Skip to main content
Loading…

Seòmar agus comataidhean

Official Report: search what was said in Parliament

The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.  

Criathragan Hide all filters

Dates of parliamentary sessions
  1. Session 1: 12 May 1999 to 31 March 2003
  2. Session 2: 7 May 2003 to 2 April 2007
  3. Session 3: 9 May 2007 to 22 March 2011
  4. Session 4: 11 May 2011 to 23 March 2016
  5. Session 5: 12 May 2016 to 5 May 2021
  6. Current session: 12 May 2021 to 4 August 2025
Select which types of business to include


Select level of detail in results

Displaying 750 contributions

|

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

A9 Dualling Project

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

I appreciate that you were not responsible. I was part of the Government for a while, so I had a collective responsibility and I have never sought to shrug away from that. However, I never had a portfolio responsibility.

Why did it take five years from the critical watershed decision of the ONS, on which no statement was made to Parliament about how significant that was, even though you now say that that was the absolute critical moment? Why did it then take until 2019 for there to be a private finance plan? That was five years during which most of the work, or a very substantial proportion of it, according to Alex Neil’s plan, was supposed to have been done.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

A9 Dualling Project

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

—all this work was supposed to have gone on and we have only seen two of the sections. Those are welcome, of course, but there is a complete absence of an explanation, cabinet secretary, about what went wrong. Can I just ask one final question?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

A9 Dualling Project

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

It did not go ahead then either, did it? Has there been any review of the failure to adhere to the plan? Has there been any internal review by the Scottish Government—or anybody else, for that matter—as to why the timetable slipped and why there has been a failure to implement the very clear pledges that the Scottish National Party made repeatedly to the electorate at every election?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

A9 Dualling Project

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

I understand all that, but with respect, that was not what I asked. I asked whether there was any review of any sort into the failure to deliver on our pledges in Government. Was there any review or not?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

I thought that Mr Barnett’s comments were apposite and that we could perhaps learn from the cited example of the experience in England.

I want to ask about the establishment of an independent national whistleblowing officer. First, how would that help to address the concerns? Secondly, would a new public body be required to fulfil that function, or could that be made an explicit function of the Children and Young People’s Commissioner Scotland?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

Well, there would be civil unrest if the crofters were denied the right to extract peat from their own land. I think that that would be unthinkable to many of us.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

Continued Petitions

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

I was pleased to hear Sarah Boyack say that, generally speaking, it is beneficial to have a factor rather than none. If you have no factor, common repairs, whether in a tenement or, for that matter, an estate where there is substantial common property to be maintained, can get neglected, and that will lead to huge problems. My experience of factors over 20 years in legal practice was that they had a bit of a thankless task, and the remuneration was generally modest in relation to the amount of work to be undertaken, the sheer amount of time spent on speaking to people and so on.

I have seen mostly good practice but, as I have said, members have received complaints, as indeed I have. However, I do think that many of the problems are not going to be solved by legal reform, because they are more practical difficulties. I might be a bit rusty, because it has been 20 years since I last practised, but as I understand it, if anyone is charging extortionate fees—which I think Sarah Boyack was suggesting in the example that she gave—there are existing legal remedies to challenge any grossly exorbitant fees for the provision of services. If services are worth, say, £1,000, you cannot charge £1 million for them, and people can, I believe, find a remedy through the sheriff court.

I am just not convinced that we are necessarily going to progress this issue through legislation, but I do support Mr Torrance’s recommendation that we find out whether the minister can make any further recommendations and that we see how the voluntary code of practice is getting on.

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

A9 Dualling Project

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

I was interested in the emphasis that you have given to the ONS decision. I do not recall there being any ministerial statement about that at the time. Why not?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

A9 Dualling Project

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

Was SFT given a deadline when it was commissioned, and did it adhere to that deadline? When did it put forward the recommendations?

Citizen Participation and Public Petitions Committee

A9 Dualling Project

Meeting date: 7 February 2024

Fergus Ewing

I will come on to that in a moment, convener.

The first area that I want to ask about is the outline plan for completion of the A9 dualling project by the envisaged date of 2035. That is subject to one important caveat, which raises serious questions in my mind about whether the plan will be delivered. That is that the use of mutual investment model contracts is

“subject to ... further decision making in late 2025”,

based on

“an updated assessment of market conditions.”

That means that a decision could be taken not to use MIM.

What criteria will be applied in 2025 as to whether MIM will be used? If MIM is not used, what is the contingency plan?