SCOTTISH people can be proud of the groundbreaking, world-leading Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003.It ensures reasonable access for all those on foot, bicycle or other non-motorised means. The legislation also required local authorities to consult widely to establish core path networks.

These formalise and protect where people are wont to go. Core paths are also included in urban areas, which shows the wide application of the act. The success of its powerful, widespread rights, governed by its code of practice, require the constant vigilance of the access forums working to protect them from ongoing challenges.

Core paths give an opportunity for motor vehicle-free passage but are not cycleway networks, as such. Many more people would like to cycle locally in towns and cities if it wasn’t for the fear of motor traffic.

Glasgow’s Strategic Plan for Cycling 2016-2025 has fine objectives for the city but a lack of progress providing segregated cycleways on central roads means its ambitions will not be met. Piggybacking on core paths, even with considerate behaviour between cyclists and pedestrians, cannot be a substitute for good cycle facilities.

Sauchiehall Street avenue treatment to the western half is now due. The design gives cyclists, pedestrians and reduced motor traffic their own parts of the streetscape. It will be interesting to see how this compares to the eastern end core path with its mixed use between foot and bike, but no motor vehicles.

Meanwhile, a simple and inexpensive way to allow cycling to flourish in Glasgow city centre could be to have some test try-outs. These would use temporary segregation, as with roadwork dividers. They could quickly establish latent demand for all sorts of cycling, show up any difficulties with the arrangement and, if unsuitable, be taken down. The processes of consultations, detailed design and fund raising could then follow, knowing that the suitable build work had already been shown to be a success.

Peter Hayman, 70 Ingram Street, Glasgow.

IT IS interesting to follow the correspondence of Ken Sutherland on Crossrail and Transport Scotland`s intransigence and Robert D Campbell pleading for rail, bus and ferry integration (Letters, August 7&8).

We had a single line rail track in Dunlop. Following its upgrade we were originally promised a half-hour rail service by all the parties, Scottish Office, Network Rail and the then rail operator. However, as the work was approaching completion, Transport Scotland called a village meeting with Dunlop and with Kilmaurs: our stations would not get the full half-hour service but, on the same line, Stewarton and Kilmarnock could. As it turned out, a spurious reason was advanced as to why.

Kilmaurs, Dunlop and Lugton community councils worked together to challenge the explanation. Both the operator and Network Rail accepted there was no problem as described, but no change came from Transport Scotland.

It concluded with a face-to-face meeting with the then Scottish transport minister and, all the time, Transport Scotland maintained it could not be done. It was overruled by the minister and the half-hour service came to our two communities.

With regard to Ken Sutherland`s point about park and ride (by train that is, bringing in Robert Campbell`s point about full transport integration), this is exceedingly complex because of the 1984 Transport Act set up with the aim of making bus and rail compete. A Strathclyde total integration scheme (road, rail and bus) in the Johnstone area was illegal and thus abandoned.

Each train through, at four an hour each way, can easily carry 250 passengers. Doing the arithmetic and even allowing for lower per train figures, a car park that cannot handle the demand for spaces is no replacement for a direct, dedicated bus link to and from the station, with single ticketing as well.

I live in hope that the clock can somehow go back and we can have transit systems as they operate in most countries.

John A Taylor, 19 The Fieldings, Dunlop.

YOUR correspondent Robert Campbell correctly points out some of the difficulties concerning bus services in the Loch Lomond area.

To these I would add the inability of buses to park at Balmaha due to private cars parking in the bus bays. Apart from painting “buses/coaches” on one side only of the bus bays (which instruction is generally ignored), Stirling Council does nothing to ensure bus bays are kept for buses.

Nor is it willing to police the matter. What is needed is for the entire bus parking area to be marked with yellow hatching, the “buses only” to be painted in each bay and all round and a couple of poles with signs on them, warning of penalties for improper use of bus bays. My email of last year to Stirling Council on this matter remains unanswered.

Scott Macintosh, 4 Alder Crescent, Killearn, Stirlingshire.

AM I the only person being denied natural justice? On December 20 last year I parked correctly in Lillybank Gardens, Glasgow. I bought a ticket and displayed it on my windscreen.

When I returned to the car I found a penalty charge notice on my windscreen. My ticket had fallen off the windscreen and landed on the floor of my car.

I assumed (incorrectly) that a simple letter of explanation and a photocopy of the ticket would have been enough to explain what had happened.

How wrong I was. Some seven months later and an appeal to the independent adjudicator and I am still forced to pay a fine of £60.

What did I do wrong? How many others have suffered the same fate from Glasgow City Council?

Patrick Boyle, 7 Parkway, Kildrum, Cumbernauld.

DUNCAN Miller’s well-thought-out proposals about elderly drivers avoiding motorways fall, I am afraid, at the last hurdle (Letters, August 8).

I am in my 80s and I can think of very few friends of my vintage who have smartphones and tablets, and none who would have, or know how to operate, the “simple satnav” app available on these devices.

I wonder, too, whether using such a device while driving brings one into conflict with the law on using mobile phones. I refer, of course, not to built-in satnav devices.

David Miller, 80 Prestonfield, Milngavie.