On a point of order, Presiding Officer. In his statement this afternoon, the Deputy First Minister and Cabinet Secretary for Finance, Constitution and Economy said:
“In light of the excellent progress on the Aberdeen western peripheral route, I confirm that work will begin in 2016-17 on the improvements to the Haudagain roundabout”.
That statement appeared to represent a complete change in the Government’s plans, which had previously been that work on the roundabout would not begin until after work on the Aberdeen western peripheral route was completed at the end of 2017. However, on closer examination—[Interruption.]
Order.
Page 127 of the budget document commits only to
“progress design and development work on the A90 Haudagain Roundabout”,
design and development work that has already been under way for some time. [Interruption.]
Order, let us hear the member.
The infrastructure investment plan, issued today, states explicitly at page 107 in reference to the project:
“Planned to begin construction following the completion of the AWPR”
Only a few minutes ago, Transport Scotland appeared to have no knowledge of any change in Government plans that would lead work on the improvements to the Haudagain roundabout to begin in 2016-17.
I am sorry that Mr Swinney is not in the chamber to listen to this point of order, but I am sure that he would not have wished to mislead Parliament by suggesting that there had been a change in Government plans or timetables for the project when there had not. Presiding Officer, I ask that you give the Deputy First Minister an early opportunity to clarify the meaning of his statement on the matter.
Thank you, Mr Macdonald. As you know, and as I have said many times before, what a member or a minister says in the chamber is not a matter for me. As you rightly say, the Deputy First Minister is not here, but I am sure that he will reflect on what you said.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer. To the people at the Haudagain roundabout, I say merry Christmas.
That was not a point of order, Mr Paterson.
On a point of order, Presiding Officer.
Is this a point of order, Mr Mason?
It is the same as the previous two.
If you have a point of order, make it now, Mr Mason.
Presiding Officer, we have raised this issue before. There has clearly been abuse of points of order over the past two days. I appeal to you again to consider restricting the use of points of order.
Mr Mason, as I have told you in writing and in the chamber, points of order are for me to determine, not you.
Previous
Land Reform (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1