It is too early to say. My officials are engaging with operators and I am keen to engage directly with them, but I have not personally done that since the publication of the report.

Yes.

Colleagues might be able to update some of my figures, but 46.2 per cent of journeys under 2 miles were made by walking or cycling in 2022, and the figure for journeys under 5 miles was 2.1 per cent. However, statistically, those figures were not much different from the figures in 2019. I acknowledge that performance might not be as strong as we might expect or want, given the level of investment that we have made, but if we do not have investment to encourage people and make those options available, that is obviously an issue in itself.

I am sure that we will have the figures for 2023 at some point, but I do not know when that will be—perhaps one of my colleagues can tell me.

I do not know the details—I am sure that the committee’s researchers can look into this—but the hands-up survey is conducted annually in schools to get an understanding of who travels to school by walking or cycling. That information is available. I do not have it at my fingertips, but we can follow up with the committee if you are interested in that.

There are still challenges in how we get the best use of our walking and cycling infrastructure. However, the more people use public transport, the more they will walk. When I commute by rail, which I do frequently, I spend more of my journey time walking than I spend on the train, and I know that people who use buses will walk more in order to use them, so we need to look at these things in totality.

One of the big benefits of the Levenmouth rail link, which opened just last week, is the active travel part, which will help to connect communities across the Levenmouth area, not just from end to end.

More vessels are being delivered than was initially anticipated, because the two for the Little Minch are now four, which will have a major impact. I am delighted to say that the MV Loch Indaal launches this weekend. That is an important next step in the delivery of those vessels.

On the SVRP, I am keen that we can move ahead with procurement. Under the pre-election guidance, we are not allowed to make any announcement on that programme, and we do not anticipate such an announcement, before the end of the pre-election period. Ministerial consideration of the business case remains on-going. However, we want to move to procure as soon as we can, in order to make sure that we can deliver within the next two to three years—probably three years—depending on the timescale for the procurement and the response. We are keen to press ahead, so the period might be shortened if it is open procurement; of course, it might be a direct award.

With your agreement, convener, I will bring in Fiona Brown, who has been involved. In Scotland, we have challenges and issues with an integrated ticketing system, because, particularly on the bus side, we are in a deregulated market, so we have to make sure that we take private operators with us on that.

It is fair to say that, in Scotland, zonal ticketing is happening—for example, with the Glasgow tripper—and there are quite a lot of developments, not least on the rail side, in the flexibility of what can be used. Also when it comes to what we are trying to achieve, simplicity of fares is an important strand in encouraging more people to use the public transport system and in the operation of integrated ticketing itself.

Our biggest challenge in Scotland is the technology platform that is needed. The national smart ticketing advisory board was set up specifically to address those issues. It is chaired by an expert in smart ticketing procurement. I think that its final meeting was at the end of May, so I expect the report on how we will achieve that very soon.

Scotland also has challenges in where the customers are and where they will be. Clearly, there are far more people who use their phones and phone technology than previously, in comparison with those of us who prefer a card. I have my flexipass. When it comes to the technology, we also have the saltire card, and the technology around the flexipass is common across different areas. Interestingly, we have just rolled out support for the digital purchase of northern isles ticketing. We are not just waiting for something to happen. Lots of things are happening. It is about how we join that all up. Barcode technology is also a problem for Scotland, comparatively, so we will need to identify how we can help to improve that.

When the report that I mentioned comes, I am sure that the committee will have a keen interest in it, so we can share it with you.

I ask Fiona Brown to come in.

Far from nothing is happening. I came in as minister and I made sure that we made a decision on our preferred route, which is a direct award. The due diligence has been live and active, and is progressing very well. The extension for a year is particularly to address issues that could not be done in parallel, in relation to the Competition and Markets Authority in particular. We could have done a pre-application, but it is understood that it is required and that it makes better sense to do that at the full completion of the due diligence. We are still on track for me to report to the Cabinet in the same timescale that I had intended.

However, the convener’s point was about planning from the previous contract to this one. I know—because it is the question that I asked when I came in—what happened in 2019, 2020 and 2021. You will appreciate that all of Government, including our ferries officials, was focused on the pandemic. The priority was to ensure that our islanders had a ferry service that could get them through very difficult and challenging times. I am saying that there was a disruption hiatus in the development of that process. In normal circumstances, the process around making the decision as to whether there should be an open tender or a direct award would have started much earlier. However, that is the explanation for why it did not start much earlier.

When the committee wrote to me, I took the opportunity to update you on progress. The extension is up to a year, and I am keen to make progress on that and to get all the measures in place. To be Teckal compliant, which is the route to ensure that we can legally and financially do it—as happens with any direct award—we have to, under public procurement legislation, ensure that we have the appropriate degree of control and interest. Therefore, organisational change is the next step that needs to take place in developing the direct award process.

That is the explanation, convener. You might not like it, but that is the explanation.

No. I might bring Alison Irvine in to support me on the answer to this one. We need to wait until the CMA comes back with its view on the decisions that I have taken. We had thought that parallel processes might be open to us but they were not. On issues including harbour operating agreements as well as CMA issues, we are trying to make sure that everything is as robust as possible. That will also ensure that our legal position is strong and robust—I know that the committee has always taken a keen interest in that—in relation to the preferred option for a direct award, should we say that that is a go, and particularly in relation to the extension.

On the decision, if the due diligence indicates that it is not possible to go to a direct award, we would know that way before a year from now, because I am still progressing the diligence process along the timetable that I had anticipated. The extra time is in relation to the CMA in particular—but not solely—and we will use the opportunity to make sure that the operational side of Teckal compliance can be put into effect. We will certainly keep the committee informed about that timescale. I still have to go back to Cabinet to recommend that we can give a direct award and everything is in place. If we cannot do that, we will move to tender. That is the same position that I took last November, when I made the announcement to Parliament.

Alison Irvine can correct me if I have misrepresented anything or add anything else that she might want to add.

It is about maximising value for money through making all the improvements at the same time. We heard questions about route disruptions. It is more sensible to co-ordinate investment in a line—in particular, the route track investment by Network Rail—with other changes that are taking place. It is about sensible decision making—integrating the train fleet with the track improvements. Some things can be done in isolation; maybe the member is trying to pursue whether we can continue to do such things. Some of that has happened to date, and we are keen to do that where we can, but we are trying to take a sensible approach, particularly given the challenging finances, to make the most of co-ordinating investment where that is possible.

I ask Alison Irvine whether she has anything to add.

I am looking forward to Edinburgh being the epicentre of the Swiftie universe, and I am sure that those who go to the concerts will have a fantastic time. A lot of planning and pre-planning have been done on the public transport arrangements. I know that the City of Edinburgh Council is encouraging everybody to use public transport over those few days in particular. I also know that ScotRail is running additional services, and it has been advertising that for some time.

If I am allowed to plug the Traffic Scotland website, it has been sharing information, as has Transport Scotland, collectively. Based on Traffic Scotland’s social media, I think that there is a Swiftie in there somewhere. That is all in order to get penetration and ask people to plan ahead for their journey. Unfortunately, I do not have a ticket to Taylor Swift, although I have a ticket to go and see “Sunset Song” at the Lyceum. At the same time as I am travelling, the city will be full of Swifties so I, too, will be planning my travel in advance. I encourage everyone to plan what they are doing in advance and to look at the ScotRail, City of Edinburgh Council and Traffic Scotland websites.

I do not know whether Monica Lennon has a ticket for Taylor Swift—I see that she is nodding. I hope that everybody has a fantastic time.

I am conscious that I did not respond to you when you raised that in the debate, but that was part of what I thought was a very good, open debate on the fair fares review, asking “What is the art of the possible?” or “What can we do?”

I would caution the member that that idea has already been aired, discussed and suggested as part of how we might fund grass-roots culture. The concept of doing that is therefore out there. How that would be operationalised is another issue. You could say, for instance, that the spend needs to go into public transport, and I would say that that would be a preference, if that were to happen. However, Glasgow City Council might want to use that spend to help clean up after such events, which can obviously be disruptive. There is already a campaign—which I think is UK-wide; it is not just taking place in Scotland—to put levies on events tickets to help develop culture and music generally.

This is straying into somebody else’s portfolio but, considering streaming and how musicians actually get their income, Bruce Springsteen or Taylor Swift will generate a lot of income from concerts, which can increasingly become part of their firmament in earning their income, but a budding, new musician will not be in that position and will have fewer opportunities to get income through the traditional ways of selling.

The idea may happen. I am not in charge of it or responsible for it, but it has been thought of in relation to supporting culture, rather than public transport. That might be something that Bob Doris may wish to pursue with Angus Robertson, the Cabinet Secretary for Constitution, External Affairs and Culture, who I think has already responded to those suggestions or will certainly be discussing that with the culture sector.