A76
The final item of business is a members' business debate on motion S2M-3520, in the name of Alex Fergusson, on the case for improvement of the A76. The debate will be concluded without any question being put—[Interruption]—and, I hope, with a lot less noise from members who are leaving the chamber.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes with regret the two recent deaths on the A76 in separate incidents north of Sanquhar and near Auldgirth; recognises that the upgrading of the A77 to motorway standard from Glasgow to Kilmarnock has brought about a steady increase in the amount of traffic using the A76; notes that there have been three deaths in five years on the same stretch north of Sanquhar which would have been upgraded by now had the Scottish Executive not shelved plans agreed in the route action plan in favour of an easier option south of Sanquhar; recognises the formation of the A76 Action Group, and considers that the Executive should identify priority stretches of the A76 for urgent upgrading on safety grounds before further lives are lost.
I thank the members who supported my motion—they are not many in number, but they all recognise the real problems to which the motion refers, which are all too tragically highlighted by the recent death of an eight-year-old schoolboy whose school bus was involved in an accident with a lorry on a stretch of the A76 that was being resurfaced. That awful accident took place three weeks after the motion was lodged.
I lodged the motion following two separate incidents that took place during our October recess, both of which claimed a life. I entitled the motion "The Case for Improvement", because there is no doubt in my mind that a strong case can be made. As we have now witnessed five deaths in five years on the section of the A76 that runs through my constituency, I welcome the opportunity to put that case. I hope that I will be forgiven for concentrating on the southern half of the route, which runs through Dumfries and Galloway. My reasons for doing so are well laid out in the A76 route action plan, which was last updated in October 1996. That document states:
"The assessment has shown that the majority of the A76 in East Ayrshire is largely to a reasonable geometric standard. Once into Dumfries & Galloway, there is a marked deterioration in geometric standards".
It continues:
"The Geometry of the route largely dictates the level of service which is available to drivers. Where the road is to a reasonable standard, as in much of East Ayrshire, journey times are faster and more reliable due to there being frequent opportunities to overtake slow moving vehicles. The converse is the case in much of Dumfries & Galloway where journey times are slower and frustration often builds due to the lack of overtaking opportunities".
No member who knows the route would argue with that, yet I am sorry to say that not one action has been taken since 1996 to change the situation.
Action needs to be taken on the A76, if for no other reason than that the nature of traffic flow and traffic type is changing rapidly. The figures show a fairly steep rise in vehicle numbers in the past two years. I am not surprised by that, because I have suggested on several occasions that upgrading to motorway standard of the A77 from Glasgow to Kilmarnock—which is at the northern end of the A76—would have a significant impact on the A76, because it is an alternative route not just to Dumfries, but onward to England. That has proved to be the case. Of course, there has been an equal increase in northbound traffic. The increase has had a huge impact, not just on the road, but on the communities in my constituency that straddle it, such as Kirkconnel, Sanquhar, Mennock, Carronbridge, Thornhill and Closeburn.
However, another factor is highly significant in the argument. The Scottish Executive's transport statistics show that the percentage of the vehicles that use the route that are heavy goods vehicles is the fourth highest in Scotland for that type of road: 18 per cent over a seven-day period and 21 per cent Monday to Friday. In other words, one in every five vehicles is an HGV thundering up or down a road which, according to the route action plan, shows
"a marked deterioration in geometric standards"
in Dumfries and Galloway. Furthermore, all predictions are that traffic flow will increase by some 25 per cent by 2012.
On road safety, the action plan—which we should bear in mind was written almost 10 years ago—noted that a section between New Cumnock and Sanquhar exhibited a higher accident rate than the national average, but that remedial measures were believed to be having a significant effect on the level of accidents on that stretch. I respectfully suggest that five deaths in five years, three of which have occurred on the same stretch just north of Sanquhar—on which, apparently, remedial measures have been taken—indicates an urgent need for a fresh approach to the mounting problems on the route. Such an approach is long overdue.
It is the easiest thing in the world for MSPs to leap up and down and demand a dual carriageway from end to end of any given road in their constituencies; others may wish to make that argument, but it is not what I seek because I realise that it is completely unrealistic. However, I strongly suggest that much could be done at reasonable cost to arrest the rapid decline in the safety record of the route.
One of the route's main problems is that although there are several straight sections on which overtaking is entirely possible in the right conditions, they are all too often interspersed with sections of sharp bends and rises and falls, which can take unsuspecting drivers—even, sometimes, suspecting drivers—by surprise. That is exacerbated by the frustration to which the route action plan refers and which, in itself, is increased by the unusually high number of temporary traffic lights between Kirkconnel and Dumfries—seven sets at my last count—and which seems to increase every time one visits the route. All those lights do is increase platooning and the consequent frustration that queuing traffic—20 per cent of which, I remind members, is HGVs—inevitably incurs.
The three deaths just north of Sanquhar took place on a stretch of road that would have been upgraded by now had not the Executive withdrawn the plans at a late stage and with no notice three or four years ago. Instead, a dedicated three-lane overtaking opportunity is to be created south of Sanquhar on a stretch that already allows overtaking under the right conditions. I can only conclude that that decision was taken on the ground of cost. As my motion suggests, I believe that such decisions should instead be taken with safety as the primary consideration. I do not seek a motorway or a dual carriageway, but I hope that I have shown that there is a need to take action. I ask that the route action plan be revisited urgently in the light of the latest traffic figures, and that priority upgrading be redefined on safety grounds.
I also believe that much could be achieved by better visibility and signing. There is a need to limit the number of temporary traffic lights on any given stretch of road to reduce as much as possible platooning and the consequent frustration, but I am also certain that traffic should be restricted where a resurfacing project is under way. The eight-year-old schoolboy to whom I referred earlier lost his life on a newly tarred corner that had not had the final anti-skid coating applied and on which there were neither white lines nor—crucially—any traffic restrictions. Proper restrictions under those circumstances would almost certainly have saved a life.
Accidents will always occur and some will involve fatalities. Sadly, that is inevitable, but it is our duty to do everything in our power to minimise them. Much more can be done to that end, and I have suggested some measures that I believe would be appropriate. I look forward to hearing what other members have to say and to a positive response from the minister. I commend the motion to Parliament.
I congratulate Alex Fergusson on initiating the debate and on his eloquence in speaking to the motion. I speak in this debate as someone who has two interests in the A76. The first is a constituency interest: the A76 runs from Kilmarnock to Dumfries, and therefore covers both Central Scotland and the South of Scotland. My other interest is as someone who lives in Ayr, who previously worked in Cumnock and who has always been extremely concerned about the state of the A76.
Alex Fergusson highlighted many of the safety issues that have been raised. It is worth taking a journey from Kilmarnock to Dumfries on the A76—I encourage the minister to do so. It is not too bad leaving Kilmarnock, but it is almost impossible to get safely through Mauchline without having to stop on numerous occasions to let heavy goods vehicles pass. Let me emphasise the point about heavy goods vehicles, because we are not talking just about transit vans. The two main products that are carried on the route are coal and timber. Coal lorries and timber lorries are exceptionally unsafe and travel at substantial speeds, despite the state of the road. There is no bypass on the road south of Cumnock. Drivers bypass Auchinleck and Cumnock to return, as on the previous section of the road, to going through towns and villages, some of which have very narrow streets. Drivers go through the main streets in Kirkconnel, in Sanquhar, in Thornhill and elsewhere.
There are concerns about the state of the road. Alex Fergusson mentioned the remedial measures that were supposed to have been taken between New Cumnock and Sanquhar. The minute you leave New Cumnock, you would not think that you were on an A-class road but on a farm dirt track, because the road is so poor. It is narrow, winding and very unsafe. It is almost beyond belief that it is classed as a main road.
I argue the case for improving the A76 on safety and economic grounds. Look at the connection between Ayrshire, Dumfries and Galloway and further south: there is no first-class road connection between Ayrshire and the south of Scotland. That has an effect on the economy. It is about 20 years since the then four local authorities in Ayrshire decided jointly that the A76 should be the main route south from Ayrshire into Dumfries and Galloway and on to the border, but in many places the road is still in a state of complete disrepair and is very unsafe.
Alex Fergusson's point about the impact of the M77 was well made; it has increased the volume—and often the speed—at which traffic travels in a hurry to get from Glasgow to south of the border.
I hope that the minister will consider the issues seriously. The one thing on which I disagree with Alex Fergusson is that I do not see why we should not set an ambition to have a dual carriageway from Kilmarnock to Dumfries. If we are serious about opening up the economies of Ayrshire and of Dumfries and Galloway, that should be our ambition. In an answer earlier this year, the minister said that an upgrade would cost about £500 million. That is less than one tenth of the money that the Chancellor of the Exchequer raised from Scotland's oil on Monday. I do not see why some of that investment should not come back into roads in the west of Scotland.
I congratulate Alex Fergusson on securing the debate and for the very impressive case that he made for improving the A76.
Sadly, since the motion was lodged there has been another fatality, that of an eight-year-old constituent, Joseph Lock. He was on his way to Closeburn Primary School in the school bus on Tuesday 22 November when an accident took place in thick fog on a stretch of the A76 that, as Alex Fergusson said, was being resurfaced.
The A76 is a road that I knew well when I used to travel between Prestwick and Dumfries. Unfortunately, in the five years since I left, things seem to have got worse: there have been more accidents and more fatalities.
I thank Amey and the Scottish Executive for agreeing to meet me in a couple of weeks to discuss the issues around the accident and I invite to Alex Fergusson and other members to attend that meeting if they wish to do so. Clearly, the circumstances of any fatality are a matter for the police to investigate, but there must be concerns about a road being left in such a condition at a time of year when the weather can be extremely bad.
I wrote to one of the minister's predecessors many years ago about the safety of the A76 and the matter has been raised on a number of other occasions by me and others. Sadly, it was only a couple of weeks before the most recent fatality that we last discussed the matter in Parliament. Officials from Dumfries and Galloway Council and East Ayrshire Council met MPs and MSPs during the summer to discuss how we can get the upgrade of the trunk road onto the Executive's agenda. Sadly, the incidence of three fatalities has ensured that the matter is now up for discussion. I pay tribute to the campaigns that are run by local newspapers the Dumfries Courier and the Dumfries & Galloway Standard. I am pleased that the minister has agreed to meet local MPs and MSPs to discuss their concern about both the A76 and the A75.
In my final couple of minutes, I will make a more general point about road safety, particularly on trunk roads. Six people have died on trunk roads in Dumfries and Galloway in six weeks. Road design is clearly a factor, but driver error and failure to drive according to road conditions are also often factors. The Scottish Executive has set targets for councils to reduce the number of road accidents and, in particular, the number of child fatalities, but I wonder whether more measures can be introduced to alert drivers to the dangers on roads that have bad records for serious accidents. That is no substitute for improvement schemes, but it will take time to introduce such schemes and in the meantime we need to do more to alert people to the dangers.
A constituent has provided me with photographs of measures that are taken in France, which also has a bad record of road accidents. The French erect black silhouettes by the side of the road to alert drivers to sections of road where fatalities have occurred. That might be a little too explicit for our tastes, but I wonder whether we can do more to remind drivers, who perhaps lack the imagination to realise the dangers in which they may be placing themselves and other road users, that they are in charge of lethal machines.
I urge the minister to take action to tackle both the specific problems of the A76 and the more general problems of driver awareness. I finish with the words of Joseph Lock's mother:
"I know nothing will bring back my little boy, but something must be done before there are any more accidents."
It is about 10 years since, as a member of Kyle and Carrick District Council and, briefly, as a member of the Ayrshire economic forum, I was involved in arguments about trunk roads in Ayrshire. The economic forum was focused on Ayrshire's trunk road links to the outside world and was concerned for the future of its agriculture, its industry and the extractive industries that were left in the area.
When trunk roads were under review, the councils and the economic forum campaigned hard for the Government to designate the A70 as the principal external route and to invest heavily in improving that road, removing the A76 to the status of a more local road and putting all the heavy traffic on a route that is quite thinly populated.
Because the Government declined to accept the proposal, the A70 remains a local road and all the freight from Ayrshire thunders its way down the A76, which is the principal route and the most direct route to the motorway network and to England. The compensation for the decision that the A76 would remain the trunk road was that a route action plan was developed and a route accident reduction plan was framed.
From my two years as a transport spokesman in the Parliament, I hope that I bring a couple of perspectives to this evening's debate, which Alex Fergusson introduced so well. I am aware from the work that I used to do that, when route action plans are framed and projects are identified, the implementation of those projects follows automatically in the great majority of cases. Sometimes it happens quickly and sometimes it happens more slowly, but generally there is a commitment to do what has been defined as necessary.
I am also aware that, as the years pass, the accepted standard for road safety changes. The accepted principles of road, junction and overtaking lane design also change. I am an occasional user of the A76, because when I travel to Dumfries I tend to take the Castle Douglas road. It is further but less stressful. If I am heading south, I tend to take the A70 and the motorway.
I consider the A76 to be a trunk road that is failing in its purpose. It collects the freight traffic but deflects a lot of other traffic on to local roads that are not designed to take through traffic. I suggest that as well as investing in the projects that have been identified, albeit subject to whatever work is necessary to bring them up to modern standards, there may be a case for revisiting the route action plan, which is now 10 years out of date—if not more, given the timing of the studies.
I was not happy to hear Alex Neil introduce the argument about £500 million. That is not a realistic prognosis. A programme of targeted, selected projects, in conjunction with an upgrading of the route accident reduction plan, could achieve what is necessary. The projects would include genuine overtaking opportunities, an end to congestion and people's frustration on many sections of the road and a radical increase in road safety. If the minister can give us any comfort on those objectives, all the users of the road and all those who are interested in the economies of that part of Scotland will be pleased.
I, too, congratulate Alex Fergusson on securing the debate. I have a great deal of sympathy with the intentions behind the motion. I note with interest that it accepts that an upgrade of one part of the road system inevitably leads to more traffic and consequential problems elsewhere. Green transport campaigners have been arguing against the Tories about that for years. The upgrade of the A77 to the M77 has caused an increase in traffic and an increase in the expectation of traffic speed on that route. We have to decide—
Will the member give way?
I shall finish the sentence. We have to decide when to reverse the failed road-building policies and concentrate instead on building a decent transportation system for everybody.
Will the member expand on his criticism of the upgrading of the M77? Will he tell us how many people were killed on that road in the year before it opened and how many people have been killed on it in the year since it opened?
I cannot, because I do not have those statistics to hand. My point is that the upgrade of the M77 has caused problems elsewhere, which is accepted in the motion. I said that I have a lot of sympathy with the intention behind the motion, but before I come to the positives I challenge Alex Fergusson to state where his priority lies.
As Murray Tosh said, there is not an unlimited pot of money for road improvements. I have heard Alex Fergusson describe the A75 as the most deserving case for expenditure in Scotland. I have heard him and his colleagues in Dumfries and Galloway alone call for priority expenditure on the A75, the A77, the A701, the A708 and the A709. He weakens his case by being so liberal with expenditure. Is he saying that we must plough money into every road in Dumfries and Galloway and ignore public transport? Is it a limitless pot?
I made it clear that a great deal needs to be done to improve the safety of the A76 with a fairly low financial input. The member is twisting the debate into something that it is not.
As I said, I wanted to make a couple of negative points first, which I have done. Moving on, some of the A76 route action plan overtaking schemes may improve safety on the route. I do not oppose the motion but, as Murray Tosh pointed out, similar claims were made for the upgrade of the A70. There is a strong case for considering whether the priority should be the A70 or the A76. The A70 carries more lorry traffic, particularly coal lorries, than it was possibly designed to.
Road deaths require urgent attention. I suggest that the minister should have a much more immediate tool at his disposal to deal with them. Accidents are caused by three things: driver behaviour, road conditions and vehicle defects. Driver behaviour is the greatest problem by a long way. A reduction of 1mph in mean speeds would lead to a 5 per cent reduction in accident rates. Excessive speed levels on faster rural roads have noticeably increased over the past decade, and drivers' speed expectations are a real problem.
I say to the minister that road upgrades take years to progress, but speed cameras can and must be installed overnight. There is now a clear case for Dumfries and Galloway constabulary positioning mobile speed cameras on the A76 at much more regular intervals. In the longer term, the A76 is a strong candidate for involvement in the extension of the hugely successful average-speed SPECS system, which was launched on the A77.
Everyone wants a safer A76, but the residents of Sanquhar, Thornhill, Kirkconnell and New Cumnock do not want an A76 racetrack that encourages more and faster traffic to go through their town or village. I am not arguing that none of the upgrades should go ahead, but that there are alternatives for improving driver behaviour that could be put in place much sooner.
I, too, congratulate Alex Fergusson on securing the debate.
I once heard somebody say that there is no such thing as a road accident; there are only collisions that are caused by failures on the part of human beings, but we must recognise that some roads are much less forgiving of the human failure that is bound to occur. On the A76, there are short straights with severe bends at each end and excess traffic furniture to warn of hazards ahead that can become hazards themselves. The road contributes to driver frustration, which inevitably makes the driver less cautious than they might otherwise be. As a result, the road makes a contribution to the human frailties from which we all suffer. There may also be many tourists on the road who are not necessarily familiar with its less forgiving characteristics. Therefore, there is a real problem.
Alex Fergusson said that south of the county march and north of Kirkconnell, there is a
"marked deterioration in geometric standards".
That is certainly an understatement. In some places, two heavy goods vehicles going in opposite directions cannot pass without one of them having to stop. We do not expect such things to be necessary on A roads.
There are fewer vehicles on the A76 than on some other A roads but, as Alex Fergusson said, the proportion of heavy vehicles is much higher. That means that a collision is likely to be much more serious than it would be elsewhere. The theoretical alternative to by-going might be to put HGVs on the Nith valley railway line, but that too is at capacity and upgrading it—although necessary—is not an alternative to upgrading the A76. There is a real problem that must be tackled.
There has been no end of glossy studies—Murray Tosh referred to the first of them. The first glossy booklet on the route action plan was produced in October 1994. All the plans contain the seeds of significant procrastination, and procrastination has taken place. Much of what has been delivered so far has been relatively minor. Non-skid surfacing at potential accident spots is an improvement, but it is also an implicit admission that there is a real problem that only major surgery at those locations would cure. I remain to be convinced that the plethora of new signs that were put up years ago—most bore pictures of tractors—was a significant step forward.
The debate has rightly been prompted by the cost in human lives, but I am conscious of the effects on the economy. Murray Tosh said that an economic forum sparked off the original debate. Way back in March 1996, a Cardiff Business School study examined the effects on the economy of north Wales of dualling the A55 from Holyhead to Chester. It said that improving the road had increased accessibility, brought wider choice and raised standards.
The study found that the A55 opened up new markets for inputs and outputs and that tourism had grown and would continue to grow. Would that we had in the depressed areas along the A76 in Ayrshire and Dumfriesshire the advantages that that study talks about. The study also considered the challenges that the economy of north Wales faces, now that it has contacts with the outside world. Would that south-west Scotland had the challenges that good transport links would give us.
I will not get into the constitutional argument, but I believe that Scotland should be able to invest much more in its transport infrastructure.
I welcome the debate and congratulate Alex Fergusson on securing it. I express my deepest sympathy for the family of Joseph Lock and for the other families who have experienced tragedy on the road. The A76 is a road that I travel fairly frequently and I know the frustration and dangers of driving along it. The inadequacies of the road have long been recognised and a route action plan for the A76 was finalised in 1996, yet, here we are, nine years on, with no improvements having been made to the road.
The route action plan set out six major improvement schemes to allow for the safe overtaking of slow vehicles along the length of the A76 between Dumfries and Kilmarnock. Those improvements were to be built over 15 years yet, nine years later, only one has been completed. The road has at least seven accident black spots: from the Dumfries bypass to Auldgirth; from Thornhill village south to the A702 junction at Carronbridge; from Sanquhar north to Kelloholm; from Kirkconnel north to Pathhead; from the B7083 junction at Netherthird to Darnlaw roundabout at Auchinleck; at Mauchline village, which has been mentioned; and from Bargower to the Kilmarnock interchange. This cannot continue. We cannot have a repeat of the latest tragedy.
Representatives from Dumfries and Galloway Council secured an urgent meeting with the Executive on behalf of the A76 partnership. I hope that we will soon hear the results of that meeting in announcements on road improvements. However, local residents and councillors have been campaigning for greater road safety for 20 years, the route action plan is nine years old, and Dumfries and Galloway Council has been waiting since 31 October for that meeting with the Executive—it still does not have a date for it. The time for waiting is over; the time for action is now.
In September, the First Minister announced the Executive's legislative programme for the year and stated:
"Too many critical transport projects … are taking too long to implement."—[Official Report, 6 September 2005; c 18782.]
I agree with him. The improvements to the A76 have taken far too long and cannot be allowed to take any longer. Let us hope that the latest tragedy is not repeated and that the vital road improvements are implemented as a matter of urgency.
I thank Alex Fergusson for bringing the debate to Parliament. His motion sets out a range of issues relating to this section of Scotland's trunk road network. I join other members in expressing condolences to all those who have been tragically affected by the recent accidents.
Members have given considerable historical background to the A76, including the route action plan—glossy or otherwise. One or two members have also suggested that no investment has taken place but, as Alex Fergusson and others have more fairly pointed out, that is not the case. There are two relevant works contracts in the 2005-06 transport programme: the reconstruction of the carriageway and associated improvements at Sanquhar, which have just started; and the resurfacing and associated measures in New Cumnock. The combined estimated cost of those projects is in excess of £1.5 million.
The route action plan study recognised that, overall, the level of traffic on the A76 would not justify a major upgrading of the road from end to end. Subsequent analysis has not materially altered that position.
Will the minister give way?
I will make a few more points and then I will give way to Mr Neil.
Six schemes were identified at the time and were classified as short, medium and long-term objectives. The short-term schemes were at Crossroads and Polquhirter; the medium-term ones were at Brackenhill and Gateside; and the long-term ones were at Glenairlie and Cample. Two schemes were initially progressed: those at Crossroads and Gateside. The Crossroads scheme was completed in late 2003 and replaced an offset crossroads junction with a new roundabout and a section of overtaking lane.
A scheme between Gateside and Knockenjig was prepared but it has not hitherto satisfied the necessary value-for-money criteria; some members have mentioned that this afternoon. Modifications were made to the original scheme but were not agreed by local landowners, as I am sure that members are aware. Dumfries and Galloway Council has been invited to assess the possibilities of another scheme in the area and I await the results of that discussion.
A further route action plan proposal that is being taken forward is the promotion of the scheme at Glenairlie, which is south of Sanquhar. The scheme is currently being prepared and will provide back-to-back guaranteed dedicated overtaking opportunities. I hope to publish the draft orders for the Glenairlie improvement early in 2006. The remaining schemes on the A76 will be progressed subject to competing priorities on the network—all transport ministers face competing priorities.
Can the minister clarify his point about the role of the council in progressing the scheme that he described? I understood that the council was the agency for the Executive in relation to trunk roads but that the Executive was the project director and fundholder. Should it not be the Executive that promotes the improvements at that location?
As I understand it—although it was before my time—we did promote the improvements but we could not reach a conclusion on the value-for-money criteria. We modified the plans, but they then did not meet the aspirations of local landowners—I believe that there were issues to do with an underpass and local farmers. We have invited Dumfries and Galloway Council to help us with that particular matter.
I will give way to Alex Neil on his earlier point.
I have a question for the minister about the criteria for deciding on investment in roads. Making decisions on the basis of existing traffic is a narrow way of judging priorities. As my colleague pointed out, in north Wales, the economic impact of the dualling of the A55, as well as the safety and social impact, has transformed a depressed area.
I will come on to that when I talk about general roads policy in a moment or so. I did not say, and no transport minister has ever said, that the only criterion is the weight of traffic on a particular section of a road.
Alex Fergusson said that the upgrading of the A77 to motorway standard has brought about a steady increase in traffic on the A76. That is not the case. Records since January 2000 show that there has been a very small increase in A76 traffic in line with national traffic trends. I am not persuaded by the argument that there has been a huge displacement. There has been some change, but we should not overdo that argument.
Parliament will understand that I cannot comment on the recent A76 accidents because investigations are under way. The police have not indicated that the physical road environment was a contributory factor in the most recent accident, but my officials and the operating company are reviewing the circumstances to establish whether action requires to be taken.
However, I acknowledge that the safety issue is core to the argument that has been made this afternoon. The safety performance of the trunk road network as a whole is reviewed annually and a programme of safety measures is implemented to mitigate identified problem areas. I have instructed the 2005 review of accidents to begin. That will identify safety schemes for implementation in 2006. The potential for accident prevention schemes at accident clusters on the A76 will be considered as part of that review. I am extremely concerned about accidents that have occurred on that stretch of our trunk road network, so I have asked the department to look at this as a matter of urgency. The report will be with me in January.
The current trunk road programme is full, with more than 40 major projects that will serve communities and users throughout Scotland, including the A76 Glenairlie scheme that I mentioned. In 2006—this answers the point that Alex Neil raised—we will start work on the strategic projects review, which will provide an opportunity to consider the major public transport and road transport priorities for the future. The review will take into account issues of national or strategic importance that affect the trunk road network throughout Scotland, including the trunk road network in south-west Scotland. The A76 will be part of that review.
I welcome the formation of the A76 action group, whose first meeting is, I understand, scheduled for Friday. The group will provide a useful focus for input to the strategic projects review. I can assure the Parliament that I have asked senior officials from the Executive's trunk roads divisions to attend that meeting on Friday both to report on progress on the A76 schemes and to listen to important local concerns in light of the motion that we have debated this afternoon.
Meeting closed at 17:48.