Seòmar agus comataidhean

Mr Kerr hits on an important point. I spent a lot of time over the summer recess meeting operators. If you meet representatives of the likes of Stagecoach and FirstBus, you get very different feedback to what you get from smaller operators who are, arguably, experiencing much more challenging times at the moment. I am mindful of that, particularly in rural areas, where people might not have access to, for example, the rail network. It is really important that bus services are maintained in areas where the rail network is not able to extend.

I might bring in officials on the specifics of the question. If that issue is not already being considered in the evaluation, I will request that it is, because Mr Kerr makes an important point. Operators are currently dealing with a range of factors and challenges such as driver shortages and the cost of fuel, so one of the reasons why I have convened the bus task force is to get folk round the table to come up with solutions to move us forward. The evaluation will give us an opportunity to ensure that we have the data from rural areas, which is particularly important in relation to Mr Kerr’s point about poverty.

The budget should be sufficient, based on the modelling. It assumes that patronage levels will recover to 80 per cent of what they were prior to the pandemic, so it is dependent on passenger behaviour, bluntly, but that would certainly measure up with what officials have forecast in relation to people returning to bus.

The other thing to reflect on is that people’s travel habits have dramatically changed, so this is not only about bringing people back to public transport. Some people do not go to a workplace anymore; they work from home. That has changed the nature of public transport in Scotland. However, I think that we are still in a bit of a pre-pandemic cycle, whereby the delivery model that we currently have across public transport networks reflects provision that existed prior to the pandemic. We need to think again about some of our delivery models when people are often working from home during the week, because that changes what the patronage uptick is. In answer to your question, the budget should be sufficient but it assumes an 80 per cent return of patronage.

I heard some of the evidence on that issue at the tail end of the previous session. I reiterate what was outlined by Mr Hobbs and others. We want 30 per cent of the Scottish ferry fleet to consist of low-emission ferries by 2032. As, I think, you heard from Mr Hobbs, the small vessel replacement programme will aim to provide low-emission vessels that primarily use battery power and onshore charging technologies.

It is important to say that the new vessels for Islay will lead to a reduction in emissions. I think that that is due to the hull design, but Transport Scotland might want to say more about that.

The challenge relates to our larger vessels. Jim Anderson made the point that the technology is not quite there yet for our larger vessels. I know that CMAL is looking at a diesel-electric hybrid model for the Islay vessels and the additional two vessels for the Little Minch routes. That will allow CMAL to look at future battery technology in relation to those vessels.

I recognise that there is a challenge in getting to the target, but that absolutely remains the target. As technology moves on, we will need to keep pace with it in order to reach the target, in line with our climate change aspirations and ambitions.

I recall.

I am not necessarily sure that it is.

The straight answer to Mr Kerr’s question is that I do not have a figure based on the impact of inflation. I think that we heard Mr Hobbs say that he was not sure what the impact of inflation would look like in relation to the costs agreed. We will have to consider that. Irrespective of portfolio, inflation has had quite a dramatic impact on what we are able to do as a Government. That has limited our potential to create investment in many different parts of the transport network.

Mr Hobbs made a point about accelerating investment. To my mind, that is how to bring down the average age of the fleet. Since May 2021, we have brought in the MV Loch Frisa on the Oban to Craignure route, we have managed to charter the MV Arrow and have made significant progress on vessels 801 and 802. Early last year, I announced the procurement of two new vessels for Islay and at the end of last year I announced an additional two new vessels, making four in total and bringing a really important level of standardisation across the fleet. Therefore, in the past financial year, we have been able to leverage additional investment, which I think is crucial to getting us to that reduction of the average age of the fleet.

However, in relation to your overall question, I make no bones about the fact that the work will be financially challenging for the Government. Of course, the Government has responded—and will respond in due course—to where we are able to prioritise those investments, in order to meet the requirements that the plan sets out.

Well, it would have to, because I am the minister.

Yes, I am. Transport Scotland is made up of civil servants, who are generic civil servants who work in lots of different Government departments, but I have two very experienced officials with me today and I am not just saying that because they are with me. I do not have a concern about the experience in Transport Scotland.

However, at the current time, the capacity within Transport Scotland is quite challenging in relation to ferries. That is because my officials spend a lot of their time responding to parliamentary inquiries, reports and the copious amounts of correspondence that we receive. That is fine, but it takes time and I sometimes think that it is a pressure that needs to be addressed. I have raised that with the permanent secretary, in relation to providing greater capacity within the ferries team, in particular, to ensure that we have the staff on board to deliver the changes and improvements that passengers expect us to.

I think that the response that you heard from Chris Wilcock was that we are not quite clear about whether that could be stipulated within the scope. I would want to clarify that with CMAL in the first instance.

I support the overall point that Mr Kerr has made about providing Scottish jobs from Government investment, but I am not clear about whether it was possible for CMAL to stipulate that within that contractual agreement. If you do not mind, convener, I will therefore seek clarity from CMAL on that point. I would be happy to write to the committee on the detail.

Chris Wilcock might want to come in on that.

I may bring in officials on whether the ferries plan should have been reviewed earlier. It is worth pointing out that the plan, which ran until this year, has already delivered a number of improvements. For example, we have got new routes running. As the committee heard earlier from Mr Hobbs, we have got the Campbeltown route and the new Mallaig to Lochboisdale route.

We have also had the roll-out of road equivalent tariff for passengers and cars on the CHFS network, which has saved passengers a significant amount of money—bluntly, £25 million a year. We have also had big upgrades in relation to port infrastructure, for example at Brodick pier, Tarbert and Wemyss Bay.

On the islands connectivity plan, the timescale was agreed previously with the ferries plan. Learning has been taken from the ferries plan. My understanding is that the timescale was agreed to—I think that it works well. We need to have that long-term forecast for where we are going next.

The plan is in draft. That is quite important. It is key that we engage with communities on what happens next. I do not want to do something to island communities that they are not content with, and it is really important to islander confidence that we mark out a clear way forward.

Chris Wilcock or Laurence Kenney may want to say more about the review period in the ferries plan that ran for the past decade.