Seòmar agus comataidhean

The impact is still to be assessed. I see that it is operating and I have no difficulty with it, but it is not the main issue that we are dealing with just now.

My first answer was clear that where there are opportunities in terms of track access, open access has worked. It has, in many cases, replaced services that have been withdrawn, but it is a different operating model, a different pricing model and has a different position. The UK Government can do that for particular reasons. It is not an area that I have had discussions with the UK Government about, so I am just saying that the jury is out on it, but the way that it has operated to date has helped to use existing track availability.

The other thing to let the committee know is that we obviously have the new climate change plan, which the committee will consider. As I have told you before, we will have to refresh the decarbonisation plan, which we will do, and it will come shortly after the climate change plan because we have to align it with that.

In terms of where we are now, I cannot get into the detail of carriages yet. If there is anything that I can follow up on about where that sits within the 2022 commitment, I will be happy to do so. It sits in our wider plans for Scottish rail. As I said, we are already taking action. Barrhead is electrified and work on East Kilbride is commencing, which will have an interchange and so on. Obviously, there are challenges elsewhere.

Seventy-five per cent of passenger journeys are currently on electric trains, which is good. However, you were talking about numbers of trains. Again, there is an interplay. Since public ownership, there has been a 7 per cent increase in the number of passenger seats. When it comes to 200 journeys operating to full timetable, we acknowledge that we are not currently doing that.

I undertake to ensure that the point is made to the UK ministers and that they are asked whether they can identify how the costs will be met.

On the more substantive point, which is about how we get efficiency out of Network Rail and deliver value for money for the £4.2 billion that the Scottish Government is contributing over CP7, I have already made arrangements to meet the ORR biannually. I will meet its board to ensure that the ORR ensures that Network Rail delivers. The ORR is the regulator to ensure that we get value for money and delivery. That is the substantive mechanism to ensure that Network Rail delivers. I have, if anything, intensified my discussions with the ORR.

I am sure that the people at ScotRail are avid watchers of the committee’s meetings. We will make sure that we draw to their attention your concerns and those of Mr Simpson about ticketing.

I will try to answer the question, but I remind everyone that we are in the pre-election period and that whatever happens will depend on the UK Government election. I expect that whoever will form the next UK Government will introduce rail reform legislation.

On the proposed establishment of Great British railways, I would just note that on the day that the election was called, just before I went over to Arrochar for the meeting about the Rest and Be Thankful, I was giving evidence to the select Transport Committee at Westminster on what was the Rail Reform Bill. I think that all political parties at UK level are interested in having an integrated rail body. Alex Hynes, who previously headed up Network Rail and ScotRail, was seconded to take that forward. Obviously, we will have to wait to see what happens after the election.

I am sure that the committee clerks can liaise with the Transport Committee on this, but I and Huw Merriman, who was a UK transport minister at the time, were the last to give evidence on the matter, and my understanding is that the committee was going to produce a curtailed report. The evidence that I gave will be on the record, as will Mr Merriman’s. I understand that the Labour Party, too, has made statements on the matter. I do not want to go any further than that.

What I will say—I have written this in previous correspondence—is that I do not think that the devolved areas were being protected as much as they could and should have been protected. I will remind the clerks about this, but I think that I have already given the committee copies of my correspondence to the UK Government on my concerns about the bill. That said, I am probably skating into territory that I should not skate further into.

Let us see where we get to in terms of the process.

The Scottish Government’s preference has always been for greater devolution of rail powers to Scotland.

It would probably be wise, convener, to return to that question when we know the formation of the new UK Government and what will happen to the bill. However, I suspect that, whatever party forms the UK Government, the principle of that bill will advance in some shape or form.

I have reflected on that point previously. There are changes in public transport use for both bus and rail: weekends are becoming more popular for leisure reasons, and we have had a period with lots of storms, which can affect people’s use. We anticipated that spring might have been a better time to assess where things were, which is why we extended the pilot to March.

As you read the report, you will see that the figures are slightly down for the spring period. We are not quite sure whether that is weather related—we do not know and I do not want to assume that—but you will see that in the full report. In the meantime, I ask Fiona Brown to answer the question about when to survey people and why.

I think that there is a case to be made for both.

I have listened to others in the ferry sector, not least the ferries community board. I think that a strategic link, with Transport Scotland ferry officials joining CMAL, as was set out in the ferries community board project Neptune report, has merit. I reiterate that I was not involved in signing off the final report, but I responded as Minister for Transport, before I became cabinet secretary. There are a number of key steps that we have to take in all the ferry process areas. I took the decision to move on the CHFS contract, which affects CalMac in particular.

Over many years prior to this, I have been involved in other portfolios that involved reorganising and bringing together different bodies. That clearly presents a level of disruption, and it is happening here at a time when we are bringing in six new ferries and are about to go into procurement for the small vessel replacement. There is an issue with timing.

With regard to the process, sorting the CHFS contract is a priority. You know that we have had to delay that, convener; I have written to the committee—