Seòmar agus comataidhean

That will come down to the process. In that respect, we have begun the design manual for roads and bridges process. We are at stage 1 of that; we will then move to the stage at which there are draft orders; and if anyone objects, there might be a public inquiry. Therefore, I cannot tell you when the work will be done, because it depends on a number of factors that are outwith our control, such as whether there are objections to the draft orders. Work on that will be done over a number of years, as is normal, but Nicola Blaney might want to say a bit more about what the process will look like, if all goes well.

At my first meeting with the first UK Government Secretary of State for Transport, and at my meeting with the current secretary of state, Heidi Alexander, I raised the issue of the importance of funding for the A75. Heidi Alexander has asked about costings et cetera for future years, which is understandable. We need to consider the road’s strategic importance of the road as an artery; indeed, Maurice Golden asked about trade links, and I can provide some assurances in that respect.

Nicola, is there anything that you want to add—without, of course, promising something that we cannot deliver, given that we are not in charge of the timescales of a public inquiry?

Yes, the draft orders went out in December, and the process ended in February. I probably should not say too much about it just now, but we are going through the process of looking at that.

I hope that there will not be a public inquiry, but, if there is, the capital funding that you asked about will not necessarily be required in the next year or the year after; it could take a bit longer, and there will still be statutory processes to conclude. The capital allocation will be required at some point. The major capital allocation for the construction will be required going forward. It is important to put on record that we have the funding this year to progress the items that need to be carried out this year, but part of what we are doing—other MSPs regularly ask about this—involves trying to manage the budget well in advance and having those funds ready for when they need to be deployed.

The six-monthly task force report is open to all councillors and all MSPs. They do not always attend meetings about it—sometimes send researchers instead—but there is an openness there, and people can hear about what is happening. BEAR Scotland provides a lot of helpful updates on current aspects and improvements, and we also get to hear from our engineers and consultants about how they are progressing with the next stages.

I have probably covered quite a lot there, but, realistically, part of the planning is to ensure that capital funding is available when it is needed, and that is what we will be doing with the A83.

Thank you very much—we are very open, and we provide lots of information all the time.

Communication is really important. People understanding what we have done, how we have done it and what the process is can go a long way. We can then focus on what the real points of difference are. Sometimes those can be resolved, but sometimes they cannot be. It is helpful to be open about that.

On the point about the active travel route, in general, we try to ensure that there is such provision. We will need to address that, but that will depend on the timing and sequencing of what happens. Nicola Blaney might have more technical detail on that, which is probably what Jackie Baillie was looking for with her question. Nicola, are you able to help with that?

It might be helpful to add that—notwithstanding the current processes—I would expect there to be discussions with the national park authority. It would be helpful, from the point of view of openness, to meet the national park authority to go through where we are, what the implications are and any information on the active travel route.

That level of detail on the traffic management and engineering is not within my capabilities, but I will ask officials to respond.

You will remember the protest.

The Scottish transport appraisal guidance is central. It was published for consultation in July 2001 and formally published in 2003. A major update was made in May 2008, and the next major update involved a refresh of the guidance in January 2022, so there has been progress during that period. When it comes to that provision, a balance needs to be struck in relation to people’s legal rights. Does the majority view prevail over the minority—perhaps landowner—interest?

A lot of the variation happens at the stage of our issuing draft orders. The existence of any objections makes a major difference in how things can progress. On some issues, we are trying very hard. An awful lot of input goes into trying to ensure that there are no objections, because a public local inquiry can obviously take a lot of time. For example, there has been a huge number of responses and enormous public input in relation to the Sheriffhall roundabout. If landowners or others have key interests, there is a balance to be struck. Even though everybody and their granny might want something, if a few individuals do not—for good and understandable reasons—we have to carry out due process.

The reason for the difference in the speed of how things have progressed is that there can be objections. As I have said to officials, we have had some success, particularly with some of the more recent proposals, such as on the A9, to which there have been no objections, which has allowed us to move to completion. It is key to complete that statutory process, because, once we do that and avoid a public inquiry, if we can, we can move to action through procurement and delivery.

There was a lot in that.

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.