Chamber and committees

That would put pressure on the capital budget, but we have always said that we would need to revert to capital in that scenario. That is why we are looking closely at value for money from the business plan, what it delivers for the public purse and what is affordable under the Scottish Government’s budget. We are having exactly those discussions about the A9, and such considerations were always going to be a part of that.

We are not underspending on active travel this year. As I have set out, we are spending the full amount. There is only one tiny element that has not been set out this year.

On the project that you mention, we have had submissions in recent months on the steps that need to take place to ensure progress on it. That is a keenly anticipated active travel route and is one of the benefits of the work on the A9. I am happy to provide a briefing in writing to the committee on that active travel segment.

As I said that I would do, I will publish the consultation on that issue very quickly, as it was a request from the round-table meeting that I had with MSPs. We must look at the A96 as a whole. As you know, there are different sections of it: Inshes to Smithton, Inverness to Nairn, including the Nairn bypass where we have taken title to land in April, and the rest of the corridor, on which we got feedback.

One of the things that we are considering following the consultation is prioritisation. The consultation feedback was in favour of full dualling of the A96, but anybody with an understanding of the current financial situation will know that that will not happen immediately. Our plans will need to set out the priorities. For example, the feedback was that an Elgin bypass is a priority. On what prioritisation will make most sense, that goes back to the point about the impact of transport on the economy. Chambers of commerce and others have an interest in that.

In relation to funding that work, it was always my view that we would need to identify what will be the infrastructure investment plan. As the committee will know, the capital forward look, the spending review and the infrastructure investment plan will be affected by the timing of the budget—I am sure that the committee is aware that the Scottish Government budget will be introduced later as a result of the UK budget being later than we thought that it would be, which will impact on other aspects.

I thought that we would be in a better position to identify when the infrastructure investment plan would be published, but it is not in my gift to say when that will be. However, I know that people will be looking at the A96.

That is our current position, but we will need to prioritise the ordering of that. There is a clear order, because parts of the A96 are further along in the process than others. Indeed, one is undergoing a full public inquiry. As I have said, we have also taken title to some land. On the ordering, as part of our market review and our interest in using MIM, we made sure that we included parts of the A96 in those discussions when we were looking at the A9.

The challenge for the A96 is whether we bundle it into one project or whether it would be more sensible, better value for money and better for delivery to do the project in smaller sections. I know that there is real appetite to focus on the Nairn bypass, which could possibly be done as a single project to get the ball rolling, for example. However, I am not in a position to give you the detail on what will happen when with that. I can just say that work is on-going to assess what that project might look like.

I am not sure that the climate change plan will go into detail about that assessment. The CCP will be about our plans to reduce emissions specifically, so it will not contain a detailed road-by-road analysis. For example, I do not anticipate that the A9 will be a specific feature of the CCP.

I will bring in Bill Reeve to expand on some of that, because he has had more contact with our officials who have been working with those from the DFT. I have met several times, including in person, Lord Hendy, the rail minister, to impress on him that there cannot be any reduction in our powers.

The concept of rail reform was initially established by the Conservative UK Government and was then picked up by the incoming Labour Government. We must ensure that Great British railways is accountable and responsible to Scottish ministers in any areas where we have strategic or financial responsibilities. We currently fund Network Rail by more than £1 billion a year and have set out our strategic requirements in connection with that funding, so it is only right and proper that we should have direct control of that part of the work. The key issue will be how that is set out in legislation. We expect legislation fairly soon but have yet to be assured that the executive devolution that we currently have will be maintained. I am spending a great deal of time on that.

I will bring Bill Reeve in to expand on that point.

You are entitled to have an opinion—

There can be a real shift in reliability because of the bus infrastructure fund leading to the provision of bus priority lanes and so on. We have seen the success of that in the reliability of bus services where there are such measures.

I would also support and echo your request for multiyear funding but, as you know, we are in discussions about multiyear funding in our spending review, our budget is coming up and there is the small detail of an election coming up, which affects future planning for the incoming Government. I am keen for us to have multiyear funding, and the convener was right to identify the fact that we could not follow through with all the funding for active and sustainable travel that we wanted to last year. We do not get as much value for money if we take a stop-start approach to these things. Local authorities want continuous rolling programmes because it helps with aspects such as staffing and delivery, and that is true for active travel routes as well as bus infrastructure.

As part of our climate change plan, if we want to see a shift to greater use of public transport, for lots of different reasons including emissions reduction as well as health and wellbeing and the vibrancy of communities, we need to give some certainty, because that will mean better delivery and better value for money from construction and design and so on. I would like to say yes, but that is a question for the Cabinet Secretary for Finance and Local Government rather than me.

I think that every MSP would say that bus is one of the issues that come into our inboxes regularly—everybody, individually, can see that. Anything that the committee can do to encourage members to be champions for bus, across the parties and with our other MSP colleagues, would be welcome.

On the change that we have to make, the vast majority of journeys on public transport are made by bus, and we have to encourage more people to make bus journeys. That means having more bus routes available that are meaningful for people based on modern-day travel patterns. I am afraid that, in some parts of the country, bus routes do not reflect what modern needs are. Increasingly, we see that the routes go from east to west across the central belt, whereas we need to have more routes going from north to south within Lanarkshire and West Lothian to reflect people’s patterns of need for leisure and for work.

Jim Fairlie is leading on that. The guidance is currently undergoing final engagement with the key parties that are involved in the franchising process, which include the Competition and Markets Authority and the office of the traffic commissioner for Scotland. Once that is completed, that guidance will be shared with the committee and others, including local transport authorities. The final timescales for publication will depend on the capacity of those stakeholders to consider and engage with the draft document; it will be issued in draft form.

You referred to the memorandum of understanding, and we are currently working with the UK Government on the costs of running the independent approval panels for the franchising process. Subject to negotiations being agreed with the UK Government, we will provide the committee with a copy of the memorandum of understanding for its awareness. We are in the final stages of that process.