SNP Government forks out nearly £10m on 'free' bikes for children at £700 a pop
The SNP Government has been blasted for "wasting our money" after forking out nearly £10 million on "free bikes" for kids at £700 a pop.
A Freedom of Information Request showed that the Scottish Government has spent £9.4 million on 13,244 bikes. This means the average cost of each bike was £711.
High street retailers sell various models of children's bikes for under £200 and a quality child's bike from the 'Specialized' brand can be bought for under £500.
Scottish Labour MP for East Kilbride and Strathaven Joani Reid said: 'The one thing the SNP excel at is wasting our money.
'It is outrageous that taxpayers are being billed millions for this failing programme.
'I am not against giving children free bikes, I am against my constituents being ripped off like this.
'Public money is precious and needs to be spent with care.'
Between August 2021 and March 2023, £4.4m was spent on the Free Bikes Pilot Programme.
From April 2023 to March 2024, £900,000 was spent on the Free Bikes Partnership.
Between April 2024 and March this year, £4.2m was spent on the People and Place Programme.
Overall this adds up to £9.4m.
A total of 13,244 bikes were distributed during this period.
The Scottish Government said the number includes bikes purchased as part of fleets - for example by schools - and used by multiple children for purposes such as cycle training.
The People and Place Programme aims to encourage people to walk, cycle, and use active modes of transport.
It aims to make people change how they travel long term - essentially encouraging them to use their cars less.
A Transport Scotland spokesperson said: 'The total costs reflect not only the cost of the bikes, but the total administration of access to bikes projects using various delivery models, alongside the provision of safety equipment, security devices and cycle training.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
27 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EUAN McCOLM: Streeting's taken the gloves off over analogue John's neglect of Scots NHS - and the SNP don't like it up 'em, not one bit
For years, the SNP 's failures in government were shielded by the prospect of a second independence referendum. Any and all inadequacies were ignored or excused by the party's supporters so long as Indyref 2 appeared to be within reach. This willingness to put The Project before the SNP's performance allowed the party to record a string of election victories despite its catalogue of catastrophe. Falling standards in schools, terrifyingly high drug death numbers, the ongoing ferries scandal… all of these, and more, failed to shake the SNP's popularity during years when former First Minister Nicola Sturgeon was promising independence supporters a second referendum was just one last heave away. These days, nobody thinks a sequel to 2014's vote is anywhere close to being imminent. The legal position - that the power to stage a constitutional referendum lies with the UK Government - is settled. And, anyway, the last thing First Minister John Swinney wants, right now, is another grinding referendum campaign. The SNP is tired and fractured. Mr Swinney's focus is on trying to shore up support before next May's Holyrood election. For a long time, it was understood within SNP circles that to criticise a political decision was to undermine the independence movement. Anyone daring to express disquiet over a policy was urged to 'Wheesht for Indy'. The main thing was to win independence then begin building a beautiful new nation. And if there were downsides, winning the prize was worth any amount of pain. There is nobody more cynical than the idealist, is there? Now, the SNP can no longer use the prospect of another referendum to deflect criticism. When John Swinney's opponents point to the things his government has got so badly wrong, he cannot - as Nicola Sturgeon so often did - dangle the shiny bauble of Indyref 2 in front of supporters. It is customary for SNP health secretaries, when confronted with the failings of the NHS in Scotland, to point to greater problems in England. What poverty of ambition in the wail: 'At least we're not as bad as them.' In fact, it is that bad. There are areas where NHS Scotland outperforms - or, more accurately, doesn't underperform as badly as - the service in England but there are others where it lags behind. Anyway, comparisons with the NHS in England should be regarded as an irrelevance. Health is a fully devolved matter, the Scottish Government has the power to raise taxes and invest further in the service, should it choose to do so. The SNP - and the SNP, alone - is responsible for the parlous state of NHS Scotland. This is a truth the UK's Labour Health Secretary Wes Streeting decided, this week, to highlight. During an interview about an improved App for NHS patients in England and Wales, Mr Streeting pointed out that a promised NHS Scotland App is still years from launch. John Swinney was 'an analogue politician in a digital age', a smart line that pithily summed up the situation while also serving as a neat critique of the SNP's stewardship of the NHS since the party came to power at Holyrood in 2007. Twenty years ago, Scotland's health service was undergoing a major process of reform under the guidance of internationally renowned oncologist and academic Professor David Kerr, who created a blueprint for a more efficient and effective NHS. Professor Kerr began his work under a Labour-Liberal Democrat coalition at Holyrood but the SNP was quite happy with his ideas, which included the creation of centres of excellence for certain life saving procedures and the closure of failing facilities. While Professor's Kerr's reforms were being put in place, the SNP spent a great deal of time and effort positioning itself as the natural guardian of the NHS. In 2004, private polling commissioned by the SNP found that when the party attacked Labour over the NHS, Labour supporters took it personally. So emotionally connected were many voters to the NHS that to suggest the party they backed had neglected the health service was to accuse them of personally failing it. The SNP adopted a new approach. Then health spokesperson Nicola Sturgeon spoke about what her party would do with the NHS rather than about Labour's failures. Ms Sturgeon gave a series of impressive speeches in the years between 2004-07 in which she made a persuasive case for the SNP as natural heirs to the NHS. In opposition the SNP carefully nurtured and grew the idea that only it could be trusted to look after the NHS. In power, the party has neglected it. Beyond the extension of the provision of free prescriptions to include the wealthy and the gift of a 'baby box' to new parents, the nationalists have done next to nothing to address the health needs of an ever-growing elderly population and the demands of an NHS already failing to keep up with innovation. Inaction is not passive. There are real consequences to the SNP's failure to address the needs of the health service. Waiting time guarantees are so often broken as to be meaningless and stories of desperately ill patients forced to wait on trolleys in corridors while medics struggle to deal with intolerable workloads are routine. So Wes Streeting was quite right, this week, to take the gloves off and start throwing punches. More commonly, minister-on-minister attacks emanate from Edinburgh. The SNP is never more alive than when it is pointing out the stupidity and moral vacuity of the Unionist foe. And it is never more brittle than when a nerve is struck. They don't like it up 'em. Not one bit. The new NHS App stands to make life considerably easier for patients in England and Wales and it is certainly true that Scotland should not be lagging behind. But the SNP's failure when it comes to NHS runs far deeper and wider. While ministers preened and blustered about a second independence referendum, they neglected the health service. In election campaign after election campaign, they promised waiting and treatment targets that could, and would, never be met. And when these failures caught up with ministers, they created a new law, guaranteeing targets would be met (Laughably, no sanction was written into this law so it may be broken with impunity. Which, given the current state of the NHS, is just as well). Over the past 18 years, the SNP has brought Scotland's NHS to its knees. Wes Streeting's criticisms were entirely justified. But pointing out problems is not enough. If Scottish Labour is to win back voters' trust over the NHS, it will have to start - just as the SNP did two decades ago - telling a positive story of what it would do differently.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Neil Gray blasted for 'disgusting spin' on worst cancer wait times ever recorded
Neil Gray has been accused of a 'grotesque' attempt to 'spin' the worst ever cancer waiting times by hiding behind a statistic now exposed as another record failure. The SNP health secretary was urged to apologise yesterday after his 'crass' and 'desperate' bid to distract the public was revealed by the Lib Dems. The row blew up as Mr Gray faced further criticism over the Government's apparent inability to get a grip on waiting times in A&E. Public Health Scotland reported almost a third of patients waiting too long to be seen in casualty units last week barely changed from the week before. Mr Gray came under intense criticism last month when it emerged Scotland's NHS recorded its worst cancer waiting times in the first three months of 2025. Since 2016, the target has been for 95 per cent of patients referred with an urgent suspicion of cancer to start treatment within 62 days. But between January and March a record low of just 68.9 per cent were treated on time, down from 73.5 per cent the previous quarter. Mr Gray chose to lead a healthcare trade mission to Japan when the data was published, leading to claims he was 'missing in action' on a 'junket'. But he did issue a statement drawing attention to a different cancer statistic - which has now caused a second outcry. 'The median wait for urgent suspicion of cancer referral to treatment is 52 days, demonstrating the extensive work by staff across Scotland to treat people as quickly and effectively as possible,' he said. But official data has revealed this was a record high, up from 49 days the previous quarter, and from 41 days when records began in 2016. The median is the central point in a set of numbers. Scottish Lib Dem leader Alex Cole-Hamilton said: 'The SNP are fast running out of excuses. 'It is grotesque and dangerously misleading for the Health Secretary to suggest that the average wait of 52 days shows progress, when that too is the worst on record. 'This kind of desperate and irresponsible political spin does nothing to bring down waits. The Health Secretary ought to apologise to patients.' Tory public health spokesman Brian Whittle said: 'It is appalling that Neil Gray doubled down on trying to paint the worst cancer waiting times on record in a better light. 'His attempts to distract from the SNP's record-breaking failure is crass and deeply insulting to suffering patients. He should be focused on saving lives, not saving face. 'Under the SNP, cancer care is in crisis and no amount of PR can mask their shocking neglect of Scotland's health service.' But in response, Mr Gray refused to apologise and effectively repeated his original spin. He said: 'We want to improve cancer waiting times and we know some people are waiting too long. 'The median wait from urgent suspicion of cancer referral to treatment is 52 days, and once a decision has been taken to treat somebody, the median wait for that treatment to begin is three days. This demonstrates the extensive work by staff across Scotland to treat people as quickly and effectively as possible.' New data yesterday also showed A&E waits improved in the week to June 29, with 67.6 per cent of patients seen within the four-hour target, up from 67.3 per cent the previous week. Waits of over eight and 12 hours also fell by around 0.5 per centage points. But the marginal gains were only achieved after patient numbers slumped 9.3 per cent. Mr Gray said the numbers were 'moving in the right direction'. Tory MSP Dr Sandesh Gulhane said the health secretary was 'burying his head in the sand'. Scottish Labour deputy Dame Jackie Baillie added: 'The reality is that John Swinney and the SNP have no meaningful plan, no strategy, and no ideas to save our NHS.'
Glasgow Times
3 hours ago
- Glasgow Times
Fake AI biographies of SNP leaders removed from Amazon
The books were first spotted on the retail giant's website by The Times and included a host of errors, including a book – John Swinney: Scotland's Education Architect by Brendy Beauty – claiming the First Minister was born in America to a Polish mother called Kazimiera and falsely claiming that Humza Yousaf's father is called 'Mohammed'. Amazon is apparently removing the books from its site, including a further biography of former first minister Nicola Sturgeon, which claimed her family 'placed a high cost on education, difficulty painting and public service' and that her 'mom' became a 'nearby press flesher'. READ MORE: 'We apologise': Latest on Glasgow City Council's cyber attack READ MORE: 18 road safety schemes to be installed in Glasgow streets - what we know There are now growing fears about the influence of AI on the 2026 Scottish Parliament election – with fake AI biographies during Canada's election earlier this year leading to rampant disinformation on social media Sam Stockwell, a research associate for the Centre for Emerging Technology and Security at the Alan Turing Institute in London, told The Times: 'As generative AI becomes more accessible, many users can now automate professionalised descriptions and even full-length books of politicians using the immense amount of data these tools scrape from the internet on such individuals. 'Since text also lacks more obvious cues compared to videos or images which allow users to determine whether it is authentic or generated by AI, there is a risk that these AI-generated biographies could have a more persuasive effect on those who read them.' He added: 'With Scottish elections looming next year, one of the main concerns here is that threat actors [people or entities causing harm via the internet] could seek to undermine the reputation of political candidates by uploading fake biographies which include harmful, fabricated claims. 'Perhaps most worryingly, an absence of any labels or information indicating that these texts are AI-generated makes it more challenging for users to be aware of when they may be consuming such content.' (Image: Jacob King/PA Wire) Morgan Currie, a lecturer in data and society at the University of Edinburgh, said: 'Amazon clearly needs better mechanisms for catching 'AI slop' biographies, of political figures or otherwise, and [to] swiftly act when they are reported. 'They stand to benefit from anyone naively downloading or buying something like this, and they are partly culpable for any political harms that could come from it. 'My worry is less about upcoming elections than about the more low-grade, slow erosion of general civic literacy, especially if these works become more sophisticated. 'For example, I notice that the John Swinney biography is geared towards young people. It has a stated reading age at 14 to 18 years old, so there is a chance that young people will purchase material like this and learn and propagate erroneous information from it.' She added: 'It does raise the threat here that inaccurate AI slop could become data that future AI recursively learns from, with the potential to perpetuate falsehoods through self-training. 'We already know that Russian propaganda is being deliberately formatted to corrupt Gen AI models. 'You could see these biographies being similarly churned out and weaponised for political purposes.' In response, Amazon said: 'We have content guidelines governing which books can be listed for sale, and we have proactive and reactive methods that help us detect content that violates our guidelines, whether AI-generated or not. We invest significant time and resources to ensure our guidelines are followed, and remove books that do not adhere to those guidelines.' The Scottish Government said: 'This is not an accredited biography of the first minister and many of the claims in this book are untrue. 'People should be aware of the risk of misinformation and disinformation online.'
