In Parliament

Scottish Parliament Debates Free Bus Travel for Asylum Seekers

In a recent debate, a member of the Scottish Parliament I emphasized the need to deliver free bus travel to all asylum seekers. This has cross-party support. I also praised the dedication of the Maryhill Integration Network.

The debate underscored the challenges posed by the UK Government's real-terms cuts to the Scottish budget. However, we do still need to recognise the low level of support asylum seekers receive from the UK Home Office, which denies them the right to work.

The UK Labour Government must ensure adequate support from the Home Office and I have called for collective efforts to secure funding and implement the policy.

Full text of my speech

When the topic was debated in the Scottish Parliament last October, I said that we must find a way to deliver free bus travel to all asylum seekers. I also said that I had been pleased to work in partnership with colleagues, particularly Paul Sweeney and Mark Ruskell, on a cross-party basis. I know that many others are involved. I put on record that there were also sympathetic voices, at that stage, from the Conservative Party. Members should reflect on Jackson Carlaw’s comments during the debate at that time. That partnership work has been a key strength of the campaign for free bus travel, and that remains the case.

During that debate, I also paid tribute to the voices network, and Maryhill Integration Network, which is based in my constituency, for their dedication and tenacity in leading the campaign, and I do so again this afternoon.

That begs the question: what has changed since that debate? Clearly, the Scottish Government’s fiscal position has been deeply undermined by the UK Government’s real-terms cuts to the Scottish budget. However, I do not wish to dwell on that this afternoon, because I wish to seek and build consensus. Indeed, we must build consensus, given the lived experience of many of our asylum-seeking communities, which Maggie Chapman outlined eloquently in her opening speech.

I hope that we can agree that one of the most compelling reasons for delivering free bus travel is the incredibly low level of support that the UK Home Office makes available to asylum seekers, while simultaneously denying them the right to work.

The delivery of a free bus travel scheme almost feels like an exercise—at least in part—in mitigating another UK Government policy that is damaging to a particularly vulnerable group in society. We have already heard that asylum seekers are living on £7 a day for food, travel, clothes and other basic essentials. If board is provided, they have £8.86 a week to live on. A bus day ticket in Glasgow costs £5.60. Mr Harvie made that point, too.

The impact on asylum-seeking individuals and families is clear. What difference would free bus provision make? I have previously mentioned the success of the Refugee Survival Trust’s asylum seeker free bus travel pilot, which supported asylum seekers to attend appointments related to their asylum cases and health-related appointments. It also allowed them to stay in contact with family, with friends and with support networks. It vastly improved their mental health and tackled social isolation. It was also advantageous to the Scottish and UK states, because the onward issues that would be created by not nurturing mental health and by tackling social isolation would be costs in themselves. However, it is just the right thing to do.

This afternoon, the Green’s motion reasserts the clear policy commitment to deliver free bus travel for asylum seekers, and the Scottish Government amendment will ensure that we work together not only to identify how it will be funded, but to tackle the underlying issue of insufficiency of funds for asylum seekers and, frankly, our local authorities.

I very much hope that the UK Labour Government will step up and ensure that the Home Office provides adequate support in a way that the previous UK Government simply did not. That said, let us work together to secure the funding and delivery of the policy intent. I believe that the political will to do so will be there across Parliament if we work together. That is the challenge for all of us. We have to identify not just the cash, but how to deliver the policy.

In the brief time that I have left, I say that I think that the estimated cost of £2 million is an overestimation. I was looking at the funds. The cabinet secretary is shaking her head, but I will compare some statistics in relation to this. I think that £189.5 million is used for the under-22s travel scheme, to which about 752,000 youngsters have signed up. Here we have 5,000 asylum seekers.

The point is that we come together as a Parliament, and we agree on the matter.