 Mae gennymu argynnu'r gwaith yn cymdr y gynnwys gears i'r Ffritwllaeth Ggriamilol. Mae'r Ffritwllaeth Gwyrdraidd yn byw, yn cymran gwaith iawn o'r cymdeithasol ac mae'r cymygwyr yn fwy agweithio'r gwelliedd iawn i dweud rydych chi'n gwaith mae gennymu pob wneud i gweithio'r cyfrydau, i ddaeth i gweithio'r gweithiau, i gweithio'r gweithiau y ddiwrnodau o'r enslavedrionau yn yr ardal i'r unrhyw amser mwy am y faint. I call Mr Simpson to open the debate for around about seven minutes, Mr Simpson. Many thanks, Presiding Officer, and can I start by thanking all the 32 members from four parties who signed the motion before us today. The issue has certainly struck a chord and rightly so. It was brought to my attention at a meeting in September with Site Scotland and Site Scotland veterans, who are two of Scotland's oldest charities. For over 200 years, they've been determined that no one should face sight loss alone. That, in essence, is what we're talking about in this debate. With the number of people in Scotland with sight loss set to rise to over 200,000 by 2030, there is a real need for support. The issue is this. There is no national policy for rail travel across Scotland, which entitles free rail travel for the companions of blind and partially sighted people. There are different concessionary and companion schemes in place across various areas and councils, and that is causing confusion to both passengers and rail staff. I wrote to the transport minister at the end of September and she replied having subsequently met Site Scotland herself. She admitted in her response to me that there is a postcode lottery. That's my phrase. I do hope that she will offer a solution to that today, because it's clearly unfair. Let me give you an example in my own region where two different schemes operate. Falkirk Council offers no discount for companions, but Strathglyde Partnership for Transport has a scheme where companions can travel at half of the fare when accompanying someone. That contrasts with the national policy for bus travel where companions of those with a national entitlement card with the I and plus one symbol can travel for free on any service across Scotland. For so many blind and partially sighted people, having a companion can mean the difference between travelling or not at all. A partially sighted person supported by Site Scotland veterans said, I would like to use the train more often, but no way would I travel without someone else with me. My eyesight is getting worse. I couldn't travel without a companion now. Another veteran said, it's more dangerous getting on and off a train with a sight problem than on a bus. I always need someone when travelling. It's also easier with plus one to use the bus because my partner gets on for free, but I would prefer to use train because it's quicker. Even when a concessionary scheme does exist, it's not always available to buy the ticket or is even known about. This is largely due to a lack of infrastructure in place as there's no option on a ticket machine to select a companion ticket. That means very often a companion must buy a ticket at full price, despite being entitled to a discount depending on which local authority or area they're travelling from or to. So often companions with an I plus one card are reliant on the knowledge of train staff about schemes to access the discount and that stations that have no staff, particularly smaller stations, asking someone simply isn't an option. It's confusing and it's stressful. Now you might reasonably ask why someone's travelling companion should go for nothing or indeed why someone who is blind or has sight problems should. It's a fair question. We know from the latest findings from the Scottish household survey that the average household incomes for disabled people tends to be lower than for those who are not. Cost was named by more disabled people than non-disabled people as a reason for not using the train. Use of rail services by disabled people is also lower than for non-disabled people with health reasons being cited by 3% of disabled people compared to nothing for non-disabled people as a reason why they didn't use the train. These findings reflect the experiences of those with a visual impairment. A single parent with Stargard disease, a form of macular degeneration causing central vision loss, explained the benefits of having a companion when travelling and why taking the train would be her preference but due to cost chooses to take the bus instead. She said, I go everywhere by bus only because of the free companion travel. That's the reason I use the bus over the train because the concessionary rate for whoever is with me, I'd rather take the train as the bus can be so unreliable especially in the darker nights which reduces what vision I do have even more. I'd take the train more if I could. The charities estimate the cost of implementing a national policy for companions to be around £2 million. When you think about the benefits it would bring, it's a small price to pay. It would make public transport more accessible and help the economy by improving access to employment. One in four registered blind and partially sighted people of working age are in employment and this scheme could help to remove the barriers of simply getting to a workplace. If the Scottish Government is serious about achieving the vision that all disabled people can travel with the same freedom, choice, dignity and opportunity as other citizens, as set out in its own accessible travel framework, then providing free rail travel for blind and partially sighted people and their companions would have a significant impact in meeting those outcomes. A lack of national policy for free rail travel for companions of blind and partially sighted people is causing anguish for passengers and rail staff. It's clear to me that having a companion can ultimately make the difference between someone being able to make a journey or not. I thank Site Scotland and Site Scotland veterans for bringing this important issue to my attention and I urge members to back the calls for a national policy to take steps towards a more equitable and accessible rail network across Scotland for everyone who uses it. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I'm pleased to be able to contribute to this important debate and I thank Graham Simpson for bringing it to the chamber. His motion free rail travel for blind and partially sighted people and companions really says it all. The cost is prohibitive for blind or partially sighted people to travel on the train because their essential companion has to pay. Presiding Officer, I'm fortunate to have the wonderful Deaf Blind Scotland headquarters in my constituency and this is the most concerning issue that they raise with me at one of my regular meetings with them. There's no national standard fare structure for communicators to accompany Deaf Blind passengers on trains. I understand that it's free in some routes, as Graham Simpson has just outlined, but it's chargeable in others, which leads to geographical inequalities and confusion among rail staff. The reality is that companions are even more essential on trains than buses, where travel is rightly free for them. There are several factors that make this case. Of course free travel on both forms of transport is necessary, but on trains the gap between the platform and the train is of variable size and the height of the platform and it's dangerous and impossible for a Deaf Blind person or partially sighted person to navigate. In addition, stops can be missed as the passenger can't hear announcements nor see the signage on route to and from stations. Also, these days, less and less stations have an on-site employee so no help can be summoned, even in an emergency which would be obviously extremely concerning. Added to the issues is the fact that the driver cannot help passengers or even know that someone is safely in their seat before moving off in the same way as a bus driver can by looking round. I have no idea what the provision of this entitlement would cost, but of course I do know that as a Government we're financially extremely constrained at the moment. However, I would hope that a commitment could be given that this is something we could deliver if not immediately but sometime in the near future and I look forward to the minister's response on that. The fact that the service is currently delivered by way of a postcode lottery or a rail route lottery would suggest to me it would be possible to expand throughout Scotland without major disruption or expense. I don't believe anyone who's not directly affected by this exclusion could possibly understand how it feels to know that you're effectively barred from travelling by train. Leveling out this service would make a world of a difference to those who need it and honestly I think we owe it to those people bravely dealing with their sight loss and many other daily struggles every day. I think I can speak for all the amazing staff, volunteers and service users of Deafblind Scotland. When I say that the ability for them to travel throughout our country in safety and comfort would literally open up a whole new world for them. Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms Macfright, and I call Neil Bibby, who joins us online. Mr Bibby, for around four minutes please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Can I commend Graham Simpson for this member's debate and shining a light on an inequality, which makes little sense. The Parliament has a proud record on making public transport available to those who need it, whether it be the young, the old or the disabled. There is a consensus in this Parliament for the principle of concessionary travel for those groups who need it most, but this debate reminds us that the cost is not just cost that is the barrier to accessing public transport and its connections to the wider world. After all, what is the point of having free travel when you are unable to take up this opportunity because you need assistance and are unable to pay for a companion? It seems dynachronistic for this problem to be recognised for those using our bus network and not for rail travel. It does not seem fair that this benefit is afforded in some local authorities' areas and not others. Scottish Labour would strongly support this being reviewed and access widened to the rail companions of the blind. This would be a positive progressive step which can improve the lives of thousands of people and recognition of the specific challenges faced every day with people as sight loss. According to Site Scotland, this will improve social connectedness as sight loss contributes to the feelings of loneliness and improvement employment opportunities, as Graham Simpson outlined, for the three quarters of working age blind and partially sighted people who are not in employment. The Scottish Government's own national transport strategy states that we will continue to review the benefits of the scheme to ensure that best meets people's needs and delivers a best value solution. Against this background, it makes the estimated £2 million cost as per Site Scotland's calculations very good value. This motion brings together two causes that I have supported since I was elected to this Parliament, better support for those who are blind and partially sighted, and a better rail service for the wider public. On the first, can I pay tribute to the amazing work being done by the likes of Site Scotland and the RNIB who campaigned tirelessly for the blind and partially sighted, constructively pointing out the many flaws in our public services that act as obstacles for those with sight issues and reminding us of the specific challenges this community faces every day? Indeed, the RNIB's transport accessibility agenda for this Parliament would be providing bus drivers with mandatory disability awareness training to cis passengers, the availability of services and timetable information in accessible formats such as Braille and Lodge Plint, and audio and visual announcements on buses remind us of progress we still have to make to make public transport fit for those with sight difficulties. That's before we get to the issues which impact on the rail service we enjoy, whether sighted or not. We face a real challenge attracting people back on our railways and a programme of service cuts and office closures will only reduce passenger numbers further, moving us further away from the good, affordable service that we all want. I hope that we can learn lessons from other countries where positive steps like short-term rail reductions, which can make taking the train viable once again for people during a cost of living crisis and have to find alternatives ways to work. In summary, can I put on record my hope that we can make this policy idea a reality for blind or partially sighted passengers as a positive next step to delivering a transport network that works for everyone? Thank you very much, Mr Bibby. I now call Russell Finlay, who also joins us online, who will be followed by Katie Clark. Mr Finlay, for around four minutes, please. Thank you, Presiding Officer. I would like to thank Graham Simpson for today's debate, which puts a focus on a big issue facing people in Scotland who are affected by sight loss. Now, it cannot be in the chamber due to industrial action on the railways. However, in a debate about rail travel, I begin with a railway reference stat being to speak about an incredible sculpture situated outside Manchester's Piccadilly train station. Titled Victory Over Blindness, it depicts a line of seven life-sized and blindfolded First World War soldiers. The Great War claimed the lives of an estimated 900,000 British military personnel. Countless war were maimed and injured, including tens of thousands who suffered damaged eyesight or permanent blindness. When I first saw Victory Over Blindness just a few months ago, it stopped me in my tracks and made me think just as good art should. As cultures throughout history have been mindful of human mortality and the inevitability of death, this poignant memorial made me feel profoundly grateful for the precious gift of sight. It reminded me of how lucky I was to be able to see it with my own eyes. While it is perhaps difficult to imagine living in a world of darkness, it is important to sometimes take the time to do so. I experienced similar feelings on a recent visit to Site Scotland veterans' hot-head centre in Paisley. That fantastic facility supports ex-military personnel who suffer from sight problems. The emphasis is on providing them with the skills and confidence to live as independently as possible. At one point, I inadvertently caused a stushy between army and navy veterans, but I was assured that such friendly fire is a daily occurrence. The centre manager, Alison Gray and her team are passionate about making a difference to the lives of those who visit. Just like seeing the statue in Manchester, the hot-head visit caused me to count my blessings. It was during my visit that I first heard from the sister charity Site Scotland about their campaigning work. The Fair Rail Vision campaign seeks to establish a national policy for free rail travel across Scotland for those with a national Scotland concessionary travel for blind persons carves and a companion. As Graham Simpson has already articulated so well, the introduction of a Scotland-wide policy would be life-changing for so many people living with sight loss. A present companion having to pay to travel can mean the difference between a blind person making a journey or not. That can close the door of opportunity for employment and social interaction. Indeed, 60 per cent of respondents to a Site Scotland consultation said that sight loss caused them feelings of loneliness. Increased isolation can make their world darker and their horizons smaller. In my West Scotland region, there are nearly 25,000 people living with sight loss, with a largest number, almost 6,000, in Renfrewshire. I therefore urge ministers to embrace this sterling campaign and to work with local authorities to make it happen. As Rona Mackay said, let's end the rail route lottery. This aim is entirely consistent with the Government's accessible travel framework, which rightly states, and I quote, that all disabled people can travel with the same freedom, choice, dignity and opportunity as other citizens. I refer to my entry in the register of members' interests. I would like to contractrelate Graham Simpson on securing this debate and the way that he has made the case. As it says in his motion, cost was named by more disabled people than non-disabled people as a reason not to use rail in the 2021 Scottish household survey. The points that he has made clearly show why we need to ensure that we have a national policy. As has been said currently, whether a visually impaired person in their companion can access free or discounted rail travel depends on where they live. As charities like SightScotland and SightScotland veterans have said, there is a very strong, I would say, unarguable case for a national entitlement. Freedom of information requests by SightScotland revealed that, although most local authorities and the Strathclyde partnership for transport offer free or discounted rail travel for blind or partially sighted people, only seven said that they offered a discount to companions. I think that the point made very fully and powerfully by Graham Simpson and none of them offered free companion travel. The rules differ depending on where you live. As Russell Finlay has already said in the West Scotland region, there are 25,000 people who we believe would be entitled to such travel if it was available. In every local authority area in West Scotland, there are thousands of people who are directly impacted. As we know, people with disabilities tend to be on lower income, which perhaps again explains the fact that Graham Simpson has given in his motion that cost is often named as the factor, which displays people from using rail. The West Scotland area, all of the West Scotland region, is covered by Strathclyde passenger transport. When it comes to the concessionary scheme, there is some support for companions in relation to buses. The companion can travel free, but in relation to rail, the companion travels at half the full fare when accompanying and when they have a national entitlement card. That is one of the better schemes, but, as has been said, in many places in Scotland there is no support at all for companions. As we know, cost is only one of the factors that deter people, particularly people with disabilities and blind people and people with sight problems from using rail. Accessibility to rail remains a significant issue on railways. It was revealed to me earlier this year by ScotRail that just a third of all stations in the West Scotland region that I represent are deemed fully accessible. For example, the winning railway station is considered accessible, but up until recently, when I made representations, the lifts only worked to four in the afternoon as a result of representations that my office made. They are now working later in the day. A third of stations are deemed accessible, but, even when they are deemed accessible, that does not necessarily mean that they are fully accessible for all who may wish to use them. Only two stations in West Scotland are currently earmarked for access for all funding to improve accessibility. Cost is one factor, but there are clearly other factors that we need to address as a Parliament and that the Scottish Government needs to address to make a real option for many people who are blind or who have sight issues. The cabinet secretary undertook on a previous occasion to carry out a review on women's safety on public transport, and I know from discussions with her that that work has been taken place. Many of the issues that women face in public transport are very similar to those that people with sight issues and people with other disabilities face. The commitment to carry out a review on women's safety on public transport came in a debate on the threat enclosures to ticket offices and booking offices. We know that that is a live issue. It is not just an issue in Scotland, it is an issue throughout the UK. I understand that the Scottish Government is awaiting decisions down south in terms of what will happen to booking offices and ticket offices down there, but we know that over many years now, we have seen booking offices close across the UK and that has a significant and disproportionate impact on visually impaired passengers and those who are blind. Ms Clark, you need to bring your comments up close. I think that the debate therefore raises wider issues about accessibility to public transport and to rail in particular. I am very much welcome that Graham Simpson has focused on cost in his motion today. The Scottish Government's own accessible travel framework says that all disabled people can travel with the same freedom, choice, dignity and opportunity as other citizens. I believe that we can make that a reality if we address the points that are being made in this debate. Thank you very much, Ms Clark. I now invite Jenny Gilruth to respond to the debate minister for around about seven minutes, please. First, I congratulate Mr Simpson on securing this afternoon's debate. A hugely important topic and one that is very close to my heart. I was listening to contributions from members and recalling my grandmother who was registered blind on one of the campaigns that she undertook over the years was to improve accessibility at Luchar station. She was successful to that end, but it was a matter close to her heart and something that she had to campaign and fight for tirelessly over the years. I think that this afternoon's debate, as we have heard from a number of members, is fundamentally important because we now have ScotRail in public ownership, and that needs to mean something for the communities that we all represent. We need to have a railway that better listens to the people. Mr Simpson will be aware of my views to that end, and I hope that he and others across the chamber will contribute to the national rail conversation when it launches in the coming weeks. I want to touch on some of the points that were made by members first of all before coming to my response as minister. The inequity that was highlighted by Mr Simpson and I think by Rona Mackay, too, is not fair between rail and bus, and I want to emphasise that point. It's worth saying, though, that there are some local authorities that do have companion schemes. I think that we heard that from Ms Clark, so West Lothian, Fife Strathglider, for example. They all offer a 50 per cent discount in that respect, but Mr Simpson highlights the inequity that can lead to passenger confusion because of different approaches taking place in different parts of the country, and I think that that has to change. I did indeed meet with Sight Scotland earlier this year. I have to say not that Mr Simpson has behest, but because I've grown up with members of my family who've suffered from visual impairment. For that matter, for that reason, I know how important it is that we get this right. Transport Scotland will be providing me with further advice on that matter next week following that meeting. Last week, I met with Seascape Scotland, who was formerly known as Fife Society for the Blind and Glen Otis, in my constituency. I was really grateful to Leslie Carcery for taking the time to explain the challenges that are really presented to the blind community, who have been particularly affected by the pandemic restrictions. Yes, absolutely. Graham Simpson. I thank the minister for taking the intervention. I think that she referenced in her letter to me that she was going to take advice from Transport Scotland. What kind of advice is she expecting to get? Will it be advice on how to run a national scheme, or will it be something else? I don't want to preclude the advice that I've commissioned from officials, but older costings, for example, of a national scheme that's being touched on today. There is a contextualisation that I want to present later in my contribution in relation to the fair fairs review, which is where that might also sit. It's important that we don't divorce those two topics, because the fair fairs review looks at affordability right across the public transport network. I take Mr Simpson's point on board. I want to pick up on Rona Mackay's point that she spoke about the importance of opening up the whole new world to the blind community. I very much recognise that sentiment. Neil Bibby spoke of the social connectedness and the opportunities to access employment that widening the scheme up at a national level would look at. Russell Finlay spoke of his visit to meet veterans with sight problems and the important work of sight Scotland in that respect. I won't comment on the friendly fire, but I think that the spirit of today's debate has been one mark by consensus and the need to do better. Katie Clark made reference to the important work that I've been progressing with Transport Scotland in relation to women's safety on public transport. I hope to bring forward a report in relation to new research that we commissioned earlier this year in the coming weeks. It is important to say, as Ms Clark alluded to, that there is absolutely a link between safety and accessibility in relation to rail. It is also important to reference that the Public Petitions Committee has been taking evidence on this matter. I understand that the committee last week agreed to initiate inquiries via local authorities who offer a discount scheme. That will look at considering uptake and also the understanding of rail staff and passengers, but I am keen to take some of the information that the Petitions Committee is gathering on board in relation to any advice that I am provided by Transport Scotland officials in the coming weeks. In relation to access to the rail network, which I think was touched on by a number of members, I have listened very carefully to the points made by members right across the chamber this afternoon. As a very regular user of the rail network, I see first-hand how passengers use the network and particularly its importance for connectivity. I agree with members at the current position of different rail companion schemes across Scotland, as well as that varying approach across public transport needs to be reviewed. I can confirm that that work will now be progressed as part of the fair fairs review, which will include a review specifically on this issue and that will be reported by early next year. I hope that that gives Mr Simpson and other members a reassurance of the importance that I adhere to this topic, because it is absolutely essential that we get this right. However, our main topic of discussion today is the rail companions card scheme. We are probably here united in the wish to see that review move forward. It is really important to recognise our on-going work in terms of accessibility and the schemes that are available more broadly in that respect. Now, we have new stations at Reston and very shortly at Inverness airport. They will be fully accessible stations designed to the highest industry standards. Work, of course, goes on in my constituency on the Levenmouth project. We will have two new stations there as well, open to passengers, and they again will be fully accessible working with our industry partners and working together to deliver that multimodal transport system. Additionally, we have Croy station, a busy station on the main Glasgow to Edinburgh line that has recently had a new footbridge and lifts and stalls as has Johnson station. There will be four further stations across Scotland that will also benefit from set-free access by early 24, so at Port Glasgow, Udingston, Dynfries and Annesland. I think that it is important to remind the chamber that rail accessibility for the current time remains a reserved matter for the UK Government, but nonetheless, we are still pressing on with direct Scottish Government funding for accessibility improvements at Pitlochry. Can you see Avymor, Nairn and Corsairs again? That will be by early 2024, yes, I give way to the member. The minister quite correctly points out that accessibility remains a reserved function, but it seeks representations from the Scottish Government and the transport of Scotland in relation to where money should be spent. There are only, as I said, two bids in relation to West Scotland. The cabinet secretary's report is to why there are not more representations in terms of upgrading what is clearly a major problem. Ms Clark highlights an important point in relation to the role that transport Scotland plays within the current framework as it operates. I have been more than happy to ask my officials to meet with the member to talk to the details of her region and as to how that scheme affects her part of Scotland. It is important to say that the scheme itself is reserved to the DFT, although it is right that ministers in Scotland have a level of impetus in terms of the views that we can share in how that scheme is operated. However, we have Scotland's passenger assist service as well in Scotland, and that gives essential assistance to those who need help when they are travelling on the ScotRail network. Travellers in Scotland can also book passenger assistance with one or is noticed, and it can be requested from ScotRail in a variety of number of different ways, which is hugely important for those who have a visual impairment. We also have the turn-up and growth service, which has been important in improving accessibility more broadly. It is important that we recognise the challenges around some of our rolling stock and our railway carriages in terms of accessibility. I have spoken about our commitment to the railway network, our work on the fair fairs review and accessibility improvements to the railway network at our stations. However, the carriages that we travel on are also hugely important, and I recognise that there is a level of challenge at the moment in relation to carriage allocation in current parts of the services experience, particularly the five services at the current time, and there are other parts of Scotland where that challenge has been highlighted in my meeting just prior to the debate that I was discussing this matter with Transport Scotland. I have asked ScotRail for an update on that matter, because if folk are jammed in like sardines on trains in a post-pandemic era that we are currently living through, it is not exactly going to encourage people out of their cars and back on to our railways. We really need to encourage a better use of carriage allocation, because that will better meet accessibility needs for all passengers. A final word, if I may, about our national rail conversation. I shall very shortly in the new year be setting out the timescales for that important work, which I see moving forward in two distinct public-facing phases. That work will be really critical in ensuring the voices across Scotland are heard and in helping to make railway services fit for the future for Scotland. Lastly, I would just like to thank everyone for participating in a well-considered debate this afternoon. I thank Mr Simpson for bringing forward this important member's debate, putting emphasis on the key role of rail and Scotland's connectivity, but also on how we consistently can support the visually impaired. Thank you very much, minister. That concludes the debate, and I close this meeting of Parliament.