was the recommendation to insert "and wellbeing" after "health" ( EB/ ST); and the insertion of "and facilitate" between "promote" and "economic growth" (Bus).
5.1.5 Comments Regarding the Objectives
Most comments focused on the first high level objective with the recommendation that the issue of sustainability be reflected in this. One respondent called for the addition of "and effectiveness" at the end of the objective (Rep Org). Another remarked that there may be a conflict between providing services and maximising efficiency as sometimes, as with overnight public transport services, there may be reduction in efficiency in order to improve a service overall (Pub).
A few consultees called for the second objective to expand by referring to other groups of socially excluded communities such as people with disabilities and those living in rural environments ( CTG, Rep Org, Oth PB). Likewise, with reference to objective 4, it was suggested that this should incorporate reference to riders and carriage drivers (Oth PB). One consultee called for a change in emphasis away from enhancing personal safety to reducing danger ( EB/ ST).
One respondent argued that the final high level objective could be dropped as it appeared more a means by which the other objectives could be delivered ( LA).
5.1.6 Suggestions for Additions to the Vision, Aim and Objectives
A recurring theme to emerge from respondents representing a variety of different sectors was that there should be a high level objective devoted to climate change emissions. Another perceived omission was an outline of a hierarchy of road users as witnessed in the strategies of other progressive policies (Acad). It was suggested that the section should identify visitors as a specific user group (Rep Org) and that the fostering of local accessibility should be reflected as a priority ( EB/ ST). One view was that the rural perspective was not adequately covered by the vision, aim and objectives ( LA).
« Previous | Contents | Next »