We want to have an efficient system of public transport, but we have different modes of public transport. Much of our public transport is run by private companies and the market in Scotland is, by and large, deregulated apart from in the Lothians. There have been improvements in partnership working with councils, as well as with the Scottish Government, on the investments to improve the bus stock, with low-emission buses being a particular focus.

In an ideal world, we would all want to have free public transport, but there are fiscal constraints within which we are operating, as well as the fiscal position under which the parties that are likely to form a United Kingdom Government are operating. During the pre-election period, I am probably straying too far with that remark. I will try not to do that.

There are international examples of free public transport. The provision of free transport for the under-22s is a good example of where we can provide that for a whole group in society and where that can help to form regular patterns and habits among a group of people.

Given that we are investing £430 million to help with free bus travel for young and older people, my challenge back would be to ask whether there is a subsidised system that we can put in place that would encourage more people to use public transport. I think that free travel is potentially unachievable in the current financial climate, although that could be an ambition for the future, and we see that in some areas.

Aberdeen had a period of free bus travel at the weekends to encourage people who may not otherwise have gone into the city to travel in for leisure reasons. That is a good example. I emphasise that we are seeing a big increase in the use of public transport for leisure as opposed to work—that is the big growth area. The challenge there is whether the public should subsidise public transport for leisure use. Actually, should we discriminate at all between travel for work and travel for leisure?

Just to speculate, when I was in Dublin, talking to the transport minister and the rail operator there, I was interested to find that they are considering how employers can help to subsidise and support travel. Many companies already do that for employees who use public transport, with loans and so on. We should think through what we can do to finance public transport, which could be provided either at a reduced cost or, in an ideal world, free.

Our choices are somewhat limited by the current fiscal constraints, but it was good to see that recommendation and interest from the people’s panel, as well as the understanding that, if we are to tackle transport emissions, we need a shift to public transport. That was the recommendation from the people’s panel.

No, that is certainly not the case. Convener, you have asked me not to stray into the territory of announcements that I cannot make. That is why I said that I cannot give you that information. I have not seen it, so I am not in a position to tell you; even if I had seen it, I would probably be restricted in what I can say in this meeting.

I am sure that the people at ScotRail are avid watchers of the committee’s meetings. We will make sure that we draw to their attention your concerns and those of Mr Simpson about ticketing.

I have already mentioned that we are looking to procure for the intercity fleet. Also, obviously, there is an issue around the suburban fleet. There is the related issue of the roll-out of decarbonisation, which I have discussed with the committee before. I am not in a position to give you any more information than I have given previously. I can say that the options for the high-speed train fleet replacement are currently being developed, and that an associated business case that will be prepared by ScotRail Trains Ltd and Network Rail will come to me for consideration.

Alison Irvine is probably better placed than I am to give you an update now. However, as I try to do regularly, I will ensure that I update the committee on key milestones, because I know that there is keen interest.

Yes, indeed.

I will also say that ScotRail’s public performance measure is currently at 90.4 per cent, compared with the average of 87.1 per cent for Great Britain. In terms of how we drive that forward, passenger satisfaction is currently sitting at 89 per cent for ScotRail, compared with a GB average of 85 per cent. I want to press ScotRail to do more. Following the meeting with ScotRail and Network Rail, perhaps I can return to the committee with their assessment of performance and how they want collectively to drive forward the performance figure.

Am I allowed to ask a question, convener? We have previously discussed that the committee will probably have quite a key role in oversight of delivery of the A9 project. I am quite interested in understanding how the committee wants to work on that. I think that committees had similar functions in relation to the Queensferry crossing, which was another major exercise. It would be helpful to know, perhaps after the meeting, how the committee plans to do that.

Yes, I bought a ticket.

No, I am not nervous. I am shocked that you think that canals are a Cinderella. Actually, Mr Fairlie is the lead on Scottish Canals. I certainly do not think that canals are a Cinderella, because the Union canal goes through my constituency, which is why I have recused myself from making ministerial decisions on that.

No. Can we separate out the issues? In the work on the direct award, we are focusing on the operation of the Clyde and Hebridean ferry service. The issues around CMAL, which I think is what you are referring to—and the idea of putting ferries officials and the ferries arm of Transport Scotland into “Ferries Scotland” by joining or merging them with CMAL—are separate issues. If you were to leave Transport Scotland alone and to merge CMAL with CalMac, that in itself gives rise to lots of different questions, and I have just gone through the implications.

I do not think that we would be doing those things in the middle of the process of due diligence. There are other factors that I have not even touched on yet, dare I say. As I know from a previous time as a minister, having brought together four different bodies to form Skills Development Scotland, way back in 2007, 2008 or 2009 or whenever that was, there are pensions issues and a whole load of different other factors, and they must also be considered in the process of a direct award.

I am trying not to confuse things, and if you need explanations later I am happy to provide them offline, but that describes the complexity of the things that are happening, and doing things in order is therefore important.

I do not necessarily agree that there are barriers. There is an issue of taking advantage of the powers that have been approved—not least by this committee—to enable the different choices that are available, whether they are bus service improvement partnerships, franchising or public ownership. I suspect that Monica Lennon might be asking where the financial investment comes from—for example, if someone wants to own their own fleet, that implies either leasing from somebody else or purchasing with capital.

On what we as a Government can do to help that process, it might be helpful for the committee to know that the powers already exist, as I said, in the regulations that have been passed. For example, on the timetable for authorities that want to pursue franchising—I understand that that is an active and live current issue for Strathclyde Partnership for Transport and that a consultation has just finished—there are steps along the way. The enabling aspects are our responsibility, and I can advise the committee, which will be actively involved in this, about the franchising arrangements transitional process.

The regulations that prescribe the process for transitioning from a deregulated system to a franchise are expected to be laid in early autumn 2024 and to come into force before the end of the year. For franchising, rules and regulations that cover the appointment and remuneration of the arrangements panel members as well as the process that the panel must follow for making decisions in relation to local transport authorities’ franchising proposals are also expected in early autumn 2024, to come into force by the end of 2024.

There is a series of Scottish statutory instruments on appeals, because it is clear that, in the current deregulated market, there are impacts of decisions, particularly on private operators. The regulations on appeals against bus service improvement service standard decisions by the traffic commissioner for Scotland are expected in 2024 and are expected to come into force later in 2024. There are also remaining commencement orders on the enforcement powers in relation to bus service improvement partnerships.

I would not describe those as barriers; I would describe them as necessary next steps—they are not stopping the process as barriers to decision making and the planning that is required. I reassure Monica Lennon that many of the regulatory aspects involved in bus reform have already come through the committee, and that includes the ones that are the next steps.