Seòmar agus comataidhean

I think that that is her title—I do not want to mis-title her. We have engagement, but, by and large, the funding for transport will come from the budget that we currently hold in devolved areas.

We have more charging points per head of population than any other part of the UK outside the south-east of England, and we have more rapid chargers. I go back to the point about the geography of Scotland and the fact that the funding that has been provided for local authority consortiums has also been supplemented by rural and island EV funding.

I am suffering a bit.

There are two things. How do we take people with us? We need to get people to look at reducing their car use. Longer journeys contribute more to car kilometres. I would be better bringing in my officials to speak to the analysis of the data, but that is measured by agreed metrics that are used in Department for Transport assessments. Remember, I gave you the figure of 3.6 per cent reduction to date and that figure comes from using those data metrics. The issue then is that we cannot distil our individual policies on DFT metrics, if that makes sense. Does anyone want to help me on this?

I think that you asked whether we accept the report, and the report has recommendations on the job of Government. The Public Audit Committee does this all the time; its role is to look at what Audit Scotland is recommending. We are taking forward the recommendations in the report.

On the findings, I can question a number of issues. For example, there was consultation when the climate plan was produced in December 2020 that included that ambitious target. That ambitious target is the challenge. We had ambitious targets to try to reach.

On leadership, I have explained that there have been changes in leadership not only at Government level but at local government level. There has been a change in the cohort of councillors during the period.

Did we have a plan? Yes. We had the draft route map that was produced in February 2022. There was extensive consultation and involvement, including of the leadership of Transport Scotland, the relevant ministers and the relevant COSLA and local council representatives at that time, during that period for delivery.

All the things that can and could be done—such as developing guidance and the toolbox and all the things that we would expect as part of that—have been worked on and developed. However, the key issue is about getting approval for what is a bold and ambitious target to deliver on. Are we doing things to help deliver it? Yes. Have we provided leadership? Yes, we have.

Almost half, if not more, of the general public across Scotland have free access to buses through the most generous concession system. Are we ensuring that there is resource and funding in the budget to help with active travel and bus priorities in these difficult times? Yes, we are. The Government has done a variety of things to provide leadership.

To boil down to the specific issue of the ambitious target of reducing car kilometres, there were challenges in providing an agreed route map and delivery at all levels. The central issue is that the Government cannot do this on its own. I am not blaming local government at all—it has a place and perspective and is absolutely key to delivery. However, if local government is not comfortable with what is put in front of it, we have to respond to that.

Has that caused a delay with regard to the plan, the route map and so on? Yes, it has. Would we have a different route map if we are trying to achieve a 20 per cent reduction, whether that is in miles, kilometres or use, compared to what we would do to achieve what the Climate Change Committee has advised the UK Government? We are still awaiting the advice to Scotland but, if that changes, of course our route map and delivery plan will change.

We are still committed to car use reduction, even though the vast majority of emissions reductions will be met by other means. Also, as you know, we do not have control over some of the issues that are in the report. Some of the major issues are about motoring taxation, such as road tax and fuel duty. On that specific point, from the start, I have actively engaged with transport ministers in the previous Conservative Government and now the Labour Government. I am also seeking agreement with Welsh and Northern Irish ministers. We have discussed the issue at the British-Irish Council, because some of the issues will need a four-nation approach to have the best effect. I am very keen for that approach to help in this area, but it has to be done collectively.

There has by no means been an absence of activity, but has there been agreement? That is the core issue in the report: has there been collective agreement on a way forward? We have not been able to achieve that, despite how positively received the draft route map was in January 2022.

The project has short, medium and long-term aspects. The option that will be proceeded with has been chosen and we are now embarking on its initial design, which is going through the processes that are set out in the design manual that we talked about earlier.

Some of the short-term improvements relate to the catchment area. Funnily enough, we were in Inveraray at an A83 task force meeting—I think that Jackie Baillie was one of the MSPs who dialled into that meeting—that took place just before Storm Babet, so we were hearing directly from Amey about what was going to happen with the rainfall that was expected, and, a couple of days later, we saw the consequences. There have been some landslides in areas beyond the areas that were initially identified, so, in the short term, there has been investment in those areas.

Significant work has been done on the medium-term aspects, which involves strengthening the old military road and improving bends on it. Quite a lot has been invested in the old military road to help with the current diversions and in relation to what will be required for the final design as part of the long-term project, which involves the covering that will ensure the long-term sustainable future of the A83.

In terms of capital budgets, the committee will be aware that we do not keep pots of money aside and say, “That’s marked for the A83 and is only to be opened at such a time as it will be invested.” We are only starting with the initial aspects of the DMRB. We have just issued the draft orders—perhaps my colleagues can remind me when that took place.

Clearly, this proposal has completed certain of the phases. There are still issues as to whether, in the next phase, there will be any objections or, indeed, a public inquiry. There are strong feelings about the proposal, but there are strong feelings about most roads in most places. The issue probably relates to the landscaping and the loch’s natural environment.

As part of the process, environmental and economic issues have to be addressed not only at the strategic outline business case stage, but at all five stages. One of the key things to relay is that, although the petitioners do not like the route that has been chosen, consideration is being given to the feasibility and attractiveness of combining with adjacent schemes to make sure that the tree line and other environmental aspects are considered. There is still time left in the process to address that point.

There is an important point to be up front and candid about, which is that, because of the interaction between the A82 and the A83—in particular, the A82 being used when there are problems with the A83—we do not think that it would be appropriate to do work on the A83 and the A82 at the same time. Because of the safety issues and the road’s importance to the economy and the people of Argyll in particular, we would prioritise the A83 over the A82. It is probably important to put that on the record.

Thank you, convener. Good morning. I have opening remarks to provide a bit of context, which might be helpful. I thank the committee for inviting me to discuss the petitions relating to the A75, the A77, the A83 Rest and Be Thankful, the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan, and the A96 Inverness to Nairn bypass.

The Scottish Government recognises the crucial role of transport infrastructure in supporting sustainable economic growth and access to essential services, and we are committed to improving transport infrastructure across Scotland. The Scottish Government has a strong record of delivering major infrastructure projects, including the £745 million Aberdeen western peripheral route and the £1.34 billion Queensferry crossing on the Forth estuary, which was a complex engineering feat that put our workmanship to the front and centre of global engineering. We have also delivered the Borders railway and electrified the rail route between our two largest cities through the Glasgow to Edinburgh improvement programme. In addition, since 2012, we have invested more than £475 million in the A9 dualling programme, which has enabled statutory processes to be completed for 10 out of the 11 projects, delivered the first two projects into operational use and supported procurement on the third and fourth contracts.

On the A82, a new viaduct has been built at Pulpit Rock on the side of Loch Lomond, which has helped to remove traffic signals that had been there for nearly 30 years, and a much-needed bypass at Crianlarich has reduced traffic in the town by half. Both improvements benefit road users and local communities along the A82.

At a total cost of £64 million, we have completed five major improvements on the A77, including the £29 million Maybole bypass. We have also completed six major roads improvement projects on the A75, with a total value of more than £50 million.

Following an initial meeting with the A77 campaign team in November, I met A75 and A77 campaigners, including the two petitioners, on Friday 21 March. I am happy to report that my offer to establish a regular six-monthly meeting to bring them together with Transport Scotland and Amey was accepted.

Although the United Kingdom autumn budget marked a step in the right direction, it did not make up for 14 years of underinvestment—austerity cannot be undone in one year. We still face significant pressures on our capital budget, which are significantly affecting our ability to maintain investment in all Scotland’s transport infrastructure.

Despite the significant pressures on our capital budget, we continue to progress improvements to the trunk road network. That includes dualling the A96 from Inverness to Nairn—including the Nairn bypass—and the procedural steps for the acquisition of land have now been concluded, which has delivered a further key milestone for the scheme. We continue to progress work to determine the most suitable procurement option for delivering the scheme, after which a timetable for delivery can be set.

Development work on the A83 Rest and Be Thankful continues at pace, with draft orders having been published last December for medium-term and long-term solutions. In addition, following the allocation of funding from the UK Government, we have wasted no time in progressing the design and assessment work to consider the options for realigning the A75 trunk road at the villages of Springholm and Crocketford, with almost 180 people having attended the meet-the-team events that were held three weeks ago.

I thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to make those opening remarks, which provide a bit more current context, and I will be happy to answer any questions that committee members have on the petitions.

Thank you, convener. Good morning. I have opening remarks to provide a bit of context, which might be helpful. I thank the committee for inviting me to discuss the petitions relating to the A75, the A77, the A83 Rest and Be Thankful, the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan, and the A96 Inverness to Nairn.

The Scottish Government recognises the crucial role of transport infrastructure in supporting sustainable economic growth and access to essential services, and we are committed to improving transport infrastructure across Scotland. The Scottish Government has a strong record of delivering major infrastructure projects, including the £745 million Aberdeen western peripheral route and the £1.34 billion Queensferry crossing on the Forth estuary, which was a complex engineering feat that put our workmanship to the front and centre of global engineering. We have also delivered the Borders railway and electrified the rail route between our two largest cities through the Glasgow to Edinburgh improvement programme. In addition, since 2012, we have invested more than £475 million in the A9 dualling programme, which has enabled statutory processes to be completed for 10 out of the 11 projects, delivered the first two projects into operational use and supported procurement on the third and fourth contracts.

On the A82, a new viaduct has been built at Pulpit Rock on the side of Loch Lomond, which has helped to remove traffic signals that had been there for nearly 30 years, and a much-needed bypass at Crianlarich has reduced traffic in the town by half. Both improvements benefit road users and local communities along the A82.

At a total cost of £64 million, we have completed five major improvements on the A77, including the £29 million Maybole bypass. We have also completed six major roads improvement projects on the A75, with a total value of more than £50 million.

Following an initial meeting with the A77 campaign team in November, I met A75 and A77 campaigners, including the two petitioners, on Friday 21 March. I am happy to report that my offer to establish a regular six-monthly meeting to bring them together with Transport Scotland and Amey was accepted.

Although the United Kingdom autumn budget marked a step in the right direction, it did not make up for 14 years of underinvestment—austerity cannot be undone in one year. We still face significant pressures on our capital budget, which are significantly affecting our ability to maintain investment in all Scotland’s transport infrastructure.

Despite the significant pressures on our capital budget, we continue to progress improvements to the trunk road network. That includes dualling the A96 from Inverness to Nairn—including the Nairn bypass—and the procedural steps for the acquisition of land have now been concluded, which has delivered a further key milestone for the scheme. We continue to progress work to determine the most suitable procurement option for delivering the scheme, after which a timetable for delivery can be set.

Development work on the A83 Rest and Be Thankful continues at pace, with draft orders having been published last December for medium-term and long-term solutions. In addition, following the allocation of funding from the UK Government, we have wasted no time in progressing the design and assessment work to consider the options for realigning the A75 trunk road at the villages of Springholm and Crocketford, with almost 180 people having attended the meet-the-team events that were held three weeks ago.

I thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to make those opening remarks, which provide a bit more current context, and I will be happy to answer any questions that committee members have on the petitions.

Clearly, traffic management is an issue when you are doing the work, because there will be disruption when it happens. I should say, though, that bypasses are easier, because, obviously, they are off-road and do not go along the same way as the traffic or on roads that people use regularly.

We can also try to do things at the same time as opposed to sequentially, if possible. With the ground investigation works that we referred to, different things can potentially happen in advance. That is a risk, because you are doing work and investing and spending public money in advance of decisions being made, but it allows you to try to do work simultaneously, where possible.