Meeting of the Parliament [Draft]

Meeting date: Thursday, September 28, 2023

Official Report 1032KB pdf

---

Portfolio Question Time

---

Transport, Net Zero and Just Transition

Good afternoon. The first item of business this afternoon is portfolio question time, and the portfolio is transport, net zero and just transition. I remind members that, if they seek to ask a supplementary question, they should press their request-to-speak button during the relevant question or, if online, enter the letters RTS in the chat function.

---

Network Rail (Meetings)

Earlier this month, the Minister for Transport confirmed a very welcome investment of around £140 million in the East Kilbride rail enhancement—

I am sorry, Ms Stevenson. Could I ask you to resume your seat for a second? The question that needs to be asked is your principal question, as per question 1 in the Business Bulletin, starting with “To ask the Scottish Government”.

Apologies, Presiding Officer, for my mistake.

To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with Network Rail and what was discussed. (S6O-02568)

I attended a meeting on Tuesday to discuss the forthcoming peak fares removal pilot, and Network Rail was represented at the meeting. My officials at Transport Scotland have regular discussions with Network Rail on a full range of subjects concerning the operation, maintenance, renewal and enhancement of the Scottish railway network. Most recently, for example, officials met Network Rail yesterday at the Scotland’s railway business briefing, which was attended by Andrew Haines and Alex Hynes. Today, officials are meeting Network Rail and South Ayrshire Council to discuss Ayr station.

I will start again. Earlier this month, the minister confirmed a very welcome investment of around £140 million in the East Kilbride rail enhancement project. I was pleased to hear that we will have new stations at East Kilbride and Hairmyres, as well as an extension to double tracking. Will the minister outline the other benefits of the enhancements to my constituents in East Kilbride, as well as for the environment?

Electrification of the route will enable quieter, more reliable and greener electric trains. It will transform the customer experience and contribute to the Scottish Government’s decarbonisation commitments. The extension of the infrastructure at Hairmyres will improve operational resilience and flexibility of service, and the new station buildings at East Kilbride and Hairmyres will make rail services more accessible and, I hope, attractive. The transport interchange at Hairmyres will provide users with choices in how they travel to and from the station, including sustainable modes, which in turn will deliver environmental benefits.

Many years ago, the Scottish Government announced £200 million to decrease journey times between Aberdeen and the central belt by 20 minutes by 2026. Was that discussed with Network Rail? Will the minister provide an update on how much of the £200 million has been spent to date and on when passengers in the north-east will start to see improvements to journey times?

I am glad that Douglas Lumsden is so supportive of the decarbonisation plans to ensure that we have electrification, which can improve journey times, among other things. As I set out, the subject of my most recent discussion with Network Rail, on Monday, was the launch of the peak fares removal pilot, which many people are looking forward to.

If there is any further detail that I can provide on spend from what was a commitment some time ago, I will, but we have obviously had a number of budgets since then.

Douglas Lumsden will be well aware that the problems caused in the United Kingdom economy and budget by his party, among other issues, have led to real constraints on infrastructure spend. As outlined by the Auditor General for Scotland only today, that has put big pressures on our spend. However, our commitment on electrification still stands.

Network Rail has previously been open to discussing the potential upgrade of the south suburban line. A train-tram solution would see vehicles running on the south suburban line, then transferring to streets to achieve convenient and more direct access to the city centre. What discussion has the Scottish Government had with Network Rail regarding the train-tram solution? Will it consider running a feasibility study on the proposal?

I do not have the details to hand of the latest discussions between Network Rail and Transport Scotland on that, which I know is something that many people in Edinburgh think would be a sensible way forward. The strategic transport projects review 2 set out priorities and future opportunities. In Glasgow, the metro would be used to enhance a multimodal approach to transport, along with light rail and other modes, and there may be potential for a similar project in Edinburgh, which would be beneficial. There are many priorities and interests. If I can follow up in writing to let the member know about recent discussions, I will do so.

---

Multimodal Smart Card

To ask the Scottish Government when it will introduce a nationwide multimodal smart card. (S6O-02569)

I am pleased to announce that we will imminently issue letters to appoint members to our newly formed national smart ticketing advisory board. Following acceptance by those members, that unique forum will include passenger, operator and public body representation to advise me and will take a collaborative approach that will ensure consistency for customers and industry.

That will build on smart activity to date, including the already established and widely accepted multimodal smart card platform used for both commercial and concessionary smart tickets on rail, bus, subway, tram and ferry by the users of the 2 million smart cards in circulation across Scotland.

The Scottish Government has been talking about having a national smart card for well over a decade, but nothing has happened. When Humza Yousaf was transport minister in 2016, he published a report that said:

“The passenger is the end user of smart ticketing and it is critical that they see benefits in a consistent experience across Scotland from multi-modal smart ticketing.”

Nothing has happened since then and the minister has just announced yet another talking shop. Why has nothing happened and, to go back to my original question, when will we see smart ticketing?

I am not sure that the member listened to my initial answer. There has been significant progress to date on smart ticketing, which includes the availability of smart ticketing for both concession and commercial tickets for those using the 2 million smart cards in circulation and the 98 per cent of our bus journeys that are now being paid for by contactless card. The use of mobile ticketing for rail journeys has also expanded.

I do not think that the industry advisers who will sit on the national smart ticketing advisory board will take kindly to the member’s description of them.

To travel from Unst, the most northerly island in Shetland, to Edinburgh by using only public transport, a traveller needs multiple bus and interisland ferry tickets and a further ticket for the NorthLink ferry to Aberdeen, and they must then buy a rail ticket for onward travel on the mainland. The fair fares review has been promised for some time. Will that review include an outline of the solutions to those barriers to flexible travel, such as the integrated smart cards that have been promised for some time?

The member makes an important point about the fair fares review, which is as much about accessibility as it is about affordability. Consistency matters. I do not know the detail about Shetland in particular, but, when I visited Transport Scotland this week, work was taking place to integrate, for Orkney, exactly the forms of transport and digital ticketing that the member described. I will find out information about Shetland in particular and give that to the member.

Why was it possible for delegates attending the 26th UN climate change conference of the parties—COP26—to have that functionality when ordinary Scots cannot, even all this time later?

I had a recent meeting with Strathclyde Passenger Transport, which has well developed plans and proposals that I am very keen to support. Many people, including 2 million smart card users, are using the existing smart technology and the specific project in Strathclyde will address the point that the member makes.

---

Fort William (Integrated Transport Plan)

To ask the Scottish Government how it is progressing its integrated transport plan for Fort William to reduce congestion and increase resilience and reliability on the trunk road network. (S6O-02570)

The proposed integrated transport plan is a recommendation that emerged from strategic transport projects review 2, and Transport Scotland has started early preparatory, planning and governance work to support its development. I recently had the pleasure of visiting Fort William, and during my visit I had several discussions with stakeholders on transport, including on the proposed plan. The Scottish Government and Transport Scotland will work with our active partners in Fort William 2040 to ensure that the future of the town is considered in a place-based way that benefits the entire town—its people, businesses and visitors.

I know that the local community in Fort William hugely appreciated the minister’s visit over the summer. She will know from that visit that the A82 is a primary route not just for locals but for anybody who travels from south to north along the west coast. However, during the summer in particular but also throughout the year, it can take more than an hour to travel a mile on that road. That has a massive impact on business haulage, on emergency services and on people getting about Fort William for their daily business. Does the minister have any ideas about how Transport Scotland can progress a permanent long-term solution to this challenge?

The points that the member raises were clearly articulated to me when I made my visit to Fort William in the summer. I recognise the importance of the A82 through Fort William and the western Highlands and I recognise the challenges that additional traffic, particularly during the tourism season, places on the local community. The continued impact of congestion on reliability has led to the proposals for a bypass being revisited as part of STPR2. Some form of bypass, bearing in mind the constraints that exist on the project, forms part of the thinking for the Fort William 2040 masterplan development.

---

Congestion Charging Schemes

To ask the Scottish Government what its position is on the introduction of road traffic congestion charging schemes. (S6O-02571)

The Transport (Scotland) Act 2001 established a discretionary power for local authorities to implement road user charging schemes on the basis that they are best placed to determine whether a scheme will support objectives in their local transport strategy. We welcome local authorities’ commitment to local measures that support delivery of a 20 per cent reduction in car kilometres, including the commitments of the City of Edinburgh Council and Glasgow City Council to a 30 per cent car kilometre reduction. We will work with local authorities to support equitable measures that will encourage active travel and greater investment in public transport for a fairer and greener transport system.

We know that Scottish National Party councillors in Glasgow are plotting a congestion charge that will hammer hard-working people who need their cars in order to do their jobs. Many have already been penalised by the punitive low-emission zone scheme, which has also hit shops and nightlife. Glasgow Chamber of Commerce is clear that this is happening only because SNP ministers are cutting cash to councils. Will the money that is taken from the pockets of motorists by any congestion charge be used to urgently repair dangerous roads and invest in public transport?

Russell Findlay’s characterisation of the opportunity for reduced congestion, greater air quality and more space for walking, wheeling and cycling is quite extraordinary—and inflammatory, I would suggest. As I set out in my initial answer, powers to introduce road user charging schemes already rest with local authorities. They have done so since 2001. As I said, I welcome the encouraging signs from both Glasgow City Council and the City of Edinburgh Council that they are committed to car kilometres reduction because of the opportunities that it creates, which I narrated at the beginning of my answer, for better spaces to live, work and spend time in.

The cabinet secretary should look more closely at what the deputy leader of the SNP in Glasgow has said. He has made it very clear that this is about raising money from people who live in areas outside Glasgow, rather than trying to tackle congestion. Is that the best way to take people with us when we are trying to tackle climate change?

On the specifics of that point, just the other day, in my response to a written question from Pauline McNeill—I understand that it will have landed with her—I was clear that the Scottish Government has had discussions with Glasgow City Council in the context of those local measures to support delivery of a 20 per cent car kilometres reduction, but the Scottish Government has not had discussions with the council regarding any specific congestion charging schemes, including on charging drivers who are not resident in Glasgow. Councils are accountable to their local communities and they have the ability to decide whether they should implement measures such as local congestion charging.

---

Just Transition (North-east Stakeholder Discussions)

To ask the Scottish Government for its response to the Robert Gordon University report, “Powering up the Workforce”.

The Robert Gordon University report shows Scotland’s enormous energy potential and demonstrates that we possess—[Interruption.]

I am sorry—will the cabinet secretary resume her seat?

Yes, of course.

Sorry, Ms Nicoll—while I was looking at another issue, my attention was drawn to the fact that the question that you asked is not the question that appears in the Business Bulletin. [Interruption.] Ms Nicoll needs to read out the question that she has asked per the Business Bulletin, so perhaps one of her colleagues could helpfully provide her with that.

I have it now. My apologies.

To ask the Scottish Government when it last met with stakeholders in the north-east to discuss its just transition strategy. (S6O-02572)

In my role as cabinet secretary, I have the pleasure of spending a great deal of time in the north-east. Most recently, I was there on 15 September—two Fridays ago. Among the visits that I undertook were visits to those who are currently in receipt of funding from the Scottish Government via the just transition fund. Those included helping to launch the energy transition skills hub with North East Scotland College in the energy transition zone, which is in receipt of £4.5 million from the just transition fund and which will help 1,000 people into energy transition jobs over the next five years.

I also had the opportunity to visit Camphill school, where I learned about its Murtle market project, which helps young people and children with complex needs to develop skills for the transition. I am pleased that we were able to support that financially as well.

The Rosebank project has been given the go-ahead. Although the oil and gas industry continues to make a significant contribution to our economy, it is clear that we must balance our future energy needs with our climate obligations—critically, ensuring a fair and just transition to net zero for our workforce.

The report that was published by the Robert Gordon University outlined that the number of people employed offshore could rise from just over 150,000 in 2023 to 225,000 by 2030, with new renewables jobs outnumbering oil and gas roles if a successful transition is achieved. What action is the Scottish Government taking to ensure that we do not lose that once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, particularly in the face of the United Kingdom Government’s disappointing—

Thank you, Ms Nicoll, you have gone over your time.

This week’s developments on Rosebank confirm a number of concerns that the Scottish Government has had for a long time. Those relate principally to the size of the field, the fact that it will primarily produce oil and the fact that that oil is due principally to be exported and therefore cannot contribute to national energy security which, alongside climate concerns, I understand to be very important.

The Robert Gordon University’s report shows enormous energy potential and demonstrates that Scotland possesses the natural resources and the skills that are required to lead the global energy transition.

I mentioned the £4.5 million that we have invested in the energy transition skills hub and the 1,000 people whom it will train over the coming years. We have also invested £11 million in a skills passport; £5 million in an energy skills passport, which will support the transition of skills and jobs across offshore energy sectors; and £1 million in a skills accelerator, which will deliver pilot training courses in the area.

After Rosebank was given the go-ahead yesterday, Sir Ian Wood, who has more than 60 years of experience and a track record of business success, said that it would accelerate a just transition to net zero and sustain thousands of jobs. On the other hand, serial corrector of the record over energy stats and career politician Humza Yousaf said that Rosebank would slow the pace of the transition. Whose analysis should the people of Scotland give more weight to?

I will be very clear. It is a stretch to suggest that fields of the size of Rosebank—primarily for oil production as they are and primarily for export, as that oil is—could possibly contribute to a just transition. [Interruption.]

Members, we need to hear the cabinet secretary’s response.

We in this Government have never advocated the switching off of the taps in the North Sea overnight; that would be the wrong thing to do for our workers and for the investment that is needed to drive the transition to net zero. However, investing in new oilfields such as Rosebank is not the answer either. We must invest in a managed and fair transition, putting people, industry and workers in the north-east first.

The offshore training passport was due to be launched by the end of this month but, with just two days to go, we are hearing reports that progress has stalled. Does the minister believe that the passport will go live in the next two days? If not, why not?

The development of the OPITO offshore passport is an exceptionally complex piece of work—the complexities of which Mercedes Villalba has consistently failed to recognise. Progress continues to be made. A review of standards mapping for the passport project is currently under way, with outputs to be considered by the project review group. For the record, that group is comprised of representatives from industry, trade body and trade unions. It will do that when it reconvenes later next month. We will have further clarity on delivery timescales for the passport when that very important part of the process has concluded.

---

Sheriffhall Roundabout (Objections)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it has received any recommendations from the independent reporter to consider any outstanding objections to the development of the A720 Sheriffhall roundabout in light of the public local inquiry, which took place at the beginning of February 2023. (S6O-02573)

The Scottish Government has not yet received any recommendations from the independent reporter regarding the A720 Sheriffhall roundabout following the public local inquiry held between 31 January and 8 February 2023.

I am disappointed to hear that. People across Edinburgh and the Lothians and the south of Scotland will really want to know when those recommendations will be given to ministers and how fast we can see this progress. We need the A720 Sheriffhall roundabout to be upgraded. It has now been five years since it was included in the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal.

Will the minister agree to meet me and campaigners at the junction at the earliest opportunity to see the real need for this to be progressed and the junction upgraded as soon as possible?

I reassure Miles Briggs that we remain committed to delivering the grade separation of Sheriffhall roundabout as part of the commitment to the Edinburgh and south-east Scotland city region deal. As with all trunk road projects, a public local inquiry is the appropriate forum for the consideration of outstanding objections. As Miles Briggs is aware, there were a considerable number of objections. I am sure that he would respect the time that the independent reporter has to take to consider them.

In response to his invitation, it would be appropriate to first see the report and then take the opportunity, as appropriate, following its publication.

---

A82 (Improvements Appraisal)

To ask the Scottish Government whether it will carry out a Scottish transport appraisal guidance appraisal of the proposed improvements to the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan. (S6O-02574)

I advise that, following Audit Scotland’s investigation in November 2022, it confirmed that a STAG-compliant assessment has already been completed in line with appropriate guidance. Therefore, it would not be appropriate to carry out a reappraisal of the preferred improvement option, as that would unnecessarily repeat completed work, resulting in considerable delay and additional cost that would not provide any value to the Scottish taxpayer.

I can confirm that the Scottish Government remains committed to improving the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan and will continue to push forward with the necessary detailed design and assessment work.

An approximation of a STAG appraisal is not a full STAG appraisal, which is yet to be carried out. There has been little consultation with key local groups, and it is also not appropriate to treat this as a standard road-widening exercise, given the sensitivity of the unique qualities of the landscape in Scotland’s first national park. There is an alternative inland proposal that has not been properly considered. Given that a full STAG appraisal has not taken place, will the minister commit to giving it a full appraisal and looking at the alternative solution, so that we can get the best possible upgrade to the A82 between Tarbet and Inverarnan?

I appreciate the concerns that were raised and that people have different views. It is probably problematic for Jackie Baillie to disagree with Audit Scotland’s recognition—its investigation in November 2022 confirmed that a STAG-compliant assessment had been done.

In the question session, we have already heard how important the A82 is, particularly for access to the West Highlands. When I was in Fort William, as well as the local issues that were raised about the A82, people raised the improvements that were needed at Tarbert and Inverarnan. We take the matter seriously, but we recognise that it is important that we get value for the public purse and that we should not repeat work. As I have outlined, it is important that progress takes place.

---

A96 (Safety Improvement Works)

To ask the Scottish Government what road safety improvement works have been planned for the A96 near Huntly. (S6O-02575)

Transport Scotland’s operating company Amey is undertaking road safety improvements at the A920 staggered junction on the A96. The resurfacing of the junction was completed in September 2023, which included the installation of LED solar powered road studs to improve the visibility of the junction for approaching drivers. Road signs and vehicle restraint systems will shortly be improved, with the provision of two electronic signs to warn drivers when vehicles are turning at the junction. That work is programmed for completion by October 2023.

Any action is better than nothing. However, implementing a few signs and repainting the road seems to be doing the work on the cheap. The A96 is the north-east’s most dangerous road, with nearly 300 collisions over the past seven years. Just a fortnight ago, another two people were hospitalised after an accident near Huntly. A local petition to install a roundabout to replace the junctions has received more than 850 signatures. Can the minister confirm what it will take for the Scottish National Party Government to take action and commit to upgrading this dangerous road in full?

The First Minister set out our commitment to improvements in the programme for government. I would not diminish improvements as they are taking place—it is important that members support improvements in their local areas. As Alexander Burnett well knows, there is an on-going review into the A96, as was outlined by the First Minister at First Minister’s questions today. We will take our commitment forward with the publication of the review.

That concludes portfolio questions on transport, net zero and just transition. There will be a brief pause before the next item of business, to allow members on the front benches to change.