The final item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S6M-17754, in the name of Miles Briggs, on the A720 Sheriffhall roundabout. The debate will be concluded without any question being put. I invite members who wish to participate to press their request-to-speak buttons, and I call Miles Briggs to open the debate.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes with concern the reported ongoing delay to progress towards a new grade separated junction on the A720 Edinburgh City Bypass at Sheriffhall; understands that a public local inquiry was carried out in early 2023, with results reviewed by an independent reporter and delivered to the Scottish Government in early 2024; further understands that the report has been under active consideration by the Scottish Ministers for over a year; believes that motorists using the Edinburgh City Bypass have been subjected to hours of unnecessary congestion due to delays in delivering the A720 Sheriffhall roundabout, since funding was committed in 2018 as part of the Edinburgh and South East Scotland City Region Deal; notes the calls for the Scottish Ministers to prioritise what it sees as this crucial infrastructure project, which, it understands, motorists in the south east of Scotland have been waiting seven years for; understands that the upgrade was originally priced at £120 million; notes the calls on ministers to urgently update the Parliament on the full details of any additional costs for the development of the junction due to the length of time that it has taken to progress it, and further notes the view that it is strategically important to make the improvements on the A720 Edinburgh City Bypass at Sheriffhall, to help deliver improvements to infrastructure that will support local and national economic growth.
19:00
Thank you, Deputy Presiding Officer. I have red lights flashing up on my screen here—sadly, that is very much like the Sheriffhall roundabout.
I thank colleagues across the chamber for supporting my motion and allowing the debate to take place. As those members who were in Parliament in 2018 will know, this is not my first speech on the Sheriffhall roundabout—or indeed on the Edinburgh city bypass; I have been campaigning on the issue throughout my entire parliamentary career.
The Sheriffhall roundabout, for those unfamiliar with it, is the only at-grade junction on the Edinburgh city bypass, and it is a notorious bottleneck where commuters who are heading to work, people who are visiting family members and loved ones and businesses that are transporting goods regularly face gridlock.
A solution, in the form of a flyover to separate local and through traffic, was agreed as part of the 2018 Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal, a £1.6 billion partnership between the Scottish and United Kingdom Governments. With an initial allocation of £120 million, the project promised that there would finally be smoother journeys and safer roads for Lothian and the surrounding region.
Sheriffhall has been steeped in controversy from the very beginning. Forty years ago, when the roundabout was being constructed, many people—including people who worked on the original planning of the road, whom I have met—made it clear that a roundabout was not appropriate for the bypass and would cause congestion.
Seventeen years ago, in 2008, an upgrade to the junction was first flagged as a priority as part of the Scottish Government’s strategic transport projects review. It then took 10 years for the Government to commit funding to the project. In the seven years since that funding was committed, however, absolutely nothing has been done to alleviate the needless waste of time and money that commuters face every day, as well as the pollution that is caused.
In 2020, a Scottish Green Party review brought the little progress that had been made to a screeching halt when it objected on environmental grounds. The Greens have branded the proposed flyover “a spaghetti junction”, but it is unclear whether they think that traffic sitting stationary in traffic jams on the bypass, with drivers now opting to cut through the city centre to avoid that traffic, is better for our environment than cleanly flowing traffic that is confined to the outskirts of the city.
Nonetheless, a public inquiry on the matter in 2023 pushed ministerial approval back even further. A decision was expected a year ago, yet it remains, as the Cabinet Secretary for Transport has said, “under active consideration”. Twelve months without a decision is not consideration—it is dither and delay. Last week, I asked the cabinet secretary whether Scottish National Party ministers would finally commit to the project before the election in 2026. However, after nearly 20 years, and more than £6 million in consultation fees, we have seen no further progress.
The frustration is felt, as I know, by MSPs from all parties who represent the area in Parliament; by businesses in the city and in neighbouring communities; and, as we saw at the meeting of the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal joint committee just last week, by the commuting public. I know that representatives of all parties who sit on the joint committee are really frustrated, and the committee’s members were—rightly—outraged when Transport Scotland refused even to attend its meeting. Furthermore, the committee expressed its embarrassment at having been made to look ineffectual by ministers who keep delaying a decision on the Sheriffhall upgrade, which is—let us remember—the region’s key flagship transport project.
As a Lothian MSP, I continue to be contacted by exasperated constituents, who cannot understand why such an obvious infrastructure problem has not been resolved. However, it is not only an Edinburgh issue. As my colleagues will confirm, and as the joint committee has highlighted, the A720 is integral to the economy of not only the surrounding south-east region but the whole of Scotland.
I go back to what I said in my previous debate on the subject: Edinburgh and the south-east of Scotland form one of the key growth areas of our economy, and we need to ensure that there is investment in the right infrastructure—in this case, the Sheriffhall junction. Gridlocked trunk roads are bad for the economy and create a poor impression for inward investors and those who want to visit our area. Lothian has the fastest-growing population in Scotland; indeed, it will account for 84 per cent of Scotland’s predicted population growth over the period to 2033. Edinburgh alone is growing at nearly three times the rate of the Scottish average, and its economy reflects that. However, if we want to sustain that growth, we must ensure that our infrastructure is future proofed.
A 2016 report, “Europe’s Traffic Hotspots: Measuring the impact of congestion in Europe”, by INRIX, a transport information company, identified the bypass as the most congested trunk road outside London, with four of the UK’s worst bottlenecks located on the A720. The report predicted that the 455 traffic hotspots in Edinburgh, of which the bypass was the worst, would cost the Scottish economy as much as £2.8 billion by this year alone.
As I have mentioned, the initial budget for the project was £120 million, but, with inflation, it is now likely to exceed that and will reach a figure between £200 million and £300 million. We do not know how much it will cost overall; indeed, my colleague Colin Beattie asked about this last week, and did not get a response. We need to hear that from ministers.
Worse still, £6.4 million has been spent on consultants for designs that, six years afterwards, remain on paper. That is public money—my constituents’ money—-that has been wasted, while the road remains clogged. More than 75,000 vehicles already use the bypass every day, and Transport Scotland’s modelling predicts that it will be being used by 102,000 vehicles a day by 2037.
East Lothian and Midlothian are both home to major house-building projects. As more and more homes are built, the pressure on transport infrastructure will only grow, so delaying the upgrade of the Sheriffhall junction risks making the situation worse for all those involved.
We must not forget that there is also a safety issue to be considered at the heart of this. Sheriffhall’s current design, whereby local and through traffic collide at a single level, is a recipe for danger, and accidents and near misses are frequent. The proposed flyover should separate those flows, reduce congestion and improve sight lines.
I am grateful to the many constituents who have signed up to my campaign and have expressed to me their concerns and ideas. I acknowledge that the Sheriffhall junction is not the only problem on the A720; the entire road is inadequate for our growing capital city, and a wider review is needed. It is clear to anyone who uses the road that we need significant investment at the Gogarburn and Newcraighall roundabouts, too. A truly strategic transport system would also improve the sustainability of transport options as part of that wider investment.
SNP transport ministers have allowed this key transport project to stall. The sad truth is that despite those ministers—many of whom I have met with over the period—saying that the upgrade of Sheriffhall is a priority for Government, it has not been taken forward. Even when the money has been committed and consultations have taken place, the stalling has continued.
I have a lot of time for the cabinet secretary, but I know that members across the chamber will share my frustration at the lack of progress to deliver the upgrade to the Sheriffhall roundabout. I hope that tonight’s debate will get the project back on track and get the upgrade the green light—finally—so that we can take forward this most important strategic transport investment for the Lothian region.
Moreover, I hope that the cabinet secretary, in responding to the debate, can take forward a number of suggestions and provide answers to the following questions. First, why it is taking so long for a decision to be made by ministers, who have had the report for over a year now? Secondly, will she agree to a cross-party meeting to try to get the project taken forward as soon as possible? Thirdly, can she give an assurance that a decision will be taken before the end of the current session of Parliament?
Finally, I thank all those members who are going to speak in the debate, and I look forward to hearing their contributions.
We move to the open debate.
19:09
I congratulate the member on securing the debate.
Way back before the Sheriffhall roundabout was born, City of Edinburgh District Council rejected, pre-construction, the proposal for an inbuilt underpass to future proof the roundabout, advising that it was not worth the cost. How much easier it would have been had that proposal gone ahead—but that was then, and this is now.
It is some considerable time since I first raised my concerns about the Sheriffhall roundabout, which is a major link into and out of the Borders and Midlothian by way of the A7. It is also used by cars travelling eastwards to the Borders and the A68, although there is now, off the city bypass, a slip lane to the A68. Incidentally, Midlothian is one of the fastest-growing areas in Scotland; one need only take a trip around it to see the number of homes.
For more than 20 years, I have, as an MSP, used the roundabout regularly in travelling to and from my constituency, and I have found that, during those 20-plus years, traffic has worsened, with long tailbacks earlier and earlier in the day.
In 2018, the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal, to which Miles Briggs referred and which had funding from both the UK and Scottish Governments, put forward a proposal for grade separation, with a flyover across the Edinburgh city bypass, taking the A702 north, at a cost at the time of £120 million.
I traced my first question on the subject back to 2017, and another to 10 November 2022, when the then minister responsible confirmed that the project was progressing, and that the public inquiry was set for 30 January 2023. In a later debate, I stressed the issue of the unsafe conditions for cyclists and pedestrians, as the roundabout is known to cyclists as the “meat grinder”. Indeed, I have rarely seen a cyclist navigating the roundabout—and no wonder. Heaven help us if there were to be an accident at the roundabout; apart from human tragedy, we would have traffic seize to a stop in all directions on all the feeder roads into Edinburgh and beyond.
Although the delay was due in part to the 2,773 objections that were lodged, I found it—and still find it—extraordinary that the Greens have always opposed the improvement. Just recently, Lorna Slater, speaking on behalf of the Greens on 15 January this year at the Economy and Fair Work Committee, referred to it as “a dinosaur”, as she considered that it conflicted with Scotland’s climate goals, such as the aim to reduce car travel by 20 per cent.
The Greens’ criticism is misplaced. It is, apparently, no matter to them that buses from the Borders and Midlothian, and the lorries that are delivering goods to and from those areas, use that route and the roundabout because they have to do so, as the Borders railway cannot carry freight. That is not to mention the police, ambulance and fire and rescue services travelling on those roads. Indeed, in the proposed design, there was to be—and there will be—a cycle and pedestrian walkway, which I think is actually very green. Instead, we have lines of vehicles spurting out exhaust fumes as they queue for the light sequences to change. That is hardly good for the environment, and hardly green.
The public inquiry has concluded and, although I know that the Scottish Government remains committed to its £120 million contribution to the project that was announced in 2018, it remains a fact that the independent report has been in the Government’s hands for more than a year and there has been—to some extent—radio silence.
These are my concerns. Delay is annoying enough, but there is also the inevitable inflation of costs for which the Scottish Government will be liable. The £120 million contribution is fixed; it is predicted that the cost will possibly be £200 million, but, going on the cost of past capital projects, I really think that that is optimistic.
So, where are we with the project? I support Miles Briggs and others, and if the Government could give us—and my constituents—an idea of progress, I would like to hear it before I retire next year. Thank you.
I call Sue Webber.
19:14
You caught me unawares, Deputy Presiding Officer. I was clapping vociferously, not for Ms Grahame’s retirement, but for wanting to get a decision on Sheriffhall.
I thank my colleague, Miles Briggs, for bringing the debate to the chamber. Sheriffhall roundabout has been a long-standing problem, yet it remains neglected by SNP ministers, after more than 15 years and millions of pounds spent on planning.
The Sheriffhall roundabout has cost Lothian residents countless hours in traffic and millions of pounds. A much-needed upgrade to the notorious junction has been discussed since 2008, but there has been no tangible progress in that time, despite the £6 million that has been spent on consultants.
More than 75,000 vehicles use the bypass every day, and that figure is set to increase, given that Lothian has the fastest-growing population in Scotland and is forecast to account for 84 per cent of Scotland’s predicted population growth over the period to 2033. That includes Midlothian, East Lothian and all the local authority areas surrounding Edinburgh.
Under the SNP-Green Scottish Government, the project totally stalled. The fact is that this key piece of infrastructure brings the Edinburgh bypass to a standstill every rush hour, and if the junction were to be successfully upgraded, it would hugely benefit people across Edinburgh and the Lothian region.
It is only seven years since the Edinburgh city region deal was signed, with the support of all the local authorities and the Scottish and UK Governments. That deal is worth £1.6 billion, and the agreement should really accelerate economic growth and prosperity, but the one element that has been missing is the upgrading of the Sheriffhall junction.
As we have heard, a flyover solution was proposed by Transport Scotland, and it should be progressing. Designs for that much-needed flyover are available and funding has been put in place but, seven years on, we are no further forward, because the Scottish Government and the City of Edinburgh Council have been in thrall to the Green Party’s anti-car agenda.
A review of the project was ordered in 2020, when Edinburgh’s SNP-Labour administration was, frankly, drunk with power during lockdown and was blocking streets and narrowing roads in a hidden agenda to make driving as difficult as possible. Having already accepted the need for improvement in the city deal, the SNP Scottish Government then bent to the Green Party’s will by agreeing to the public inquiry in 2023.
Earlier this year, the Sheriffhall overarching objectors group—ShOO—got the Scottish Government to hold a public local inquiry, following the submission of 2,771 objections to the scheme’s draft orders. It has come to light that, according to Transport Scotland, a high proportion of those objections, which sparked the hearing, were submitted through the Scottish Green Party website. The resulting report was delivered to SNP ministers a year ago, and since then, there has been nothing, apart from the fact that we now know that £6.4 million has been spent on consultants to produce designs. We are no further forward.
In fact, Transport Scotland failed to appear at last week’s city region deal committee meeting to provide an essential update on the continued delay in progressing the Sheriffhall upgrade.
It is worth noting, for the record, that there are no Scottish Greens in the chamber to listen to this debate.
They might well be watching online, working from home or something—I am not sure—but they should be here, because, frankly, they are at fault for causing the delay.
The delay is having a massive impact on the south-east of Scotland’s economy. It is impacting on 42,000 vehicles a day, with commuters being delayed an average of 30 minutes a day. As Christine Grahame rightly said, having cars spurting out those fumes is hardly green. After successive delays caused by the opposition of the Greens and the complacency of the SNP, it is time for the Government to commit to a deadline and a budget for the project before costs spiral further out of control.
My colleague Miles Briggs has launched an online petition calling for work to start without further delay, and I hope that it persuades the cabinet secretary to really get a move on. There is only one year left in this parliamentary session, Ms Hyslop, and I would be delighted if we were able to sign off by delivering something of genuine benefit to Edinburgh, the Lothians and the Borders.
Always speak through the chair.
19:18
I join members in congratulating Miles Briggs on bringing this issue to the chamber.
Anyone who uses the A720 city bypass for commuting or travel will agree on its importance. However, they, like me, will have spent hours in slow-moving, congested traffic, faced frustration at longer journey times and wondered why no progress has been made on delivering a grade-separated junction at Sheriffhall roundabout.
It has been clear for a while that change is needed. Sheriffhall was named Scotland’s most dangerous roundabout and topped the roundabout league of shame in 2019. Midlothian and East Lothian are Scotland’s fastest-growing local authority areas, and their populations are expected to grow by 15 per cent and 7 per cent, respectively. That will bring more cars, more congestion and more accidents, if nothing changes.
The A720 is also a strategically important road for Scotland’s economy. It connects Edinburgh with our largest trading partners in England; it also connects to one of our busiest cargo airports, Edinburgh airport. We must ensure that our infrastructure is a positive factor in driving growth and we must enable people and goods to move freely and easily. Upgrading Sheriffhall will enable that to happen over the coming decades, as tens of thousands of people will continue to use the bypass and junctions, even as we progress to net zero.
The motion notes that
“motorists ... have been waiting seven years”
for construction to begin, but the need for a flyover was first identified in the 2008 strategic transport projects review. The same point was made then: a flyover will contribute to road safety and reduce emissions. The proposals that ministers are considering will not only achieve those goals, but allow work on the proposed extension of Edinburgh tram and orbital bus routes to progress. Active travel is also included in the proposals. However, those things cannot happen if progress is not made.
I recognise that the process must be followed, but it is not acceptable that seven years have passed since a commitment was made, with no spades in the ground or timeline decided. There is also now doubt over the £120 million costing.
All this speaks to a wider issue with a planning system that is holding Scotland back and undermining investment in all areas of our economy. We are discussing Sheriffhall today, but we have to be clear that it is by no means an isolated case.
Today, I am hoping for transparency from the Scottish Government on funding. I want the Government to reaffirm its commitment to the project and, for safety, the economy and road users, commit to a timeline for its completion.
19:22
I am pleased to be able to speak on this important issue and I congratulate my colleague Miles Briggs on securing the debate. I commend him for launching his campaign to finally deliver the much-needed upgrades to the Sheriffhall roundabout. The continued delay to those upgrades is unacceptable, and the impact on residents, commuters and businesses increases every year.
As we have heard, more than 75,000 vehicles use the Edinburgh bypass every day. With Lothian still seeing rapid population growth, that number is only going to get higher. It is vitally important that we get a solution—the need for one is becoming more urgent.
It is, however, clear that the project is, and has been for some time, low on the Government’s priority list. As Miles Briggs’s motion notes, we have been waiting for years for Transport Scotland to provide a flyover solution, and the problems at Sheriffhall are being exacerbated because of the length of time that the project is taking.
We have known about the issue for decades, with numerous MSPs talking about a flyover over many parliamentary sessions. However, although the issue was first brought to the SNP’s attention during its first year in government, the project still has not progressed as we want it to. We also know that £6 million has already been spent on consultants’ fees alone, without getting a solution—a complete and utter waste of time, effort and money.
The situation continues to cause issues across Edinburgh. In addition, commuters from across the central belt and the south-east of Scotland have their journeys disrupted at Sheriffhall, and it is a constant bottleneck for those who are travelling north from the rest of the UK.
The failure to address the situation is hardly surprising, because the SNP Government’s record on transport infrastructure is not good. Countless other road projects have been left stuck in the slow lane by the SNP Government, and Sheriffhall continues to be one of them.
The Scottish Government has failed to upgrade important rural roads, including the A77, the A75, the A96 and, in my region, the A9. Elsewhere, those using the A83 at the Rest and Be Thankful are still facing disruption. It is a pattern that we see time and time again. We need to look at all the projects that are not being delivered because we want to see what is happening.
I agree with a lot of what Alexander Stewart says, but we did build a third bridge over the Forth, and we built the Borders railway, after decades of dither and delay by the UK Government. Although I am prepared to criticise my Government, it is not the case that it has done nothing in transport that is worth while. That is very unfair.
I thank the member for her intervention and I acknowledge what she says. However, when a party is in government, it is there to provide as much as possible for the whole community, not just parts of the community. The Sheriffhall roundabout has become a disappointing saga, with promises being broken again and again. It is now nearly two years since the independent reporter submitted recommendations to Scottish ministers, but we are still tied up with bureaucracy.
The debate has shown clear cross-party support for the action that is required. I can only hope that the Scottish Government is willing to listen.
Progress on Sheriffhall is long overdue, and it is time for the SNP to stop sitting back and waiting. It must deliver, even if that means that it has to be dragged kicking and screaming to make the right decision—to deliver the roundabout upgrade for communities.
19:26
I thank Miles Briggs for raising this issue and for doing so in a constructive way. His case has been somewhat destroyed by Alexander Stewart, though, who did not acknowledge the support that the Scottish Government has successfully given to considerable road projects, not least the Queensferry crossing; the Aberdeen western peripheral route; the M8 raised interchange; the short, medium and long-term developments that are being prepared for the A83; and the investments in the A77 and the A75. Alexander Stewart does not help to persuade me in favour of his case and give a constructive response when he hijacks the reasonable and articulate case that has been made by other members in relation to something that we must consider in the round, following due process.
I have listened carefully to the range of points that have been made during the debate and I would like to reassure members of the Government’s commitment to improving transport infrastructure across the country, including in Edinburgh and the south-east of Scotland, building on our strong delivery record. Notably, 2025 marks 10 years since the Government reopened the Borders railway line, after its being closed for nearly 50 years. That has increased accessibility, economic growth and social benefits for the region. Additionally, 17 years ago, the Government completed construction of the nearby Dalkeith bypass, bringing relief to towns and settlements along that route.
I would also like to reassure members that I am fully aware of the challenges and frustrations faced by all users at the Sheriffhall junction. I, too, have often made the journey along the city bypass and through the Sheriffhall roundabout. The standard of the junction has always been out of step with the rest of the Edinburgh city bypass, as Miles Briggs has pointed out—it is the only single-level junction on the bypass. However, that was a consequence of complexities arising from an underlying geological fault and historical mine workings, and it led at the time of construction to the choice of a roundabout rather than the grade-separated junctions used elsewhere on the bypass.
Following the opening of the Dalkeith bypass, Transport Scotland undertook a review of the junction, and that work, together with stakeholder input, highlighted a number of challenges in the existing junction’s operation. The first strategic transport projects review, published in 2008, confirmed that position and the need for improvements to the Sheriffhall junction.
Given that, as we have heard from Foysol Choudhury and others, the project is being taken forward through the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal, and given that it arose from the first strategic transport projects review, the scheme was not considered within the scope of the second strategic transport projects review appraisal. The STPR2 recommendations represented a repositioning of our wider transport investment priorities, with the focus firmly on how transport can help us protect our climate and improve lives while supporting the economy, but the review also recommended a number of road improvement interventions.
The most transformative of the review’s recommendations for the region is the development of a mass-transit system for Edinburgh and the south-east of Scotland. The recommendation is for an enhanced cross-boundary public transport system, potentially comprising tram, bus, rapid transit and bus priority measures, which will be relevant to Christine Grahame’s constituents in the Borders.
This point might be left field, but I have never understood why the park-and-ride facility is on the north side of the Sheriffhall roundabout and not on the south side. It means that people, when parking their cars, need to go around the roundabout to the park-and-ride facility before going into Edinburgh. The park-and-ride facility at the Penicuik end is on the south side of the road. The cabinet secretary might not have an answer to that, but I would like to know whether the facility could be moved.
Christine Grahame makes an important point. It was before my time, so I will move on, but the logic of what she has said makes a lot of sense. We will consider what can be addressed in the future.
I recognise that, in addition to the recommendations in STPR2, improvements at Sheriffhall are a priority for regional partners, road users and local residents. The proposed improvements at Sheriffhall would provide a significant strategic contribution to the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal themes, including accelerating inclusive growth, removing physical barriers to growth and providing targeted employability and skills interventions. Improvements would also provide opportunities for greater levels of movement by public transport and, as we have heard from Christine Grahame and others, for pedestrians and cyclists, who would be able to traverse the junction more safely.
Although those benefits might be understood, we must recognise that there are other views and that ministers must follow a statutory process in which they have decision-making responsibilities that are separate from their responsibilities as a promoter. As we have heard, following publication of draft orders, Transport Scotland received 2,773 objections to the proposed scheme. As Transport Scotland was unable to resolve all objections that were received, a public local inquiry was held from 31 January to 8 February 2023, during which time an appointed independent reporter heard evidence from objectors and Transport Scotland. Following consideration of the objections that were received, the reporter submitted her conclusions and recommendations to the Scottish Government on 10 October 2023, and they remain under active consideration by my officials.
Ninety-seven per cent of the objections have been identified as coming from Green Party sources, but only 12 per cent of the Lothian population voted for that party at that point. Do you think that it is fair—
Speak through the chair.
Do you believe, cabinet secretary, that it is fair that the Green Party has hijacked that process?
First, I acknowledge that “you” refers to the Presiding Officer. Secondly, it is important that Sue Webber has put what she has said on the record, but I will not make a judgment on it.
It is only right that my officials take the appropriate time to consider the significant number of objections that were received, along with the conclusions and recommendations that the reporter made, prior to providing advice to ministers. I continue to await advice on the matter from my officials. Although I am keen to see progress being made, it is essential that we follow due process, because not doing so would be a risk. The statutory right for individuals and organisations to have their say on proposals and the need for ministers to take those matters into account before reaching a final determination cannot be set aside, as some have suggested.
Sheriffhall is being promoted on behalf of Scottish ministers by Transport Scotland, which is seeking to make road orders under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 and to acquire land under the Acquisition of Land (Authorisation Procedure) (Scotland) Act 1947. The 1984 act, under which the scheme is being promoted, requires me, as Cabinet Secretary for Transport, to make a decision at the end of the statutory process.
In excess of 1,200 pieces of evidence were lodged for the public local inquiry, and that evidence needs to be rigorously scrutinised by technical and legal advisers, who must be separate from those who have been involved in the promotion of the project. That is a time-consuming process, but it is necessary to ensure robust and well-reasoned decision making. I am very sympathetic to the frustrations about the length of time that the process is taking, but it is not possible, at this time, to give members the timeline that they understandably want.
If the project had progressed as part of the city deal, an upgraded roundabout would have opened this summer. There is concern that Transport Scotland is not engaging with the city deal partnership, which is frustrating for people who are actively working on the project, so will the cabinet secretary instruct Transport Scotland to attend the partnership’s meetings in the future?
I can give you the time back, cabinet secretary.
I was not aware that Transport Scotland had been invited to those meetings but had not attended them. There is a difference between the promoters and those who advise me on the matter, but I will actively look into that issue.
The Scottish Government continues to support the promotion of the grade separation of the Sheriffhall roundabout as part of its £300 million commitment to the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal. I recognise that the proposed scheme is a priority for regional partners, and my officials continue to progress it through the statutory authorisation process.
Although I recognise the need for due process, I will, when it is appropriate to do so, meet a cross-party group of MSPs with an interest in this very important development. I am fully aware of their interests on behalf of their constituents, as expressed in the debate.
That concludes the debate.
Meeting closed at 19:35.Air ais
Decision Time