#Holyrood2026 : Travelling Backwards
The Holyrood election on 7 May is critical to active travel and wider transport policies and budgets for the next 5 years. Is there a local project being planned that you’re looking forward to? – in Edinburgh, say Meadows to George Street, or Portobello to Musselburgh? When and if such projects will happen depends largely on the existence and size of the Scottish Government active travel budget.
Sadly and shockingly, in view of the climate crisis, the cost of living crisis, and the need for healthier lifestyles to help the NHS crisis this year’s manifestos mark a massive deterioration in active travel policies as compared to the 2021 election – or even 2016.
This article includes an analysis of the various party manifestos, and lots of other relevant info. We will add more as it becomes available.
Retreating from 2021
In 2021 all parties promised to increase AT investment from its then 3.5% of total transport. Indeed, Conservatives, Greens and Labour all promised to reach 10%.
In 2026 the Greens retain a 10% promise, but no other parties promise even to maintain current levels (3.9%) and the Conservatives explicitly promise a cut, calling active travel an ideological project. Meanwhile, apart from the Greens, there is unanimity on pouring more cash into increasing trunk road capacity.
This is all the more tragic given the recent compelling evidence from Cycling Scotland survey data of the successes of the new onroad protected bike lanes in Glasgow and Edinburgh, with, for the first time, more bikes than cars during all 4 peak periods surveyed on one section of Glasgow’s South City Way, and the public health and pollution benefits resulting.
Manifesto links & pdfs
As usual, we uploaded the manifesto pdf’s so that they remain accessible post-election even if the links disappear from some party websites
| Manifesto link | Conservative | Green | Labour | LibDem | Reform | SNP |
| Manifesto pdf | Conservative | Green | Labour | LibDem | Reform | SNP |
Manifesto analysis
Our manifesto analysis included most of the items directly relevant to cycling policy from manifestos, as well as some wider environmental transport issues. However, we did not look at walk, bus and rail in our comparison – if we find relevant analyses by other groups, we’ll include them in Resources below. On the basis of the items we looked at, our overall impression is…
- Greens – excellent
- LibDem – positive in a fairly modest way
- Labour & SNP – poor
- Reform – bad
- Conservatives – terrible
Manifestos – brief selected points of interest
Green – if we had to quibble, more should be said on the public health and NHS benefits of people cycling for everyday travel; and, unlike all other parties, there is no specific mention of potholes.
Lib Dem – Several positive policies, but nothing really strong, and no mention of the importance of cycle networks. However, it is good to see AT referenced in several parts of the manifesto, not just transport, including several references to its public health importance.
SNP – The manifesto makes zero mention of the active travel budget (currently ~£163m), instead offering £2.5m for a bicycle repair fund and possible funding for outdoor recreation paths. No mention of cycle networks, traffic reduction, 20mph, LEZs or cycling’s value for public health.
Labour – It is incomprehensible that there is no mention of cycling. The many top Labour politicians who understood and acted on its value for everyday travel, public health, climate, and enjoyable places to live would be quite bewildered – David Begg (expanded North Ed Network), Alastair Darling (created Edinburgh Council’s cycle team), Sarah Boyack (initiated regular Scot Gov AT funding), and Council Transport conveners who took action on active travel, including Mark Lazarowicz, Andrew Burns, Scott Arthur and now Stephen Jenkinson.
Reform – The shortest of the manifestos, with an aim to “end the war on the car.” Cycling would however be supported as a means of recreation in rural Scotland.
Conservative – Although most other parties don’t mention the AT budget one way or the other, the Conservatives are the only party explicitly promising to cut it (indeed their wording may even mean scrap it). They explicitly oppose any attempt to moderate car use growth, instead fast-tracking trunk road expansion and opposing LEZs, congestion or workplace charging, most speed reductions, air tax increases, etc. They also indulge in semi-trumpian language such as ending “the obsession with cycle lanes” and describing active travel schemes as “ideological projects.”
?? Possible explanations
Why has the understanding of and explicit support for active travel – and particularly cycling – changed so drastically since the 2021 election? We don’t know .. but here are some suggestions. Feedback welcome!
- Public money Public finances are much tighter than in 2021, and are predicted to get worse. Yet parties are willing to make big promises on trunk road expansion! Active travel infrastructure also has a much higher cost-benefit ratio than providing for motor traffic. And active lifestyles help reduce pressure on the NHS, a fact only mentioned in the Green and Lib Dem manifestos
- Campaigning In 2016 and 2021, the Walk, Wheel, Cycle, Vote campaign [referenced here] made massive efforts, to the extent of surveying all candidates throughout Scotland, and starting well before manifestos were complete. It was a massive effort by a small number of volunteers, but really getting inside parties. In 2026, whilst 60 organisations (including Spokes) have supported the joint 2026 Active Travel manifesto, there has not been the capacity to run a campaign equivalent to WWCV
- Societal trends The last 5 years have seen a wave of right-wing populism, which has had major impacts in UK and Scottish politics. Do parties want to modify their policies (or feel they have to) including active travel, in response?
- Illegal use of modified ebikes This may seem an odd suggestion, but looking back there was originally a positive response when ebikes first arrived, but the prevalence of illegally ridden modified e-bikes, together with battery fires, seems to have had a significant impact on public opinion [more info, p11 here]. Unfortunately ordinary legal e-bikes, the modified machines, and bikes with dangerous batteries, are now often lumped together in public and media discourse as “e-bikes” with much negativity. Are some parties reflecting this as a perceived change in public attitudes to bike use as a whole?
What you can do
- If you are on bluesky, repost one or more of our election tweets … this article / Spokes hustings report /
- Contact (or speak to) your candidates. Use this article to find points to raise, if you don’t have some already! Find candidates (and known contact details) at the Democracy Club links in Resources below (see the Constituency and the Regional List links).
Resources
- Spokes 2026 Hustings report
- Spokes reports on previous Holyrood elections: 2021 / 2016 /
- Democracy Club – a truly fantastic resource, for the public good, largely by volunteers, with considerable info on each candidate. And … you can help, for example by uploading leaflets you receive from candidates.
- Info about the election
- Constituency seat candidates (all Scotland)
- Regional List candidates (all Scotland)
- Scottish Parliament info about the election and how it works
- Joint Active Travel Manifesto by over 60 Scottish organisations including Spokes.
Election info pages from local councils
Lots of info, including registering to vote, full lists of local candidates, important dates, previous election results, etc, etc [some of this will not appear until closer to the election]