Category Archives: Press Release

Living Streets Edinburgh Group: our asks for Holyrood 2026 elections

News, Press Release, , ,

Living Streets Edinburgh campaigns to make walking and wheeling better, safer and more accessible in Edinburgh. We support national calls for the Scottish Parliament to give more priority to active travel and have four specific changes we want parties and candidates for the elections to commit to:

  1. Engine idling

The penalty for breaking the law against engine idling hasn’t increased since 2003 – still standing at £20. This means that it’s not economic for councils to enforce compliance and it is no surprise that there is effectively zero enforcement. This is absurd given the time money and effort spent in recent years on raising awareness of air quality issues in Scotland and introducing Low Emission Zones.  We want to see the penalty raised to an effective level, and index-linked to future inflation.

  • ‘Continental-style’ zebras

We want to see cheap, simple zebra crossings (i.e. ‘paint-only’, without Belisha Beacons) permitted on Scottish streets. This is a quick and cost-effective way to give pedestrians priority, especially on side roads where pedestrian priority is now confirmed in the Highway Code. Evaluations of the design by Edinburgh Napier University and Transform Scotland have demonstrate their potential (https://transform.scot/2023/12/04/new-research-would-european-style-zebra-crossings-work-in-scotland/). The Scottish Government says that it has no devolved powers to even trial these zebras – in which case, the Scottish Government must press immediately for such powers.

  • Roadworks

While roadworks are inevitable both for maintenance of streets and to maintain and improve public utilities, they cause severe and often unnecessary problems for all modes of travel – including pedestrians. The Scottish Road Works Commissioner has stated that 2/3 of works are on footways.  This not only disrupts pedestrians (especially disabled people) but also often results in long-lasting damage to roads. We want to see a ‘lane rental’ system introduced, as permitted in England, where the works undertaker pays for the occupation of the road on a daily basis. This will encourage works to be completed as quickly as possible, minimising disruption, and also increase resources available for inspection of works, improving the standard of reinstatements.

  • Safety Cameras

Two thirds of safety cameras (for speeding and red light jumping) in Edinburgh are ‘bagged’ (out of commission);  8 cameras were bagged in 2025 alone. https://www.livingstreetsedinburgh.org.uk/2025/08/25/bagged-speed-and-red-light-cameras-in-edinburgh-result-from-our-foi-request-august-2025/   This sends a green light to motorists that there are no consequences for speeding and jumping lights. Police Scotland, which operates the cameras, bears the cost of maintaining and upgrading them – but receives no income from penalties, which ultimately goes to the UK Treasury. So Police Scotland currently has a financial incentive to minimise the use of cameras, which are an essential tool to encourage safe and legal driving. We want MSPs to lobby for change on a UK basis so that the revenue generated by safety cameras is retained by the enforcement agency – normally Police Scotland.

Living Streets Edinburgh Group

October 2025.

***

Our call for fair and effective speed enforcement (Letter to Transport Minister)

Press Release, Road Safety

Dear Ms Hyslop

Safer Speeds for Scotland

We are writing to you to highlight a crucial road safety issue that is undermining Scotland’s Road Safety Strategy. Namely the fact that there is no effective enforcement system for Scotland to be able to ensure that safe driving speeds are achieved. 

Given the fundamental importance of safer driving speeds for collision speeds and the resulting casualties, this issue underlies all other efforts to improve driver behaviour. There is no possibility of approaching the ‘Vision Zero’ goal that our governments at UK, Scotland, and local authority levels claim to support, without reform of an enforcement system that is unfit for purpose. 

In Scotland we strongly support the proposed reduction of the national speed limit from 60mph to the more appropriate 50mph on single carriageway roads. This will help to reduce an appalling level of casualties on these roads, especially if followed up with further adjustments to set reduced speed limits that are appropriate to individual road sections. However it will do nothing to ensure that drivers keep to these safer speeds. Without suitably intensified enforcement efforts it is certain that many will not. 

As it stands there are no incentives for either Police Scotland or local authorities to make greater enforcement efforts. All the revenue income arising from fines and penalty charges for speeding currently revert to the UK Treasury, leaving a situation whereby more enforcement requires more expenditure at the expense of the many other pressing priorities for public services. Here in Scotland that income is in effect deducted from Scotland’s block grant, and so is unavailable for any public service purpose in Scotland. There is also no provision for local authorities to assist the police in providing better enforcement. So much for effective devolution of powers to the local levels at which they are needed!

Responding to a question from a Lib. Dem. MP in December, the UK Government minister, Lilian Greenwood, brushed it aside stating there were currently no plans for changes.  

It surely is time for the Scottish Government to demand a system that funds enforcement where it is needed, and at the levels that are needed, through the retention of income from fines and penalties. There is a gaping hole in the devolution of enforcement powers over road safety and it is one which must be fixed. We assume that fixing it commands your support and that of your SNP colleagues in government. So we hope that you will now help in bringing pressure to bear on the UK Government.    

We will also be writing to the UK Secretary of State for Scotland to request his support internally in pressing for this change.       

John Russell

Living Streets Edinburgh Group

LSEG calls (again) for more investment in everyday walking

Council Policy, News, Press Release, , , ,

The Council’s Transport and Environment Committee on 22 May will consider a report recommending priorities to deliver the City Mobility Plan. We’re surprised, and very disappointed, to see no mention of some key initiatives which we were able to get included in the CMP delivery plan. Especially disappointing after the committee decided to freeze footway maintenance while increasing spending on roads, only last month. We’ve therefore sent councillors this message.

Dear Councillor

I’m writing in connection with the report on City Mobility Plan priorities, Item 7.5 on the TEC agenda for 22 May bit.ly/43ktlep  The recommendations do not adequately reflect the CMP’s ambition to effect “a transformational change in walking and wheeling in Edinburgh”.

Over two years ago, two new initiatives were introduced into the Active Travel component of the City Mobility Plan: ‘Action for Better Crossings” (ABC) and the “Edinburgh Accessible Streets Initiative” EASI). These programmes (both proposed by us) finally offered the prospect of a strategic, rather than piecemeal, approach to addressing some of the most fundamental problems with getting around the city as a pedestrian – for example:

  • the time that you have to wait for the green man at traffic lights,
  • the thousands of missing dropped kerbs on pavements,
  • narrow footways, 
  • pavement clutter, etc.

As we understand it, effectively nothing has been done yet to implement either initiative as a coherent programme. We had hoped that they would form a key part of this report. However, there is no mention whatsoever in the report of either ABC or EASI, despite Council having confirmed them as at the heart of CMP policy only last year (see attached).

Instead, some elements of ABC and EASI are simply noted as part of the ‘rolling programme’ in Appendix 4b. Paragraph 4.14 of the report states an expectation that these will be funded at “an overall level roughly equal to recent overall investment”. This isn’t good enough: there is no indication of how much money is budgeted for these schemes; certainly there has been no systematic investment at all in recent years in widening footways. Many of the other aspects like the pedestrian crossing programme and the crucial school streets reviews have huge backlogs owing to lack of resourcing.

These vital programmes need to be considered alongside, and on the same level playing field, as the active travel and public transport listed in Appendix 1. Councillors should be able to consider whether investment in school streets, road safety, ABC or EASI is more or less worthy than these projects, whether they be George Street, Hawthornvale-Salamander Street, the Lindsey Bridge or Dalry 20 Minute Neighbourhood. Otherwise the opportunity to consider where best to invest both staff time and capital funding is lost and a ‘silo’ approach is entrenched.

We also have serious concerns with the overly-complex methodology for assessing projects in Appendix 1. It gives no weighting to walking and wheeling (“top of the travel hierarchy”) and doesn’t sufficiently value schemes relatively modest but important to pedestrians such as Calton Road and the Causey. These projects fail to score highly enough only because work on them has already been “paused’ for years.

However, the fundamental weakness of the report is to take too narrow an approach to evaluating a limited set of projects. We would therefore like to see the report deferred perhaps for two cycles, and a new report brought forward with a more strategic approach to future investment, including the programmes mentioned above.

David Hunter

Convener

LSEG response to Consultation on the National Speed Limit Review, March 2025

Consultation Response, Press Release, ,

Consultation Submission submitted on behalf of the Living Streets Edinburgh Group (LSEG)

This submission is being made as a direct email rather than through your standard consultation form since the design of that form does not allow us to be able to adequately express our concerns for pedestrians. We trust that our views, as below, will nevertheless be considered seriously.

The LSEG very strongly supports the proposed lowering of the default national speed limit from 60 to 50 mph on single carriageway roads. Scotland has a very poor safety record on these roads, with a large proportion of all fatalities and serious injuries occurring on them, as evidenced in the Consultation Review report. The 60 mph limit is far too high for safe driving, other than where there are long stretches of strait road without intervening property entrances or side-road junctions. A 50mph limit will result in safer speeds on these roads and all the more so if the new limit is properly enforced. We note that an even lower, 60 kmph, national limit is now being introduced on rural roads in Ireland, many of which have similar characteristics to those in Scotland.

The benefits for pedestrians on such roads is unlikely to be great however, since traffic speeds at up to either 50 or 60 mph intimidate pedestrians, and without the protection of segregated paths, on what are mostly narrow rural roads, there is little pedestrian activity. Our principle concern therefore is that the introduction of the 50mph limit does not go nearly far enough to make conditions safe for pedestrians or to reduce the levels of suppressed pedestrian trips along these roads.

In many places there are extensive stretches of bends with the current 60mph limit but where the maximum safe speed around the bends is no more than 40, or 30, or even 20mph. All too often only ‘Slow’ markings on the carriageway are in evidence. For conditions to be considered at all safe for pedestrians, with their visibility restricted by bends, speed limits need to be set at the appropriate lower levels that match the road design / conditions, not simply set to 50mph. There are also still many places, in particular on the approaches to villages or other settlements, where the prevailing speed limit needs to be reduced from 60 to well below 50mph; and, as in the Scottish Borders, 20mph in the villages themselves  We therefore call for there to be a comprehensive review following on from the introduction of the 50mph limit, with the aim to have speed limits set to appropriate levels for safe driving throughout the network, and whether or not there have been casualties in a particular location. This is a fundamental necessity if more walking is to be encouraged, in line with government policy. 

Even with the setting of the most  appropriate speed limits conditions will still be challenging for pedestrians and potentially dangerous without the provision of segregated routes. There is also a clear need in many places for the provision of pavements or off-road paths alongside rural roads. This provision could encourage many more walking trips, for example between adjacent villages or from villages to the nearest town where distances are not too great. It is also the case that more recreational walking, by visitors as well as residents, would be encouraged by the provision of more off-road footpaths in rural areas throughout Scotland. It is notable that many of the islands are very suited by size for recreational walking (and cycling) trips, yet still with very little provision of safe, segregated routes. Provision of such routes could encourage the leaving of cars behind on the mainland perhaps, or even altogether. Promoting such active travel would help increased tourism to take place without a comparable increase in car use.

Finally much intensified efforts to enforce the improved speed limits are essential in order to eliminate excessive speeding. Funding for these efforts needs to be resourced by means that are protected, otherwise grant cuts are likely when, as now, overall national and local public sector resources are under pressure. Without this the Vision Zero aim to have no serious injuries or fatalities will remain just a vision. The current enforcement system is simply not fit for purpose and needs reform, as the LSEG has argued elsewhere:   https://www.livingstreetsedinburgh.org.uk/2021/11/17/slower-speeds-safer-streets-for-edinburgh-an-action-plan/

We need to have a more comprehensive approach, with policies for the road safety of walkers (and cyclists) integrated with those for tourism and wider economic development.           

Edinburgh campaigners call for £83 million boost for walking 

Press Release, , ,

Media statement

Transport Scotland has yet to decide how to spend £83 million of its active travel budget in the current (2024/25) financial year. The figures have been revealed by the Edinburgh group of Living Streets, the national campaign for everyday walking and wheeling, after a Freedom of Information request. 

The figures show that while councils have been earmarked for £38 million, and other agencies promoting cycling and walking are set to receive £99 million, this leaves a shortfall of £83 million – 38% – still to be allocated from the £220 million active travel budget.  

David Hunter, Convener of the Living Streets Edinburgh group said “The whole active travel funding picture seems like a complete mess – so many different public agencies and charities receive significant sums without any apparent logic or coordination. Amid all the recent changes in the way the Scottish Government has been allocating this money, it’s alarming to see that there now appears to be a shortfall of more than a third of the budget as we head toward the half-way mark in the financial year. 

“What we’d really like to see is a much more focussed commitment to investing in Scotland’s pedestrian infrastructure which is so often in a dreadful condition. These budgeted funds should be released as soon as possible to local authorities so that they can spend them on active travel priorities as they see fit. Councils are best placed to make these decisions and in Edinburgh, this funding would go a long way to improving facilities for pedestrians through desperately needed measures like improving pavements and pedestrian crossings. For example, adding a pedestrian phase to the traffic lights at Leslie Place/Deanhaugh Street, Stockbridge is now more than five years late.”

According to Sustrans Scotland, some 40% of Edinburgh’s pavements don’t even meet the minimum width, while it’s understood that there are nearly 17,000 missing or substandard ‘dropped kerbs’.  Improving pedestrian facilities benefits everyone and would be a simple and effective use of these unspent Scottish Government funds.

Documents:-

Active Travel funding 2024 – 2025

FoI 202400420711 Funding figures

FOI Response