I think that there is a case to be made for both.

I have listened to others in the ferry sector, not least the ferries community board. I think that a strategic link, with Transport Scotland ferry officials joining CMAL, as was set out in the ferries community board project Neptune report, has merit. I reiterate that I was not involved in signing off the final report, but I responded as Minister for Transport, before I became cabinet secretary. There are a number of key steps that we have to take in all the ferry process areas. I took the decision to move on the CHFS contract, which affects CalMac in particular.

Over many years prior to this, I have been involved in other portfolios that involved reorganising and bringing together different bodies. That clearly presents a level of disruption, and it is happening here at a time when we are bringing in six new ferries and are about to go into procurement for the small vessel replacement. There is an issue with timing.

With regard to the process, sorting the CHFS contract is a priority. You know that we have had to delay that, convener; I have written to the committee—

You wrote to me, and I took the opportunity, in my reply, to set out where we are with that. That contract in itself presents governance issues, in particular for CalMac.

With regard to the timing, therefore, if we want to take certain steps—such as a merger, for example, although I do not want to set hares running that that is happening overnight or anything like that—there are governance issues that would have to be addressed for legal reasons in order for us to do certain things. The order in which we do things, therefore, is important.

I am conscious of the need for preparation with regard to what things look like as we move forward. In the meantime, we need to ensure that there is far tighter communication in terms of engagement and planning. That has to happen for practical reasons, because of the deployment of the new ferries that are coming on stream between now and 2026, but it is also important from a governance, policy, culture and management point of view. That is why we are seeing far more active involvement, dialogue and engagement with the ferries community board; I know that the committee sets a lot of store by the board’s views and respects the importance of its role.

I cannot give the committee a decision as to what is happening, but I reassure you that those options are there for us to consider. I want to ensure—given that we are talking about people’s jobs and careers—that I do not unnecessarily worry or perturb anybody by my remarks. I just want to ensure that the committee, in holding me to account, knows that I am very much alive to the opportunities that there will be to try to simplify and rationalise the process.

As I know from previous experience, that is not simply about bringing bodies together physically or organisationally; it is about their vision and their culture, and how that helps the delivery and impact. I am very keen that we improve the delivery, impact and service.

I understand the calls for rationalisation and the import of that. As a Government minister, I am also conscious of our responsibilities to ensure that the services are delivered. I reassure the member that I have taken an acute interest in port and harbour development, and the investment and activity in that regard is extensive.

The committee will be aware that work, particularly at Port Askaig, is about to commence in preparation for the Islay ferries. That is very important improvement work, and our harbours and ports deserve that investment and activity. CMAL is organising that preparation work, along with Argyll and Bute Council, with a view that ferries to Islay will be going into Port Ellen over that summer period. If—as I have—you have travelled to Islay, you will also have seen the work at Kennacraig. Investments are taking place in a number of ports to make sure that we have improved the port and harbour structure.

At the same time, if you have an operational focus, particularly on major activity, with the delivery of six new vessels by 2026 and the harbour developments to support them, that might not be the best time to go into mass reorganisation activity. My imperative as a minister is to make sure that there is far more regular and active engagement with Transport Scotland, CMAL and CalMac in those areas.

I know that it can be frustrating and that you want things to happen overnight when you produce a committee report. I also know that that has been a recommendation previously. However, in terms of activity, CMAL is operating very well, for example, with the northern isles ferry services—NIFS—network in relation to the procurement of the four vessels from Turkey, which is going well and to plan.

On the live action that is required, I am barely in office as transport minister; I cannot remember the exact date that I came into office, but I do not think that it has quite been a year yet. It will be a year this month. I have tried to progress a lot of the major issues, of which this was a significant one, but I cannot, unfortunately, give you the answer that you are looking for, as to when that will happen, just now.

We know that car use will continue in a rural country such as Scotland, particularly because of our geography. We are encouraging people to use electric vehicles, and we have ambitions in that regard. There is a lot more to do in the delivery of the public charging network, which we will be improving and increasing. That is part of our climate change policies.

However, we do not just need to encourage more people to use electric vehicles; we need to encourage and support public transport use. We are simplifying rail fare structures and are substantially reducing fares by trialling the removal of peak rail fares.

However, not everywhere is served by rail, so we have to think about other modes of transport. We support our bus system. We have £430 million of investment going into the bus network. That activity is primarily around concessionary travel. The committee has looked closely at different aspects of that. The interesting thing will be what young people’s experiences are and whether they continue to use buses once they are old enough that they no longer get a free bus pass.

The real challenge for us is how we use the substantial amount of public investment that goes into our bus network in a way that makes services more sustainable and reliable not just in our cities but in our rural and semi-rural areas.

In terms of the fair fares review, some of the most interesting aspects were in the international paper about what other countries do. Some countries have entirely municipal systems, which makes them much easier to control. We must use the investment in a smart way to ensure that our bus companies are not only sustainable but can thrive and grow their patronage. How do we get more working-age fare-paying people to get on our buses? What would the subsidies look like for that approach? There would need to be a balance between support for our older people, who rely on our bus systems, and for working-age people. We would need to consider whether we would support the latter, and, if so, whether the balance between the two is right.

The more that you grow the patronage, the more we will rely on bus companies. Given that it is a deregulated sector, it is likely that every part of Scotland will do something that reflects its area, regardless of whether that is through a franchising scheme or a bus service improvement plan. However, we will continue to rely on bus companies, so we need to support them to work in a profitable way so that their services and their availability improves.

The bus issue is a big-ticket item for the Government, the Parliament and all political parties. As we did in the fair fares review debate, we need to consider how, collectively, we work together to ensure that we get more people using buses. We need people not to use their car or to use it less in order to meet our targets. The issue is getting and will continue to get a lot of my attention, and I would like to work with the committee on how we can best deliver that.

I hold the ferries community board in high regard. Indeed, I met it immediately after I gave my statement to the Parliament.

I note that a direct award is a preferred route and is still not a final decision. It is a preferred option, subject to due diligence, which is progressing well. There do not look to be any problems in being able to do it, but we are not at the final decision yet.

As I said, immediately after I made the parliamentary statement, I met the ferries community board in the Parliament. I owed it to the board, because of the reviews that it had undertaken, to explain why I had taken the decision that I had.

There has been a consultation on the direct award, which has just finished. Its publication will be in the coming weeks, so you will see that, as well.

I have regular meetings with the ferries community board, and its main focus is to have a resilient and reliable service. By and large, we have that, but, when it is not resilient or reliable, that has a major impact, as we all know. I am very conscious of that.

The ferries community board is actively involved in identifying its role as a body within the new award. Indeed, just on Friday, there was a working session with the ferries community board to help to establish its role.

I reassure the committee that we do not have to wait until the award is given to see improvements. The interim chief executive of CalMac is progressing the improvement and enhancement plan, which commences regardless of the direct award.

The issue that the ferries community board particularly wants to address is the culture of a management that is not responsive to where the board is. CalMac has been working hard over the past year to ensure that that relationship and engagement is not just one-way traffic, so that it is about not just communicating what problems there are, but how we might resolve and improve them.

For example, there was an issue in the committee’s report about whether ferry spaces could be held for islanders in busy seasons. Tourism is very good in Scotland. We know that; we have a record year, which is looking very positive, but it is about confidence. If the ferries are busy and locals cannot get on for immediate personal issues, such as health and others, that is a challenge. There have always been opportunities to get on for particularly immediate health issues, but there are other personal reasons why islanders might need to get on. A pilot has been running for some islands to identify how reserving places could work—and work well. Should that prove successful, it will be rolled out.

We do not necessarily need to wait for the direct award to make the improvements that we want to see. It will entrench the improvements in the contracts and reliable services that the ferries community board wants. I will be meeting the board again to ensure not only that is it informed about how we have got to now but that it will have a key role in the next contract.

The route map is what I referred to when I discussed the important work that we are doing with COSLA—it is a joint initiative. I am looking forward to working on that and delivering it with Councillor Gail Macgregor, who leads on that for COSLA. COSLA is keen for it to be published and we expect to be able to do that by the autumn, which is what we set out in the climate change plan, as I indicated in my previous answer.

I will unpack some of the points that you made, but you have probably conflated different issues. I have made it clear that Inverness to Nairn, including the Nairn bypass, was always treated as separate from the rest of the A96 review. The A96 review is subject to pre-election guidance, but I am keen for it to be published when we can do so, to inform interests in that area.

On the Inverness to Nairn upgrade, including a Nairn bypass, work on procurement continues, so I can talk about that. As I said in the meeting on Friday night—people there were very engaged; they are quite rightly impassioned about what they want to see—there is not a pause on that; indeed, the made orders that were published on 12 March have not been challenged. We as a Government are therefore in the position now to proceed to the purchase of land to develop that part of the route. I have also said that, in the next few weeks, we should be able to announce the made orders for the Inshes to Smithton road connection, which is complementary to that route.

I went to Nairn as it was important that I heard what locals were saying. The event was well organised by The Inverness Courier and was well attended. It was also extremely well chaired, and we covered a lot of ground.

In relation to suggestions about how the work can progress, it is clear that we are now in the procurement phase; we will be able to develop the purchase of the land, and then the work will move into procurement. The contract is quite large, and it is a challenge in relation to the available finances.

An important point that I took from the meeting was about giving priority to the Nairn bypass part of the Inverness to Nairn route. There was a strong feeling that work on that should start first. There are different reasons as to whether that can and should happen, but it was important to hear what people said.

I am very familiar with Nairn—I have holidayed there frequently. I was meant to be there during storm Babet and, unfortunately, I did not manage to get there then. It is interesting because it has the road going right through it. It was clear from the meeting that, because of the delays and issues there, there was a real strength of feeling that the bypass part of the route, which is a big contract, should be first. The issue is then whether to break up the contract or have one big contract. I hope that that is the next stage of thinking about procurement. It was helpful to hear what people were saying.

I am sorry that you missed the meeting, convener. I am surprised that you waited until I had left before you arrived, but I am sure that there were good reasons why you could not be there.

Good morning, everyone. I am pleased to have been asked to continue as Cabinet Secretary for Transport by the First Minister. It is a privilege and an honour to be asked to serve in John Swinney’s Cabinet and to play a part in delivering on his Government’s core priorities.

As members all know, transport is vital to every aspect of our nation’s economic and social wellbeing. It plays a key role in all our lives. It helps to build and maintain relationships with people who are important to us; it helps businesses to get the goods and services that they need to thrive; and it helps communities to become and stay connected, which enables everyone who lives there to get around.

This weekend, I was delighted to join the celebrations with local communities at the reopening of the railway to Levenmouth. The railway forms part of a multimodal investment that will open up more access to leisure, economic, employment and educational opportunities, alongside improving the connectivity to and from the area for residents, visitors and businesses.

We have recently extended our ScotRail peak fares removal pilot until 27 September. The removal of that cost is helping many individuals and families to cope with the on-going cost of living crisis, and it is a financial benefit that really matters to people. However, I am also keen for cheaper fares to be available at all times of the day, and I am keen for such a move to encourage more people to use the train. We have listened to the many positive benefits that the removal of peak fares has had so far, and to continue with that, we need more people to choose to travel by train, not least to help cut transport emissions.

In the past few days, enforcement of the low-emission zones has commenced in Dundee, Edinburgh and Aberdeen. Although air quality in our cities has improved over recent years, there is no safe level of air pollution, and those zones will help to save lives. Recent research highlights that improving air quality and measures such as LEZs remain essential to keeping children safe and protecting public health.

We are making good progress on the A9 dualling programme. We are on track to award the Tomatin to Moy contract in early summer, and we launched the procurement for the Tay crossing to Ballinluig dualling project as planned.

We have also published the recommendations of our fair fares review to help us to move further forward towards an available, affordable and accessible public transport system, and we have published our islands connectivity plan.

I am proud of the Government’s track record on transport, not least because of our investment in vital infrastructure such as road improvements, the new Queensferry crossing, new railway stations, low-carbon buses and new ferries. There is more to do, but our ambition is hampered by the cuts to the Scottish capital budget that have been made by the United Kingdom Government. In addition, the 2025-26 budget settlement is one of the toughest that we have faced in recent years. I hope that members will at least acknowledge that, and I would welcome the committee’s support in pressing the case for more capital funding from the incoming UK Government for transport and wider Scottish needs.

I am focused on maintaining the assets that we already have, to keep our essential transport network operating for Scotland. Rail investment priorities will focus on fleet decisions, while work will continue on expanding the electric vehicle public charging network and supporting the procurement of zero-emission and ultra-low-emission vehicles and buses.

I am committed to the reform of the Clyde and Hebrides ferry service contract, and good progress is being made on the construction of major ferries for the Little Minch. I will continue with bus sector reform, while maintaining Scotland-wide concessionary bus travel schemes, which help people who are in the greatest need.

As everyone is aware, we are in a pre-election period. In that context, issues of some sensitivity may be under discussion today, but I will attempt to answer the committee’s questions as transparently as possible. I look forward to continuing to work with committee members and to hearing your questions this morning.

The £500 million in support of buses is a long-term funding commitment. That was made before there were a lot of the fiscal pressures that we know all of Government faces in different areas.

In a previous appearance before the committee, I think that I said that I was frustrated that we have had to pause the bus partnership fund, because it is a helpful enabler to give confidence to the bus sector, which is really important, and to provide access improvements. When people see that they can travel more readily, we can see improvements. The experience in Aberdeen, where there has been a 25 per cent reduction in journey times by bus—that has benefited 600,000 people—shows the attractiveness of travelling by bus and switching from car, not necessarily for all journeys but for some of them. That can make a difference.

How do I transparently express that in the current circumstances in which we find ourselves? I am actively pursuing finding ways to reallocate funding or jointly fund with other projects that might help us to move forward in that area. I cannot give you a direct answer to the question, Ms Lennon, but I reassure you that I am trying to unlock that so that we can unpause the fund, because it is a vital connection. In tight fiscal circumstances, a lot of climate change and transport improvements that are not legally or financially contracted have been difficult for us to advance in the past year.