Chamber and committees

I hope that the short-term discussions with HIAL allow the service to be brought back in October. There might be a UK element to this, but the situation exposes the need for the Scottish Government to lead a strategic review of delivery of Highlands and Islands services as a matter of urgency. I think that there is cross-party support for that, and we have written to the transport secretary in that regard.

In the meantime, and reflecting on potential sensitivities in other areas, we heard earlier from Maggie Sandison from Shetland Islands Council, who talked about a gradual erosion of the service, which is affecting confidence. Services to Edinburgh on the Orkney and Shetland routes were merged at the start of this year. Even now, the timetabling changes make a day return to Edinburgh much less convenient than was previously the case. We are seeing changes to profitable routes that very much run the risk of leading to a drop-off in usage of those routes and, therefore, problems further down the line.

Mr Matheson, you say that ADS is simply a passenger convenience rather than a subsidy. I accept that ADS goes to passengers and not directly to the airline. However, but for ADS, those passenger numbers would be even lower. In the face of fares that can often reach £600 and, as I know to my cost, £700 for a return, that ADS bill has climbed significantly. Loganair is taking decisions at the moment around pricing. There has been no evidence of an environment having been created in which incentives for more passenger usage have been in any way effective. I simply cannot understand, and nor can my constituents, why that is the case.

I circle back to the issue of the impact on patients. I very much agree with the convener that it is difficult to square the statement on the prioritisation of patients with what has happened. I do not know what conversations have taken place with each of the three island health boards, but I would strongly urge a renewed engagement with them, even over the summer, on how mitigations can take place.

For an orthopaedic patient in Orkney, it is no comfort knowing that there is still a route via Aberdeen, with land transport to Inverness. Those discussions need to happen as a matter of urgency, so that we can see what can be salvaged from the decision that has been taken.

Convener, I thank you and the committee for prioritising this issue. That this is the first evidence session of this parliamentary session will be of some reassurance to my constituents and those who are similarly affected in the Western Isles and in Shetland. I also put on record my thanks to Loganair, with which I have engaged regularly and consistently over my time as an MSP.

In that context, I will perhaps start with the cuts to services from Inverness. I understand the commercial sensitivities, but during my discussions with Loganair—which have taken place pretty consistently every two or three months—there has been no intimation, notwithstanding that the Inverness route has traditionally been less well used than routes from Aberdeen, Edinburgh and so on, and despite the discussions that have taken place with HIAL and Transport Scotland, that this was a potential outcome should those discussions not go in the way that it wished. Mr Matheson, do you not recognise that, as a stakeholder, that is difficult?

More significantly, in light of what we heard from the health boards, I push back very strongly on what you said about mitigating the impact on patients. I accept that the decision on whether to operate the route ultimately needs to be taken by Loganair, but at that point, a discussion with the health boards would have indicated how you intended to mitigate this.

Given that there will be a service reduction, how will you limit the impact on patients—particularly at a time when the national treatment centre for orthopaedics and ophthalmology is being established in Inverness and the number of patients using it, along with consultants travelling to the islands, is likely to increase? Why did that discussion not take place ahead of the decision?

I do not disagree with the point about the strategic review, which the Scottish Government, with HITRANS, ZetTrans and other stakeholders, needs to lead as a matter of urgency; nor do I dissent from the view that it is in nobody’s interest for Loganair not to be financially viable. We have seen what has happened to Eastern Airways, Flybe and others. What I am saying is that I am seeing no evidence of the combining of routes, in the way that happened with Orkney and Shetland, elsewhere in the UK—routes that I understand have not been terribly profitable either. There is a disconnect in the treatment of Orkney and Shetland routes compared with some routes elsewhere in the country.

Even now that the decision has been taken, you will be retaining some level of service solely at weekends for Orkney and Shetland. Let us not lose sight of the fact that the decision has removed any air connectivity between Orkney and Shetland during the week. There is a weekend service to those islands, and there is an afternoon service to the Western Isles. As I understand it—Donald MacKinnon knows this far better than I do—had that rotation taken place in the morning, the impact on patients seeking to travel to Inverness for treatment would have been significantly reduced, including a reduction in the need for overnight accommodation, rather than with the afternoon slot that you have retained.

That point would have emerged from the discussions with the health boards. Even after the decision was taken to remove the service or cut it right back, there were still discussions that would have helped and been valuable to mitigate the impact on patients, but they simply did not take place.

I have no relevant interests to declare at this point.