The next item of business is a statement by Derek Mackay on the Forth road bridge. The minister will take questions at the end of his statement, and there should therefore be no interventions or interruptions.
14:20
I am grateful to Parliament for the opportunity to make a statement on the Forth road bridge. As members will be aware, on the night of Thursday 3 December, a necessary decision was taken to close the Forth road bridge to all traffic, cyclists and pedestrians. I will update Parliament on the reasons for that closure, providing information on the mitigation measures that have been implemented and the next steps that we are taking to repair the bridge and return it to normal operation at the earliest opportunity.
I thank the communities around the Forth road bridge, commuters and road users for their continued patience at this time. I reassure them that we are aware of the significant impact of the situation and that we are working with all our partners to minimise the impact where we can. It is an issue of national significance and, with everyone playing their part, we can limit the impact on the local, regional and national economies.
Following the discovery of a serious defect near the north-east tower on Tuesday 1 December, during a routine inspection, the decision was taken to restrict traffic to the northbound carriageway, away from the defective area. Detailed analysis of traffic and of different traffic load scenarios was then undertaken to evaluate the structure and determine whether it was safe to keep the bridge in operation. Results on the morning of Thursday 3 December showed that the existing restrictions needed to be augmented with a further restriction on vehicles over 7.5 tonnes except buses, which had been modelled into the load analysis.
The defect affected one of the two truss end links that support the main truss at the north-east tower. If a further failure had occurred, support would have been lost to the end of the main span-stiffening truss, which would have dropped by between 150mm and 700mm depending on the loading at the time. That would have meant that the load would have been redistributed across to the link on the north-west tower, increasing loads on other elements. The carriageways would also have dropped, further damaging the structure. That kind of damage was a likely outcome and would have required bridge closure for a repair that could have lasted several months.
The operating company, Amey, conducted a series of additional inspections and tests on the welds and joints to the other truss end link immediately after the initial defect was found. The focus was on first inspecting the welds of the adjacent member, which was carrying additional load from the failed member. The inspection and testing were completed by late afternoon on Thursday 3 December and the results were presented to Transport Scotland.
The results showed cracking having started at the same weld location and having spread along the load-carrying weld at the critical pin joint. At this stage, the extent is small but the implications are large. The main truss of the bridge relies on that joint being at full strength to cope with the additional loading due to the adjacent defect, but our experts concurred that, with continual loading, the identified crack would be likely to propagate, leading to the failure of the remaining truss end link. The timescales for that occurring could not be estimated, as a large number of factors are involved, many of which cannot be fully quantified at this stage. However, removing the remaining traffic load from the structure would reduce the loads and stresses on the remaining truss end link and ensure that the travelling public were not put at risk.
As a result of that advice, the decision was taken to close the bridge to all traffic from midnight on Thursday 3 December in order to safeguard the integrity of the structure.
It is anticipated that, following the completion of a successful repair, the Forth road bridge will reopen in time for people to return to work in the new year. The decision to close the bridge was not taken lightly. It is based firmly on the expert opinion of the engineers who operate the bridge day to day and that of independent experts in the field. Every effort is being made to open the bridge as quickly as possible, but safety is the main priority. Unfortunately, the works are weather dependent, given the height and location of the defect on the bridge.
We are aware of the potential economic impact for strategic traffic in the east of Scotland and on people who live in the local communities. This is an unprecedented challenge in the operation of the Forth road bridge. On balance and following the advice from engineers and independent experts, full closure is the right decision. It is essential for the safety of the travelling public and to prevent further damage to the structure of the bridge.
The bridge operators, Amey, have in place a robust inspection regime that aligns with industry standards for a structure of the bridge’s nature. That regime is a continuation of the methodology used by the Forth Estuary Transport Authority. Due to the thorough nature of the regime, specialist engineers are confident in their view that the defects have occurred only in the last few weeks.
We are taking every step we can to alleviate the impact of the closure. Action taken last week will mean that any closure will be much shorter than it might have been if we had waited to take action. We continue to work closely with all partners to co-ordinate our efforts to alleviate the impact of the closure. Every effort and resource available is being deployed to repair the damage to the Forth road bridge and minimise the disruption to the public.
To be clear, FETA reports that are being discussed in the media refer to the other end of the truss end link, where it connects with the north tower at the top, and not to the pin joint at the base of the link, where the defect has materialised. Works to the top of the truss end link were already under way. Specialist engineers believe that the new defect that was identified on Tuesday as part of a routine inspection occurred only in the past few weeks. For the avoidance of doubt, based on the advice and evidence that we have received from those engineers, we believe that the current fault is entirely unrelated to the above project and there is no indication that the on-going repair project in the towers has caused the defect.
The Scottish Government fully funded all FETA programmes after taking over the funding of the annual grant in 2008. Prior to the authority’s dissolution earlier this year, FETA made decisions on its programme and priorities of repairs completely independently of Transport Scotland.
The timing of the closure was communicated to the public within minutes of ministers taking the difficult decision and was covered on evening news programmes, which advised people of the closure and the measures to take when travelling on Friday morning. Local authorities were involved from the early stages and undertook to inform their local communities where possible.
There is on-going consultation with business organisations such as Scottish Enterprise, the Federation of Small Businesses, the Scottish Chambers of Commerce and the Road Haulage Association. We are also in discussions with our other partners such as Police Scotland, other emergency services, NHS Scotland and public transport operators to minimise disruption and deliver our contingency plans.
A comprehensive travel plan was launched for commuters and affected communities on Sunday afternoon to allow people to plan their trips for the working week ahead. We also created a dedicated website, which had more than 85,000 hits on Sunday. It has details of the travel plan along with some questions and answers to help people tailor their travel plans. That comprehensive travel plan was put in place in time for the Monday commute to work. With 100,000 people using the bridge every day, delays and longer journeys are inevitable. Therefore, it is important that everyone—workers and employers—be flexible in working arrangements during this period.
Together with public transport operators, we too will be flexible. The plan will be monitored and adjusted to give the best possible service to the travelling public. ScotRail has provided additional rail capacity as part of the full travel plan. That plan was made available to the travelling public on Sunday to allow people to plan for their journeys to work on Monday. As a result of our monitoring, it has been modified to accommodate commuters where possible. In response to passenger demand, an extra early morning train has been laid on, which leaves Inverkeithing before 6 am. Overall, an extra 8,000 seats are now being provided, and that number will increase further.
Additional subsidised bus services have also been provided. Thirty-three extra buses are providing 11,000 additional seats per day. Along with bus priority measures, they have allowed for reliable journey times to Edinburgh, even in the peak periods.
Both bus and rail services are being served by dedicated park-and-ride sites at Halbeath and Ferrytoll, and we continue to work closely with Fife Council to monitor the operation of those sites.
A dedicated heavy goods vehicle and bus route was implemented from Monday morning. That involved segregating traffic and ensuring that we put measures in place to prioritise bus movements to get the maximum number of people to work and ensure that journey times for HGVs were improved to reduce any impact on the economy.
The travel plan also included alternative routes for road users who use the Kincardine bridge and the Clackmannanshire bridge. Updates to the public were and continue to be broadcast using the traffic Scotland website and Twitter feed, the Traveline Scotland app and traffic Scotland radio. ScotRail and Stagecoach are also providing regular updates.
The plan will be monitored throughout the bridge closure and adapted as necessary. I thank the local communities of the areas for their patience throughout, as I am sure that the closure will cause additional disruption to them. Following our monitoring of the HGV and bus route, the restrictions on it have been relaxed between the hours of 8 pm and 5 am to help to ease the impact on local communities.
The plan is in place, and I will describe today’s situation. Rail services commenced with the additional service at 5.52, which carried approximately 160 passengers. Services between Edinburgh and Fife have been busy, and they have been strengthened where possible to cope with additional passenger flows. Queuing systems have been in place at stations in Fife, and ScotRail staff are in attendance at all stations. The 6.13 from Dalgety Bay was full, and there was no room for 70 passengers at Inverkeithing nor a further 25 passengers at Rosyth. I understand that that service was the only one that passengers were unable to board this morning, but all those passengers were accommodated on the next train.
The A977/A907 Gartarry roundabout, the A977/A876 Kilbagie roundabout and the M876/A876/A895 Higgins’ Neuk roundabout were heavily congested during the morning peak period, but traffic continued to move. Fife Council reported problems on the coast road through Culross. Congestion on the A9 at the Broxden roundabout was heavy at times, but the temporary traffic management at the A9 Keir roundabout worked well and kept the strategic traffic flowing. At 9.30, the roads were running free, but they were still busy at the key roundabouts.
The bus and HGV prioritisation on the A895 between the Cairneyhill and Longannet roundabouts operated well and facilitated park-and-ride buses from Ferrytoll and Halbeath. Stagecoach reported bus journey times of between an hour and 30 minutes and an hour and 45 minutes. However, uptake of the park and ride was low, with loadings averaging 12 per cent at Halbeath and 7 per cent at Ferrytoll. We are doing everything that we can to encourage further use of that bus service. I remind everyone that the successful implementation of the plan depends on the choices that people make. Again, we encourage the public to use the additional public transport services, particularly the bus services.
Emergency vehicles will still be able to use the bridge in blue-light situations, and arrangements have been made with NHS Scotland in respect of other critical medical appointments.
A call with business organisations, which was chaired by the Deputy First Minister, was held this morning. That was an opportunity to share information and identify any practical steps that could be taken. A number of suggestions have been made by business, and ministers have committed to look at all of them in detail.
This is an unprecedented transport challenge. The safety of the travelling public is of paramount importance, and the decisions that we have taken will ensure that that is maintained. Specialists are working day and night to return the bridge to normality, and we will fix the problem as soon as we possibly can.
We continue to work with all partners and the emergency services to manage the impact of the closure and to help to ensure that diversions operate as efficiently as possible. We will continue to share all travel information through the dedicated website.
Members of this Parliament will be aware of the issues that have been raised previously regarding the suspension cables on the bridge and the subsequent action that FETA took to mitigate the impact and halt further deterioration. The residual risk of a potentially lengthy full-bridge closure remained, which supported the decision to progress with a Forth replacement crossing.
I thank the minister for the advance copy of his statement. The gravity of the situation and its impact on the ability of thousands of people to get to and from their work must not be understated.
We think that the Scottish Government took the right decision to shut the bridge, because public safety must be the absolute priority. I acknowledge that the minister has worked hard over the past few days to keep the Government’s focus on the people and businesses that are affected, and to put in place emergency measures.
It is important that people have a way of feeding back information about what is and is not working. My party will continue to work with the Government to ensure that we are able to do everything possible to enable people to get to work, and to support businesses that have been impacted.
The minister referred to media reports about what has gone wrong and why. We must be clear; it is not just the media that are asking questions. How has the fault developed? Yesterday a top engineer claimed that key maintenance on the bridge was cancelled in 2010. We know that two senior engineers on the Forth road bridge resigned. It is understood that those specialists, who had years of experience on the bridge, left because the operation and maintenance of the bridge had, in effect, been privatised. What impact has privatisation of the bridge had on available expertise and, ultimately, on ongoing maintenance of the bridge?
We know that in 2012 Audit Scotland confirmed that there had been a capital funding cut in relation to the bridge. We also know that in 2007 Transport Scotland identified repairs that were needed on the bridge but which were never carried out.
People have questions and need answers, which is why I am calling for a parliamentary inquiry into the circumstances that led to the crisis. A parliamentary inquiry is in the public interest, and I hope that the minister and the Government will support such an inquiry.
I thank Alex Rowley for his participation over the past few days.
Communication has been important in the context of improving the travel plan and sharing the message about safety, and the member made a fair comment about using social media to share information and listen to the public and communities. We are doing that in real time and have adapted the travel plan—for example, by lifting restrictions on the priority corridor. We are engaging with communities, local authorities, elected members and parliamentarians, and businesses. It is right to listen and to respond.
On the fault that has been identified, let me be clear. The fault was not predicted: it was not identified in the location on the member that has been deemed to be overstressed, therefore the fault was not predictable. Separate works were already under way on the rest of the member, but the specific element in question was not predicted to fail or to crack in the way that it has done.
Information from the comprehensive inspections and daily and weekly inspections lead our expert engineers to conclude that the fault occurred only in the past few weeks. There is the offer of a further technical briefing for parliamentarians, which I hope will assist them in their understanding of the fault that has occurred. We will be transparent about the nature of the fault, which I think shows that the Government has taken all appropriate action.
There are no critical repairs for which FETA has requested funding that have not been funded by Government or Transport Scotland. The operation and management of the bridge is independent of the Government and is led by the operating committee, and finance was in place to carry out the identified work programme.
Indeed, the work programme that FETA developed was being delivered by our operatives through the new operation. On staffing and the current practices of the bridge operator—Amey—there are more people working at the bridge than was the case before the transfer on 1 June, and their substantial—indeed, enhanced—expertise on the bridge is part of the current operating arrangements.
The nature of staff change was not as Mr Rowley described. Most of the staff who were working on the bridge before the 1 June transfer are still working on the bridge, and all the operating manuals on the history of the bridge have been maintained. There was a seamless transition to the new operator to ensure that continuity of work, and this Government—through Transport Scotland and the operator—has prioritised elements of work that we inherited from FETA.
I thank the minister for his statement and for advance sight of it.
It hardly needs to be stated how damaging the closure of the bridge is for the economy of Fife and for the east of Scotland more generally. I have been contacted by businesses that stand to lose considerable sums in an important trading period, and by commuters who face weeks of disruption, additional cost, and frustration.
The efforts of the Scottish Government, its agencies, and the transport companies to put alternative travel arrangements in place are appreciated. However, there are still problems; for now, the priority should be resolving those.
For example, this morning, I used the Ferrytoll park and ride, which was very quiet, but I still found myself waiting 40 minutes for the promised shuttle bus to Inverkeithing rail station, which is little more than a mile away. In fact, I could have walked the distance had I realised that the wait was going to be so long.
Although people travelling from Fife into the centre of Edinburgh have options that they can use, many of my constituents need to get to work in west Edinburgh, at Edinburgh airport, or elsewhere in the Lothians or in the central belt. What more can the Scottish Government do to provide them with public transport alternatives?
Minister?
Presiding Officer, there are two other points that I want to cover briefly, if I can.
Very briefly, Mr Fraser.
First, businesses that are losing large sums of money as a result of the bridge closure are understandably calling for compensation. What does the Scottish Government propose to do to assist them?
Finally, there has been a great deal of speculation, as Mr Rowley said, that the bridge closure was the result of inadequate maintenance. We have heard from John Carson, who has blamed “incompetence” on the part of Transport Scotland.
Will the minister now agree that we need a fully independent inquiry into what went wrong, reporting as early as possible in the new year, so that we can find out the truth of the matter and learn lessons for the future?
I thank Murdo Fraser for those questions and for his support in regard to the public transport alternatives. They have been strengthened and there is real information on those alternatives to assist the public.
As regards alterations and improvements, we are looking at further strengthening the public transport interventions. I am happy to hear any constructive suggestions on how we may further improve those interventions as we enhance what is currently being provided.
On business support, the Deputy First Minister engaged with businesses this morning. As I said in my statement, any suggestions that are made will be fully considered. However, the key thing has to be to get the bridge open as quickly as possible, so we are working around the clock to do that.
The Government has taken the right decision in closing the bridge so that investigation, preparation and repair work can be carried out. I believe that we have averted a much more serious structural incident that would have been more damaging to the economy in the area, if it had occurred.
On transportation of goods and other support for businesses, we have prioritised HGVs and we are looking at extending that to support businesses further. By way of our intervention and prioritisation and our partnership working with businesses, we will continue to do everything that we can to support them at this difficult time.
Thank you. We are very tight for time this afternoon and I have absolutely no scope to extend the statement and questions. I will therefore give priority to constituency and regional members whose constituents are most affected, and to constituency and regional MSPs who indicated to me by the usual time their wish to ask a question.
As I do, many of my constituents use rail to commute daily to Edinburgh. Will the minister clarify exactly what measures have been put in place on the rail network to minimise disruption? What discussions has the minister had with local authorities on the relaxation of parking restrictions and an increase in available parking spaces?
I will try to be brief in my answers, Presiding Officer.
Through ScotRail, we have identified extra carriages, which has enabled us to increase the number of carriages and trains and to provide an extended timetable. That has amounted to an extra 8,000 seats, and that capacity will be enhanced further. Staff are in place at all affected stations. We are sharing that information through the dedicated website.
Local authorities are key partners. Along with Police Scotland, they have worked in partnership with us to help to manage the local traffic impact. Local authorities will consider actions including removing unnecessary road works to try to encourage free flow of traffic where possible. We will continue to engage with local authorities on our travel action plan.
I thank the minister for providing advance sight of his statement and for his engagement over the weekend. In particular, I was pleased with the announcement about the special arrangements over the bridge for chemotherapy and radiotherapy patients. However, I want to make it clear to the minister that I expect him to return to Parliament for a proper examination of the decisions that ministers have taken in the past few years and which might have contributed to the defect on the bridge.
Today, however, people want to know what changes the minister is going to make to the transport plan. In particular, will he agree to lift the restrictions on the A985 for off-peak travel during the daytime? The restrictions are having a dramatic impact on the local community and on traffic flows, so I would appreciate his looking again at that.
I have invited Willie Rennie to take up the offer of a technical briefing, and I believe that he has taken up that offer and will receive the briefing today. That will give him a fuller understanding of the technical issues about how the fault has occurred, which I referenced in my statement.
As a listening Government, we are adapting the travel plan to take account of local circumstances. There is on-going monitoring of the traffic system, as well as of demand for transport provision including the enhanced rail services. There is more capacity on buses and in park and ride facilities, so I again encourage people to use that. The priority route is working in providing a reliable journey time, but if we can relax the restrictions further to support businesses and communities, we will absolutely look at that. We have lifted some restrictions to reflect what was working, what was rational and what can make the biggest difference. I, of course, remain open-minded to the right interventions.
As the constituency member covering Dunfermline and west Fife, I know that very few of my constituents have not been detrimentally affected by the bridge closure. I am grateful to the minister for his speedy responses to the issues that I have already raised.
The minister is aware of the lack of parking at train stations, which is an on-going issue in west Fife, with spaces full before 8 o’clock in the morning. The bridge closure is causing a real headache for the growing number of commuters who have no option but to travel. On Friday, I wrote to the minister asking that free shuttle buses be provided between Halbeath park and ride and local train stations. Did the minister discuss that option with Stagecoach and, if so, why is it not being pursued?
It does not surprise me to hear that the uptake of park and ride is low, because no commuter wants to spend two hours sat on a bus when they could be at their destination in half the time if a free shuttle was provided to the local train station. I would appreciate it if the minister would let me know what discussions have happened with Stagecoach, because our front-line workers have to be put before Stagecoach’s shareholders. I would appreciate it if the minister would act on that.
The reason why Stagecoach has been deployed is that, frankly, it is the largest operator in the area and its expertise is very useful. The extra buses that have been provided have created capacity. There is huge demand on rail, which is perhaps because of the certainty around that. However, I want to correct the journey time that Cara Hilton mentioned, because the average journey time is actually an hour and a half, and not two hours.
That is not what my constituents are telling me.
Order, Ms Hilton.
I think that that compares quite well with people using the private car. I understand that some people will continue to require to use the car but, for those who can use public transport, I direct them towards the bus provision. Rather than have more buses going from park and ride sites to railway stations, the approach is possibly more about trying to transfer some people from queueing at stations on to buses, where there is extra capacity.
I have been in regular communication with a number of members, including Cara Hilton. I have considered every suggestion that has been put to me and worked those through the system, and many of them have been implemented. The measures will remain under constant scrutiny and focus and they will be adapted if that makes sense.
I need shorter questions.
In my constituency there is one business, 98 per cent of whose goods are exported out of Scotland, so I am grateful for the minister’s comments about the dialogue between the Deputy First Minister and business. Will that dialogue continue so that the current urgent situation can be resolved?
Yes, it will. We will have constant dialogue with the key business representatives and, of course, major employers in the area.
It is clear from the questions that have been asked by members around the chamber that we would benefit from a parliamentary inquiry on the issue.
The minister said that it is anticipated that the bridge will be open for people when they return to work in the new year. How confident is he of that timescale? Which factors might lead to a delay? It is obviously of great concern to commuters in Fife, particularly shift workers, that the bridge is reopened as soon as possible.
The most recent briefing that I had, which I had just before I left the national traffic control centre, where the multi-agency response is being co-ordinated, to come to the Parliament, was that the work is on track as per the timetable that has been published.
Among the factors that may change that is the fact that the works are weather dependent, because we will not have people working in unsafe conditions, but we are working around the clock to get the bridge open as quickly as possible.
For those who are being critical, there is a slang phrase that recognises that life is full of unpredictable events, but I had better not use it in here today.
In that light, what discussions has the minister had with the United Kingdom Government on a relaxation of the rules for HGV drivers who may face issues with working hours as a result of the diversions? I am sure that he will recognise that the haulage industry is very important to the Scottish economy.
It was because I recognised the pressures on business and the haulage industry that I moved quickly to have discussions with the secretary of state. He has had discussions with the Department for Transport, and there will be a relaxation of the rules on drivers’ hours to support businesses at this time.
Given that 100,000 people use the bridge every day, a wide range of journey patterns and journey purposes are represented. In his statement, the minister mentioned a willingness to monitor and adjust the travel plan according to feedback. Has any consideration been given to offering a telephone helpline, which could gather first-hand experience and provide reliable advice and information, thereby enhancing the monitoring?
There is a telephone helpline available for people to use through Transport Scotland and it has been scaled up in anticipation of demand.
Although the main priority in the coming days and weeks must be the need to minimise disruption to the travelling public, once the bridge has reopened will the minister instruct the carrying out of a full and thorough assessment of the causes of the closure so that we can understand why we have arrived in this position and what lessons, if any, can be learned for the future? What further assurances can he give that the Government will act to ensure that there is proper transparency and accountability in relation to all the historical decisions that were taken prior to Transport Scotland assuming responsibility for the bridge?
That is a helpful question. We have shared a lot of the technical expertise that has come from expert engineers and we can continue to do that as we update people on progress on the bridge. Of course we will review systems, inspections and processes to ensure that, if there are any lessons to be learned, we will learn them. I think that that is the right thing to do, considering the unprecedented nature of this incident and the impacts of the closure, so I will commit to doing it.
After discussion with the haulage industry in the Highlands and Islands, I have two very quick practical points. First, can we relax the rules on drivers’ hours? Bruce Crawford raised that important issue. Secondly, as an emergency measure, can we increase speed limits on single carriageways to 50mph in light of what is happening on the A9?
I have addressed the issue of drivers’ hours: there will be a relaxation of the rules. That has been taken on board by the Scottish Government and the UK Government.
As far as speed limits are concerned, David Stewart and I have exchanged views on that issue in the past. A specific package of measures has been put in place to allow for an increase in the speed of HGVs on the A9, but I do not think that it would be appropriate for there to be a wholesale increase, and I do not think that an increase would be appropriate in this specific case, only because there would be an increased risk of fatalities and casualties if there were more incidents.
South of the border, where the UK Government is increasing the national HGV limit, it said in its own assessment that there would be an increased risk of fatalities and casualties, and I am afraid that that is not a gamble that I am willing to take with lives in Scotland.
Does the minister recall my announcing in June 2007 that there would be a new bridge delivered in 2016? Is it a result of a proper and permanent response then, and effective management now, that we are on schedule and £1 billion below the budget that I announced at that time?
I think that it is fair to say that, as well as all the other contingency plans that have been put in place as a result of the bridge closure, the decision that was made to build the replacement crossing is a rather substantial contingency plan. The events have vindicated the Government’s decision to build a replacement Forth crossing, which is being delivered on time and under budget.
Does the minister have any comment to make on the document that was published on the public contracts Scotland website on 25 May 2010, which is headed “Truss End Links” and concerns the Forth road bridge, the status of which is now “Cancelled”?
I have offered all political parties a full technical briefing and an explanation of mitigation measures. The only party that I know has not taken up that offer is the Conservative Party, which is perhaps why Alex Johnstone is so ill informed. I would have thought that, in listening to the statement, Alex Johnstone would have understood some of the issues that he is asking about.
The key point is that FETA was in operation at the time. The works that the member has identified are not where the fault has occurred. The specific crack was not predicted. It has emerged in the past few weeks. It was identified on Tuesday, a recommendation was made to ministers on Thursday and action was taken within minutes.
FETA, which was responsible at the time, had a work programme that it was working through and it did not identify the fault. With regard to the technical nature of that contract, FETA re-scoped its own works and was getting on with the job. After 1 June, on transition to the Scottish Government and our operation with Amey, we inherited the work programme. We were delivering that and were strengthening brackets that had been identified when this quite unrelated fault emerged. Government took the swiftest action possible.
I recognise the frustration for businesses and commuters and the cost to the economy, which is estimated at some £50 million.
The First Minister told the press today that there was not a cut to the budget. In its report on FETA, Audit Scotland said, at paragraph 34, that
“the budget for capital expenditure was cut significantly”.
Is it not the case that Audit Scotland is quite right and that plans were made by FETA, in conjunction with Transport Scotland, in the context of reduced budgets?
It is not the case that budget decisions have had an impact in relation to the fault. As I said, the expert engineering advice is that the fault was not predicted and has appeared only in the past few weeks. FETA was amending its work programme, which the Scottish Government has inherited and is delivering. Of course, we will see through the necessary repairs.
On the issue of capital grant, there was on-going investment. Funding this year is £10.7 million, matching the programme of works that was developed by FETA, and it has not been subject to any reduction. In addition, we have never restricted funding for critical works.
I thank the minister for his statement and the measures that have been put in place to deal with the closure of the bridge.
What steps is the Government taking to alleviate the difficulties that are faced by commuters using the already under-pressure Dalmeny railway station in my constituency—the first halt on the southern side of the rail bridge—who are unable to board trains due to capacity issues, as well as the local road congestion and parking problems around South Queensferry?
Extra carriages have been identified and deployed, there is staffing at stations to support commuters and the travelling public, and we are looking at further enhancing the number of seats, through extra carriages, and making further amendments to the timetable in order to support everyone who is affected on the rail line, which has been enhanced to support commuters at this challenging time.
Will consideration be given to early services? I have had feedback to suggest that, for many commuters, it is simply not possible to use the train because services do not run early enough. That is having a big impact on businesses and the public sector in the Edinburgh area.
That is a very reasonable question because our advice is that, if people can avoid the peak periods, it will help to alleviate congestion in the busy periods. We have therefore extended the timetable for an earlier departure—the 5:52 service—and we are looking at further enhancing that with earlier trains and, if possible, overnight trains. Hopefully, we will increase the number of seats provided during the duration of the bridge closure by more than 10,000. We are actively looking at that, and I will update members through the channels that I have established.
With the greatly increased number of commuters travelling by rail or bus, what discussions has the minister had with local authorities on relaxing parking restrictions or increasing the parking available?
Local authorities and Police Scotland have been asked to take all reasonable measures and are being proactive in doing so. That might include removing restrictions and supporting parking where appropriate and, as I said earlier, removing unnecessary road works to try to make our road system as accessible as possible. However, it is simply not possible to displace 70,000 vehicles on to the rest of the network and not expect a degree of congestion. That is why we are encouraging people to car share, to avoid travelling where possible and to use public transport.
On public transport, rail is in huge demand, so let us add the focus to bus, where there is plenty of extra capacity, prioritisation on the bus and heavy goods vehicle corridor, and journey times of around an hour and a half, which is much better than was anticipated.
I sympathise entirely with the plight of those in Fife and other areas that are most directly affected by the closure of the bridge, but the 8,000 additional train spaces that the minister spoke to have been brought to Fife and surrounding areas at the cost of some disruption in other parts of the country.
Can the minister assure me that that disruption will be kept to the very minimum? Will he speak to Abellio in future about the possibility of there being additional spare capacity in rolling stock? Already this year—between August and November—the constituents I represent have suffered disruption to services because of engineering works. They are now suffering disruption because of the closure of the Forth road bridge and will, during the period of the Edinburgh to Glasgow improvement programme, suffer a further 22 weeks’ disruption. My fear is that—
I think that you have made your point, Ms Ferguson.
First, all of the disruptive works that Patricia Ferguson has outlined are to achieve the outcome of more trains for Scotland; faster, greener trains; and, with more seats, capacity enhancements. The Edinburgh to Glasgow improvement programme will be about future proofing the railway. I appreciate that people have endured pain and disruption from works that are necessary for electrification and the refurbishment of Queen Street station, but some of that will be worth it for the expanded rail service that will be provided.
On the second point about supporting Fife, I am sure that the whole country understands that this is an issue of national significance and that we need to pull together to support the region at this time. Again, I appreciate the impact that the bridge closure has had on some other people, but it is important to give the area as much support as we can in what is a very challenging period, as the main artery is not in operation.
Finally, we have used the rolling stock capacity to the max so that we are getting the best out of the railways with the rolling stock that we have. More trains have been ordered and will be delivered through the new franchise agreement. That will be a good deal for Scotland.
On the temporary impact, we asked ScotRail to identify carriages and rolling stock outwith Scotland first before impacting on services in Scotland. That has been achieved, in that some of the rolling stock has come from elsewhere, but there has been an impact on some ScotRail services. As I say, though, surely we all understand that the Fife area is under considerable pressure and that it was right to intervene in the way we did. We must pull together as a country and support that region in the way that most other members have been encouraging me to in the past few days.
Will the minister ask his officials in Transport Scotland to ensure that the signposting for diversions is accurate, as that was not the case between the Cairneyhill roundabout and the Kincardine bridge yesterday?
Yes of course. We will try to make sure that all relevant information is accurate and updated in real time. Some of our equipment was subject to vandalism, but of course we will try to make sure that all information is as up to date as possible. The nature of this incident is that we, as a listening Government, are changing the travel plan according to what is working and what will provide the best intervention. All information should flow seamlessly from those decisions.